# Clinton River Stocking Programs



## The Downstream Drift (Feb 27, 2010)

Hey guys, I have a question that I am looking for some public opinion on.

We all know that the Clinton River gets an annual stocking of steelhead. (29,000 fish in 2010) These fish are planted in late April right at the end of the returning spawning run. Now we all know that the Clinton gets very low in the summer and the temperatures get very high. This leads to a very poor habitat for spawning steelhead and for the stocked fish.

The question is... what would you guys think about cutting the steelhead stocking numbers and beginning to plant salmon in the fall every year? This would allow for the stocking of salmon to happen when the river is already low and starting to cool down for the winter. This would also allow for almost 5 months of cool water for the salmon to live in. In the future this would also allow for returning spawning fish to have a much better habitat to spawn in. The temps would be more in line for survival and the water levels would be better as well.

What are your thoughts on this?


----------



## vampile (Nov 4, 2008)

The idea seems great. I don't think you would find too may people to complain about a salmon run in the metro area. There in lies the problem. I would be worried that a fishery like that would get RAPED! Everyone and their brothers would be out in there getting salmon any way they could. 

Just think of the 6th street complaints. When you have a large population, you are bound to run into more issues.


----------



## i want to catch fish (Apr 17, 2008)

love the idea and safe for the fish with 5 to 6 months of cold water and put some salmon back in lake huron great idea but like he said everyone and there brother will be out there just look at it in the sping with steelhead how overly crowed it is alrready it will deff. attract alot of new people to the river and and what do you think the sucess rate of them living will be too


----------



## bborow2501 (Nov 12, 2007)

if they don't seem to do well returning to the ausable and other high quality east side tribs from that lake I don't see how they could do well from the clinton. What happens when they are out in that lake is a bigger issue.


----------



## diztortion (Sep 6, 2009)

vampile said:


> Just think of the 6th street complaints. When you have a large population, you are bound to run into more issues.


Yeah. More people, more problems.


----------



## bborow2501 (Nov 12, 2007)

oh and if they do so, they should do it up from yates. The steelie smolts (planted by the dnr in the fall of last year) I was catching in this area this past spring seemed to be doing quite well even for the lack of water at times.


----------



## i want to catch fish (Apr 17, 2008)

ya above the dam would be nice deff. would lose some presure from people but what about a fish ladder


----------



## The Downstream Drift (Feb 27, 2010)

In my opinion if the MDNRE was to plant salmon in the Clinton it would need to be downstream from Yates. We all know what kind of destruction these fish can cause to the substrate of a river. I honestly don't think this would be a good thing for Paint Creek.

You guys are right though, there would be a totally new crowd down there in the fall. And with this new crowd it would bring with it the same type of regulation violations as does Tippy and 6th Street. This does however bring more of a management focus from the conservation end to the river. I would imagine that the MDNRE, MFFA, and the four local TU chapters would spend a little more effort on the river if it held a decent salmon run.

As for the comparison to the other Lake Huron rivers... We need to remember that the fish that come into the Clinton River are Lake Erie fish. Lake Huron has a huge issue with bait fish that the MDNRE is looking into different solutions to correct. Lake Erie, on the other hand, supports an excellent habitat for steelhead. This is proven from the Ohio rivers in Steelhead Alley. I don't see an issue with Lake Erie supporting salmon as well (which it already does). This would just be a way to get fish "trained" to come back into the Clinton.

And the fish ladder thought... that is a conversation for another day and another thread. This topic has already caused some controversy on this site so lets stay away from that one this time.


----------



## The Downstream Drift (Feb 27, 2010)

bborow2501 said:


> oh and if they do so, they should do it up from yates. The steelie smolts (planted by the dnr in the fall of last year) I was catching in this area this past spring seemed to be doing quite well even for the lack of water at times.


I have to question this post. The MDNRE has not planted "steelhead" upstream from Yates. The only steelhead stocking was at its usual spot. Now the year before they put a bunch of rainbows in at Auburn Hills but officials from the MDNRE have told me that the fish they put in there would be resident fish not migratory steelhead. I'm not a biologist but I believe there is a slight distinction between the two strains of fish. Much like the different strains of browns that the MDNRE stocks. Essentially they are all browns but they do have subtle differences genetically.


----------



## The Downstream Drift (Feb 27, 2010)

Good thing I'm not a fisheries biologist. Studies have shown there is no genetic difference between the two fish.

http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/publications/techmemos/tm27/genetics.htm

However, habitat and evolution have created differences in the fish. It is interesting though that these two fish used to be classified under different scientific names untl they were lumped together recently. I guess even the biologists get things wrong sometimes.


----------



## Toga (Nov 11, 2009)

I would welcome a salmon run in the area with open arms. I think the Huron river would be better suited for it however with its abundance of access points and park systems. In either case the big question is can lake st clair and lake erie support a support a salmon population in their current state?


