# Making Big Steelhead



## Kisutch (May 26, 2011)

To all you nice people who can't wait for the total demise of the salmon. It takes lots of alewife to produce trophy sized steelhead. They will not get big by eating bugs off the surface in 700 feet of water. So if you truly want to maintain a viable steelhead fishery (large fish) please say a prayer for the little alewife. When they are gone you will wish they were still around.

Kisutch

Kill all the Lake Trout


----------



## Corey K (Dec 11, 2009)

http://www.accuweather.com/en/us/ludington-mi/49431/february-weather/333651?monyr=2/1/2016

Granted not very accurate but, the extended forecast does look favorable for the Ale's.


----------



## riverbob (Jan 11, 2011)

I agree with ya, with the big lake not freezing over this year, it might help the alewife's spawn


----------



## Lou is Blue (Sep 14, 2014)

Kisutch said:


> To all you nice people who can't wait for the total demise of the salmon. It takes lots of alewife to produce trophy sized steelhead. They will not get big by eating bugs off the surface in 700 feet of water. So if you truly want to maintain a viable steelhead fishery (large fish) please say a prayer for the little alewife. When they are gone you will wish they were still around.
> 
> Kisutch
> 
> Kill all the Lake Trout


The ones that really want the salmon gone, want the steelhead gone too.


----------



## skipper34 (Oct 13, 2005)

Please, somebody correct me if I am wrong, but didn't we have a steelhead fishery in the great lakes before the alewife invasion? If memorie serves, rainbow trout have been in our tributaries since the 1800's.


----------



## jpmarko (Feb 26, 2010)

Kisutch said:


> To all you nice people who can't wait for the total demise of the salmon. It takes lots of alewife to produce trophy sized steelhead. They will not get big by eating bugs off the surface in 700 feet of water. So if you truly want to maintain a viable steelhead fishery (large fish) please say a prayer for the little alewife. When they are gone you will wish they were still around.
> 
> Kisutch
> 
> Kill all the Lake Trout


I agree wholeheartedly with this post.


----------



## jpmarko (Feb 26, 2010)

skipper34 said:


> Please, somebody correct me if I am wrong, but didn't we have a steelhead fishery in the great lakes before the alewife invasion? If memorie serves, rainbow trout have been in our tributaries since the 1800's.


Correct. But no where near as many. And no where near as big.


----------



## wintrrun (Jun 11, 2008)

There has not been big steelhead since the middle to late 90's.


----------



## Lou is Blue (Sep 14, 2014)

skipper34 said:


> Please, somebody correct me if I am wrong, but didn't we have a steelhead fishery in the great lakes before the alewife invasion? If memorie serves, rainbow trout have been in our tributaries since the 1800's.


True, but not native.


----------



## Fishndude (Feb 22, 2003)

jpmarko said:


> Correct. But no where near as many. And no where near as big.


Not true. There weren't nearly as many Steelhead before the DNR began actively planting them on a large scale. But the Steelhead that existed from natural reproduction, were quite large. Friends of mine who fished for them when it was a good year to catch 2, or 3 have let me know that it was pretty common to catch 15# Steelhead back in the day. They mostly fished the Little Manistee river. They almost never caught Skippers, and most fish were over 10#. That was in the late 1950's and early 1960's. Those fish were feasting on Alewives.


----------



## Lou is Blue (Sep 14, 2014)

Fishndude said:


> Not true. There weren't nearly as many Steelhead before the DNR began actively planting them on a large scale. But the Steelhead that existed from natural reproduction, were quite large. Friends of mine who fished for them when it was a good year to catch 2, or 3 have let me know that it was pretty common to catch 15# Steelhead back in the day. They mostly fished the Little Manistee river. They almost never caught Skippers, and most fish were over 10#. That was in the late 1950's and early 1960's. Those fish were feasting on Alewives.


Hemingway makes reference to rainbow trout fishing in the Sault Rapids and fish being caught to 14 pounds during his youth.


----------



## Robert Holmes (Oct 13, 2008)

Steelhead feed on a variety of fish and insects. They do not need alewifes to survive. I have caught many of them stuffed with gobies and stickelbacks lately.


----------



## Robert Holmes (Oct 13, 2008)

I caught a 13# and a 14# this fall so large steelhead might be making a comeback. It has been a couple of years since I landed a 15# or larger fish. I am sure some are out there and gobies might make the difference. Just recently I landed a 7# and 8# ice fishing that I cleaned and they had no less than 5 gobies each in their bellies, along with crayfish, stickelbacks, and a bunch of wigglers.


