Michigan Muskie Alliance

Will Schultz wrote:

Pete wrote:

hemichemi wrote:One question that occurs to me: will the startup of the GLS stocking program this year affect the Northern strain stocking program negatively?

Yup. No northern strain reared this year, just GLS. Because of that the goal of GLS fall fingerlings has been moved up from 20K to 40K. If the GLS stocking proves to be a success, I'll be all smiles though.

So much for letting the DNR make this announcement later this week...

LOL we can just pretend we didn't read that!

Will Schultz wrote:

Pete wrote:

hemichemi wrote:One question that occurs to me: will the startup of the GLS stocking program this year affect the Northern strain stocking program negatively?

Yup. No northern strain reared this year, just GLS. Because of that the goal of GLS fall fingerlings has been moved up from 20K to 40K. If the GLS stocking proves to be a success, I'll be all smiles though.

So much for letting the DNR make this announcement later this week...

Whoops, didn't know this was a secret! As long as we act surprised when they tell us it will be just fine...

hmm...so i have lots of questions... later this week!?!?

Hamilton Reef wrote:I suspect there will be some culture changes tried in 2011 based on comment suggestions from the out state biologist during the Cool Water Culture Workshop.

Now you know why my last comment was phrased in the present time frame leaving the DNR free for their timing.

Pete wrote:

Will Schultz wrote:

Pete wrote: Yup. No northern strain reared this year, just GLS. Because of that the goal of GLS fall fingerlings has been moved up from 20K to 40K. If the GLS stocking proves to be a success, I'll be all smiles though.

So much for letting the DNR make this announcement later this week...

Whoops, didn't know this was a secret! As long as we act surprised when they tell us it will be just fine...

I've been biting my tongue on this, for the most part, since the end of January. It wasn't 100% until March 3rd, as they were trying to find a solution so all the eggs weren't in one basket or jar as the case will be(pardon the pun).

So I guess we might as well get to the nuts and bolts...
The reason for this wasn't money or too little space for rearing both strains, well... space is part of the problem I guess. The real reason for this is that while everyone is confident in the dissinfection process there is no getting around the fact that they will be bringing in fertilized eggs and rearing muskellunge fry that were obtained from a VHS positive source. There is only one muskellunge rearing building and it is not possible to split the building in a way to be sure there will be no contamination. Bottom line is that it is better to be safe than sorry.

This is the right direction for Michigan with the ultimate goal being the establishment of selfsustaining fisheries and/or fisheries that need only supplemental stocking.

Will Schultz wrote:

Pete wrote:

Will Schultz wrote: So much for letting the DNR make this announcement later this week...

Whoops, didn't know this was a secret! As long as we act surprised when they tell us it will be just fine...

I've been biting my tongue on this, for the most part, since the end of January. It wasn't 100% until March 3rd, as they were trying to find a solution so all the eggs weren't in one basket or jar as the case will be(pardon the pun).

So I guess we might as well get to the nuts and bolts...
The reason for this wasn't money or too little space for rearing both strains, well... space is part of the problem I guess. The real reason for this is that while everyone is confident in the dissinfection process there is no getting around the fact that they will be bringing in fertilized eggs and rearing muskellunge fry that were obtained from a VHS positive source. There is only one muskellunge rearing building and it is not possible to split the building in a way to be sure there will be no contamination. Bottom line is that it is better to be safe than sorry.

This is the right direction for Michigan with the ultimate goal being the establishment of selfsustaining fisheries and/or fisheries that need only supplemental stocking.

So is the overall goal not to rely on stocking as much in the future? Are these stocked GLS muskies going to be able to reproduce in lakes other than the broodstock lakes?

So are GLS muskies are supposed to be the norm? If so will all the lakes contain them instead of the northern strain?

Esoxonthefly wrote:Are these stocked GLS muskies going to be able to reproduce in lakes other than the broodstock lakes?

The short answer is yes assuming spawning habitat is available. That is why we've been working so hard the last 20 years trying to restore the fishery habitats of our drown-river mouth lakes preparing for the day we could reestablish the native GLS. Wisconsin has documented small amount of natural GLS spawning in Green Bay. Wisconsin needs a few MI fish to start up brood lakes for their GLS program just as Michigan is doing. The original Green Bay GLS came from very few MI fish thus limited genetics. This MI-WI GLS partnership is good for both states in tough economic times.

Hamilton Reef wrote:

Esoxonthefly wrote:Are these stocked GLS muskies going to be able to reproduce in lakes other than the broodstock

The short answer is yes assuming spawning habitat is available.

But isn't that true for the Northern strain also?
I haven't read anything saying that they are more successful spawners. Only that they 'may' use different spawning habitat (as it relates to bottom content)

One of the big issues is still shore line development. Something that hurts or even prevents the Norther Musky from being successful spawners.


Are the GLS more successful spawners?

Spawning success probably won't be much different in a given LP lake with GLS muskies, even despite what John Molenhouse found out about the different spawning habitat preferred by the GLS muskies he's studying as compared to the northern strain. Most LP lakes don't have ANY muskie-friendly spawning habitat.

The reason GLS muskies are preferred for stocking MI waters is that WHERE they're stocked won't be limited to only those waters that don't have direct/easy access to Great Lakes waters. The DNR biologists want to preserve the GLS muskie strain in found in the Great Lakes and limit them mixing with northern strain muskies. If we raise GLS strain muskies for our stocking program (instead of the northern strain being raised currently), that will no longer be a limiting consideration for which lakes get stocked, and maybe someday we can see many more lakes with muskies in them than we have now. Right now, only waters that don't directly/easily connect with the GL are considered for the MI stocking program.

In addition, lakes with natural spawning habitat and successfully spawning populations (the SCR, LSC, DR, Elk chain, etc) can have their populations augmented with stocked GLS fish if conditions warrant it. And if (heaven forfend!) an environmental disaster ever occurs (disease/chemical spill/natural disaster) causing any of those natural populations to be depleted, we'll have a biological back-up to help restore the population with the original GLS strain.

I would ask Steve's question again.

Is the eventual goal to have GLS fish in inland lakes, instead of Northern fish?

LonLB wrote:I would ask Steve's question again. Is the eventual goal to have GLS fish in inland lakes, instead of Northern fish?

My understanding is yes, but that is over the long term.

So I'm assuming that they aren't concerned with the two strains intermingling. And do they have enough info to say the stclair fish are similar enough to the elk and black chains' to let them intermingle???

Vano397, The state managers have to make the tough judgement calls based on the resources and factors they are dealt with. That is why they get paid and we get to play Monday morning quarterback. Seriously our DNR friends are going through a hard time right now, so I'll trust their judgement.

vano397 wrote:So I'm assuming that they aren't concerned with the two strains intermingling. And do they have enough info to say the stclair fish are similar enough to the elk and black chains' to let them intermingle???

No, I don't think they're concerned in lakes where spawning isn't successful. Yes they are concerned in lakes where they spawning is successful, which is why they aren't currently stocking those lakes, because northern strain fish are all they've had for stocking up to now.