# How far do browns go?



## axisgear (Jan 24, 2007)

If there is any doubt about lake run or native.....Does it have red spots? No red=lake run.


----------



## limige (Sep 2, 2005)

I think many over here reef spawn in the lakes near shore. Mid November is prime time to find big schools of prespawn browns.


----------



## Cement Pond (Jan 2, 2011)

Run timing depends on the strain that is planted. Seeforelans were Late, very late, like sometimes running the spring runoff in March. Wild Rose were October November migrations. Wisconsin's St. Croix is more of an August September run. It would be cool if the Michigan DNR planted 3 different strains to have runs from August thru winter.


----------



## Multispeciestamer (Jan 27, 2010)

axisgear said:


> If there is any doubt about lake run or native.....Does it have red spots? No red=lake run.


Thats how you can tell the difference in strains but not the difference in lake run or not. Both German and Seeforellen Browns are planted in the Great lakes, and stream planted versions of either variety can and do migrate to Lake Michigan/ Great Lakes. Seeforellens will have no red spots not even when in spawning colors. But the many different strains of the German variety do tend to have red spots. 

When you take one of the German varieties and it finds itself in the Great Lakes, it has the potential to reach the same sizes as the Seeforellen Strain.


----------



## Multispeciestamer (Jan 27, 2010)

Well from what I can tell Michigan has cut the Seeforellen program from here on out, and went to the new Sturgeon River strain as a replacement.. I do not know much about the Sturgeon River strain other than the max size they collected for brood stock was only 20". Guess only time will tell if they can grow to the sizes the Seeforellens could in the Great Lakes. I see the DNR making the same mistakes already that helped lead to the demise of the Seeforellens. Keeping the brood stock in large rearing pens/ponds and feeding on pellet diet. Instead of doing an egg and milt take on returning river fish every year.   . Also planting at the pier heads is not going to do any good to get a spawning population in the rivers in the fall.


----------



## ausable_steelhead (Sep 30, 2002)

Multispeciestamer said:


> Well from what I can tell Michigan has cut the Seeforellen program from here on out, and went to the new Sturgeon River strain as a replacement.. I do not know much about the Sturgeon River strain other than the max size they collected for brood stock was only 20". Guess only time will tell if they can grow to the sizes the Seeforellens could in the Great Lakes. I see the DNR making the same mistakes already that helped lead to the demise of the Seeforellens. Keeping the brood stock in large rearing pens/ponds and feeding on pellet diet. Instead of doing an egg and milt take on returning river fish every year.   . Also planting at the pier heads is not going to do any good to get a spawning population in the rivers in the fall.


Seeforellens have "ran their course", so to speak, as far as genetic vitality. The DNR stated a couple years ago, that they were not getting the survival they used to, and are looking into a different strain. Genetics do play a role in ultimate size, but if those Sturgeon river browns find adequate food, they'll grow big.

Cement pond is right on, the Seeforellens were the later fish, and Wild Rose were the October-November runs. All of my LRB experience and observations were made in the NE and Thumb areas of the state. They were doing WR in the Southern half of the lake, and SF in the Northern half of the lake for awhile. I just hope they don't scrap browns, as they're one of my favorites.


----------



## Multispeciestamer (Jan 27, 2010)

Gooey-Bob said:


> Seeforellens ran their course? Even after breaking the world record 2 times in the last 4 years just in lake michigan? You dont think the genetic vitality has something to do with the michigan dnr's hatchery practices on brown trout for the great lakes? Lazy hatchery practices lead to lazy strains of browns. Other states take their broodstock from returning river run fish, and their programs seem to be 100 times what michigan's brown trout program is, all while stocking about the same per strain stocked. It's time to put the jug of kool-aid down. Signed, An angler fed up with the Michigan DNR


 This guy said it right on ausable_steelhead. If the DNR keeps using these raised Sturgeon River browns they captured as brood stock; the program will suffer the same end as the Seeforellen program did.


----------



## Jay Wesley (Mar 2, 2009)

Michigan is mainly stocking Gilchrest Creek, Wild Rose, and Sturgeon River. 

