|
|
|
Here's a paraphrase of what Rod Ramsell had to say about muskies in warm water.
Warmer water loses it'a ability to hold oxygen, fish are cold blooded animals, and with warmer water thier metabolism increases.
What this means is, fish consume oxygen faster in warm water, which is holding less oxygen.
This also means that they need oxygen faster to recover from being "excersised" on the end of your fishing line, than they do in colder temps.
In a nutshell, fish need more oxygen in warmer water, while warmer water holds less oxygen.
The stress of being caught in hot water with low levels of oxygen will kill fish that wouldn't have died in colder conditions.
There isn't a more qualified muskie biologist in the states that Rod Ramsell.
JS
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8801
| <The stress of being caught in hot water with low levels of oxygen will kill fish that wouldn't have died in colder conditions. >
I think that pretty well sums it up. It doesn't mean you WILL kill fish, it just means that overstressing a fish in warm water is more likely to kill it than overstressing it in cold water.
I think we all need to make our own decisions about how to haldle warm water temperatures.
If you stop fishing, good for you.
If you don't, good for you.
It wasn't that long ago people were shooting them at boatside or clubbing them in the boat.
Perhaps its time to think about what we ARE doing -- closed seasons, increased size limits, C&R, better nets, better handling techniques, stocking, genetic research, breeding, education... If I see someone mishandling a fish, I'll suggest how they might improve, presuming they care about the survival of the fish. But I'm not going to tell someone they shouldn't fish. All the efforts we put into preservation are for a reason so we can go fishing and catch muskies.
|
|
| |
|
| I have read all the speculation and theory posted here and while I agree with the logic I'm not seeing any real data as a result of solid research, therefore what we have are a bunch of opinions. I'm guessing the reports here of high water temps are based on the surface temp sensors in your boats? Don't underestimate the temperature variance only a couple feet down in many lakes even with this heat. If you guys are really worried about it why don't you go buy a temp sensor that you can drop down on a cord and see what the temp is where the fish are on the breaks? |
|
| |
|
| You know this subject would make a great "On line chat" if you could find someone qualified,,Ramsell,DNR, etc |
|
| |
|
Posts: 7058
Location: Northwest Chicago Burbs | Call'em HH, if you can get them coordinated into one night, I will (with fairness) moderate it. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 132
Location: Elkhart, IN | There is not much data on the subject. All I see here are a bunch of experienced anglers deciding one way or the other on what to do during a warm water period based on their experience and maybe someone else’s. I don't see anyone telling anyone they had better not fish or they are fools if they don't keep fishing.
I personally will not fish when the water gets to 80. I've seen what I can do to them when the water is that warm. Especially for a prolonged period. To me, it is common sense for ME to stop fishing.
There are a lot of valid arguments to continue fishing. That's great. Keep fishing if that is what you want to do.
I liken this subject to swallow rigs. Did it really have to be proven that swallow rigs killed fish? Yep, for some people it did. Some still don't believe they kill fish. I feel this subject is very similar as some feel pretty strongly they are right without much proof to back themselves up. Some will need proof before they change their minds. That works either way too. I know I would need some proof that it doesn't hurt them before I'll start fishing for them when the water is 80+, because my experience tells me it does. I have made the choice to err on the side of caution and stop fishing rather than keep fishing and in the future someone comes out with a study that proves fighting fish in hot water kills them.
But, until someone comes out with some proof either way this really comes down to doing what you feel is right.
Have a good summer, I can't wait for the snow!
Brian
|
|
| |
|
| Another one of those "where is the study" arguments.
Just because there hasn't been a specific study done to see how much muskies can take before they die we shouldn't believe it?
When two of the leading muskie biologists in the world, Rod Ramsell and Bob Strand tell us things about fish handling, fish stress and the like we should be smart enough to listen.
Believe me, two -three weeks of 90 degree weather makes the water very warm beneath the surface. I've done enough disolved oxygen and temp profiles to know that.
