|
|
Posts: 2
| About one in 6 of the 50" muskies in Mille Lacs are still of the WI strain. You can see the second photo for the Mille Lacs Muskie Tournament album listed on the general discussion is one of them that was 52.5". Chris Jensen also caught a 51.5" by 25" WI strain pre-fishing the Mille Lacs Muskie Tournament on Friday. The Wisconsin strain muskies are growing to a giant size in Mille Lacs, with dozens of fish approaching and surpassing the 35# mark being released each year. I would even guess that there could be more 35# WI strain caught in Mille Lacs each year than in all of Wisconsin combined.
The question that I keep asking concerned WI anglers is why the WI DNR will not contact the MN DNR to try to do an egg take from these WI fish in the spring. If there is any truth that the WI brood stock is of a questionable quality in regards to their growth potential then this could be a solution to that problem. These eggs could be used to start some brood stock lakes in WI that are closed to fishing. These new brood stock lakes would be producing muskies to stock in 6 or 7 years. If they are taking eggs from these 35# to 50# (that is the size that many of the remaining WI stocked fish are) then there should be no question as to their "genetic integrity". In the past 2 years there have been 8 WI strain caught by members of the Minnesota Muskie Guides Association or their clients that weighted between 40# and 50# on Mille Lacs. If anyone knows of a good contact at the WI DNR, I and many of the participants in the MN Muskie Tournaments would help to get the go ahead from the MN DNR to start this great project.
Paul Hartman
MN Muskie Tournament Trail |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2024
| May I ask:
How do we know they're WI strain? Not trying to stir the pot, or ruffle feathers, just curious. Thanks. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Paul,
According to everything I have received from the biologists from MN and WI, the reason those fish are doing so well over there is environment. The fish were LCO, if I remember correctly, and undoubtably were the same 'mutts' (tongue in cheek, here) we have here in Wisconsin now, just one adult muskie lifetime seperated. No need to get anything from those fish; it's what we already have. What we DON'T have is Mille Lacs Lake. There is very little questioning about the 'genetic integrity' of the fish over here by the scientific community; the questioning comes from an activist group, is VERY selective as to interpreting data, and is widely dismissed by those working in the fisheries field as over-simplistic. This group will assert those are NOT Wisconsin fish and that you don't have a clue what you are talking about, or claim some strange 'remnant' genetic capacity as they did when I showed them 40# class fish stocked in that same timeframe from a lake by my house, but also, at the same time, claim that the fish from BOTH Woodruff AND those stocked in Bone, LCO, and other area waters are not capable of the very growth they have achieved in Mille Lacs. Slower growth early on than that of the LL, fish, yes, but heavy, big bodied fish I sure wouldn't toss out because they are 'inferior' once they grow up. The trick is to let them GET that big, with the correct environment and excellent forage. Mr. Bentely used to have a lot more room to fish muskies when a 'big' one from Mille Lacs was 45".
As to as many caught on Mille Lacs as all Wisconsin waters combined, I think Mille Lacs has more surface area than all the Wisconsin Muskie lakes, combined. Man i hope those fish are protected soon, I have heard some 'harvest' stories from Mille Lacs and Leech this month that sound awful familiar.
Read this article, this clears up alot:
http://www.wnrmag.com/stories/2006/aug06/musky.htm
50, those fish are obvious as can be, and the folks fishing Mille Lacs since the introduction of the WI and then LL fish know the difference. I remember very well when the Wisconsin strain was what was getting caught pretty much, and what the reaction was when the LL fish began showing up in the equasion out there. I bet, though, that Dr. Sloss would appreciate a sample or ten of tissue from a couple of those pigs to add to his work.
Wisconsin fish in Mille Lacs are big, stocky, heavily barred fish different in color, markings, fin color and build, and not just a little different. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2
| The fish that we've been identifying as WI strain look completely different than the Leech Lake strain. These fish match up size-wise with when the WI strain were stocked into the lake. If you look at the photo that I referred to above, you will see its barring is completely different than the other fish posted in the tournament photo album. The distinct mustard coloring is also an indicator of its WI heritage (possibly caused by beer, brats, or cheese?).