Most of our brown trout stocking is for inland streams. Therefore, we maintain captive broodstock that are certified disease free. This insures that the hatchery is certified disease free so that the trout can be stocked anywhere in the state. 

The Gilchrest Creek and Sturgeon River strains are from Michigan sources where the trout have been naturally reproducing for many years. We can go back to these systems to get new broodstock to replenish the broodstock. 

We could not do this with Seeforellen and their survival in streams eventually went down. 

The Sturgeon River strain was brought in because they show a trait of living both in streams and in lakes. 

We are currently experimenting with Sturgeon River stocking in Lake Michigan to see if their survival is better. Most of them have a left ventral fin clip. 

Brown trout stocked in the lake are meant to create a nearshore lake fishery. A secondary bonus is that some of these fish will run the rivers. 

Unfortunately, they do not like to use fish ladders like steelhead, coho, or chinook. Some do make it past them and do provide some upstream fishing opportunities. 

The Lake Michigan brown trout fishery has declined significantly in the past 15 years. Reasons could be the strains used, changes in prey availablity, water temperature, and/or other factors. 

I have a theory that it is water temperature. Twenty years ago, brown trout could stay nearshore year around and survive. Now we get water temperatures in the mid 70s or warmer nearshore, which is too warm for any trout. Therefore, brown trout now have to move deep to stay alive. 

Over in Wisconsin, they tend to have the cooler water throughout the summer. Their browns can survive our warmer summers. 

I know that a lot of people have good memories of brown trout and occassionally catch one. However, the cost to stocking compared to the return to creel is high. I am not sure that it is worth it for us to be stocking them south of Muskegon where water temps get so high in the summer.


----------



## Benz (Sep 25, 2010)

Thanks for the info Jay. Love getting that info from the source. I really appricate all the work that you guys do. My parents are both in the DNRE/DEQ in Lansing.


----------



## Multispeciestamer (Jan 27, 2010)

Jay Wesley said:


> I have a theory that it is water temperature. Twenty years ago, brown trout could stay nearshore year around and survive. Now we get water temperatures in the mid 70s or warmer nearshore, which is too warm for any trout. Therefore, brown trout now have to move deep to stay alive.
> 
> Over in Wisconsin, they tend to have the cooler water throughout the summer. Their browns can survive our warmer summers.
> 
> I know that a lot of people have good memories of brown trout and occassionally catch one. However, the cost to stocking compared to the return to creel is high. I am not sure that it is worth it for us to be stocking them south of Muskegon where water temps get so high in the summer.


I would love to see this theory of yours tested, before you go and stop stocking Browns in Lower Lake Michigan.
Radio tracking should give you a good idea of where these fish hold in the summer. I have no idea myself. You see very few caught by guys trolling out deep, so I would think that rules out the cold water. But you also do not see many caught by guys fishing shallow for perch down here. Gobies, smelt and shiners being a main forage, I can understand why they are not out deep with the kings very often. 
The ones that do show up being caught in southern Lake Michigan are large, a 20 pounder is not uncommon. And even a 30 is not out of the question. As we all know Browns can tolerate warmer water then any salmon or trout can. Being in warmer water fuels a high metabolism that leads to trophy fish. 
I cannot think of a better place to stock browns, for a trophy fishery: moderate water temperatures, lots of gobies and other forage. Southwest Michigan.


----------



## ausable_steelhead (Sep 30, 2002)

Gooey-Bob said:


> Seeforellens ran their course? Even after breaking the world record 2 times in the last 4 years just in lake michigan? You dont think the genetic vitality has something to do with the michigan dnr's hatchery practices on brown trout for the great lakes? Lazy hatchery practices lead to lazy strains of browns. Other states take their broodstock from returning river run fish, and their programs seem to be 100 times what michigan's brown trout program is, all while stocking about the same per strain stocked. It's time to put the jug of kool-aid down. Signed, An angler fed up with the Michigan DNR


I was just reiterating what I read and saw from the DNR; you may be right, who knows? They weren't getting the returns they had been with SF's, so they decided to go a different route. The Sturgeon fish are wild broodstock from the Sturgeon river right here in Northern Michigan.