Water can be 80 degrees from top to bottom in 12 feet in these conditions.
JS
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8801
| Skarie
How much difference do you feel it really makes?
Just by fishing we take a chance that a fish might die. Foul hooked, broken snap, lure in the gills...
And what is the point when it becomes detrimental to the fish? 80 degrees at the surface? 80 degrees 10 feet down? Is 78 dergees ok? How about 76? The best way to preserve the resource is not to fish at all. If nobody catches any more muskies, no more muskies will ever be killed by anglers...
Considering the average amount of hours spend on the water per angler before actually catching a fish, is this really an issue??
Personally, if it's between fishing this weeknd or next, or fishing at night instead of during the day, many people will simply hang it up for a few days or a week, and that's great. If you have the luxury of fishing today, or tomorrow, or the day after, somewhere right down the street it's not a big deal to just not fish because the weather got hot. But you can't expect someone who planned a trip 8 hours north several months in advance to just cancel it because the water got hot, and drive 400 miles and then just not fish because the surface temps are 80 degrees. For those folks, not fishing for two weeks in July can very well mean "I didn't get to fish at all last summer"
Considering the average amount of hours spend on the water per angler before actually catching a fish |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2384
Location: On the X that marks the mucky spot | More Data Needed,
I do have a temp guage on my Aqua View. I was going to go out yesterday and give examples of what the water temps were at various depths. Due to the fact we had 2 days of 25-40 mph winds it would render the matter moot due to the water mixing. Maybe later this week I can get around to it.
If you want to go out no one will stop you. Just use your head on which bodies of water you choose and how you hand the fish. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32904
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I spoke with Frank Pratt and Dave Neuswanger on the phone today about the temperature issue. Dave managed a couple Muskie fisheries in Missouri leading to extensive experience with warm water over a long period of time and muskie mortality. He stated that the muskie tolerates warm water better than other game fish, and the results of release and recapture in water temps at 80 and a couple degrees above (even up to 86) were excellent, and in the case of one lake he managed, many were caught and mishandled in 80 degree temps and yet muskies caught in that water exhibited one of the highest survival rates in the US. He stated that obviously, one needs to take care of the fish, but that it is not necessary to quit fishing muskies in water temps in the low 80's. He quoted some study material indicating that muskies can survive in water temps over 90 degrees, something he says is unlikely to happen, and will many muskies gravitate to WARMER than average areas of the lake during summer temps in many cases. I should have the hard copy of that information very soon.
Frank said basically the same thing, but both cautioned that there is increased mortality to consider if the fish is coming from 60' down on a trolling bite into MUCH warmer surface water as a result of capture; that the fish's location at capture needs to be considered. He said that Walleye and Trout were WAY more susceptable to stress from warm water, and the fight alone would kill most brown trout in high water temps. He stated the muskie is on the far outside portion of the scale of concern when considering angling in warmer water temps.
Synopsis of the conversation? Handling is important, release the fish as quicky as one can, water release is a good thing. Prolonged battles as a matter of course should be avoided, but that's a fact no matter the temps. Muskies do very well, in fact better than other fish in warm waters, and that it is not necessary to stop angling for muskies in water temps in the 80 degree range.
EXTREME conditions would warrant more concern, but the possibilitiy of mid 90 degree water in the top 1/3 of the water column here in the mid west under most summer conditions is very small.
This information basically supports Sorenson's remarks, and doesn't necessarily contradict what John is saying; extreme conditions require more care, but what we have now on most waters is not extreme.
MuskieFIRST is launching a new feature very soon, one all our users will appreciate, that will add credibility to this sort of discussion.....stay tuned!!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 216
Location: Belleville, WI | Thanks for bringing us all the great info, Steve. It's nice to hear from real experts on this topic. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 440
| Thanks Mr. Worrall, that is great info. I need to get some rods out of the rack.
Edited by ChadG 7/19/2005 7:06 PM
|
|
| |
|
|
I guess it's up to the individual to make the choice on how to fish, when to fish, and when not to fish.
