# 2008 salmon forcast



## STEINFISHSKI (Jan 30, 2001)

tgafish said:


> I think you're wrong quest. If you find out you're girlfriend is cheating on you, you don't wish for your buddies to be cheated on too.... but you're usually the loudest telling them what to look out for


That dirty little tramp!:rant::lol:


----------



## itchn2fish (Dec 15, 2005)

STEINFISHSKI said:


> No doom and gloom here, enjoy each season as a gift and like it may be our last one.


That's my mind-set also. Lake Michigan is to lust after, the sultry wench is the grandest of all of the Great Lakes, and we are blessed with her. It's gonna be another great season regardless.


----------



## thousandcasts (Jan 22, 2002)

fishinmachine2 said:


> Theres too much natural reproduction in the lake Michigan river systems to have a total collaps! I'm glad that they are cutting plants, Hell they could even cut them more as far as i'm concerned!! I wouldnt mind less fish as long as long as we could get the size back up!!
> 
> Scott


Speak for yourself. I'll take the numbers any day of the week, any year, anytime. 

I'm a Strike, headshake and Battle junkie...the more I get, the happier I am!


----------



## Chasin (Jun 25, 2002)

quest32a said:


> Misery loves company, I think deep down a few of the Huron guys really want the Lake Michigan fishery to collapse.
> 
> Just a thought....


Nobody on this site loves salmon fishing more than I do. The last thing I want is to see anykind of collapes that Huron has seen. Hell, I'm actually going up to Frankfort area next week to look at property so I can build a cabin and leave my boat there.

There is no doubt Lake MI is more fertile than Huron. 1/3 of the lake is farther south so its able to get warmer which helps produce more organisms.. 
Water from Huron has a much faster turnover than Michigan due to the flow from Superior which is much less fertile water than what is in Lk Michigan. 

But to see you make a ridiculous comment like that and see you would just rather stick your head in the sand and "see what Happens" when all these signs are staring us in the face seem a little counter productive. Dont you think???

The catch rate is at an all time high. The prey base is at an all time low. If we want kings to catch in any kind of numbers in the future drastic steps need to be done. I see your a Mod. Keep this thread in your file and throw it in my face in three years if lake is back in balance.

If I,m wrong I will gradly eat the crow.:lol:


----------



## mrymar (May 9, 2002)

fishinmachine2 said:


> Theres too much natural reproduction in the lake Michigan river systems to have a total collaps! I'm glad that they are cutting plants, Hell they could even cut them more as far as i'm concerned!! I wouldnt mind less fish as long as long as we could get the size back up!!
> 
> Scott


I am with you Scott on the size issue. I don't see how guys can say they are looking forward to a banner year of number, when it is going to be a struggle to take fish over 15 pounds.

When was the last year that was not a banner year numbers wise? Either you do not know how to put fish in the boat, or you were fishing when BKD, 1980's, killed off a bunch of chinnys. Every year in the past 10 years you could go out and whack 10 kings. Here is a pic from 2000, 9 fish (8 kings (3 over 20 lbs, 1 brown (9lbs)) that weighed in over 160 lbs. Thats a day to remember.









Imagine if the deer herd could only produce 6 point or less bucks. The entire hunter population would be up in arms.

I have more hours fished at Ludington than any other Great Lake Port. It is one of my favorite places to go fish. But with the Lack of 20 pound fish, I have been heading to Lake Ontario.


----------



## STEINFISHSKI (Jan 30, 2001)

mrymar said:


> I am with you Scott on the size issue. I don't see how guys can say they are looking forward to a banner year of number, when it is going to be a struggle to take fish over 15 pounds.


Last year we caught many kings in the 14-17 lb class. Not one king over 20# but also caught some great steelhead to 17#, many 8-10# cohos, and some lakers to 20#. Most of this within 1/2 hour from home so again I am looking very forward to this year. Who could bitch about this kind of fishing I say. Sure we had them bigger years ago but no complaints about our fishery here. Things could always be worse.


----------



## wally-eye (Oct 27, 2004)

Yep people might actually have to "learn" how to catch salmon instead of like the late 70s when you could put a pop can down with a treble on it and catch a salmon. Its a learning curve and the smart ones will catch the bigger fish.


