steelhead numbers down

[fishman1 164]

with the poor water conditions over the last several years, the numbers of steelhead have been greatly reduced. jon george has reported that the portage creek numbers were down last year by 60 percent. this number is also reflected in all north shore rivers. correct me if i am wrong ,but jon told me that this years run will be dependent on only one strong year class. i believe it is the 04 class. hopefully anglers will practice a little catch and release to help the fishery.

[NoUseForAName_GW 18]

Last year was the only year with poor water conditions. 08 and 09 were great years for spawning fish and the resulting fry

Last year the spring had very low water conditions, but the summer was good and the rivers stayed full.

The 04 year class will again support most of this years run but we should see some 08 fish for there maiden spawn.

The numbers may be slightly lower do to mortality but will bounce back with 2 mabey 3 very succesful recent spawns.

hopefully last years fish made it back to the lake and didn't die due to a horrible trip up and back down the rivers.

[Chuck 19]

I don"t know who is responsible for these so called surveys but I saw lots of spawning fish in many of the rivers and creeks around here

The problem I saw wasn't due to low water levels but the over abundance of beavers that had blocked the creeks with their dams preventing the fish from going further upstream But when you mention getting rid of the rodents.... well now their cryin oh you can't do that

So what do you want fish or creeks littered with dams fallen trees muddy waters and such Let the beaver live on a nickle because their both worth F***All

Just my .05cts

[ghart 55]

simply ban fishing during theyre spawning runs like specks/walleye - after a few years of that you could likely walk accross the fish.

[filletandrelease 17]

Why ban fishing on a non native species especially when there is already a stringent slot size in effect and a healthy fishery. I do like the beaver comment though.

[Guest Munshaw]

I don"t know who is responsible for these so called surveys but I saw lots of spawning fish in many of the rivers and creeks around here

The problem I saw wasn't due to low water levels but the over abundance of beavers that had blocked the creeks with their dams preventing the fish from going further upstream But when you mention getting rid of the rodents.... well now their cryin oh you can't do that

So what do you want fish or creeks littered with dams fallen trees muddy waters and such Let the beaver live on a nickle because their both worth F***All

Just my .05cts

Somehow I don't think beavers are responsible for such a drastic decline in the fishery. Most of the rivers that support healthy populations of steelhead are too fast for beaver dams anyway. Who is the guy responsible for these studies? Jon George? Yeah I don't think he knows much about steelhead....

Environmental impacts (water levels) clearly have the biggest impact upon the fishery, as there is negligible harvest from Portage Cr. and the numbers are way down. Add to that some angler harvest and things can go from bad to worse. More water in the system, and fish can easily navigate beaver dams. Its pretty unreal what those fish can make it up, all given the right water levels. This year should be good.

Also, I think it was more than just last year with poor conditions. In fact, several years abot ( I think around 2006) I had a photo in a magazine where the Jackpine had almost completely dried up. THAT was a very poor year, and there's a lack of those fish returning. 2004 supported most of last year's run I believe, as was evident by a number of very large fish. There won't be as many of those guys back this year I don't think.

[Buck 120 32]

I have never really understood why it is legal to fish for Steelhead during their spawn. Every other fish including Walleye is closed during their spawning time. Does anyone have a logical answer?

[Guest Munshaw]

Why can you fish for salmon? What's the difference? Depends on the purpose of the fishery. To provide sport in the case of Steelhead I would say, with some consumption taking place. Maximum enjoyment of a sustainable fishery seems to be the goal. I don't think catching steelhead with any kind of reasonable expectation of success outside of the "spawning period" is possible for the majority of anglers. How many people target steelhead during June-October on the big lake? Not many I would say. So then... what would be the point in fishing for them at all right?

[NoUseForAName_GW 18]

Also, I think it was more than just last year with poor conditions. In fact, several years abot ( I think around 2006) I had a photo in a magazine where the Jackpine had almost completely dried up. THAT was a very poor year, and there's a lack of those fish returning. 2004 supported most of last year's run I believe, as was evident by a number of very large fish. There won't be as many of those guys back this year I don't think.

your right about other poor years, 04 was a great year then 05 06 and 07 were horrible with very few fry surviving, due to low water conditions and high temps. I believe it was 06 when most rivers all but dried up.

the 04 year class has been sustaning the runs ever since. however 08 09 were very good years (mabey even 2010) so numbers will pick up over the next few years. unfortunately the 04 year class is thinning out.

