Muskie Discussion Forums
| ||
| Moderators: Slamr | View previous thread :: View next thread |
| Jump to page : 1 Now viewing page 1 [30 messages per page] Muskie Fishing -> General Discussion -> How Deep is Too Deep? |
| Message Subject: How Deep is Too Deep? | |||
nar160 |
| ||
Posts: 415 Location: MN | How deep (the fish, not the water) can you target fish without significantly increasing the risk of fatality from barotrauma? There doesn't seem to be a precise consensus on this topic, but it's particularly important now with the ability to target open water fish of all depths. Let's look at some suggestions and considerations: - Mayhem/Gibson crew: they suggest targeting top 15' only. This is pretty conservative, but there is some interesting anecdotal evidence. Brad H. has stated open water trolling in the past he has observed bloated fish. I don't know exactly how deep his baits were running at that time, and it seems the fish depth was somewhat unknown as well (could be 35' down coming up to a bait 20' down) but it seems worth considering the observation given the clear symptoms of barotrauma. They have also talked about seeing floaters in recent times from sharpshooters targeting deep fish, but we don't really know how deep those fish were. Based on one incident Chase outlined in a podcast, it seems on at least some of the lakes they fish, muskies can be regularly found 35+ down. - Have heard various guides use 20', 25', etc. Hard to tell what it's all based on exactly, but it seems likely at least some of it is based on observations of fish not releasing well or having visible signs of barotrauma. I have also heard of a guide catching some at 40' and claiming they release totally fine, but there are some reliability issues with the source. - Jordan Weeks was asked this question on Musky Insider Pro and gave the answer of roughly 1 atm or 33 ft. That was based on his knowledge of all available evidence. - Various sources cite the 1 atm figure as a general rule of thumb (example: https://gf.nd.gov/magazine/2021/jul/understanding-barotrauma). That seems consistent with my experience with walleye at least - I don't remember seeing bulging eyes or stomach from a fish in under 35', but it's very common 40'+. - Apparently pike/muskies are less susceptible to barotrauma than other fish because they have a duct that allows them to release air quickly. What's not clear to me is if they are able to do this in the midst of a fight! - Being low density, C&R only, muskies are different than many fish when it comes to this consideration. A 15% mortality rate from barotrauma is significant (and unacceptable) for muskie, but maybe not so much for walleye. I've been personally using 25' as the limit in the warmer periods and 30' post turnover. I have caught several fish from these depths (yes, using livescope) without seeing any bloating or obvious signs of barotrauma. In my experience, they haven't released any different than shallow fish. In the past, pre-livescope, I caught some fish that came from >30' down. Those fish all swam away and were not bloated, but it seems like 1/3 to 1/2 were slow going. Regardless of depth caught, it seems like you get the occasional fish that swims on the surface for 5+ minutes after release before going down, but with those earlier very deep fish it felt more frequent. Another consideration I have is my primary lake (Tonka) has an outside weed edge in the 22-25' on big parts of the lake; this has been a standard place to fish for years, with many many fish being caught at those water depths. Now that's the water depth - of course the fish could be higher, but some of those fish are definitely near the bottom - I've seen them on sonar before livecope (and with) and caught them working tubes deep. This is not something I've ever heard anyone raise an issue with and we certainly don't see floaters by the dozens out there. Post turnover, fish release better and you don't have the temperature gradient issue. I have watched a fish on livescope swim from 30' down up to the surface in a couple seconds, porpoise (presumably to look at the boat), and then go right back down to 30'. That's common at less depth as well - it was just a bit surprising to see it with the fish 30' down. I have also seen once where a fish came off structure, hit my lure 5-6' down without getting hooked, then quickly ran over into open water and down to 30' below the surface. In all of those cases, the fish didn't seem to have any problem moving vertically under its own power. Thoughts? I feel like it lays out: 0-20': zero issue, tons of evident its OK 20-25': likely OK 25-30': borderline, only under "good" conditions 30-35': most fish OK, but mortality rate increasing, not worth it for muskies 35+': playing with fire, stay way | ||
| CincySkeez |
| ||
Posts: 630 Location: Duluth | This is a topic that we definitely need some clarity on. Again tough to study without killing fish but I think the angling community as a whole would be better off with a legitimate answer. | ||
| Angling Oracle |
| ||
