# Giant muskie!!!!!!!!!



## Revinchev

Deeply saddened to see all the recent posts of muskies that have been harvested this winter. Worst of it is they are coming from lakes like Black Lake that have the lowest population densities in the state. Social media has tasked some of us with having to explain why SCIENCE, not opinion shows us why harvest is such an issue on these lakes. Some comments that are being posted are far from truthful. We can clear that up right now.

MICHIGANS MUSKIE POPULATIONS ARE NOT EXCELLENT
Contrary to what many believe, the muskellunge is not well in many of Michigan/s waters. There are numerous waters that are falling well short of .33 muskellunge per acre, and exceeding the 5% exploitation rate which is outlined in the muskellunge management plan. Seeing pictures of large fish does in no way outline the fishery as a whole. Not by lake or state. These blanket statements are ridiculous. Some ask how are we producing such large specimens if there are limited fish available. I think that question answers itself. With an abundance of rough fish available and limited competition these fish easily grow to mammoth proportion. Sure there are some waters that are doing well but these include waters with reduced harvest by means of longer season closures and higher MSL's.

MUSKIES HAVE EATEN ALL THE FISH IN MY LAKE
The comment I hear and shake my head at. "We used to get our limit every day but the muskies are eating everything". Who's eating who here? Would it be crazy to believe that you harvesting your limit instead of limiting your harvest is the reason for your dismal success? Muskies play an important role in maintaining a healthy aquatic community. They help keep the fishery balanced by eating the less desirable rough species like suckers and gizzard shad that compete with perch and walleye.

MORE MUSKIES DIE FROM CATCH AND RELEASE 
Don't know who came up with this. It would be silly to say that none die incidentally from CPR anglers but with modern practices and specialized release tools the chances of a successful release is extremely appreciable. Lets look at it in a perspective of any of the lakes in the Antrim or Indian Chain. Assuming a Catch and Release mortality rate of 3-5 percent (which is probably generously high on these waters) lets compare. If 5 fish are harvested in a single year by any method, it would take at least 5 years of incidental deaths to match that of harvest if 20 fish were released per year. 

MUSKIE NUTS ARE FORCING THEIR OPINION ON OTHERS
False. We are trying to educate. Our statements hold validity. We have educated ourselves on what it takes to have a quality fishery based on the management goals defined by the Michigan DNR. Its our job as sportsman/sportswoman to be stewards of the resources we use, and understand it before we exploit it.

Fact is there will always be opposition on both sides. Over Harvest will always be a problem if we don't take steps to educate ourselves and others. PLEASE BE OPEN MINDED. Take a second to hear your fellow man.

spread the word


----------



## mkroulik

I'm not a big musky supporter. I think a lot of money is being spent building a fishery for fish that probably less than 1 in 1000 fisherman fish for, and a fish that is not particularly good for the table. I would rather see that money spent on other stocking programs. Just my opinion.

Mike


----------



## scooter_trasher

they should plant some in the fly only holy waters, where they will be safe


----------



## mtrop

Well I just harvested a musky 
And did it with all legality 
I'm not ashamed at all I theythey we as sportsmen should not even start a post that are against each other and keep are opinions to oneself

By the way they are some of the best table fare you will ever have


----------



## triplelunger

mtrop said:


> Well I just harvested a musky
> And did it with all legality
> I'm not ashamed at all I theythey we as sportsmen should not even start a post that are against each other and keep are opinions to oneself
> 
> By the way they are some of the best table fare you will ever have


Congrats. 

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## sbooy42

dang it!!! I was hoping to see a picture of big musky....is it musky or muskie?


----------



## Tron322

mtrop said:


> Well I just harvested a musky
> And did it with all legality
> I'm not ashamed at all I theythey we as sportsmen should not even start a post that are against each other and keep are opinions to oneself
> 
> By the way they are some of the best table fare you will ever have


Congrats, i never have harvested a muskie, but target them...i dont expect to get one evwry trip like others apparently do.

Shame that so called sportsman cant just honor what another sportsman is doing legally rather than trying to divide the outdoor sports in general...does a better job hurting us than any anti group like PETA or Humane society evwr could.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Firefighter

Regardless of the argument, facts can be spun into tangled web to support whichever side. Spearing of musky accounts for far less mortality than delayed mortality from catch and release, and in spearing's case at least the fish is utilized. Are some populations too fragile for any type of human kill? Yes. Close them to all methods. Are some healthy enough for more? Yes. 

