Trophy Pike Survey

[QuickStrike]

This has probably been covered here many times over in the past, but I'm curious. I'd be interested to see a sample of the number of people who would like to see more widely available big pike waters. This would certainly require greater restrictions on possession numbers and tactics. The DNR would have to get involved. But I'm curious if there is a group of Michigan anglers who would support this type of managerial movement/shift.

Would you or would you not support trophy pike regulations on a more widespread (and thus more accessible) group of fishing waters? Please give some reasons for and against.

[mykass]

I would support it because that is all I really fish for anymore are pike and musky. But the issue would boil down to slot limits. And the problem with this is there are really few lakes here in Michigan with a slot limit on them and if they are not regulating the walleye through a program like this I think it would be very difficult to get slots on northerns to go through. Heck i know of a few lakes that have no size limits on northerns. It will be interesting to see what everyone else thinks.

[bigjonbuck]

im all for it .i usually target pike on inland lakes andrarely catch any over 28". i never eat them but they are mean and fun to catch . the bigger the better. what is all this slot talk about , can someone explain?

[mykass]

Slot limit means you can only keep fish say between 24 and 28 and anything else has to be released or you can keep fish only between 28" and 32". The sizes can vary on the species but that should help give ya an idea what we are talking about.

[QuickStrike]

Okay, for the sake of argument, let's assume there is a way to get trophy regulations on more diverse and accessible waters. And let's also assume that a trophy pike fishery would mean less exploitation (smaller harvest) but potentially larger fish.

Does this change your outlook? Anyone?

[ESOX]

I am all for regulations that would allow pike to reach their maximum size potential for any given body of water. that would certainly mean a slot limit on most waters. Perhaps even C&R only on others. The DNR has done a good job in the past handling waters with too many stunted pike with no bag and size limits on some for years at a time.

[yoopertoo]

I think we should go barbless on any lake designated as trophy water. I hate the thought of letting a fish go knowing it will die. I have been barbless for a while. I like it it.

[ESOX]

While I applaud your intentions, there have been some studies (with differing results) on weather or not barbless actually reduce mortality. Barbless hooks easily penetrate deeper therefore increasing the likelyhood of hitting something vital. A single hook instead of trebles is a great way to reduce fish damage. A lot of Canadian trophy waters only allow single hooks for ths reason.

[Hamilton Reef]

I could easily adapt to quality pike regulations and play CPR specifically on the West Michigan drowned-river mouth lakes. These bodies of waters connected to Lake Michigan are large enough lakes with vast habitat diversity and forage to produce large pike. It is because the pike don't live long enough to reach full potential and do their top predator job that I've been trying to get the native GLS muskie reintroduction program going. Muskies need to be 42" to be legal where the pike are harvested lest than 30". We have a huge biomass of sheepshead, carp, gizzard shad, and suckers that need to be transformed into a untapped sport fishery. We produce a few 15-pound plus pike, but not par to the potential we have. Note that my first priority is the top predator and forge balance. Any trophy fishery is a bonus pike or muskie.

[ESOX]

Those lakes have an awesome potential. I wish you luck in your endeavor Tom. What can we do to help?

[Hamilton Reef]

You are aware of the work MMA has done with MDNR and muskie stocking programs. Just continue supporting the MMA and DNR. The DNR, Feds, MMA, and Muskie Inc. are all well aware of our West Michigan potential. We've just had continual setbacks every year with muskie pox, VHS, funding etc. For the last several years I've been working to assure all the paperwork and plans are ready when the fish finally become available. In the case of Muskegon Lake and White Lake we have the fishery mgt plans done to include the GLS muskie, remedial action plans include the muskie and habitat restoration, Muskegon River has its DEQ 319 plan done and we just got funding to work on White River 319 plan. I'll be working on that plan for next 18-months. In 1993 I helped the Wisconsin DNR take eggs from Indian River to start up their Fox River Green Bay GLS program. Once we get pass the VHS challenge we can get fresh GLS gametes over to Wisconsin to boost their limited genetic diversity and that will open our door at the same time. Two weeks ago the Feds from Chicago came up to White Lake looking for ways to help us with habitat funding. I can still work with the spawning habitats while waiting for the fishery program to move forward. This is one of those dream projects we've been working on for several years. Meanwhile I try to fish for GLS muskie once a year.

[QuickStrike]

HR:

I'm wondering what's wrong with the habitat at White? There's what appears to be a great spawning ground for big fish, water depth, access to the Great Lakes and thus prime forage. The great majority of the drowned rivermouth lakes ought to produce giants with very little habitat and cash effort, and much needed trophy regulations. The list of names should include Manistee, Platte, PM, Muskegon, Mona, Spring, etc.

I'm not new to this stuff, just to this side of the state and this site. Thanks for your patience.

[yoopertoo]

While I applaud your intentions, there have been some studies (with differing results) on weather or not barbless actually reduce mortality. Barbless hooks easily penetrate deeper therefore increasing the likelyhood of hitting something vital. A single hook instead of trebles is a great way to reduce fish damage. A lot of Canadian trophy waters only allow single hooks for ths reason.

