Muskie Discussion Forums

Forums | Calendars | Albums | Quotes | Language | Blogs Search | Statistics | User Listing
You are logged in as a guest. ( logon | register )
Moderators: Slamr

View previous thread :: View next thread
Jump to page : 1
Now viewing page 1 [30 messages per page]

Muskie Fishing -> General Discussion -> Cave run vs Kinkaid and the differnece in size
 
Message Subject: Cave run vs Kinkaid and the differnece in size
davep
Posted 4/1/2004 8:18 PM (#102547)
Subject: Cave run vs Kinkaid and the differnece in size




Posts: 642


Location: mount prospect illinois
This was brought up in conversation outside of this board but i was wondering what you guys think. Cave run and kinkaid are often compared. Cave run has a habit of putting out 50 inchers and Kinkaid doesnt. Why is that? Is it the strain of muskie that is so different between the two? Population density? (cant be baitfish availablity because there are a ton in both lakes) so what is your hypothesis. I know project green gene is looking into this but what do you guys think?
BenR
Posted 4/1/2004 9:26 PM (#102562 - in reply to #102547)
Subject: RE: Cave run vs Kinkaid and the differnece in size


It is an interesting thing. What makes it even more goofy is that kinkaid puts out a much larger fish on average. More mid to upper fourties.......Just lacks the 50's...Ben
2Rodknocker
Posted 4/1/2004 11:29 PM (#102586 - in reply to #102547)
Subject: RE: Cave run vs Kinkaid and the differnece in size




Posts: 459


Location: New Baden IL
That is a great question. In my opinion, the Cave and Green River must have some different strain of muskies in it. I know they are working on the project Green Gene here in Illinois, and I think that the Missouri dept. of Conservation are working on the same thing.
I think they are planing on stocking Kentucky strain fish in Missouri waters to see if they have the potential to reach the magic 50" mark there.
The only bad thing is the time it takes a fish to reach that mark, if they do, and then capturing one and getting the data from it.
I think it's amazing that they are willing to put out the money and the time to do that kind of research.
Rodney LaCaze
Barry Wesley
Posted 4/2/2004 6:37 AM (#102598 - in reply to #102547)
Subject: RE: Cave run vs Kinkaid and the differnece in size


I have been told by a reputable fisherman, a doctor, that he caught a 51" muskie below the spillway. Now, obviously it has been a number of years ago because the spillway barrier has be operational for quite some time.

Now, I know what you are thinking, yeah sure.... 51". Well, this man is one of the very few that I would believe under these circumstances.

However, I know of no other 50+ fish that has been taken out of Lake Kinkaid.

Both lakes are beautiful and a joy to fish.

davep
Posted 4/2/2004 8:33 AM (#102617 - in reply to #102598)
Subject: RE: Cave run vs Kinkaid and the differnece in size


There was one caught last year but was very skinny. Kinkaid fish can be pretty chunky so this one may have been stressed or sick. Isnt there a "Kentucky or cave run strain"? Maybe they can handle the warmer temps better. I have heard the Leech lake strain wont/dont do well in the warmer southern waters.
tomyv
Posted 4/2/2004 8:38 AM (#102619 - in reply to #102617)
Subject: RE: Cave run vs Kinkaid and the differnece in size




Posts: 1310


Location: Washington, PA
I don't know about the "strain" but, those cave run fish definately look differant than any other muskies. Cave Run is a bigger fishery, not to mention that Cave run fishes "big", that could have something to do with it. Lot's of spots on the cave.
Chris Haley
Posted 4/3/2004 9:19 PM (#102768 - in reply to #102547)
Subject: RE: Cave run vs Kinkaid and the differnece in size





Posts: 73


Location: Hazard KY
kinkaid's size is not a factor it is directly related to the type of fish stocked in the lake. I guide on buckhorn lake KY which is half the size of kinkaid and the biggest fish we boated last year was a 42 pound 54" class fish. Kinkaid has some of the best forage base that i have seen anywhere it should grow some pigs. Kentuckys fish is a native stream fish from the ohio river system and can be found in many of tennessee's river as well.
they grow fast and have a moderate girth but the major difference is the way they handle warm water temps and turbitity.

MO has the right ideal pomm will be awsome when those fish get some age on them

Good fishin
Chris Haley
www.kentuckymuskie.com
kevin
Posted 4/3/2004 11:16 PM (#102775 - in reply to #102547)
Subject: RE: Cave run vs Kinkaid and the differnece in size





Posts: 1335


Location: Chicago, Beverly
"Kentuckys fish is a native stream fish from the ohio river system and can be found in many of tennessee's river as well. " I kinda thought that may be the difference between the two... I do think that the IL DNR may have gotten some Kentucky strain fish around 4 years ago I think..to stock in Kinkaid.. If I can find the article i saw it in I will post it.. Otherwise a lot of the IL fish are Leach Lake Strain and some from the Fox Chain of Lakes.
davep
Posted 4/4/2004 9:10 AM (#102782 - in reply to #102775)
Subject: RE: Cave run vs Kinkaid and the differnece in size




Posts: 642


Location: mount prospect illinois
Kevin:
That would be cool if you could find it. I think i also heard that the Leech Lake strain fish are not doing as well as hoped here in Illinois (third party info/rumor/not scientific). My very limiited knowledge of this seems to lead me to believe that the "Ohio river/cave run" strain could possibly be the answer due to their apparent tolerance for warmer water temps. At least for the southern lakes. I guess i will wait for the Project green gene results and see what they say. Interesting though.
jerryb
Posted 4/5/2004 12:08 AM (#102860 - in reply to #102547)
Subject: RE: Cave run vs Kinkaid and the differnece in size




Posts: 688


Location: Northern IL
I fish both lakes so to me it's very simple and we don't need a "green jeans" or what ever they call it,,,, it all comes down to a native fish being stocked vs. one being planted. Also,

All things being equal the lake with the depth and the mass of water available is the one that will produce the pigs in much greater numbers. The normal sanctuary zone for the muskie is 45'-55'. This is under ""normal"" water and weather conditions,, and much deeper under adverse conditions.

