Alright, I have a place on a private lake north of Mille Lacs that currently is quite the bass fishery. Many years ago there were a considerable number of 5-10 pound northerns, these fish were targeted for harvest by the 5 or 6 groups of people that have access to the lake for many years. Now the lake is overrun with hammer handles, but a few pike over 36 inches show every year. The DNR used my lake for an experiment with Northerns some years back (detailed below), with no real success.
Lake Stats–
Lake Area (acres): 121.00
Littoral Area (acres): 81.00
Maximum Depth (ft): 31.00
Water Clarity (ft): 8.50
Here is sampling for 1999–
Length of Selected Species Sampled for All Gear for the 1999 Survey Year
Number of fish caught in each category (inches)
Species 0-5 6-8 9-11 12-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 >29 Total
Black Crappie 4 24 6 0 0 0 0 0 34
Bluegill 183 43 0 0 0 0 0 0 226
Brown Bullhead 0 0 4 2 0 0 0 0 6
Hybrid Sunfish 18 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 33
Largemouth Bass 2 0 9 6 1 0 0 0 18
Northern Pike 0 0 2 5 10 32 6 1 56
Pumpkinseed Sunfish 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
Walleye 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2
Yellow Bullhead 9 12 10 0 0 0 0 0 31
Yellow Perch 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
Bear with me here, comments from the DNR—
Status of the Fishery (as of 06/28/1999)
“Lake X is a shallow lake located in a watershed of pastureland, rolling hardwoods, and a spruce wetland. There is a private access through the campground on the east side of the lake and there is no public access on the lake. Because of the limited access and a fish community with abundant small bluegill, Lake X was chosen for a management experiment aimed at increasing the size of bluegill through attempting to control the number of young-of-the-year bluegill. Controlling small bluegill numbers, which would allow for greater growth of those remaining, may be possible if predation pressure can be increased by increasing the abundance of yellow perch and reducing northern pike which prey upon perch. With this reasoning, over four thousand pounds of northern pike where removed and seven thousand pounds of yellow perch were stocked in 1992 and 1993. The results of this project were short term. Northern pike growth increased in 1993-95 following the removal of pike and stocking of yellow perch, possibly because they had more forage of yellow perch per individual. The stocked yellow perch may have been successful in limiting the successful production of yearling and young-of-the-year bluegills in 1992 and 1993. This may also have been part of a larger pattern of poor centrachid recruitment statewide. Whatever the cause, there was an increase in growth of young bluegills from 1993-1995, possibly as a result of the lower density. The perch stocking was not successful in establishing a population of significant abundance. There were just two yellow perch caught in the 1999 assessment. The number of predators left in the lake at the time of the stocking may have been too great to allow the perch population to take hold.
The current fish community is much the same as before the removal and stocking experiment. Northern pike abundance was fairly stable at 10.8 fish per gill net lift, which is high compared to other lakes of this type. The average size of the northern pike was 21.1 inches, which is the same as that observed in 1996 and represents an increase over the 20.3-inch average of 1991. Bluegill abundance was still within the normal range for this type of lake at 18.5 fish per trap net. The average size of the bluegills has increased slightly from 4.6 inches in 1991 to 5.2 in 1996 and 5.0 inches in 1999. The black crappie abundance index of 4.8 per gill net is stable at a level that is normal for a lake in this class. About half of the fish were over 8 inches long and had average growth compared to statewide averages. However, no fish were caught that were larger than 9.5 inches. The 1999 sample had fish from five different year-classes, which suggests good recruitment. Like the bluegill population, the black crappie in Lake X may not be able to grow beyond these sizes because of fishing pressure that targets the largest individuals. Lake X continues to support a population of largemouth bass with higher than average abundance. The size structure of the population has changed to include more small individuals since the 1996 assessment. A pulse of larger bass of the 1984-1990 year-classes that was observed in the 1996 assessment has largely passed through the system and was not caught in 1999. This is probably because due to a natural cycle of recruitment and senescence rather than harvest by the angler. Largemouth bass abundance and size structure has been variable since the first survey in the 1983. The quality of the largemouth bass fishery will likely improve as the 1994 and 1995 year-classes get older and anglers practice catch and release bass fishing. More than any management activity, angler behavior has a great potential for restructuring the northern pike population. Selective harvest of smaller northern pike and the release of the larger predators will allow for the reduction in the number of smaller northern through cannibalism and an increase in the catch rates of larger fish.”
I have managed to convince everyone that still fishes the lake to let everything go, ESPECIALLY the big ones. Most of them are old shoolers that don’t fish it anymore because the pike are gone. As far as I can tell, in talking with everyone who wets a line, I am about the only person that has really dialed in the bass. So my question to you guys is this. Considering the Pike problem we have, do you think it would be beneficial to stock muskies in this lake? I specifically want to address the small pike problem, and maybe thin the gils and crappies a bit. I know we have had this argument before about muskies eating bass, but I really don’t believe a proportional number of muskies stocked can ruin a robust bass fishery. If anything I think the skis will target the most abundant forage, the dinky pike.
Well?
