Game Fishing Forum banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Administrator
Joined
·
13,955 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Ever wonder how far Musky travel and what time of year they travel. The following maps should help give an idea.

Sonic Tracking of Tiger Muskies

In October 1997, nine tiger muskies (Table 10) were implanted with Sonotronic sonic tags, including one depth tag, to monitor fish movements. Locations offish were noted weekly. Subsequently, two fish apparently died in early April 1998; no further sign of one fish was observed while the depth tag (#9) was recovered on the lake bottom in a few inches of water. The lake level had been lowered several feet prior to tag recovery in late May. This tag was fitted with a new battery and implanted into another fish (#10) in October 1998. Tracking offish was terminated in November; signal strength of several tags was weak, making tracking difficult.

Results of the tracking are presented as maps (Figure 1.). For each fish as possible, two maps are presented; October 1997 -December 1998 and January-November 1999. In examining movements, it is clear that year-to-year gross and seasonal movements are similar for each fish.
Monitoring of the two depth-tagged fish showed fish were deep in winter and spring and shallow in summer and fall. Depth-tagged fish #9 was in 0.6 m of water on October 10 in the big weedbed and on October 21, it was in front of Mayfield Dam in 12.7 m of water. Mean depth of the fish from October 21 through April 13 was 8.2 m; once it was under a raft of logs at a depth of 1 m. The deepest observation was 14.5 m. The fish usually appeared to be close to the lake bottom.

Depth-tagged fish #10 was at an average depth of 8.2 m from November through May, and 1.3 m from June through October. The deepest the fish was detected was 23 m. The depth range generally reflects residence in the shallow weedbeds in summer and fall and deeper open water in winter and spring. This fish also appeared to be close to the lake bottom.

Table 10. Length at tagging and duration of tracking of sonic-tagged tiger muskies.
Fish Length (cm) Time Tracked
1 85 Oct. 1997-Nov. 1999
2 67 Oct. 1997-Nov. 1999
3 94 Oct. 1997-Nov. 1999
4 105 Oct. 1997-Nov. 1999
5 97 Oct. 1997- June 1999
6 86 Oct. 1997-Nov. 1999
7 93 Oct. 1997-Nov. 1999
8 72 Oct. 1997-Apr. 1999
9 110 Oct. 1997-Apr. 1999
10 80 Oct. 1998-Nov. 1999
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,952 Posts
That's pretty cool. I have never targeted them. I would like to some day. Looks to me like they tend to hold in the same areas.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
554 Posts
Looks like incoming water flow and shallow fast flats add to the catch total (JUST FROM WHAT i CAN SEE)

Since Ive never fished Mayfield Im certainly not qualifiyed to give the answer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
434 Posts
Theres a pretty good coorelation there with the location densities and where you see the most fish taken. That winston creek bay is a wide shallow bay with moderate weed growth and lots of baitfish. That entire east bank is thick shore with logs and debris overhanging into the water, and that area south of the trout hatchery is a large flat with quick access to deep water, and lots of shore structure and weeds. There are fish in the whole lake, but those areas are where you see 75% of the tmusk fisherman, and therefore a good portion of the catch. Definately an interesting study, wonder if it was just out of curiosity?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,037 Posts
It would appear that the biggest concentrations are near the inlet or outlets, Foraging for Feeder Fish ? "TRAPPER"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,397 Posts
THE TRAPPER said:
It would appear that the biggest concentrations are near the inlet or outlets, Foraging for Feeder Fish ? "TRAPPER"
Interesting statement!

I wonder why Tacoma' FHMP does not address these introduced none native fish species…? Only a fool would think that these Tigers don't eat smolts, especially if one follows the charts of where these fish are located at. I am pretty sure if you follow the smolts paths, that one would also find that there is a reason for these Tigers locations. :eek:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,168 Posts
So when are we going Doc? I have the tow rig and a place to stay and you got the boat and gear.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
328 Posts
hey hook, where did you find this at? did they have any other tracking test? i'd be curious to see some other species as well. cool read thanks.

troy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,397 Posts
The way that I remember it, it was a renegade WDFW employee who was paid by Tacoma to introduce these fish. The way that I remember, that person was just about hung out to dry by his superiors at the time. If other species where tagged with the same type of radio tags, you would be seeing a whole different story. But when the FOX who was guarding there hen house (Tacoma) pays the bills, and the there were no ESA listed at that time, the Tigers where allowed to go there way. Tigers have also been caught below the Barrier Dam; but that information has been kept pretty tight to the WDFW belt….Da!

Tigers belong in areas where salmon and steelhead are not. One has to ask how the Endangered Specie Act addresses these fish in the Cowlitz. But then again, one has to ask that question to all.

It's true that Tigers may be fun really fun to catch…but at what price for the VERY FEW that are caught each year is it really worth it?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,033 Posts
If CFM's speculations are true, I know a great way to get back at the Muckleshoot and their sockeye... Muskies, Pike and Walleye galore in L Washington! Talk about cutting off the head eh? ;)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
414 Posts
i could be wrong but i remember hearing that they were put in to eat the pike minnows that were eating the salmon smolt. they are suposedly sterile and i am sure they are eating more than pike minnows but i know they put them in merwin and they really did a number on the pike minnows. either way i love them and i think they are a cool fish to catch, i am not a big fan of introducing a non native fish even if it is sterile.

thanks for the post though doc. it was a really cool read. clap:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,033 Posts
The problem with adding a fish in to control another is that the fish you've added doesn't always follow directions. Muskies are voracious and will eat anything they get their rows of teeth on. Whether this be pike minnow or smolt, they will not distinguish, but will eat if it happens to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. Its kind of like that lady who swallowed a fly, so she ate a spider story.

Now, granted, Muskies ARE fun to catch. If they are there, no complaints from me. If they are stocked for sporting purposes, no complaints. But if they are stocked with the intention of modifying nature, I'll have to ask about the long term consequences.

Fortunately, those tiger muskies are sterile, so if the state does decide that they have too much of an impact, the muskies would not be teribly hard to get rid of.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top