|
|
| They say muskys are a fish of 10000 casts. Does anyone record, how many hours fished per musky in a season? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 425
| I never recorded the excact, but, well, at least for me, it definetly does not take thaaat long to boat a musky. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 264
| wow 50 'skie good job being so modest  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 378
Location: Michigan | I kept very close records for years. It actually varied a lot one year to the next. But overall, with 2 guys in the boat, about 3-6 hours to get a fish in the boat. One year my personal average was 20 hours for a fish (that year sucked...), but another it was 6 hours. I personaly think a fish per day is overall a reasonable average. Of course, many skunks, but also a few very memorable days with multiple fish. My best year was 103 in the boat with 326 hours on the water. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 425
| What?......I was just saying |
|
| |
|
| Chadster, thanks your the only musky fisherman including the "professionals" who has given me a definative answer. In the musky business you hear a lot of stories plus big pictures. 103 fish and 326 hours your one guy who's not fishing for "minimum wage" if you know what I mean |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32922
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | If one doesn't keep 'track', one cannot answer. Look into the Wisconsin creeling data, that gives a pretty good picture on some of the Muskie waters creeled. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1460
Location: Kronenwetter, WI | Ratio not as good as we'd all like, but I have a feeling if it was easy most of us wouldn't be doing this. It's hard work but fun no matter where you fish. What I get a kick out of is guys that claim to catch 2-3 fish each outing.
I'd like to know the average % of fisherman per day that actually boat fish during say, PMTT or WMT, etc....seems like that could be figured out. I think that would be telling. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 413
Location: Madison WI | I didn't keep a log of exactly how many hours I put in last year but I think my ratio of muskies per hour was around 0.017, I fished all but about 2 weeks of the season last year. All fishing was done from shore which is most likely why my ratio was so low. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1023
| I am no star by any means but in "numbers lakes" in Ontario, 2 -3 fish per day is not unrealistic, but 50" fat fish are rare in these spots. We likely average 2 -3 fish per day on these lakes with fish between 30 and 46 inches. But, I went 3 trips in a row last year and saw nothing too. Of course, just when I was ready to throw in the towel, the next trip was ridonculously good!!!
Landry |
|
| |
|
Posts: 223
Location: Minn. | Here are the final resultsl of the PMTT Fox Chain of Lakes Event. It was a tough bite out there as there were over 80 teams registered to fish but only 13 fish caught in total. 80X2 Fisherman X 16hrs = 2560 manhours divided by 13 fish =196.92 hrs per fish . How many casts in 192 hours? Doesn't seem that easy, even for those that fish them professionally. Alot of times conditions overrule ability. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32
Location: Minnesota | I like the stats muskyfvr! |
|
| |
|
| 168 fish last season in the boat...a fish for every 3.65 hours on the water...
Had many 4+ fish days/nites |
|
| |
|
| Bn: 168 fish--3.65 per hour that's over 75 eight hour days. No big three? Weather, work and women. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32922
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Water_pix, you seem to be on some sort of mission to discredit folks, which is kinda rude and will be a problem here...some folks who frequent this place put a ton of Muskies in the net every year, and don't need your approval to do so. Catch your own fish, worry less about what others catch, and we'll all be happier. |
|
| |
|
| Sworrall- I wasn't on a mission to discredit anyone...your the one who seems negative. Bn catches alot of fish...spends slot of time doing so. He's fortuate to have the freedom to do so. Chill dude, the economy will get better |
|
| |
|
Posts: 734
Location: Watertown, MN | Tournament usually fall into a 10-15% participant catch fish, remember they miss sunrise, sunset, might get moon, and many angler are beating the key areas to death, prefishing stings a few fish. Although at the 2004 PMTT Champ, is was like 47 fish for 50 teams.
You can average lower hours per fish by fishing numbers lakes, or simply propably like brad and some other is hit the water after work for sunset and hit a good window and stick 2 or 3 fish in 4-5 hours. I will see storm moving in and can be on the water in 20 minutes, and things can happen fast.
Like steve stated look at creel survey, I was on LCO for several years, 90+ hour per ski, I though I sucked on that lake, they saw that and felt pretty good.
Troyz |
|
| |
|
Posts: 284
|
Somewhere around 160 hours on the water so far this year with only 4 fish for my total. (44, 40, 39.5, 37)
|
|
| |
|
| Water_pix - 5/14/2009 5:22 PM
They say muskys are a fish of 10000 casts. Does anyone record, how many hours fished per musky in a season?
For me, the fish of 10,000 casts is no exaggeration. (But I'm not asking for a pity party.) Truly, I think once you get the basic skills down, and some experience on the water, the most important factor in the success of the amateur angler is where you fish. You are going to catch a lot more muskies per hour fished in North or Central Minnesota, North Wisconsin, or Ontario than you are in SW Pennsylvania. |
|
| |
|
Location: The Yahara Chain | Brad what was your fish per man hour? I know you are using 'boat' hours for that total which is deceiving.
