Jump to content

50" Musky susquehanna river

1dogshy
 Share

Recommended Posts

final flight

final flight

Posted
Posted

Oops anyway if the musky has disemated the white sucker, the rock bass, the yellow belly catfish, carp and bluegill forage base all gamefish specie will suffer, say what you will but it's my belief that this is what the tigers have done, the river has never been cleaner than what it is now, so it's not "pollution" that is to blame . Cleaner/ clearer water allows these eating machines to grow to there large size in a short time. If I'm not in the boat trolling the lakes I'm on the river, 50-60 days a year(?) and I have really noticed the sufferance in the forage base . And yes I have caught tigers with walleyes in there gut along with small mouths , I don't see how you can compare a lake study with a river, study and cone to the same conclusion oh well ..... To each there own!

1dogshy

1dogshy

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Good readings.

Thank you.

I found this interesting:

The Musky was considered "Too Valuable a fish to Kill for examination of its stomach contents"

Therefore, they flushed the stomachs.

Nice job..Muskiedreams

I fish on the rivers (Susquehanna and Chenango) here 3-4 days a week all spring,fall, part of winter til it freezes solid.. plus summer months.

Some years probably 150-200+ days on the water...

Musky and Tigers rare.

Edited by 1dogshy
muskiedreams

muskiedreams

Posted
Posted

As you can see in the study, there were several flowages and a river or two involved in the study. It is true that every fishery is different and there is a fine balance of all factors including stocking, forage base, fishing pressure, birds, weather events (especially in conjunction with flowage changes), pathogens, algae, aquatic vegtation, various types of runoff from farming, mining, industrial activity and other human activity. Even the presence a certain bug can have an affect. When a fishery changes, there are usually multiple factors involved.

 

If you look back at the recorded history of events, conclusions, and actions taken by your state DNR fisheries specialists, you will probably find some answers. It is possible that muskies were a factor if there is in fact a change in forage base or other gamefish populations, but I doubt it is the sole factor. One thing about tigers is that they do not reproduce. So, if they become a problem, they can be eliminated from the system by simply ending stocking.

 

The fisheries biologist are our best bet in managing our fisheries. They are not perfect. They can make mistakes. They are sometimes slow to take action but they can't just react without analyzing a situation detemining the best course of action. There are also sometimes other roadblocks and hurdles they have to overcome. It is by no means a perfect system but it is the best we have. The best thing you can do is to work with them, let them know what your concerns are and learn what they are doing to address your concerns. But you should never take matters into your own hands. That can get you in trouble and maybe cause other problems.

 

By the way, How many walley do you harvest per year and how many other anglers are also harvesting them? How much baitfish harvesting activity is occouring? Is there any significant numbers of fish being taken by Native Americans? If you are on the water that many days, your observations (and that of others) while on the water may provide significant data that can be used to better manage the fishery. Ask your DNR what you can do to help them.

pro-fish-n-c

pro-fish-n-c

Posted
Posted

Is the walleye population on the decrease in the Susquehenna? I was under the impression that there are members on here that catch 25 to 50 fish a trip right through the winter.

1dogshy

1dogshy

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Just quick.

I dont keep many fish.

Maybe a few a month at most. Or none.

I see too many people who just take and take and take.

Other fisherman:

Usually not many.. sometimes None others are fishing where I go.

With the most being only at "best times for catching" times of year.

Environment. .. these river flood like mad at times...

So I would think it changes things up.

Not many native Americans that I know of fishing here.

Gotta run...

My best...

Sent from my SCH-I435 using Lake Ontario United mobile app

steelie1

steelie1

Posted
Posted

Is the walleye population on the decrease in the Susquehenna? I was under the impression that there are members on here that catch 25 to 50 fish a trip right through the winter.

rougarou

rougarou

Posted
Posted

! dogshy That area has a large amish population? I have witness over harvesting of steelhead on western NY tribs and Walleye on Chautauqua

final flight

final flight

Posted
Posted

I personally keep afew but only the ones that are under 19", the rest go back in, may be I'm in a hot bed of musky but it's not uncommon to hook into several Muskies during a day of fishing, north branch of the susky, Wyalusing down stream to Messhoppen, (?) I know I guy that guides for bass and he has the same feeling about the tigers, WAY To MANY !!

old man

old man

Posted
Posted

Where exactly are there too many tigers? I'll go get some and release them here. Dec is impotent. Been fishing 50 years and checked once.

Sent from my iPhone using Lake Ontario United

muskiedreams

muskiedreams

Posted
Posted

I am not too familliar with the Susquahanna except that when I was a kid we used to go to visit my grandparents in Shamokin PA. This was in the mid to late 60s before all the highways were built. The roads were all one lane on each side. It was always a nail biter every time my dad went pass a truck going up a long steep grade. We used to follow the river for quite a while and cross it a few times. It was probably pretty poluted then.

1dogshy

1dogshy

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Final F.... you got themmm!... up above the line into ny...

Owego/broome... we are not like that..

Roug.... no Amish here..

I see people taking or saying... taking limit walleye day after day...

I just hope they all get eaten.

Ice fishing on Whitney Point reservoir...

There are some who take any size of anything...

They are a certain nationality. ..

Really dont want to say...

