# Best winter steelhead river?



## huntnfish247

Hi everyone, I was just wondering what you guys think the best steelhead river would be in the winter or early spring? I am looking to book a float trip but I dont really know what the best river would be? any info on good guides would be great too! Thanks guys

Aaron


----------



## -Axiom-

On the West side, Manistee, Betsie, Pere Marquette, and Muskegon.


----------



## REG

Here's two guides to start with:
http://www.hutchinsguideservice.com/
http://www.gettingbitguideservice.com/

Both these guides fish multiple rivers. Best advise to you would be to pick the date and let them advise on the river. They'll know what's hot.


----------



## Boozer

Had no idea Greg Knapp "Getting Bit Guide Service" was guiding like that, guys a fishing machine, would be well worth your money...

Didn't know Hutch guided either like that, cool!


----------



## Up-Stream

Check out troutscout.com Capt. Lance definetely knows the big manistee river. went out with him a few times this winter and we have boated double digits every time out, with one amazing day of 29 fish landed. he books up, so I'd act soon.


----------



## [email protected]

If you're looking to fly fish, Brian Pitser, who owns The Northern Anglers is the best there is. I've fished with him a number of times and he knows the river better than anyone. He's also a lot of fun tos spend the day with on the water. [email protected]. Good luck!!


----------



## samsteel

hit the Mo


----------



## thousandcasts

Boozer said:


> Had no idea Greg Knapp "Getting Bit Guide Service" was guiding like that, guys a fishing machine, would be well worth your money...
> 
> Didn't know Hutch guided either like that, cool!


Greg Knapp...Fishing Machine. That's the understatement of the year. :lol:

I personally have nothing but the utmost respect for his abilities to catch fish.


----------



## samsteel

thousandcasts said:


> Greg Knapp...Fishing Machine. That's the understatement of the year. :lol:


yeah, you can't go wrong with Getting Bit Guide Service or Hutchins Guide Service.


----------



## Fishslayer5789

Don't the Mo and the Grand get the two largest returns of steelhead in the state? I like the Mo in March and the Grand in November, but both are plenty fun to fish all winter long.


----------



## thousandcasts

Fishslayer5789 said:


> Don't the Mo and the Grand get the two largest returns of steelhead in the state? I like the Mo in March and the Grand in November, but both are plenty fun to fish all winter long.


Not the Mo. If you're talking plant #'s it's only around 55K per year. Whereas The Grand and St. Joe get 80K + 

If you're talking simple numbers, then no way would I say the Mo gets one of the largest returns in the state.


----------



## ausable_steelhead

> Not the Mo. If you're talking plant #'s it's only around 55K per year. Whereas The Grand and St. Joe get 80K +
> 
> If you're talking simple numbers, then no way would I say the Mo gets one of the largest returns in the state.


Mmm....how is it one of the more popular steelhead rivers then? All three of those get good runs, throw in the Manistee and those are the better rivers(for numbers). Hutch, I think you need a week on some of the water I fish, then I think you'll appreciate what you got for fish bro.


----------



## wintrrun

Best winter steelhead river???
That's simple. 
The one that finally sees an increase in flow from runoff or snow melt.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Steelheadfred

I was much more tuned into the Winter Steelhead scene when I lived in GR, and to be honest the Grand and the Joe have to be the best steelhead rivers in the state followed very close by the Mo and the Big Manna. 

I remember the glory days of winter time fishing on the PM in the late 90's before the weir ruined that place. Never been much of a fan of the PM for a variety of reasons, but it sure was peaceful on warm winter days without much pressure and it was very very consistent.


----------



## thousandcasts

ausable_steelhead said:


> Mmm....how is it one of the more popular steelhead rivers then? All three of those get good runs, throw in the Manistee and those are the better rivers(for numbers). Hutch, I think you need a week on some of the water I fish, then I think you'll appreciate what you got for fish bro.


I'm not complaing one bit and I do appreciate every single fish I hook. I feel sincerely blessed and fortunate that I'm a half hour at most from several launches on two different major rivers. 

The Muskegon gets a GREAT run, but would I consider it better than the Joe or Grand? Nope. That's what my point is, no more, no less. It's right there with the Big M and definitely in the top five, no doubt. 

As for its immense popularity--that's something that's really only come about in the last five years or so. If you want to know why that is, see the Pere Marquette for reference and then apply the same principle to the Mo.  :lol:


----------



## Steelheadfred

thousandcasts said:


> I'm not complaing one bit and I do appreciate every single fish I hook. I feel sincerely blessed and fortunate that I'm a half hour at most from several launches on two different major rivers.
> 
> The Muskegon gets a GREAT run, but would I consider it better than the Joe or Grand? Nope. That's what my point is, no more, no less. It's right there with the Big M and definitely in the top five, no doubt.
> 
> As for its immense popularity--that's something that's really only come about in the last five years or so. If you want to know why that is, see the Pere Marquette for reference and then apply the same principle to the Mo.  :lol:


Hutch,

The PM collapse did not help either in that fashion.


----------



## thousandcasts

Steelheadfred said:


> Hutch,
> 
> The PM collapse did not help either in that fashion.