I'm sure it is still an impressive number as I know you had a great season.
Edited by Bytor 5/15/2009 10:09 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32922
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Water_pix,
I was referring to the post from you I removed. Please watch your tone, this is a good subject and worth looking into.
That said, I used to log every fish caught in my rig when I was guiding full time. We averaged about 1.5 fish a day, but the number of anglers varied, so I don't have any idea what the man hours were.
Two seasons back, TJ and I had a run of about 7 weeks that was really interesting, averaging two per evening for about 3 hours fished. Last year, things were different on the two lakes we were hitting, and the average dropped to what would probably compute out to about 1/2 a fish per evening. Less time on the water, feeding windows that were narrower, and different structure elements in play scattering the fish which made contacting multiple fish in a short period of time more difficult. |
|
| |
|
Location: SE Wisconsin | 2009 - 45 Hours on the water at about 4 hours per trip after work except opening weekend / 12 fish out of my boat = About 1 fish p/outing or 4 hours.
This year, while only 13 days running here in Southern WI, the bite started out stronger than previous years from the get go, but as I discussed with a friend last night, this is that transitional period where opening patterns & tactics are no longer reliable. Water temps still linger around 60 degrees, and summer patterns aren't in full effect yet. While I have not personally boated a fish the last three times out, my net has gotten wet 2 of those three times. Last night was interesting to say the least. . . The only fish I hooked up to last night was purely incidental. Ryan and I picked up James from the launch and as we slowly motored away I unhooked my lure and with only the 5 or 6 feet of line out, began ripping it in the prop wash to watch its action - low and behold a mid 30 was on it in seconds. Ryan killed the motor on my word and I hooked up briefly on the eight - CRAZY! We raised 6 more yesterday evening, but no takers. My group of guys/gals have had a stellar opening couple of weeks though, with all of us keeping up with each others numbers and sizes (nothing over 40 yet) 
I can't say the same about last season. James and I had a thorough season, but it took "too many" (as he would say) hours before Ryan started a well deserve 1 fish a night trend that didn't start until September, but lasted him for several trips. Sometimes you have a hot stick, other times you don't. Most memorable for me was last season doubling up three outings in a row, one of which was two fish in two consecutive casts. . . Pretty neat.
Edited by Sam Ubl 5/15/2009 9:13 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 724
Location: Southern W.Va. | I have logged in a total of 2 fish in about 20 hrs of water time this year, a 35" & 36" musky. 10 hrs. per fish and I think I've got a better average then last year. Maybe I'm not much of a fishermen but I sure have fun !!
Mauser |
|
| |
|
Location: SE Wisconsin | I wouldn't question your status of credibility as a fisherman. . . Different people fish different water and some are just fortunate to have been in the right place at the right time. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32922
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Great point, Sam. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1168
| It gets really interesting if you start breaking down those ratios more and break down the data for legal fish, night fish, day fish, shallow water, open water...and on and on and lets you see that just a straight up number of fish boated per year or on specific baits can be shown to be a self fulfilling prophecy. I've been logging how many hours I've used specific baits just to get a more clear picture of how this plays out.
Guys throw numbers around of how many fish were boated but to me that doesn't tell the true story. Looking at two seasons I had a few years back one saw 49 fish and the other had 32. The 49 fish year I was out over 100 days, the following year when 32 were boated I was on the water maybe 40 times. Some will get hung up on the higher number and think that was the better year, the reality of it is that it was not.
Crunching these numbers is a pretty cool thing and can tell you alot. I prefer to add as many different controls to it (i.e. examining the data more specifically....hours per legal fish, hours using specific baits, hours per fish caught in complete darkness, hours fished over open water....etc.) because just having a bottom line of "1 fish caught every 4 hours" doesn't satisfy my need for information. On the other hand, I can take a look and identify more specific trends and this has proven to increase my efficiency and the time between fish has continued to decrease substantially. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 431
| I think I've put about 46 hours on kinkaid this year. It takes me 4 hours to get there, so when I go it's for a full day and I don't get to pick and choose conditions. Personally I've got 6 fish, which is a fish every 7.7 hours. If you add in couple of fish caught by my dad while he was with me, it's 5.75 hours per fish. It's crazy how much these numbers can get skewed though. Mar. 6, 5 fish between my dad and I in 8 hours. 2 other outings with 18 hours total-0 fish (granted 1 of these outings was during spawn and 1 was immediately post-spawn and one of the most brutal days I've had). |
|
| |
|
Posts: 431
| If you look at the IMTT on kinkaid a couple of weeks ago, 36 boats with 28 fish caught. Total hours of fishing: 16. Assuming every boat had 2 people and fished the entire event, that's 1,152 hours of fishing or 1 fish for every 41 hours. If you take out the top teams numbers-they blew away everybody else with6 fish, you get 35 boats with 22 fish-1 fish for every 50 hours. |
|
| |
|
Location: SE Wisconsin | Ulbian, you just took it to the next level, and I agree, keeping detailed record goes a lot further than the entertainments sake of divying up hours fished by fish caught. Some of the biggest names in our industry have libraries of data they have collected over the years. Another point, unlike Lake-Link, as a family of musky fisherman, you don't find a whole lot of "Where do I go", "What color do I use", "What bait to try. . ." Instead, as musky hunters, it's understood that fish don't come that easy as to live and die by the answer someone gave you. Keeping records through the years is just another addition to molding yourself into a more intuitive musky fisherman.
