# Platte Bay Angler Access



## Far Beyond Driven

That launch is crazy in any kind of onshore wind and parking is a joke.


----------



## slightofhand

HeatherHettinger said:


> Well we really don't want all 800,000 to come back to the Platte- we stock them on the Platte River so that the pattern they have developed over the past 40 years is maintained- they congregate in the south end (warmer) of Lake Michigan in the winter/early spring, then gradually work their way up the shoreline as the water warms and bait begins to emerge/move around. This way as the fish progress north to the Platte in October pretty much every port along the Lake Michigan shoreline gets a crack at them out in front of their harbors/on the Bank at some point during the season.
> 
> Even with the ongoing issues and discussions with the Park Service, Platte Bay creates a really unique small boat fishery, kayak fishery, shore fishery, and river fishery. If you haven't come up to try it, you really should. We do have other nearby launches (Empire, Frankfort) so for boats over 18ft its a 20 minute boat ride to fish here. Smaller boats can be pushed over the river mouth bar- most of the time. You just have to be willing to get your feet wet...hopefully we can find some middle ground as a couple of the other folks on here have mentioned and continue public access here, not only for coho anglers, but lake trout and brown trout anglers as well.


Not true heather and this is a losing argument. These fish move south spring and move up the middle and Wisconsin shore only to squirt into platte in late fall. Look at the crappy creels on Michigan side after May as compared to Wisconsin and Illinois The pattern needs to be broken. This is dated stocking strategy designed to preserve jobs at the hatchery up there. Move all
Of these fish south and they will move east west and return to where they were stocked and provide river anglers a legitimate crack at them where angler access is much better. Platte is a useless location and needs to be completely abandoned. Feds are using a stupid bird to screw anglers. Time for mdnr to outsmart the Feds and move coho to where the fishermen are. And screw Wisconsin and Illinois freeloaders in the process....our dollars, our fish. End of story


----------



## TK81

mbirdsley said:


> Empire would be the closest and you can launch big boats there. But, it is straight into the lake no protection from a break wall if I remember. It’s right on the empire beach so also have to contend with tourists.


Yep. I have thought about launching there but it always seems to be 2 to 3 footers when I am there in the fall. Watched a guy attempt to launch a pontoon of all things one breezy afternoon. He actually got it off the trailer and made about 50 yards out before he made a sound decision to bring her back in. Two footers were rolling over his deck.


----------



## toto

slightofhand said:


> Not true heather and this is a losing argument. These fish move south spring and move up the middle and Wisconsin shore only to squirt into platte in late fall. Look at the crappy creels on Michigan side after May as compared to Wisconsin and Illinois The pattern needs to be broken. This is dated stocking strategy designed to preserve jobs at the hatchery up there. Move all
> Of these fish south and they will move east west and return to where they were stocked and provide river anglers a legitimate crack at them where angler access is much better. Platte is a useless location and needs to be completely abandoned. Feds are using a stupid bird to screw anglers. Time for mdnr to outsmart the Feds and move coho to where the fishermen are. And screw Wisconsin and Illinois freeloaders in the process....our dollars, our fish. End of story


Mostly true but be careful what you wish for. Last fall we were catching, or hooking at least, some really large steelhead, guess who planted those, Wisconsin. I don't know about you, but I think it's a fair trade. BTW, you do understand what Heather does for a living right?


----------



## slightofhand

toto said:


> Mostly true but be careful what you wish for. Last fall we were catching, or hooking at least, some really large steelhead, guess who planted those, Wisconsin. I don't know about you, but I think it's a fair trade. BTW, you do understand what Heather does for a living right?