Paul Hartman |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2894
Location: Yahara River Chain | How can this be??????
The WMRP says that WI strain doesn't grow like the Leech Lake Strain.
Could it be other factors at work? Looks like the WI DNR was closer to the truth than WMRP. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Go figure....people who have gone through years of schooling and have obtained very high degrees in a field dealing soley with fish versus some average joes....who would have thunk it!!
Mike |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2024
| Thanks, fellas! |
|
| |
|
| Those LCO genes if pure produce big fish, pure being the operative word  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | What is 'pure'? Reality of it is that the Wisconsin strain fish stocked in Mille Lacs would be no more 'pure' than those stocked in Bone, or George, or any other lake stocked with WI fish in that thimeframe. |
|
| |
|
| What year were the WI fish stocked? What year was the 53.5" LL fish stocked? I want the one that got to 50"+ 5 years before the other one! I bet I know what fish got to 50" first.
One more thing wasn't the issue with WMRP more to do with growth rates? I am a biologist and logic and science tells me that if there are two seperate lakes and it takes 10 yrs. for a musky to get to 50" in one lake and 17yrs. in the other the lake that has more 50" will be the lake that it only takes 10 yrs.
Edited by DJS 8/24/2006 7:01 AM
|
|
| |
|
| speaking of science: the best researched work on muskies growth potential demonstrated that the biggest fish were those with moderate growth rates that lived for a long time, not those which grew real fast. (the Casselman studies, i believe)
what Paul is saying would match this, the WI strain fish are heavier at length than the LL strain, albeit likely somewhat older fish.
|
|
| |
|
| Could someone post a photo of a wiconsin strain fish (from Mille Lacs) and a leech strain (from Mille Lacs), I would like to see the difference,.
Does anybody know how many Wisco strain were stocked in Mille Lacs ? Are they reproduceing there ? |
|
| |
|
Location: The Yahara Chain | I believe that this is the fish that Mr. Hartman is referring to....caught by a young man from Wisconsin who fishes Mille Lacs a lot.
Nice fish, Steve.
Attachments
----------------
 Imhoff - 52[1].5.JPG (80KB - 354 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
| Might I add, the Wisconsin fish look way cooler. |
|
| |
|
Location: The Yahara Chain | Here is a LL strain from Mille Lacs that my brother-in-law(Dan) caught a couple weeks ago. Both of these fish were 52.5"...Dan's fish had a 22" girth. I don't know if Steve's fish was girthed or not but I would guess its girth at around 24". Lee Tauchen netted both of these fish so he would be a good person to ask about the differences of these fish.
No big Wisconsin fish in Minnesota...LOL
Edited by Bytor 8/24/2006 8:13 AM
Attachments
----------------
danemailmillelacs.JPG (57KB - 252 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 910
Location: Hastings, mn, 55033 | "I am a biologist and logic and science tells me that if there are two seperate lakes and it takes 10 yrs. for a musky to get to 50" in one lake and 17yrs. in the other the lake that has more 50" will be the lake that it only takes 10 yrs."
i'm not a biologist, but i will say the lake with the most 50"'ers will be the lake that has the habitat, forage, oxygen levels etc etc etc to sustain and carry a large population of top tier predators. you can stock 1 million fry from super dooper uber gentetics in a 100 ac lake and your surely not going to have more 50"'ers than if you stock "inferior" genes (still perfectly capable of reaching 50+ inches and usually heavier bodied than the competing strain) into a 130,000 acre lake.
you will also have more 50"'ers in the lake in which a higher number of juvenilke and young adult fish are allowed to live to reach old age.
