# What # test for trolling KINGS??



## charcoal300zxtt (Sep 8, 2011)

I've found and read a few older threads on line size however many new line brands, braids, Fluro, ect ect have came on the market in the past few years and I'm curious what everyone is running. I am getting back into the game this season after a 4yr break and re-spooling 8 older rods. In my head I'm thinking 20# Stren Mono all day, but what if I have a NEWB on the boat and they pick up the rod with a 30lb Beast on it, doubt it will make it to the net. 
So my question is Mono-Fluro-Braid, and what # test?


----------



## John Hine (Mar 31, 2019)

Lots of answers for this one, everyone will have their favorite way & they’re all right. For me;

40lb power pro braid for dipseys (Or wire)
30 lb braid for backers on my leadcore & copper rods
30 lb big game for rigger rods, leader down to 20 lb segur florocarbon
I keep a couple rods of strait 20 lb big game on hand as well


----------



## gatorman841 (Mar 4, 2010)

All 30# big game for me for riggers and leads on leadcore.
Backing I use 50# big game or 50# braid for lead.
Never had a issue with line breaking with this unless it’s a bad knot,
Got this guy yesterday on 10 color with 30# big game leader.


----------



## gatorman841 (Mar 4, 2010)

charcoal300zxtt said:


> I've found and read a few older threads on line size however many new line brands, braids, Fluro, ect ect have came on the market in the past few years and I'm curious what everyone is running. I am getting back into the game this season after a 4yr break and re-spooling 8 older rods. In my head I'm thinking 20# Stren Mono all day, but what if I have a NEWB on the boat and they pick up the rod with a 30lb Beast on it, doubt it will make it to the net.
> So my question is Mono-Fluro-Braid, and what # test?


Salmon are not line shy no reason to go light


----------



## blackghost (Oct 2, 2010)

This will all depend on where, and when you're fishing. 

Generally for my season on Lake Michigan I do the following:

For downriggers, 20# big game is plenty. Mono tends to stretch and provide a lot of shock absorption. _Also, Lake Michigan clear water salmon can be extremely line shy. _ I've often run 15lb test big game with 12lb flouro leaders in the summer (on downriggers). The light line would be for spoons. 

For flashers/flies on riggers 30lb is fine.

For copper/leadcore from 1 color/30 ft up to 4 color/120 feet I use 15 lbs leads (until August, then I bump up to 25 lb).
For copper/leadcore from 4 color/120 feet up to 10 color/300 feet I use 20 lbs leads (until August, then I bump up to 25 lb).
For copper longer than 300 feet, I use 25 lb leads all year.

Dipsey leaders - everything gets 30 lb.


----------



## salmon_slayer06 (Mar 19, 2006)

good info here. with the copper set ups I like a heavy section of mono to clip board to and for cushion when angry king hits kinda like a snubber. by the time you gain the mono back he should settle down. I like 100 foot of 30-35 pound. backing I like power pro 40 pound or 30. hopefully they bring back the Shimano Tekota 800's.


----------



## SJC (Sep 3, 2002)

blackghost said:


> This will all depend on where, and when you're fishing.
> 
> Generally for my season on Lake Michigan I do the following:
> 
> ...


What this guy said except I run 50 on my dipseys.


----------



## Cork Dust (Nov 26, 2012)

Once the sun is higher than 15 degrees to the horizon, chinook become increasingly line shy, particularly on sunny days without surface chop. I run 15lb fluoro on my mono downrigger rods spooled on Shimano Calcutta 700b reels with Tuna Tom drag discs, 17lb fluorocarbon 50' leaders on my SWRs, no mono dipseys, only wire and braid. I copper SWR and two long copper 45lb with 20lb fluorocarbon leaders.


----------



## jpmarko (Feb 26, 2010)

Cork Dust said:


> Once the sun is higher than 15 degrees to the horizon, chinook become increasingly line shy, particularly on sunny days without surface chop. I run 15lb fluoro on my mono downrigger rods spooled on Shimano Calcutta 700b reels with Tuna Tom drag discs, 17lb fluorocarbon 50' leaders on my SWRs, no mono dipseys, only wire and braid. I copper SWR and two long copper 45lb with 20lb fluorocarbon leaders.


Corkdust,

When you run the SWR on the downrigger, do you prefer to run a 1 color or 2 color? Also, do you stick to a 50 ft leader length as a rule? Or do you go shorter?

Here’s why I ask. I started running a SWR with a 1 color and 30 ft mono leader on my downrigger. (I like 30 ft mono or fluorocarbon leader on my leadcore off the planer boards because it gives my spoons good action.) I ran it a few trips and it never got a hit. My suspicion is that the lure is simply not far back enough from the boat. A single color of lead and 30 ft mono leader only gets me about 60 ft back. I’m considering changing my SWR downrigger rod to a 2 color with 50 ft mono/fluorocarbon leader to get the lure further back and away from the boat.

Do you think my approach is correct?


----------



## UBDSLO1 (Feb 23, 2004)

For my downrigger spoon rods, I use (this year) 15lb. Stren Hi-Impact clear mono.
For downrigger flasher/rotator/fly combo's, 20lb. Stren Hi-Impact mono. 
Leaders off of lead cores,copper, etc. I use 20-30lb mono.
Dipsy's, I use 50lb clear Andy with no snubber.