We don’t trade. We stock for a return fishery to our tribs ....big lake guys get them and then trib guys should get them. What’s the use if your trib is garbage access like platte? Or other state big lake guys get your bounty. Heather probably works at the hatchery. I have heard enough complaining out of ppl
working at the platte hatchery already...they want to keep their fifedom. I get it. Put fish where anglers can access them. Put fish where the greatest economic impact will be. Too bad for glen arbor and empire....every port South of there is a thousand times more valuable and those communities can use the economic shot after the Feds have ripped away chinook stocking due to intentionally crashing alewife pops by over stocking lake trout. Bring down the coho. Bring down the Skamania, bring the kings down out of worthless Medusa. Put them where we can get them on the open water AND in large accessible rivers. Our stocking practices are not shocking, this is what you get when you put white coats in charge of a business instead of a business person who knows how to sell and market a product.. The fishery is the product. Put the fishery where your customers are and encourage them to come utilize it. Or be an idiot and stock a million fish in a ditch with no access and tell your customers to drive five hours and get their feet wet dragging boats over sand bars or beat the crap out of themselves driving 20 Miles by water. Sorry heather i am sure you are a nice person but step aside and let someone with more business acumen take control of this


----------



## toto

So if you want to stock cohos for economic benefit, how do you explain the fact that the village of Honor is so down trodden anymore. Especially since we plant too many coho there.


----------



## slightofhand

toto said:


> So if you want to stock cohos for economic benefit, how do you explain the fact that the village of Honor is so down trodden anymore. Especially since we plant too many coho there.


Honor empire glen arbor...cmon man. Those are drive thru towns. Those aren’t ports. Put the fisheries where there are multiple launches, marinas, bait shops, fish cleaning and plenty of river access for many miles up stream. Towns with infrastructure and lodging to support population influxes. Platte is a bunch of people who HATE fish and the fishermen who go there. Guys down south would KILL for a couple hundred thousand coho are you kidding me? Trib guys would go nuts for it along with big lake guys. Common sense is all that is required. Better and more efficient utilization of the resource


----------



## toto

Yes they are drive thru areas no question there, but not knowing how old you are; did you ever fish Platte back in the 70's? If so you can remember how many people used to fish there, both in boats on on the beach, you just don't see that anymore. As for port cities such as Frankfort for example, this port isn't dependant on coho or has it really ever been. Kings, Brown's, and steelhead have been the focus for a long time, so in that example cohos aren't needed there even though there are quite a few caught there. Kind of odd though that you would mention that the people around Honor don't want the coho, and you seem to be advocating the same thing. Things are fine the way they are, with the exception of a decent boat launch.


----------



## glucas

*Diamond Jim's in Empire used to be a destination of ours back then, also some place on the south end of Honor had all you could eat smelt. I think the Platte lake Assoc. griped about too many salmon and got big reductions in plants and the lack of fisherman doesn't help any of those "drive thur" towns but I like them! I had to quit coming up right before the Feds came in and screwed everything up. Started going to Olcott N.Y. But Michigan is way more pretty.*


----------



## Hose Puller

We'll put Toto. There is a lot of strong words being used by someone that I doubt has any type of fisheries degree. I don't have one either and don't claim to have the answers, but I will say this. I LOVE the Fall fishery that the Platte offers. Some of my fondest memories are fishing East and West Platte Bay. I make the run from Frankfort every year. When the coho are there, I am never alone. Seems like plenty of anglers find a way to take advantage of this great fishery. I am not always one to agree with the DNR's decisions, but I definitely appreciate what we have here. Thank you to all of those that work hard to maintain such a valuable resource.

Sent from my XT1254 using Michigan Sportsman mobile app


----------



## ausable_steelhead

Slightofhand never has any useful things to say. He just says to truck everyone else's fish down to where he fishes; like SW MI needs more fish...


----------



## gobluemike

toto said:


> Yes they are drive thru areas no question there, but not knowing how old you are; did you ever fish Platte back in the 70's? If so you can remember how many people used to fish there, both in boats on on the beach, you just don't see that anymore. As for port cities such as Frankfort for example, this port isn't dependant on coho or has it really ever been. Kings, Brown's, and steelhead have been the focus for a long time, so in that example cohos aren't needed there even though there are quite a few caught there. Kind of odd though that you would mention that the people around Honor don't want the coho, and you seem to be advocating the same thing. Things are fine the way they are, with the exception of a decent boat launch.


