# Manistee River, Hodenpyl Stretch



## Whit1 (Apr 27, 2001)

There is some evidence that the MDNR used to plant fish after the season closed. I've been talking about researching that with Mark's help in MDNR records in the Cadillac office.


----------



## gunrod (Jan 16, 2001)

Correct me if I'm wrong but if the fish being planted are one year olds and we waited to plant them in Sept or Oct to avoid warm water problems for a while, wouldn't the fish survive the winter to be 2 year olds? I'd have to go back into the report to find out how old the plants are but I thought they were one yrs.

I agree that some would follow the trucks to catch the fish that have reached their limits. In reading the report it showed there may have been some success with the scatter plantings which would keep folks from fishing them out. Especially on the Manistee in this stretch considering it's 12 miles long. I'd be willing to help scatter fish from my boat if it would help and I could get the day off.


----------



## Shoeman (Aug 26, 2000)

I watched them plant trout on the White in Arkansas. Their "scatter planting" works something like this: They utilize a pontoon boat that's about 16-18' long. In between the pontoons there's a net with a small slot that is operated by a lever. The fish are dumped into the net and the boat travels down-stream, while shaking the plants out of the slot. This boat would cover several miles before returning to the launch. Sure it's labor intensive, but it does spread out the fish unlike some of our access points that harbor these fish for several weeks/months. Like Pat had mentioned, the survival of the fish seems to be greater in the Flower Flats section, which leads me to believe that through studies such as this, other stocking practices could lead to a better fishery without too much additional expense.

As for the hatcheries, all of us know that the DNR's plate is quite full with the constant stocking of the Great Lakes for the Salmon and Steelhead program. Then there's the walleyes, pike, bass and our beloved trout. Most other States do not suffer from trying to maintain those fisheries. 
Since hatchery space is at a premium, I'm sure that such studies will provide the info necessary to maximize our license dollars and the survival of the plants for years to come. Each system differs, coldwater influences dictate survival and there are no guidelines until the become established through studies such as Mark's. 

Nice work


----------



## Whit1 (Apr 27, 2001)

Ralph,
It's at times like this that you sound downright eloquent, demonstrating a masterful use of science, observation (a major part of any scientific method), deciphering, and a calm, rational, demeanor. No one would ever visualize you as "The Squirrel Monkey Man"........LOL!

Thanks for your input.


----------



## Steve (Jan 15, 2000)

Another issue in all of this would be what the fish look like after being in a pond so long. Many of us have seen the fish in the Huron this year and in years past and the beat up fins or missing fins are unattractive to say the least.


----------



## Shoeman (Aug 26, 2000)

Hi Milt 

I sure wished that Squirrel Monkey would have attached himself to someone other that myself. He was on me like a cheap suit. Maybe he sensed my "motherly instinct". LMAO Maybe it's because I was the Keeper of the jug. 

There are many things that could be done to improve our fishery, but with limited funds we're backed against wall. It's just good to see that studies are being performed to actually provide a window to see where the population stands as far as survival and growth rates. This is very important for the long-term. Hopefully his findings will be taken into consideration. This is essential for marginal waters.

I see that Mio came up in the study. I sure would love to see the numbers for that stretch. I stopped by there a few years back. It was in August and the temp at the dam was 78 degrees.


----------



## Steve (Jan 15, 2000)

I happened to look into the stocking numbers for Pennsylvania this year as I might be buying a visitor's license for a week in August. Seems they plant many more fish which are quite large in comparison to MI.


----------



## Shoeman (Aug 26, 2000)

It's a Zoo

This weekend is their opener. Keep an eye on the Bug Forum next week. A few members are fishing it. From the sounds of it, it's combat fishing at its finest.

I'm not sure if they have a deferred stocking program where they release fish several times a season, or if it's done once. I'll check into it. 
In some tailwaters like the Cumberland, it's stocked once a week. I never noticed any imperfections on the fins like we have in the Huron. The ponds must be lined and less abrasive


----------



## Steve (Jan 15, 2000)

From what I read it sounded like they stocked a couple times of year in some of the waters.