Posts: 351 Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | What I consider safe from a lot of experience hook and line fishing, nets and bottom trawls and a wide range of species. 15' for trolling for the reasons outlined by Brad. 15-17' for jiggiing if the bottom over 25' - same reasons as trolling, fish will come up from deeper. Clarity and light conditions will define how high. Up to 25' if the bottom is 25' When jigging, fight the pike/muskies at that depth to allow it to burp (as you said, they have a duct, but it is not as open as trout). They won't always do so, and they won't always stay down, hence a lot of allowance for avoiding catching fish that may be deeper (there is not really a threshold - I've netted pike at 80') I've caught a lot of pike jigging and routinely have them bloated from 15', have had to keep, etc. I've caught them from deeper and seen them "burp" too. Tip-ups have caught them in the 20s range with no issues, but again, there is time to burp adjust, not been hauled easily with a musky rod. Generally the quicker you bring them up, the more bloating issues that will occur, but sometimes even a longer fight at depth they don't adjust. You then are dealing with a fish that is tired and can't get down, so really the answer becomes don't fish deep at all unless you are keeping (which we are not doing with muskies). We killed a lot of deep caught pike in our net studies - alive but way too bloated, and these were brought up pretty slowly. From this it is a apparent that the muscles of which control the bladder duct and adjustments seem to decline with exhaustion. The pressure issue is not just about bloating, eyes or temperature - there are also effects on cells functions, enzymes. The gut gets compressed, there are internal parasites that maybe affected with the sudden pressure changes, lots of unpredictable outcomes. There will always be the temptation to fish deeper if you are seeing fish at these deeper ranges, which they often are. This is why I don't like FFS (for muskies) as I know what can be done with it. Eventually you will have a bad day if you keep fishing around 30' (well, the musky will have a bad day). Edited by Angling Oracle 2/3/2024 10:28 AM | ||
| nar160 |
| ||
Posts: 415 Location: MN | Thanks AO, I was hoping you would respond. To be clear, I think we are using depth numbers differently here - I am talking about confirmed depth of fish before targeting it, while I think you are talking about presentation depth. If trolling blind over deep open water, I totally agree you do not want your baits more than 15' down. Even at 15', a fish at 30' can easily run it down. That makes a lot more sense of Brad H's comments now. Your suggestion of up to 25' if the bottom is 25' is essentially equivalent to my 25' number in the summer. I'm not suggesting running baits at that depth over deep water, but targeting fish that are that deep. For what it's worth, I have seen many muskies on FFS, and in my experience it's quite rare to see them deeper than 30.' In the summer, the most common depth is 15-20' down with some in the 10-15' range and some 20-25'. Preturnover, I've only seen a few deeper than 25, which I did not cast at. After turnover, there is a lot more variability with a few more fish deep. That's my experience on a handful of lakes in MN and Canada. It seems to vary lake to lake, so its very possible I'm just not on lakes where this could be a real problem with fish commonly being 35' down. | ||
| Angling Oracle |
| ||
Posts: 351 Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | nar160 - 2/3/2024 11:22 AM Thanks AO, I was hoping you would respond. To be clear, I think we are using depth numbers differently here - I am talking about confirmed depth of fish before targeting it, while I think you are talking about presentation depth. If trolling blind over deep open water, I totally agree you do not want your baits more than 15' down. Even at 15', a fish at 30' can easily run it down. That makes a lot more sense of Brad H's comments now. Your suggestion of up to 25' if the bottom is 25' is essentially equivalent to my 25' number in the summer. I'm not suggesting running baits at that depth over deep water, but targeting fish that are that deep. For what it's worth, I have seen many muskies on FFS, and in my experience it's quite rare to see them deeper than 30.' In the summer, the most common depth is 15-20' down with some in the 10-15' range and some 20-25'. Preturnover, I've only seen a few deeper than 25, which I did not cast at. After turnover, there is a lot more variability with a few more fish deep. That's my experience on a handful of lakes in MN and Canada. It seems to vary lake to lake, so its very possible I'm just not on lakes where this could be a real problem with fish commonly being 35' down. Thanks Nar160, I really would be uncomfortable in giving specifics of the how, when and where the deep scenarios are in play for muskies where we fish (always water over 60' nearby). Fish predators in general are going to locate to areas when their needs are met (prey availability, temperature, oxygen, visibility). Not all of these have to be optimal, but most need to be within tolerances. The main prey here (cisco and whitefish) preference is to remain deep and below the thermocline most of the time during summer stratification, and then things open up the rest of the time. Edited by Angling Oracle 2/3/2024 12:52 PM | ||
| Kirby Budrow |
| ||