This is right on. Part of the attraction of fishing Platte Bay is it's remote feel. If we just had a decent launch for boats under 20ft, it would be perfect. Anything bigger can make the haul from Frankfort, but anything smaller will struggle, especially in any kind of wind. 

I think all most of us are asking for is a better compromise. We don't need a harbor or anything like that, just something more than 6 inches of water at the end of the river. I would gladly take one of the proposed new launch sites.


----------



## slightofhand

Great way to entertain your “customers” ....

“When the violent storm struck, more than 100 boats were swamped and others capsized in 25-foot waves.

The U.S. Coast Guard launched rescue crews. The state police used bullhorns from the beach, urging fishermen to return to shore.

The National Guard unit in Manistee was put on standby.

"It was pure hell," said William Jacobson, a marina owner who hopped aboard his 36-foot fish tug to help with the rescue, according to a UPI wire service story about the disaster.

"The waves were fantastic - like mountains."

Media at the time reported that at least 100 boats were "hurled ashore and beached on rocks and sandbars."

Of the seven people who died that day, the victims included people from Jenison, Grand Rapids and Wyoming. They included the bodies of two men found washed ashore on an Empire beach.”

Here’s a list of locations with first dibs on platte coho. Big sable, Whitehall, muskegon, Holland, Saugatuck, South Haven. Increases in GH also. Smart business, great returns, high participation, no deaths reported


----------



## slightofhand

ausable_steelhead said:


> Slightofhand never has any useful things to say. He just says to truck everyone else's fish down to where he fishes; like SW MI needs more fish...


Even screwballs like you stand to benefit. You got guys on your side fighting to move said coho to Lake Huron and the ausable. Like I said, get out of the way and let the smart people create your fishery for you. No more white coat only decisions, just common sense


----------



## ausable_steelhead

slightofhand said:


> Even screwballs like you stand to benefit. You got guys on your side fighting to move said coho to Lake Huron and the ausable. Like I said, get out of the way and let the smart people create your fishery for you. No more white coat only decisions, just common sense


I don’t need anyone to create a fishery for me. Unlike you, I can catch fish anywhere in the state. I don’t need them all in my backyard, so I can puff my chest out to people who really don’t care.

You’re not very witty, and come across as a complete bore.


----------



## toto

So, if I understand you correctly, we shouldn't have cohos in Platte bay because of a disaster years ago? Sounds like a weak argument to me. Did you once consider that the Platte is a better area than say GH, for example. I notice you only mention more southern ports, I guess those to the north of Platte, i.e. charlevoix, shouldn't get them? This is the same attitude I see out of other areas of our fisheries, me me me.


----------



## rlbyfd

IMO the difficult access at Platte River and Bay is due to the feds, not the state. Recreational fishing is not a priority for the feds whatsoever. I think the state would have that area dredged consistently if not for the feds. Access to the river below platte lake is pretty decent. It would make sense to have a launch within a few miles of the bay. It is such a beautiful spot that can be a darn good fishery as well. The state has put a lot of money into the salmon fishery over the years and the home base for coho isn’t exactly easy to access (big lake portion). I’ve fished this area for 30 years and had property in the park. The state is not perfect, but they are far from the problem with this issue and area. Has anyone here called they’re senator or congressman? Sometimes that can move the needle a bit. Just my 2 cents


----------



## Far Beyond Driven

It's a "destination fishery". Just like the browns that were moved from southern Lake Michigan to up north...


----------



## Far Beyond Driven

There's tons of access to the lower Platte. None of it is very conducive to good fishing though. Very little holding water and those who know where it is get there early.


----------



## Far Beyond Driven

How many boats go out of Charlevoix fishing on a given August Saturday? Grand Haven would be in the 100's. I doubt there's 100 salmon boats in Charlevoix, and most of those go out 3-4 times a year if that.


