Ya know, as I re-read the previous posts, now another thought/question has come to mind. 1.5 or fewer fish per-acre sounds low, but probably not if the said lake is 5-7 feet average. That is not a lot of volume per "surface acre" so that 1.5 number would go up quite a bit in theory. SOoooo, lets say LC has par to sub-par muskie forage base, Is it possible they didn't really thrive because there were actually to many planted vs volume of water and they hammered the food supply?
"kid coulson" said:
There is no oxygen below 10' in Thornapple during summer
Seems I read that somewhere as well. But I have marked plenty of fish below 10' in Thorn during summer. If there is no oxygen, how do they survive?<- not trying to be a di*k, that is a serious question.
I don't think a judgement can be made on two plants with 1.5 or fewer fish per acre
Well I would say a lot less water per acre when the lake is only 5-7 feet. They went in a very healthy size and if I recall some were the Iowa "super fish" but yet very few caught even reached the 38-40" mark. I believe the longest recorded on lunge log is only 41 inches. Does that not throw up a red flag??
Don't get me wrong, I hope all goes extremely well with this operation, but,…. I have my opinions and questions and obviously some concerns. It's not a "criticism" of Will. If that is how I am coming off, my apologies.
Carp and gar can tolerate ultra low oxygen for extended periods.
At the time of stocking the lake was at 430 acres. When the water dropped it likely experienced winter kill. All that is in the past and won't happen again. I heard of a number of over 45's in lower crooked and it's completely possible there are a few BIG fish there still.
For what its worth, about a year ago when I lived in Hastings, a local saw me filling up my boat at a gas station and came up to me asking about muskies in the area since he saw my boat littered with big baits. He told me that he speared 2 48s out of Lower Crooked from the same hole on back to back days in February of the previous year. I should have asked him more about it but I was having a hard time being cordial after he laughed at me for mentioning the whole 1 tag per year law, which apparently is just a guideline and not an actual law.
Who knows if he was telling the truth about the length, but at the very least it shows some of the fish in there have survived. He did mention them being real skinny compared to some of the big Thorn fish he had caught on tip ups. He also seemed oblivious to the season closure for pike and muskie in the winter on Thorn when I mentioned that as well. Those Hastingites are a special breed, thats for sure…
I have my concerns with Lower Crooked as a suitable lake for the transfer. Its not an ideal choice in my opinion but it can work. They will have to get used to a new forage base and they probably won't grow much more than they already have. At least some of the fish from the early stockings have proven they can survive in there. In the grand scheme of things moving them out of Thorn is the right decision. I hope they do well in their new home.
"Steve S" said:
Will, are they still going for the under 43". When they transfer them, will this be hard on them? I guess there is a KTD sign at Lower Crooked, what about Orchard Lake?
They considered a cut off for length but its not in the plan. Everything they catch will be moved. We will make sure all access sites are signed appropriately. Anything out of thevery ordinary is hard on fish but the trucks/trailers used to haul fish are as good as it gets and mortality shouldn't be any higher than them going through the spawning process. The water is cold at that time of year which will help a ton!
I fished thornapple a year ago with will and was looking forward to another trip there this next year but sounds like that wont happen. Be interesting to see how these lakes handle the influx of muskie. Im disappointed that Ovid didnt receive fish and I would hope a 50" limit and no spearing ban would be enforced. This could really devastate the fishery if not.
368
16