|
|
Location: Vilas | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7PazVEProk
very intersting talk with some guys that know!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32785
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | The entire 'It's the Fish' debate including this subject in great detail was held right here on MuskieFIRST (the only publisher willing to publish it all and go to the biologists from the US and Canada for their responses) with VOLUMES of input for those saying that WI fish can't compare to LL strain. Turns out in some cases they can't and in some cases, they do better. Dr. Sloss's work should clarify the track taken over time since then by the WIDNR, we have both video and a volume of content about that on MuskieFIRST as well. Lots of Leech lake fish stocked now, and since then, the Green Bay fishery has taken off like a shot.
I'm not listening to it, so someone please let me know if any if this is mentioned in the podcast, I'd be interested to know. |
|
| |
|
Location: Vilas | I guess what I take from the video is the DNR is covering up the success of the LL strain being put in Nancy Lake. Larry Ramsell and Pete Maina talking on the subject, with Pete saying it was the best fishing he`s ever seen in Wi! and it was Pete`s opinion that there was natural reproduction going on. If the DNR doesnt know this, why not? and if the DNR does know this... why is it not doing something positive with the info?? I know when I go to Eagle or a Mn lake, I see more big fish in a week then all year in Vilas Cty! If something can be done about that, then Im all for it
Edited by JGlass 2/22/2021 9:09 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32785
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | JGlass - 2/22/2021 9:08 AM
I guess what I take from the video is the DNR is covering up the success of the LL strain being put in Nancy Lake. --How is the population doing now in Nancy? Didn't LL fish get stocked in other lakes in WI since? What/who determined which lakes could be stocked with LL fish and why? Are there some success stories and some not across the muskie range stocking LL fish? Why would Eagle be better than any lake in Vilas or Oneida, has it ever been stocked? What did Dr. Sloss's long-term genetics study reveal? (That's the real answer, plain and simple)The answers to your questions below are all published right here on MuskieFIRSTif you take the time to look for them. I can tell you this, for every single reason muskie management is complicated and expensive, there are zero magic bullets.---
-Larry Ramsell and Pete Maina talking on the subject, with Pete saying it was the best fishing he`s ever seen in Wi! and it was Pete`s opinion that there was natural reproduction going on. If the DNR doesnt know this, why not? and if the DNR does know this... why is it not doing something positive with the info?? I know when I go to Eagle or a Mn lake, I see more big fish in a week then all year in Vilas Cty! If something can be done about that, then Im all for it
OK, MN stocking their own strain- LL fish. Vermilion is a GREAT case study. What happened and is happening there is exactly what several of the biologists from the US and Canada we spoke with predicted. That's the results in a body of water where one might have expected a tremendous fishery well into the future with great NR and a bounty of 50s never-ending. And now, the MNDNR is under big time pressure and is taking heat to 'fix' Vermilion's declining muskie population. (look up new reservoir syndrome) NO magic bullet. Oh, and Mille Lacs too.......
There's now in MN the kind of heat the WINR was taking back then, the vitriol was amazing, as was the gleeful MN muskie anglers 'Look at Mille Lacs and Leech, OUR DNR is progressive and amazing, this will be forever the best muskie destination forever!!!" Yet now muske anglers FROM MN discourage us all from having unrealistic expectations about a trip to Vermilion or Mille Lacs, and muskie anglers booking cabins has dropped way off in the resorts. The border closing has helped the resorts immensely, but that will end too, and there will be immense pressure on the fish this year again.
Don't get me wrong, I like spotted muskies a lot. I work with Pete and Larry regularly and respect their opinions, agreeing with much of the 'it's the fish' debate. I think spots should be welcome to be stocked wherever it's possible and affordable and they can be acquired, and thanks to many folks including Larry's work and the WIDNR response and Muskies Inc, they are. It's a battle in an ongoing 'war'we have already won, and the reason we did is in large part this community. How soon we forget.
My opinion? Old news brought back up to acquire You Tube views for Today's Angler. |
|
| |
|
| The first time I witnessed 'new reservoir syndrome' was back in the late 1960s. A dam was put in on the Yellow River in Wood County. Created a large lake, park, etc. A couple years after the dam went in, the panfish exploded. Anyone with a boat could go out and catch a limit of big bluegills. The locals thought that would last forever, but it was a short term thing. There it was a case of the dam creating an explosion of plankton and other small creatures that the blue gills fed on. As that went back to a normal level, the panfish also reverted to normal numbers and growth rate. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 20178
Location: oswego, il | New and reclaimed lakes can have tremendous fishing as well as newly stocked lakes. It takes a life cycle to balance the lake. Until that happens fishing can be phenomenal, so can growth rates. It's not just with Muskies either. If you have ever had the chance to experience it you know what I am talking about. I caught 10 Muskies in a lake my third time there with a combined total of 18. The guides had not fished it yet. Caught 12 in a day on another and caught 80 in my first 20 trips. Another went 6 for 9 on my first trip. Got in and enjoyed it before the masses and guides descended. While those lakes are still decent they don't offer that type of success anymore because they lakes found their balance.