I do agree, Wisky's brownie fishing is leaps and bounds ahead of ours. My question is: Why is it so bad now, when as short as 10 years ago, I could catch all the browns I wanted on the East side of the state?


----------



## StonedFly (Feb 24, 2012)

86 the kings, stock more browns..and steel..

Dam removal and tributary improvement.. 

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## wartfroggy (Jan 25, 2007)

Multispeciestamer said:


> As we all know Browns can tolerate warmer water then any salmon or trout can.


 Tyler, you do realize that Browns ARE a trout, right?


----------



## wartfroggy (Jan 25, 2007)

Jay Wesley said:


> The Lake Michigan brown trout fishery has declined significantly in the past 15 years. Reasons could be the strains used, changes in prey availablity, water temperature, and/or other factors.


Thanks for the reply Jay. 
I would agree with most everything that you said. Looking back through some notes, I would say that 98-00 was probably about the peak of the fishery. The first big year we had, we could go out in the spring and have a limit in no time, but most were rather smallish fish. The next year, few fish, but mostly larger. Same with the next. We have seen the same thing in the offshore fishery. We used to catch quite a few more random browns offshore than we have in the last 10 years. While it wasn't terribly uncommon to catch 1 or 2 in a trip, it is now more like 1 or 2 in a season. We have also seen a change in the fish that we are catching. Most fish we caught 15 years ago were much chunkier football browns, even the shorter ones, while now most are quite slim fish. While I would agree that the water temp and baitfish availability does play a large role in why Wisc has such a good fishery, I do believe that there is more to it. Like I said, we had a very very good fishery one year, followed by continuously slower years yet larger fish. This leads me to believe that the first year of that brown trout boom was mostly, or at least partially caused by a very good survival rate of a single year class. Another contributor that is against good survival of plants is higher predation now than before. Between increased walleye populations, cormorants, and other factors, small browns have a harder chance of survival now than they did 10 to 15 yrs ago. 

Brown trout fishing has been my favorite Lake Michigan fishery for as long as I can remember. Partially because it is the first big lake fishing I get to do each spring, partially because they are such a pretty fish, they are a great eating fish, and also because of the simplicity of fishing light line close to shore. In college, I earned some credit hours helping Dr Mark Luttenton on some projects that he was working on researching the % of different strains that made up angler catches through mitochondrial DNA extraction and analysis of fin and tail samples. I spent alot of time at cleaning stations and traveling around to gather samples and data, and loved every minute of it. Ever since, my interest in this fishery has continued to grow. I know that I don't speak for just myself when I ask that you continue to keep us updated on the status of this fishery, as well as any upcoming proposals or changes.


----------



## Jay Wesley (Mar 2, 2009)

This is a great discussion. 

By no means am I an expert. I just know that the browns are not showing up in the creel like they used to and we are still stocking a lot at a high cost. 

I think that the DNR is willing to try different things, but recently they have not been successful - especially in lake huron. We even tried fall yearlings, which cost about $48 a fish for return to the creel. 

Another theory of a retired DNR biologist was that we would see a good brown trout fishery the year following a good alewife year class. We had a good 2010 year class of alewife and we heard of a few more browns caught in 2011. Early indications from hydroaccoustic surveys show that the 2012 year class was good as well (at least average for recent history). If this theory holds true, there should be a good brown fishery this coming spring. 

We just want to make sure that you are getting the best out of the products that are stocked. We just do not hear much about brown trout in the big pond. I usually here comments that we caught 1 or 2 per year. That is an expensive product to stock to get such a low return. 

So, we would appreciate hearing from you about your brown trout catches in recent years. You can emal me at [email protected]. 

DNR will be looking at other options in the near future. We even offered some ports that are seeing significant chinook cuts that we could give them a few more chinook if we reduced brown trout stocking. Basically a chinook eats twice as much as a brown, so we would have to reduce 2.2 browns to get a chinook back. 

We would much rather contribute to a diverse fishery that provides opportunity so early in the spring, however, that seems to be a thing of the past.