----------



## Steelheadfred (May 4, 2004)

skipper34 said:


> Please, somebody correct me if I am wrong, but didn't we have a steelhead fishery in the great lakes before the alewife invasion? If memorie serves, rainbow trout have been in our tributaries since the 1800's.


Yes


----------



## Syndicate (Jul 15, 2014)

Why is it that people want salmon and steelhead gone if I may ask?


----------



## Fishndude (Feb 22, 2003)

I don't know anybody who wants Salmon, or Steelhead gone from our lakes, and rivers. But the fact is that Alewives are dying out in the Great Lakes, and they are/were the main food source for King Salmon, and have been a very big part of the diets of all Trout/Salmonids that migrate out to the lakes, for decades. Without Alewives, our Kings will virtually disappear, and the other Salmon (Cohos, Pinks, and Atlantics), as well as some Trout species are going to decline in size. It has already been a trend for a number of years. 

Since we can't stop it from happening, we sit on website forums and discuss it endlessly. I'm as guilty of this as anybody.


----------



## RiverRat22 (May 19, 2010)

Not one to comment on here very much but there has been year class in the river with some large fish.... 2013 was awesome and saw many fish over 15 pounds and a couple around the 17 mark. there's still hope if the alewives can make a comeback


----------



## Treven (Feb 21, 2006)

RiverRat22 said:


> Not one to comment on here very much but there has been year class in the river with some large fish.... 2013 was awesome and saw many fish over 15 pounds and a couple around the 17 mark. there's still hope if the alewives can make a comeback


I landed my biggest steelhead and king salmon in 2013. I wish I was in college in the 90's...


----------



## Treven (Feb 21, 2006)

Syndicate said:


> Why is it that people want salmon and steelhead gone if I may ask?


Stupidity.


----------



## Lou is Blue (Sep 14, 2014)

Treven said:


> Stupidity.


They hope to restore the Great Lakes to their native state.

Since that can't happen; between the dams, agriculture, and the flow of non-native species; they pacify themselves with torturing Salmon fisherman with inflammatory language.


----------



## Gthumb13 (Dec 15, 2015)

Im with Mr Holmes on this one....steelies are not dependant on alewives like the kings are. They are not nearly as picky of an eater and many times in the fall you will find they are predominately filled up on wigglers. They also while in the tribs are eating others eggs as well as baitfish, insects, and larvae. When back in the lake its not like they are only targeting alewives. From what i have seen the steelhead fishery is very healthy. I would be more worried about all the feed the salmon produced for many years bringing in nice fall runs of fish gorging on eggs in the river. Just my 2 cents and tight lines to all!


----------



## RiverRat22 (May 19, 2010)

The problem is with no salmon the charter guys that make part of their living on the big lake have to get their clients on some sort of fish and go to the temp break everyday and whack 20 fish...... With how many charters out there plus the weekend warriors it adds up and the returns to the rivers will go way down


----------



## shotgunner (Jan 15, 2003)

Steelhead were very prolific in the old days.. They had to naturally reproduce though, therefore self limiting due the lack of viable habitat streams. A lot different than stocking loads of smolts in marginal tribs while the water is still cold.. and adults returning to seasonal cold water on same marginal trib. 
_
"By 1914 runs of steelhead were so thick on the Pere Marquette that laws were being considered to allow for spearing* or netting. As a result of modern sport fishing technology benefiting charter captains and stream fly fishers, angling pressure and the stress it puts on a watershed have kept the annual run in a state of balance, with both good and bad years running in a cyclical fashion."_

*They did do this for a few years.. seems crazy to contemplate. 

Pretty sure the late Simmy Nolff was in full swing guiding (P.M.) in the 1930's

Steelhead are opportunistic. They may not _need_ aelwives to survive but you can bet they see benefit.. numbers and size included.

Re charters running out to scum lines eats a lot more time and more importantly fuel, driving cost up. What you'll see is less people booking trips. Still a factor though.


