|
|
Posts: 711
| The recently revived thread on Chad Cains 55 twelve years ago got me thinking... that fish was really a BIG deal when it was caught. Now I hear about many fish in the 54-57 range being caught every year.
50 inch muskies are more common than ever in some waters. Here in MN or on say St Clair a 50 is a great fish but if you put in your time and fish smart it is a somewhat certain destiny that it happens.
It seems that in Canada (specifically Ontario) and Wisc a fifty raises eyebrows a bit more. Example: A buddy that has been heading to Ontario for years just nailed his first fifty out of at least a hundred caught up there. So is a 50 from those waters more significant than from areas where they are more common ?
Also in the areas where the fish grow long fast what does it take to really get every ones attention ?
Edited by bturg 9/25/2018 7:42 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 3
| Never fished Minnesota, but seems awfully Stange so so many of you guys come North if that were the case! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8717
| I think we have a false sense of what really can be expected out of our lake ecosystems on a long term sustainable basis.
We've seen a lot of "new" lakes coming of age in the last 15 years. Those first few year classes, growing up in a system with loads of forage, unlimited habitat, and no competition paint a picture of heaven that is not reality. They peak, get bombarded, and fade. And then the great unwashed public complains about the pressure, and the (inevitable) decline. The end result is a fishery that is what it can sustain long term. We've come a long way with stocking, catch and release, size/slot limits. 50" is still 50", and it's a small percentage of fish in even the best ecosystems.
In the vast majority places where we fish for them, very few of the fish will ever get there.
I'm no biologist, I don't even play one on TV. But in nature, there are boom years and bust years. Too hot, too cold, this or that hatched and did very well, all the fry or all the eggs got eaten, muskie reproduction = poor. Then you have a banner year, or two or three. 15 years down the road, there's a bunch of big fish. IMO we need to manage our fisheries in a way that reflects what happens in nature. Stocking the same number of fish, year after year after year? Great. Make more fish. But that's not what happens in nature, and nature? It works all on it's own.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 93
| I've caught some big ones in both created fisheries like MN and natural fisheries like Lake of the Woods. In my personal record book, the natural ones are a bigger deal even though they're not as big as some others I've caught from created and maintained waters. Lake St. Clair is harder to figure since it kind of acts like both: a natural fishery that maintains incredible numbers of big fish.
That said, a big fish is a big fish anywhere it's caught, and I'll always give those pictures a look-see and I'll continue to get my lures wet in both kinds of waters.
Edited by undersized 9/26/2018 8:28 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 267
| esoxaddict nailed it. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1969
| Muskie fishermen have really fine tuned their craft, and especially the Leech lake stockers, those fish have some predictable habits that good anglers have really taken advantage of..the number of really good fisherman chasing MN big fish is crazy compared to 15 years ago, on any given lake , a pie can only be cut into so many pieces..But how many 50’s are caught in Mn annually? I know one things 100’s get caught most never hear about.. a 50” anywhere is still a great accomplishment.. Not sure about Ontario being any harder (or easier) than MN.. 8 of the last 10 week I’ve been to Ontario, we’ve put at least 1 50” in the boat. This spring was a year we didn’t get one, bright sun and zero wind made converting the big girls boat side very difficult, even with less than ideal weather, we had chances...Catching a big fish is great, but you miss a lot of great memories if that’s your only focus. A 55” is still a big deal anywhere in my book!! |
|
| |
|
Location: Grand Rapids, MI | bturg - 9/25/2018 8:39 PM It seems that in Canada (specifically Ontario) and Wisc a fifty raises eyebrows a bit more. Example: A buddy that has been heading to Ontario for years just nailed his first fifty out of at least a hundred caught up there. Not sure how true that is, lots of places in Ontario (assume you're talking NW not E) that have common 50's. It's just that people vacation at resorts in areas where they can catch numbers and not on the waters where the numbers might be lower but % of 50's are higher.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 343
| I lucked out and caught a southern 50" last week. Not the most common catch down there. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 397
| Been fishing for 16 years for these things and still haven't put a 50 in and i fish MN lakes, and LOTW. I fish lakes that are known to put out big fish and fish hard. Nothing is certain when it comes to catching a big muskie!!! I keep plugging away on good waters and get excited for every fish i catch, and hoping the next one will be THE ONE!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 711
| I love catching them all for sure and hope that everyone who chases them hard gets their shot at a tanker...whatever a tanker is where you fish.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1667
| A million bucks is a million bucks. A 50 is a 50. Doesn't matter to me where it comes from. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1969
| But a million bucks ain’t what it was 20 years ago!  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4269
Location: Ashland WI | IAJustin - 9/28/2018 6:11 AM
But a million bucks ain’t what it was 20 years ago! :)
And a million bucks mexican ain't a million bucks american.. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1220
| I’m likely on record in several places dismissing the importance of the number “50.” It’s a false target for musky expertise. You can likely find a first timer teenager who hired Spencer Berman for a half day on LSC and got two or three that day. And, there’s some really fine (even expert) anglers in smaller waters who never saw a fifty. I’ve also caught a lot of high forties fish I think are better than my low fifties fish. But, all that aside.....I think most of the fisheries producing 50’s are there because those responsible for the water managed their water better than others. I’ll never admit the Vikings are an NFL franchise, but the Minnesota guys in charge of managing musky populations deserve a Lambeau Leap! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1636
| 50 incher caught from a lake that was stocked...
