# A little steel is better than no steel. pic



## 4lbtest (Feb 28, 2007)

These guys may be little but they whack the worms and try to be bad.










_just one more cast._


----------



## quest32a (Sep 25, 2001)

4lbtest said:


> These guys may be little but they whack the worms and try to be bad.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You 100% that is a steel? Almost looks like an Atlantic to me.
Could be wrong though.


----------



## 4lbtest (Feb 28, 2007)

Mouth all white inside. Between all the guys I call friends we have caught near 50 of these little guys maybe more by now. I say they are the first return of plants that's made it back in a long time, here's another;









_just one more cast._


----------



## 4lbtest (Feb 28, 2007)

Atlantic doesn't have spots on the tail. According to the trout identifier guide I had to look up cause you got me wondering LOL! 

_just one more cast._


----------



## Btek (Jul 15, 2010)

Just wondering how u came up with atlantic on that one? Steelhead 100%. 

Are any of those little fish females or just skips?


----------



## 4lbtest (Feb 28, 2007)

All mine been males, as far as I could tell, but I'm no expert.

_just one more cast._


----------



## Anish (Mar 6, 2009)

Looks like fun to me!!


----------



## quest32a (Sep 25, 2001)

Btek said:


> Just wondering how u came up with atlantic on that one? Steelhead 100%.
> 
> Are any of those little fish females or just skips?


Torpedo shaped body, and the spots just seemed off. Ive caught a lot of steelhead in my day and only a few Atlantics. I also know that last summer more Atlantics were planted on the NE side. Maybe part of me was hopeful that some are already returning. Just looked a bit off....

Just checked out a few Atlantic pics and no spots on the tail. Sorry for the confusion...


----------



## Fishslayer5789 (Mar 1, 2007)

I can see how you could sort of mistake that for an Atlantic with the spot pattern, but to me it just looks like a sweet strain of steelhead. I would love to catch one with that kind of color pattern.


----------



## RIVER LADY (Jun 13, 2005)

You are right, they may be small but, it is a sign of hope for the Au Sable. Nice to see.


----------



## Ralph Smith (Apr 1, 2003)

Nice lookin little guys Definately steel. Atlantics would have "X" shaped spots also and not the rounder ones. The A's look more like browns than steel to me. Good to hear the steel is doing well. Wish they'd have another outing up there like a few years back with the commorant harrassement thing. Was a good time.


----------



## ellsworth24 (Mar 1, 2007)

Ive always thought atlantics looked more like a brown than a steelhead too


----------



## LSSUfishmaster (Aug 4, 2008)

I saw the body first and was thinking atlantic but that face is all steelhead.


----------



## Fishndude (Feb 22, 2003)

100% Steelhead. Those are great when they bite, and until you get a tight line on them. Until then, it could be ANYTHING. :lol: Fighting little Steelhead is better than not fighting any Steelhead. Every one of those I have seen are small males. Many have kyped jaws, and are mature. 

I wonder what would happen if the MIDNR raised hatchery Steelhead for 2 years, before releasing them into the Ausable? Not a lot, because I know it is expensive to raise Steelhead. Maybe 1000 or 2000 fish, just to see what happens when they return. Lake Huron has been so bad the last few years, that I would be all for any experimenting they wanted to do to test new ideas. Planting fewer, but larger fish seems like something to try. Planting different fish is good, and they are doing that. Heck, I have even heard rumors of the DNR raising and planting some baitfish species.


----------



## RiverRanger (Aug 23, 2006)

Fishndude said:


> 100%
> I wonder what would happen if the MIDNR raised hatchery Steelhead for 2 years, before releasing them into the Ausable? Not a lot, because I know it is expensive to raise Steelhead. Maybe 1000 or 2000 fish, just to see what happens when they return. Lake Huron has been so bad the last few years, that I would be all for any experimenting they wanted to do to test new ideas. Planting fewer, but larger fish seems like something to try. Planting different fish is good, and they are doing that. Heck, I have even heard rumors of the DNR raising and planting some baitfish species.


I would love to see this happen also, I would have to believe the survival rate would increase quite a bit. At least with those flying rats anyway, I just can not picture them swallowing them like they do with the planters now. When I was up there two weeks ago I took a drive through the parking lot out by the pier and noticed about a dozen or so of those rat birds bobbing for fish and most were coming up with something, not a pretty site to watch.