Not to sound like an *** or anything because I truly don't know and I'm asking on honest question here, but did the lamprey barrier really have that big of a negative impact on the steelhead runs or are there other factors involved as well?


----------



## plugger

thousandcasts said:


> Not to sound like an *** or anything because I truly don't know and I'm asking on honest question here, but did the lamprey barrier really have that big of a negative impact on the steelhead runs or are there other factors involved as well?


 Everyone likes to blame the lamprey barrier but I dont think it had as near as big an effect as discontinuing planting steelhead. The natural reproduction while significant does not provide near the numbers that plants and natural reproduction combined for.


----------



## thousandcasts

plugger said:


> Everyone likes to blame the lamprey barrier but I dont think it had as near as big an effect as discontinuing planting steelhead. The natural reproduction while significant does not provide near the numbers that plants and natural reproduction combined for.


That's why I'm asking...because it seems to me that lower steelhead numbers aren't just a PM thing. The Little M returns are lower, the Muskegon fishery isn't the same as it was a few years go, etc.


----------



## riverman

I'm going to have to disagree with mike on the wier. It disrupted migration both up and DOWNSTREAM. All you had to do was look over the bridge in June and early July. Will never convince me it didn't take a toll on smolts dropping down to the lake also. Another factor that gets discussed by those that have fished the river for years is certain gravel areas that USED to have tons of fish and now only see a few returning. Has overfishing those certain spots over the years decreased the return rate to that specific gravel? Many of us believe it has. Would love to see the river get some plants, close fishing in March and first three weeks of April Wally up, for a couple of years and see what happens. I have a feeling alot of folks would be very surprise at how fast that river could recover and provide some outstanding fishing.


----------



## Sam22

Boozer said:


> You can thank the bottled water companies for a large part of our water going away...
> 
> I can tell you this, there is a few feeder streams of the Joe that flow about half of what they used to when I was a kid, seem to flow less and less every year.
> 
> Yet another reason I wouldn't want to bring a child into this World, going to hell and quick...


Bottled Water? Are you serious? What about irrigation for farms and golf courses? Evaporation from reservoirs? Rapid run off due to deforestation and erosion? 

I can't even imagine how anyone would blame bottled water for serious ground water depletion.  Where did you get this idea?


----------



## Fishslayer5789

Sam22 said:


> Bottled Water? Are you serious? What about irrigation for farms and golf courses? Evaporation from reservoirs? Rapid run off due to deforestation and erosion?
> 
> I can't even imagine how anyone would blame bottled water for serious ground water depletion.  Where did you get this idea?


 
BAHAHAHHAAA!!!!! I was thinking the same thing.......hmmmmm where did all this water go???? I KNOW!!! We *DRANK *it all!!! This is basic environmental geology here.....I learned this stuff in high school and freshman year of college!:lol::lol::lol: Assuming that bottling water has even a moderate effect on ground water depletion is simply a reflection of being uneducated. Agriculture is the #1 reason that we lose our ground water.


----------



## Boozer

I suggest you guys do some research on how many millions of gallons of water is taken out of Michigan for bottled water...

I never said it was the only reason, but it is something which has just came about in the last few years "and keeps expanding", where as everything you guys speak of has been happening for ages and most of it is a natural process.

What I was getting at is, bottled water unlike irrigation where some of it ends up back in the environment, once it's pumped out for bottled water, it's gone completely.

Typical young lads, very narrow scope on things and only seeing what you want to see.

Agriculture is not taking from our ground water 24/7/365 like bottled water plants are and there are proposals for more and more of these plants are on the table, more specifically, they want to take more water from the sources of some of our West Michigan rivers...


----------



## mcfish

Fishslayer5789 said:


> BAHAHAHHAAA!!!!! I was thinking the same thing.......hmmmmm where did all this water go???? I KNOW!!! We *DRANK *it all!!! This is basic environmental geology here.....I learned this stuff in high school and freshman year of college!:lol::lol::lol: Assuming that bottling water has even a moderate effect on ground water depletion is simply a reflection of being uneducated. Agriculture is the #1 reason that we lose our ground water.


What a classy response to a post. What, you didn't learn civility in high school or your freshman year of college?


----------



## Boozer

mcfish said:


> What a classy response to a post. What, you didn't learn civility in high school or your freshman year of college?


Ahhh not a big deal...

I think that people fail to realize just how much demand there is for bottled water WORLD WIDE and that this is a real threat to our ground water supplies as Michigan is a HUGE attraction for these companies...


----------



## Boozer

Ron Matthews said:


> USGS said it was Wisconsin, Milwaukee specifically.
> the whole upper Mississippi drainage in general.
> I'll see if I can find it....


I wonder if that has anything to do with the beer companies sucking massive amounts of ground water out to produce beer?

May or may not, but when you say Milwaukee has a shortage of ground water, all those beer factories come to mind.


----------



## Ron Matthews

You know it..... It's a thirsty world out there! The worse the economy the more beer is sold -fact-

Legislation going to allow tanker pump ships from other parts of the world to come fill and transport fresh water from the Great Lks to places like Saudi Arabia via the St. Lawrence channel, 10 million gallons at a time? 

water diversion into the Mississippi river has really increased also, Pres says it's needed to maintain commerce traffic along the water way

bottle plants using millions of gallons of ground water, pumping every day... Day after Day...... 

with no ice on Lk Mi, it looses like 11' a season due to evaporation alone I've read.