Kinkaid 2750 acres. Cave Run 8270 @ summer pool and a max of 14,870 acres. Cave Run has some natural reproduction going on see attached:

Kinkaid's thermo sets up in 15' and @ the Cave 20'-30'.


Zoom - | Zoom 100% | Zoom + | Expand / Contract | Open New window
Click to expand / contract the width of this image
(cave3incher.jpg)



Attachments
----------------
Attachments cave3incher.jpg (32KB - 152 downloads)
Chris Haley
Posted 4/6/2004 4:08 PM (#103096 - in reply to #102547)
Subject: RE: Cave run vs Kinkaid and the differnece in size





Posts: 73


Location: Hazard KY
I don't think lake size or sanctuary depth has anything to do with the ability to grow fifity inchers I am shure that is plays a minor role. our lake is 8ft deep at winter pool with pot holes that may reach 15 feet. in the summer our thermacline is 6 to 15 ft depends on the rain fall . The lake is 1200 acres and has an average depth less than 20ft. we still get over 10 fish a year over fifty with one in the mid fifities every season. It all boils down to which fish can handle the warmer temps.

In summer cave run has no oxygen below 20 ft this info is supplied by the corps of engineers. the head water of the lake has oxygen from top to bottom.

good fishin
Chris Haley
www.kentuckymuskie.com
jerryb
Posted 4/7/2004 10:53 PM (#103303 - in reply to #103096)
Subject: RE: Cave run vs Kinkaid and the differnece in size




Posts: 688


Location: Northern IL
Minor role????

When it's all said and done Buckhorn lake will "NOT" be in the running for Kentucky's state record fish.
On the other hand if a lake like Cumberland was to be stocked,,, Now we're talking about possibilities!!!!!! Cland has produced many state records including a 24lbs+/- state record walleye?
mikie
Posted 4/8/2004 6:44 AM (#103319 - in reply to #102547)
Subject: RE: Cave run vs Kinkaid and the differnece in size





Location: Athens, Ohio
I think one of the other differences involves the hatchery. At the Minor hatchery at Cave Run, they slip those fingerlings a sip of 'shine every now & then. Not only adds to the girth but makes 'em mean as a snake. m
Chris Haley
Posted 4/11/2004 7:08 PM (#103674 - in reply to #102547)
Subject: RE: Cave run vs Kinkaid and the differnece in size





Posts: 73


Location: Hazard KY
. what I am saying is Kinkaid should produce 50 inch fish. Not Buckhorn is the greatest Kentucky lake ever, but it does punch out 50 plus inch fish every season and its smaller than kinkaid. thats my point hate to step on your toes.

Cumberland lake has muskies in it they are in the south fork and bernside area you should know that! you should fish there.
and leave real muskie water to people who care about their beloved muskie.

Good fishin
Chris
lew kornman
Posted 4/12/2004 10:49 AM (#103732 - in reply to #102860)
Subject: RE: Cave run vs Kinkaid and the differnece in size


The fish shown here appears to be a brook silverside. The are found in small schools near the shoreline and often jump from the water when disturbed.
firstsixfeet
Posted 4/12/2004 1:27 PM (#103760 - in reply to #102547)
Subject: RE: Cave run vs Kinkaid and the differnece in size


Well then, are you saying the brook silverside DOES reproduce in Cave Run Lake, or that Buck Perry is alive and living in Graceland, or that actually Louie Spray did NOT catch the world record muskie?

I guess I am not sure where this discussion is going to or coming from but it would be fairly common for different strains to grow to different lengths regardless of the habitat makeup, that would be point #1. The second thing that would be obvious is that Cave Run does enjoy a deeper thermocline and probably more environmental comfort factors than does Buckhorn or Kincaid, with also a large amount of sanctuary water in both upper arms of the reservoir and also a running stream with habitat above the lake. Buckhorn must be considered with the stream above it as additional sanctuary and water temperature and habitat choices. Not having seen a map of Kincaid I wonder how much "escape water" there is in this body of water during the summer? I would sure hate to be caught in IL for an entire summer, might make me go off my feed too.
kevin
Posted 4/12/2004 8:40 PM (#103812 - in reply to #102547)
Subject: RE: Cave run vs Kinkaid and the differnece in size





Posts: 1335


Location: Chicago, Beverly
here is a look at kinkaid lake: http://www.kinkaidlakeguides.com/art/lake.gif taken from Al Nutty's website(hope he doesn't mind..)

Edited by kevin 4/12/2004 8:41 PM
Jump to page : 1
Now viewing page 1 [30 messages per page]
Jump to forum :
Search this forum
Printer friendly version
E-mail a link to this thread

(Delete all cookies set by this site)