I tend to be on the cautious side when it comes to fish, be it muskies, trout, or other species that are slow growing, low numbered predators which can suffer from intensive fishing more readily than say bass or walleyes.
I firmly belive that with the explosion in muskie fishing, delayed mortality will have an effect on our future, and try to minimize my impact on fish catching as much as possible.
It is apparent that different biologists have different opinnions. I guess I will choose to follow the advice of the men I know in MN. They've done wonders with our fishery, and I know they want nothing more than to protect it for the future.
I will choose to take the road that minimizes my impact on the fishery, so my kids can have the success that I've enjoyed.
Maybe I'm over-cautious, but I can live with that.
If my previous posts have been a little blunt, and maybe condenscending, I apologize, but I just say what I believe in.
JS |
|
| |
|
| lots of good info getting compiled here,,hopefully the hard copy will have a severe temp zone for pike too has a comparison,,also would like to know some info on Hybrds too has the TC area manages around 18 lakes for stocked tigers |
|
| |
|
| Surface water on Tonka was in the hi 70's (tuesday) after the cool and blow we just had....no worry about the fish........they are in hibernation.
BT |
|
| |
|
Posts: 185
Location: Mendota Heights, MN | Mr Worrall,
Once again you have come through! Thanks for taking the time to go beyond mearly moderating. When I browse across all the various musky sites online, you are a prime reason why I keep coming back to Muskiesfirst as the place to go to know.
I certainly appreciate that everyone will have there own feelings about this issue. Mr. Skarie and others, I really respect your dedication and commitment to preserving the fish, your better safe than sorry position is truely a moral high road on this issue.
I on the other hand, barring extream conditions, will fish. (I don't even know how to get to the high road, the ditch is to deep and I'm to short to see out of it!) Anyway, My gut feeling was as per Mr Worrall's last post.
Finally, to Hooker: It would be very nice if you would name the source lake of the dead 50's that your anonymous source gave you. I don't say this to attract a bunch of people to a 50's lake, but to better understand what type of water this was happening in. Are we talking a shallow dark water body like Indy, a large clear water like WB? Please name the lake.
This has been an awesome topic and timely, keep it coming.
thanks all,
steve |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2384
Location: On the X that marks the mucky spot | Does Missori use Leech Lake strain fish or the strain that's in Kentucky? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 734
Location: Watertown, MN | I would suspect Missouri muskies to cope better in mid 80's water temps as they are more condition to those temp, were as in MN and WI lake temp usually do not reach these temp to often. LCO was 86 on sunday in 6 years I have not seen temp much over mid 70's. Also the other variable is the dissolve oxygen, mid 80's probably would be okay if you had wind mixing the layers, but with a week+ of flat calm no wind the oxygen content would be more of the concern for a released fish than the water temps. To me it would be like me trying to run 4 mile in the mountains in 90+ temps, I might live, but I would probably never be the same.
Troyz
B420
"The World needs to Smoke a Jackpot"
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32904
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | The Missouri fish were barred I think, Pennsylvania or New York if I remember. Mr. Neuswanger's papers on that project are on the way here snail mail, with the hopes some of the information there on water temps are germain to this discussion. When they get here I'll confirm. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2089
| I believe some Leech Lakers have been stocked in Hazel Creek.Maybe Mark Boone could help us out on this one. Steve |
|
| |
|
Location: The Yahara Chain | Steve thanks for taking the effort to help clear this issue up.
I see an awful lot of BST's here. The only real expert that had posted (Sorenson) was dismissed by all metro water temp "experts".
Treats the fact that your surface temps went down 5 degrees when it got windy shows me that it wasn't really that hot in the first place.
Just A Thought, if you think Cady and Hulbert aren't fishing I would like some of whatever you are on.