----------



## toto (Feb 16, 2000)

We had this discussion years ago on here, or at least a parallel discussion. The previous discussion was started by a guide on the PM who would see steelhead swimming in circles, and upside down on the PM. He captured one and sent it to the DNR who deduced that steelhead eating alewives wasn't good for them. It appeared as though the thiamine levels in alewives wasn't good for the steelies. Having said that, steelhead will eat a massive amount of bugs. How many have been out to the scum line? I have, and in cleaning the ones I kept they were jam packed with bugs, all sorts of bugs. Personally, and I could be wrong, but I think you'll see summer run steelhead with more alewives in them than the winter runs, just humble opinion. I don't really think we need to worry about the steelhead fishery in Michigan, I believe they'll always be around, the salmon, maybe not.


----------



## reelnsteel (Mar 21, 2010)

What about the smelt, never hear much about that, are they still around


----------



## Robert Holmes (Oct 13, 2008)

reelnsteel said:


> What about the smelt, never hear much about that, are they still around


Smelt are still around but they are on the menu too. Less alewives means less smelt because lake trout love to eat them too.


----------



## Gthumb13 (Dec 15, 2015)

Ok so this is getting interesting and confusing. Alewives were an invasive which became managed by salmon stocking. Smelt used to be so prolific before alewives were even a problem that you could dip a whole 5 gallon bucket in one dip. Hopefully someone sees where my logic lies on this one......


----------



## Lou is Blue (Sep 14, 2014)

Gthumb13 said:


> Ok so this is getting interesting and confusing. Alewives were an invasive which became managed by salmon stocking. Smelt used to be so prolific before alewives were even a problem that you could dip a whole 5 gallon bucket in one dip. Hopefully someone sees where my logic lies on this one......


Well, if you're going where the food chain collapses from the bottom because of the mussels; you are headed in the right direction. If you're hoping to go to a return of the smelt; you're living in a fantasy world.


----------



## Benzie Rover (Mar 17, 2008)

Lou is Blue said:


> The ones that really want the salmon gone, want the steelhead gone too.


 Not true dude, not at all....


----------



## Benzie Rover (Mar 17, 2008)

Kisutch said:


> To all you nice people who can't wait for the total demise of the salmon. It takes lots of alewife to produce trophy sized steelhead. They will not get big by eating bugs off the surface in 700 feet of water. So if you truly want to maintain a viable steelhead fishery (large fish) please say a prayer for the little alewife. When they are gone you will wish they were still around.
> 
> Kisutch
> 
> Kill all the Lake Trout


 
Speaking for myself anyway, I'm all for letter the salmon population go to a natural reproduction fishery with no augmentation from stocking. I suspect this is what the majority of the 'nice' people would prefer as well, but I'll just speak for myself as someone that is sick and tired of seeing the tiny Platte River get carpet bombed with nearly a million yo-yo smolts every single spring only to yield an adult return hovering around 1% or less for the last several years, which is an unacceptable return rate for the cost of the program. Additionally, this massive dump of fish does not help the instream brown trout and steelhead smolts. People need to remember that some of our best Chinook fisheries are totally natural reproduction - Betsie and Pere Marquette are probably the two best examples. We'll still have a fishery, but we won't be wasting critical hatchery space on a fish that will inevitably out consume their available forage base. No, it won't be double limits for three weeks straight in August, but there will be fish to be caught.

Steelhead actually have a very diverse fish diet - they do eat alewife, but also love spot tail shiners (grays) and other great lakes minnows, whereas Chinook are pretty exclusive to alewives. And of course steelhead will also forage on insects, crayfish, etc... Jory Jonas out of Charlevoix fisheries research station has done a lot of fish diet analysis and has concluded much the same.

We would still get some large fish as well - although maybe not as many fat, double-chin piggies that we're used to since alewives are high in fat content. I think the fish would start to resemble the Lake Superior steelies more (just as long, seemingly faster and a bit leaner) which I'm personally fine with - those fish are a blast IMO.


----------



## Lou is Blue (Sep 14, 2014)

Benzie Rover said:


