Great Lakes Muskellunge

Steve S · Post by **Steve S** » Thu Mar 17, 2011 10:40 pm

Is this money from the Hugh C. Becker fund. Don't want to sound like a idiot here (whats new) but who is Hugh C. Becker?

Post by **Will Schultz** » Thu Mar 17, 2011 10:44 pm

Steve S wrote:Is this money from the Hugh C. Becker fund. Don't want to sound like a idiot here (whats new) but who is Hugh C. Becker?

Yes and... http://www.twincitiesmuskiesinc.org/hug ... /index.php

Steve S · Post by **Steve S** » Thu Mar 17, 2011 11:03 pm

WOW!! "Greatest Generation"

MattG_braith · Post by **MattG_braith** » Fri Mar 18, 2011 1:06 pm

Wouldnt using Thornapple as a broodstock lake be difficult when collecting eggs from the GLS plants with all of the Northerns already in there?

Duke · Post by **Duke** » Sun Mar 20, 2011 12:45 pm

Jim tenHaaf wrote:Joe, there was an article in Musky Hunter back in 2008 written by Steve Gensen on a lot of the differences that he has observed fishing both Wisconsin and Minnesota waters. There were some differences like the GLS are pack feeders, and there are more intense feeding windows, whereas the barred were more likely to bite at any time throughout the day. Also, the GLS seemed to be more wandering. I still have the mag and can make copies if you are interested in reading it.

Wow lots of questions firing from all over! great to see what a stir the ol spotted fish have caused.

This article was extremely interesting, but the 2 strains being compared were "Leech Lake aka Mississippi River" strain vs. "Wisconsin" strain. Although the Leech/Mississippi typically display the spotted pattern, that does not necessarily mean they have anything in common with GLS as they are completely distinct populations. It will be awesome to see if any tendencies do bear out though, can't wait to start doing research! Joe I wouldn't worry about them being any tougher to catch- the GLS will bow before you just like all fish!!!

MattG_braith wrote:Wouldnt using Thornapple as a broodstock lake be difficult when collecting eggs from the GLS plants with all of the Northerns already in there?

I'm sure you're right and it will complicate things a bit, but a lot of the current muskies have been pit-tagged, which will help. They might fin-clip the new ones too I wonder?

Jim tenHaaf · Post by **Jim tenHaaf** » Sun Mar 20, 2011 6:02 pm

Agreed that the Minnesota strain doesnt necessarily mean "spotted", but in his article, he specificall said the spotted, or "Leech Lake" strain vs barred or "Wisconsin" strain.

Esoxonthefly · Post by **Esoxonthefly** » Sun Mar 20, 2011 8:55 pm

Jim tenHaaf wrote:Agreed that the Minnesota strain doesnt necessarily mean "spotted", but in his article, he specificall said the spotted, or "Leech Lake" strain vs barred or "Wisconsin" strain.

He does actually call them "GLS" in the arcticle though so he does mislead us there.

LonLB · Post by **LonLB** » Sun Mar 20, 2011 9:37 pm

Esoxonthefly wrote:
Jim tenHaaf wrote:Agreed that the Minnesota strain doesnt necessarily mean "spotted", but in his article, he specificall said the spotted, or "Leech Lake" strain vs barred or "Wisconsin" strain.
He does actually call them "GLS" in the arcticle though so he does mislead us there.

Do we KNOW that the GLS is different from those fish?

vano397 · Post by **vano397** » Mon Mar 21, 2011 9:16 am

LonLB wrote:
Esoxonthefly wrote:
Jim tenHaaf wrote:Agreed that the Minnesota strain doesnt necessarily mean "spotted", but in his article, he specificall said the spotted, or "Leech Lake" strain vs barred or "Wisconsin" strain.
He does actually call them "GLS" in the arcticle though so he does mislead us there.
Do we KNOW that the GLS is different from those fish?

From what little I know, and I am sure theres a lot more to the logistics, but these current GLS fish from St. Clair, even though the "SAME" as the fish in the antrim chain and other natural populations, still might be "DIFFERENT"...at least enough that they want to make sure that spawning and other things won't get messed up, and then hurt the original population. so if someone else wants to break down the timeline and cost associated with this, or add anything please do!

so in reply, they are the same if they are genetically GLS, but their habits formed by nature might be completely different... therefore mixing them could be bad...but might not be...