Everyone out west wants our water?


----------



## brookies101

mcfish said:


> What a classy response to a post. What, you didn't learn civility in high school or your freshman year of college?


 "BAHAHAHHAAA!!!!!". ..... I was wondering the same thing. It was the type of response that makes alot of these threads head in the wrong direction. No need for it, jmo


----------



## -Axiom-

Water that never leaves the watershed isn't wasted or lost.
When water is bottled and shipped out of the watershed it is lost.


----------



## Sam22

True Axiom....but evaporated water can leave the system too.


----------



## Shoeman

At one point even the wading anglers will realize that cycling water draws fish

Constant flow or flow of the river has done squat for the runs or the silting


----------



## Boozer

Sam22 said:


> True Axiom....but evaporated water can leave the system too.


That would be a largely natural cycle with the exception of agriculture where some of the water would leave the system.

However, what you failed to understand from your text books is this is not the corn belt so to speak and there is much less irrigation needed here than many other places and farmers are irrigating, what maybe 2-3 months each year?

Saying agriculture plays no negative role would be false, but at the rate things are going, bottled water plays an extremely serious threat to our ground water supplies. Those pumps are running non-stop and they wantto build more and more of these factories everyday...


----------



## METTLEFISH

Help re plenish ground water supplies... pee outside !..... it doesn't snow like it did when I was a kid iether... then again my knees are 12" higher too !....


----------



## Fishslayer5789

In the grand scheme of things, bottling water wouldn't even make the list of major threats to ground water levels depleting. I found it halarious earlier because that's like saying "Where are all of our fossil fuels going? I know! We are using them to start too many campfires!" 

Here's some facts: 

The main reasons that account for our loss of ground water are agriculture, industrial use, and domestic use. 99% of water used in your home is NOT from drinking it. A lot of people do not use bottled water, so realistically, you are probably doing a lot more damage to the ground water levels by drinking water in your own home, not to mention showering, watering your lawn, using a toilet, etc. The United States uses* 50 BILLION gallons of water* every day for agricultural purposes alone. I was simply baffled at the fact that people were jumping at blaming something as ridiculous as bottling water being any kind of a serious threat to ground water depletion, when in fact it has a minuscule effect. The next time you go golfing, you can think of all that ground water it took for you to play on a nice green course. I completely agree that my last post was not "classy", but it is difficult to not be exasperated at such a ridiculous conclusion that can be facilely downturned by common knowledge.


----------



## Fishslayer5789

Boozer said:


> Typical young lads, very narrow scope on things and only seeing what you want to see.


Narrow scope, or well-educated on modern science. I attend one of the hardest academic schools in the state and am pretty confident that I'm not being sent in the wrong direction when I'm paying $36,000 a year.


----------



## -Axiom-

Perhaps you should do some research into watersheds and drainage basins.
Research the water cycle while you are at it.

In all of your examples of domestic and Agricultural water use the water remains in the watershed.
When you extract water from the ground, bottle it, and ship it out of the watershed, well it doesn't return to the watershed.

Pretty simple stuff.


----------



## Boozer

Fishslayer5789 said:


> Narrow scope, or well-educated on modern science. I attend one of the hardest academic schools in the state and am pretty confident that I'm not being sent in the wrong direction when I'm paying $36,000 a year.


The original post was about Michigan, you are using figures from the ENTIRE country, hence VERY different regions/climates.

You are also using figures from places like Los Angeles, New York, etc... that have a MUCH higher population than Michigan ever will. Not to mention Florida and California which grow MASSIVE amounts of food 12 months out of the year.

I would also love to know where I stated that bottled water was the only thing depleting ground water.

Anyway, typical kid, it's cool I don't care...


----------



## Ron Matthews

44 bottle companies in Mi alone!


----------



## Boozer

Ron Matthews said:


> 44 bottle companies in Mi alone!


Each pump at these factories is pumping over 500 gallons per minute 24/7/365 and most factories have multiple pumps.

So 41 factories...

It's not just some minute amount of water that should be getting ignored.

10 years from now if these companies have it their way, this number will be doubled or tripled.

Most of Nestles plants produce over 260 million gallons of water each year. Most of which is being taken from the sources of many of our most treasured rivers.

This is water that NONE makes it back into the system, much is shipped half way around the World...


----------



## -Axiom-

One of the reasons there is a water problem out west is because they are taking water from outside the watershed, and the places they are taking it from are low on water because it isn't being replenished.


----------



## Boozer

-Axiom- said:


> One of the reasons there is a water problem out west is because they are taking water from outside the watershed, and the places they are taking it from are low on water because it isn't being replenished.


I remember when I was in San Diego, Christmas Day they had sprinklers going...

Here in Michigan with our climate/population, we likely use 10% of the water a state like California uses each year, maybe even less, so with his claims of how much water is used everyday, then you look at the numbers of gallons of water leaving the state everyday in little bottles, doesn't seem like such a minute amount...