Some talk like they've read from a book, others talk like they wrote the book.
Edited by Sam Ubl 5/15/2009 10:22 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 400
Location: North/Central WI | Are you guys counting all muskies? Legal muskies? Muskies of a certain size? Tournament stats are only going to include legal fish for that body of water. Can't really compare those stats to somebody who counts every 26". See what I am getting at? Too many variables. |
|
| |
|
Location: SE Wisconsin | I for one am counting all musky. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1168
| All fish are counted but it's how you break down the variables that make it useful. If I am throwing a crankbait 80% of the time I theoretically will catch more fish on that than I will on a jerkbait that I am using 5% of the time. However, if on certain bodies of water, under certain conditions that jerkbait is showing a better ratio of hours per fish than the crankbait does then it begs the question...what is the more efficient bait to use under those conditions? A high number of fish caught overall on that crankbait could easily cloud your perception of what baits are "better."
Then to break it down in size categories it could easily alter your approach as well. Information is useless if you are unable to analyze it in a way that is personally beneficial. It's sort of like applying Sabremetrics to muskie fishing and after a few years of doing this you might be able to hit well known water under specific conditions with a more calculated idea of where to begin having the data to back it up as opposed to just using what has worked before on all sizes of fish under all conditions. If my data shows that under high skies one type of bait has been more efficient on a particular lake than a different bait that I've boated more fish with on the same body of water and it's a high sky condition, numbers be #*^@ed, give me the better hours per fish ratio as a starting point.
Edited by ulbian 5/15/2009 11:12 AM
|
|
| |
|
| sworrall, I was just trying to get some interesting thoughts (and numbers). Some times on these forums the subject matter get bogged down with alot of BS. One of my flaws is I never back down...so when it seems to get negative I go to attack mode....please accept my apology. Anyway great posts, I find the numbers interesting. keep them coming |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32922
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | No apology necessary, just trying to keep things civil!
I only counted legals in the records I have kept. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 619
Location: Verona, WI | I keep track of this pretty closely - in '07 I was at 7.75 hrs per fish and last year I jumped up to 10.3 hrs. If I look at total boat time including everyone it's about 5.5 hrs per fish. I get about 160 hrs/year to fish.
Looking back at the data I have found I am really streaky. I had a stretch where I caught 8 fish in 22 hrs and then had a 43 hr stretch when I didn't see a fish.
Shane
Edited by ShaneW 5/15/2009 1:06 PM
|
|
| |
|
| While you guys are counting your hours, I'm casting lures, fixing my baits or sharpening my hooks. I do think it's interesting, but I will never be that guy that keeps track of hours per fish. Not ripping on anyone that does, it's just not my style. I think of it more as days fished and not hours. 10+ hours fished is a full day and anything less to me is a 1/2 day. I averaged at least 1 fish per full day, but not quite 2. So, I guess I'm in the 10-12 hour range per fish for me, not counting other peoples catches in my boat. |
|
| |
|
| Its not hard to count your hours and fish, count them when you aren't fishing?? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 169
Location: Houlton, WI | some people say 1000 some say 10000, i think 1000 more realistric |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1169
Location: New Hope MN | boy... reading about all this success is really making me crappy
I'm lucky if i boat one a weekend. |
|
| |
|
| That's kind of old adage, Musky being the fish of 10,000 casts. It's certainly much less with many of the advantages we have with electronics, boats, knowledge, etc.
Maybe it was 10,000 cast in Grandads’ time---using oars in a wooden boat. But if you do some loose math (one cast and retrieve taking 1 minute), that's 60 casts an hour, or only 600 in a 10-hour day. USUALLY, there's a fish in the boat in a day for most these days. 10,000 casts would be---what---166 hours, or 20, 8-hour days?
I think we've whittled that down a bit from the days of wooden boats and oars when it that saying was launched.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 378
Location: Michigan | Here is a sample of the stats I kept for the year i referenced. No big fish, but not bad for numbers... Sorry for the quality of the text... Can't figure out how to get better image...
Edited by Chadster 5/15/2009 5:53 PM
Attachments
----------------
 Picture1.jpg (23KB - 156 downloads)
Picture2.jpg (51KB - 146 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1295
Location: WI | In 2007 I caught 15 muskies in about 140hrs of fishing. 3-4 were short or around 30", one was 50". In 2008 I caught 9 with 2 under 30", and the median length around 40" vs 34" from 07. I fished approx 150hrs on 08. Largest in 08 was 43.5".
