West River Nov 3rd

[Capt. Larry D. Jones]

Its official I guided a client in his boat today using TUBES! Patrick Beltz caught a nice 47 1/2" muskie! Cullen is also still on fire,he will tell you about his great day I'm sure!

[jojo wilczewski]

Good Day

I wish we could or even the DEC. I think the "sea crows" and the gobys are our main adversaries.  The DEC wanted to remove some of them and were but Audubon stepped in and put a halt to it. We are prohibited from doing it. As a duck hunter I am sure you know the consquences of shooting a sea gull???  

Maybe we can talk to the DEC about making a screen or screens to put in the water to keep out these invaders.  Cheap and easy like me??

ALA BALA BALA jojo out

[Tony Scime]

John P:

The interplay of wind, water, and temperature has been a constant dynamic since the creation of the Great Lakes. I don't know what's changed in the past ten years that would make things any different. A good SW blow always blew in good muskie fishing in the fall. I never took note, but maybe it was doing exactly as you describe. But I don't believe that a change in the fishery is due to that phenomena, because that phenomena has always been a player in daily and weekly movements. The only difference, I think, is the number of muskies effected.

The only possible explanation for the change you describe would be the end of the warm water discharge in the Lackawanna canal. We don't have a complete understanding of that factor. I think the discharge stopped operating in 2001. It corresponded to a decline in the catch rates not only in the harbor, but also in the river (the declines mimicked each other). So I believe that the decline was system wide and had little to do with the discharge. Also, the catch rates continued to decline well after any effect from the discharge.

Otherwise, I don't see how the temperature changes you describe are anything new. I think they've always occurred and aren't the cause of a more difficult fishery.

Tony

John Pensyl said:

Tony, my theory isn't that of lower water temps attract fish. It's that warm water amongst cool attracts bait that attracts fish. If members found warmer water inside the walls than the NOAA found out in the lake it supports that perfectly. Today you need wind to push cold water to our end to create that warm water bubble inside the walls and attract fish into the harbor, this rarely happens. Obviously I was only able to witness it for 4 short days in the harbor but the difference in bait and fish populations below the surface was amazing. When temps reversed and the harbor held cooler water that the lake once again it was a absolute ghost town. Blank graph. I keep asking and all I hear about is how the warm waters of the buffalo harbor were a bait magnet during the hayday. The same scenaio sets up in the spring below the power vista in the lower, warm water from the reservoir pumps into the lower river and loads with shad and Muskies. Muskies that arent there when temps are equal or reversed. Thoughts?

[Capt. Larry D. Jones]

Tony, I hope when you show data in your March article that your only using data from the last 7 years that give the true water temp changes with these last few years of no Ice or less Ice on Lake Erie.

[Tony Scime]

Larry:

I include all the data. I think that's the only way we can make a comprehensive comparison. I need the old data compared to the new to see if anything's changed and to see if such changes can be the cause of lower catch rates.

Tony

[Stephen Glassic]

It seems to me that there still may be fair populations of Muskies in the Buffalo area of Lake Erie. It may be that they are just not visiting Buffalo Harbor as frequently as in the past.  The loss of the warm water discharge is probably a major contributing factor but there could be others.  We all know that if the bait doesn't visit, the muskies will not. 

The fact that in recent studies in the spring there has been lower numbers of adult and young of the year counted is the most distressing thing to me.  Maybe more extensive studies need to done in the spring to try and determine why the results have been so low.  Would it be helpful to do the same studies at earlier and/or dates?  Are there some unknown reasons the they are not showing up in the traditional spawning areas?  Have they move to other areas of the harbor for spawning or to attempt to spawn?  It was said that the trophy bass anglers have been encountering muskies in May.  Would it be helpful to find out from them where they have been encountering them and if it is in different areas, make a plan to further study those areas?

These are just some questions that I thought might be worth trying to find answers to.  It seems to me that evidence of spawning and the young of the year is the most critical data needed in monitoring the health of the fishery.

[John Miller]

Larry - "Tony, I hope when you show data in your March article that your only using data from the last 7 years"

John - Larry statements like this scare me and are my cause for concern that folks may be pushing for a change in regulations when they dont really undertsand the scope and consequence of their wishes.  As Tony has stated the only way to critically analyze the fishery dynamics as a result of water temp change would be to consider all of the data available.  Data from when the fishery thrived to current conditions.  Only considering portions of the data (data being the only facts we have) and then making assumptions about the best course of action in our fragile urban fishery is sloppy science and negligent at best.   

 

[33sjfo56qd2lf]

At this point, I don't want to just rebuild the population of muskies to what is once was, I want to rebuild the population far beyond that.  We are wasting our time discussing something that is far less important than talking about habitat building or trapping and stocking.  We need to start a thread discussing that instead of a season extension.

To me, if we do nothing but fish, it is the same thing as voting for the extension of the season.  PA stocks tens of thousands of muskies into Presque Isle Bay, Lake Erie, each year.  Why can't we do something that will build the fishery?  We are doing nothing for this fishery but fish it, and that alone is sickening.  Things will get worse before they get better, especially if we vote on extending the season during a time where we are all doing nothing to rebuild it.

[Tony Scime]

In past years we worked hard to raise size limits, to teach catch and release, and at habitat restoration and protection (most notably Strawberry Island). Also, the DEC has done extensive habitat restoration in the river. Unfortunately, not much habitat improvement has taken place in the harbor and we do have to re-focus and re-energize our efforts in that area.