50 incher caught from a natural lake...
It's like going to a grocery store vs hunting for deer. Using the microwave vs the grill. Going through a fast food driveway vs a home cooked meal.
Obviously we aren't eating these fish... but, I'm sure you get my point.
Maybe winning the lottery vs working for 50 years to earn a million dollars is a better comparison. Playing Madden at home on a big screen TV vs a front row seat at the Super Bowl. Reading Todd Minor's fishing reports on MuskieFIRST vs fishing with him in his boat.
Both require work and effort in some way... and mean something... but, in the end - one is probably a little more satisfying over the other. This is probably especially true if you have experienced both and have been fishing for a long period of time.
Aside from those things... there is a lot to be proud of when it comes to the stocked lakes. A lot of time and effort goes into something like that... and the results deserve a lot of credit. I think a lot more people deserve credit for those fish - along with the people who catch them.
With all of that being said... a 50 is a 50... but, the initial scenario's mentioned are different in many ways.
Artificial vs natural.
I love them both |
|
| |
|
Posts: 10
| esoxaddict - 9/25/2018 9:34 PM
I'm no biologist, I don't even play one on TV. But in nature, there are boom years and bust years. Too hot, too cold, this or that hatched and did very well, all the fry or all the eggs got eaten, muskie reproduction = poor. Then you have a banner year, or two or three. 15 years down the road, there's a bunch of big fish. IMO we need to manage our fisheries in a way that reflects what happens in nature. Stocking the same number of fish, year after year after year? Great. Make more fish. But that's not what happens in nature, and nature? It works all on it's own.
I think you are right. Where I fish, over the past 2 seasons I haven't caught (and have very rarely seen) any fish in the 35" to 40" slot. For the longest time that was the most common size fish I caught. But over the past 2 years, I have seen (and caught) a ton of shorter fish. Those fish are nice and fat, so they aren't stunted. I've also seen a pretty typical number of larger fish as well. Who knows though, your areas might be different. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 20178
Location: oswego, il | A million bucks mexican is the same as a million bucks american. Ledo, shut the basement door please.:-)
Not sure where I fell in the analogy, if I fell at all but as stated previously in other threads by big fish guys here, you are not relevant until you catch a 50!:-)
Edited by ToddM 10/2/2018 6:54 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 452
| Maybe somewhere in our bio section we can have something about how many 50's you've caught, so forum users can decide if our advice is usefull or not? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1220
| If you’re prepared to believe folks who frequent this forum on how many 50’s they have caught, I’d like to pour you a koolaid and discuss an investment opportunity! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 452
| Make it a double |
|
| |
|
Posts: 556
| A 50" is still a Big Fish anywhere--- and I would think almost all Musky Anglers would be excited to catch their first 50--or their 10th - 50" fish.... Doesn't matter what lake or stocked or Natural---- NOW A 55" Fish--- that's a Giant anywhere in any type of water--- I would think there are very few LEGIT 55's caught every season... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 253
Location: On the water | I'm with esox on this one. Couldn't have said it better.