The thing I just don't get is all the hook and line fish that are harvested, but the "musky guys" never utter a peep. Where was the uproar when the world record ski was kept? What about all the guys holding big skis at boatlaunches in St.Clair? Pretty sure Selfridge and Metro shore fishing isn't that good. 

My point is, most "Knowledge Sharing" is cluttered with personal feeling and covered in hypocrisy.


----------



## Firefighter

And I'll add, the comments from the "Musky Guys" over the recently taken fish are some of the most vile, disgusting, and pitiful segments of word I have ever read on the internet (not from this site). They rival those on the boy that killed the albino buck in the fall. Violent threats about a fish? Really? How can a group be given much credibility when they cannot self-govern to prevent such radicals.

Keep letting them hurt your cause.


----------



## CaptainNorthwood

Life is grand when everyone acts the way I WANT them to act and DO as I WANT them to DO!!! Surprised it took this long for this thread to show up and I gotta say I am not surprised!


----------



## triplelunger

Keep stabbing those muskies! I don't spear, but I love seeing huge fish pictures. (I should start someday)

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## scooter_trasher

The way I understand the problem Muskie have is they are out competed by northern Pike, so I'll do all I can to help by eating every legal Northern I catch, cause I just want everyone to be happy and as far as Muskie go by the time they are legal they are long overdue for the table
and Pike don't eat perch either, that's why smerch make such good bait :lol:


----------



## SWMbruiser

I am pretty pro catch and release when it comes to muskie. But I think I would be lying to myself if I wouldn't have speared that pig if he swam below my hole. Its a fish of a lifetime and congrats to the fisherman.


----------



## zachattack

In the whitetail forums (I'm sure most of you've been there), they say "this is why I like the ice fishing forums, because there is no arguing" etc... I can see a debate of "which lure is better" or "leader or no leader on tipups", but seriously guys? You are gonna slam someone for catching and keeping a Muskie?! If I were out there fishing all day, I'd keep it (obviously if it was speared)!! 

Mtrop: Congratulations on your Muskie!! that surely is a fish of a lifetime!! Now go take a kid out and find a bigger one!


----------



## Revinchev

My only intention is to educate all so that we can unite and create a sustainable fishery for all to enjoy. I have no problem with legally harvested species of any kind. My only concern is if we don't take steps towards ensuring a sustainable fishery we all will lose. Take it for what it's worth. If anyone feels they need to turn this message into something it's not, feal free but remember that I didnt attack any method of harvest and did not single anyone out.


----------



## scooter_trasher

zachattack said:


> In the whitetail forums (I'm sure most of you've been there), they say "this is why I like the ice fishing forums, because there is no arguing" etc... I can see a debate of "which lure is better" or "leader or no leader on tipups", but seriously guys? You are gonna slam someone for catching and keeping a Muskie?! If I were out there fishing all day, I'd keep it (obviously if it was speared)!!
> 
> Mtrop: Congratulations on your Muskie!! that surely is a fish of a lifetime!! Now go take a kid out and find a bigger one!


You can't use kids for bait they outlawed that when they started protecting alligators


----------



## vano397

Firefighter said:


> Regardless of the argument, facts can be spun into tangled web to support whichever side. Spearing of musky accounts for far less mortality than delayed mortality from catch and release, and in spearing's case at least the fish is utilized. Are some populations too fragile for any type of human kill? Yes. Close them to all methods. Are some healthy enough for more? Yes.
> 
> The thing I just don't get is all the hook and line fish that are harvested, but the "musky guys" never utter a peep. Where was the uproar when the world record ski was kept? What about all the guys holding big skis at boatlaunches in St.Clair? Pretty sure Selfridge and Metro shore fishing isn't that good.
> 
> My point is, most "Knowledge Sharing" is cluttered with personal feeling and covered in hypocrisy.


I personally remember a lot of sad comments and comments about release from both of the last records. It was an unfortunate case that the last one was caught on 8 lb test and wasn't going to make it anyhow. I have no problem with that harvest as it was going to die anyway. I would say its a safe guess that someone catching a ski on that method in those circumstances is so rare that you can't even consider it in management and harvest talks. The facts are that there is a much greater concentration or the population in shallow water in the winter time, making seeing them in that 10% of the lake a lot bigger of a reality. Also comparing St Clair to to anything in the inland musky management conversations is both incommensurable and a little hurtful to you cause! regardless of harvest the winter regs have helped that lake more than anything else! Also, St Clair at this point can handle the small amount of harvest of the select few you chose to bring up. That point is almost as absurd as me bringing up the reported undersized harvest from people not being able to identify what they are spearing on lakes where both pike and muskies exist. It happens, but they are not the norm, and there is no use bringing it up in a discussion on responsible harvest levels in different populations of muskies. I would love to see an ounce of data to support the claims that more muskies die from hook mortality than from winter harvest (not inclusive to your method).
I can also assure you that this has nothing to do with pitting sportsman vs. sportsman, and everything to do with protection of drastically under-performing populations of fish. Basically its not the fisherman doing what the law allows, its why in the heck does the law allow it!