I think my numbers would be better if I fished longer hours per outing vs. just more outings. Lots of times I only head out for 2-4 hours before work or get blown/rained off the lake.
I fish both numbers lakes and lakes with trophy potential. My learning curve in increasing over the past 2 seasons. I hate to think how many I would have caught in 07 if I had figure 8'd all the time like I did in 08. Whoops.
To make it more interesting, I think I saw/follow/lost/etc about 30 additional muskies in 08. So I did have a lot more action than 07, even if I caught fewer fish. I don't count fish that others boated in my boat either (which would probably be about 2 in 07, and 3 ??? in 08 if I remember right).
I do skip around and try new lakes and different presentations (trolling for example) too which I think would lower my percentages.
Edited by JKahler 5/15/2009 8:45 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 103
| I keep track of everything I can each year. It gives me something to look through each winter. In 2007 I fished 360.5 hours and caught 15 Muskies. Which would be 24 hours per fish. Lat year I fished 322.5 hours and boated 21 Muskies. Which would equal 15.5 hours per fish. I counted every musky I caught. |
|
| |
|
| Troy, I didn't keep track of man hours but with about 625 hours, I would say 500 of them I had a partner in the boat, so 1125 man hours 168 fish....
my personal ratio was a fish for every 6.7 hours in the boat but I don't look at it that way and look at the boat as one/team and figure it out that way, an avg we as a team/boat put a fish in the net under 3.75 hours on the water.
I also only count/keep track of fish over 30".
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1220
| Well, here's my attempt at "Muskie Math 101." I'm guessing that if you track a whole lot of tournaments, and grant a little respect for the majority of the anglers being somewhat skilled, and the waters being somewhat decent--you will find a average tournament catch rate of about 15%. Now if you then take (let's say) 8 hours for a tournament day times a hundred guys to produce those 15 fish, then you have 15 fish into 800 hours or 53 angler hours per caught fish. Another way of looking at the same number is that you would need to fish 9 hours a day for almost six days to get the one musky that you have coming. Naturally, you also have to keep in mind that tournaments eliminate all the early daybreak and evening hours that can be so productive, to say nothing about no night times at all. Personally, I believe my own catch rate to be something around two legal fish for a hard fished three day weekend-sun up to sun down. Marty Forman |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1168
| Tournament numbers once again only give a raw number that is broken down into an hour per fish ratio. To me it needs to go farther so I won't use the data provided by tournament numbers for a hardcore analysis. If I can get verification on some of the other factors then it is a wealth of information. For instance...the PMTT that was held on Petenwell a few years back. Fish were caught shallow and fish were reportedly caught deep trolling bulldawgs. An hour to fish ratio is only beneficial in that regard if those two tactics are pulled out and examined on their own. How many hours were spent trolling bulldawgs like that by the entire field? How many hours were spent by the entire field up shallow? That's information that we don't have. Sure, if you start to see high numbers of fish being caught it does turn some heads but to me it's because out of a field of 30 or so boats you'll know that a wide variety of tactics are being used.
When I have been a judgeboat for some local tournaments I have worked with our fishery manager to provide him with a bunch of info that could be useful for him. Temps, depths, time of day, baits, locations, etc. When we've done this he's been along with me and we were also tagging fish for a project he is working on. Spending full days on the water with a biologist who is looking for this information has just increased my personal desire to use any variables possible. The biologist is not Pointerpride...when I fish with him we usually talk all day long about what TJ has told either of us that has made us laugh and/or shake our heads.
I won't put my info into graphs like Chadster does but I will run tables with a handful of other variables included.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 264
| It always frustrates me when you here of first-time muskie anglers that go out and catch a fish in their first ten casts. Especially when you go out and try for days at a time and get no breaks that fall your way. So i guess to answer your question it can range from any side of the spectrum |
|
| |
|
Posts: 55
| too many casts, not enough fish! that's my ratio |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4080
Location: Elko - Lake Vermilion | tmusky,
It sounds like you and I have the same ratio.
I don't EVEN want to know, it would spoil all the fun that I thought I was having, Ha,Ha,Ha......
I don't care, just let me get out on the water and chuck some baits in the right direction of some muskies..
Jerome |
|
| |
|
Posts: 724
Location: Southern W.Va. | Fished this weekend for about 8 hours with no fish , so my ratio has dropped from 1 fish every 10 hrs. to 1 every 15hrs.
Still had fun!!
Mauser |
|
| |
|
Posts: 425
Location: Roseau | Trolling on LOTW here are the stats.
