# Fishing reports



## salmonfreak05 (Sep 13, 2009)

I have just read my go to site, riversbendguideservice.com They believe its the worst its ever been in over 19 years. 

I don't know much but I do a lot of research and read a lot of reports and i study past years reports. I have noticed a declining pattern. 

Last year was a decent year we got into a couple good pods of fish, but nothing like 2006. Since 2006 the fishing has dropped tremendously. 

Everyone talks about the decline in baitfish and to stablize the population, they decrease number of salmon... Now the steelheaders are in love with this. They release more and more steelhead every year to also lower the salmon numbers. The 5 fish limit that went in effect 09 won't show effect until 2013. 

Lets do simple math... An average female has what 4000 to 6000 eggs in their sack. Say 150 females spawn with 4000 eggs each. Thats 600,000 fry. but say there is 200 steelhead running 3 weeks later, they are going to eat most of the eggs. Now lets take the 600,000 and multiply that by .0078 (a very high rough survival rate estimate) thats 4680 fry that make it. Now those make it 4 years and get to make the run. this is where the 5 fish limit comes in... But now lets say 100 females spawn and now their is 300 steelhead running after. Smaller numbers of salmon but bigger numbers of steelhead. Now this is far off the actual numbers but its the point I am trying to make. 

Now I am no biologist but I think i am making a good point. The salmon population is dwindling and will continue to fall. I hate to say this but its gonna just keep getting worse and worse. If they keep decreasing numbers of salmon with the steelhead numbers rising and the 5 fish limit is still in effect You think this year is bad, wait until 2013 and after.


----------



## ausable_steelhead (Sep 30, 2002)

> Smaller numbers of salmon but bigger numbers of steelhead


Not seeing the problem in that.....


----------



## salmonfreak05 (Sep 13, 2009)

ausable_steelhead said:


> Not seeing the problem in that.....



Ha ha ya steelhead are gorgeous fish.. I am just giving my view


----------



## Fishslayer5789 (Mar 1, 2007)

salmonfreak05 said:


> Smaller numbers of salmon but bigger numbers of steelhead.


That would be icing on the cake.


----------



## gribble (Sep 18, 2010)

O please let that be the case!
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## FishKilla419 (Feb 22, 2008)

Salmon were planted to do a job. There job is getting less and less needed each year. We will probably never in our lifetime see Alewive #'s like they were years ago, or salmon fishing like it was in it's heyday. Therefore we need less and less salmon each year until there is a balance between baitfish and predator. The salmon population will decrease until this happens. Would you rather have decent #'s of low to mid teen fish or tons of 6-8#'s. That would be the likely scenario if bag limits and planting were left alone as if there were enough food out there.


----------



## Fishndude (Feb 22, 2003)

There aren't more Steelhead around now, than there were 20 years ago. There just aren't. Less Alewives = less of all species that prey on them, which includes King Salmon, Coho Salmon, Brown Trout, Lake Trout, and Steelhead - all of the most popular fish to pursue in the Great Lakes region.


----------



## RLWagner (Dec 17, 2007)

Freak05, just might be that we are better off with Steelies than Salmon for a number of reasons. They taste better, fight better and are found closer to the surface at sea making them accessible to a wider swath of the angling community at a lesser cost. Not to mention the economic impact to small town Michigan that is improved by having TWO runs each year. Too bad we cannot train Salmon in the same manner, just saying
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## randhoog (Sep 21, 2010)

When in the fall do the Steelhead start to run?


----------



## RLWagner (Dec 17, 2007)

Depends upon the river system, temps etc. Also upon species as Skamania will run earlier than others, hence as to why they arte referred to as a "summer" run. One can begin nabbing steel as early as late Sept. Right on thru spring. October and November can be a slam fest.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## randhoog (Sep 21, 2010)

Do they typically run the same rivers, (Bear River and Boardman River) as the salmon do in northern michigan?


----------



## Abel (Feb 14, 2003)

Hoog,
Like the salmon, they will run just about anything that has moving water at one point or another. But the stocked rivers and thsoe that have good reproduction will hold the better runs. Yes they run in the areas you mentioned as well.


----------



## pikedevil (Feb 11, 2003)

salmonfreak05 said:


> Now the steelheaders are in love with this. They release more and more steelhead every year to also lower the salmon numbers.


This is not even close to true, they have not increased steelhead stocking at all. The hatcheries are at max production for steelhead and have been for a very long time. The numbers cannot be increased unless new hatchery facilities come online, which wont happen anytime soon due to budget shortfalls. Just because they cut chinook salmon stocking, doesn't mean they have more room for steelhead, the two require different hatchery environments.

If you look at historical data like the counts at the little manistee weir and
creel surveys you will see that steelhead numbers are down and have been down for sometime over their highs.