Good luck everyone on catching a 50. Tom |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | yah not sure why a "natural" 50 is any different than a stocked 50? can't say 50s on LOTW are any harder (or easier) to catch than stocked lakes... both have the same behavior... 50s are definitely a lot more common these days than 15 - 20 yrs ago... I remember when the thought of catching just one 50" seemed out of reach... now we can catch multiple 50s in a day or trip. legit 55s. at least in MN/WI/Ontario they are pretty darn rare... out east maybe not as much... have been lucky to have one over 55" in the boat.
Edited by BNelson 10/2/2018 6:02 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8717
| BNelson - 10/2/2018 5:58 PM
yah not sure why a "natural" 50 is any different than a stocked 50? [...]
Stocking, especially on new lakes, creates a fishery that's basically artificial. Those first few generations of fish are far more likely to reach 50" in great numbers that any subsequent generation after them. Lakes that rely on natural reproduction will produce what the biomass can support. You know this, Brad. Some lakes will never produce a 50" fish no matter how we try to intervene. Some lakes will produce a few generations of 50" + fish and taper off. Some lakes can support a consistent population of 50" fish because of the right combination of forage, water chemistry, acreage, etc.
Yes, a 50 is a 50 is a 50. But look at your home water. Hanson's got what, 2 or 3 50's out of the Yahara Chain? Those lakes are pee pounded. The clubs do a great job with stocking and management. But without that, those fish are basically extinct. We have our dog #*#* fisheries down here as well. Pour 100's of predatory fish into an ecosystem, and you're going to get what you would expect. But is that something that's sustainable long term?? |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | Wi strain vs. Leech lake strain. Night and day. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8717
| That's another factor. The genetic WI fish, mutts... You're right. Night and day. The DNR lacks the funding, research, and ability to properly "manage" our fisheries to the extent we'd like. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1425
Location: St. Lawrence River | esox911 - 10/2/2018 6:26 PM
A 50" is still a Big Fish anywhere--- and I would think almost all Musky Anglers would be excited to catch their first 50--or their 10th - 50" fish.... Doesn't matter what lake or stocked or Natural---- NOW A 55" Fish--- that's a Giant anywhere in any type of water--- I would think there are very few LEGIT 55's caught every season...
Some bodies of water pump out 54-55” fish on an almost regular basis. You will just never hear about some.
Edited by JakeStCroixSkis 10/3/2018 5:18 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 343
| I don't guess I understand why Leech Lakers are "inferior" to Wisconsin strain in the rating of 50's. Perhaps the Leech Lakers are a superior strain, as they are capable of growing faster and longer than the actual "inferior" Wisconsin strain. Oh by the way all my 50's are either hybrid "tigers" or Ohio strain southern fish, except a Nebraska unknown strain. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4269
Location: Ashland WI | true tiger tamer - 10/4/2018 1:52 PM
I don't guess I understand why Leech Lakers are "inferior" to Wisconsin strain in the rating of 50's. Perhaps the Leech Lakers are a superior strain, as they are capable of growing faster and longer than the actual "inferior" Wisconsin strain. Oh by the way all my 50's are either hybrid "tigers" or Ohio strain southern fish, except a Nebraska unknown strain.
I think the Wisconsin 50 is more rare. That's why people could see catching the Leech Lake strain 50 as an "inferior" accomplishment. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 408
Location: MN | Exactly. The point is that they are more rare.
Stats on last 10 years of fish entered into Muskies Inc lunge log:
----------- Vermilion --- Madison Chain
Number --- 1732 ------- 5906
% 45+ ---- 46 --------- 7.5
% 48+ ---- 23 --------- 1.6
% 50+ ---- 16 --------- 0.27
% 52+ ---- 7.3 -------- 0.034
% 54+ ---- 1.9 -------- 0
In terms of comparative rarity, a Mad chain 45 is like a V 52, and a Mad chain 48 is like a V 54. Presumably you can catch higher numbers on the Mad chain, but in order for you to catch the same number of 50s over a given time frame, you'd have to catch 60x as many fish on the Mad chain.
That is why people take notice of a 50 in WI, but not as much so for a 50 in MN. A 50 is still a big muskie anywhere in my book - it's just not super super rare in some places while in others it is.
Edited by nar160 10/4/2018 2:53 PM
|
|
| |