Avg. size = 40.5"
Total Hours = 71
Total fish = 16
Avg. Hours per fish = 4.4375
Thanks |
|
| |
|
| fisher, thanks alot !!... thats what I was looking for without all the fanfare |
|
| |
|
Posts: 425
Location: Roseau | No problem, I wont even post my casting results, I am a very unlucky caster!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 717
Location: Grand Rapids, MI | Last year, I was at about a 10hr/fish average. Some days I'd go for 2 hours and bag one. Other times, I wouldn't get one until the 3rd outing. This year has been tough for me so far. about 30 hours in, and only one fish to show for it. Hopefully it gets a little better! I've been able to trigger them, just haven't got them all the way to the net. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 443
Location: Indiana | Fished the Indiana Muskie Classic this weekend. It was a tough bite. I don't know the total number of fisherman, but this is a reasonable estimate.
90 boats
180 fisherman
22 hours of fishing per fisherman
32 fish caught
Yields 124 man hours hours per fish. Like I said, it was a tough bite. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4080
Location: Elko - Lake Vermilion | Thats not bad, for a Tournament
Jerome |
|
| |
|
Posts: 33
Location: NE Ohio | You wisconsin boys don't know how lucky you got it.... I was up to about 120 hrs (some from last year) and finally netted a 39 last weekend..
I fish rivers and lakes here- there is a ton of pressure with few numbers of fish. When leesville (best numbers lake in Ohio) gets really hot- expect to be 5th or 6th boat in a line trolling a shore... Then the bass fisherman are throwing their spinnerbaits all year hooking a few and educating them.. Fun. Fun.  |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | this May has started off pretty dang slow so far...72 hours in, 9 over 30" in the net with 4 lost...have had action from from 104 fish though...some big ones were moving yesterday ...one was pushing 50"
Edited by MSKY HNR 5/22/2009 3:58 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2754
Location: Mauston, Wisconsin | The question was "Ratio fish per hours fished". It said nothing about legal versus 26" - In Rhode Island a 26" muskie is legal- there is no size limit.... For me worst was 1996-2002 Zero fish with very limited hours fishing. Moved back to WI, and went on the 1st MF Cass Lake Outing & broke the spell (~ 40 hrs - 1 fish -> a 44"). Saw & had on other fish. But that 44" spotted was sweet! My best in WI has been 9 fish in the net in ~7 hours of total fishing time - fishing alone. Best in Canada was 17 fish in ~ 60 hrs of total on the water time fishing muskies with my good buddy Mike Hoffmann on a fly-in. We also fished laker's and smallies on that trip. It varies, location , time of year, weather, feeding windows, live with it or become a couch potato! If you're fishing muskies to just catch fish, maybe you should try another sport or species.
Have fun!
Al |
|
| |
|
Posts: 724
Location: Southern W.Va. | My best week was in '03 on LOTW at the outing with MuskyFirst on Cedar Island. Caught 13 muskys in 6 days of fishing. Probably averaged about 12 hr of fishing a day. Can't even think of how many I saw or lost, probably another 10 or 12 as bloom was kinda bad and water off-colored. Still 1 musky for every 6 hrs fished or there abouts ain't too bad in my book. Best day was 5 fish with 2 days with no fish. Caught my largest there, a 45"er, but saw my 1st 50" fish while fishing with Steve Jonesi on " 10 Cast Bay" ( just what I call it).
For what it's worth
Mauser |
|
| |
|
| I meant "legal" fish per hours fished. Who cares about the little ones, until they grow up. I understand all the different "situations"...so that's way the question was for the season. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2754
Location: Mauston, Wisconsin | Are you for real? Or are you the same muskie fisherman who has fished muskies for 36 years and doesn't know how to fillet a fish? Legal? How do you qualify that one? On Lac Seul there is no legal, even a 60" fish is illegal. What about lakes w/ 54" limits like Crow (Kagagi) or Dinorwic, etc ?
I suspect you have watched to many episodes of "Numbers"! Let's go straight to the recycle bin, this is like herding rabbit's!
Have fun!
Al |
|
| |
|
| Esox maniac... Try kissing some girls when you get bored ! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 929
Location: Rhinelander. | Not sure as I would have to total hours and do the math. I will say this for you guys doing a fish every 3 or 4 hours is great. I just wonder are you counting all skies or just legal ones. I also am curious as to what waters your fishing to do that. Its impressive to me to average that. Good job to you that are.
Pfeiff |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2058
| 3000 Hours no "legals" on Lake of the Woods - does that help you Water_prix? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2754
Location: Mauston, Wisconsin | Don - I count all fish- to me counting just legals makes no sense at all, i.e., because legal really has no fixed length definition throughout the muskie's range. Don't get me wrong either, I like, everyone else have days when I get skunked-don't even see a fish. However, I also don't have a lot of time on the water chasing muskies - family/job etc. The economics are also tough right now- just working my butt off to help the company bottom line & keep jobs. Like the State of WI employees, we were notified we had to take two weeks vacation this year - 1 week in -> July-Sept and 1 week over Chjristmas. That doesn't bother me. I just don't know if I can afford to fish muskies in N. WI or MN that week in July-Sept. So I'll probably just fish locally.