there are many many more factors to this than genetics. until the other issues are dealt with nothings going to change (except the ads from the tourism bureaus!!) |
|
| |
|
| Castmaster, I think you're missing something here. My understanding is that the Wisconsin strain (ie. inferior strain) grows at a slower rate than that of the Leech Lake strain. If one fry from each of the two strains are put into the same growing environment the Leech Lake strain is said to reach it's full potential faster than that of the Wisconsin strain. That's strictly based on a genetic factor. Keep in mind, that not all fish, regardless of age, will grow to reach that magical 50" mark either. It's also my understanding that the Leech Lake strain fish stand a much better chance of surpassing that mark. |
|
| |
|
| If a small town in WI has a population of aliens that grow to 7 feet tall by age 15 and a small town in MN has a population of aliens that grow to 7 feet by 75 yrs. old and the average life span of both populations is 80 yrs old which population (all things being equal) will have more aliens at any given point that are 7 feet tall?
Even you can figure out the WI town will have more aliens at seven feet tall at any given point in time. It won't matter what they eat or how big or small the town is those aliens in WI are going to get to 7 feet tall. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | the entire strain issues has been a pharse from the beginning and an excuse used in an argument that has mismanaged it's own resource through a combination of "opportunities" for the taking of big fish out of good systems (not great) and living off of historic lore of fish made bigger than they were claimed to begin with. so when the customer base built its own fishery without the same pressures on the big fish in a great system with a higher quality forage and preservation system ... the tourists went away and didn't come back. the economic effect is the fight, not the fish ... and there has got to be a responsible party ... so, why not push it toward the dnr and their stocking practices, right? ... these fish grow if given the opportunity to ... would it be so crazy to see the hayward musky built on the side of the road in garrison? ... or should it be reproduced in oshkosh? |
|
| |
|
| first and foremost, suggesting that other people are dumb is extremely unhelpful and will get you quickly deleted. it's also a quick path to getting any possible point you have overlooked in emotionality.
as for your example, you're overlooking the scientifically proven truth (have you read the studies?) that muskies which live the longest and grow at a moderate pace reach larger ultimate sizes.
ie., the aliens that live 75 years would be 8 foot tall and fat...
Cassleman, J.M. and E.J. Crossman. 1986. Size, age, and growth of trophy muskellunge and muskellunge-northern pike hybrids: the cleithrum project 1979-1983. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 15:93-110.
Casselman, J.M. and C.J. Robinson. 1995. Age and growth of trophy muskellunge from selected southeastern Ontario water bodies, 1979-1994. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. Research, Science, and Technology Branch, Glenora Fisheries Station, Picton, Ontario.
Casselman, J.M., Robinson, C.J. , and E.J. Crossman. 1999. Growth and ultimate length of muskellunge from Ontario water bodies. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 19(1): 271-290.
Casselman, J.M. and C.J. Robinson. 2000. Muskellunge age and growth analysis for northwestern Ontario. Manuscript. Ministry of Natural Resources. Research, Science, and Technology Branch, Glenora Fisheries Station, Picton, Ontario. 24 pp.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2865
Location: Brookfield, WI | MY WIFE IS AN ALIEN WI-MN MUSKY HYBRID
A Wisconsin man's scaley spouse is 8' tall and fat. Story continues on page 11.
Kevin
Still packing |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I think DJS needs to watch the Casselman video from the Symposium, and he also needs to heed lambeau's more than patient response. The growth rates studied and so widely quoted by proponents of the LL strain in Wisconsin were in the first 5 to 6 years, and not long after studies found the two strains 1% upper confidence limit for any body of water to be not all that different. Fast growth has several downsides, read the well documented material out there for all fishes. Lambeau is correct, according to the top muskie minds out there, survival to older age growing at a sustained rate is supposed to create the largest specimens. We now have projects underway to do side by side comparisons, I'd direct anyone interested to read the linked article above.