----------



## fishinmachine2 (May 7, 2004)

I like to catch fish and get action just like the next guy but it would be nice to get a few fish over the #20 mark on a consistant bases and an occasional one near #30. I remember days back when you would hook a king and you would have to put the boat in and out of nuetral or pull some lines and even chase a fish. Then your cooler would only have 8 or 10 fish in it and you couldnt shut it or even lift it.
Back in 2000 was the first year for the Ludington Off Shore Classic and we won the ameture division that yr. Our first days catch was 6 kings and 4 steelhead weighing at 135 lbs of fish and that was when the tournament was in early July! I havent seen a bag of 10 fish weighing that much in a long time! Even in the Salmon Splash in Manistee where the Pros can weigh 10 salmon the biggest catch was around 124lbs. These are just a few things i remember back when we had bigger fish and I know with all of todays technology and equiptment and the know how you will still be able to go out and catch a bunch of fish!

Scott


----------



## quest32a (Sep 25, 2001)

Chasin said:


> But to see you make a ridiculous comment like that and see you would just rather stick your head in the sand and "see what Happens" when all these signs are staring us in the face seem a little counter productive. Dont you think???


I am not one that wants to wait and see what happens, I completely agree with the DNR cutting plants and relying on a more natural balance. The more they do now the better. Its a good thing. It just seems like some of the biggest doom and gloomers are from the east side. 

I was just making a general observation more than anything.


----------



## ausable_steelhead (Sep 30, 2002)

Quest, I believe some L. Huron guys just think that alot of L. Michigan anglers just don't seem to think it's possible for "their" lake to crash and don't seem to be taking it seriously. Why the hell would we want all of the lakes surrounding us to have ****** salmon fishing? I wouldn't want L. Michigan to crash, then Michigan would really be in alot more trouble. IMHO, it's possible for a drastic change to occur in L. Michigan, but it's hard to say. When you see record high catch rates and record low baitfish numbers, everything is not alright. Lake Huron crashed because fisherman didn't want to believe the DNR's warnings about how low the bait was getting and how many salmon were in the lake. Yeah record catch rates mean alot of salmon are in the lake, but it could also mean starving salmon, which bite lures very readily. Salmon were really easy to catch in L. Huron in the early 2000's because they were hard up for bait, so they were whacking just about anything. I don't think L. Michigan's salmon are starving, but they are getting low on bait.

There probably are a few guys hoping L. Michigan crashes, but that's probably because some L. Michigan anglers like to talk alot about how great they are. I was too young to know, but I'm sure in the late 80's/early 90's when L. Michigan was in the throes of BKD and L. Huron was rockin' for salmon, the same thing happened. Lake Huron's overall baitfish biomass increased from 32 Kilotons to 40 Kilotons the past year, alot were younger baitfish. It's a step in the right direction, and hopefully continues. L. Michigan's baitfish level keeps falling considerably every year, that's not cool. Alewives did hold steady in Michigan so hopefully that continues. Alewives are still very low in Huron, but bloater chubs and smelt increased. I think the cut-back in stocking in both lakes was good, and yes it's important to make adjustments, but at the same time, there is gonna come a time when us anglers and the DNR just need to sit back and watch what happens.


----------



## Salmonous Maximus (Jan 28, 2004)

ausable_steelhead said:


> Quest, I believe some L. Huron guys just think that alot of L. Michigan anglers just don't seem to think it's possible for "their" lake to crash and don't seem to be taking it seriously. Why the hell would we want all of the lakes surrounding us to have ****** salmon fishing? I wouldn't want L. Michigan to crash


----------



## DOUBLE DOWN (Aug 13, 2004)

I usually do not chime in much, but read most threads re: The West Side Story. But; I have to admit, this one grabs my attention. I have great concern for Lake Michigan's biomass situation. Mostly due to the fact that what is happening resembles so much like what we went through here on Lake Huron. 

No doom or gloom, I am happy that many fish are being caught. I personally would take numbers over size any day.

I would like to take the oppurtunity to say that we East Side Boys don't have it so bad though. Especially if yoy live in the Greater Detroit area near the bridges. Understand, that we are the "Gypsies" of the Lakes, with a pole in one hand, and boat in-toe. We are never more than a few hours out to some extreme fishing ports including Canada giving us access to Lake Erie and Lake Ontario. We are the benefactor to be so geographically represented. 