----------



## toto

Far Beyond Driven said:


> How many boats go out of Charlevoix fishing on a given August Saturday? Grand Haven would be in the 100's. I doubt there's 100 salmon boats in Charlevoix, and most of those go out 3-4 times a year if that.


 exactly my point, why would there be if there are NO salmon there to speak of. If a basis for any fishery is economics of a community, which I hate that idea BTW, then why not places such as Charlevoix? Just trying to use the same rationale as others.


----------



## JTRama

I vote for keeping it somewhat rustic like it is - it is a National Lakeshore.
Why does everything have to be a super duper shiny whiz bang facility for yachts.

There is plenty of boats that somehow launch there (Platte) - some days too many.

There is a growing kayak fishery and plenty of area to wade fish.
There was I think about 10k Coho harvested at Traverse wier last fall and there was plenty of Coho swimming around Frankfort. SO it is not like there is a local shortage of Coho in the region.

This is why I like Sleeping Bear - it is a little more remote and rustic.


----------



## mbirdsley

JTRama said:


> I vote for keeping it somewhat rustic like it is - it is a National Lakeshore.
> Why does everything have to be a super duper shiny whiz bang facility for yachts.
> 
> There is plenty of boats that somehow launch there (Platte) - some days too many.
> 
> There is a growing kayak fishery and plenty of area to wade fish.
> There was I think about 10k Coho harvested at Traverse wier last fall and there was plenty of Coho swimming around Frankfort. SO it is not like there is a local shortage of Coho in the region.
> 
> This is why I like Sleeping Bear - it is a little more remote and rustic.


I’m not saying we need a boat launch to launch 30ft charter boats at the mouth with gas docks and slips. But, as it been said it would be nice just to get 14 ft tin boat through the sand bar with out chipping your out board or burning up an impeller. The locals have a hard enough time doing it let alone somebody not familiar with the mouth area. If you could get decent access there it would be a boon to the local area.

Right now riverside canoe is basically the only businesses benefitting from the river and that is only memorial to Labor Day. If feds would just put a little effort into it would be s great small boat fishery 

There is no reason with as far as run it is from Frankfort or Empire why there can not be decent access to platte bay. Even if they moved the launch out of the river and farther east into the bay it’s self it would be fine. If the river was really low or just to iffy I would not make the run from empire in my tin can.

The coho plants should stay in the Platte.


----------



## rlbyfd

^^^^This X2


----------



## Far Beyond Driven

Waders. Problem solved. Says the guy who has pushed / pulled his 14' out of there many a time.


----------



## fishfray

The NPS ("the feds") have an agenda against two things: fisherman and non-native species. The last thing they will do is help increase angler access for Pacific salmon in any way, shape, or form in the national lakeshore. The DNR is not the problem here, and they aren't fans of the NPS either from what I know 

Sent from my Pixel using Michigan Sportsman mobile app


----------



## slightofhand

ausable_steelhead said:


> I don’t need anyone to create a fishery for me. Unlike you, I can catch fish anywhere in the state. I don’t need them all in my backyard, so I can puff my chest out to people who really don’t care.
> 
> You’re not very witty, and come across as a complete bore.


Be sure to express your disinterest in increasing fishing opportunities for your fellow anglers at the next Lake Huron advisory committee....chest beater. On second thought, don’t say anything, nobody is listening to you anyway lmao


----------



## slightofhand

toto said:


> exactly my point, why would there be if there are NO salmon there to speak of. If a basis for any fishery is economics of a community, which I hate that idea BTW, then why not places such as Charlevoix? Just trying to use the same rationale as others.