Any muskie that gets caught gets stressed, if you guys are so worried about the fish you should quit fishing for them. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1764
Location: Ogden, Ut | In all fairness to Treats, I did have a couple of other correspondances w/ him and got a bit more info on the subject. Some of the metro waters may indeed have serious problems, but they are not limited to temperature. Many of these lakes are a bit unique in their properties that may lead to low dissolved oxygen (DO) levels. The temperatures, while exascerbating the problem, are not typically the causative agent in fish (muskie) mortality. The higher temps drive metabolic rates of fish up, thereby creating a need for more oxygen. Most fish can only make use of oxygen in the form of DO in the water and as water warms, it's ability to hold DO diminishes. Instant problem - DO need goes up while the DO availability goes down. Add to that the problem many metro lakes have w/ Eurasion water milfoil - which Treats relayed to me was dying in some spots. Dead and decaying plant material uses a bunch of DO during the decay process (and has no means to replace it via photosynthesis), even further lowering the amount available to fish. So you see, there may indeed be a problem in some of the metro lakes, but don't jump on the hot water bandwagon - it's only a part of the problem. The good news is that it doesn't take much of a weather break to get things back to 'normal'. A good wind can help break up the extreme nature of the stratification that sets up and allows the mixing w/ the cooler water (from the deeper layers) that can hold more DO. It also helps mechanically churn the surface allowing oxygen from the atmosphere to more readily dissolve into the water. Enjoy your resource, I lived in Minnesota long enough to know that if you don't like the weather, stick around for a few minutes, it will change...
K. |
|
| |
|
|
Wind has no effect on waters ability to hold oxygen, it is temperature related only.
On very windy days, the temp can stay the same, DO levels don't go up and down with wind.
The availability of oxygen is not the problem, warmer water can only absorb and hold so much.
Stratification is different on every body of water, even in high winds, thermoclines are quite deep in hot temps, and that cooler water is not mixed well at all with the surface, which is why surface temps are virtually the same from one day to the next if the air temps are high even in windy conditions.
If the availability of oxygen suddenly went down in the air we breath in hot temps, how do you think our bodies would react? How many of you have hiked in the mountains in the heat?
Decaying plant material is a sure sign of low DO levels, and only makes the problem that much worse as decomposition uses oxygen. Weeds are dying up here in my area, as well as algae from the hot temps and sunlight.
It's not rocket science guys, and just because someone from Missouri worked with muskies for awhile doesn't make them the leading authority on muskie physiology.
For anyone here to second guess what biologists like Bob Strand or Rod Ramsell have to say on these issues is pretty weak. Bob Strand is considered on of the top Muskie researchers in the world.
JS
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1764
Location: Ogden, Ut | John,
It is true that the wind has little affect on the water to hold DO, but it does create a situation where there is more surface area to absorb it faster under conditions where it is below saturation. DO is often not at saturation levels throughout many portions of the day due to respiration of aquatic organisms utilizing it faster than reabsorbtion rates.
Wind can and does often partially break extreme stratification - but as you have stated, often thermocline layers are deeper than mechanical mixing effects can reach. Each system is different.
I have hiked in the mountains in the heat. I live there. You would be amazed at how quickly one can adapt.
Believe me, I am not trying to second guess any muskie experts, I just want to caution against painting with too broad of a brush - some systems will suffer no ill effects from angling during higher than normal water temperatures. No, it's not rocket science, but the sky is not falling everywhere it gets hot either.
Kent |
|
| |
|
Posts: 7058
Location: Northwest Chicago Burbs | "It's not rocket science guys, and just because someone from Missouri worked with muskies for awhile doesn't make them the leading authority on muskie physiology."
Dave Neuswanger
Fisheries Supervisor, Upper Chippewa Basin
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
*actually, that does make him an expert in Muskies physiology.
and being that Kent Sorenson is a professional fisheries biologist, that makes him an expert also.
Beyond being a very concerned muskie fisherman who has done some reading, and has spoken with muskie experts, what are your scientific qualifications?