> Speaking for myself anyway, I'm all for letter the salmon population go to a natural reproduction fishery with no augmentation from stocking. I suspect this is what the majority of the 'nice' people would prefer as well, but I'll just speak for myself as someone that is sick and tired of seeing the tiny Platte River get carpet bombed with nearly a million yo-yo smolts every single spring only to yield an adult return hovering around 1% or less for the last several years, which is an unacceptable return rate for the cost of the program. Additionally, this massive dump of fish does not help the instream brown trout and steelhead smolts. People need to remember that some of our best Chinook fisheries are totally natural reproduction - Betsie and Pere Marquette are probably the two best examples. We'll still have a fishery, but we won't be wasting critical hatchery space on a fish that will inevitably out consume their available forage base. No, it won't be double limits for three weeks straight in August, but there will be fish to be caught.
> 
> Steelhead actually have a very diverse fish diet - they do eat alewife, but also love spot tail shiners (grays) and other great lakes minnows, whereas Chinook are pretty exclusive to alewives. And of course steelhead will also forage on insects, crayfish, etc... Jory Jonas out of Charlevoix fisheries research station has done a lot of fish diet analysis and has concluded much the same.
> 
> We would still get some large fish as well - although maybe not as many fat, double-chin piggies that we're used to since alewives are high in fat content. I think the fish would start to resemble the Lake Superior steelies more (just as long, seemingly faster and a bit leaner) which I'm personally fine with - those fish are a blast IMO.


Yo BR; I would never claim the anti-salmon crowd is all against steelhead; but if you haven't had a beer with the pro 100 percent native fishes crowd; you are missing out...lol.


----------



## reelnsteel (Mar 21, 2010)

I do thank the salmon for getting me interested in steelhead fishing


----------



## Bob Hunter (Jan 19, 2016)

RiverRat22 said:


> The problem is with no salmon the charter guys that make part of their living on the big lake have to get their clients on some sort of fish and go to the temp break everyday and whack 20 fish...... With how many charters out there plus the weekend warriors it adds up and the returns to the rivers will go way down[/QUOTE


----------



## Robert Holmes (Oct 13, 2008)

RiverRat22 said:


> The problem is with no salmon the charter guys that make part of their living on the big lake have to get their clients on some sort of fish and go to the temp break everyday and whack 20 fish...... With how many charters out there plus the weekend warriors it adds up and the returns to the rivers will go way down


Doubt it because all the charters have to do is hit 60 fow and set up for lake trout. Sometimes the steelhead can be a tough bite, with lots of hit and miss. One of the UP charters caught 6 steelhead all summer long last year so not much damage.


----------



## Multispeciestamer (Jan 27, 2010)

Alewife are not the best forage, especially in more recent times. Fish need to eat a lot more of them to gain the same amount of nutrients they could gain from eating other prey. Not to mention the Thiamine deficiency problems that come along with the consumption of too many Alewife. Lake Michigan Steelhead are at a pivotal time. Other forage seems to be doing well Shiner populations, 2015 bumper YOY Perch population, Gobies, Gizzard Shad, to name a few. Many of the Steelhead I caught this Fall were small young looking fish, but man were they ever stocky. If our goal is to produce bigger fish, then the answer is pretty simple, more adult fish need to be released. That is the fastest most convenient way. An adult Steelhead has already faced most the dangerous obstacles and stands a far better chance of coming back again then simply releasing more smolts (planting more fish). Better hatchery policies would also go a long way in ensuring bigger fish. What I mean by this is our current population is full of early maturing fish that return to the river in 1 year or less after being released at a year old. So majority of our steelhead caught are 3 year olds instead of 4-5 year olds like they should be. This is a genetic problem that can be solved with more selective breeding habits at the hatcheries. Our smolts are stocked in the spring around 1 year of age. The small fish we catch in the rivers under 20" are just over a year of age and would turn 2 that spring, so max a little over half a year spent in the lake feeding before their first return run. The 20"-28" fish are usually over 2 years of age when they return and would turn 3 that spring, meaning they spent a year and a half feeding in the lake before their first spawning run. Steelhead can spend up to three years in the lake before their first run but they dont, at least not much anymore, this would make them 4+ year olds on their first spawning run (this is probably what resulted in the big fish of the past).


----------



## Bob Hunter (Jan 19, 2016)

RiverRat22 said:


> The problem is with no salmon the charter guys that make part of their living on the big lake have to get their clients on some sort of fish and go to the temp break everyday and whack 20 fish...... With how many charters out there plus the weekend warriors it adds up and the returns to the rivers will go way down


Amen!
So very true!


----------



## Bob Hunter (Jan 19, 2016)

Robert Holmes said:


> Doubt it because all the charters have to do is hit 60 fow and set up for lake trout. Sometimes the steelhead can be a tough bite, with lots of hit and miss. One of the UP charters caught 6 steelhead all summer long last year so not much damage.


You should go to the charters cleaning stations in Ludington and Manistee then, you would be amazed at the numbers of steelhead being cleaned ! I have nothing at all against it, but with salmon numbers way down and steelies being targeted so heavily it puts a big dent in the numbers of steelies that are able to run the rivers. If this continues , the steelhead plants if possible may have to be increased.