Charlevoix is not a fishing port. They could give a rats ass about salmon and fishermen. They don’t even want them there. That’s cheese and wine country


----------



## slightofhand

mbirdsley said:


> I’m not saying we need a boat launch to launch 30ft charter boats at the mouth with gas docks and slips. But, as it been said it would be nice just to get 14 ft tin boat through the sand bar with out chipping your out board or burning up an impeller. The locals have a hard enough time doing it let alone somebody not familiar with the mouth area. If you could get decent access there it would be a boon to the local area.
> 
> Right now riverside canoe is basically the only businesses benefitting from the river and that is only memorial to Labor Day. If feds would just put a little effort into it would be s great small boat fishery
> 
> There is no reason with as far as run it is from Frankfort or Empire why there can not be decent access to platte bay. Even if they moved the launch out of the river and farther east into the bay it’s self it would be fine. If the river was really low or just to iffy I would not make the run from empire in my tin can.
> 
> The coho plants should stay in the Platte.


Okay you can have 5000 Coho to support the 5 guys stupid enough to drag boats over sand bars. Hope that’s enough Jesus a million you get now and you still can’t come close to utilizing the resource. The rest of the fishing friendly ports in the state will divvy up the remaining 995k. Except wherever dB ausable fishes, he can catch them when they aren’t even there lol.


----------



## toto

One million fish return to the Platte, didn't know that. The fact is, that isn't even close. Do they plant close to that, yes in some years they do, doesn't mean that many return. They catch them like crazy down by St. Joe in the early spring, and catch them all kinds of ports along the West Coast of Michigan. You can go to the Betsie in the fall and catch a lot of em, but wait that isn't possible, they don't plant cohos, or kings for that matter in the Betsie. As for the use of Charlevoix, apparently you are getting the example, go ahead and pick your port north of Platte, it was an example. Basically slight, once again, your just PO'd about something, don't know why, don't care frankly, but don't take it out on us, or the DNR for doing what they believe in, even if it is against your opinion.


----------



## slightofhand

toto said:


> One million fish return to the Platte, didn't know that. The fact is, that isn't even close. Do they plant close to that, yes in some years they do, doesn't mean that many return. They catch them like crazy down by St. Joe in the early spring, and catch them all kinds of ports along the West Coast of Michigan. You can go to the Betsie in the fall and catch a lot of em, but wait that isn't possible, they don't plant cohos, or kings for that matter in the Betsie. As for the use of Charlevoix, apparently you are getting the example, go ahead and pick your port north of Platte, it was an example. Basically slight, once again, your just PO'd about something, don't know why, don't care frankly, but don't take it out on us, or the DNR for doing what they believe in, even if it is against your opinion.


Not taking anything out on anyone. Stating the cold hard facts. A ditch in the nw portion of our state with the worst angler access both from the lake side and the tributary side....and receives the highest number of salmon stocked than any other location in the state by a WIDE margin. It’s outrageous, unjustified, wasteful and quite frankly dereliction on the part of the DNR. Again, look at the creel on the Michigan side after May for coho. It’s garbage compared to what is stocked at platte. Wisconsin and Illinois benefit, and then the five guys who fish platte in the fall. Stock those fish directly in all the ports up and down the shoreline and buckle up for the stampede of economic impact on those communities as those fish return to their rivers for all Michigan anglers to enjoy. For far too long the DNR has bent to special interests like yourselves, hording state resources for your own little playground in your back yard. It’s time to spread the wealth around. And I can assure you it will happen. Enjoy what you have and expect to receive much less in the future. No way no how any justification for that special interest deal you guys have going on up there. It’s going to come crashing down to the benefit of the rest of the state. And it’s about time.


----------



## toto

5 guys on the Platte? When were you there Last? You don't see the beach fisherman like you used to, nor do you see boats like you once did, but let tell ya, when it comes to people fishing river there are PLENTY, day and nite.

The good news, the DNR has just announced a new coho program. They have hired animal trainers in an effort to train cohos to not go to Wisconsin. Furthermore these fish will be trained to only run in rivers south of Ludington. They will be fitted with shock collars and mini GPS devices; should a coho venture into wisconsin waters, the collar will shock them back to michigan waters. They will also have the same shock should they venture north of Ludington. Sound better to you?