Passion and enthusiasm for this sport have brought on MANY positive changes for the sport of muskie fishing. Muskies, Inc., the advent of the C&R ethic, the ending of the usage of single hook sucker rigs.....all of these have been propogated and supported by concerned muskie fisherman, to the benefit of all of us. However, there seems to be a rash lately of 'arm chair biologists' in this sport dictating to others what and how they should fish, dictating to even the DNRs of states how they should manage the resource. As well meaning as these feelings are, there is also a serious slant towards dictating to the masses what should and should not be done by all of us. When science does not fully back these beliefs or desires up, that isnt of consequence to the arm chair biologist, because common sense backs up their beliefs. Common sense is not always true in the face of scientific facts, and that IS a fact. We all need to learn more about muskies, not just the catching of them, but many other areas. We need to respect and learn from those PROFESSIONAL BIOLOGISTS who are adding information to the discussions here on MuskieFIRST and elsewhere. We may hear information that runs adverse to our pre-determined beliefs, but to discount the input from these professionals is not only ignorant, but also dangerous. To judge the actions of others, and to try to force policies for or against muskie management, while discounting the scientific input put forth by professionals with training, that is where the danger comes in. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8801
| Come on now, I sense some of you guys are getting a little angry here...
Why are we all here? Because this is an issue that concerns us. If it did not concern us at all we'd say "**** it" and not give it a second thought. We ALL have our own selfish interests at play here. Guys want to fish, guys still want to be able to catch fish down the road, or have their kids catch fish down the road. Admit it guys, every single one of us is here because we want to be able to catch big muskies. "Don't fish when its hot like this so I can catch that fish too..." Selfish f8ckers are we. Nobody claims to have all the answers, some of us don't claim to have ANY of the answers. Instead of bashing each others qualifications, whether real or percieved, lets get back to discussing the real issues. Here they are as I see them:
1. How hot is too hot?
2. Are surface temperatures always reflective of the water column as a whole? i.e. is it sometimes safer to fish with surface temps above 80 and not safe other times
3. If it's strictly related to O2 content, what are the variables other than heat that can affect O2 content
4. Do any of us here know enough about this to make a decison based on ANYTHING other than how we feel about the issue?
Let's let the people who KNOW about this stuff tell us what we need to know.
Jeff
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 132
Location: Elkhart, IN | I can't speak for anyone else. What I have read so far has not changed my mind. I have seen what high water temps do to the fish I catch. Maybe I am really bad at releaseing fish? I know I am better off not fishing right now. Guest has it right. No matter what people say some will not change their minds. I am proof of that.
I am very interested in the info Steve is getting in the mail. You don't know how bad I want to get out and fish. This is worse than Ice on. But, right now I know me not fishing is the best thing I can do for the fishery here right now.
Brian |
|
| |
|
Posts: 132
Location: Elkhart, IN | Excellent post Addict.
Brian |
|
| |
|
| Phoeinix
wont name the lake out of respect to the source,, if you I did people would think the "big fish" bite was on then just the opposite effect of this post would ha[ppen fish would get pounded even more,,All Ill say is its not "dark shallow" water |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32904
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Another point:
Wind, especially strong winds similar to what we have had recently in the effected areas, also has an evaporative cooling effect on surface temps which is why surface temps fall in windswept areas even in hot conditions. As the water cools a few degrees, the DO availabily increases. As usual, we are arguing semantics, not facts most of this discussion.
John,
Be careful who you 'attack' here (and please exercise a bit more interpersonal communication care), we draw commentary from qualified scientists across the country and Canada pretty regularly. No one is questioning your dedication or the qualifications of your the two well known fisheries folks you have mentioned; we are simply attempting to reach what might be considered an educated consensus on this issue. Mr. Neuswanger has a stellar reptation as does Frank Pratt as top shelf fisheries folks, and both are extremely well qualified to comment on this subject. I am headed out this fall to fish Sorenson's Utah Hybrids, and I'm very much looking forward to sticking a big Tiger in his managed waters!!
As I stated, what has been said here doesn't necessarily contradict your statements, it goes more to qualifying the degreee of concern warranted in each situation. |
|
| |