----------



## vano397

scooter_trasher said:


> You can't use kids for bait they outlawed that when they started protecting alligators


haha and that is funny! How about Chihuahua's???


----------



## Mr. Botek

I administer the other page which Firefighter made reference to. In the first 12 hours after Mark's trophy went public, I had a non-stop job of deleting and banning users. I'm glad I can't share with you all of the comments. They ranged from simple swearing, outraged personal attacks(vulgarity laden of course), to outright threats of violence. OVER A SINGLE FISH!

Pathetic.


----------



## Mr. Botek

vano397 said:


> haha and that is funny! How about Chihuahua's???


My uncle used to get Musky Hunter magazine. I liked the picture of a poodle hooked through it's sweater as bait on the back cover. Stunned there weren't protests over that from the ASPCA.


----------



## vano397

Mr. Botek said:


> My uncle used to get Musky Hunter magazine. I liked the picture of a poodle hooked through it's sweater as bait on the back cover. Stunned there weren't protests over that from the ASPCA.


I think that was a St Croix add. I wanted the t-shirt!


----------



## vano397

Mr. Botek said:


> I administer the other page which Firefighter made reference to. In the first 12 hours after Mark's trophy went public, I had a non-stop job of deleting and banning users. I'm glad I can't share with you all of the comments. They ranged from simple swearing, outraged personal attacks(vulgarity laden of course), to outright threats of violence. OVER A SINGLE FISH!
> 
> Pathetic.


And I agree, pathetic. Its not at all the fishermans problem that he did something totally legal. Its the question about whether it should be legal or not that haunts many of us. I hope to see proper regs on a lot of lakes in Michigan to where my grandkids can enjoy musky fishing with whatever method they choose.


----------



## zachattack

scooter_trasher said:


> You can't use kids for bait they outlawed that when they started protecting alligators



I'm sorry, when did this happen?!?! All these years I've been breaking the law?!?!?!


----------



## Mr. Botek

vano397 said:


> And I agree, pathetic. Its not at all the fishermans problem that he did something totally legal. Its the question about whether it should be legal or not that haunts many of us. I hope to see proper regs on a lot of lakes in Michigan to where my grandkids can enjoy musky fishing with whatever method they choose.


The decades of overharvest and market fishing are over, and muskie survived. Not only that but with better regulations they are doing better, and will continue to do so. 

Get over the fact that muskie are not immortal! They are not sacred. They are a fish, a renewable resource that properly managed can sustain some harvest.


----------



## vsmorgantown

Mr. Botek said:


> The decades of overharvest and market fishing are over, and muskie survived. Not only that but with better regulations they are doing better, and will continue to do so.
> 
> Get over the fact that muskie are not immortal! They are not sacred. They are a fish, a renewable resource that properly managed can sustain some harvest.


 
Exactly! My goodness....some people would have you think cancer could be cured if ONLY you wouldn't have killed that Muskie.


----------



## vano397

mkroulik said:


> I'm not a big musky supporter. I think a lot of money is being spent building a fishery for fish that probably less than 1 in 1000 fisherman fish for, and a fish that is not particularly good for the table. I would rather see that money spent on other stocking programs. Just my opinion.
> 
> Mike


Thanks Mike, that brings up a valid point about angler participation, and cost to the state. The numbers are a little hard to trace because the hatchery is going to spend the same amount of money no matter how much return they get. A few years ago the only got 7900 fish, those were some pricey buggers that were also a little on the small side to boot. But the last few year they have harvested 37k and 55k+. This makes them about $3-5/fish. Making the total expenditure by the state in the $150-200k range, not bad considering the the economic impact to the areas they are stocked, and also the overall cost of the hatcheries. I've seen their budget numbers from a while back in the $6-8 million range but that doesn't include a lot of stuff like overhead capital, among other costs... Basically the state $ is hard to follow, can't blame anyone for that:SHOCKED:

Anyhow, my point is that the cost of this program is fairly proportional to the cost of other programs, also with the new direction of the program and Great Lakes strain of muskies being stocked in lakes that had/have historical populations of those fish, there is an end goal, and that is the cost being eliminated completely to the state. Also the cost to the state of managing the Antrim Chain, and Indian River Chain are $0, and these are the two places most referenced in this debate. They are not able to stock these lake out of fear of crossing gene lines and doing more damage than not doing anything.


