Muskies & Walleyes

All right guys I’ll start this off right away.

The lure manufacturers have it all wrong. There is no such thing as a walleyed colored lure to fish for Muskies. Muskies DO NOT eat walleyes. So the color should be “Glitter Gold” or “Fall brown”.

With that said I’m wondering the opinion on the group out of Alexandria that is moving towards Mille Lacs. The name of the group is “No More Muskies” and is trying to stop all muskie stocking. The arguement they use is that Muskies are depleteing the Walleye population. I strongly disagree with that and with the large number of Eye fisherman on this site I’m wondering what you guys think?

Steve “Glitter Gold” Cady

Hey Steve

Your kidding about the “No More Muskies” group… right? I’ve read several studies, gosh I wish I could remember when and where I saw this, on the diets of pike and muskie. Now the reports did disagree with your statement that “muskies DON’t eat walleye” but it did go to great detail to show the incredibly small number of instances where walleye ended up as muskie chow. The portion of the diet made up by walleye was very tiny. SO it does happen… but so infrequently that its a non-issue. And the walleye that were found in muskie and pike were themselves very small.

I sure hope nobody takes these “No More Muskies” guys seriously. Misconceptions do abound though. I know of one charter captain of Mille Lacs that still routinely slits bellies on small pike when he has a charter out fishing walleye. I’ve not seen it personally, I’d go completely postal on the guy, but I’ve been told this same story about the same guy by a couple of trusted friends.

Interesting subject. Thanks for posting it.

This is the first I have heard about the group, but I wonder if the root of it is the frequency in which large muskies hit walleyes on the way into the boat. Of course-one story gets told 50 times to 100 fisherman and pretty soon we start thinking that it happens all the time. Muskies do relate to deeper water than their northern counterparts-so they are probably more likely to SEE hooked walleyes struggling. Any distressed fish would be irresistable to a big predator.

I could be COMLETELY wrong-just some thoughts.

I was not kidding about the group…but I was kidding about the fact that muskies don’t eat walleyes…of course they do just as walleyes eat muskie fry…

I will get more info on the group and what it is saying attempting to do and post in here on FTL…

Stay tuned

Oh boy……the last thing that we need is fishermen battling fishermen. I’ve heard the same crap from people in northern WI who brag that they kill every muskie that they catch in order to save the walleyes.

One guy made it a point to tell me that the walleye fishing was steadily declining ever since muskie fishermen started to practice CPR.

How ironic that he failed to see the obvious fact that the walleye fishing started to go in the toilet with the advent of native spearers taking thousands and thousands of fish attempting to spawn every spring.

You guys are right, the studies are out there that prove that walleyes make up a minute part of a muskies diet. In fact, I doubt that a walleye would make an easy target for a muskie…..unless of course it’s hooked by a fisherman and is struggling for it’s life. That’s the point most illadvised fishermen miss when they see a muskie chasing and grabbing a walleye that they are reeling in. Muskies do the same thing to perch, bluegills, crappies, any hooked fish. They are on the top of the food chain and they know an easy meal when they see it. As far as them being roaming walleye eaters…forget it. I’m sure that the DNR knows better and would have the numbers to back up any studies on the subject.

This topic is like many others. Educating the general public is always a primary concern whenever you encounter them. Sounds like NMM is in need of some education.

Beav

“How ironic that he failed to see the obvious fact that the walleye fishing started to go in the toilet with the advent of native spearers taking thousands and thousands of fish attempting to spawn every spring.” Actually anglers take 10X more walleye than spearfishermen. All the fish that are speared are stripped and fry are raised in the Native American fish hatcheries. Every year the tribes stock more walleye in the lakes they spear than they take out. You wont find a knowledgeable fisheries biologist that will disagree with spearing. If walleye populations are on the downside in northern wisconsin, I don’t know, then it’s probably a byproduct of fishing harvest or pollution or other damage to the environment. Muskies don’t do any damage either because they are not a prefered forage and most lakes don’t have enough muskie to damage the walleye pop. anyway. thanks for listening

Not to start a pi$$ing match here, but you have to be kidding me! Walleyes stripped? Been at the landings, never saw it. Spearers have no impact? Yea, I guess that’s why limits on some lakes were reduced to 1 or 2 fish. Fishermen take 10X more fish? Well concidering that there are 100,000 more anglers than spearers, I can’t argue that point, it’s basic math.Restocking the lakes? What’s the survival rate of those fingerlings and fry?Can’t find a knowlegable fisheries biologist who’s got anything against spearing? I doubt it. It seems catch and release is a better option than having a piece of steel stuck through your skull.

Wouldn’t like to discuss the need to spear muskies too would you? Oh yeah, they’re great table fare. And since there are thousands of walleyes speared, you show me the need for more fish.