----------



## Cork Dust (Nov 26, 2012)

jpmarko said:


> Corkdust,
> 
> When you run the SWR on the downrigger, do you prefer to run a 1 color or 2 color? Also, do you stick to a 50 ft leader length as a rule? Or do you go shorter?
> 
> ...


I have no idea whether Skip is still fishing. Can't remember his last name. He is a software engineer who I credit with developing the SWR when he chartered in Wi. He moved to Manistee years ago. His theory was that SWRs slither through the water column creating additional movement of the bait, as well as being able to present the lure below (away from) the acoustic signature of the downrigger ball. I almost always have one out, After about 9:30 if there is little or no cloud cover, my two lowest 'riggers will have them running a moonshine green RV flounder pounder or a Silver Streak blue whale. Moonshine Carbon 14, SS Michael Jackson, RV wonderbread are sunshine lures run on this set-up. If these are producing well, I will run a braid dipsey with a spoon behind the flasher. IF it is choppy, I will run a wire dipsey on one side and a braid off the other and let the fish tell me what they want as I switch through spoons every half-hour. Wire dipsey rigs are deadly in a heavy surface chop most of the time- again due to their jigging action imparting movement to the bait. This is wh,y I suspect the SWR slithering effect is a key component of why they work well. Three colors of leadcore just creates problems. 

Go on Youtube and watch downrigger ball generated video of salmon approaching a lure. Over half of those fish seem drop away to the left. I suspect that, as they fall away from the high bait running short, or the ball they have approached, suddenly there is a low running lure (SWR) that "appears" in their faces, triggering a reflex strike in neutral fish

I have fished both two and three color SWR set-ups on Tuna Tom drag modified Shimano Charter specials since these are stupid simple to preset and reset the drag level accurately. Eventually, I settled on two core lengths and a fifty foot leader, removing it when it gets about ten foot shorter. These get top quality Spro #3 swivels rated at 60lbs. break strength-they are strong and small, as well as working well.. I set these in red offshore releases buried deep in the pads. IF there are shakers about, I will use Scotty double tension releases, but still set them at the high setting. Both of these releases are hanging off three foot heavy mono. leaders.. When a salmon hits with the Offshores on they often do not release, but they are usually well hooked by the time I do get them released. Because of the length and degree of stretch, I like the fixed tension achieved by the release as an aid to hooking them, particularly late in the summer when they start to develop a kype because their mouths get so bony hard. As the rigger is coming up I snap them loose by reeling down and then setting the hook which usually brings them to the top quickly, keeping them our of trouble. I use lead weights to set the drag level up on these at five lbs. below the rated break strength of the leader. I now use braid on them for backing instead of mono.


----------



## jpmarko (Feb 26, 2010)

Cork Dust said:


> I have no idea whether Skip is still fishing. Can't remember his last name. He is a software engineer who I credit with developing the SWR when he chartered in Wi. He moved to Manistee years ago. His theory was that SWRs slither through the water column creating additional movement of the bait, as well as being able to present the lure below (away from) the acoustic signature of the downrigger ball. I almost always have one out, After about 9:30 if there is little or no cloud cover, my two lowest 'riggers will have them running a moonshine green RV flounder pounder or a Silver Streak blue whale. Moonshine Carbon 14, SS Michael Jackson, RV wonderbread are sunshine lures run on this set-up. If these are producing well, I will run a braid dipsey with a spoon behind the flasher. IF it is choppy, I will run a wire dipsey on one side and a braid off the other and let the fish tell me what they want as I switch through spoons every half-hour. Wire dipsey rigs are deadly in a heavy surface chop most of the time- again due to their jigging action imparting movement to the bait. This is wh,y I suspect the SWR slithering effect is a key component of why they work well. Three colors of leadcore just creates problems.
> 
> Go on Youtube and watch downrigger ball generated video of salmon approaching a lure. Over half of those fish seem drop away to the left. I suspect that, as they fall away from the high bait running short, or the ball they have approached, suddenly there is a low running lure (SWR) that "appears" in their faces, triggering a reflex strike in neutral fish
> 
> I have fished both two and three color SWR set-ups on Tuna Tom drag modified Shimano Charter specials since these are stupid simple to preset and reset the drag level accurately. Eventually, I settled on two core lengths and a fifty foot leader, removing it when it gets about ten foot shorter. These get top quality Spro #3 swivels rated at 60lbs. break strength-they are strong and small, as well as working well.. I set these in red offshore releases buried deep in the pads. IF there are shakers about, I will use Scotty double tension releases, but still set them at the high setting. Both of these releases are hanging off three foot heavy mono. leaders.. When a salmon hits with the Offshores on they often do not release, but they are usually well hooked by the time I do get them released. Because of the length and degree of stretch, I like the fixed tension achieved by the release as an aid to hooking them, particularly late in the summer when they start to develop a kype because their mouths get so bony hard. As the rigger is coming up I snap them loose by reeling down and then setting the hook which usually brings them to the top quickly, keeping them our of trouble. I use lead weights to set the drag level up on these at five lbs. below the rated break strength of the leader. I now use braid on them for backing instead of mono.