----------



## vano397

Mr. Botek said:


> The decades of overharvest and market fishing are over, and muskie survived. Not only that but with better regulations they are doing better, and will continue to do so.
> 
> Get over the fact that muskie are not immortal! They are not sacred. They are a fish, a renewable resource that properly managed can sustain some harvest.


New regs help a lot, in a lot of places. But the MSL on the inland water way and Antrim Chain are still very sub par. That change is a must, and would make me personally rest my case... almost  There is always the counterproductive harvest in lakes being managed as reintroduction/rebuilding programs...


----------



## Ice Scratcher

Mr. Botek said:


> The decades of overharvest and market fishing are over, and muskie survived. Not only that but with better regulations they are doing better, and will continue to do so.
> 
> Get over the fact that muskie are not immortal! They are not sacred. They are a fish, a renewable resource that properly managed can sustain some harvest.


Good post ^

IMO, I don't have a issue with guys harvesting anything that competes with pike, I love pike... As was also mentioned, by the time a ski is legal its past being good to eat....

I don't have the type of cash to hang a 50" fish on my wall so I'm more in the "more money for Northern Pike/Walleye stocking/management" corner myself...

There are guys out there that fly fish and believe casting besides a dry fly is taboo... I think they are a little off about what fishing is about.. But a lot of these Musky guys are making them look pretty good...

Also IMO, one should get to know the congregation at the church they just joined before they try to get everyone to come over to the one they want to start....

<*)))>{


----------



## vano397

Mr. Botek said:


> The decades of overharvest and market fishing are over, and muskie survived. Not only that but with better regulations they are doing better, and will continue to do so.
> 
> Get over the fact that muskie are not immortal! They are not sacred. They are a fish, a renewable resource that properly managed can sustain some harvest.


I will add one more thought to this. As you mentioned there were decades of over harvest. I am not sure that muskies were ever a viable market fishery, but what we are concerned about is the long lasting affects of the admitted decades of overharvest. Every year there is overharvest, the allowable amount of harvest decreases, making a lesser amount of harvest needed to constitute overharvest. It is my strong opinion that in the northern michigan natural lakes ANY harvest constitutes overharvest, but that is a little ridiculous and I know it. So, I will refer to the DNR concept of allowable harvest/exploitation, being a rate of 5%/year. When we have populations in the 100-200 acres per adult fish, that leaves us with an allowable harvest rate of 5-10 fish/year fish on a lake like Black Lake, and between .625 and 1.25 fish/year on a lake like Skegmog. We have accomplished both of those rates in the last two weeks, and that is only fish that were posted to social media, or reported to the DNR! So, have the decades of overharvest truly stopped???


----------



## Mr. Botek

vano397 said:


> I will add one more thought to this. As you mentioned there were decades of over harvest. I am not sure that muskies were ever a viable market fishery, but what we are concerned about is the long lasting affects of the admitted decades of overharvest. Every year there is overharvest, the allowable amount of harvest decreases, making a lesser amount of harvest needed to constitute overharvest. It is my strong opinion that in the northern michigan natural lakes ANY harvest constitutes overharvest, but that is a little ridiculous and I know it. So, I will refer to the DNR concept of allowable harvest/exploitation, being a rate of 5%/year. When we have populations in the 100-200 acres per adult fish, that leaves us with an allowable harvest rate of 5-10 fish/year fish on a lake like Black Lake, and between .625 and 1.25 fish/year on a lake like Skegmog. We have accomplished both of those rates in the last two weeks, and that is only fish that were posted to social media, or reported to the DNR! So, have the decades of overharvest truly stopped???


But of course catch and release fishing should be allowed to continue because that only kills a few, the true number of which nobody knows because some of it is delayed. Oh wait, someone addressed halting ALL muskie fishing as impossible in another thread. So some dead muskie, some of which may be sub-legal size, is okay since they weren't intended to die?