----------



## Fishslayer5789

The situation that needs to be addressed about ground water supply is the fact that the Great Lakes Region is exporting water to places such as Las Vegas for irrigation and domestic use (which I think someone may have mentioned in this thread). That water is the water that does not come back to us. The demand for water used for agriculture, irrigation, and domestic use will always account for nearly all the water that gets used. Bottled water companies may pump 500 gallons of water per minute, but they will only supply what people demand. Nestle may be able to sell 500 gallons of water per minute, but multiply that by 44 companies and that assumes that they are selling off 31,680,000 gallons per day of drinking water. Let's assume that 25% of the people in the U.S. are drinking water that is being shipped out of michigan on a daily basis (which I would be willing to bet is far more than the percent of the population that consumes bottled water regularly). That would mean that each of those people were drinking 3 to 4 bottles of water each day on top of their tap water supply. The United States as a whole consumes 8.6 billion gallons of bottled water per year, which means that only a touch under 236 million gallons of water are being sold every day. That is also under the assumption that those 44 factories are supplying the entire nation's demand, which is also incomparibly higher than the demand of any other country in the world. Nearly all of that water is consumed in the United States rather than being exported. Exported bottled water would be extremely expensive given the fact that the weight of a water shipment would be tremendous. If those bottling companies are pumping 31,680,000 gallons of water per day and the market for water is only demanding 236 million gallons per day, then there would be no possible way or reason that a water bottling companies would continue to pump out a quantity of water that was equivalent to 150% of the market's demand on a daily basis. There are hundreds of bottled water suppliers throughout the country that compete with Michigan companies, which would imply that we are not losing even close to the numbers I listed. Yes, we lose water from these bottling companies, but the vast majority of the problem is the agriculture, irrigation, and domestic consumption. A loss of 50 billion gallons of water for agricultural purposes every day is a lot more than 31 million gallons, which is only 0.0006% of the amount used for agriculture. If we were to downscale the issue to a smaller area of focus, you wouldn't see a whole lot of difference.

P.S. This is a pretty fun debate. It's helping me pass time as I'm clicking back and forth from editing my Global Strategic Management powerpoint presentation. Gotta love business


----------



## Boozer

There is a much higher demand to ship bottled water globally than one would think.

We do not send our water out West for irrigation purposes.

You keep forgetting to take into consideration that much of the water used for irrigation, showers, etc... ends up back into the ground. Where as bottled water does not.

If they are not using the current factories to their fullest potential, then why do they keep wanting to build more?

Anyway, done arguing, no sense to it...


----------



## Robert Holmes

The good old USA is shipping water around the world for what probably about $15 a barell and we are buying oil for $110 a barell. Am I missing something here? Oh, yea good old USA. That is right. I am sure that Obama will keep the middle east in water.


----------



## Boozer

Robert Holmes said:


> The good old USA is shipping water around the world for what probably about $15 a barell and we are buying oil for $110 a barell. Am I missing something here? Oh, yea good old USA. That is right. I am sure that Obama will keep the middle east in water.


Middle East actually is not in need of water for the most part, those countries have enough money thanks to oil production they can afford desalinization to obtain their water from salt water...

Not all of the countries, but the major oil producing ones anyway...


----------



## Benzie Rover

keeping up with the 'topic de jour' on this thread is harder than figuring out which hole the next pod of chromers will be in! 

but as to water withdrawl and the nestle plant, you need to look at the situation at hand to understand what is actually threatened by that operation... our State wide groundwater supplies can not be impacted by a single water bottling plant... no matter how much the 'pump and ship'... Industrial scale Ag operations routinely pump more water out of the ground, but most of that does end up back in teh Great lakes basin... not all, but most... food processing plants/manufactuers use a lot as well... but again, the cumulative impact of these withdrawls and uses does not account for the depletion in our primary groundwater aquifers... we are in a long-term drought folks! Over a decade of below average precip leads to lower groundwater recharge... that is the problem here. Ineffecient uses of the water we have only helps to speed up the problem, but is not the problem. Note, we can not do anythign about the problem though, so we should probabaly figure out how to slow our consumption, or at least recycle it better within our watershed. 
BUT, please understand the REAL threats of the nestle plant... when those pumps run full bore, the groundwater springs that supply the Standwood bottling plant are visibly lower... like instantly lower... been there, watched it myself... and they need to pump from directly underneath the spring outflows so they can call it 'spring water'... this is why Dasini and other bottled water is OK for the environment, relatively speaking... that is surface water that has been filtered... (not saying if it is smart to pay someone for tap water, but hey, at least it is not being sucked out from undernearth our brookies and browns!) *luckily* though, Nestle has not yet followed through, YET, on it's original plans to pump from the headwaters of #[email protected]#$@ Creek (small trout stream trib to the mainstem Muskegon that some locals would freak if I named)... if you saw the # of 15-20" browns we shocked from that SMALL (8-12' wide) stream, people would flip out... seriously good trout stream... instead they are still using the original spring source inside the big hunt club, and that spring actually feeds into a small bluegill/bass lake before going into the north branch of the muckegon, so it is not nearly as big of a coldwater killer as the spring source to the north) BUT, if Nestle opens up that pipeline to the north and starts pumping from underneath those headwater springs, than that individual stream will be hurting, big time... does that hurt all of the Great Lakes? no, not at all... but would it suck to loose one of this states highest quality small-stream brownie populations? I sure think it would be a crime of the highest magnitude!