Thanks. That’s very helpful.


----------



## Cork Dust (Nov 26, 2012)

jpmarko said:


> Thanks. That’s very helpful.


There was one study that stood out in my mind when I was doing research on how well salmon can see. They documented that juvenile coho could see zooplankton slightly smaller than a grain of salt and actively feed on them at a background candlepower rating equivalent to a nearly dark room. Chinook and brown trout are major boat avoiders among the salmon and trout species we fish for on the Great Lakes.

Another thing we do, a trick I learned from my duck hunting partner is to set a wire diver rod up with a Slide-diver on it. Basically the same concept as an SWR, where you can "push the bait back away from the diver device. Unless I am fishing coho, I ether use black or clear body dipsey divers. The burn through the surgical tubing stops, but they can be very effective and can be fished past 100 feet down using a Tekota 600 with 19lb Malin on it. Wrap the reel spool with duct tape before loading so the wire gets some "purchase".


----------



## salmon_slayer06 (Mar 19, 2006)

dick swan used to run 4 pound on noodle rods salmon trolling. think he even used 2 pound. but he would stop the boat, reel in the other rod and fight the one fish. now imo that would be more fun and less nerve wracking hoping a king doesn't go into your 400 copper board or when its close to the boat it decides to get into the wire rod as well.


----------



## BFG (Mar 4, 2005)

I believe Skip Berry can be credited with the concept of the SWR rig. He is alive and well, but no longer chartering having sold his Tiara a few years back. Another deadly tactic with the SWR can be credited to my buddy Red Rider from Port Washington who runs a #3 j-plug off his SWR as his deepest rigger when the sun is high. Often times, this rig will take the largest kings of the day. The idea that fish drop down and away can be verified with any of the thousands of underwater camera clips that guys like No Fish Nick have taken over the years. My question has always been, how often do those fish hit the SWR when this happens? IMO, the SWR is good for the same reason your 200' copper is good. It's slipping along quietly all by itself far away from the boat. 

I've seen more broken swivels, snap rings, etc. etc. the last two years than I ever did from the first 20 years I fished salmon. There are monsters swimming around out there now, but not a lot of them. When you get lucky enough to encounter one, I hope you decided on 20# mono at a minimum for your mainline, 50# on your fly leaders, and 30# braid for your divers/board rod backing. 

One of the best king killers with whom I ever fished was Mojo Risin', also from Port. Joe used heavy line and heavy drags, his concept being he didn't want a fish to ever run out hundreds of feet of line, because in Joe's opinion every foot that fish gained was one foot closer to that fish being lost. He ran short Ugly Stik trolling rods with 40# braid mainline and 40# fluoro leaders as I recall. Did he lose some fish because of the tight drags? Sure...but if the fish stayed on for more than about 15 seconds, the odds of you landing it were damn good because that hook was buried. The line was heavy, the drags were tight, and his cooler was often full.

Kings and browns are most definitely boat/line shy, which is why clear and/or black divers are very popular and probably more importantly super long leads of 15-20' behind the diver are now the norm. It can make landing fish an adventure, but the evidence is in the film as countless guys post diver shots with kings that must be hand-lined to the net. I believe is was Syonker who originally posted the "100' rule" for setting downrigger lines. As an example...if fishing 60' down, let the spoon back 40'. 90' down, keep it 10' back. Basically meaning...the more shallow the water, the longer the lead and vice versa. That applies to spoons....not flasher/fly combos as we all know opinions vary on lead length. 

Good luck!


----------



## UBDSLO1 (Feb 23, 2004)

There is some really great info in this thread, thanks guys!


----------



## charcoal300zxtt (Sep 8, 2011)

Thanks everyone for the great info I will put it to good use!


----------



## Zeboy (Oct 4, 2002)

Surprised that no one has mentioned the relationship between fleas and line diameter. 25lb and 30lb mono shed fleas WAY easier than 20lb mono.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Michigan Sportsman mobile app


----------



## cruzer (Feb 8, 2012)

I absolutely agree with Gatorman...What size of mono are meat rigs and flies are made of? Fish are not line shy of them!!! They are made of 50lb. You will get more blow back with heavier mono on a rigger, So I use 30lb Big game mono for rigger rods.. But on my wire(low diver) and braid (high Diver) dipsys, I run 50lb between my dipsy snubber and meat rig or flies. Oh and a loooong leader of 50lb and hand line a big king by hand is much easier than a dipsy flopping around allowing a king to get wrapped up in cables behind the boat... Hope that makes sense and most important, use what works for you.. and what you have the most confidence in.. Remember also there has to be fish there, and they have to be hungry. Good Luck, Some good months are all most here...


----------



## charcoal300zxtt (Sep 8, 2011)

Thanks again for the replies guys I appreciate the input. "Landon Fish" named after my youngest son, was my Dads boat he passed a few years ago and its just been too hard to take it out. Well this is the season its getting back in the game and after some chrome! Splashed it over fathers day weekend just to make sure I remembered how to use all the gear, took me a little bit to get it all set out but it came back to me. Launched out of Manistee and went to 150' drop off. Sent Meat, J-plug, spoons, and a fly down 15' off the bottom, tried a few different depths but didn't hook up. Wasn't really expecting to just wanted to make sure everything worked (mostly my memory). Looking forward to hearing that bail scream in the coming months!


