Muskie Discussion Forums
| ||
| Moderators: Slamr | View previous thread :: View next thread |
| Jump to page : 1 2 3 Now viewing page 3 [30 messages per page] Muskie Fishing -> General Discussion -> Michigan Gets it... |
| Message Subject: Michigan Gets it... | |||
| JimtenHaaf |
| ||
Posts: 717 Location: Grand Rapids, MI | CiscoKid - 3/3/2014 8:01 AM Yooper Padre - 3/3/2014 4:58 AM It is possible that this practice may result in the near extinction of that sub-species, which would be a shame. I'm not sure why this decision was made, but I understand very few of MIDNR's decisions. Fr. K Not if they naturally reproduce in which case there is no need for stocking. Right, Trav. As long as there are correct regulations in place, and those regulations are followed/enforced. | ||
| Will Schultz |
| ||
Location: Grand Rapids, MI | Yooper Padre - 3/3/2014 5:58 AM The point no one is addressing here is the stocking of Great Lakes strain muskies in inland waters. The DNR will no longer be raising and stocking the so-called "northern strain" of muskies which are currently found in our inland lakes and rivers. It is possible that this practice may result in the near extinction of that sub-species, which would be a shame. I'm not sure why this decision was made, but I understand very few of MIDNR's decisions. Kudos however for the decision to stock muskies in a number of lakes in an effort to control sucker populations. If this works out, Upper Michigan will see improved walleye fishing and great musky hunting. Fr. K Fr. K - For the vast majority of Michigan waters, UP and LP, the GLMUS is the right strain. If there's a history of muskellunge in a water and that water is connected in any way to the Great Lakes, regardless or the number of dams now in the way, the native strain was likely GLMUS. Many waters were stocked with the wrong strain simply because there wasn't a viable source for GLMUS. There are very few waters in Michigan that have the Wisconsin strain NMUS, naturally occurring. If stocking is needed in those waters it will be addressed, as mentioned previously mentioned, through an annual trade with Wisconsin. There are waters that rely solely on stocking, where it really doesn't matter what strain goes in, and these waters may benefit from a change in strain since it could yield natural reproduction. Why? The strains often select different spawning sites and the same water but new fish may have an impact on spawning success - time will tell. The third category of water is naturalized populations, these waters didn't historically have muskellunge but were once stocked and are now maintained all or in part by natural reproduction. The naturalized waters may or may not be impacted by a change in strain but if they are naturally reproducing stocking shouldn't be necessary except at a very low "supplemental" density which again can be addressed through the trade with Wisconsin.
| ||
| Yooper Padre |
| ||
Posts: 337 Location: Watersmeet, Michigan | Checked with my fish biologist buddy, which is what I should have done right away. He said that in those parts of the U.P. which are part of the Mississippi watershed (Western Gogebic county), the native muskies were northern strain. At the same time, he said he is not convinced that planting almost exclusively GLMUS is the best way to go. I guess the bottom line, from my perspective, is that I'm glad to see some planting going on again, and hope it becomes more widespread. Fr. K | ||
| Mr Musky |
| ||
Posts: 999 | It would be nice if Michigan could introduce a few more lakes in the U.P. that currently do not have muskies. Can you imagine what Lake Gogebic would produce if it were full of GLS Muskies? As mentioned Bond Falls Flowage could def use more fish. I dont think GLS fish would best fit that but perhaps a flowage strain of skis would do well. Not sure if it's even possible but just a thought. | ||
| Will Schultz |
| ||
Location: Grand Rapids, MI | Mr Musky - 3/6/2014 12:28 PM It would be nice if Michigan could introduce a few more lakes in the U.P. that currently do not have muskies. Can you imagine what Lake Gogebic would produce if it were full of GLS Muskies? As mentioned Bond Falls Flowage could def use more fish. I dont think GLS fish would best fit that but perhaps a flowage strain of skis would do well. Not sure if it's even possible but just a thought. This is a good case of management over just throwing fish at a lake. Does Bond Falls really need more fish if the population is self sustaining? If the population doesn't meet management goals it should be addressed through additional protection and habitat improvement. | ||
| IM Musky Time |
| ||
Posts: 243 | Mr Musky - 3/6/2014 11:28 AM It would be nice if Michigan could introduce a few more lakes in the U.P. that currently do not have muskies. Can you imagine what Lake Gogebic would produce if it were full of GLS Muskies? As mentioned Bond Falls Flowage could def use more fish. I dont think GLS fish would best fit that but perhaps a flowage strain of skis would do well. Not sure if it's even possible but just a thought. I agree with you about more lakes having the potential for introduction and ongoing management and DNR Fisheries in the U.P. do as well. The number of fish available to do that is limited at this point, but we hope that will change in the future. Regarding Bond Falls, I don't believe it has been specifically managed for muskies before (never stocked by the DNR) and may be one of the bodies of water up here with a trace population that was planted by a "Johnny Muskieseed" a while back. Stocking may make sense to create and maintain a fishable population there...that approach has worked in flowages on the MI/WI border and throughout NE WI. If the adult population is vulnerable to spearing and that caused the population to crash, a change in the regulations there might be in order....the change was overdue on some of the other U.P. lakes that are now closed to spearing. | ||