----------



## RML

What was the topic of this post ?? Way, Way, Way off topic but I'll bite. I like this rant...The PM is the best winter steelhead fishery .. I'll throw that in the hat. Back to the rant..

Oil is @ around $85-87 a barell currently CNBC..Yes our water is being sold out of OUR country the USA by foreign owned Companys getting rich off our resource. Water should be traded Barrel for Barrel for Oil.. But our goverment is a bunch of *****s..

Our water is being lost at millions of gallons a min.out of Lake Michigan to the good old Illinois water way full of Asian Carp.That water makes it's way to the Mississippi and is used for AG along the way. If there is a active pipeline which I TOTALY believe there is from the Mississippi west underground to TX,AZ,NV,NM,CA...Why do you think they will not close the canel " shipping". Las Vegas would dry up along with the rest of the desert if's it's closed..It's likely the Mississippi would be to shallow for shipping without the Great Lakes water as well.. It's all just a theory :16suspect...

The rest of the water drains out in the Gulf of Mexico and is lost..Anyone ever wondered why the Great Lakes has been getting lower and lower sence 1930 when they reversed the flow of Lake Michigan for shipping and sewage for Chicago..The world largest reserve of fresh water is being flushed down the toilet literaly..


----------



## Shoeman

Bottom line:

We're stuck with marginal flows. blame farming, water thieves, dams, ect.

No need to "wish for change", but it would be nice. We're stuck with what we've been reduced to. Lower plant numbers, lousy returns, poor management, whatever....

Better face it. Life is short. I've seen the demise of the Au Sauble. If I would have waited I would have lost a portion of my life looking for things to improve

For you young bucks (yeah, the ones that still have energy to chase these fish), DO IT

Many of us old timers gave up, although we still get few each year. It's just not THAT important any more

I still enjoy looking back at pictures of 10-20 fish days during brutal conditions. Now I might make one or two trips a year just to get my fix

The only constant in life is change... adapt!


----------



## Fishslayer5789

Shoeman said:


> For you young bucks (yeah, the ones that still have energy to chase these fish), DO IT


I plan on it!  Gotta get it while you still can!


----------



## Fishslayer5789

RML said:


> I like this rant...


I second that. It has definately provoked some interesting insights.:chillin:


----------



## TrekJeff

270 million gallons/year...nah shouldn't have any effect.... it would equate to around .5% of the volume of Hougton Lake.


----------



## Fishndude

I just ran a quick calculation about water flows, and will tie it to the Big Manistee river. It flows around 1250 cfs on average, year round.

1250 CFS x 60 seconds (in a minute) x 60 minutes (in an hour) x 24 hours (in a day) , then it flows 108,000,000 cubic feet of water/day. That is 108 *million*. That is one river that flows into one of our Great lakes. 

1 cubic foot = 7.48051948 US gallons

So that one flow would produce 807,896,104 gallons of water in a single day. More than double what our county consumes in bottled water in a year. I really don't think bottling water is the issue. Changing weather? Yes. Too little precipitation? Yes. Too much evaporation, compared to the historic averages? Yes. 

I have to think the Big Man and the Mo would vie for being the most productive rivers for winter Steelhead fishing anymore. Maybe they are just guided more, and I see the reports from guides on them more?


----------



## REG

Fishslayer5789 said:


> The situation that needs to be addressed about ground water supply is the fact that the Great Lakes Region is exporting water to places such as Las Vegas for irrigation and domestic use (which I think someone may have mentioned in this thread). That water is the water that does not come back to us.


This statement got my attention and I would kindly ask for some kind of verification on that; also, how that meets this agreement/law:
http://www.cglg.org/projects/water/CompactConsent.asp
http://www.startribune.com/local/11592456.html


----------



## Boozer

Fishndude said:


> I just ran a quick calculation about water flows, and will tie it to the Big Manistee river. It flows around 1250 cfs on average, year round.
> 
> 1250 CFS x 60 seconds (in a minute) x 60 minutes (in an hour) x 24 hours (in a day) , then it flows 108,000,000 cubic feet of water/day. That is 108 *million*. That is one river that flows into one of our Great lakes.
> 
> 1 cubic foot = 7.48051948 US gallons
> 
> So that one flow would produce 807,896,104 gallons of water in a single day. More than double what our county consumes in bottled water in a year. I really don't think bottling water is the issue. Changing weather? Yes. Too little precipitation? Yes. Too much evaporation, compared to the historic averages? Yes.
> 
> I have to think the Big Man and the Mo would vie for being the most productive rivers for winter Steelhead fishing anymore. Maybe they are just guided more, and I see the reports from guides on them more?


Except you are comparing natural water flow to something completely un-natural and something that takes that water out of the region/country.

Not to mention, if bottled water plants were to dry up the aquifers which supply rivers like the Big Man, well think about it... 

Bottled water is not the only threat, but not something to be ignored either...

The Big Man and Mo are good producers of steelhead, however, nothing can compare to the Joe, the Summer steelhead program is the reason for that though. If comparing just Winter fish, may be different...


