The myth of the "kings are now 3 year old fish"

[SurfDog]

I was speaking to DNR census taker today, and was asked for some scale samples. I agreed and asked what they look for in the samples. They confirm the age of the fish with their visible assessment. The great majority of 'mature fish' that run the rivers are 4 years of age. Per this DNR rep, very few 3 years old or 2 year old fish mature and become part of the river run.

The reason for the size decrease over the years has very little to do with the fish are not staying in the lake an extra year anymore, it has to do more with environment. (genetics, food supply, water conditions, and amount of predators in the evironment)

Thoughts? and factual evidence...?

[Crowhunter]

Thanks

[Carpmaster]

I was speaking to DNR census taker today, and was asked for some scale samples. I agreed and asked what they look for in the samples. They confirm the age of the fish with their visible assessment. The great majority of 'mature fish' that run the rivers are 4 years of age. Per this DNR rep, very few 3 years old or 2 year old fish mature and become part of the river run.

The reason for the size decrease over the years has very little to do with the fish are not staying in the lake an extra year anymore, it has to do more with environment. (genetics, food supply, water conditions, and amount of predators in the evironment)

Thoughts? and factual evidence...?

Hmmm....they need to get thier stories straight.
I have had the exact opposite of this explained to me numerous times by fisheries workers...

[ausable_steelhead]

Well in my part of Lake Michigan so far this year, there's been lots and lots of 12lbers, and not much larger. I've hit 3-16lb males, and they are easily the big fish so far. If it's taking them 4 years to hit 12lbs, then there's WAY to many salmon.

[Crowhunter]

You would think if it was lack of food they would be long and snaky looking .Bud

[ausable_steelhead]

You would think if it was lack of food they would long and snaky looking

There is a shortage somewhat of food, but I think it's just too many salmon for whats available. The fish are for the most part in good shape, but there are some slim ones. I caught a 35" buck that weighed 13lbs, that's 2lbs less then he should have been.

[EdB]

Creel clerks are not biologists. Some know there stuff and some don't, I've heard innaccurate info from some in the past. They are a great source of info on what's happening catch wise at the various ports they sample. ;) The biologists will tell you a lot more fish spawn at 3 than at 4 years old in recent years.

[SurfDog]

I was curious to see what others have heard from DNR reps they have run across. I always talk to them to learn as much as I can about the given area, the scale sample was something I've never had a census taker do, so I just found out more about it. Not saying the this person was the be all end all of the current fishery, but they are inside the bottle so to speak.

[malidewd]

In my part of Lake Michigan, I have seen 5 20lb+ kings caught in the last three days and several others that15-20lbs. The fish to me this year have been bigger. Unless we are talking about the little 8 inch kings slammin cleos and wobblers. Them little suckers are nuts. I have caught three of those little guys from 8-10 inches. All natural fish too, not planters.

[Salmonous Maximus]

The fish defiantly are bigger this year. Not much bigger, but they are healthier and thicker. To me it seems like the average fish being taken are in the 13-16 pound class. The last few years is was maybe 10-14 or so.

[Mickey Finn]

Some years ago, maybe eight. My brother and I were in Manistee. We came upon the dnr trawler. The guy working on it said that they were just back from a ale-wife survey. We asked how it looked and he said not good.

When he loosned up, and began to talk. As opposed to trying to look busy. He said that the numbers had been going down on the last few surveys. He didn't say if they were yearly or what. But he did say that it would produce smaller and stressed salmon. Which would lead to smaller stocking numbers.

So, at least he knew what he was talking about.

[Far Beyond Driven]

There was a 300 fish sample taken on the Grand a few years ago. Over 90% of the fish taken were 2-3 year old fish.

I've pulled over 30 kings with wire tags in them, and don't have a 4 year old fish. I've had a 16# two year old, and a couple 3-4# that were mature and up in the rivers at 1 year old, but no four years olds. One 10 year old Jenny Craig laker that was 5.7#.....

Fish are definitely more solid this year. Look at the big fish or 333 scores in any tournament and you can see that as well. As for bait, I trolled through a 1/2 mile long stretch on the beach yesterday, and marked more pods this year than the years before. Still not the 80' tall balls on the graph that would make your rigger rods wiggle, but better than before.

[MoneyMan11]

I caught a tagged fish in Manistee 2 years ago that was 19.7 and was a all of 3 years old and ready to run. Got my free Swedish Pimple Spoon.:lol:

[Fletch09]

This is going from memory, but I believe that five years ago in Lk Huron the take at Swan Creek in Rogers City was less than 2% 4 year old fish. The majority were two year olds.

[cmueller302]

One of the biggest reasons for smaller fish now days is genetics. If you are collecting eggs and a 25 pound female is next to a 12 pound female you are going to collect the eggs from a 12 pound female. The same goes for the males. So what happens is the genetics from the smaller more easily to handle fish are the ones that are being reproduced. 6 to 7 years ago the majority of fish were bigger because most of the fish to pick out were bigger.

Before everyone jumps on this I said ONE of the reasons. Of course the lack of bait fish had a roll to play; but the salmon are hear because "they" wanted to control the bait fish.