----------



## chuckinduck

First off let me start off by saying I have no issue with c&r fishing for musky or the sportsman that enjoy it. The ironic part is every c&r fish is put in harms way?? If the fishery is truly that fragile then all forms of fishing should be eliminated including c&r and spearing. Afterall that's why this thread was started. To protect the fishery right?? How many musky die on the bottom of a lake from the stress and riggers of a fight each year?? Probably a lot more then by someone with a spear. Oh and spearers dictate which fish dies unlike hook and line where are all at risk of the same fate.


----------



## BFTrout

to stir the pot further. . . there's another monster ski that was stuck out of skegmog last weekend. who can find the photo first?


----------



## pikedevil

I cannot believe we are discussing this again but tis the season I guess. 

Here is the Landsman study on hook and line mortality of muskies caught by angling.

http://www.muskiescanada.ca/articles/Landsman-et-al.-2011-MuskieC&R.pdf

Here is the Michigan Muskellunge Management plan if anyone would like to read it. 

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/dnr/ManagementPlanMuskellunge_344153_7.pdf

Now if catch and release does harm to the population than perhaps Mr. Botek can provide an explanation for why all the waters that see heavy spearing pressure are underperforming and below population management goals and the waters without spearing have met or exceeded population goals despite far more targeted Muskie fishing pressure on these waters. For example why is the population flourishing on Lake St Clair and Lake of the Woods Ontario despite them being world famous Muskie fisheries that draw thousands of anglers a year? 

Arguing that catch and release Muskie fishing damages the population more than spearing is ridiculous and refuted by every study and real world example you can point to. 

As for muskies surviving decades of overharvest, they are holding on in some areas, but what about the countless lakes and river systems where they have been eliminated? Great Lakes Muskies were native and abundant in all the drowned river mouth lakes, bays, and river system in Michigan, most of those populations are completely gone. If we continue to exceed 5% annual exploitation on the Antrim chain or lakes and the Inland waterway the fish will be gone, regardless of what regulations are on the books.


----------



## BFTrout

google the research done in MN comparing abundance and productivity of lakes open to musky harvest vs. lakes closed to harvest. that may give you a different perspective.


----------



## Mr. Botek

I never said catch and release is more harmful than spearing to a population. I said catch and release is not without harm. It was said that some waters are in such jeopardy that no muskie should be killed in them. What I said was fine, close them to all forms of targeted muskie fishing until such time that they can be reopened to keeping muskie by ANY METHOD. 

You all can twist and turn all that you want, the bottom line is what you are truly against is spearing/killing of muskie. That plays out that you are hypocritical in accepting a few dead muskie through catch and release mortality as long as no others can enjoy the resource. That's exclusionary, hypocritical and discriminatory.


----------



## pikedevil

Mr. Botek said:


> You all can twist and turn all that you want, the bottom line is what you are truly against is spearing/killing of muskie..


I'm not against killing muskies at all, but it has to be done in a scientifically sustainable manner, that means all anglers and spearers need do their part in not pulling the trigger so to speak on waters that are below management goals or where killing just a couple fish will exceed 5% exploitation rates. I personally don't like to fish the Antrim chain or the Indian River chain because there are so few fish left there that it is not any fun to fish. That and I don't want to risk hurting one (if I could even manage to catch one) until populations can rebound. I would love for that to turn into a fishery that both user groups can enjoy but as long as people continue to take the large breeding females out that will never happen. 

This is just common sense and basic biology, you don't shoot a 2 year old female deer in areas with extremely low population densities so why would you try and justify killing a 20 year old female fish in waters that are struggling?


----------



## Sprytle

Mr. Botek said:


> My uncle used to get Musky Hunter magazine. I liked the picture of a poodle hooked through it's sweater as bait on the back cover. Stunned there weren't protests over that from the ASPCA.


----------



## Mr. Botek

That's one of them Sprytle!

Before I get in deeper water, I'm against the use of live dogs as muskie bait&#128520;


----------



## Mr. Botek

Feels like deja vu all over again doesn't it pikedevil? Didn't we hash through all of this recently, and respectfully a short while ago?


----------



## pickle252

Will someone post a picture of this muskie please? I have looked and cannot see it.