Posts: 2317 Location: Chisholm, MN | While casting an island this fall, I had my scope pointed at the shoreline watching my bait come in, when a big fish came straight up from below the boat at my pounder. It was on the bottom in 28 feet and my bait was down maybe 8 feet. I have no answer to your question but I think it’s hard to control the depth you catch your fish from unless you are specifically targeting deep fish or if your boat is in shallow water. I do think it’s much less the depth the fish is in and more about the change in water temperature after a fight that harms the fish. I’ve also caught fish in the fall from shallow water that wouldn’t go down. I can’t explain that. | ||
| kap |
| ||
Posts: 549 Location: deephaven mn | ihave caught lots of walleyes on Tonka from 45' and deeper. I would slowly reel them up and super slow at the start. They would not be affffected by barotrauma when doing this. Seen lots of small walleyes have barotrauma on lake of woods when reeled in fast from much sahallower water water less then 30 feet. I have caught several Muskies on Tonka from deep weed edge near bottom no livescope around 30 feet with no noticable barotrauma effects so i think you need to be mindfull and not change water depths fast when reeling in fish. Great topic! I think some fish die even when we are quick at releasing and they swim away fine. I suggest that we donate money to stock more | ||
| Angling Oracle |
| ||
Posts: 351 Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | This is a fairly condensed explanation but explains how the various types of bladders work with some good diagrams and photos. https://earthlife.net/swim-bladder-evolution-of-fishs-air-bladder/ The big take away is the speed of adjustment. Most species like walleye, catfish, pike, bass, etc, is they fight away or down from rod pressure, whereas muskies often try to get air or head shake. The bloating effect gets worse with depth, but the "weight" of the water starts as soon as one goes down as we know from swimming ourselves, so when we talk about a "safe zone," we are only talking about a reduced effect, not no effect from a rapid rise from depth. When walleye fishing and catching perch you will often see the stomach in throat issue given the gear is oversized for the perch and they are brought up rapidly even from 20 ft or so. In general fishing deep for predators or other game fish that don't have the open bladder (such as lake trout) is very risky if there is a requirement or a want to release them. Edited by Angling Oracle 2/4/2024 9:21 AM | ||
| sukrchukr |
| ||
Location: Vilas | Late fall one time I drifted off my structure as I was retying... looked at my graph and I was over 57` of water and marked a fish... lowered my sucker and it ate it. I set the hook and knew it was a smaller fish and eased it up were I released it. The following summer I caught that same fish. Water temp was about 38 when I first caught it in late fall. I know its only one example, but its not a death sentence if it comes from deep water. | ||
| Baby Mallard |
| ||
| I have caught walleyes on Mille Lacs fishing the tops of the mudflats in 25’ with blown up swim bladders with stomach hanging out their throats. I have had lots of muskies post release that will swim on the surface for a very long time before going down. Do those fish live? I have no idea but I hope so. I try to avoid fishing deep water (25’ +) because I do think there is a much higher chance of mortality for all species of fish. Edited by Baby Mallard 2/4/2024 5:45 PM | |||
| kap |
| ||
Posts: 549 Location: deephaven mn | clean10 crappies today that were caught suspended around 25 to 27 feet deep three of the ten had bruised ribs or bloodied ribs which would be caused by barautrama. Has me thinking that 25 feet might be the number. Just because a fish swims away and seems heathy it may not be. I am now more open to the idea that fishing for anything you plan to release should not be targeted below 25 feet. | ||
| Masqui-ninja |
| ||
Posts: 1240 Location: Walker, MN | I limit my basin trolling to June, and then again after turnover in October just to error on the side of caution. Lures never more than 15'down. Warmer surface water may worsen the effects of barotrauma, though I've never had any known issues releasing a fish. Again, erroring on the side of caution. I do see a ton of floaters every year around that 4th of July period however, seems to be the worst time out here. I think the warmer surface water, deeper fish (deeper than June) and poor handling just stack the odds against healthy releases. | ||
| Angling Oracle |
| ||
Posts: 351 Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | kap - 2/4/2024 9:27 PM clean10 crappies today that were caught suspended around 25 to 27 feet deep three of the ten had bruised ribs or bloodied ribs which would be caused by barautrama. Has me thinking that 25 feet might be the number. Just because a fish swims away and seems heathy it may not be. I am now more open to the idea that fishing for anything you plan to release should not be targeted below 25 feet. Thanks for adding that observation, kap. Realistically I can see necropsy study potential here to kind of counter the nonsense we are seeing on YouTube regarding "debunking" barotrauma in crappies. There are actually lots of good research on barotrauma effects and really the rec fishing world sort of doesn't really give it the weight required. Was not an issue prior to CPR I suppose. I think really an issue with walleye tournaments where obviously very important to get an over fish, and often those fish are not shallow. As per CincySkeez's "dams are bad," - has always been a major issue with the hydro-electric scene given fish go