[MoneyMan11]

No doubt about genetics, but I'll take age and food over genetics. I've seen the same report a couple years ago that Fletch was referring to.

[UltimateOutdoorsman]

One of the biggest reasons for smaller fish now days is genetics. If you are collecting eggs and a 25 pound female is next to a 12 pound female you are going to collect the eggs from a 12 pound female. The same goes for the males. So what happens is the genetics from the smaller more easily to handle fish are the ones that are being reproduced.


Come on... Theyre gonna collect the "12 lb" roe and toss the 25 lber's?

Nah. I don't buy it.

[milledad]

Come on... Theyre gonna collect the "12 lb" roe and toss the 25 lber's?

Nah. I don't buy it.

You are right, they wouldn't do that. But think about how many 25# you run across as opposed to 12#. Even in a controlled environment it's not easy to get fish to grow that big. You will have a lot more 12's around to harvest from than 25's. So over a period of time you will have more medium size fish.

I have a degree in Natural Resource Management, I have had a fisheries class, but let me tell you, I am no fish biologist. Most of those guys and girls that make those kind of decisions have more knowledge about making a sustainable fish population than I do in my little finger. Remember that these scientists made the great lakes the fishery that they are today. With out the planting practices and management that they do we would have very few fish to go after at all!

If there is one thing that you learn in science, it's that you need to get good data and effective management you need to eliminate variables. When you throw in all of the things that everybody has brought up here there are just too many variables. It's probably not just one of; genetics, bait, fishing pressure, environmental factors, water temperatures, or stocking practices, but a big combination of all of them. I'm sure we will see more big fish again some day, until then I'll take all of those little shakers that I can find! They taste better anyway!;)

[Fletch09]

It has been hypothesized that salmon instinctively run earlier in their lives if they are nutritionally stressed. This seems logical as it would be a naturally evolved defense mechanism against a creating predator/prey imbalance. There is no way of knowing with any certainty but I'm inclined to agree with this line of thinking.

[milledad]

It has been hypothesized that salmon instinctively run earlier in their lives if they are nutritionally stressed. This seems logical as it would be a naturally evolved defense mechanism against a creating predator/prey imbalance. There is no way of knowing with any certainty but I'm inclined to agree with this line of thinking.

That sounds completely logical to me. Most of nature is there to reproduce. If a fish is stressed and my die then they will do what they have to to reproduce. The sixty four thousand dollar question is why are they more stressed now than in the past?

[Mickey Finn]

That sounds completely logical to me. Most of nature is there to reproduce. If a fish is stressed and my die then they will do what they have to to reproduce. The sixty four thousand dollar question is why are they more stressed now than in the past?

I thought everyone agreed. Over stocking and reduced forage. Is there something else?

[milledad]

I thought everyone agreed. Over stocking and reduced forage. Is there something else?


Obviously those are large potential problems. But why is there reduced forage? It's probably not just overstocking. Little things like clearer water due to zebra muscles, changes in the climate, lake levels, fishing pressure, and things like that all contribute to to the lack of forage.

[Fishslayer5789]

That would not bother me one bit if the DNR cut stockings by a ton. I would love to see what the potential is of these fish and see how big we can really get kings to grow to in the great lakes. JMO

[Fishndude]

Obviously those are large potential problems. But why is there reduced forage? It's probably not just overstocking. Little things like clearer water due to zebra muscles, changes in the climate, lake levels, fishing pressure, and things like that all contribute to to the lack of forage.


Zebra and Quagga Mussels are probably 99% of the factors which are negatively affecting the ecosystem of our lakes, and the Salmon. They out-compete native species that form the bottom of the food chain, which are Diporiea Shrimp. Alewives eat Diporeia, and since the Shrimp are disappearing, the Alewives are, too. The Salmon do not adapt to eating other species well, and are becoming smaller and fewer as a result. Planting less Salmon is a step in the right direction, and the DNR has already taken that approach.
Lake Michigan is around 750 feet deep at it's deepest spot. Dropping the lake level by 3 feet does not drastically affect the fishery. Climate change (global warming) seems to have been exagerated, because we have had a very cool summer, on relative terms. Fishing pressure is less than it was 20 years ago - especially on lake Huron. The Mussels are the key, period. Not sure what can be done.

[milledad]

Zebra and Quagga Mussels are probably 99% of the factors which are negatively affecting the ecosystem of our lakes, and the Salmon. They out-compete native species that form the bottom of the food chain, which are Diporiea Shrimp. Alewives eat Diporeia, and since the Shrimp are disappearing, the Alewives are, too. The Salmon do not adapt to eating other species well, and are becoming smaller and fewer as a result. Planting less Salmon is a step in the right direction, and the DNR has already taken that approach.
Lake Michigan is around 750 feet deep at it's deepest spot. Dropping the lake level by 3 feet does not drastically affect the fishery. Climate change (global warming) seems to have been exagerated, because we have had a very cool summer, on relative terms. Fishing pressure is less than it was 20 years ago - especially on lake Huron. The Mussels are the key, period. Not sure what can be done.