----------



## zig (Aug 5, 2009)

RLWagner said:


> Freak05, just might be that we are better off with Steelies than Salmon for a number of reasons. They taste better, fight better and are found closer to the surface at sea making them accessible to a wider swath of the angling community at a lesser cost. Not to mention the economic impact to small town Michigan that is improved by having TWO runs each year. Too bad we cannot train Salmon in the same manner, just saying
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Kind of off subject, but are steelhead really better tasting? I've only had a couple steelhead, but holy cow the two I brought home from the big lake tasted like cat food......My dog wouldn't even eat them.


----------



## RLWagner (Dec 17, 2007)

pikedevil said:


> This is not even close to true, they have not increased steelhead stocking at all. The hatcheries are at max production for steelhead and have been for a very long time. The numbers cannot be increased unless new hatchery facilities come online, which wont happen anytime soon due to budget shortfalls. Just because they cut chinook salmon stocking, doesn't mean they have more room for steelhead, the two require different hatchery environments.
> 
> If you look at historical data like the counts at the little manistee weir and
> creel surveys you will see that steelhead numbers are down and have been down for sometime over their highs.


You are refewrring to State hatcheries it sounds like. Might wanna look at the numbers from private clubs that use rearing pens in marinas and do hunongo releases. As far as taste, I marinate them boneless and skinless in italian dressing lemon juice and seasonings, then cook 3 days later over hickory. Taste just like Mahi Mahi
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Abel (Feb 14, 2003)

I think they're better than the kings, even Alaskan kings which i've ate plenty of in the last 3 yrs. Even better if pulled out of the ice, but i won't eat them out of the river.


----------



## Fish Eye (Mar 30, 2007)

Both Salmon and Steelhead have been on the decline since the early 1990's. Yes, you can still get some good fishing in both the lake and rivers but the size and numbers have been consistently declining. Someone mentioned the "mini-chinni" phenomenon that happened a few years ago. This was a warning signal. I caught several of those and simply couldn't believe it. Dark, spawning, dink Chinooks. 

Small fish 4-5 lbs are better eating than larger fish. fish caught during the spawning runs are generally average to poor table fare.

Earliest Steelhead I ever caught was a 6-7 lbs. fish on the PM caught on a spinner on 9/15/92. Needless to say, she was Chrome. Raise the the fees on fishing licenses to explore options. My 2 cents.


----------



## pikedevil (Feb 11, 2003)

RLWagner said:


> You are refewrring to State hatcheries it sounds like. Might wanna look at the numbers from private clubs that use rearing pens in marinas and do hunongo releases.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Please provide me with these numbers as I have never heard of steelhead being raised and stocked by sportsmen clubs out side of the state hatcherys. Their are some tribal plants like the Orsini(?) hatchery that raise some fish but they have done so for quite some time. The net pen projects you speak of are used for chinook stocking, the pens are often funded and monitored by private clubs, but the fish are still initially raised in state hatcheries and show up as state plants.


----------



## salmon fever (Aug 10, 2006)

Fish Eye said:


> Both Salmon and Steelhead have been on the decline since the early 1990's. Yes, you can still get some good fishing in both the lake and rivers but the size and numbers have been consistently declining. Someone mentioned the "mini-chinni" phenomenon that happened a few years ago. This was a warning signal. I caught several of those and simply couldn't believe it. Dark, spawning, dink Chinooks.
> 
> Small fish 4-5 lbs are better eating than larger fish. fish caught during the spawning runs are generally average to poor table fare.
> 
> Earliest Steelhead I ever caught was a 6-7 lbs. fish on the PM caught on a spinner on 9/15/92. Needless to say, she was Chrome. Raise the the fees on fishing licenses to explore options. My 2 cents.


My view - In the 1980's, the alewife numbers were off the chart and the bag limit was 5 fish. I recall as a boy walking the beaches with my grandfather and seeing the dried up stinking alewives everywhere. Also, 30 pound PIG football shaped kings were common and stocking in some venues was just plain ridiculous. 

Let me throw this out there for some thought.....for years we had a bag limit of 3 chins and now it is back up to 5. Add to it reduced plants and last 4 years have showed a lesser amount of natural born chins coming back up river (totality of the aforementioned). Some charter boat captains are reporting that they are seeing more bait wads out there past few years and we all know the kings are not really getting bigger.....but they should be! 

I am no fisheries biologist but something is up with our chins guys. I don't know if that it is they are milking much smaller kings now and the change is genetic or something else. I did read an article about the beta proteins in the alewives is not as dense as it used to be (way over my head).  I know I have seen a few reports of fish with BKD and too many 3 year old spawners. Whatever it is I agree our king fishery is either in decline or at a new plateau.


----------



## randhoog (Sep 21, 2010)

Lake Superior Sate College has a stocking program.
www.lssu.edu/arl/fishcam.php


----------