----------



## Trout King

> So to re-iterate my opinion; steelhead fishing is better on the mo or white but steelhead catching is often better on the Grand. Hopefully that clears up my point for ya TK
> 
> Read more at Michigan-Sportsman.com: Best winter steelhead river? - Page 3 - The Michigan Sportsman Forums http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/showthread.php?t=367592&page=3#ixzz1DfEwM3pv/QUOTE]
> 
> I get ya scoot. I understand about the fishing and catching differences. I'm still holding my opinion that the Grand is good fishing, as well as catching. There is a lot of water between Lansing and Grand Rapids. I spend more time out that way. Eagles, deer, turkeys, and other wildlife sightings are abundant. Each system has it's own special qualities. I love the PM in the winter also! Probably the prettiest waters I've seen have been in the UP...fishing is slower but well worth the trips.


----------



## bigfisherman

Hard to say really, It depends on the year regional weather patterns, ice cover, lots of factors. Any of these rivers can hold thousands of fish but with ice over head they are hard to catch...

As much as I hate to say it for the average angler without a boat it would probally be a toss up between the Joe and the Grand depending on how the weather came in and Ice. The Big Man is usually going to be pretty consistant with good numbers but pretty limited without a boat and Muskegon can be really good or just ok in the sections that are accessable to the regular angler. 

Overall the top river every winter probally a moving target but going to be one of the larger systems on the west side. Smaller water can be good but not nearly as consistant.

oh ya on the other topic water draws- bottled water is statistically insignificant regionally water levels aquifir levels but can be very detrimental to small localized environments such as described by the one in mid michigan because of the fact that it can affect the key cold water springs that make a specific system productive or not. This is not limited to bottled water it is any high usage factor directly near a source of a spring and this is were aggriculture has a much larger effect than they are given. Depending on the type of irragation time of day and type of crop much more of that water is lost to evoporation, and evotranspiration (sp? loss through plants) than anyone is realizing. And that water is rarely put back into even the regional aquifier it came from. You irrigate when it is dry, when it is dry is when you lose the most water, when it is dry that moisture goes with the wind. that air mass rarely drops the water back into the environment except during winter. the most common times when evoporation leads to moisture is lake effect snow and lake effect rain (a fairly rare occurance). So don't think that watering lawns, fields or anything else doesn't have an effect. Water lawns does much more damage locally regionally than bottled water. If you doubt it water your lawn in peak of a drought with a sprinkler it is hard to keep the grass even wet let alone get water past the roots to the ground water or to even saturate the soil enough to make mud. When designing irragation systems for waste water treatment plants the are very involved calculations that are made to figure the amount of water you are actually putting into the ground based on a mulittude of factors. Also don't think because water goes into the soil that it is recharging the aquifier it takes a substatial amount of water depending on lots of factors like soil type vegitative cover, etc to get a drop down to recharge anything.


----------



## Boozer

bigfisherman said:


> Hard to say really, It depends on the year regional weather patterns, ice cover, lots of factors. Any of these rivers can hold thousands of fish but with ice over head they are hard to catch...
> 
> As much as I hate to say it for the average angler without a boat it would probally be a toss up between the Joe and the Grand depending on how the weather came in and Ice. The Big Man is usually going to be pretty consistant with good numbers but pretty limited without a boat and Muskegon can be really good or just ok in the sections that are accessable to the regular angler.
> 
> Overall the top river every winter probally a moving target but going to be one of the larger systems on the west side. Smaller water can be good but not nearly as consistant.
> 
> oh ya on the other topic water draws- bottled water is statistically insignificant regionally water levels aquifir levels but can be very detrimental to small localized environments such as described by the one in mid michigan because of the fact that it can affect the key cold water springs that make a specific system productive or not. This is not limited to bottled water it is any high usage factor directly near a source of a spring and this is were aggriculture has a much larger effect than they are given. Depending on the type of irragation time of day and type of crop much more of that water is lost to evoporation, and evotranspiration (sp? loss through plants) than anyone is realizing. And that water is rarely put back into even the regional aquifier it came from. You irrigate when it is dry, when it is dry is when you lose the most water, when it is dry that moisture goes with the wind. that air mass rarely drops the water back into the environment except during winter. the most common times when evoporation leads to moisture is lake effect snow and lake effect rain (a fairly rare occurance). So don't think that watering lawns, fields or anything else doesn't have an effect. Water lawns does much more damage locally regionally than bottled water. If you doubt it water your lawn in peak of a drought with a sprinkler it is hard to keep the grass even wet let alone get water past the roots to the ground water or to even saturate the soil enough to make mud. When designing irragation systems for waste water treatment plants the are very involved calculations that are made to figure the amount of water you are actually putting into the ground based on a mulittude of factors. Also don't think because water goes into the soil that it is recharging the aquifier it takes a substatial amount of water depending on lots of factors like soil type vegitative cover, etc to get a drop down to recharge anything.


You still keep forgetting to take into consideration that irrigation/agriculture is not a huge impact IN THIS STATE, especially considering a lot of it doesn't come from ground water...

Most farms have irrigation ponds so technically they get water from excess rainwater or they have pumps near local watersheds "lots of them here on the Joe". Also, irrigation takes place here in Michigan, maybe two months out of the year.