| eightweight |
| ||
Posts: 209 | Great news !!!! Larry Ramsell - 2/11/2014 10:17 AM Great Lakes muskies are being stocked in new waters Scott D'Eath and Brad Horton with a Lake St Clair muskie. (Courtesy | Dave Kenyon, Michigan DNR) Howard Meyerson | The Grand Rapids Press By Howard Meyerson | The Grand Rapids Press on February 09, 2014 at 6:57 AM, updated February 09, 2014 at 6:58 AM Anglers are going to see a new apex-predator swimming in certain western and northern Michigan waters in future years. The DNR is continuing to expand its Great Lakes muskie program. I suspect an increasing number of anglers will be rising to the bait. “Being able to raise Great Lakes muskies opened up the opportunity to stock drowned river mouths and lower river systems in western Michigan,” said Jay Wesley, the DNR’s southern Lake Michigan management supervisor. “We are going into a new era with these muskies.” You may recall that the DNR switched to raising Great Lake muskies exclusively in 2010 when the state launched its Great Lakes muskellunge program after decades of stocking northern muskies, a strain native to parts of Michigan’s Upper Peninsula. Fisheries officials and representatives from groups like the Michigan Muskie Alliance have said the Great Lakes strain is preferable because it is indigenous to more waters and can be stocked in more places. The first crop of those fish was distributed in 2012. More were shipped out in the fall of 2013, including to several western Michigan waters for the first time. Fall fingerling muskellunge were stocked in Lake Macatawa, Mona Lake, Muskegon Lake, and on the Lower Grand River in Lloyd’s and Bruce bayous and Indian Channel. “These drowned river mouths are entering a new era,” Wesley said. “It will be three or four years before sub-legal fish are caught and six to eight years before we see 42-inch muskies, the legal size. It will be 10 to 15 years before we see 48-inch or 50-inch fish, trophy size.” Mona Lake got 1,043 fall fingerlings and will continue to get the same in future years. Other western Michigan waters got only a percentage of the desired stocking goal. Muskegon Lake got 6,846 fall fingerlings. The goal is eventually to stock 12,696. Each lower Grand River site got 1,100 fingerlings. The goal is to stock 1,500. Muskie stocking today is limited by production at Wolf Lake State Fish Hatchery in Mattawan, where space for the program is limited. Wesley and others hope that will grow in future years. “We’ve had to convert an old laboratory into a rearing facility there and have had some challenges with disease and other stuff,” Wesley said. “Last year was our best year so far. We raised and shipped 45,000 fall fingerlings. Raising muskies can be a challenge, according to Wesley. There is a learning curve even for experienced hatchery personnel. The hatchery took delivery of 1.2 million muskie eggs, collected from spawning fish on the Detroit River and Lake St, Clair where Great Lakes muskies thrive. Those eggs produced a half-million fry. At a certain point in a muskie's young life they start to eat minnows. If none, or too few are available, they will eat each other. It’s taken a couple of years to learn and fine tune the feeding program. The hatchery suffered nearly an 80 percent loss in the meantime, Wesley said. Ramping up the program is likely to require a new or expanded facility. DNR staff have discussed and requested a coolwater rearing facility, one that would be geared towards species like muskie, walleye, lake sturgeon and northern pike. But getting there is likely to cost $3.5 million. In the meantime plans are underway to grow the program as best possible, which includes attempting over the next decade to convert Thornapple Lake, in eastern Barry County, into a broodstock lake for Great Lakes Muskies, saving the time and effort of needing to collect eggs from the Detroit area. It has been a western Michigan bloodstock lake for northern muskies. A similar conversion is also planned for Big Bear Lake in eastern Otsego County, according to Tim Cwalinski, a senior fish biologist from the DNR’s Northern Lake Huron Management Unit. “It’s been stocked (with Great Lakes muskies) for two or three years now and we hope in 10 years to be able to go into it for eggs for the program rather than down to the Detroit River,” Cwalinski said. Four other northern waters got stocked with Great Lakes muskies last fall for the first time. Some had been stocked with northern muskies previously. Stocking practices have been erratic in the past. The plan now is to stock them consistently. Those waters include Lake Besser and Lake Winyah, two impoundments on the Thunder Bay River upstream from Alpena. Lake Winyah got 2,295 fall fingerlings last November and Lake Besser got 588 fall fingerlings. Otsego Lake, in Otsego County, got 2,978 fall fingerlings. It had been stocked with northern muskies in the past. Cooke Pond on the AuSable River got 2,913 fall fingerlings. Big Bear Lake got 1,800 fall fingerlings in November, the same as in in 2012. It got 3,046 in 2011. The conversion to Great Lakes muskellunge and the expansion of waters that have them is likely to spark additional interest in fishing in Michigan. That is good for the state and the economy. It could well draw anglers in from other areas. No doubt, it will be several years before they are abundant in the catch. But if Lake St. Clair’s Great Lakes muskie fishery is any indication of what is possible, that’s something well worth waiting for. Email Howard Meyerson at [email protected]; follow him on his blog: The Outdoor Journal at howardmeyerson.com and on Twitter at twitter.com/hmeyerson | ||
| Jump to page : 1 2 3 Now viewing page 3 [30 messages per page] |
| Search this forum Printer friendly version E-mail a link to this thread |