----------



## vano397

scoot said:


> I'm new to all this musky stuff so bare with me but when I think of musky fishing I think of Minnesota and Wisconsin, not Michigan (with exception to LSC which I've heard is a good musky fishery). Shouldn't we emulate regulations that seem to be successful in other states? How do ours differ from theirs?


in a lot of situations we should. all lakes differ in content and how much they can hold, and some are at that level.
anyhow, minnesota has a season of 6/6-12/1 for 2015 and a minimum size limit of 54" which took affect this year. wisconsin has a season of the saturday nearest memorial day to 11/30 in the north, and the first saturday in may till 11/30 in the south. their minimum size limit is 40". And for the record since you mentioned st clair, the season there for michigan waters is June 7 thru 12/15, size limit is 42". Michigan has reduced harvest to 1 per season where the other states are 1 per day, as ours were until last season. Minnesota essentially eliminated harvest with the 54" size limit as only less than 1% of their catch is over that limit.

The one common denominator is a closed season from december thru close to june if not later.


----------



## Mr. Botek

Wisconsin also currently doesn't even allow pike spearing, but I've a feeling that will be changing before too long.

I think the one per season change is hoing to have a major positive impact.


----------



## pickle252

Thanks for sharing the photos!!!!! Dont know much about the fish in particular, just that my buddy catches them every now and then on lake st. Clair. Hope i can catch on that big one day!!


----------



## Dmatt

Mr. Botek said:


> You guys are all from the Rockford/Grand Rapids area. I drive through there daily. If you're ever interested in grabbing a drink and talking fish sometime, let me know. We just all might walk away a little wiser.


 I'll take you up on that Mr. Botek. I love both Founders beer and talking fish.


----------



## mkroulik

vano397 said:


> Thanks Mike, that brings up a valid point about angler participation, and cost to the state. The numbers are a little hard to trace because the hatchery is going to spend the same amount of money no matter how much return they get. A few years ago the only got 7900 fish, those were some pricey buggers that were also a little on the small side to boot. But the last few year they have harvested 37k and 55k+. This makes them about $3-5/fish. Making the total expenditure by the state in the $150-200k range, not bad considering the the economic impact to the areas they are stocked, and also the overall cost of the hatcheries. I've seen their budget numbers from a while back in the $6-8 million range but that doesn't include a lot of stuff like overhead capital, among other costs... Basically the state $ is hard to follow, can't blame anyone for that:SHOCKED:
> 
> Anyhow, my point is that the cost of this program is fairly proportional to the cost of other programs, also with the new direction of the program and Great Lakes strain of muskies being stocked in lakes that had/have historical populations of those fish, there is an end goal, and that is the cost being eliminated completely to the state. Also the cost to the state of managing the Antrim Chain, and Indian River Chain are $0, and these are the two places most referenced in this debate. They are not able to stock these lake out of fear of crossing gene lines and doing more damage than not doing anything.


If what you say is true, and I have no reason to doubt it than I guess I see no real harm in it. I personally would like to see it limited to certain lakes which it appears to be. I have no issue with anyone keeping any legally caught fish. If you want to clean it and use it, so be it. I personally don't know anyone that targets Muskie so my view may be skewed. It would be interesting to see out of every person that purchased a fishing license, how many targeted Muskie for at least one full trip. I'm guessing it's less than 1% but I will admit that I have 0 data to back that up. 

Mike


----------



## vano397

not sure how many licenses were sold, but there were 106700 musky tags issued. take that for its worth on how many used them. also i know a handful that fished muskies and didnt want the tag, so it might be a pretty accurate representation of participation. anyhow i also found last years budget for hatcheries at $9.1 million.


----------



## vano397

Mr. Botek said:


> You guys are all from the Rockford/Grand Rapids area. I drive through there daily. If you're ever interested in grabbing a drink and talking fish sometime, let me know. We just all might walk away a little wiser.


Ha, I guess I dodn't know where langston was! I too love beer, and fish, so any time. It's a long winter, and with the rivers mostly frozen lately its even longer...


----------



## AllSpecieAngler

vano397 said:


> not sure how many licenses were sold, but there were 106700 musky tags issued. take that for its worth on how many used them. also i know a handful that fished muskies and didnt want the tag, so it might be a pretty accurate representation of participation. anyhow i also found last years budget for hatcheries at $9.1 million.



You have to take into account that a lot of those tags were probably issued to C&R guys that had them just incase they had a fish that was going to die if released. Just saying a lot of the tags probably weren't even used. Do they require you to register it if you keep it? Seems that would make for good data on exactly how many are harvested and where. I've never fished for them so I don't know how that works...


----------



## Mr. Botek

Vano & Dmatt: I'm free this weekend, weather looks horrible. PM me a time and place. First one's on me.