----------



## Cork Dust (Nov 26, 2012)

cruzer said:


> I absolutely agree with Gatorman...What size of mono are meat rigs and flies are made of? Fish are not line shy of them!!! They are made of 50lb.


You do understand that one of the principal reasons flies and meat rigs are tied using heavy line ( I use fluorocarbon, not monofilament) is so they maximize the motion imparted by the flasher they are running behind? Both set-ups rely on a stiff connection to the flasher to get it to movement right...either the snap or a stunned baitfish or the roll of one just hit.

Send Captain Dan Keating an email or call him directly and ask him what his thoughts are on the relationship between line diameter and hook-up rates for chinook. 

I view chinook catchability from the stand point of whether the fish is actively feeding, neutral, or negative. IF I can entice a few more neutral fish to strike after they have come into the spread, that is gravy. I apologize, getting on the water to troll for salmon never moves me to think in terms of running a spread that is the easiest thing for me, particularly with premium unleaded running $3.60. I want to catch fish because playing a chinook is a heck of a lot of fun!


----------



## gatorman841 (Mar 4, 2010)

Cork Dust said:


> You do understand that one of the principal reasons flies and meat rigs are tied using heavy line ( I use fluorocarbon, not monofilament) is so they maximize the motion imparted by the flasher they are running behind? Both set-ups rely on a stiff connection to the flasher to get it to movement right...either the snap or a stunned baitfish or the roll of one just hit.
> 
> Send Captain Dan Keating an email or call him directly and ask him what his thoughts are on the relationship between line diameter and hook-up rates for chinook.
> 
> I view chinook catchability from the stand point of whether the fish is actively feeding, neutral, or negative. IF I can entice a few more neutral fish to strike after they have come into the spread, that is gravy. I apologize, getting on the water to troll for salmon never moves me to think in terms of running a spread that is the easiest thing for me, particularly with premium unleaded running $3.60. I want to catch fish because playing a chinook is a heck of a lot of fun!


Well if you wanna catch fish (kings) and are worried the price of gas your in the wrong hobby and state for chasing them.


----------



## Cork Dust (Nov 26, 2012)

gatorman841 said:


> Well if you wanna catch fish (kings) and are worried the price of gas your in the wrong hobby and state for chasing them.


Essentially, that is the central argument of the discussion: potential catch rate of kings as a function line type and lb. test. With all due respect, I'll maintain my approach of minimizing fuel burn while maximizing catch rate.


----------



## BFG (Mar 4, 2005)

Cork Dust said:


> Send Captain Dan Keating an email or call him directly and ask him what his thoughts are on the relationship between line diameter and hook-up rates for chinook.


I've listened to Dan several times and I have met him twice at sport shows. IMO, when he wrote the book that included the 12# mono for downriggers information, he was doing so during a time when a 20#+ king was a rarity (i.e. 2010-ish). Dan has forgotten more than I'll ever know about salmon fishing, but IMO landing a 25#+ king on 12# mono while trolling 2.5mph is going to take great equipment, advanced angling skill, and a whole lot of luck. 

Does it work? He wouldn't have written it and spoken to it hundreds of times otherwise. Would I do it knowing that I could potentially lose the fish of a lifetime to something as simple as not having the correct line? No way, not given the voluminous options for fluorocarbon leaders that could be Uni-knotted to 25# Big Game mainline. You want to catch big fish, you need to have equipment and tackle that can handle big fish. 

I once happily fit a 6 color on a Magda 30 with 20# backing at one time in my salmon fishing youth. Sure, it fit, but the first big king that hit it on the middle board spooled me and took all 6 colors and the backing with him. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. Measure twice, cut once.


----------



## Cork Dust (Nov 26, 2012)

BFG said:


> I've listened to Dan several times and I have met him twice at sport shows. IMO, when he wrote the book that included the 12# mono for downriggers information, he was doing so during a time when a 20#+ king was a rarity (i.e. 2010-ish). Dan has forgotten more than I'll ever know about salmon fishing, but IMO landing a 25#+ king on 12# mono while trolling 2.5mph is going to take great equipment, advanced angling skill, and a whole lot of luck.
> 
> Does it work? He wouldn't have written it and spoken to it hundreds of times otherwise. Would I do it knowing that I could potentially lose the fish of a lifetime to something as simple as not having the correct line? No way, not given the voluminous options for fluorocarbon leaders that could be Uni-knotted to 25# Big Game mainline. You want to catch big fish, you need to have equipment and tackle that can handle big fish.
> 
> I once happily fit a 6 color on a Magda 30 with 20# backing at one time in my salmon fishing youth. Sure, it fit, but the first big king that hit it on the middle board spooled me and took all 6 colors and the backing with him. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. Measure twice, cut once.