----------



## FishMichv2 (Oct 18, 2004)

am i the only one that remembers when salmon were in the clinton and paint creek? am i the only one who sees what happens to a river during a salmon run? personally im fine without salmon in the area. dont get me wrong i like salmon fishing(mostly coho) but i dont like what the season brings. we should be happy we have a decent steelie run in the area and concentrate on the health of the river. in short i feel this quote 
"cutting the steelhead stocking numbers and beginning to plant salmon"
might be one of the worst ideas ive ever heard. 


http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=3359997#ixzz12nMfBtz3​


----------



## psycodad (Jul 17, 2004)

FishMichv2 said:


> am i the only one that remembers when salmon were in the clinton and paint creek? am i the only one who sees what happens to a river during a salmon run? personally im fine without salmon in the area. dont get me wrong i like salmon fishing(mostly coho) but i dont like what the season brings. we should be happy we have a decent steelie run in the area and concentrate on the health of the river. in short i feel this quote
> "cutting the steelhead stocking numbers and beginning to plant salmon"
> might be one of the worst ideas ive ever heard.​


 A bunch of us old time locals remember this circus and many of us lobbied for 10-15 years to get the steelhead plant increased from 12000 to almost 30000 and you want to give them back for salmon that turn brown as they run and die in less than amonth after spawning? Really? I prefer steelhead and here's why. I do not want a 1 month fishery with poor returns in exchange for the 5-6 month steelhead run with a decent return that we enjoy now. If we were to add fish I would rather see steel put into the north branch to spread out the pressure. As far as the steel plants, the spring fish leave (smolt) the river in May so the warm water doesn't matter. That is why warm water creeks can get a planted run. The fall fingerlings are surplus fish that they use to dispose of. Some make it, most do not. These fall fingerlings are planted above the dam.


----------



## The Downstream Drift (Feb 27, 2010)

This is why I asked. I want to hear some public comments and concerns before this idea is presented to the MDNRE. I don't even know if they will be responsive to it but it was an idea.

One thing I can say is that the health of the river is getting alot of focus. That is proven from the work the PAC is doing in an attempt to eventually delist this AOC. There are also alot of projects going on throughout the watershed to help the river. Some of these include the dam removals at Cascade, Wolcott, and on the Paint. With these dam removals I wouldn't be surprised to see the North Branch see a stocking soon.

As for the salmon that die in the river every fall after spawning... there was another thread on this forum that someone mentioned the benefits for the river of the salmon carcasses. These are an excellent food source for the smolt (including the steelhead).

It is just a thought and I doubt it would happen due to the lack of salmon stocking done on the east side of the state. But it is worth asking you guys that use the river. IMO this would add another 1 to 2 months worth of fall fishing to our river prior to the steelhead coming up. And it might also increase the fall steelhead run as these fish tend to "follow" the salmon up river.

Just a thought, don't kill me for thinking.


----------



## 1styearff (Mar 3, 2010)

I like the idea of a salmon run so close to home, and I know that the members of this site would be respectful of the river and harvest fish legally, but my concern would be "those other guys". Just like at Tippy, this kind of run would most likely attract a sub-population of a-holes who would come in and trash the river and the banks. 

I can even see some of these guys heading up into the Paint (legally or not) looking for salmon and disturbing the substrate, littering and trespassing and making the landowners less than happy to see any fishermen in the water so that when it comes time for us to fish it legally and in-season, we get hassled.

If the MDNRE and other groups were able to monitor/patrol the river with enough officers and spotters right out of the gate and let people know that snagging and violators will not be tolerated, it may make a difference.

As I said, I really like the idea, but I would hate to see a negative impact on the river and its tribs.


----------



## zfishin (Dec 19, 2003)

1. keep the steelhead stocking #'s
2. add some walleye stocking 
3. don't local school's plant salmon fry?


----------



## bborow2501 (Nov 12, 2007)

heres an Idea:
get a fishery going for lake run browns
they run later than salmon, Im pretty sure the young can handle higher water temps, and they would run later (november when there is actually more water in the system) than the salmon which tend to run earlier, and if a few make it to the paint, no biggie, just come back and add a few to the resident fish population. It would be a unique draw to the area.
http://www.cleveland.com/outdoors/index.ssf/2008/10/big_brown_trout_featured_at_ne.html


----------



## bborow2501 (Nov 12, 2007)

The Downstream Drift said:


> Good thing I'm not a fisheries biologist. Studies have shown there is no genetic difference between the two fish.
> 
> http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/publications/techmemos/tm27/genetics.htm
> 
> However, habitat and evolution have created differences in the fish. It is interesting though that these two fish used to be classified under different scientific names untl they were lumped together recently. I guess even the biologists get things wrong sometimes.


I am under the impression that they are rainbows that migrate (out to the great lakes in this case) when conditions become less than ideal (rainbows like faster, cooler more oxygenated water than browns) , and given the flow in auburn hills during the summer I would not be too suprised if a some headed out to the lake this past summer. They will most likely return to join those that already are coming back to this area (strays?). In fact in some streams the fish head upstream in the fall (when conditions become ideal again) and over winter in the river, spawning in the spring.