Then you "and others" keep bringing up natural cycle stuff, which cannot be included persay as it's all part of the natural cycle. When you begin trying to determine a significant threat to say ground water supplies, you are going to want to exclude natural processes as much as possible, which leaves non natural things at the blunt end of the threat. In those terms, bottled water would pose a threat as would agriculture, but in this state, agriculture is not as big of a threat as say it would be in Nebraska, the large percentage of fields in this state used for farming are not even irrigated...

Anyway, in the grand scheme of things, doesn't really matter, that is how I look at it anyway, not trying to argue big guy, especially since I want one of your bamboo rods!


----------



## bigfisherman

Boozer said:


> You still keep forgetting to take into consideration that irrigation/agriculture is not a huge impact IN THIS STATE, especially considering a lot of it doesn't come from ground water...
> 
> Most farms have irrigation ponds so technically they get water from excess rainwater or they have pumps near local watersheds "lots of them here on the Joe". Also, irrigation takes place here in Michigan, maybe two months out of the year. *I grew up working on a farm we had both pond and well irrigation, lots more irrigation comes from wells than you think but yes many are from surface waters. This impact is many orders of magnitude when compaired to bottled water. There are plenty of farmers that do it right out of creeks and troutstreams and dry them right up except for pools where the holes are. *
> 
> Then you "and others" keep bringing up natural cycle stuff, which cannot be included persay as it's all part of the natural cycle. When you begin trying to determine a significant threat to say ground water supplies, you are going to want to exclude natural processes as much as possible, which leaves non natural things at the blunt end of the threat. In those terms, bottled water would pose a threat as would agriculture, but in this state, agriculture is not as big of a threat as say it would be in Nebraska, the large percentage of fields in this state used for farming are not even irrigated... *We are not depleting our ground water at the rate close to out west and our recharge time is much less but we do have impacts. Watering lawns is not a natural cycle and almost always comes from ground water as most municiple sources and rural sources are ground water select coastal cities or those connected to then like detroit are the only ones pulling out of lakes rivers as well as a few isolated communities that pull from inland lakes or impoundments. When I am talking about evopotransporation I am not talking about it as a natural process I am talking about it with regard to irrigation specifically.*
> 
> Anyway, in the grand scheme of things, doesn't really matter, that is how I look at it anyway, not trying to argue big guy, especially since I want one of your bamboo rods!


see above


----------



## Robert Holmes

How did this inquiry about steelhead go to pulling the plug on the bathtub? Anyway the best steelhead river is the one you are fishing when you are fishing. Like tomorrow I will be fishing steelhead on the ***** River. If it does not produce i may switch spots.


----------



## Boozer

Robert Holmes said:


> How did this inquiry about steelhead go to pulling the plug on the bathtub? Anyway the best steelhead river is the one you are fishing when you are fishing. Like tomorrow I will be fishing steelhead on the ***** River. If it does not produce i may switch spots.


It's Winter and we are bored as hell, at least that's my whole issue...

Always fun to have a Friendly debate, can learn a lot that way...


----------



## Neapolis

I second that Ralf. At my age it is a major accomplisment getting out. Catching them is still a hoot though. I find that it is easier to move closer to the fish.

_OutdoorHub Mobile, the information engine of the outdoors_


----------



## wdf73

I agree that the best river in the state is whichever one you can fish. 
I don't claim to have studied and researched, (never went to college) but it seems I remember from science class that water never leaves the environment. Doesn't it simply cycle back into the system again? If that is the case, which state or country is suddenly seeing their water table rise 10 feet?
I would also be a bit skeptical about the claimed difference from 100 years ago. How did they measure the water table back then? 
Maybe the same way Grandpa measured the distance he had to walk to school in the winter......through 10 feet of snow...........uphill both ways?:lol:


----------



## Fishslayer5789

REG said:


> This statement got my attention and I would kindly ask for some kind of verification on that; also, how that meets this agreement/law:
> http://www.cglg.org/projects/water/CompactConsent.asp
> http://www.startribune.com/local/11592456.html


Certainly. *"**Throughout the West, South, and Midwest, groundwater is pumped out to irrigate crops, aquifers are drying up, and farmers and politicians are looking to the Great Lakes as a source of water.

Governor Bill Richardson of fast-growing New Mexico has called for the diversion of Great Lakes water to dry areas of the country.

Population growth in New Mexico and other rapidly-developing states in the hot, dry South and West is driven by the sunny climate and booming economy. Water shortages have been a fact of life in these regions for decades." *Las Vegas is in the same situation right now. I originally became aware of this from a 2008 discussion in my Environmental Geology course. This was from 2 years ago, and there is still tons of controversy on the issue. I'm trying to figure out if any water diversion has actually occurred as of today. If not yet, the likelihood of it happening is very high. Those laws protecting the great lakes water may very-well get changed if it is "for the good of the people" if you can even donate the time of day to call it that, especially for Las Vegas lol. The link to the rest of this article can be found at http://www.citymayors.com/environment/us-great-lakes.html


----------



## Fishslayer5789

Boozer said:


> It's Winter and we are bored as hell, at least that's my whole issue...
> 
> *Always fun to have a Friendly debate*, can learn a lot that way...


I agree. Just be thankful that Sam and I are here to give them a jump start. If no one said anything, it would have ended at "bottled water".