I count myself lucky to be able to fish muskies 100hrs a year. Would I like to have more time to fish muskies, sure! But, a man has to have priorities. Why am I sitting here on Memorial Day? - Just finished plowing & disking the garden's. Now it's back outside to straighten out the garage and other honey do stuff! Then it's off to the Cemetary to see my Dad and pay my respects to the other Veteran's who sacraficed their lives or a part of their lives so my family can do what we do-> live free!
The 9 fish in 7 hours was on the WI River. Reef Hawg (MF member) knows the area. The 17 fish on the Canadian flyin was on the lake that got me hooked on muskies. Bob Pieske (MF member) also knows that lake. The really interesting part is that those fish were at the end of the season.
The Canadian flyin was last week of September, whereas the WI River fish were last week of November. Both time period's had very similar weather patterns, including rain, sleet & snow. We were the last ones into the flyin cabin - when they picked us up, they shutdown the cabin and loaded up the boat motors.
God Bless all the Veterans!
Have fun!
Al
Edited by ESOX Maniac 5/28/2009 5:36 AM
|
|
| |
|
| Al, I'm perplexed why you jabbed me on the 23rd. Your last post was good. I fish like you maybe 100 hours for musky a season and the rest of the time other species. I was just looking for a ratio, especially from the people that exclusivly fish for them. It seems to me the "musky hunters" are "extremely" passionate about fishing for that species. I wanted to how much time spent for success...I used "legal" more for a realitive state of mind, rather than a quantative result. Sorry if it was confusing. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 222
Location: c.wis | over 6 years of part time fishing/ 60 hrs a season- 18 fish, most under 40" 4 over 45" |
|
| |
|
Location: Right Here | We actually do a breakdown for the Indiana Muskie Classic every year to put in our booklet for the following year. This was what it looked like after one of our BEST years.
(Sorry for the length, but it is good reading.)
----------------------------------------------------------
2006 IMC “fun or not so fun” facts
While the muskie is certainly not the fish of 10,000 casts here in the Hoosier State catching one is not as easy as they make it seem on those fishing DVDs we consume during the long cold off season. After getting pumped up all winter on those TV Muskies I just know that come spring I’ll have a fifty in the boat by noon the first day on the water. Right? Yea, right.
Just to help me keep my muskie catching or not catching in perspective I have compiled some data from the 2006 Indiana Muskie Classic. Reviewing what 200 good sticks did on Indiana’s best muskie lakes over a productive three day period helps me to “keep it real” regarding my muskie catching expatiations.
From a fish catching point of view the 10th Annual IMC was one of the most successful Classics ever with over 100 fish caught, but on the other hand it’s still muskie fishing after all.
So here we go with the 10th Annual IMC fun or not so fun facts.
Who caught fish:
Over three days 206 fisher folk caught 104 fish.
36 percent or 71 of the anglers caught a fish in the tournament.
9 percent or 10 of the anglers caught two or more fish.
5 skilled slash lucky fishermen caught 4 fish.
Information breakdown by day:
45 percent of the fish were caught on the first day.
28 percent were caught on day two.
27 percent were caught on Sunday.
Information breakdown by lake:
Webster: Produced 51 fish or 49% of the total 2006 IMC catch
Average length was 35.39 inches
55% were less than 36 inches
45% were 36 inches or larger
15% were 40 inches or larger
6% were over 42 inches in length
The largest fish was 47 inches.
Tippy: Produced 27 fish or 25% of the total 2006 IMC catch
Average length was 40.18 inches
15% were less than 36 inches
85% were 36 inches or larger
50% were 40 inches or larger
42% were over 42 inches in length
19% were over 44 inches in length
The largest fish was 49.4 inches.
Barbee: Produced 26 fish or 25% of the total 2006 IMC catch
Average length was 36.5 inches
37% were less than 36 inches
63% were 36 inches or larger
19% were 40 inches or larger
15% were over 42 inches in length
The largest fish was 44 inches.
How long does it really take to catch a muskie:
200 plus folks fished a three day, three lake tournament for a total of about 4,400 angling hours.
It took:
42 angler hours to catch a 30 inch or better fish.
169 angler hours to catch a 40 or larger fish.
400 angler hours to catch something over 42 inches.
880 angler hours to catch a 45 plus.
2,200 angler hours to a 49 incher. Ouch, that’s 275 work days or almost 7 work weeks
Each lake received about 1466 angler hours of fishing pressure.
On Webster
28 angler hours or 3.5 work days to catch a 30 inch fish.
63 angler hours or over one and a half work weeks to catch a 36 inch fish
290 angler hours to catch a 40 plus inch fish. That’s over seven work weeks.
On Tippy:
56 angler hours or 7 work days to catch a 30 inch fish.
69 angler hours, again over one and a half work weeks to catch a 36 inch fish
117 angler hours to catch a 40 plus inch fish. Obviously the best bet for a big fish!
On Barbee:
30 angler hours or almost 4 work days to catch a 30 inch fish.