----------



## RiverRat22 (May 19, 2010)

That one up charter is the rarity because like bob said if your at ludington, grand haven, manistee or any large port along Lake Michigan massive amounts of steel are hit each day and a couple that I personally know of that hit well over 500. You don't think that puts a huge dent in the population? And that's not juvenile plants from the river but mature fish that would be returning to spawn.


----------



## Robert Holmes (Oct 13, 2008)

I guess that some of the millions of steelhead that get planted on the gold coast do surviv e. Its a wonder that the DNR refuses to plant any more steelhead in the UP. I am happy with the steelhead that I catch in the UP and NLP but I can see where the DNR has to keep the charter captains happy. I would not think that it would be fair to all fishermen throughout the state to raise millions more steelhead and plant them all on the west side. I realize that charters put lots of money back into the resource but then so do lots of other people. If the charters want more steelhead to catch then they need to release a few or the DNR needs to reduce the limit.


----------



## Corey K (Dec 11, 2009)

I can't find the quote but, Steelhead were never intended to provide a big water fishery, there isn't a way to sustain both a big water fisher and river fishery if they are targeted heavily on the big water. It goes something like that...

"Also, we tend not to stock walleye
into lakes where we stock trout, as walleye can be heavily
predaceous on the stocked trout (which are expensive to rear!). "

A quote off the DNR website, go check fish stocking data for Walleye on some of our major Steelhead rivers...

I love Walleyes so I'm not hating the fact that they stock them, and I think a mixed bag fishery is ok too. We've had some plants in the livewell that were spit up....

I do think the offshore fishery will be pounded early summer more than usual and it's probably not a good thing for our Steelhead fishery. If gas prices go down at the Marina's, you will see more boats venture out there. If gas was 5$ a gallon running a 30' plus boat one way 17 miles one way isn't the best way to make a bunch of money chartering???


----------



## ausable_steelhead (Sep 30, 2002)

Robert Holmes said:


> I guess that some of the millions of steelhead that get planted on the gold coast do surviv e. Its a wonder that the DNR refuses to plant any more steelhead in the UP. I am happy with the steelhead that I catch in the UP and NLP but I can see where the DNR has to keep the charter captains happy. I would not think that it would be fair to all fishermen throughout the state to raise millions more steelhead and plant them all on the west side. I realize that charters put lots of money back into the resource but then so do lots of other people. If the charters want more steelhead to catch then they need to release a few or the DNR needs to reduce the limit.


You sure are not wrong on this assessment Robert. From the Manistee down is where the bulk of the plants go. Be nice if our NLP stocked rivers got more than 6k a year. The divers eat half the plant within the week they were planted. Thank God for wild fish around here.

The only exception is the Au Sable, which is planted with 150,000 annually. Unfortunately, they are also chowed on heavily, by birds, walleyes(LOTS) and lake trout(LOTS). The corms have been culled considerably, compared to the early 2000's, but the plants are still picked off big time. I believe the DNR has admitted the AS stocking #'s are because of the heavy loss they take, and the sheer number planted allows atleast a few to survive. 

Michigan would be wise to crank up our steelhead fishery, all-around. No one hates chromers, and they provide fishing all year; in the lakes, off the piers, and in the rivers. Add in browns again, and maybe atlantics, and I don't see much to complain about. They can augment the big time walleye fishery we have, and add to the increasingly hated laker fishery.


----------



## Robert Holmes (Oct 13, 2008)

What is very irritating about fish planting is that the DNR backs up a truck and before the first fish hits the water there is a thousand birds flocking in. There are enough sportsman groups around that would be happy to man and maintain a net pen to allow a monitored night time release of the fish. This would guarantee that more fish would survive and allow for a later release of fish if necessary. Some plants such as the ones that they do in the UP are miles from the lake to allow for more fish to survive, I am okay with this. Due to the numbers of spawning fish the various wildlife agencies have done lots of stream improvement work in the UP and NLP to promote better spawning habitat. I actually prefer this to planting fish because the numbers of natural fish has improved. If the DNR wants more steelhead numbers cut the limit to two fish. Just in doing that would allow thousands of more fish to spawn.


