Hay Creek Fall Electroshock Results

MAPS TO GUIDE YOU TO THIS EXCELLENT FISHERY, A MERE 30-45 MINUTES FROM THE TWIN CITIES:

Hay Creek – satellite view

Hay Creek – habitat improvement and easement map

MN DNR did a fall electroshock and here are the results:

Adult Brown Trout 2,600+ per mile

Younger Brown Trout 2,300+ per mile

Trout over 12 inches per mile 452

Trout over 14 inches per mile 62

~5,000 per mile total!

HAY CREEK FISHING RULES (standard season): Protected slot limit for trout 12″ to 16″ (artificial* lures or flies only), bag limit of 5 trout, no more than 1 over 16″.

HAY CREEK FISHING RULES (pre-season – STARTS JANUARY 1): Catch and release, barbless hooks, artificial* lures or flies

Thanks should also go to the dedicated volunteers who gave their time over the past few summers to do H.I. work and continue to improve the overall health of this watershed.

There are certainly quite a few trout in this stream, adverstising and maps aside. Notice the numbers that illustrate how many larger trout there are not at this point. 514/5000 over 12 inches isn’t many, so I urge all of you to continue and follow the slots, as well as even allowing those fish over the slot to be released.

Thanks for your considerations,
D.A.

Good point DA. I give thanks for TCTU, MNTU, MTA, the MN DNR (and any others I may have missed). Personal compliments to Josh Nelson, the TCTU guy who spearheaded HI projects.

DA the larger fish 452 12″ or longer are protected under the 12-16″ slot limit. It is a good reminder however.

Do you know how many trout per mile are 16″ or larger from the fall suvey?

Do you know how many trout 12″ or larger on the previous electroshock to compare?

I don’t have any HC numbers, but in talking to guys who routinely fish it, the numbers, especially smaller, under the slot fish, are more prevalent. There are probably many parts as to why that is. Certainly the 12-16 inch slot helps as does the artificials only regulation.

My reminder is simply that rules are rules, and we must follow them even if we don’t agree with them: slots, artificials only areas, season lengths and boundaries, etc.

D.A.

P.S. I’ll send Josh your priase when I talk to him.

Quote:

---

P.S. I’ll send Josh your priase when I talk to him.

---

Thanks D.A. Maybe Josh et al. can stop calling me a poacher and we can bury the hatchet with a round of boilermakers.

My apologies here. Initial post modified. Artificial lures or flies only. One cannot use corn, cheese, marshmallows as I initially suggested. Plastic worm fine. Assume PowerBait (stink in a can) also cannot be used.

How about Gulp?

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

P.S. I’ll send Josh your priase when I talk to him.

---

Thanks D.A. Maybe Josh et al. can stop calling me a poacher and we can bury the hatchet with a round of boilermakers.

---

that’s only going to happen when you realize and admit that the folks filling you with lies and misinformation are not in your best interest.

Talked with the MN DNR today. They confirmed Gulp plastics – unscented and scented can be used on Hay. Trout pond fishing a few weeks a go I started with crawlers but switched to unscented plastics which were doing better. Anyone have recomendations – favorite brand, color etc?

T-31 to pre-season!

Quote:

---

Notice the numbers that illustrate how many larger trout there are not at this point. 514/5000 over 12 inches isn’t many

---

Dave can you give me some examples of streams with better numbers of fish >12″??? Everything I have read tells me 95% of trout will be less than 12.” Hay Creek seems to be the exception, at around twice the average – 10% of fish are 12″ or larger.

We could compare this to Trout Run. Trout Run from the survey this fall:

Adults/mile = 3,847

>12 inches/mile = 332

>14 inches/mile = 30

>16 inches/mile = 11

Recruits/mile = 7,950 …that’s 11,797 trout/mile!

So if we add up the fish >12″ (in red) for Trout Run we come up with 373 trout/mile. Trout Run IMO is significantly more popular than Hay Creek. It also has slot limits, artificial only.

I can’t give you that. I don’t give most people that kind of info. let alone put it out there on the web. There’s more to trout populations than electroshocking numbers.

You do understand that not every inch of every stream is electroshocked. They have stations and they get a sample based upon a certain reach. There are sections of streams that have better numbers, larger fish, etc. than other sections of streams. One electroshocking station is not necessarily indicative of the entire stream

There are streams that don’t have the history or the data that you are looking for.

BTW, recruits means YOY, so I look at those numbers with a grain of salt. They are still juveniles and have a long way to go to make it. There are many variables beyond our control that can easily decimate at YOY class.