There was a similar scenario brought up in illinois and brought up by a seminar speaker at our club meeting. Pretty much the same deal about initial stocks from another area doing really well compared to what the fishery settled into. Even though that person could not answer my questions others bit the suick crossways and refused to listen to any discussion otherwise.
Edited by ToddM 2/22/2021 12:08 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 6
| There is a pretty good podcast with Jordan Weeks on Backlash. It gets into this discussion. Worth a listen... Seems like WI is open to stocking whatever strain you desire south of highway 10. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1969
| Leech lake fish get 54”+ everywhere they are put..Madison isn’t new res. Syndrome quite the opposite., interesting when Larry talks about many north of 10 lakes don’t have native fish anyway
Edited by IAJustin 2/22/2021 1:21 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1969
| Someone please throw 5000 15” leech lake strain in West Okoboji , 100% guaranteed Iowa would have 55-56” fish in 15-20 years.. something this state has never seen. 
Edited by IAJustin 2/22/2021 1:27 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1675
Location: Mt. Zion, IL | I would believe Larry on size over nearly anyone else in DNR/lake management on muskies. I say stock them already and let's get this over with. This is not simply a way to get "views" as Steve says above, but a way to try to gain support for the cause. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 315
| I was the guy that released the 54” Illinois LL strain fish from McMaster in 2006 that Larry referred to. I believe the first stocking of LL fish was in 1991 with another stocking in 1994. The biologist figured that fish was from the original stocking in ‘91 so it was probably a 16 year old fish since I believe they were stocked as 18-20” one year old fish. In 1998 I released a 48” fish there which means if that was from the original stocking as well it was only an eight year old fish! So that LL strain fish went from 20” to 48” in only seven years! We had some absolute giant fish in that lake from around 2004-2010 or so. I saw a couple fish there that I sincerely believed were longer than that 54.
When we had our local club we wanted to put more LL fish in McMaster and other lakes because we saw firsthand how those fish thrived and grew quickly to trophy size and were told no by the DNR despite the fact that we would pay for the stocking. Talk about being frustrated!!!! They seem to thrive very well in almost all lakes where they’ve been stocked. I can’t help but feel they’d do very well in some of the inland lakes in WI too. Personally I’d love to see it! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1275
Location: Hayward, Wisconsin | First of all Steve, that Podcast wasn't done to "...acquire YouTube views for Today's Angler." Those gentlemen are serious about the subject and are unhappy with the misinformation being promulgated by certain DNR sources, not to mention using "studies" to slant and interpret the data to their "biased" (in my opinion) view point. I'll not go into detail here, it was stated on the Podcast. If I thought otherwise, I would not have participated!
NOW, some "possible" good news on the spotted fish front, albeit not Mississippi River/Leech Lake strain muskies. After the Podcast, I received an email from a gentleman who has been communicating with a couple of WI DNR Biologists (whose names I won't mention as I do not wish to get them in trouble). He related to me that he was told that beginning THIS YEAR, any waters that get stocked with muskies that drain into the Great Lakes would be stocked with Great Lakes Strain (spotted) muskies!! "IF" true, the battle is half over! Perhaps Steve you can contact your DNR sources and find out if this is true.
As you may recall Mr. Worrall, back in 2006, then Chief Biologist and Supervisor of the Upper Chippewa Basin State waters, Dave Neuswanger, AGREED that Great Lakes strain muskie SHOULD be stocked in Wisconsin lakes that drain into the Great Lakes and that one such, the Gile Flowage, in his domain, would be if he had any say in the matter...evidently he didn't, because it didn't happen and was never mentioned again! (you can check the archives if you doubt this). Can you imagine what we would have in Wisconsin NOW if that strategy had been instituted back then???