----------



## Multispeciestamer (Jan 27, 2010)

wartfroggy said:


> Tyler, you do realize that Browns ARE a trout, right?


 In common terms yes, yes they are.


----------



## riverbob (Jan 11, 2011)

Thanks Jay for the good info.


----------



## Multispeciestamer (Jan 27, 2010)

So Jay I have a few Questions about the DNRs failed Seeforellen 
program.​ 
Where did the Brood stock come from?​ 
How many years was the same Brood stock used?​ 
Where did the replacement Brood stock come from?​ 

Why are there empty raceways at Thompson Creek hatchery?​ 

Why are we not doing egg takes on returning river run Seeforellens or 
other strains of Great Lake Run Browns like other states?​ 
Why can&#8217;t the DNR use the Traverse City, Boardman River weir for such 
a Lake Run Brown program/egg take?​ 

How are the genetics so messed up for Seeforellens if the world record 
was broke twice in the past 5 years by Lake Michigan Seeforellen 
browns?​ 
Also the current world record Brown was caught in 40 fow in 70 degree water temps in Racine WI. ​​


----------



## llpof (Mar 31, 2012)

Hi Jay,

FWIW, the pier fishing for browns has improved at Grand Haven for the past two years both in numbers and size.

The several that I've cleaned have (like the steelhead), held not just alewife, but also a large number of Gizzard Shad, and Gobies. Saw several caught in August with the Salmon for the first time and in three or 4 years too.

I've generally heard comments that it was improving for browns around here.


----------



## plugger (Aug 8, 2001)

I have fished browns since the late 60's and esp into the 70's and 80's. The first I caught was casting off the frankfort pier when I was a kid. While the smelt arrival brought large numbers to the near shore in the spring there seemed to be some around all year. Guys used to cast the manistee pier early in the morning throughout the summer. I and a couple other first mates in manistee found an untapped fishery that fired up at night in the summer, usualy after the bar closing. Many nights we would take fifteen to 20 fish trolling flat lines off outriggers in the harbor. we use to joke there was more than one way to get lucky in manistee. Our spring tactics are so far improved from the early days when we trolled out of twelve foot aluminum boats with a single rod being hand held. If you could take todays tactics back to the old days I can only imagine what the catch rate would be. The brown fishery is more valuble than a creel census might indicate. I dont have any answers to where the problems lie but I do know at one time we had a great brown fisery, a great perch fishery and alot more smallmouth tha I have found in the big lake in many years. I would prefer to see a diverse fishery versus a one super star show.


----------



## Multispeciestamer (Jan 27, 2010)

tannhd said:


> I woulndt generalize the Sturgeons as being small fish, though.
> 
> I was fortunate enough to fish the Burt Lake run this year, and was very surprised with the Sturgeon strain. They were big and they were excellent fighters. Many jumped like a Steelhead. They are BADA** Michigan fish.


 Got any pics man? Sounds great.


----------



## tannhd (Dec 3, 2010)

Multispeciestamer said:


> Got any pics man? Sounds great.


 
No I dont. It was night fishing mouse patterns. I highly recommend it, though. Those fish are crazy, seriously. 

I can put you in contact with an excellent guide in the area if you want. Just PM me if you are interested.


----------



## Multispeciestamer (Jan 27, 2010)

tannhd said:


> No I dont. It was night fishing mouse patterns. I highly recommend it, though. Those fish are crazy, seriously.
> 
> I can put you in contact with an excellent guide in the area if you want. Just PM me if you are interested.


 I would love to, but I think ill have to pass on that one for a while.


----------



## SALMOTRUTTA (Nov 10, 2010)

do the sturgeon strain have spots all over? i caught one last year that was like those leopard spotted rainbow in alaska but it was a nice 8 pound brown. I foul hooked it in the gill plate when i was casting a pearl white rapala during the early run of a certain river so it is likely the fish swung at it and got it in the side of the head but any how. it was unlike any brown i ever saw until i was looking around on here and i saw one like it EdB caught while pier fishing.