----------



## Fishndude (Feb 22, 2003)

RiverRanger said:


> I would love to see this happen also, I would have to believe the survival rate would increase quite a bit. At least with those flying rats anyway, I just can not picture them swallowing them like they do with the planters now. When I was up there two weeks ago I took a drive through the parking lot out by the pier and noticed about a dozen or so of those rat birds bobbing for fish and most were coming up with something, not a pretty site to watch.


Don't kid yourself. I've seen a Cormorant swallow a Brown Trout (in Alpena) that was about 15" long, in one gulp. They are talented predators, for sure.


----------



## Cramer1 (Nov 7, 2006)

I think those steelies are just the right size for good eating, I'd take those over the bigger ones anytime. We get some like that over on the Betsie every now and then. Anyway, nice fish!


----------



## Btek (Jul 15, 2010)

Fishndude said:


> 100% Steelhead. Those are great when they bite, and until you get a tight line on them. Until then, it could be ANYTHING. :lol: Fighting little Steelhead is better than not fighting any Steelhead. Every one of those I have seen are small males. Many have kyped jaws, and are mature.
> 
> I wonder what would happen if the MIDNR raised hatchery Steelhead for 2 years, before releasing them into the Ausable? Not a lot, because I know it is expensive to raise Steelhead. Maybe 1000 or 2000 fish, just to see what happens when they return. Lake Huron has been so bad the last few years, that I would be all for any experimenting they wanted to do to test new ideas. Planting fewer, but larger fish seems like something to try. Planting different fish is good, and they are doing that. Heck, I have even heard rumors of the DNR raising and planting some baitfish species.


Cant happen with steelhead. They smolt.


----------



## Fishndude (Feb 22, 2003)

In some BC and other northwest rivers, they smolt at 4, 5, and even up to 7 years of age. The largest wild Steelhead that return are typically fish that spent 4 years or more in their natal rivers before smolting.


----------



## quest32a (Sep 25, 2001)

Fishndude said:


> In some BC and other northwest rivers, they smolt at 4, 5, and even up to 7 years of age. The largest wild Steelhead that return are typically fish that spent 4 years or more in their natal rivers before smolting.


I believe that I just read a few weeks ago that even here in MI specifically the Little Manistee that a number of fish were living in the river for 2 years before the smolt. 

I have also seen some pics of "smolts" out west that were 12 inches long before they left the rivers.


----------



## Btek (Jul 15, 2010)

Fishndude said:


> In some BC and other northwest rivers, they smolt at 4, 5, and even up to 7 years of age. The largest wild Steelhead that return are typically fish that spent 4 years or more in their natal rivers before smolting.


Sounds like you are on to something there. Maybee we should request that they try and raise them for 4 or 5 years so they all could be giants when they return?


----------



## quest32a (Sep 25, 2001)

Btek said:


> Sounds like you are on to something there. Maybee we should request that they try and raise them for 4 or 5 years so they all could be giants when they return?


I know its been brought up before and cost is far and away the most prohibiting factor. It would be nice though.


----------



## Fishndude (Feb 22, 2003)

Back in the early 90's, a LOT of planted Steelhead were 12", and some were 16" or more. Not sure what they did differently, but there were TONS of returning fish, and the average size was about 8#. Every day you fished, you could reasonably expect to catch a 10# fish, and 12# Steelhead were common. It has been suggested to the DNR that they focus their egg take on larger fish, but they prefer to raise more diverse stock. I can understand that diversity is good.


----------



## Btek (Jul 15, 2010)

Fishndude said:


> Back in the early 90's, a LOT of planted Steelhead were 12", and some were 16" or more. Not sure what they did differently, but there were TONS of returning fish, and the average size was about 8#. Every day you fished, you could reasonably expect to catch a 10# fish, and 12# Steelhead were common. It has been suggested to the DNR that they focus their egg take on larger fish, but they prefer to raise more diverse stock. I can understand that diversity is good.


Yea I remember those days. 12# females that had a body shape of a brown. That was also pre mussel days when the water in lake mi was green and stuffed with plankton. I know steelhead can and do feed on many other different things like bugs off the slicks, but they had alewife a plenty then which really fattens them up. Not any more. On a positive note, the steelhead were up slightly this year with a decent number of fish in the 8-10# range with a few even bigger.


----------



## Fishndude (Feb 22, 2003)

Agreed about the Mussels and Alewives. Steelhead fishing was never better than when they planted the larger plants, though. Probably for a variety of reasons.


----------

