Musky Stocking in a couple new Western Washington Lakes

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Nick Berto on June 20, 2012 at 9:26am

I don't know much to how this would effect the bass in either lake but I can say both lakes already have terrible facilities for boat launch/access.

Samish has one actual launch lane with broken cement that can take out an axle and a space to the side to launch that is gravel with 2' plus holes that if you don't have 4 x 4, you will get stuck, I had a hard time with it! And as Tag pointed out in the Musky group discussion, tweakers are another thing (I got my truck broken into big time). Good luck trying to make this an adequate or civil launch area. I hope the added attention would only help this launch because it is a beautiful lake and area.

Stevens can be a nightmare as well. Rowers/crew people think they own the launch, Kokanee/trout anglers take up most spots unless you are there at o'dark thirty and we won't talk about the traffic if the weather is even remotely nice out.

I wonder what the Kokanee fisherman on either lake will have to say as they have and will continue to put forth a lot of time and money to continue both of these lakes as two of the best.

I hope there are better reasons for adding Musky to these lakes other than for the hell of it and for more places to fish for them.

Permalink Reply by Nick Berto on June 20, 2012 at 9:28am

Samish Squawfish and Stevens Perch could use some enemies though!!!

Permalink Reply by Chad Simon on June 20, 2012 at 9:29am

Are these studies being done on walleye introduction? You can't tell me there is more people interested in catching musky over walleye! Not one lake in Western Washington has walleye! You'll find more people fishing walleye on any given day on Potholes alone, then you will find people fishing for musky in the entire state! Makes complete sense to me, more misuse of WDFW funds! As big a predator is the walleye is, I can't think of one lake/river that has a diminishing bass/spinyray population because of walleye present! Potholes, Banks, Columbia river, Roosevelt, Moses, exc...... All these are different in there own unique ways, yet they all have thriving populations of walleye/other saught after fish. I'm not a biologist, although I do have a minor in biology, bachelors in Law Enforcement with an emphasis in fish/wildlife, and I've worked numerous jobs with the WDFW. He who cries the most usually gets his way! God forbide the WDFW ever ask the anglers what they want! I've seen so many mismanaged fisheries in this state, it makes me sick! Not all of us have time to attend hearings in such, some of us actually have families, and work! Are the musky groups that are propelling these efforts financially prepared to face the reprocussions that could result from harming other fisheries?

Permalink Reply by Ryan Higgins on June 20, 2012 at 10:35am

Chad, Tiger Musky are sterile and can be controlled.  Once Walleye are introduced, good luck removing them if they have devastating effects.  There is a reason the Tigers are used and not only by Washington State, but by many other states including New Mexico.  They are an effective predator whos population can be managed by increasing or decreasing plant numbers and size limit enforcement.  I cant think of one lake that has a diminishing bass/spiny ray populations due to Musky introduction other than those lakes planted with spiny ray reduction as the management goal.  I also can not think of one lake introduced with Tiger Musky were proven to be reducing Salmonid populations.  Walleye are voracious predators of Salmonids in the Columbia River system.

Again many of you are ignoring the reason these fish are introduced.  It is not solely a sport fishing venture.  These fish are a management tool used to control stunted populations or over abundant populations of other fish.  Evergreen Reservoir has an over abundance of small stunted non-native perch.  Tigers were introduced to curtail the problem.  Curlew Lake, Tapps, and Merwin all had larg populations of Northern Pikeminnow.  Tigers were introduced to curtail the problem.  Many diet studies have been done on many of these lakes and it shows that the Tigers generally target the target species for management.  This is due in part to the fish either being preferred prey (soft rayed fish living in the same water column) or the most abundant easy to catch prey (over abundant spiny rays in the same water column). 

You also have to remember, LM and SM Bass, Perch, Walleye, Crappie, and Bluegill are all non-native predators to Washington State and they can not be controlled other than lake treatment via poison.

Permalink Reply by Nick Berto on June 20, 2012 at 11:20am

So why is it that they want to plant Samish and/or Stevens then? Still haven't heard the reason or a fish they will help manage on either of these fisheries that is creating a problem?

Permalink Reply by Ryan Higgins on June 20, 2012 at 12:27pm

I cant tell you, I'm not a biologist for the state and I'm not privy to that information.  I will ask around the Musky community and see if anyone knows.  What I do know is that Stevens is being looked at due to it's topography, specifically it's size, depth, and structure.  The state also took into account the proximity to urban areas as well as improvised boat launches.  WDFW stocks Tigers in lakes with adequate forage for the fish.  The reduction in Pikeminnow numbers could and most likely will increase the survival rate of Salmonid fry in the planted waters.  I do not know if either lake has a Pikeminnow problem or a stunted fish population, I dont fish that side of the state.  I'll bring any facts I learn of here.

Permalink Reply by Tag Watson on June 20, 2012 at 1:53pm

The average size of the bass and in both Lake Samish and Lake Stevens is exceptional.  I know the kokanee fisheries in both lakes are among the best in Western Washington as well.  I've never caught a pikeminnow in Lake Stevens or seen one on the underwater camera, but I've only fished Stevens a half dozen times.

Lake Samish, on the other hand, does have a population of pikeminnows.  I'm not a biologist, but the established pikeminnow population hasn't appeared to have a detrimental effect yet on the spiny ray, kokanee or Fall cutthroat fisheries.  Maybe we can pay the tweakers and crackheads a bounty (like the Columbia River) to catch and harvest the pikeminnows so they can stop stealing valuables out of our rigs? 

Permalink Reply by Chris Blandi on June 20, 2012 at 2:06pm

I like Tag's idea. Plus it will save the Lake Tapp's guys gas money.

Permalink Reply by Kevin Bye on June 20, 2012 at 10:06pm

I will admit that I have a strong bias that favors tiger muskies. I enjoy fishing them and educating the general public and promoting the fishery. However,I'm not familiar with Samish and have only fished Stevens maybe 3 times in my life,so I have no clue as to the "possible" introduction of tigers and their overall impact.

I would rather see Mason Lake receive a plant,that lake is choked with squaws.

I also enjoy bass fishing and if I thought tigers were destroying bass lakes,trust me,I wouldn't be such a strong supporter of the musky program. I will jump in more later,just got home from Idaho and need to dry out some gear.

Permalink Reply by Daniel Bavery on June 22, 2012 at 11:24pm

You guys think Tag be a good bass fisherwoman, you should see him with his Squawfish pole, he is beast! Thats when he wears his superman outfits

Permalink Reply by Tag Watson on June 23, 2012 at 8:42am

Ha ha!  Let me know if squawfish start showing up in the Cal Delta.  I'll bring my tights, cape, squawfish combo and several dozen fertile, juvenile musky to try to save your precious fishery.

Daniel Bavery said:

You guys think Tag be a good bass fisherwoman, you should see him with his Squawfish pole, he is beast! Thats when he wears his superman outfits

Permalink Reply by Daniel Bavery on June 23, 2012 at 10:05pm

The bassies are big enough here to eat them Squaws, hehe. At least thats what the internet says...my new to me Ranger still hasnt seen water yet...sigh

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page