BTW just what special interest am I involved in that has anything to do with cohos? I'm only conjecturing that DNR should be left to make those decisions using sound science, is that too difficult to understand? Why do you think the great lakes states have an agreement on how many fishshould be planted? Do you think Wisconsin fish only stay in Wisconsin? Your argument is so unrealistic, I'm just flabbergasted by the sillinness of it.


----------



## slightofhand

toto said:


> 5 guys on the Platte? When were you there Last? You don't see the beach fisherman like you used to, nor do you see boats like you once did, but let tell ya, when it comes to people fishing river there are PLENTY, day and nite.
> 
> The good news, the DNR has just announced a new coho program. They have hired animal trainers in an effort to train cohos to not go to Wisconsin. Furthermore these fish will be trained to only run in rivers south of Ludington. They will be fitted with shock collars and mini GPS devices; should a coho venture into wisconsin waters, the collar will shock them back to michigan waters. They will also have the same shock should they venture north of Ludington. Sound better to you?
> 
> BTW just what special interest am I involved in that has anything to do cohos? I'm only cinjecturing that DNR should be left to make those decisions using sound science, is that too difficult to understand? Why do you think the great lakes states have an agreement on how many fishshould be planted? Do you think Wisconsin fish only stay in Wisconsin? Your argument is so unrealistic, I'm just flabbergasted by the sillinness of it.


Ignorance is bliss eh Toto? It’s called a RETURN FISHERY. Get it? Salmon RETURN TO WHERE THEY ARE STOCKED SO PEOPLE CAN CATCH THEM. You sure are fighting to defend your fifedom up there at platte so i am going to assume you too work at the hatchery. Coho will return to where they are stocked, and guys will catch them there....instead of driving to bfe platte river with no access. I can’t think for you anymore Toto but I can leave you with a piece of advice...unplug your keyboard.


----------



## toto

Nah won't unplug. The simple fact is, you act as though ALL cohos return to the Platte, not true, or even close. No I don't work at the hatchery, but I use a ittle knowledge to debate my point, unlike yourself using emotions and very well I might add, to make your point. Your point BTW seems to be that you know more than a highly educated biologist. Frankly I could care less where they plant them as I don't fish them all that much. As I said, take a look at the Betsie plenty of cohos run that river, want to take a guess at how many have ever been planted there? Answer: zero. Cheer up, if you get good grades in school may be daddy will bring you up here. For the record, you really should do a little more research and explain where, why, when, and how many cohos should be planted elsewhere. I'm sure the DNR will abide by your demand since you obviosly know more than they do. One more thing, you statement about bfe platte pretty much tells us all.what we suspected all along, you dont want to make the drive up here, I get that. You seem to be jealous that we, some of us anyways, have been blessed enough to live in this area, its a choice we all made at some point on our life. You too have that option too, but you'd rather p and m about no cohos in.my backyard.:gaga::gaga:


----------



## Hose Puller

Slightofhand, there is a lot more to it than just thinking all of our salmon go to Wisconsin. Spring winds dictate a lot. From my experience, and I am no expert, East spring winds set up bait on the Michigan shoreline. Last years east winds set up incredible salmon fishing thru most of June while the Wisconsin boys struggled. If we see lots of west winds, like 2016 the baitfish move to Wisconsin waters and so do our salmon. Many years you can follow the coho right up the Michigan shoreline. It was almost like clockwork. They would show up in Ludington around mid July, Manistee early August and Frankfort just before Labor day. Granted there are years that they do go up the center of the lake or Wisconsin shoreline. That isn't the DNRs fault. If you planted 1 million coho at St Joe then the northern guys wouldn't get much of a shot at them. Sorry the DNRs agenda doesn't fit your scientific decision making, but they are doing what they feel right to maintain a great fishery and I commend them for their efforts.