----------



## bborow2501 (Nov 12, 2007)

zfishin said:


> 3. don't local school's plant salmon fry?


 yes in very limited numbers (a few hundred per class)


----------



## The Downstream Drift (Feb 27, 2010)

Your right B. There are probably less than 1500 fish that annually get put in the Clinton from these programs. With the expected yield of 3-5% of fish returning from each stocking this only leaves us with 45-75 fish coming back. Now those numbers are usually in ideal conditions. I would expect that the gaunlet of Lake St Clair reduces this number greatly.


----------



## Maverick1 (Jan 28, 2009)

We get a small push of Salmon now, that's just fine with me. Sure i would love to see the fishery improve to support a bigger run, but I think that is a few years out. I would much rather concentrate efforts on getting a better Steelhead program in place and get a few years of data under the belt in the Clinton with "ideal" flow rates in the spring. It sickened me to see the exposed redds this spring in areas where there was active spawning weeks earlier. We'll never know if the Clinton could support self sustaining steel without a few years of trials.. bigger battles up stream need to take precedent over Salmon in my mind. Push for more steelhead stocking like Ohio or Indiana. If it is just a put and take as many claim, then appropriate the funding and stocking according. SE Michigan is where the majority of sales are generated from and should therefore see the largest stocking programs (if just a put and take).

Interesting about the lake run browns however.... I like that idea for sure.


----------



## REG (Oct 25, 2002)

Greetings. There were a few interesting propositions here and also a few responses from those that had been around the fishery for a while. Just offering a few observations, but one thing regarding salmon that might be an issue is how good of an enviroment Lake Erie would be for them? Perhaps the limiting factor to salmon in Erie is the forage base. Chinooks definitely favor alewifes in Lake Michigan, Huron and Ontario. If I remember correctly, Ohio did stock cohos, and I believe they may have stocked chinook at one time and I don't think they got good returns.

LRB's might be an interesting option. They seem to have a more varied and flexible diet (for better or for worse) However, what I see is they don't seem to have as strong of a drive to push upstream during the spawning run as much as salmon. When there is a low water year (like this year), they will stay down in the harbor or lower river, for which they can offer good fishing. What's nice about them, however, is that they will run throughout the fall, and you can also see some great pushes during mid winter thaws.

Just to throw another option out there- Pennsylvania "steelhead". Might not compare to LM fish, but they are fall run fish? Fun topic!


----------



## The Downstream Drift (Feb 27, 2010)

Thanks Reg. Its nice to see a guy that normally isn't on the threads for this side of the state chime in. The LRB option seems like a good one but, as you said, they don't have the "push" that salmon naturally have. Years ago the Clinton was planted with a variety of salmon species (they even tried cutthroat trout) but that was back when the water quality was much, much worse than it is now. I am going to get the opinion of our fisheries biologist then I'll keep you guys posted on the pros and cons he gives me.


----------



## psycodad (Jul 17, 2004)

On the Clinton the issue with a summer or early fall run fish like a Pennsylvania or Indiana "steelhead" has always been water temperature, both in the river and in the lake at the mouth. These fish return best where there are cold water temps (deep water) near the mouth and in the upstream reaches of the river. An example of a place where these early run steelhead would work well in MI would be the east branch of the augres.


----------



## Hip-Wader (Oct 28, 2010)

I am all for the salmon planting. It would add another couple months of fishing on the Clinton. Don't take away from the steel head planting though.It would be nice to see more salmon there. Oh wait it would be nice to see at least 1 salmon, as i have yet to see any there yet. I don't see it being any different than the spring steel head run as far as pressure goes. It gets pretty busy there in the spring. If you don't have patience and good luck you won't fish the Clinton. Its a hard river to fish and you have to put in a lot of time,that keeps a lot of the idiots from fishing there. Sure you will always run into a couple of idiots, but that's life in the land of the free. All in all there are quite a few good groups of resident fishermen there. Very helpful and very informative.We need a local salmon run to hold us over til the lakes freeze enough for ice fishing. BRING ON THE FALL SALMON RUN.


----------



## FishMichv2 (Oct 18, 2004)

fished the clinton for a few hours today and thankfully didnt see a single salmon. thanks to the lack of salmon the river was quiet, clean, and there was some decent fishing. there were a couple nice people in the area either fishing or checking the fishing and one was nice enough to snap a couple pics of the chromer i brought to shore before i put him back. there were no wads of 50lb test line, no beer cans laying around, no fish being dragged to shore by the dorsal, and a few of us were afforded the chance to fish some steel without needing to clean up or call the rap line. to be clear, i like fishing for salmon but i dont like what comes along with it. hip-wader, thanks for takin the pic, we'll have to agree to disagree on the salmon. hope to get some fishing in with you out there.


----------