----------



## Multispeciestamer (Jan 27, 2010)

M. Tonello said:


> Tamer,
> That's the whole reason we went with a local strain instead of one that's already in the federal hatchery system (like our Wild Rose for example). With the Sturgeon River strain, we can go right back to the original source if need be to collect new broodstock with new genetic material.
> 
> There is one drawback though- unlike the Wild Rose, which are very domesticated (read not that bright) and easy to raise in the hatchery system, the Sturgeon River fish are very wild. They are flighty, shy, and not all that easy to rear. They don't feed in the raceways as well as the Wild Rose do, and therefore don't grow as big during the rearing cycle. So the question becomes do you want to stock bigger, dumber fish, or smaller but smarter fish? We're currently studying that question in a number of different waters around the state.
> ...


 Thanks for the replies, any chance you can get a pic of the Sturgeon river strain and share it with us?


----------



## GobyOneGnoby (Aug 18, 2010)

Our (Cleveland) Browns go straight to the basement and stay there all season.


----------



## wilsonm (Dec 28, 2010)

Some other brown trout info. The Sturgeon River, Wild Rose and Gilchrest Creek strains that Michigan currently plants all can be caught in Lake Michigan. Seeforellen's will continue to be in the mix due to the brown trouts longetivity. Like Mark said, there is an ongoing strain comparision going on inland and in some Lake Michigan ports. As far as identification of a strain, it is important to remember that the sex, time of year, amount of time spent in the river, and individual traits all play a role in the look of a fish.


----------



## wartfroggy (Jan 25, 2007)

Multispeciestamer said:


> Thanks for the replies, any chance you can get a pic of the Sturgeon river strain and share it with us?


 Google can be your friend.









http://articles.petoskeynews.com/2011-12-08/oden-state-fish-hatchery_30492931


----------



## Multispeciestamer (Jan 27, 2010)

Very beautiful fish and yes Salmotrutta that fish in your pic looks near identical to the DNR photo. 

Does the DNR know what strain of browns were originally planted in the Sturgeon river years ago that resulted in this wild Strain. They resemble a seeforellen. Lack of red spots, over all silver appearance, in all the pics I have seen.


----------



## The Jimmer (Jan 30, 2011)

Multispeciestamer said:


> I see the opposite trend here. Running earlier and earlier. August, I seen my first LRB in the Berrien Springs fish Cam. Around the same time a guy caught one that was over 20 pounds. 24 pounds I think it was was caught while fishing for skams. I hooked and lost a LRB that looked to be 20+ pounds in Sept. on a crank in a Trib. Lost the fish couldnt keep his head down and he tossed the crank.











Late January and she was full of eggs!


----------



## Multispeciestamer (Jan 27, 2010)

The Jimmer said:


> View attachment 25283
> 
> 
> Late January and she was full of eggs!


 Ive seen Browns in March and April that had loose eggs. Whats your point? There are always thos odd fish.


----------



## wartfroggy (Jan 25, 2007)

Multispeciestamer said:


> Ive seen Browns in March and April that had loose eggs. Whats your point? There are always thos odd fish.


 Have seen that a few times too. Usually the eggs are in pretty poor condition/very soft and fragile and adsorbing back into the body since the fish never spawned.


----------



## itchn2fish (Dec 15, 2005)

wartfroggy said:


> Have seen that a few times too. Usually the eggs are in pretty poor condition/very soft and fragile and adsorbing back into the body since the fish never spawned.


 Ya dat, tis true, me too


----------



## Multispeciestamer (Jan 27, 2010)

wartfroggy said:


> Have seen that a few times too. Usually the eggs are in pretty poor condition/very soft and fragile and adsorbing back into the body since the fish never spawned.


 Yup


----------



## The Jimmer (Jan 30, 2011)

wartfroggy said:


> Have seen that a few times too. Usually the eggs are in pretty poor condition/very soft and fragile and adsorbing back into the body since the fish never spawned.


Usually that's what I see as well but this girl had them pouring out when I lifted her out of the net. We kept some of her eggs that were in really good shape and then released her back to the river. 

Good luck out there guys and gals!


----------

