|
|
Posts: 50
Location: Central Wi. | Anyone know what happened today? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 43
| Junkman was there, he said no legals (40") were caught. Not sure if any sublegals were caught. been tough there for a few years. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 929
Location: Rhinelander. | And what does that say about a lake that has had a 40 inch size limit on it for sometime? It kind of surprises me as you'd think with it being 40 for years now you'd see alot more 40 plus being caught. Is the bigger size limit working there or not working? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 619
Location: Verona, WI | I fish that lake quite a bit as I spend 2 weeks every summer there with the family at Sunrise Lodge. I have long periods without fish and then seen some pretty good runs. However, I have never seen the numbers or quality of fish that I have seen in other lakes. Part of me wonders if it is the forage situation. LVD used to be well known for large panfish (particularly perch) but now you have to do a lot of sorting. Maybe the smaller panfish have reduced the musky forage?
Shane |
|
| |
|
Posts: 218
| I lived on the lake for 10 summers and spent another 9 summers less then 1 mile from the boat landing. In looking at my logs for that time period I see a trend toward fewer and smaller muskies. The lake bottomed out for me about the time the 40" limit was put in place. I expected to begin seeing more large fish but the opposite seemed to happen. I saw fewer fish with each passing summer and the size did not change much. There was still an occasional mid to upper 40" muskie seen and caught each year but in general the 40" size limit did have the desired and expected results. I gave up fighting the trend and moved. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 941
Location: Freedom, WI | Ask Rick Lax how many fish he gets in from LVD and that could be your answer. It seems there are many people that do not know what a reproduction is. Something to think about. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 393
Location: Hopefully on the water | This tourney out there has had many times that it take a name out of the hat for the winner to be determined. I have fished LVD for 14 years and only have 1 legal fish from out there that I caught. I have seen some very nice fish and one of the largest fish out that I have seen out there. But getting them to eat is another story. I don't think the WMT would move from there because of the history of the lake and being the first place they had one of their tourneys on. I personally think it is the weeds out there. There is very little for weed lines. The whole lake is weeds out there. Even the walleyes over the last couple of years has dropped for us incredibly. Just my thoughts. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1220
| Actually, in addition to the tournament, I had my family with me and stayed from Thursday till Monday. Caught a pretty little Tiger Thursday night and what would have been a decent keeper on most other lakes Friday during practice....then Zippedee-Doodah during the tournament and in lighter fishing Sunday and Monday. Does have an incredible population of 20" slimers that will hit anything you toss. I really don't have a big history on LVD but I totally think the unique conditions on Saturday led to the zero result for the WMT--not the lake. And, by the way, we had the most beautiful, terrific cabin at the Thunder Bay Resort there and were treated just great by truly wonderful people who run the place. I will return to the lake, the resort, and the tournament. I just kept thinking that I was about to catch a 54 inch Tiger and I want that replica hanging in my office. Marty Forman |
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| Wow no suprise on LVD, I believe over the past 8 or 9 years there has been an average of 2.5 40 plus inch fish registered in this WMT tourney And looking at the Hillside Tourney that is later in June your always lucky if there is one or two legals caught in that tourney as well year after year many years it's draw. I agree this fishery has gone downhill, fishing it for the last 15 years I see less and less fish each year. I agree with Roger in that a ton of fish are kept each year out of LVD, ive seen plenty of fish pics in front yards to make me puke. Seen a stack of poloroids at a lakefront baitshop where one elder guy had kept 3 47"s in the same year. It is one of those lakes that desperately needs a 50 inch size limit but bordering with Michigan that is going to be hard to accomplish. LVD no doubt still hold good fish but I think the overall numbers are not even close to what they used to be. I hope things will change in the future, they just stocked a couple thousand ski's in there last year.
Mr Musky |
|
| |
|
Posts: 929
Location: Rhinelander. | I don't understand why you'd want a 50 inch limit on the lake when fishing has gone downhill since the 40 inch limit was put in place. I think the lake needs a real good hard look at. I've fished it for 35 years and have not botherd to the last 3. I think something else is going on there and I don't know what and not sure anyone does. Keep it in mind that when the locals don't fish it much anymore for muskies something is up. They have a better pulse on things then a guy who just visits a few times a year. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1220
| You know, I think it was also mentioned above, but this is not a lake that is easy to pick apart looking at a contour map for an hour over a beer the night before. I went to Cave for the PMTT earlier this year and a full 1/3 of the guys were in one small area and another full 1/3 of the field was in another fairly small area. At my home lake (Pewaukee) too, I could mark 5 or 6 spots for you and pretty much guarantee that eighty percent of the tournament fish will be caught there. LVD is different. I think this lake has a unique structure of incredible weed beds that makes it a crap shoot to find fish. It is also hard and frustrating to fish it. Still, my experience of having this lake bring me to my knees this week will not turn me away from it. I think it's likely to be chock stuffed with monsters waiting for me to get to be just a little better of an angler. I'm not done with LVD. Marty Forman |
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| Don, I believe a 50" size limit would protect what's left in there. I agree the lake needs to be looked at big time. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | I will pressure this with I don’t fish LVD much. Haven’t in a couple of years. However, all I keep hearing is how bad the weeds are every year. From what I saw most of the lake is weeds, and hence why I don’t fish it much. Back in the “hayday” did the lake have so many weeds? Did the dominant weed type change from then to now?
When you have 2000 acres of weeds it will make it pretty tough to target those fish.
Lakes go through cycles with fish numbers and size structure…regardless of size limit. I guess I don’t understand the reasoning that because there was a 40” size limit put into place that now the lake only has small muskies. Take for example slot limits. Usually if a lake has nothing but small fish, and a slot is put into place it doesn’t take long before a ton of fish are within that slot. So if you put a 40” limit on the lake you would generally find a lot of fish near that size. However that doesn’t sound like it’s the case. Why not? As Roger mentioned take a look at the fish that get killed out of there. If you continue to kill a lot of fish over 40” you will eventually end up with a pile of sub 40” fish and not many over (I can vouch for the “little” guys out there). Kill enough and your population density begins to drop due to few quality reproducing muskies for a lake that size.
The lake has the forage to support large fish, as well as quantity. I do like fishing it for other species because of what LVD offers there. So if the forage is there what else could be the problem with lack of numbers and size? They either have lots of places to crawl into making them hard to get at, or too many fish are getting bonked. Or both!
I would say the only time a higher size limit would hurt you is if you have a population that cannot be supported by forage and available water space (overcrowding).
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 714
Location: Rhinelander, WI | 2006 WDNR population estimate for LVD was at .2 fish per acre. 2006 WDNR population estimate for North Twin was .1 fish per acre. If someone knows where to look you should be able to find the size breakdown.
Travis hit the nail on the head on a couple of points. Those gigantic weeds beds make LVD HARD to fish under many conditions. Needle in a haystack, fish don’t need to concentrate when there are 2000 acres of 5 to 8 foot weed beds. They can be anyplace chasing those perch. Twin has a lower population estimate, but fish concentrate more.
Also if there is a high harvest rate, one would expect the fish size to be concentrated right below the size limit. LVD is fished a lot by multi species fishermen. I don’t find it unbelievable that if those fishermen catch a 40 incher that they get it mounted.
Nail A Pig!
Mike |
|
| |