The answer to the 'alien' question isn't as simple as presented; in the parallel alien/muskie population faster growing MAY mean more forage consumption, more sustability to disease, and more reliance on forage cycles to reach potential, possible higher mortality due to the fact the faster growing fish are more 'active' and therefore more likely to be caught multiple times by 'CPR Alien Predators' and perhaps, if the limit isn't raised significantly, harvested, stuffed, baked or fried. Up to 30% of any alien year class disappears with NO harvest anyway in the wild confines of the proposed towns, so I'd vote for aliens that adapt and survive very well and grow to top tier upper confidence levels for any system in which they are present over the long haul. There are management questions galore....and not all towns will support the 7' aliens, anyway.
|
|
| |
|
| Stick to your slow growing WI strain Sworall. I can't believe people really think it is all about the lakes. Answer the alien question as posed. The answer is very simple! I can't wait until the LL strain dominates in the WI waters being studied!
If you want to have one huge 55lb. fish in your system maybe the WI strain is the way to go. If you want many 50" 30lb. fish that are actually catchable go with the LL strain.
How many 50" have ever been caught in the World Championship Musky Classic in Vilas County? Answer ZERO The WCMC has been held for 30 years and has had 800+ contestants the last 10-15yrs. Must be the lakes!!!!! 
Edited by DJS 8/24/2006 9:57 AM
|
|
| |
|
| sounds like its the casselmen video for some great info
Also I didnt see any CPR practiced when I rented Alien vs Predator last month from blockbuster |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | DJS, really now.
Looks like far more than one big WI strain fish in Mille Lacs.
I'm looking forward to the results of the LL studies here too, I believe I have said in another thread I hope the LL fish do well and we can use the strain in certain applications in WI because I like spotted muskies and feel they are easier to catch.
And alot more than one big girl in George, too. The 'nursery', as well, and those who know that tiny lake know what I mean. Underfished waters with VERY low harvest rates where the fish reach full potential.
The Boulder Junction lakes are beat near to death, harvest is STILL very high by national average, and the average lakes in the area on the list of the event you mention ( I won that event's Guide division in 1979) small and infertile. I can't believe a biologist would suggest OVERALL environment has nothing to do with growth and potential.
There was a single day event this year on North Twin that registered 2 over 50".
And yes, I'd prefer 55# to 30#, but that's me, and I DID answer the 'alien question' as posed; not creating my own parameters or trying to pretend there are no factors that would effect the outcome of the answer. Did you watch the Casselman video yet? Read any of his works? Read any of the related papers/works from the recent symposium? Look at the volumes of work available at Trent? I'd do that before declaring the LL fish or any 'strain' the magic bullet or another 'strain' insufficient. What do you know about the Ohio strain? Look up what the side by side comparisons found with that fish. The next world record is, according to scientists at the symposium, most likely to come from The ST Lawrence, so what....we should all ( even the MN folks) demand that fish be stocked in our lakes?
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 147
Location: WI - Land of small muskies and big jawbones | Here is a photo of a Mille Lacs fish. Which strain would you say this one is?
Attachments
----------------
MK.49.1.07.jpg (75KB - 273 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | The flash from the camera washed this one out pretty bad, I wouldn't even venture a guess. Nice fish, though, regardless! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 734
Location: Watertown, MN | Like Steve stated, the flash washes it out, but from what I can see on the tail section it appears to be spots, I would guess LL.
Troyz |
|
| |
|
Posts: 734
| One thing I wonder is how I caught a 48.25 WI strain in Mille lacs. Shouldn't all these fish be massive if they are from a long time ago. Or does this suggest that their is some natural reproduction going on, including the WI strain in Mille Lacs. I have talked to a few guides that fish there everyday and they have caught some small WI strain out there. Some were as small as 38 inches I think he was saying. Here is the pic of the WI strain. This is one for sure right????
Attachments
----------------
my 48.25 WI strain.jpg (57KB - 266 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
| not from Mille Lacs, but this one's from a northwestern MN lake this summer...definitely not one of the fish stocked 20 years ago. they are out there, and they're doing their thing.
Edited by lambeau 8/24/2006 3:23 PM
Attachments
----------------
MNWI.jpg (21KB - 270 downloads)
|
|
| |