Tony
 
Adam Kazmark said:

At this point, I don't want to just rebuild the population of muskies to what is once was, I want to rebuild the population far beyond that.  We are wasting our time discussing something that is far less important than talking about habitat building or trapping and stocking.  We need to start a thread discussing that instead of a season extension.

To me, if we do nothing but fish, it is the same thing as voting for the extension of the season.  PA stocks tens of thousands of muskies into Presque Isle Bay, Lake Erie, each year.  Why can't we do something that will build the fishery?  We are doing nothing for this fishery but fish it, and that alone is sickening.  Things will get worse before they get better, especially if we vote on extending the season during a time where we are all doing nothing to rebuild it.

[Capt. Larry D. Jones]

Adam, Acually the Upper Niagara River was stocked with Chautauqua Strain Muskie Fry by the NY DEC from 1941 to 1955,30,000 to 40,000 Fry.Then the Canadian OMNR stocked vairious sizes from fry up to fingerlings from 1960 to 1974,they came from Stoney Lake(Chautauqua Strain).So the Upper river is already a mixed strain of Great Lakes & Chautauqua Lakes Strain,so stocking Chautauqua Lake Strain in the Upper Niagara River would not change the genetics much from what is there now.But the Buffalo Harbor fish have been mostly Spotted Great Lakes Strain natural to the Great Lakes.But this year in November I know of (1) One Barred Chautauqua Lake Strain of Muskie that was caught & released.it was 51 1/2 inches long and had the Right Pectorial Fin CLIPPED! The muskie could not have come from any previous stocking of the Upper Niagara River because the last stocking with muskie fingerlings from the OMNR with a Right Front Pectorial Fin Clipping was 1968,that would make this muskie being 44 years old,not likely.The only other explimation is stocking of Chautauqua Lake Strain Muskies with fin clipping by the PA Fish & Game Comm. at Presque Isle Bay on Lake Erie infront of Erie,Pa.So it is highly possible that muskies are traveling from as far away as Pa on Lake Erie to the waters out infront of the Buffalo Harbor.We need to closely look at all the pictures olf the December caught muskies from the Canadian waters of the Upper Niagara River to see if any of those brighter silver colored muskies caught & released have a Clipped Fin.That will tell us if any of those muskies are transit from Lake Erie or not as well.I can see them not wanting to mix the strains in the Buffalo Harbor through stocking,but I see no reason why we can't ask for Prendergast Hatcheries extra 60,000 3 1/2 to 4 inch muskie figerlings that are excess every year and stock the East River!

[Capt. Larry D. Jones]

Capt. Larry D. Jones said:

Adam, Acually the Upper Niagara River was stocked with Chautauqua Strain Muskie Fry by the NY DEC from 1941 to 1955,30,000 to 40,000 Fry.Then the Canadian OMNR stocked vairious sizes from fry up to fingerlings from 1960 to 1974,they came from Stoney Lake(Chautauqua Strain).So the Upper river is already a mixed strain of Great Lakes & Chautauqua Lakes Strain,so stocking Chautauqua Lake Strain in the Upper Niagara River would not change the genetics much from what is there now.But the Buffalo Harbor fish have been mostly Spotted Great Lakes Strain natural to the Great Lakes.But this year in November I know of (1) One Barred Chautauqua Lake Strain of Muskie that was caught & released.it was 51 1/2 inches long and had the Right Pectorial Fin CLIPPED! The muskie could not have come from any previous stocking of the Upper Niagara River because the last stocking with muskie fingerlings from the OMNR with a Right Front Pectorial Fin Clipping was 1968,that would make this muskie being 44 years old,not likely.The only other explimation is stocking of Chautauqua Lake Strain Muskies with fin clipping by the PA Fish & Game Comm. at Presque Isle Bay on Lake Erie infront of Erie,Pa.So it is highly possible that muskies are traveling from as far away as Pa on Lake Erie to the waters out infront of the Buffalo Harbor.We need to closely look at all the pictures olf the December caught muskies from the Canadian waters of the Upper Niagara River to see if any of those brighter silver colored muskies caught & released have a Clipped Fin.That will tell us if any of those muskies are transit from Lake Erie or not as well.I can see them not wanting to mix the strains in the Buffalo Harbor through stocking,but I see no reason why we can't ask for Prendergast Hatcheries extra 60,000 3 1/2 to 4 inch muskie figerlings that are excess every year and stock the East River!

Could the better fishing in the West River compared to the East River have anything to do with the fact that the Canadian OMNR stocked the West River Canadian waters for 14 years?

What would the East River fishery possibly look like if we stocked 40,000 to 60,000 Chautauqua Strain Muskie Fingerlings for a few years?

[John Pensyl]

The muskies that survived VHS in the St. Clair and St. Lawrence fisheries are being described as some of the fastest growing hardiest muskies ever seen. Their growth potential is huge! The weak were removed from the gene pool, what if what's left are more resistant, faster growing, stronger fish? If we have any chance at any similar scenerio here I'd rather not water it down any more with hatchery brats. Wild fish rule!

[33sjfo56qd2lf]

John P,

I have heard the same thing from several people about the strain of muskies that survived the era of VHS.  We should trap muskies from the St Lawrence and stock those here.  It's funny, the DEC recommends not to stock for couple of reasons, one being VHS, and our fishery continues to decline, while other states do it and there fisheries are flourishing.

If there is anything we should really vote on pushing for, it's stocking.  We are all fisherman that want to catch giant muskies, and by keeping our focus on restoring our fishery, we will all benefit in the future, but we need act now.