Sent from my XT1254 using Michigan Sportsman mobile app


----------



## fisheater

slightofhand said:


> Not taking anything out on anyone. Stating the cold hard facts. A ditch in the nw portion of our state with the worst angler access both from the lake side and the tributary side....and receives the highest number of salmon stocked than any other location in the state by a WIDE margin. It’s outrageous, unjustified, wasteful and quite frankly dereliction on the part of the DNR. Again, look at the creel on the Michigan side after May for coho. It’s garbage compared to what is stocked at platte. Wisconsin and Illinois benefit, and then the five guys who fish platte in the fall. Stock those fish directly in all the ports up and down the shoreline and buckle up for the stampede of economic impact on those communities as those fish return to their rivers for all Michigan anglers to enjoy. For far too long the DNR has bent to special interests like yourselves, hording state resources for your own little playground in your back yard. It’s time to spread the wealth around. And I can assure you it will happen. Enjoy what you have and expect to receive much less in the future. No way no how any justification for that special interest deal you guys have going on up there. It’s going to come crashing down to the benefit of the rest of the state. And it’s about time.


More kings are planted in Swan Creek than any other Lake Huron port. There zero shore access as it is a large piece of private property. 
It is a long paddle from Rogers City. Part of the reason for the Platte River location is to secure brood stock. It also allows small boat anglers close to shore access to deep water. It also is a uniquely beautiful location.
I wish they planted browns in southern Lake Huron, but I am not in charge, and it isn't just about me.
S of H, I wish you and all a safe and productive season.
Peace


----------



## slightofhand

fisheater said:


> More kings are planted in Swan Creek than any other Lake Huron port. There zero shore access as it is a large piece of private property.
> It is a long paddle from Rogers City. Part of the reason for the Platte River location is to secure brood stock. It also allows small boat anglers close to shore access to deep water. It also is a uniquely beautiful location.
> I wish they planted browns in southern Lake Huron, but I am not in charge, and it isn't just about me.
> S of H, I wish you and all a safe and productive season.
> Peace


Good luck to you as well fisheater. I’m not a fan of the Swan situation either, they got theirs coming as well. Times they are a-changing


----------



## glucas

slightofhand said:


> Good luck to you as well fisheater. I’m not a fan of the Swan situation either, they got theirs coming as well. Times they are a-changing


gees what a dush


----------



## slightofhand

Hose Puller said:


> Slightofhand, there is a lot more to it than just thinking all of our salmon go to Wisconsin. Spring winds dictate a lot. From my experience, and I am no expert, East spring winds set up bait on the Michigan shoreline. Last years east winds set up incredible salmon fishing thru most of June while the Wisconsin boys struggled. If we see lots of west winds, like 2016 the baitfish move to Wisconsin waters and so do our salmon. Many years you can follow the coho right up the Michigan shoreline. It was almost like clockwork. They would show up in Ludington around mid July, Manistee early August and Frankfort just before Labor day. Granted there are years that they do go up the center of the lake or Wisconsin shoreline. That isn't the DNRs fault. If you planted 1 million coho at St Joe then the northern guys wouldn't get much of a shot at them. Sorry the DNRs agenda doesn't fit your scientific decision making, but they are doing what they feel right to maintain a great fishery and I commend them for their efforts.
> 
> Sent from my XT1254 using Michigan Sportsman mobile app


Who said anything about a million coho in st
Joe? Thanks for putting words in my mouth. Fact is the DNR is getting it and already has started to peel coho away from the clutches of a select few and sharing them with the good people of Ludington, muskegon and Saugatuck. Those anglers not only now have the legitimate and wonderful opportunity of catching those fish nearshore in the spring and offshore in the summer, they also will get them back in their rivers in the fall. The DNR is to be applauded for such forward thinking business prowess. Looking forward to more in the future and spreading the rest of them to the awesome ports and tributaries to the south and also on Lake Huron. Michigan anglers around the state have much to look forward to now that the blinders have been removed from the DNR and those with self serving interests have been exposed! Hatchery employees included!


----------



## blackghost

So great! The DNR is stocking more coho down south. What are you actually arguing about then?

Fact is they need to continue to stock such a high number in the Platte because of the varying returns. Some years returns can be very poor.

Also, there's a lot of fisherman who fish the Platte.


----------