But then again, it’s supposed to be a spiritual thing. I just can’t understand why spearing thousands of fish is spiritual but spearing a few hundred isn’t?

Seems in the years before spearing there wasn’t a need for the term’safe harvest’, now it’s all you hear about. Once again the minority gets to take way more fish than they’ll ever need while the average Joe gets to take 1 or 2.

You said it yourself….a byproduct of overharvest. I think the overharvest happens every spring.

If you think that spearing has no bearing on the walleye population, I’ll have to say that I disagree.

Smallmouth bass are flourishing better than ever before. That’s a by-product of catch and release regulations and maybe, just maybe, the fact that they don’t get decimated every spring when they’re trying to spawn.

Beaver, I’m not looking for a fight, just looking to inform. The numbers don’t lie there is no question that indians stock more walleye than they spear. How many survive, who knows, but how many DNR stocked fish survive. The DNR and GLIFWC’s (great lakes indian fish and wildife commission) techniques are simular and success is likely very simular. It is obvious that spearing has no major effect because there is a clause to prevent it. If spearing has a negitive effect on fish populations the DNR has the right to stop spearing. So since indians can spear it must not have a major effect on the walleye population. I C&R all fish that I catch and no I am not happy that indians spearfish but the effect is overrated and there is nothing you do to stop it. I would much rather see anglers C&r more fish. Too many anglers fish and take limits of fish everytime out. You said yourself that there are far more angler than spearfisherman and so the effect of anglers is obviously more significant. Muskies? very few muskies are speared per year, again I would rather they didn’t but the effect must not be significant. Some lakes might benefit form spearing, not many but a few. Some lakes in northern wisconsin are filled with stunted fish these lakes could use some more harvest spearing or angling. Spearing 100’s vs. spearing 1000’s I can’t argue with that statement. Well, thats all, Thanks for listening -Swimwizz

Time to join in……………….I think there’s more to it than what is being said. It’s not the DNR that fought the courts tooth and nail to legalize a spearing season. It would appear that they have found a way to balance it, but low impact? Every fish taken, AND every fish left has an impact. Little to no effect is just another way of saying that it’s going to take longer than one might anticipate to deal with a bigger problem.

I just read an article this past month about stocking efforts and the declining rate of success in it’s programs. This study is showing that if a lake will support 200,000 pounds of walleye, that’s it. It doesn’t matter how many you C&R or restock, the lake will only support that amount. At maximum support, it’s supportive of stunting growth because of the competition for forage. All species are subject to this. “Junk” fish, panfish, game fish………..all of them. So, the new push from this study? Start selective harvesting fish or else you will eventually help reduce the size of adults and lower your odds of producing trophy fish. Again, over time.

Throw spearing into this………………what size fish is being speared? Throw the angling harvest in……………what’s being kept? What is being restocked behind either one? A few little fish, or a couple big fish, either way the pressure from both sides IS having an overall effect on what we see in our lakes today. Restrictions and slots and even modified techniques and seasons.

So far, it would appear that both sides still have a lot of people to educate about balance, but be forwarned, restocking is not “THE” magic answer, and neither is 100% C&R.

Do I have the answer? I only wish for the sake of all who are passionate about this sport that I did.

No question that stocking is not always the right answer. I know some lakes that have hevay stocking (like bone lake) have seen increased numbers of muskie but the average weight of the fish for a given length has gone down. Stocking can produce un-naturally high numbers of fish but since a lake can handle only so many pounds of each species then the average size and weight decreases due to overcompetitiopn for food. The answer for how to manage lakes is still tough. The lakes need to ride the line between too many and too few fish. I support selective harvest, I personally C&R most of my fish because I don’t care to eat them. Occasionally keeping a few panfish or walleyes for other people. I don’t know what walleye population are like in northern wisconsin because I don’t fish for them up there. I know there is plenty of muskie and bass and maybe a few too many panfish.

No question that stocking is not always the right answer. I know some lakes that have hevay stocking (like bone lake) have seen increased numbers of muskie but the average weight of the fish for a given length has gone down. Stocking can produce un-naturally high numbers of fish but since a lake can handle only so many pounds of each species then the average size and weight decreases due to overcompetition for food. The answer for how to manage lakes is still tough. The lakes need to ride the line between too many and too few fish. I support selective harvest, but I personally C&R most of my fish because I don’t care to eat them, occasionally keeping a few panfish or walleyes for other people. I don’t know what walleye population are like in northern wisconsin because I don’t fish for them up there. I know there is plenty of muskie and bass and maybe a few too many panfish.

I was in Gander Mountain today and looking at some clearance Buchertail lures and got a good chuckle when I turned the package over, only to read the description as “Baby Shallow Raider – Walleye”!!! Steve, thanks for this post! I’d have never “appreciated” the Buchertail label otherwise!

Have you used any of the new “ducky” styled lures yet and if so, what has your results been?