----------



## Gthumb13 (Dec 15, 2015)

Do you reallly think that those charter captains want to deal with burping steelies properly and releasing them in a manner in which mortality would not be a problem....all they care about is numbers, putting more meat over the gunnels and making more trips each year. If you guys do believe they are putting a dent in the lake then eventually they will fish themselves or future charter captains out of existence... I mean i think we all know the type that just likes to troll all day long and never even feel the tonk many of us are really after! To each their own and i will continue to be a steward of the rivers and teach ppl that there is nothing wrong with catching an amazing species of fish taking a picture and personally feeling them gain their strength back and swim away. I would much rather eat walleye and perch anyways :bouncy:


----------



## Robert Holmes (Oct 13, 2008)

Gthumb13 said:


> Do you reallly think that those charter captains want to deal with burping steelies properly and releasing them in a manner in which mortality would not be a problem....all they care about is numbers, putting more meat over the gunnels and making more trips each year. If you guys do believe they are putting a dent in the lake then eventually they will fish themselves or future charter captains out of existence... I mean i think we all know the type that just likes to troll all day long and never even feel the tonk many of us are really after! To each their own and i will continue to be a steward of the rivers and teach ppl that there is nothing wrong with catching an amazing species of fish taking a picture and personally feeling them gain their strength back and swim away. I would much rather eat walleye and perch anyways :bouncy:


You said it , not me. If the charter captains want to stay in business they should release more fish. When the salmon fishing went belly up they were the first to complain. They are also the first to complain about any type of commercial fishing. At the same time they are hanging 20 fish on a board 2 and 3 times a day. They know if all else fails they can fish for lake trout and still make a living.


----------



## Fishndude (Feb 22, 2003)

Robert Holmes said:


> You said it , not me. If the charter captains want to stay in business they should release more fish. They know if all else fails they can fish for lake trout and still make a living.


That is a real short-sighted view. I don't know anybody who will pay the rates charters charged for King charters, to fish for Lake Trout. 

I watched Lake Huron crash, and am watching the crash of Lake Michigan as it is happening. Hopefully Lake Michigan won't bottom as low, and there will be halfway decent fishing for Silver fish for the foreseeable future. But I'm not betting any money on it. And, everyone who makes a living chartering for Silver fish will have to either adapt, or close their doors. Lots will try to adapt by switching to Steelhead, and Lakers. Cohos are still mostly an incidental catch, for most of the year. If Kings just completely crap out, I honestly think the attraction of Steelhead, and Lake Trout won't put nearly as many butts in charter seats as Kings did, and the fleet will shrink. 

But the only way to know for sure is to wait, and see what happens. If I made a living from fishing the Great Lakes for Salmon, I would plan for the worst, and hope for the best. Computer programming is always a high demand field.


----------



## Robert Holmes (Oct 13, 2008)

I think all charter captains see the great lakes as a put and take fishery. Take as many as you can get on every charter and who cares about what tomorrow brings. The DNR will plant more fish for us to catch. As a captain you cannot have a C&R boat either or you won't be in business long. What do you do practice good conservation ethics or fill coolers for clients? I think that the shore fishermen will be crying foul if the day comes when they can't catch steelhead. The fishing could end up being very much like deer hunting in the UP. In the end the DNR should be prepared to tighten its wallet.


----------



## Robert Holmes (Oct 13, 2008)

This winter I have caught 3 steelhead per trip on tip ups. I have also released a good number of small steelhead. The small steelhead are 20 inches + and the larger ones are 26 - 32 inches. No complaints here on what the 2016 year might bring. I have already got some good samples. Supposed to be a great weekend to get out and hit some spots. I happen to think that steelhead are great eating, so I keep a few for the grill. Unlike the charters I don't keep 500 per year. I am thinking more like 30 or 40 fish and many of those are winter caught because they are the best ones to eat.


----------



## Corey K (Dec 11, 2009)

Robert Holmes said:


> I think all charter captains see the great lakes as a put and take fishery. Take as many as you can get on every charter and who cares about what tomorrow brings. The DNR will plant more fish for us to catch. As a captain you cannot have a C&R boat either or you won't be in business long. What do you do practice good conservation ethics or fill coolers for clients? I think that the shore fishermen will be crying foul if the day comes when they can't catch steelhead. The fishing could end up being very much like deer hunting in the UP. In the end the DNR should be prepared to tighten its wallet.


It's not just on the Big Lake either, I don't see too many Steelhead being released on guided river trips for the most part either. Nothing wrong with keeping fish to eat and for eggs, it's just confusing to see some "cutting their own throats" sometimes...Steelhead are great fish to release on the big water, they generally are not coming from the depths and as long their jumping doesn't land a treble in the eye or throat they are releasable. I've seen some poor table fair Steelhead being cleaned from the Big Lake after spawning, some people just like the numbers and the "hey look at my catch" pics on a board.