BFG, that is my point, there is no 'correct line" to catch a big chinook...but you first have to get them to bite! Since you know Dan, give him a call and make your pronouncements to him, afterall he only fishes for a living and I am only repeating his advice to maximize hook-ups. There is one point you left out when you attempted to argue that his advice is dated: Water clarity has increased, as chinook numbers have dropped and individual size has increased. A simple four to six rod spread is adequate for light line fishing to minimize fish spooked by your gear.

These fish pics are all fish taken on the same set-up that Keating uses via a six rod spread on my duck hunting partner's 21' Pro-Line boat. His daughter worked summers as a first mate on a charter boat out of Leland. You should see the haul of yellow fin and big eye tuna she and her husband Bryan caught- three very nice big eye tuna and three yellow fin.

We just caught 7 of 8 fish that hit last Thursday southwest of Manistique. Only two of them were over twenty pounds, still. I don't fish for the wall, I fish to play fish.... Other than the fluorcarbon flies everthing was taken on rods fishing no heavier than 17lb fluoro. So, lets try this again: 1.) My reels for light line downrigger fishing are a pair of Calcutta 700B with Tuna Tom Drags. New Tekota 600s are faster but they would benefit from TT's drag washers. Seaguar fluorocarbon is what is attached to the lure. Not once did I say what they have on them for backing. 

Dan keating fishes a Penn saltwater that is essentially the Calcutta equivalent. His anglers are charter customers.


----------



## BFG (Mar 4, 2005)

Cork Dust said:


> *Since you know Dan, give him a call and make your pronouncements to him, afterall he only fishes for a living and I am only repeating his advice to maximize hook-ups.* There is one point you left out when you attempted to argue that his advice is dated: Water clarity has increased, as chinook numbers have dropped and individual size has increased. A simple four to six rod spread is adequate for light line fishing to minimize fish spooked by your gear.


Geesh...take a breath. I never said his tactics do not work. I said he wrote the 12# stealth spread concept when the fish were small. I am not wrong. It works for him. In fact, he sold thousands of copies of his books and made a lot of money at seminars based off of those concepts. He's a smart businessman and a great fisherman. 

We are arguing two different points, and I did my best not to pretend that you were some low-life novice in my reply.
Please do me the courtesy in your response. 

Once again. Nice fish.


----------



## Cork Dust (Nov 26, 2012)

BFG said:


> Geesh...take a breath. I never said his tactics do not work. I said he wrote the 12# stealth spread concept when the fish were small. I am not wrong. It works for him. In fact, he sold thousands of copies of his books and made a lot of money at seminars based off of those concepts. He's a smart businessman and a great fisherman.
> 
> We are arguing two different points, and I did my best not to pretend that you were some low-life novice in my reply.
> Please do me the courtesy in your response.
> ...


Now that is "rich"! You call me a "low life novice" and then demand courtesy in my response. 

Actually, the point you again fail to grasp that ties our two perspectives is that the fish has to be duped to hit first; the principal point in my, and Keating's rationale for using light line as a stealth technique-getting more fish to strike compared to heavy line spreads.

I first noticed that folks fishing the same heavy tackle they had used previously who caught some fish each trip catching fewer to no fish back in 2007-2010, the same interval where visibility on Lake Michigan really began to climb. In 2012 Steve Pothoven's group published study data that indicated that the zooplankton population had shifted from one dominated by cladocerans like Daphnia sp. and Bosmina sp., to an array dominated by omnivorous copepods, principally Limnocalanus sp. Why was this important? As a fish biologist who has worked in Great Lakes research, this was big stuff because it meant that the phytoplankton stocks lakewide were now significantly restructured and smaller, secondarily changing not only the degree and depth of light penetration, but how and at what depth various colors could be seen by chinook since the visible waveband penetration depths had now changed. With the loss of various organics in suspension that used to contribute to biogenic turbidity, combined with depth of penetration of various wavebands in the visible spectrum, reflection and absorption of colors also underwent marked changes, enhancing the depth of penetration of the red-orange wavebands as well as the blue-green end of the spectrum. The dissolved carbonate and bicarbonate in solution in the water column of Lake Michigan that lends the lake its aqua-blue color also causes reflection of visible light in the blue-green end of the spectrum while absorbing light particles in the red-orange end. Chinook possess the same array of opsin pigments on their cone cells in their retinas that we do, but they have enhanced vision in the blue-purple end of the spectrum, compared to us. They also can see well in the UV range prior smolting and again in the interval prior achieving sexual maturity. Add-in that they also possess the distant touch mechanism afforded by their lateral line and swim bladder connections to cranial nerves that enable them to have the ability to receive and interpolate vibrations moving through water, both from active movement and strict displacement generated wave energy. In summary, chinook see well much deeper in the water column now at nearly all background light levels, secondarily aided by the lateral line and swim bladder sensory systems.

When I was first hired by MSU, my main job was to change film packs on an array of tethered current meters anchored to cables as part of a current study on the impacts of the Ludington Pumped Storage Power Plant. When we would dive on tethers anchored in 100FOW or more it was really interesting to note the impact of light penetration on visibility. We had to use handlights to see at any depths beyond 70FOW. Sunlight really started to fall-away at roughly 35'. We never really noticed the marked difference in light penetration above 35' until we were ascending to the surface; like turning the lights back on as the "colors all came back". We used to catch burbot by hand from their hiding spots in the array of concrete parking stops. 