----------



## Sprytle

Holy Crap! That fish almost looks unreal! Are there skis' in Mullet lake that big??

http://grandrapids.craigslist.org/spo/4850391007.html


----------



## vano397

AllSpecieAngler said:


> You have to take into account that a lot of those tags were probably issued to C&R guys that had them just incase they had a fish that was going to die if released. Just saying a lot of the tags probably weren't even used. Do they require you to register it if you keep it? Seems that would make for good data on exactly how many are harvested and where. I've never fished for them so I don't know how that works...


The intent of those numbers was that Mike had commented on the cost of the musky program compared to the participation. So I put the numbers up only to show how many people had an interest in fishing for muskies, or thought they had a chance to fish for them at least. I know I have zero intention of keeping one, but got the license to provide participation data to the DNR. Unfortunately they do not require you provide harvest info. It wasn't the intent of the tag, however it would be invaluable information!


----------



## Mr. Botek

Some people also may get tags that have no intention of participating at all. When the short lived dove tags where out, I got one (think they even cost) knowing I wouldn't get to the open areas to use the tag. 

While a voluntary reporting of tagging a muskie wouldn't be 100% accurate, it would be a step in the right direction.


----------



## sureshot006

AllSpecieAngler said:


> You have to take into account that a lot of those tags were probably issued to C&R guys that had them just incase they had a fish that was going to die if released. Just saying a lot of the tags probably weren't even used.


This is what I do. No intention to keep one but if it was keeper size and dying I would take it.


----------



## MISTURN3

and got the tag each time. I was amazed at the care that was taken to keep the fish alive and the speed at which they addressed a potential issue. almost think "mouth to mouth" would have been performed as a last resort  2 trips (total of 12 hours fishing) - 15 fish caught largest being 27#48".......between 4 of us.....all but one was a great lakes kind - I did pick up about a 26" Tiger last july along with quite a few nice smallies - every fish was released. to each his own - but my avatar shows a huge bass caught on a private lake on a tip up years ago - would have released it but it was gonna die and no way something that big 22" almost 10# was gonna go back and be fish food.


----------



## Special_Ed

I can tell you right now, that black lake has no shortage of muskie, I have fished that body of water for over 30yrs,I have property on the black river. I have never been skunked when targeting muskie on black lake or the upper black river, in fact, I can't recall ever catching any less than 3 on a trip. I have caught them incidentaly on many occasions as well. I do agree that they need to be released on many lakes that are less fortunate than black lake as far as numbers go. I release all that I catch as I don't eat them, but to say that black lake is less than .33 fish per acre is rediculous. I get a tag but never intend on using it unless I get one over 40lbs, then I might think about it, a fish that big has aged beyond spawning.


----------



## Mr. Botek

Special_Ed said:


> I can tell you right now, that black lake has no shortage of muskie, I have fished that body of water for over 30yrs,I have property on the black river. I have never been skunked when targeting muskie on black lake or the upper black river, in fact, I can't recall ever catching any less than 3 on a trip. I have caught them incidentaly on many occasions as well. I do agree that they need to be released on many lakes that are less fortunate than black lake as far as numbers go. I release all that I catch as I don't eat them, but to say that black lake is less than .33 fish per acre is rediculous. I get a tag but never intend on using it unless I get one over 40lbs, then I might think about it, a fish that big has aged beyond spawning.


Thank you for sharing your first hand experience.


----------



## Dmatt

Special_Ed said:


> I can tell you right now, that black lake has no shortage of muskie, I have fished that body of water for over 30yrs,I have property on the black river. I have never been skunked when targeting muskie on black lake or the upper black river, in fact, I can't recall ever catching any less than 3 on a trip. I have caught them incidentaly on many occasions as well.


How often do you specifically target muskies on Black Lake, where you are regularly catching more than 3 per trip and have never been skunked? This sort of success rate would be extremely rare for even some of our highest density waters. Just trying to get an idea of how frequently you fish for muskies with this sort of catch rate.


----------



## scoot

Over .33 muskies/acre? That's not even remotely accurate


----------



## jasonvkop

Special_Ed said:


> I can tell you right now, that black lake has no shortage of muskie, I have fished that body of water for over 30yrs,I have property on the black river. I have never been skunked when targeting muskie on black lake or the upper black river, in fact, I can't recall ever catching any less than 3 on a trip. I have caught them incidentaly on many occasions as well. I do agree that they need to be released on many lakes that are less fortunate than black lake as far as numbers go. I release all that I catch as I don't eat them, but to say that black lake is less than .33 fish per acre is rediculous. I get a tag but never intend on using it unless I get one over 40lbs, then I might think about it, a fish that big has aged beyond spawning.