----------



## toto (Feb 16, 2000)

Someone mentioned "burping" the steelhead, I'm assuming you mean to deflate the air blatter? If so, there is no need to do that on steelhead in the big lake, even if you are over 900' of water, they are in the top 20' or so. I fish quite a bit up here, and from what I've seen so far, most guys do release their fish, except for one or two now and then. A lot of the river guides are starting to introduce C&R as well. As for me personally, I'll keep a few early in the fall, and let some co-workers have some, but once they've all received one, I'm done keeping, except for maybe one or two for my and my wife. I release almost all of my fish now. It really bugs me to see someone throw out a freezer burned fish of any kind. If that happens enough, you would think that person would stop keeping fish, but it's legal so what cha gonna do?


----------



## Robert Holmes (Oct 13, 2008)

There aren't many river guides in the UP or Charters that put the hurts on the steelhead. I have seen many days that it can be difficult to find another steelhead fisherman. I am pretty much a weekend warrior and I use what I keep so I don't feel too bad keeping a few. If they hit the freezer I usually smoke them and can them to eat later. I used to do that with the salmon but now steelhead have taken their place.


----------



## Steelheadfred (May 4, 2004)

The DNR does not have hatchery space to raise more steelhead. Chinos grew in cold water. If we want more steelhead stocked, we need more hatchery space.


----------



## Ranger Ray (Mar 2, 2003)

This past fall had a pretty good run of decent sized steelhead. Better than we have seen in several years. Same with the salmon. Where are these rivers called doom and gloom? I need to make sure I don't fish them.


----------



## Ranger Ray (Mar 2, 2003)

Robert Holmes said:


> In the end the DNR should be prepared to tighten its wallet.


Ah, the recent price increase wasn't for nothing.


----------



## Fishndude (Feb 22, 2003)

Ranger Ray said:


> This past fall had a pretty good run of decent sized steelhead. Better than we have seen in several years. Same with the salmon. Where are these rivers called doom and gloom? I need to make sure I don't fish them.


Last Fall's King Salmon runs were the worst on record. There might have been a good sized pod in some small river that nobody really fishes, but the overall Salmon run was pathetic. I did hear about a halfway decent several-day stretch on a NW river that usually gets a ton of fish. Definitely not the usual ton of fish there, though.


----------



## Ranger Ray (Mar 2, 2003)

Yes, I am aware there isn't the number of fish there used to be. The fish were almost a month late on the rivers we fished. Many fishermen had checked out by then. Pathetic? Not what we saw, but certainly not the numbers of years past. Having fished the 70's and 80's, the salmon fishing for the last 20 years could be considered pathetic. :lol:


----------



## Robert Holmes (Oct 13, 2008)

Ranger Ray said:


> Yes, I am aware there isn't the number of fish there used to be. The fish were almost a month late on the rivers we fished. Many fishermen had checked out by then. Pathetic? Not what we saw, but certainly not the numbers of years past. Having fished the 70's and 80's, the salmon fishing for the last 20 years could be considered pathetic. :lol:


Pathetic yes but when the usual salmon army has disappeared it balances out a little bit.


----------



## wdf73 (Sep 14, 2009)

Save a few steelhead for me Robert! 
Sounds like you have had a great winter.


----------



## Treven (Feb 21, 2006)

Ranger Ray said:


> This past fall had a pretty good run of decent sized steelhead. Better than we have seen in several years. Same with the salmon. Where are these rivers called doom and gloom? I need to make sure I don't fish them.


Ha ha! Did you just switch to bait this past year, or something? I'm ball busting here, but for real...?


----------



## Robert Holmes (Oct 13, 2008)

wdf73 said:


> Save a few steelhead for me Robert!
> Sounds like you have had a great winter.


Will do. I have been ice fishing more for steelhead because I am tired of paying for minnows and catching sub legal pike and I don't drive as far to catch the steelhead. From what I have seen this winter if you want a wall hanger head for the NLP or the Yoop. The lack of salmon might be beneficial for the steel fishermen.


----------



## B.Jarvinen (Jul 12, 2014)

OK, going back to the idea that Steelhead are smaller now ... are the smaller ones just as fun on a lighter weight rod?


----------