So, as a 'low life novice' who caught his first chinook salmon in the late sixties with a Mitchell 300 and 10lb line during an era where 20lb fish and up were quite common, I have learned one very important lesson over the decades. The person fishing a short stout rod with heavy-test line tends to put too much confidence in their tackle's ability to hold a large fish. Consequently, more often than not in the fight they rush to put it in the net, horsing a hot fish inside the spread and enabling it to commit havoc with hundreds of dolllars of tackle. The person who has a heavy fish on with light line has only one option let the fish run and exhaust itself,, prior starting to pressure it toward the boat. Not a good technique if you are in a tight pack of boats, but a stealth spread has little impact on enhancing a strike

Stealth Downrigger Tactics by Dan Keating – Great Lakes Angler (glangler.com) 
Note the date...Oddly, he is still advocating using light line to catch big chinook...while making a solid argument regarding why. Again, as you state, his tactic works- for a guy whose clients generally know little about playing large salmon. 

What I appreciate about Keating's approach is that, he pays attention to what is happening around him and develops and modifies his fishing approach to one that recognizes how his personal observations impact his fishing success. He may not know the science side, but he has very good insight into how it drives where fish are and when they are active.


----------



## BFG (Mar 4, 2005)

Re-read my post again....I didn't insult you, I asked to not be treated like a low-life novice in your response. You have a tendency to talk down to those to whom you are responding. That was my point. 

I'll still poke the bear though, and ask why you were using 17# fluoro and not 12# mono...


----------



## Cork Dust (Nov 26, 2012)

BFG said:


> Re-read my post again....I didn't insult you, I asked to not be treated like a low-life novice in your response. You have a tendency to talk down to those to whom you are responding. That was my point.
> 
> I'll still poke the bear though, and ask why you were using 17# fluoro and not 12# mono...


I would encourage you to reread our initial post in this thread your follow-up as well; all pronouncements and Both are pretty peppered with name dropping... I had one phone conversation with Dan Keating in 2007; why I encouraged you to speak with him directly to determine whether he still advocates using light line. Instead, you posted your interpretation of what he "really intended" without support evidence, but full of qualifiers that were pure supposition on your part.

Yes. I know who you are. Back when I first joined this forum you were one of the folks who asked if I was Thirsty Whaler from the old Great Lakes Angler forum, so you know me as well.

Never said monofilament- ever. Other than as backing, I haven't used monofilament in over a decade on the lure or bait end of a trolling line. I did say I have two rods rigged as stealth set-ups with 12lb fluoro., not all rods Also as I stated previously, I never said that it was the entire spool contents either. Again, as I stated previously several times, when I am fishing in a pack of boats, I don't go to really light line set-ups. I used Lewis' pics because he fishes this set-up exclusively. Leland down to the Platte is not very crowded.


----------



## BFG (Mar 4, 2005)

Cork Dust said:


> I would encourage you to reread our initial post in this thread your follow-up as well; all pronouncements and Both are pretty peppered with name dropping... I had one phone conversation with Dan Keating in 2007; why I encouraged you to speak with him directly to determine whether he still advocates using light line. Instead, you posted your interpretation of what he "really intended" without support evidence, but full of qualifiers that were pure supposition on your part.
> 
> Yes. I know who you are. Back when I first joined this forum you were one of the folks who asked if I was Thirsty Whaler from the old Great Lakes Angler forum, so you know me as well.
> 
> Never said monofilament- ever. Other than as backing, I haven't used monofilament in over a decade on the lure or bait end of a trolling line. I did say I have two rods rigged as stealth set-ups with 12lb fluoro., not all rods Also as I stated previously, I never said that it was the entire spool contents either. Again, as I stated previously several times, when I am fishing in a pack of boats, I don't go to really light line set-ups. I used Lewis' pics because he fishes this set-up exclusively. Leland down to the Platte is not very crowded.


I hope you continue to contribute on this and other forums. The fishery is in big trouble (especially on the Michigan side) and I hope positive change can happen before it is too late.


----------



## D-Fresh (Feb 8, 2005)

Man, some guys go out of their way to argue about the dumbest things. 

Based on the sad coolers at the tourney in Manistee this past weekend, a bulk spool of 8lb Stren should get the job done on 95% of the fish you're gonna encounter (4-12 lb greasers) on the Michigan side of the lake. Outside of an early run on the southern end and hit or miss fishing in late July/August, lake Michigan is a pathetic fishery on the Michigan side. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Michigan Sportsman mobile app


----------



## gatorman841 (Mar 4, 2010)

D-Fresh said:


> Man, some guys go out of their way to argue about the dumbest things.
> 
> Based on the sad coolers at the tourney in Manistee this past weekend, a bulk spool of 8lb Stren should get the job done on 95% of the fish you're gonna encounter (4-12 lb greasers) on the Michigan side of the lake. Outside of an early run on the southern end and hit or miss fishing in late July/August, lake Michigan is a pathetic fishery on the Michigan side.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Michigan Sportsman mobile app


Once you visit the Wisconsin side or a trip to NY then you really realize how bad it really is here…. Lake trout are a horrible replacement for us . We need more planting, not sure on our side but no shortage of ales on the Wisconsin side at all.


