Seems like Diane with the shad forage would support a higher number of fish per acre. I may be wrong. the only problem I have with Diane is the lake association and the weed kill they do every year. I was on fish early spring before the weed kill after that I couldn't find a fish to save my life, open water, flats, shallow they were m.i.a.
There are even more Wallye and Catfish in Diane, and the cats are reproducing there. They may not be at Hudson. If the Hudson cats aren't reproducing its a pretty simple "problem" to fix. The bag limit is 10 a day… My understanding is a big part of the consideration to go back to Hudson was the surface acreage of the lakes, Hudson is bigger and thus can have more total fish which therefore increases the genetic diversity being used at the hatchery.
"Mayhem" said:
There are even more Wallye and Catfish in Diane, and the cats are reproducing there. They may not be at Hudson. If the Hudson cats aren't reproducing its a pretty simple "problem" to fix. The bag limit is 10 a day… My understanding is a big part of the consideration to go back to Hudson was the surface acreage of the lakes, Hudson is bigger and thus can have more total fish which therefore increases the genetic diversity being used at the hatchery.
I totally agree with hudson with the surface area it's a great getaway with the No wake and being undeveloped. What is the size limit for muskie at Hudson currently? I never pay attention for the fact I have never kept one. But would it make any sense on broomstock lakes to become catch and release for muskies only. If there is a 50" size limit that means the ones going out of the lake by the harvesting crowd are females that produce the greatest amount of eggs. Just seems kinda backwards to put that much effort into a fishery to lose the greatest asset for future generations.
It's just a thought I've had for a while just for broomstock lakes. I understand wanting to keep a 50" for a trophy but i think catch and release would do big things for a lake like Hudson especially with all the accidental catches I've been told about over the years that end up in the bottom of someones Jon boat or pickup bed.
"alumacraft07" said:
Seems like Diane with the shad forage would support a higher number of fish per acre. I may be wrong. the only problem I have with Diane is the lake association and the weed kill they do every year. I was on fish early spring before the weed kill after that I couldn't find a fish to save my life, open water, flats, shallow they were m.i.a.
There is a very significant predator/prey imbalance in Diane. The biomass is so out of whack that the lake is honestly one disease event away from collapsing. Quite honestly, muskies in there is a terrible idea.
"alumacraft07" said:
[quote="Mayhem"]There are even more Wallye and Catfish in Diane, and the cats are reproducing there. They may not be at Hudson. If the Hudson cats aren't reproducing its a pretty simple "problem" to fix. The bag limit is 10 a day… My understanding is a big part of the consideration to go back to Hudson was the surface acreage of the lakes, Hudson is bigger and thus can have more total fish which therefore increases the genetic diversity being used at the hatchery.
I totally agree with hudson with the surface area it's a great getaway with the No wake and being undeveloped. What is the size limit for muskie at Hudson currently? I never pay attention for the fact I have never kept one. But would it make any sense on broomstock lakes to become catch and release for muskies only. If there is a 50" size limit that means the ones going out of the lake by the harvesting crowd are females that produce the greatest amount of eggs. Just seems kinda backwards to put that much effort into a fishery to lose the greatest asset for future generations.
It took me a full year of phone calls, emails and meetings to get a 50" MSL on Thornapple. The original idea of C&R only was killed by the managers because the lakes are managed as broodstock lakes but also as trophy fisheries. It was determined that allowing zero harvest went against it being a trophy fishery. If someone wants to harvest a 20 year old 50" fish, that's fine she'll have been used many times as an egg producer.
Went to the stocking reports on Hudson from the DNR, went back to 1980. The column for the lake say's from top to bottom Lake Hudson, Bear Lake, Covell Lake and in big letters Lake Hudson. I'm guessing it's for Hudson. Cats stocked 01,02,05 about 5,000 each time at 8".5 to 9'.5. Muskies started in 1980, from then to now about 30,000 about 8" to 10". Said Walleye forgot which year 750,000 the size of guppies. Why I don't think there they aren't re-producing . This is a SWAG guess. The bottom of the lake is that white clay and when the wind blows hard against the shore the water will be white about 75' out. Plus the carp screw everything up. I don't know how the crappies, gills, perch and bass reproduce. Cause there is always tons of tiny gills and crappies. I'm not a biologist nor do I play one on TV!!
368
25
1 Guest(s)