I applaud the Tournament Trail and am excited about the new beginning of organizations such as GL2S. Hopefully it will have great popularity starting up on your side. With it's success, some of you may consider re-locating when it spreads. Fisherman learn to be mobile, selective and thrify to be able to enjoy all aspects of the entire Great Lakes waters that it offers.


----------



## DOUBLE DOWN (Aug 13, 2004)

I usually do not chime in much, but read most threads re: The West Side Story. But; I have to admit, this one grabs my attention. I have great concern for Lake Michigan's biomass situation. Mostly due to the fact that what is happening resembles so much like what we went through here on Lake Huron. 

No doom or gloom, I am happy that many fish are being caught. I personally would take numbers over size any day.

I would like to take the oppurtunity to say that we East Side Boys don't have it so bad though. Especially if yoy live in the Greater Detroit area near the bridges. Understand, that we are the "Gypsies" of the Lakes, with a pole in one hand, and boat in-toe. We are never more than a few hours out to some extreme fishing ports including Canada giving us access to Lake Erie and Lake Ontario. We are the benefactor to be so geographically represented. 

I applaud the Tournament Trail and am excited about the new beginning of organizations such as GL2S. Hopefully it will have great popularity starting up on your side. With it's success, some of you may consider re-locating when it spreads. Fisherman learn to be mobile, selective and thrify to be able to enjoy all aspects of the entire Great Lakes waters that it offers.


----------



## inthenet (Mar 14, 2003)

Fletch09 said:


> Size was certainly a disappointment last year.
> 
> However, 2006 was a step up in size from 2004-2005. Perhaps in 2008 we'll see the same kind of size improvement we saw in 2006?


That is what she said:evilsmile


----------



## thousandcasts (Jan 22, 2002)

I for one take all of this seriously, but we've been hearing the same gloom and doom on the west side for the last 10 years. I mean, go back to '98 and they were saying the same thing. "Yeah, it's great now, but no way it can last." 10 years later, it's crash, crash, crash. Sound the alarms! 

I don't think people believe just how much natural reproduction is going on with the salmon. At the same time, I'm sick of hearing about cutting plants on everything. Every freakin' time we get numbers of something it's cut the plants. Too many salmon, too many steelhead. 

I don't fish the big lake anymore (unless it's calm)...my stomach just can't handle all that rolling around out there. So when those fish move in close and in the harbors and lower rivers with the cold water turnovers, I *love* the numbers we're getting. I'd rather get out early in the a.m. and pop 20 15lb fish over casting all day for 5 20+ lb fish any day of the week. Don't get me wrong. Casting cranks and skein at fresh kings is my favorite kind of fishing bar none, so the last thing I want to see is a crash. However, I just don't see it happening anywhere near the same scale as Huron. I just think Lake Michigan is better suited for salmon and far healthier in that respect. 

Are there warning signs there? Sure...but Lake Michigan is a different animal, a far different ecosystem. Maybe Huron (other than the northern waters of it) was never suited to sustain salmon the way it was. I've fished salmon and steelhead since the mid 80's and when Lake Michigan crashed, it was for an entirely different reason. Yes, food sources were down then, but those fish were just screwed to begin with and they couldn't handle the stress of the BKD. They were pretty much all hatchery fish and weak. Now it's the complete opposite, fish are mostly wild and far stronger because of it. They're not sickly looking things like we started to see prior to the first crash. Natural reproduction did not start happening with any significance until AFTER that first crash. So if any salmon aren't able to handle finding food right now, there's plenty of little offspring pouring into that lake every spring to take their place. 

Why sweat what mother nature is going to inevitably going to take care of in her own way? ENJOY what we have like it's your last day on earth. Everytime I cast a crank or a gob of guts into a pool of kings, I don't sweat this stuff...I cherish every minute of it, ya know? What else can you do?


----------



## thousandcasts (Jan 22, 2002)

There's a few 20# fish out there. Here's a 23# hen that took a firetiger minnow rap on 9-15-2007 (river name will not be mentioned. ). There's a lot of truth to the "20lb is the new 30lb" saying, so this was a "pig" using that scale. LOL!!! Note: One of my sons was needed to provide size comparison.


----------



## TheSteelheadBum (Feb 7, 2006)

The look on his face is like "Oh yeah, I'm good..."


----------

