From the Lake City DNR Office:
We had an interesting tag return reported last month. A guy from Eau Claire caught one of our tagged lake sturgeon below the dam in Eau Claire. We had tagged this fish below LD 2 in 2008. It was a small fish – 36 inches when recaptured. Long movement for a little fella.
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Lake City, MN 55041
So that shoots the whole theory of only the large females move. (and supports the “never say never” on the river!)
Did it grow much in 2 years?
There are sturgeon in pool 2? I dont believe it. Somethings fishy here.
It was below Lock and Dam #2 Mike…or the head of pool #3.
I’m working on getting the growth info. 
I will say it again. I did see a dead sturgeon in pool 2, 2 years ago. Take it for what it is worth. Maybe our grand kids will fish for sturgeon in downtown St Paul…or not.
That’s a pretty impressive trip considering all the obstacles it had to go thru to get there in only two years.
This is also solid proof that there is no need for fish passageways, saving $650,000.00 in studies and millions in construction costs.
I have registered a complaint with Minnesota DNR because I have not been getting feedback on reported tags. If I report fish for the Minnesota River, I never get feedback. What other incentive do I have to report. I think this is one of the great game fish of the world and have every reason to want these fish to survive and multiply. Why would the DNR not encourage those of us who take the time to give them information?
I am all too aware that it is not legal to fish for Lake Sturgeon in the Mississippi, but that does not keep anyone fishing for Shovelnose or Channel Cat from catching them whether or not they want to.
All of the fish I have reported but not received answers for were reported to DNR in St. Paul by phone. When I get a better method, I will convert to that.
Of the three tags I recently turned in, two had been tagged in Four Mile Bay and were 40 miles from the tagging site. One had been tagged in the Sturgeon River in Ontario and was only 3 – 5 miles from the original tagging site.
a80 923 had been tagged in Four Mile bay on April 19 and was reported again in 2005 and 2006 all in Four Mile Bay. We caught the fish 40 miles away and it had not been heard from in four years. It grew from 50.6 to 52, 54 and when we caught it a whopping 56 inches. What a fun fish and what interesting information.
Quote:
Did it grow much in 2 years?
The fish recaptured in the Chippewa River at Eau Claire was tagged on 9/23/2008 below LD2 and was 32.7 inches TL at tagging. So it grew about 3.3” in two years.
How far did this fish travel and what path do you suspect it took to get there? 
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