from suddenly high pressure to low once they pass through turbines (so very rapid decompression). Necropsy, as kap has done, is the best way to see what's going on. Just one study basically figuring out how to study it with tags: https://afspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1577/T08-122.1 I notice in this paper: "Gas emboli in the gills and internal hemorrhaging were the major causes of mortality. Rupture of the swim bladder and emphysema in the fins were also common." Lots of stuff going on besides the fish not being able to go down (which in the case of these wee salmon, also fatal given they become bird food). The bottom line is when catching fish from deep water, if the decompression is rapid (like the human diver scenario) things go wrong. Fishing deep is high risk - with risk increasing the deeper you go and the faster the fish decompresses. Edited by Angling Oracle 2/5/2024 10:36 AM | ||
| BillM |
| ||
 Posts: 184 | Uncut Angling just had a really good video about barotrauma and delayed mortality. https://youtu.be/n9Nrcu1fNyY?si=oCQH1FHIrP51_myG Edited by BillM 2/5/2024 2:34 PM | ||
| CincySkeez |
| ||
Posts: 630 Location: Duluth | BillM - 2/5/2024 2:33 PM Uncut Angling just had a really good video about barotrauma and delayed mortality. https://youtu.be/n9Nrcu1fNyY?si=oCQH1FHIrP51_myG I believe this is the youtube nonsense that Oracle was referring too. Do I have my issues with MNDNR methods, sure. Do I take an even bigger issue with someone with his audience making the claims hes making. Absolutely Also LOL, "the future of fishing is livescopes and paddle boards!" Edited by CincySkeez 2/5/2024 3:00 PM | ||
| raftman |
| ||
Posts: 538 Location: WI | CincySkeez - 2/5/2024 2:59 PM BillM - 2/5/2024 2:33 PM Uncut Angling just had a really good video about barotrauma and delayed mortality. https://youtu.be/n9Nrcu1fNyY?si=oCQH1FHIrP51_myG I believe this is the youtube nonsense that Oracle was referring too. Do I have my issues with MNDNR methods, sure. Do I take an even bigger issue with someone with his audience making the claims hes making. Absolutely Also LOL, "the future of fishing is livescopes and paddle boards!" Curious to know what you think his claims are as your LOL seems like misinformation. I believe he was simply stating the draw of FFS to young anglers and that small crafts with FFS are a better representation of what the future of angling will look like than big expensive trucks pulling big expensive boats. | ||
| CincySkeez |
| ||
Posts: 630 Location: Duluth | Young people getting on the water in whatever their budget allows is a tale as old as time. Fishing on a paddle board is great, until you want to eat a sandwich, drink a beverage and talk to your guest/date/fishing partner between spots. Or if that darn wind is blowing. Then you upgrade to a 16ft tin boat etc. Either the cycle continues or you find your groove in whatever size fits you. People like sandwiches and company, I don't see this changing. Saying FFS and those crafts are preferable when alternatives are within reach seems suspect. I opt to leave the boat behind frequently, and more this summer than any other I launched the overturned canoe next to my boat on the lift but that was because I didnt want to fuss with ANY electronics while fishing. Im also not the future anymore but every young angler I talk to is looking for a slightly larger boat. | ||
| raftman |
| ||
Posts: 538 Location: WI | CincySkeez - 2/5/2024 5:19 PM Young people getting on the water in whatever their budget allows is a tale as old as time. Fishing on a paddle board is great, until you want to eat a sandwich, drink a beverage and talk to your guest/date/fishing partner between spots. Or if that darn wind is blowing. Then you upgrade to a 16ft tin boat etc. Either the cycle continues or you find your groove in whatever size fits you. People like sandwiches and company, I don't see this changing. Saying FFS and those crafts are preferable when alternatives are within reach seems suspect. I opt to leave the boat behind frequently, and more this summer than any other I launched the overturned canoe next to my boat on the lift but that was because I didnt want to fuss with ANY electronics while fishing. Im also not the future anymore but every young angler I talk to is looking for a slightly larger boat. Don’t want to rehash FFS. Is that his only nonsense claim? I felt he was challenging the methodology more than he was challenging the impacts of barotrauma. He was pretty clear he supports catching your dinner and leaving over C&R at depths. He also seemed to understand that people are going to target fish at these depths so he did a good job emphasizing good, quick handling and proper release. His use of FFS to show how a fish descends was pretty effective in showing the issues of using the net used in the study. Was listening to the recent sporting journal radio podcast and it sounds like the MDNR was out recently with FFS and underwater drones for another barotraumas study. Not sure if that was directly related to his video, but if his video puts pressure on the MDNR to get the study right, then I think that’s a win. That’s especially true if they are looking to use the study address regulations. | ||
| Jump to page : 1 Now viewing page 1 [30 messages per page] |
| Search this forum Printer friendly version E-mail a link to this thread |
Copyright © 2024 OutdoorsFIRST Media |