----------



## sixft4par (Apr 1, 2008)

NY is on my bucket list I hear Ontario is really amazing.

I run the heavier lines mentioned earlier. 25-30# big game on most everything. I have 20# flouro leaders on a few of the higher leadcore lines for steel.


----------



## John Hine (Mar 31, 2019)

So what does Wisconsin do different than us?? Please add:
1. They return fish offal back to the water to help replace micro nutrients..
2. They have just said no to the excessive planting of laketrout. 
3. Much better diversity of species planted.
4??????


----------



## Captain of the 4-C's (Sep 11, 2003)

#4 - For the past 5 - 6 years, with wind a significant variable, there are far more alewifes to feed them on the Wisconsin side. More nutrients enter the water than on our side too. Kings simply follow the easiest food they can find. The scum lines of 20 - 30 years ago don't happen like they used to on our side of the lake these past few years.


----------



## D-Fresh (Feb 8, 2005)

Captain of the 4-C's said:


> #4 - For the past 5 - 6 years, with wind a significant variable, there are far more alewifes to feed them on the Wisconsin side. More nutrients enter the water than on our side too. Kings simply follow the easiest food they can find. The scum lines of 20 - 30 years ago don't happen like they used to on our side of the lake these past few years.


No doubt the location of the food is a huge factor. Chicago and Milwaukee dump a huge amount of "nutrients" into the lake on that side. The Michigan side of the lake looks similar to Lake Huron.... sterile/gin clear water that's full of worthless 4-12 lb lake trout and the occasional silver fish. The obvious difference being that the silver fish on lake Michigan still could be a 30+lb king vs maybe a nice steel on Huron (yes, there are a few kings too). The chance at a 30+ lb king keeps me going back to lake Michigan, maybe that'll end if the border opens back up to shorten the drive to Lake O.

I apologize to the OP for derailing your thread. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Michigan Sportsman mobile app


----------



## Captain of the 4-C's (Sep 11, 2003)

I don't subscribe to the line diameter theory that the diameter itself bothers king salmon. I do susbscribe to the theory that the lighter line allows for greater spoon movement as you troll them through the water inducing a higher likely-hood of getting them to strike. When I worked on a charter in the Pacific out of Avila Bay, we used #100 test and krokodile spoons exclusively. Caught many kings using lines attached directly to downrigger cables with surgical tubing as shock absorbers trolling - 5 mph. Got paid $3/pound and kings had to be 28 inches minimum during the summer of 1975.


----------



## charcoal300zxtt (Sep 8, 2011)

Lots of good info here guys no apologies needed as I do enjoy a good debate especially when its related to fishing/hunting. Carry on


----------



## markrazzy (Jan 19, 2018)

I still think there's something to the Lake Michigan water levels either directly or indirectly affecting the spring migration of the kings. Maybe St. Joe's was hot this year (I didn't pay much attention because we were catching in WI), but for the past 2-3 years, it seemed the kings would run up the Michigan side in May before dispersing, while the few years before that, they basically ran up the Wisconsin side. 2016 was still an all-time numbers year for me in my kayak when I caught over 100 kings (almost all in June/July) from my kayak in Wisconsin, including some trips in July that I caught 15+ kings in a trip in less than 40 fow. I caught 56 kings that year during Salmon-a-rama in 5 trips. However, I didn't catch a 20 lb king that year until September when the 3/4 year olds came home. I've been catching 20+ lbers in May the past few years, but lacking numbers, with my PB 28.3 lber last mid May. This year, we've got some good numbers and great size on our side - it's ridiculous. Also, for what it's worth, it is illegal on the Wisconsin side to dump fish offal into the lake. Not to say charters don't do it, but it's illegal. 

More than ever, these fish seem to follow a select migration pattern that seems to depend on water levels, currents, and probably more importantly, the alewives. Here's a thought - if Michigan did hypothetically stock 1 million more kings, wouldn't most of those fish just follow the same migration pattern as the rest of them? Or is the thinking that with that many more fish, everyone would just have a little bit better of a chance to catch 'em?


----------



## Cork Dust (Nov 26, 2012)

D-Fresh said:


> Man, some guys go out of their way to argue about the dumbest things.
> 
> Based on the sad coolers at the tourney in Manistee this past weekend, a bulk spool of 8lb Stren should get the job done on 95% of the fish you're gonna encounter (4-12 lb greasers) on the Michigan side of the lake. Outside of an early run on the southern end and hit or miss fishing in late July/August, lake Michigan is a pathetic fishery on the Michigan side.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Michigan Sportsman mobile app


6-29-2021

Michigan waters.in Fog and intermittent light rain. Surface temp. 55-59F Six chinook 21 to 14lbs; two steelhead 7-9lbs. Only hatchery origin fish we caught. Fishing 35-55 feet down in 105-120FOW.