----------



## Boozer

Fishslayer5789 said:


> I agree. Just be thankful that Sam and I are here to give them a jump start. If no one said anything, it would have ended at "bottled water".


You still aren't getting it.

Not one of you have been able to give solid evidence that bottled water is not a threat "which a threat is all I ever claimed it was, not the only thing using our ground water". Bottled water takes water from our ground water, it is a largely unregulated industry and they are wanting to build more and more of these plants here all the time, now tell me young lad, how does this not pose any sort of threat to our ground water supplies? Half the statements you have made were false in regards to this state and you still are failing to recognize the difference between natural cycles and non-natural. Not to mention you are failing to recognize how little the amount of irrigation that takes place in Michigan.

You have stated all these valid reasons for ground water being used, but NOT IN THIS STATE.


----------



## Boozer

Fishslayer5789 said:


> Certainly. *"**Throughout the West, South, and Midwest, groundwater is pumped out to irrigate crops, aquifers are drying up, and farmers and politicians are looking to the Great Lakes as a source of water.
> 
> Governor Bill Richardson of fast-growing New Mexico has called for the diversion of Great Lakes water to dry areas of the country.
> 
> Population growth in New Mexico and other rapidly-developing states in the hot, dry South and West is driven by the sunny climate and booming economy. Water shortages have been a fact of life in these regions for decades." *Las Vegas is in the same situation right now. I originally became aware of this from a 2008 discussion in my Environmental Geology course. This was from 2 years ago, and there is still tons of controversy on the issue. I'm trying to figure out if any water diversion has actually occurred as of today. If not yet, the likelihood of it happening is very high. Those laws protecting the great lakes water may very-well get changed if it is "for the good of the people" if you can even donate the time of day to call it that, especially for Las Vegas lol. The link to the rest of this article can be found at http://www.citymayors.com/environment/us-great-lakes.html


You stated we ARE exporting water out West, where does it say that in this?

I will answer that for you, it doesn't because we aren't "unless you consider the exportation of bottled water"...

$36,000.00 a year on college and you can't read?

Since your 2008 discussions in your class, there has been even more laws passed to keep our water from ever being sent to the Southwest. Not saying there is zero chance it will ever happen, but at this time it is not an immediate threat, nothing to be ignored though.


----------



## Shoeman

Screw all that speculation as for a cause

The Lake is stressed, the stockings are down and the bankies pushed for a constant flow. No fluctuation in flow, no run... Simple!

Now we get a blow-out in Spring and they keep it running. By the time the water gets back to normal, many of the fish have come and gone.

Shelf ice was something that may last for a week tops. Increase of flow and it would blow it out. Now it's there until they decide to raise the water in March.

I enjoy reading all the comments, but most of them are from guys that are new to the sport and are grasping at straws.

Start working the dams like they were designed to do. Oh wait, we can't do that..... yeah now we really have silting


----------



## Ron Matthews

Shoeman said:


> Screw all that speculation as for a cause
> 
> The Lake is stressed, the stockings are down and the bankies pushed for a constant flow. No fluctuation in flow, no run... Simple!
> 
> Now we get a blow-out in Spring and they keep it running. By the time the water gets back to normal, many of the fish have come and gone.
> 
> Shelf ice was something that may last for a week tops. Increase of flow and it would blow it out. Now it's there until they decide to raise the water in March.
> 
> I enjoy reading all the comments, but most of them are from guys that are new to the sport and are grasping at straws.
> 
> Start working the dams like they were designed to do. Oh wait, we can't do that..... yeah now we really have silting



It's called "Natural Flow" 
At least what I've been told....


----------



## Shoeman

Ron Matthews said:


> It's called "Natural Flow"
> At least what I've been told....


Great, call it what whatever

Natural flow doesn't do squat to draw fish, reduce siltation, ect

The cycling that some of us old timers grew up with brought fish on a daily basis, reduced siltation and shelf ice.


----------



## Boozer

Shoeman said:


> Great, call it what whatever
> 
> Natural flow doesn't do squat to draw fish, reduce siltation, ect
> 
> The cycling that some of us old timers grew up with brought fish on a daily basis, reduced siltation and shelf ice.


The fish are still there, just not pressed up near the dams where it's like shooting fish in a barrel...

There is no perfect way to run a dam, but I personally like them keeping it "run of river" as much as possible. Meaning let them flow as they naturally would as much as possible. Which if I understand you correctly, we are on the same page...


----------



## diztortion

By having a high and low flow on the river, it keeps silt from building up.


----------



## Back Country

I'm going to hold my breath on this ridiculous out of bounds thread, and say the best winter steelhead river is.... any river or stream left with the least 'known about' glorifications.


----------



## Putman Lake Campground

Back Country said:


> I'm going to hold my breath on this ridiculous out of bounds thread, and say the best winter steelhead river is.... any river or stream left with the least 'known about' glorifications.


When the *****willows are popping the suckers are running. when the suckers are running the steelhead are running...

I've never caught a legal steelhead out of a river! maybe this week! Oops never kept an illegal one either... (they swim into smelt nets during good smelt runs back when there was such a thing )


----------



## Back Country

Nature at times can reveal it's own secrets.


----------