Let us all hope it is so and we can look forward to more great "spotted muskie" fishing in the future. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1199
Location: Walker, MN | Florida strain Largemouth were stocked in Lake Chickamauga TN starting in in 2000, by 2015 they had a new 15# state record (the fish was 12 yrs old). They also had record tournament results with huge bags, and tons of 8#-10# fish catches. Fast forward to today and the fishing participation and business around the lake are at an all time high. They've since stocked a few neighboring large reservoirs in TN with these fish (Watts Bar, Kentucky L, Nickajack), it will likely be a true bass Mecca in about 5 more years. Results were similar with Florida strain LM in California and Texas.
I know it's not Wi or muskies, but it's an exciting success story. Everyone likes the chance at trophy fish, hopefully they'll be able to figure out the right formula.
Edited by Masqui-ninja 2/22/2021 4:02 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32785
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | RyanJoz - 2/22/2021 1:26 PM
I would believe Larry on size over nearly anyone else in DNR/lake management on muskies. I say stock them already and let's get this over with. This is not simply a way to get "views" as Steve says above, but a way to try to gain support for the cause.
We went through this debate for a couple years involving the best muskie minds in fisheries on the planet, and the DNR hired Dr. Sloss to study our muskie's genetics and the strains we have in N WI. No matter how much Larry, Pete, I, and the rest of us want to see great slakes strain stocked here, it's been an uphill battle that is still underway.
Muskies Inc. got all sorts of involved, and I think that's much of the reason why there are LL fish in the waters they are in. It ain't like we deleted years of discussion, either.
Lakes with no NR which are mainly south of ten have been cleared for stocking LL fish, and then there's Bay of Green Bay with that strain. Someone would have to pay for all of this, too.
Then there's the fact the DNR's of both states are clearly not currently stocking muskies of any strain with the goal to create a high-volume no/poor NR trophy population. I suggest you call your area fish manager and ask why not.
What's happened on Vermilion and Mille Lacs since this debate first began? THOSE are the lakes held up as the epitome of LL stocking success when Larry fired up the original discussion. What happens with initial stocking (the new reservoir syndrome) and then trying to maintain that makes things a hell of a lot more complicated because us arm chair biologists don't understand it well.
Then we have the issues of meeting the needs of the entire fishing public on any one waterbody, and those goals frequently clash with ours. I believe Larry is correct and has been, headway has been made, but our requests and perceived needs don't always match the bigger picture.
I'm all over getting fast growing muskies stocked wherever we can, but one has to be realistic and diplomatic in that process.
The entire tone of that piece in the promotion was sensationalistic, which I felt was a deterrent last time, and still feel that way. I have said from the start attacking the people you need to get to agree with you, especially after making headway in the battle, is an ineffective way to negotiate. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32785
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Larry Ramsell - 2/22/2021 3:22 PM
First of all Steve, that Podcast wasn't done to "...acquire YouTube views for Today's Angler." Those gentlemen are serious about the subject and are unhappy with the misinformation being promulgated by certain DNR sources, not to mention using "studies" to slant and interpret the data to their "biased" (in my opinion) view point. I'll not go into detail here, it was stated on the Podcast. If I thought otherwise, I would not have participated!
NOW, some "possible" good news on the spotted fish front, albeit not Mississippi River/Leech Lake strain muskies. After the Podcast, I received an email from a gentleman who has been communicating with a couple of WI DNR Biologists (whose names I won't mention as I do not wish to get them in trouble). He related to me that he was told that beginning THIS YEAR, any waters that get stocked with muskies that drain into the Great Lakes would be stocked with Great Lakes Strain (spotted) muskies!! "IF" true, the battle is half over! Perhaps Steve you can contact your DNR sources and find out if this is true.
As you may recall Mr. Worrall, back in 2006, then Chief Biologist and Supervisor of the Upper Chippewa Basin State waters, Dave Neuswanger, AGREED that Great Lakes strain muskie SHOULD be stocked in Wisconsin lakes that drain into the Great Lakes and that one such, the Gile Flowage, in his domain, would be if he had any say in the matter...evidently he didn't, because it didn't happen and was never mentioned again! (you can check the archives if you doubt this). Can you imagine what we would have in Wisconsin NOW if that strategy had been instituted back then???
Let us all hope it is so and we can look forward to more great "spotted muskie" fishing in the future.
I agree. I am with you and solidly on your side and clearly remember what was said, and the backlash that I dealt with in person and on the phone for months. We lost Dave's participation here not because of Dave, that much is clear. Several times I quoted sources from the US and Canada who refused to let me state a name, not wanting to end up in the situation where they would find themselves pitted against a portion of the muskie angling public and their peers. This was a PRIME example of why folks hire a PR firm or person.
It's the tone of how it was promoted I disagreed with, not your participation or information. The title alone won't make us many friends from those already willing to tell us to pee off.