Sent from my SCH-I435 using Lake Ontario United mobile app

steelydan

steelydan

Posted
Posted

I grew up fishing the susky so I feel that I can say with all honesty that the catch rate of all species ( except bass ) is way down from the younger years, this being said take a look at the stocking numbers that the PA. Fish commission has posted. You can't put 689,000 eating machines in a water way and not have an effect! Like everything else they do it's all about the money! So you release them unharmed I chose not to. By the way make sure you don't have weeds hanging off your trailer or your get a ticket for INVASIVE species, what a crock!!!!!

there is also 100x's the amount of guys fishing. should we kill them??

muskiedreams

muskiedreams

Posted
Posted

Ice fishing on Whitney Point reservoir...

There are some who take any size of anything...

They are a certain nationality. ..

Really dont want to say...

Sent from my SCH-I435 using Lake Ontario United mobile app

 

 

New York State should use some of that surplus money they have to hire more conservation officers and surveilence equipment to enforce the regulations. And then they need to require Judges to impose substantial minnimum mandaitory sentances.

 

Ronix 51

Ronix 51

Posted
Posted

Final Flight you (and the many other anglers who come to similar conclusions regarding muskellunge/northern pike) are severely mislead and uninformed/ignorant. Muskiedreams provided you with some informative reading material and in addition I figured I'd offer my .02 in response to your previous postings.

 

"...the river has never been cleaner than what it is now, so it's not "pollution" that is to blame . Cleaner/ clearer water allows these eating machines to grow to there large size in a short time"

 

Zebra mussel colonies were first found in the Upper Susqi beginning in the early 2000s and have since been documented throughout the river system down to as far as the Chesapeake Bay. Most fisherman are well-aware of zebra mussels as I'm sure you are too. They are incredibly efficient filter-feeders that can remove substantial amounts of suspended nutrients from the water column. I can't remember exact volumes but a single (1) mussel is capable of filtering over one liter of water/day. Their introduction is in large-part to blame for the clear waters you notice. In regards to clearer water being the factor that allows these "eating machines" to large sizes in a short time that is incorrect. Temperature is one of the primary factors influencing metabolic and growth rates in esocids; clarity as very little, if anything at all, to do with it.

 

"If I'm not in the boat trolling the lakes I'm on the river, 50-60 days a year(?) and I have really noticed the sufferance in the forage base..."

 

In addition to increasing water clarity, their ability to filter out large amounts of suspended nutrients in the water column deprives other species of food (especially those towards the bottom of the food chain i.e. zooplankton and forage fish). Very simply put: more nutrients removed my zebra mussels -> less food for zooplankton (less zooplankton) -> less food for forage species (less forage species) -> less food for gamefish herego less gamefish. Is this the sole reason you see a decrease in forage species or any other species? Absolutely not, it could be attributed to numerous other factors or combinations of multiple factors.

 

"You can't put 689,000 eating machines in a water way and not have an effect!"

 

You were able to read the articles above discussing impacts on other species so I won't bring that up again. There are several articles discussing survival rates of stocked tiger muskies. To think that even 10% of what is stocked survives (especially in a smaller river system like the susqi) is a severe over-estimate. Mortality of stocked tiger muskellunge is very high. Many of these stocklings end up as food for largemouth bass, walleye, birds, and other muskies. So there is an effect right there: more food for your bass and walleye!

 

Kidding aside, will some of them survive and grow and occasionally eat a walleye or smallmouth bass? Absolutely. Will largemouth bass -also a voracious predator- consume plenty of yellow perch and panfish? Definitely. Perch, rudd, alewife, etc. also feed heavily on walleye fry in the spring...if a the walleye population declines over the years is it still the muskie's fault? Questions like that can't be answered without substantial amounts of data collected over extended time periods by qualified biologists.

 

The point I'm trying to make is that ALL fisheries are dynamic and experience changes. Some faster than others and the susqi is no different. The reasons for these changes are numerous and likely a combination of multiple factors. For any angler to assume they know the cause of a declining sport fishery simply because they've fished it for a while and not try to educate themselves on can be irresponsible and furthermore hurt a fishery that people pay for the priviledge to fish with their hard-earned money (insert lake st. claire muskie bashing video here).

 

Think, Think, Think....don't assume, assume, assume

TileMan Dan

TileMan Dan

Posted
Posted

Ronix, your contribution to to this thread is spot on with regards to its content which I agree with. However, I do disagree with your statement that the Susquehanna is a small limnological system. It is the major feed to the Cheasapeake Bay.

Sent from my iPhone using Lake Ontario United

panfisher

panfisher

Posted
Posted

1dogshy...... Beeeaaaauuutiful baby!!  :)   :yes:   It is do good to hear of and know that our rivers are still growing and producing near record and record size fish of any kind. And despite any esox haters (some states require decapitation of said esocidae and reporting and surrendering the caught pike family member to authorities.....ignorance to me, but maybe they know things I don't... :thinking: ), you won't forget that one! And Ronix....right on with those conclusions and points well made.

justtracytrolling

justtracytrolling

Posted
Posted

First, and foremost, great fish 1dogshy!

I live on the susquehanna and live on Otisco most of the summer, and locals in both places tend to agree with final flight. Honestly, on the surface its a logical conclusion to jump to. We have a long way to go to educate sportsman as to the need for muskies and tigers. For a meat fisherman, the only kind of fisherman until recently, its not a normal reaction to want the huge predators. I personally agree with the musky consevationists, but I havent always. With a little time, patience, and a continued effort to educate anglers as to the pros I feel sportsman will continue to become more tolerant of the esox overall, and from what I can see both Otisco and the susquehanna have excellent numbers of these fish. This leads me to believe most people catching them arent killing them for the most part.

old man pm me if you ever wanna fish the susquhanna Ill point you in the right direction. Just dont put that beautiful boat of your in the river!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...