----------



## Cork Dust (Nov 26, 2012)

markrazzy said:


> I still think there's something to the Lake Michigan water levels either directly or indirectly affecting the spring migration of the kings. Maybe St. Joe's was hot this year (I didn't pay much attention because we were catching in WI), but for the past 2-3 years, it seemed the kings would run up the Michigan side in May before dispersing, while the few years before that, they basically ran up the Wisconsin side. 2016 was still an all-time numbers year for me in my kayak when I caught over 100 kings (almost all in June/July) from my kayak in Wisconsin, including some trips in July that I caught 15+ kings in a trip in less than 40 fow. I caught 56 kings that year during Salmon-a-rama in 5 trips. However, I didn't catch a 20 lb king that year until September when the 3/4 year olds came home. I've been catching 20+ lbers in May the past few years, but lacking numbers, with my PB 28.3 lber last mid May. This year, we've got some good numbers and great size on our side - it's ridiculous. Also, for what it's worth, it is illegal on the Wisconsin side to dump fish offal into the lake. Not to say charters don't do it, but it's illegal.
> 
> More than ever, these fish seem to follow a select migration pattern that seems to depend on water levels, currents, and probably more importantly, the alewives. Here's a thought - if Michigan did hypothetically stock 1 million more kings, wouldn't most of those fish just follow the same migration pattern as the rest of them? Or is the thinking that with that many more fish, everyone would just have a little bit better of a chance to catch 'em?


Great Lakes enforcement personnel generally look the other way regarding dumping carcasses back into the lake. IF you motor forty yards away from a ramp and dump fish, you will likely be ticketed.

From 2010 on to 2019 EVERY chinook planted in Lake Michigan has had a Coded Wire Tag inserted in its snout prior planting. The Mass Marking data indicate that chinook disperse quickly from their plant sites, with most migrating to several areas primarily on the western shore. Each year these fish begin to move back to their plant site locations in early August with nearly all surviving fish arrayed off the natal streams . Whether they spawn that year or not, by September's end. This pattern repeats annually. Researchers assume the wild origin stock component exhibits the same dispersal pattern My perspective on where Michigan's fishery has suffered disproportionally is related to the 2013 chinook plant reductions when Michigan agreed to take a roughly 70% plant reduction because the fishery was augmented annually by a large cohort of wild origin fish. Water levels were quite low in the streams that produce these fish and they had consequently very low production-USFWS estimated only 1.4million fish, down from 6.8 million the previous year, per mass marking data generated estimates- magnifying the :"hit" that occurred when the 2013 plant cuts were implemented. USFWS estimates that only 7% of the Chinook caught in Michigan waters are stocked there. Wild origin stocks have slowly rebuilt their numbers, but this has not been a consistent trend, nor have spring smolt numbers returned to 6.8 million wild fish entering the Lake Michigan basin from these tributaries. So the question is: Did the cuts cause the slight increase in alewife biomass that now exists or did the additional near-collapse of wild origin chinook beneficially impact alewife abundance? Open lake estimates of the wild origin stock component ranged around 70% of the stock for multiple years via mass marking estimates.

Now add-in that Wisconsin broke with the other Lake Michigan stakeholders states last year when Todd Kalish, Deputy Chief of Fisheries, authorized the increased chinook plant value of 1.21 smolts annually by dropping lake trout plants and adding chinook smolts via calculated "chinook equivalents" via the lake trout plant reductions. For comparison purposes, Michigan increased their chinook plants last year by roughly 30,000 fish putting MI chinook plant contribution somewhere around 630,000 fish last spring. Wisconsin planted 1.21 million chinook again this spring while Mi increased plants to around 850,000 chinook. 

You can get accurate breakdowns of dispersal via a search on USFWS Mass Marking program. It has expanded over the years to include lake trout, steelhead and brown trout plants and fish movements.

A big contributor to the patchy dispersal of salmon is tied to the patchy dispersal of alewife. Once upon a time the USFWS used to calculate a statistic using their trawl and acoustic data. relative standard error (RSE) values on individual samples over their total sampling effort annually. RSE values have sequentially increased from 2000 on, increasing markedly since 2010. RSE is an indicator of patchiness of distribution for a variable. The used to also calculate RSEs for Mysis sp. sampled in acoustic transects. For whatever reason, this had been dropped about five years ago. Specific to trawl sampling versus acoustic sampling, acoustic transects annually sample a volume of water equivalent to ALL trawl samples from the inception of the program. The other issue that makes their sampling results not directly comparable is that the trawl does not accurately capture alewife until they reach a size equivalent that roughly corresponds to 3YO fish, because of the mesh size of the trawl and the cod-end. Three year old and up age alewife are NOT very abundant in the population in Lake Michigan, why so many trawl tows come up empty of them now.


----------



## BFG (Mar 4, 2005)

The Ozaukee county salmon club takes their chinook allotment and places them in net pens in the harbor area, feeding them and watching over them until they smolt. Then, when conditions allow, the net pens are towed offshore of the harbor mouth, at night, and the smolts are released, far away from cormorants, sea gulls, brown trout, northern pike, and smallmouth bass. It's no mystery why the fishing has been so good at places like Port Washington for the last few years. What will be interesting to see is if the increased stocks from the MI side end up on the WI side for the majority of the season. 

If I had a boat on trailer, I would be driving to Port Washington, Sheboygan, Algoma, or Racine.


----------