I have heard rumbles of the same regarding stocking which would be great! I will, in the spirit of cooperation and working together to create change... because of my position here and my position with MI as PR/Marketing VP, do all I can to prevent the creation of a possible new divide or a widening of the divide between anglers, Muskies Inc, Larry, Pete, I and the WIDNR or any other DNR. Working together will get the job done, polarization will not. Let's continue working to improve this situation, use the alliances with area fish managers we have gained to create a new dialog, and make this work. It won't work if we collectively allow another name-calling train wreck to occur. People who are not aware of what it takes to make changes like the 50" limit on Pelican, getting LL stain permits on some waters, and getting the entire establishment structure we must work with to change to meet our hopes have a tendency to be less than reasonable. I'll do my best to stop us from taking a step backward because I want success. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 64
| I think we also have to remember that for a lot of people who go muskie fishing, their goal isn't necessarily to catch the biggest fish possible. In fact, I believe most muskie anglers are interested in numbers. There's only a select few who are interested in only catching trophies. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 20178
Location: oswego, il | Protect Green Gene has shown that Leech Lake Strain Muskies do not survive well in Illinois lakes they did not capture a fish after the second year. There are some waters like McMaster that's part deep gravel pit where they would survive. There is some survivability in the fox chain. And I did see a 51.5 pulled from a DNR net. For the most part not many are caught when enough were stocked to see a some numbers caught. One year a.bunch were stocked and a bunch caught in their first year then no two year olds showed up. They are.not the answer but for a couple of illinois lakes.
Edited by ToddM 2/22/2021 4:07 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32785
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | IAJustin - 2/22/2021 1:11 PM
Leech lake fish get 54”+ everywhere they are put..Madison isn’t new res. Syndrome quite the opposite., interesting when Larry talks about many north of 10 lakes don’t have native fish anyway
Really, what makes you state that about Madison? When were LL fish stocked, how many, how many since the first stocking and what has been the survival and growth rate? The info is available.
I actually belong to the Cap City chapter, just re-upped with a family membership. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1969
| sworrall - 2/22/2021 4:47 PM
IAJustin - 2/22/2021 1:11 PM
Leech lake fish get 54”+ everywhere they are put..Madison isn’t new res. Syndrome quite the opposite., interesting when Larry talks about many north of 10 lakes don’t have native fish anyway
Really, what makes you state that about Madison? When were LL fish stocked, how many, how many since the first stocking and what has been the survival and growth rate? The info is available.
I actually belong to the Cap City chapter, just re-upped with a family membership.
When Mid 2000’s, how many = not enough... growth = exceptional look at the 53”+ on today’s angler
Edited by IAJustin 2/22/2021 5:36 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 386
| IAJustin - 2/22/2021 1:25 PM
Someone please throw 5000 15” leech lake strain in West Okoboji , 100% guaranteed Iowa would have 55-56” fish in 15-20 years.. something this state has never seen. :)
Where do they come from now? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32785
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | IAJustin - 2/22/2021 5:35 PM
sworrall - 2/22/2021 4:47 PM
IAJustin - 2/22/2021 1:11 PM
Leech lake fish get 54”+ everywhere they are put..Madison isn’t new res. Syndrome quite the opposite., interesting when Larry talks about many north of 10 lakes don’t have native fish anyway
Really, what makes you state that about Madison? When were LL fish stocked, how many, how many since the first stocking and what has been the survival and growth rate? The info is available.
I actually belong to the Cap City chapter, just re-upped with a family membership.
When Mid 2000’s, how many = not enough... growth = exceptional look at the 53”+ on today’s angler
Didn't answer my other question. This is a population of fish introduced into a body of water where there have never been any in the past. Same as Mille lacs, in fact, stoked over a population of Wisco fish. It will be interesting to see how they do long-term with multiple stocking years, high fishing pressure, and a long-term general increase in water temps. As for the 'not enough', someone, as noted before, has to pay for all this. Good to see the fish doing OK there for sure, though. Would be really interesting to see how they do in some Iowa water, what's the fisheries manager's stance over there?