Ask the creel survey guys which stream is more popular in terms of hours.

D.A.

You bring up an excellent point DA. Leave rhe recruits/YOY out of it. Their survival is low. It will be interesting to see how things play out on Trout Run in the next 5-10 years.

Trout Run
373/3847 adults = 9.7% population 12″ or larger

Hay Creek
514/2600 adults = 19.8% population 12″ or larger

I think 20% of a trout population 12″ or greater must be off the charts. Bet this is a new milestone for MN DNR, TCTU, MNTU, MTA. Congratulations are in order!!!

Quote:

---

It will be interesting to see how things play out on Trout Run in the next 5-10 years.

---

I’d say as long as we have summers without major flooding, the numbers will continue to escalate to a point. Each stream only has a certain amount of biomass to support its residents (not just trout).

D.A.

lots of BWO’s on those streams.

You can have your PRIVATE stream

When looking at DNR trout population data/figures you don’t add the numbers of trout over 12″ with those over 14 inches and those over 16 inches to give you a total. Example: if the DNR’s electro fishing data says there is 332 trout per mile over 12 inches that mean it INCLUDES ALL trout past 12 inches on up to whatever the largest size trout is they captured. in this case the total of all sizes of large trout over 12 inches is 332.

I should mention that for years the number of trout per mile in ALL streams in SE MN the DNR sampled by electro fishing AVERAGED TOGETHER was LESS than a 100 per mile over 12 inches. So when you start getting 300 + per mile over 12 inches that is considered EXCELLENT large fish numbers. Not poor, or average but way above average!

Great news! I cant wait for me and my buddies to hit Hay Creek with some Gulp for some pigs!!

If you want pigs you need to fish the mouth of Hay Creek where it dumps into the Mississippi. Besides, if you fish the new H.I area you will have LOTS of company!

Dear HYBES actually amazed that the Hay Creek shock surveys are actually NOT in the pasture area where the HI takes place. Rather it is downstream of the “town” of Hay Creek. I always assumed the shock data would be where the HI was done however the DNR needs to be consistent and shock the same area over the years before data become statistically significant. Klotz told me some of the statisticians are telling him he needs 20+ years of data.

If you want a fish dinner you can do so with flies, spinners, jigs, and glup. Just no soft baits including food such as corn, marshmallows, cheese etc. You can keep five trout (12-16″ protected), with only one fish being over 16.”

My brother In law is on the DNR electro-fishing crew I talked to him last night about where the electro-fishing was conducted on Hay Creek. He said, it was done on the old H.I project the trout groups and the DNR designed cooperatively together about 12 years ago. That area is downstream from the NEW H.I. area about two miles. I’m not surprised the old H.I. area had good numbers of trout in it. So actually they did shock in an H.I area on Hay Creek just not the NEW H.I. area!

I JUST called Vaughn Snook the DNR Assistant Fisheries Supervisor to run down a number of questions I had about the Hay Creek Electro-fishing data.

What I found out is quite a bit different than what was said in the original post.

1. The area the DNR electro-fished was not in the NEW H.I. area that the original post made it sound like it was.

2. The area the DNR did electro-fish was also NOT in the protective slot regs area of the stream.

3. The area they did electro-fish had some old H.I work but was managed under General Regulations. Which means the regulation allows all methods of angling and harvest.

4.The DNR wondered why someone would purposely try to drive anglers to the NEW H.I area on Hay Creek by making up false electro-fishing data. They thought it was alittle funny someone would do that especialy since that area has protective slot regulations. I wonder why someone would do that?

Below is the REAL Electro-fishing data collected on Hay Creek by our DNR. I couldn’t send the 2008 electro-fishing data along because it is locked in a PDF. However, Vaughn said the data from 2008 was about the same as 2009 maybe aliitle less 12 inch trout per mile.

Vaughn told me the DNR hasn’t electro-fished the area the NEW H.I. is in for YEARS.

Tom,

Here is what we have for estimated numbers of brown trout in the Hay Creek LTM station from October 5, 2009…

Adults/mile = 440

Recruits/mile = 689

Total estimated numbers of BNT’s = 1,129

Within the adult population above there is an estimated…

BNT’s >12 inches/mile = 65

BNT’s >14 inches/mile = 11

BNT’s >16 inches/mile = 5

These numbers have not been error checked and the official assessment is not completed and signed…so they could change somewhat….but not by much.

GPS Coordinates for the downstream end of the 975 ft station are Northing 4927798, Easting 534688

This station is NOT in the protected slot water.

The assessment from last year (2008) is attached.

Vaughn