I would say that all sounds about right on. However be careful where you draw the line at native species. There isn't much in the great lakes that is native at this point. The loss of Alewives is due to the loss of Diporeia but alewives are not native. In fact the whole reason Salmon were introduced to the Great Lakes in the first place was to try to control the population of alewives that ran out of control when they first invaded. I guess when you look at it that way, problem solved! That doesn't do much for us as fishermen though. It's crazy to think about how different it would have been if we would have just introduced zebra mussels to cut down on alewives and skiped the salmon step completely. Would we all be on here talking about where to find the Lakers with out running in to those pesky Lake Sturgon and Burbot?! I know I would. Fishing is fishing. :)

[fishlkmich]

I fish saltwater and watch environmental issues dealing with U.S. saltwater fishing issues fairly closely. One of the biggest problems facing the U.S. saltwater fishery is bottom trawling. Bottom trawling:
-Stirs up bottom sediments, causing a number of problems.
-Catches everything in its path (near the bottom), including juvenile sport fish (bycatch).
-DESTROYS the bottom dwelling species in its path, leaving a barren bottom.

We have a billion dollar sport fishery. We have no ecologically sensitive bottom dwelling species and eliminating the net portion of the trawler would eliminate any bycatch. With a few old shrimp boats we could:
-Stir up the bottom sediments, providing food for zooplankton.
-DESTROY quagga and zebra mussels and automatically distribute the generated waste to further feed the food chain.

To me this seems like a viable solution to a huge problem. The cost would be minimal compared to losing the money generated by our sport fishery. Quagga and zebra mussel biomass would be returned to the food chain. Zooplankton would thrive on the mussel remains and sediment generated by the trawlers. Alewife would thrive on the abundant zooplankton . . .

If the trawling continued during ice free conditions diporea may rebound, with food and mussel free bottom sediment for habitat. The gin clear waters of Lakes Michigan and Huron may again become “murky” with zooplankton.

But, it’s unproven and would cost money. Never mind.

[Johnnydeerhunt]

Nature is cyclical. Salmon have only heavily populated the Great Lakes for 40 years, which biologically is a very short period of time. Genetically these fish are almost all genetically identical, and their phenotype is shown in terms of size. With thousands of eggs and millions of sperm per fish, I would contend that this has a small impact. If salmon naturally reproduced in the Great Lakes, they could automatically correct numbers and size through natural selection. The prey base (alewife) is stressed on both ends, as it has very little to eat and tons of predators. Salmon numbers are artificially high, but don't count on the DNR to control the number of salmon for the optimal health and size of the species (it is a billion dollar industry). Naturally, there would be no salmon, steelhead, brown trout, alewives, zebra mussels, or gobies. Yet in this mess, we have a world class fishery and very little control over it.:dizzy:

[toto]

Its always interesting to me, to see what everyone thinks is the problem. I personally think , but have to scientific background to prove it, that it is a combination of these things.

If there is no forage base, than it stands to reason that the fish wouldn't be as big, although you would think a few could find enough to grow to a sizable amount. Genetics probably does play role in this, if the eggs are continually taken from smaller fish, it stands that these fish would be smaller too. Someone should call one of the biologists to ask their opinion. They generally are pretty open to talk about such things.

[Sam22]

Creel clerks are not biologists. Some know there stuff and some don't, I've heard innaccurate info from some in the past. They are a great source of info on what's happening catch wise at the various ports they sample. ;) The biologists will tell you a lot more fish spawn at 3 than at 4 years old in recent years.

Yeah.. Creel Survey guys know what they know.. not much else in my experience. I don't personally believe many three year olds are running. I haven't done the journal research on this, and won't likely do it.. but it seems like quite a to me. Do some run? no doubt...

[Spanky]

I was speaking to DNR census taker today, and was asked for some scale samples. I agreed and asked what they look for in the samples. They confirm the age of the fish with their visible assessment. The great majority of 'mature fish' that run the rivers are 4 years of age. Per this DNR rep, very few 3 years old or 2 year old fish mature and become part of the river run.

The reason for the size decrease over the years has very little to do with the fish are not staying in the lake an extra year anymore, it has to do more with environment. (genetics, food supply, water conditions, and amount of predators in the evironment)

Thoughts? and factual evidence...? I think you have misunderstood this clerk, you have it backwards actually, less than 5% of mature fish are 4 years old now. Its been that way for quite a while. The genetics of our salmon have changed very much from what they once were through crossbreeding, stress, disease and lack of forage. True 4 yr old fish are very hard to come by these days.

[Spanky]

Every year in the late winter/early spring we hold workshops in different ports of Lk. mich and Huron. These are salmon workshops and are sponsored by the Seagrant and DNR. They are open to the public and last the whole day, lunch is usually included. I have posted these dates on here every time we have had them. Very few from here go to them, perhaps next year when they come around again, some of you will think about attending. There are lots of stuff to learn, and tons of literature to take home with you. Factual data is presented, and the forum is quite informative and extremely interesting. As a representative for the SW lake michigan zone in the LMCAC, I have been to a few of these, and everyone is welcome to attend. The amount of info that one can obtain is huge, and often usefull(just like this thread) to dispell myth and educate the public.;)