85 angler hours or over two work weeks to catch a 36 inch fish
290 angler hours to catch a 40 plus inch fish. That’s over seven work weeks.
Please don’t think I am a dork. I really don’t enjoy punching the numbers on a calculator mostly because it makes me feel stupid that I don’t know what all of those little squiggly signs and symbols mean, but I do take some comfort in knowing just how challenging it is to boat a muskie and keeping my expectations real makes the hours and days, okay I confess its more like weeks, between fish a little easier to stand.
Keep the faith. You are on the right lakes at the right time of year. Keep your bait in the water and it will happen. I’ll see you out there. I’ll be easy to recognize. I’ll be the guy scratching my head and shrugging my shoulders.
(Written By somebody else)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 413
Location: Madison WI | If we are talking about legal fish then my ratio for 2009 is about 250 hrs per legal fish, otherwise my ratio per fish for 2009 is about 31 hours per fish so far, being skunked for five 12 hour days didn't help the ratio either. |
|
| |
|
| J Routt thanks alot. I wonder, on the daily breakdown the catch goes steadily down from day 1 to 3. The $64000 question ; is it because of pressure on the fish or fisherman fatigue ? any thoughts from the" tourney guys" ? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | Personally I don’t think the number of hours it takes to catch a fish means a rats butt. A lot of variables can make great looking numbers, and a lot can make for terrible looking numbers. Knowing the right water can make one look good even though they may just be an average fisherman. On the flip side if a great fisherman doesn’t have the “right” kind of water available to them they may end up looking like a terrible fisherman just by numbers. It’s all in context.
I use to keep records of fish caught, but not hours. I quit keeping track a few years ago of fish caught. This year I may pick it up again, but for the reason for crunching some numbers in the off season and to deep dive into some theories. Too much of a pain in my opinion to try and be get too geeked out into the data collecting, and for me it takes some of the fun away.
Huge number days throw your average for a loop, and in my opinion more so than do “dead” stretches. A 6 fish day can really skew the average even if you fish another 5 days and didn’t boat a thing. A great weekend will skew things even more. Those that have the privilege of fishing whenever they want may have skewed results compared to the weekend warrior. Jumping on a pattern and only fish 3-4 hours an outing but boating 3 fish is not uncommon when you are on a hot pattern. If you have the luxury of fishing that pattern for several days guess what, your average may be skewed. Take those that fish when they can, for as long as they can. Take me. 20 hour day is not uncommon. String 2 or three of those together and by golly I would need an average of 4 fish a day to just be under a fish every 5 hours (just picking a number). On some occasions very do-able. Most of the time that doesn’t happen. Take a guy that may only get out for 2-3 hours after work. Unbeknownst to the poor angler the pattern is in the morning, and the afternoon bite is pretty much nil. It doesn’t take long for hours to add up without any fish boated. If the angler got too wrapped up in numbers they may just quit fishing rather than enjoy just getting out on the water.
To each their own I guess. In my opinion a body of water can make someone look like a hero, and on other bodies of water a zero. Picking a body of water doesn’t make one a good fisherman or one a bad fisherman.
|
|
| |
|
| my 2 cents ; I can understand crunching the numbers CAN be a "geek" thing. However....I have alot of experience offshore and crunching the numbers is very important , because of the MONEY involved. The process on salt water is very expensive; boats, captain/crew, mooring costs, electronics, equipment, large tournament fee's, fuel, etc. BIG INVESTMENT. So with sports where there's big money, the numbers matter,example: baseball--batting average, golf--under/over par, football--passer rating, hockey--plus/minus, basketball--freethrow % ,on and on. Espn is all about the numbers. Today, IMO, musky fishing has evolved into a big money sport and people are very passionate about that fish. They spend countless hours and money i.e.,vacations, boats, guides, touraments, equipment, etc. to catch a 50". The numbers ARE important to the full time musky hunter. Their not casting a zebco with a five of diamonds off the dock anymore. For the casual guy, I agree, the numbers don't mean a much. But fishing full time for Mr. Musky.... Time is money / money is time. just ask a scout for the Minnesota Twins about the numbers...... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | Some data is useful I agree whole heartedly. Number of hours per fish is not important in my opinion. Knowing that my hours per fish of lets say 3 last year will not help me or my clients put more fish in the boat this year. Now knowing that last year the water temps ran fairly cool and that the 10” Jake put 30% of the total fish in the boat IS important in terms of helping to get desired results this year.