Post by **Will Schultz** » Mon Mar 21, 2011 9:22 am

Duke wrote:
MattG_braith wrote:Wouldnt using Thornapple as a broodstock lake be difficult when collecting eggs from the GLS plants with all of the Northerns already in there?
I'm sure you're right and it will complicate things a bit, but a lot of the current muskies have been pit-tagged, which will help. They might fin-clip the new ones too I wonder?

All of the GL MUS going into the broodstock lakes will be PIT tagged so there is no question.

LonLB wrote:
Esoxonthefly wrote:
Jim tenHaaf wrote:Agreed that the Minnesota strain doesnt necessarily mean "spotted", but in his article, he specificall said the spotted, or "Leech Lake" strain vs barred or "Wisconsin" strain.
He does actually call them "GLS" in the arcticle though so he does mislead us there.
Do we KNOW that the GLS is different from those fish?

Yes. Genetic testing leaves no question.

hemichemi · Post by **hemichemi** » Mon Mar 21, 2011 9:29 am

Will Schultz wrote:
Duke wrote:
MattG_braith wrote:Wouldnt using Thornapple as a broodstock lake be difficult when collecting eggs from the GLS plants with all of the Northerns already in there?
I'm sure you're right and it will complicate things a bit, but a lot of the current muskies have been pit-tagged, which will help. They might fin-clip the new ones too I wonder?
All of the GL MUS going into the broodstock lakes will be PIT tagged so there is no question.

What about when they raise some GLS at Wolf Lake and use them to plant more in Thornapple? Can they PIT tag a YOY fish? Or won't they ever put fish in Thornapple that weren't adults harvested from LSC?

Post by **Will Schultz** » Mon Mar 21, 2011 9:39 am

hemichemi wrote:
Will Schultz wrote:
Duke wrote: I'm sure you're right and it will complicate things a bit, but a lot of the current muskies have been pit-tagged, which will help. They might fin-clip the new ones too I wonder?
All of the GL MUS going into the broodstock lakes will be PIT tagged so there is no question.
What about when they raise some GLS at Wolf Lake and use them to plant more in Thornapple? Can they PIT tag a YOY fish? Or won't they ever put fish in Thornapple that weren't adults harvested from LSC?

No adults are being removed from St Clair and put inland, it will be an egg take only. Yes, it is no problem PIT tagging the fall fingerlings.

hemichemi · Post by **hemichemi** » Mon Mar 21, 2011 10:26 am

Will Schultz wrote:
hemichemi wrote:
Will Schultz wrote: All of the GL MUS going into the broodstock lakes will be PIT tagged so there is no question.
What about when they raise some GLS at Wolf Lake and use them to plant more in Thornapple? Can they PIT tag a YOY fish? Or won't they ever put fish in Thornapple that weren't adults harvested from LSC?
No adults are being removed from St Clair and put inland, it will be an egg take only.

Duh. I knew that. Brain fart...

I need more coffee!

Duke · Post by **Duke** » Mon Mar 21, 2011 11:48 am

Will Schultz wrote:No adults are being removed from St Clair and put inland, it will be an egg take only. Yes, it is no problem PIT tagging the fall fingerlings.

Except the cost & manpower for installing PIT tags in all those little fish that are not going to survive... Even if those PIT tags are dirt cheap there still is a better way. Fin clips, or just choose some fresh lakes to start with so you don't have to tag them until they are growed up.

Jim wrote:Agreed that the Minnesota strain doesnt necessarily mean "spotted", but in his article, he specificall said the spotted, or "Leech Lake" strain vs barred or "Wisconsin" strain.

Exactly! What I mean is that the "Leech Lake" strain is not the GLS!!! This is all understandably quite confusing. I gotta double check but I don't think Genson talked about Green Bay fish?- these would be the only GLS fish that he might have compared.

Post by **Will Schultz** » Mon Mar 21, 2011 12:18 pm

Duke wrote:
Will Schultz wrote:No adults are being removed from St Clair and put inland, it will be an egg take only. Yes, it is no problem PIT tagging the fall fingerlings.
Except the cost & manpower for installing PIT tags in all those little fish that are not going to survive... Even if those PIT tags are dirt cheap there still is a better way. Fin clips, or just choose some fresh lakes to start with so you don't have to tag them until they are growed up.

The cost an manpower really isn't much of a concern, it's not like it will take a team of five people a week to place tags.

Are you suggesting that the PIT tag would cause mortality? As I'm sure you know, fin clips can be done wrong and therefore aren't perfect. Freeze brands also aren't perfect.