[Fishbum 35]

Just a little side note.....

I know that steelhead mu ch rather prefer higher water...i have been steelheading for a long time and know that the higher the water, the more fish that enter the river and stay in the river, the further they can go, and the easier it is on their bodies.

However...when you think about it....where do you see most of the spawning trout...those shallow gravel bars, corners, and riffles...which they prefer. So for a year like last year where the when the water went up, but dropped quickly, and stayed low year round.....sure you may not have the same number of fish entering the river for the same period of time, or travelng as far...but now many locations where the fish did spawn were water covered, and appropriet conditions for the eggs to hatch. Rather than haveing the gravel bar where all the reds are made dry up as the water drops, killing all the eggs and or small fry....maybe the fish who did spawn would have a better survival rate, and egg production???

[RLK 38]

Just a little side note.....

I know that steelhead mu ch rather prefer higher water...i have been steelheading for a long time and know that the higher the water, the more fish that enter the river and stay in the river, the further they can go, and the easier it is on their bodies.

However...when you think about it....where do you see most of the spawning trout...those shallow gravel bars, corners, and riffles...which they prefer. So for a year like last year where the when the water went up, but dropped quickly, and stayed low year round.....sure you may not have the same number of fish entering the river for the same period of time, or travelng as far...but now many locations where the fish did spawn were water covered, and appropriet conditions for the eggs to hatch. Rather than haveing the gravel bar where all the reds are made dry up as the water drops, killing all the eggs and or small fry....maybe the fish who did spawn would have a better survival rate, and egg production???

Your right. With the low water conditions throughout the run the fish had to spawn in the main channels as this is the only place there was water. I see it as a good thing.

[Guest Beamer]

Lots of fished made it up last year even though water levels were low, we clipped 279 steelhead in the McIntyre with some older fish to 10/11 years being the oldest. If I were to bet I would say 2010 will be a strong year class due to the fact the fish spawned in the main channels as mentioned above time will tell.

Beamer

[Guest Munshaw]

Lots of fished made it up last year even though water levels were low, we clipped 279 steelhead in the McIntyre with some older fish to 10/11 years being the oldest. If I were to bet I would say 2010 will be a strong year class due to the fact the fish spawned in the main channels as mentioned above time will tell.

Beamer

Do you have numbers for how many were recaps? I'm not sold that there were large numbers of fish overall last year. I think the appearance was that there were because the water levels were so low, and the fish vulverable to angling. And for that matter, on many rivers you could probably count the entire population visually. Seeing fish doesn't necessarily equate strong populations. Just my observation.

[Guest Beamer]

Do you have numbers for how many were recaps? I'm not sold that there were large numbers of fish overall last year. I think the appearance was that there were because the water levels were so low, and the fish vulverable to angling. And for that matter, on many rivers you could probably count the entire population visually. Seeing fish doesn't necessarily equate strong populations. Just my observation.

very few,10 percent(26 fish), not very many for the number caught.population estimate(2009) was 1255 fish + - 412 (2008) was 1543 + - 878

[Guest TerryK]

<!--quoteo(post=50863:date=Apr 8 2011, 06:05 PM:name=Beamer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Beamer @ Apr 8 2011, 06:05 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=50863"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Lots of fished made it up last year even though water levels were low, we clipped 279 steelhead in the McIntyre with some older fish to 10/11 years being the oldest. If I were to bet I would say 2010 will be a strong year class due to the fact the fish spawned in the main channels as mentioned above time will tell.

Beamer<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Do you have numbers for how many were recaps? I'm not sold that there were large numbers of fish overall last year. I think the appearance was that there were because the water levels were so low, and the fish vulverable to angling. And for that matter, on many rivers you could probably count the entire population visually. Seeing fish doesn't necessarily equate strong populations. Just my observation.

The population estimate is done using a Peterson estimate, which is the standard used by fisheries biologists nation wide. Last years estimate came with a 95% confidence level. The numbers are solid.

PS: current year recaps are not counted. If the fish has a current year fin clip, it is released without any data being recorded so the theory of "recycling" fish is a non issue.