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2275
Location: Chisholm, MN | This is for Steve. The new reservoir syndrome is a thing and most people do not doubt that. But...in the vermilion/Mille lacs debate, which has experienced this type of syndrome, wouldn’t you think there is a way to improve on it? Yes, there is a decline that cannot be completely reversed but wouldn’t stocking MORE fish help get closer to where it once was? There is a huge difference in the stocking levels nowadays compared to what it once was. More stocking equals more fish. Simple math. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32785
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | As I understand it, stocking the recommended 1 to 3 fish per acre will still not get you what we saw in the Vermilion discovery by muskie anglers. Still lots of pressure there, and a change from the current stable low-density population management will bring more. NR is not what was hoped for I think, and then there are the cost thing and management objectives. Might not meet our hopes or expectations. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 188
| I can certainly attest to new reservoir syndrome. I made numerous trips in the early 80's to 'new' impoundments in Missouri (Truman Lake) and elsewhere chasing bass. After a few years the system gets past peak and cools down. As for the Podcast I wasn't going to sit through but the topic caught my attention and I learned a lot not having been privy to the info previously. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1184
| While each area fisheries manager has some discretion as to exactly how they go about managing their area, and they do manage them a bit differently, the statewide (MN) muskie management plan, is to have a low density, trophy fishery. To that end, they are accomplishing their goal. The only lakes that are actually managed as "action" lakes, are the tiger lakes. Usually smaller lakes with a 40" limit. Perhaps the next time the management plan is updated, a conversation about managing a few more lakes for numbers, might be warranted, especially with the growth of the sport and the desire to grow it more. The DNR does want to add new lakes, but as we saw with the last 5 lakes that were added, it can be a sticky wicket, politically. Whole other conversation. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1969
| Steve not sure on stance today, assume nothing has changed , we had a club, had money and tried late 2000’s to get some leech lake strain stockings going, DNR had no interest.. beat our heads against the wall for three years and then donated money raised, I believe it went to walleye stockings |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1969
| FlyPiker - 2/22/2021 5:51 PM
IAJustin - 2/22/2021 1:25 PM
Someone please throw 5000 15” leech lake strain in West Okoboji , 100% guaranteed Iowa would have 55-56” fish in 15-20 years.. something this state has never seen. :)
Where do they come from now?
We pull eggs from fish on Iowa Great Lakes, those fish originated from Wisconsin in the 60’s I believe, I knew the lake/hatchery they came from 10 years ago but forget now. Ha!...they are a heavy built fish but rarely hit 50”, the longest fish I’ve ever heard from Iowa is 53”. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 20178
Location: oswego, il | IAJustin - 2/22/2021 8:24 PM
FlyPiker - 2/22/2021 5:51 PM
IAJustin - 2/22/2021 1:25 PM
Someone please throw 5000 15” leech lake strain in West Okoboji , 100% guaranteed Iowa would have 55-56” fish in 15-20 years.. something this state has never seen. :)
Where do they come from now?
We pull eggs from fish on Iowa Great Lakes, those fish originated from Wisconsin in the 60’s I believe, I knew the lake/hatchery they came from 10 years ago but forget now. Ha!...they are a heavy built fish but rarely hit 50”, the longest fish I’ve ever heard from Iowa is 53”.
Iowa fish are mutts like Illinois and indiana. Illinois has traded fish with iowa in the past. In the earlier days of indiana I've caught so many different strains even the Wisconsin clear with red fins. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 357
| its always interesting to me how everyone is caught up in just size (caught a 50 syndrome). i would prefer to have local fish of whatever sort they are. I personally think it is cool to fish for the different strains. Anglers seem to have a desire to have boom lakes, not just sustainable fisheries.
i may be wrong, but i thought a lot of the really big fish early from Mille Lacs were Wisconsin fish?
One of the funnest days ive had Musky fishing was on a Shoepak lake.
You dont have to look very hard to find the realism of stocked lakes in MN. Its not just the big lakes like Vermillion and Mille Lacs in a state of peril. The heydays of MN are long since over. Do the math on a Frank Schneider tournament sometime. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 591
Location: Duluth | RJ_692 - 2/24/2021 7:47 AM
its always interesting to me how everyone is caught up in just size (caught a 50 syndrome). i would prefer to have local fish of whatever sort they are. I personally think it is cool to fish for the different strains. Anglers seem to have a desire to have boom lakes, not just sustainable fisheries.
i may be wrong, but i thought a lot of the really big fish early from Mille Lacs were Wisconsin fish?
One of the funnest days ive had Musky fishing was on a Shoepak lake.
You dont have to look very hard to find the realism of stocked lakes in MN. Its not just the big lakes like Vermillion and Mille Lacs in a state of peril. The heydays of MN are long since over. Do the math on a Frank Schneider tournament sometime.
I strongly agree that returning musky to their natural range, maintaining regional genetics and ensuring natural reproduction should be the goal. Sure it's fun to fish during new res syndrome but some people have trouble understanding that's neither sustainable or desirable for a fishery. |
|
| |