The extraction of a barbless hook is where I see the benefit. I thought most fish trauma was from the angler extracting a hook. I have never seen a case where a barbless hook would have done more damage then a barbed hook. I'm skeptical.

Single hooks definitly help also. Of course you get less retained hits. I would not mind though; I'm a jigging fanatic anyway.

Large parts of Saskatchewan and all of Manitoba are barbless. I don't recall any restirctions on treble hooks there, but I'm not an expert on their regs that is for sure.

[Hamilton Reef]

QuickStrike, The historic loss of spawning habitat and drastic altering of the natural flows of the Muskegon and White Rivers are two major reasons for pike and naive GLS muskie decline. Note Muskegon Lake 4100-acres has lost over 25% of the lake to landfills for sawmills and later heavy industry. The US-31 freeway then channeled the River to only two openings thus destroying the natural nutrient filtering and spawning larvae/nurseries. This also hurt the larvae walleye as well.

White Lake 2600-acres is much the same story with lumber history, but the most critical habitat of the whole lake is upstream of the 'narrows' that has been destroyed by marina developments. Again the US-31 freeway allows only one channel with the natural marsh converted to historic celery muck farms. The lower river causeway between Whitehall and Montague is now one channel, but used to have three major channels under the earthen causeway. In all cases the freeways and causeway should have been originally constructed has long bridges instead of as 'dams'. This would have allowed the marshes to function. MDOT historically goes for cheap construction, not what is best for the watersheds.

We just finished writing the White Lake Shoreline Habitat Management Plan and when we met with the EPA a month ago they were very impressed. Our complete shoreline is mapped and several areas highlighted as numerical ranking for habitat protection and restoration. The Region 5 EPA have about $1.5M coming for 2007 habitat projects. We've worked hard to have everything in place so when the grant funds are released we can apply for the grants and receive higher ranking than other projects in the five states.
The following project is a example : N. Pike Habitat Protection and Restoration - Green Bay Project Title: http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/fund/2000/guidreview/087.pdf

Here are some examples of what we do when I'm not goofing off on this forum. Check them out.

Fish & Waterfowl Assessment
http://www.muskegoncd.org/White%20Lake%20Fish%20and%20Waterfowl%20Aquatic%20 Habitat%20Assessment.pdf

Shoreline Habitat Study
http://www.muskegoncd.org/WL%20Habitat%20Management%20Plan.pdf

White Lake Community Action Plan
http://www.muskegoncd.org/RAP%202005.pdf

More White Lake & Muskegon Lake info:

White Lake Public Advisory Council
http://www.muskegoncd.org/White%20Lake%20PAC.htm

Muskegon Conservation District http://www.muskegoncd.org/

Again, I say we need to work on the protection and restoration of pike/muskie habitats at the same time you work with the pike management and social issues.

[Icecreep]

More important to the survival of the fish is properly landing, handling and release techniques. The issues of vertical holds, time out of water and high water temps are of greater concern in my opinion.
Always have a quality pair of hook cutters with you. If you have a badly hooked fish, quickley cutting hooks is the easiest route, barbed or barbless.
My .2

J.Merics

[QuickStrike]

I think IceCreep has it right. Although I've never had to use cutters on a fish, they are in my box if I need them.

In my boat, I consider the large capacity rubber-coated net to be the most fish-saving tool available. Once the fish is at the side of the boat, she is netted and left in the water for hook removal, assessment, and measuring if desired. The only time I take the fish out of the water is if I'm going to photograph it, and then it is only out for about 30 seconds or so (the camera gear is ready to go when the fish is lifted). The advantage is that the fish stays in the drink with as little stress as possible for the entire time.

So for me, the net is the biggest factor for getting my fish bigger for the next go-'round.

[yoopertoo]

More important to the survival of the fish is properly landing, handling and release techniques.

Agreed. Very important, but if you have not tried barbless it is easy to use pliers to smash the barbs. Often, the fish unhooks itself at the boat by just giving slack. I was convinced of the benefit after spending two weeks in Canada last summer. They seemed to be convinced enough to very often make it the law.

[Icecreep]

Agreed. Very important, but if you have not tried barbless it is easy to use pliers to smash the barbs. Often, the fish unhooks itself at the boat by just giving slack. I was convinced of the benefit after spending two weeks in Canada last summer. They seemed to be convinced enough to very often make it the law.

Yoop,
I have used Barbless many times in the past. My point was, no matter what method you choose ( barbed or barbless) have a good pair of hook cutters on hand.
The only big pike i could not release was caught on a single hook with no barb ( third page of my photos, fish with blood). The pike would not have made it wether I had barbed or barbless hooks, and I did not carry hook cutters on me 15 years ago.
I am in no way against barbless hooks, in fact I think they are a good thing, I just dont use them on most of my lures.
My .2

J.Merics

[yoopertoo]

My point was, no matter what method you choose ( barbed or barbless) have a good pair of hook cutters on hand.


I agree. Cutting is by far the less stressful for the fish - barbed or not.

[sea nympho]

[quote=QuickStrike]
In my boat, I consider the large capacity rubber-coated net to be the most fish-saving tool available. quote]

These nets are great. But I just reach over the side of the boat, grab hold of the hook with hemo's, give a twist, & the fish pops right off. No net, fish never leaves the water.