Geeked out wasn’t meant to be a bad thing. Going that far into it makes it fun, for some. There is a point though that spending too much time at what doesn’t matter will only hurt you when it does matter.
|
|
| |
|
Location: SE Wisconsin | My question is this. When you catch a stocker, or lose a fish in battle, does that mean another 10,000 casts? Kidding of course. |
|
| |
|
| Agreed, it's about enjoying what your doing, whether it's for silver or sport, but watch out; you might get a client this year who's the dean of mathmatics for some big ten university....karma and Neptune are buddies |
|
| |
|
| I think keeping a journal and looking at past success / failure helps you figure out where and when to be to capitalize on the right situations.
looking back at my journal can help me plan on what lakes I should be, when the water temps or conditions are right so my fish per hour ratio is low.. I'm not out there to wash baits for 20 hrs and not catch fish...that isn't enjoyable to me..maybe for some 20 hours of no fish can be fun...no thanks, I like action and fish in the net! it's only a stat that you can use to compare your own seasons/trips as we all fish diff waters, diff times and diff ways...but it is interesting if someone is boasting about x # of fish they caught only to find out they had 1000 hours to do it..puts some things in perspective |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1938
Location: Black Creek, WI | Wow. Passionate discussion.
I keep a journal/log. The way I have it set up, I'm capable of tracking hours per fish. Fish per trip. Average size. And all kinds of statistics.
I think most of the "debate" in this discussion revolves around HOW those stats are used. If they are used to pad one's EGO.... or to boast about themselves.... well... then those stats are futile for reasons outlined by Kopke, BN, and others.
I use Hours per Fish and Average Size to help me understand whether the changes I make in a season are a good INVESTMENT. For me, its all about ROI. Pending what my goal may be.... I will make changes to my gameplan in hopes to achieve that goal as easily and effectively as possible.
If my Hours per Fish are going down.... well... that's a good thing, right? However if my average size is also going down.... that may NOT be such a good thing. Thus, I may want to make a change to what I'm doing.
Or.... if I'm fishing the way history suggests I should.... and my stats are not up to par.... that might be an indicator to me that I may need to "step out of the box" and fish a little differently that season. Old patterns may have fizzled and its time to look for new patterns. Thus, I find personal value in keeping these types of measurements.
But, if someone wants to say "I average 3 hours per fish with an average size of 49.5 inches" as a vehicle to demonstrate their superiority.... well... I say those people need an ego check.
Fun discussion and thanks for the laugh. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | The point I was attempting to make is just what Brad and Long brought up in their last posts. Average hours per fish is only beneficial to THAT particular angler. I would argue though if it really is beneficial to THAT particualr angler though. We all have good years, and we all have bad years. If I am coming off of a great year like Brad is, and end up having a so-so year going or a terrible year going how will last years average hours per fish number help me this year? I think subconciously, without knowing the average hours per fish, we already know we need to do something different to turn things around or accept the results thus far as such.
Perhaps I don't get it as I haven't tracked it, and perhaps I should try it before I knock it anymore. |
|
| |
|
| Cisco, assuming the fisherman new what he was doing, and he was spending a lot time on the water without the previous success, wouldn't knowing ratio's be helpful ; changes in lake conditions(pollution,new resort, more lake traffic etc) lake becoming fished out, or the fisherman himself. Fatigue, boredom, age or just plain bad luck. The numbers would lead him somewhere....maybe golf next year??????? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | If you wait a whole year, or even half the year to get the numbers that are telling you either you have to change what you are doing or that the lake has changed is much too late. Not responsive enough for me. Lakes go through hot/cold streaks all the time. We are all aware of that. Relying on a number to tell me that the lake is perhaps "cold" isn't being very intuitive. A lot of fisherman know on any particular water what to expect for action. I don't need a chart, graph, spread sheet or whatever else to tell me when I should perhaps change a lake or change what I am doing. I need to realize that on the water as I go, and make the call at the moment.
I rely on intuition and the fabled sixth sense. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Making the correct decision isn't important, but just making a decision promtly IS important. Sure some can use their data and quickly make decisions, but knowing musky fisherman or just fisherman in general most start wondering what to do with that data. They start wasting time on the water.
Again, much more important factors in making decisions than an average hours per fish number. To me some keep track of the number just because it is something fun to keep track of and interesting to look back on. I'd rather be sharpening hooks, tying leaders, looking at maps, and so on!
I thought about taking up golf, but then I would have to start wearing a visor! 
Edited by CiscoKid 5/27/2009 8:22 PM
|
|
| |
|
| Cisco, yea, sometimes just good old fashioned gut instincts are the best solutions. Wearing a visor.... Now that's funny. If you give up fishing you might try stand-up comedy.....lmao |
|
| |
|
| Water,
I keep very detailed records and have been muskie fishing for the past 19 years. Last year I fished muskies for 142.45 hours and caught 22 fish. That means that "on average" I caught one fish every 4 hours out. Those fish ranged in size from 24 inches to 49 inches (average 39") I primarily fish Wisconsin but take a trip to LOTW every summer. I hope that helps answer your question
G |
|
| |
|
| it depends on when u fish.......if u work the "WINDOWS" your ratio per hour can be very high...i too keep logs and time fished and it really varies season to season.It also depends on what body of water u fish....I can go to some small musky lakes up here in Ontario and have 20 -30 fish days yet the reality is you have to work for your fish.. |
|
| |