You should probably start a guide service up there as tons and tons of people would come from all over the country if you can basically guarantee 3 muskies per trip. What is your biggest out of there and would you mind posting some pictures? I haven't seen too many fish caught up there besides ones during the winter.


----------



## sureshot006

Ya no kidding. Minimum 3 per trip is incredible. Not saying you're lying but to someone who fishes musky it sounds "fishy".


----------



## wyandot

How many guys really target them in Black Lk.? Burt or Mullet Lk.? How about Black, Cheb., Indian or Crooked river?


----------



## robhj

I've gone up to Mullett for 1-2 weekends each year for the past 10 years to fish mainly for muskies. I've personally witnessed 2 muskies caught in Mullett lake, and a few others caught in Cheboygan and Black Rivers. It is very low density. It may seem like higher populations of muskies are in those waters because of all the pictures you see every winter of speared fish. That is an inaccurate reflection of the muskie populations in those lakes. Muskies congregate in the shallower areas of lakes during the winter and stay there until after the spawn making them more easily exploited during the winter spearing season, especially the females which grow larger.


----------



## BigBucks13

scooter_trasher said:


> they should plant some in the fly only holy waters, where they will be safe


LMAO My thoghts exactly!


----------



## Fowlersduckhunter

mkroulik said:


> I'm not a big musky supporter. I think a lot of money is being spent building a fishery for fish that probably less than 1 in 1000 fisherman fish for, and a fish that is not particularly good for the table. I would rather see that money spent on other stocking programs. Just my opinion.
> 
> Mike


While I disagree on the table fare, the rest of this is spot on.


----------



## mtrop

Well if you call shallow water 17 ft deep 
All the musky I've seen and have seen taken came from 17 ft or deeper


----------



## mtrop

Should clarify this is on northern deeper lakes and up lakes


----------



## vano397

mtrop said:


> Well if you call shallow water 17 ft deep
> All the musky I've seen and have seen taken came from 17 ft or deeper


I would call anything less than about 20-24, on the top edge of the shelf on those lakes shallow. Most of the open water trolling bite on the lower chain is over suspended fish in 40+ fow.


----------



## robhj

mtrop said:


> Well if you call shallow water 17 ft deep
> All the musky I've seen and have seen taken came from 17 ft or deeper


Point taken, I should have clarified. "Shallow" is a very subjective term. Looks like if I ever want to spear a musky up "north" I should focus on water that is deeper than 17 feet.


----------



## mtrop

That would be a good start


----------



## mtrop

Most of the guys I know that speer usually target 8 ft or less of water


----------



## detroithardcore

Now that is impressive. I don't know anyone in the Muskie world who can claim 3 fish per trip. Even the best on St. Clair have been skunked from time to time. You need to be guiding if you can document Muskie on every trip (not excluding the accidental catches). I've pounded the Black and Cheyboygan Rivers for a week straight and saw one small Muskie. I've pounded Mullet as well for a week straight for a couple years in a row. I caught nothing but Pike. Lets see some of those awesome fish up that way! That's some of the best Muskie fishing I've heard of up that way! Congrats to you! Great job!




Special_Ed said:


> I can tell you right now, that black lake has no shortage of muskie, I have fished that body of water for over 30yrs,I have property on the black river. I have never been skunked when targeting muskie on black lake or the upper black river, in fact, I can't recall ever catching any less than 3 on a trip. I have caught them incidentaly on many occasions as well. I do agree that they need to be released on many lakes that are less fortunate than black lake as far as numbers go. I release all that I catch as I don't eat them, but to say that black lake is less than .33 fish per acre is rediculous. I get a tag but never intend on using it unless I get one over 40lbs, then I might think about it, a fish that big has aged beyond spawning.


----------



## jgeorge

isn't this like any other population of a species? it needs to be regulated and managed like any other group of animals. I know where that fish came from because I fish it every other day! I target walleyes specifically but that lake has fish that are very sizable taken every year! i'm guessing 4-6 fish a year that I would consider true monsters.. not to mention this has been going on for many years. one less fish to eat all my walleyes :lol:!! a true trophy!! congrats!


----------



## HCTE#86

pickle252 said:


> Will someone post a picture of this muskie please? I have looked and cannot see it.



Exactly


----------



## HCTE#86

HCTE#86 said:


> Exactly



Finally got to it. Congrats to the hunter. Once in a life time fish.


----------