----------



## Whit1 (Apr 27, 2001)

Ralph,
I'm sure your duties as "keeper of the jug" had a great deal to do with your relationship (I'm sorry I wasn't there to see it) with The Squirrel Monkey Man. How do you feel about his "one night stand" manner of social relationships? LOL!

Back when I cut my trout fishing teeth, Michigan, having a much larger hatchery capacity than they now do, managed trout as a "put and take" fishery. They planted legal trout just before the season opened and on into May and June. Some fishermen (I use the term very loosely) would indeed follow the hatchery trout around, fishing shortly after it dropped its load at a bridge or access site and passed on down the road around the far bend.

My father and his buddies scorned "planters", as they called the hatchery fish. They would leave a stretch of river, usually the PM, Little Manistee, or Betsie, if all they were catching were planted fish, always a very easy thing to do.

As table fair the planters were unintereting, at best.

Now and then the MDNR would release some of their brood stock, larger, mature fish that, for whatever reason, were considered surplus in the hatchery system. I can remember as a lad reading (in the GR Press) about in one particular year, how fishermen were catching huge rainbow trout out of Log Lake in Kalkaska County (this was before many of you guys were born). The 'bows were up to five lbs. All were surplus brood stock.

One one bright, sunny, Saturday afternoon, Dad saw a large trout finning in Cedar Creek north of Grand Rapids. He cast, using night crawlers, to the fish which readily took the bait. Upon landing the fish, Dad found it to be a brook trout of 15" in length. The fish had the markings of a brookie, but not the color. He kept it, which was the norm back then. The flesh was your basic white and the fish had little flavor. It was a hatchery fish, released by the MDNR.

Ralph is correct about MDNR studies being important for our marginal trout waters. Mark and the guys with whom he works are to be commended for their recent studies of the Hodenpyle stretch as well as the Betsie R., another very marginal trout stream.

Dad and his buddies fished the Betsie in the '50s and I carried on fishing that river through the early '80s when the brown trout fishery dropped off to nothing. At one time the brown fishery in the upper Betsie was some of the best to be had, especially through the month of May. The trout were not native, but they were "wild", having been planted and then grown in the fertile waters of the Betsie. They were colored as any native trout, their flesh being a deep red/orange and made excellent eating.


----------



## TSS Caddis (Mar 15, 2002)

They used to scatter plant on the PM and Big M. As far as I know Schmidt quit doing on the Big M and I didn't think it was done on the PM anymore. If Ray quit doing it I'd imagine he wasn't seeing any fruit from the labor. Just a thought.


----------



## M. Tonello (Sep 20, 2002)

Here's my response to the questions about why we don't stock larger fish. I emailed some of my more knowledgeable co-workers in Fish Division for help with this one, and most of my response comes from them. Apparently, back in the 1960's and 1970's we used to stock fewer, but larger fish. We stocked what we called "legals", which from what I hear usually ran from about 8-10". This is called a "Put and Take" fishery. It created a "truck chasing" mentality, in which after a high-intensity, short-lived fishery, most of the hatchery fish were yanked, leaving little behind for holding over or for the rest of the season. Some of you have already mentioned this. We (Fisheries Division) apparently took a lot of flak for these practices back then, especially from groups like Trout Unlimited. 

At some point in the late 1970s, Fisheries Division made the conscious decision to move away from "Put and Take" to "Put, Grow, and Take". In other words, we'd stock more but smaller trout, and we'd only stock them where they have at least a chance of holding over or surviving to the next year. This got us away from the truck chasing mentality, and today we've progressed even further in that we no longer stock streams or stream reaches that get adequate natural reproduction. 

As you might expect, stocking the bigger trout was very expensive, and we were not able to stock nearly as many as we can by stocking yearlings. Luckily we have enough true trout water in Michigan that we can manage in this fashion, unlike other states that simply are not blessed with the cold water resources that we are. 

Hope this clear things up a little. Thanks for everyone's interest in this subject!


----------

