Northwest Fishing Reports

Okay guys, going a little stir crazy to get this dang hard coating (i.e., ice) off the lakes. The last day or so has done nothing to help that! :(

What lake will the first (logged) 50 inch fish come from, and will it happen this summer? I for one figure ANY of the lakes, with the exception of probably Evergreen have the capability to produce a 50" fish this summer.

My money will be riding on Curlew, even though it likely receives the least amount of pressure. We have the first Muskie tournament for Chapter 60 on Curlew. Hope we get to see one of those behemoths!

Newman will be a close second. I know it has the potential, and with the number of people hitting it, there is a good chance it will produce the largest fish of the year...... What does everyone think?

Yea, you can say it... I am bored sitting at home, and need to get on the water. Pike on the POR will be a nice bit to tide us over, but it doesn't compare to putting BIG fish in the boat!!! I'll be on the water at fist opportunity upon ice off!

I vote Curlew, because it doesn't get the pressure and the locals seem to like the Tigers.

Newman is rumored to have resident (live on the lake) Tiger haters that catch them, gill them, and release them. IF that is true, then I think we may see the Tigers in Newman take a beating.

Hopefully that is just rumor.

Hopefully they aint, the haters have hit Tapps in the past though.

Any more info on Pike in Newman?

I have heard stories about 50+ being caught at Tapps a few times. Nothing that was officially measured but I hear they are there.

The largest one I have seen was at Mayfield. It was so big, you wouldnt believe me if I told you.

I tend to think that record fish will come from Mayfield as its had Tigers in it the longest and I too have seen some unbelievable muskies there. However the prime habitat seems to be Curlew and I wouldn't be surprised if the record came from either. The trump card would have to be Merwin where the available food may eventually produce the largest Tigers in the state. Thats my opinon, for whatever thats worth. >:"":>

1. Mayfield
2. Curlew
3. Merwin

Excellent topic and I think the census is about the same.
I'm pretty much split between Curlew,Mayfield and Merwin as being the best chances to produce a 50+.
The forage base seems rather endless. Curlew has some rather large pikeminnows to keep the tigers growing.
Merwin and Mayfield have the minnows and plenty of suckers(chubs I believe)
Tapps might not be far behind,its a quality fishery but I'm on the fence about the pressure it receives. On one side with so many anglers the chances of a big fish are high in terms of overall odds but the flip side is again,plenty of pressure on them,toss in some heavy boat traffic in the mix and I think it knocks the chances down.
Newman is a very realistic possibility but only fished it a few times and not very familiar with the forage.

Now,who will be the lucky individual to catch a well documented 50+ tiger? None of us on here,it will
end up being one of three people.
1.Kid fishing with a Snoopie/Barbie pole with hook and bobber
2.Trout angler trolling a wedding ring
3.Bass guy pitch'n Senkos

kevinb wrote:Excellent topic and I think the census is about the same.
I'm pretty much split between Curlew,Mayfield and Merwin as being the best chances to produce a 50+.
The forage base seems rather endless. Curlew has some rather large pikeminnows to keep the tigers growing.
Merwin and Mayfield have the minnows and plenty of suckers(chubs I believe)
Tapps might not be far behind,its a quality fishery but I'm on the fence about the pressure it receives. On one side with so many anglers the chances of a big fish are high in terms of overall odds but the flip side is again,plenty of pressure on them,toss in some heavy boat traffic in the mix and I think it knocks the chances down.
Newman is a very realistic possibility but only fished it a few times and not very familiar with the forage.

Now,who will be the lucky individual to catch a well documented 50+ tiger? None of us on here,it will
end up being one of three people.
1.Kid fishing with a Snoopie/Barbie pole with hook and bobber
2.Trout angler trolling a wedding ring
3.Bass guy pitch'n Senkos

That seems to be how it always works out Kevin.

As for which lake I would have to vote Curlew. I think the only thing that holds Curlew back is it doesn't have the hours put into it that the others do. I know Newman is right there, and I wouldn't be surprised to see one from Tapps this summer either. The real question is which club will get it first? Gotta love a little competition!

I'm surprised we didn't see it last year. It should be ant time now!

well first off there,s no question which club will. Be the first to land the infamous 50 incher but i hear they reside west of the mountian,s. And as far as lake any has the potential to put out a monster

Well guys hate to burst your bubbles but 3 years ago a gent caught a 52 out at Curlew. I have seen several out there cruising the east shoreline on the edge of the breakline out there. That were about the same size or bigger.That fish was kept. I have a picture of a 49 incher from Curlew that was shocked by the WDFW its a mammoth beast from last year. Its roaming around that lake. I know there was a 53' caught out at Newman 3 years ago too. And another over 50 " fish. If you bing or google it u can see a picture of it. Theres a picture of it on the bulletin board at Newman Lake Resort. It was released too. Silver Lake..not yet. Maybe in a year or two. Buddy of mine got a 46" last year. So she might be inching close to that 50 mark. Evergreen, not many people fish it but heard they shocked some good fish. In the 40's ..thats all I'm saying about that. Tapps..Mike got close last year. I've seen photos of a 54" caught out of there a few years back. Plus I've personally seen one pushing the same size early last spring. Not saying where. Along with a 6 foot sturgeon..yes a sturgeon! Mayfield's got a toad. All I saw was the tail as he followed me up to the boat. The meat end of his tail was big around as a Louisville slugger. I lost a good 50 at the boat 2 summers ago.Bummer I had a witness with me..owner from Fish Country was with me just ask him..I think he pooed on himself. The same year that fellow from Eatonville pulled a 51 1/2" out of there on a 4 inch Zarra Spook. He kept it. Nice fellow. Met him on the lake about 2 weeks after the fact. He had wished he let it go..Mayfield has lots of 50's..now that the bow hunters were caught they have a better chance. I'm giving it a early shot on March 12th..so we will see... Merwin..could be the prize down there. Heavy, healthy fish. I think I'd put my money on Merwin. Tube baits..Big ones and swim baits bigger ones. That'll do the trick.
Just gotta put a lot of time on the water to better the chances and tyour odds. I agree Doug. What part of Wiscony are you from? I'm headed back the first week of June for 8 days of True Muskies. Fishing the Laona, Crandon, Rhinelander area..
This cold snap just sent me into hibernation again.

I'm pretty sure chapter 60's ganna get the 50" not the Westsiders...

cudaman wrote:well first off there,s no question which club will. Be the first to land the infamous 50 incher but i hear they reside west of the mountian,s.

Soooo, what your saying is a Ch. 60 member will get one over there at one of your tournaments:-"

muskyhunter..... I know there have been several taken. I have seen the fish you list (pictures of course) that have been taken. I was talking between the clubs, and who would put one on their board first..... I know CMA and MI have some excellent fishermen, and I can't wait to see pics of one of us putting a fish in the boat that would break..... I should say SHATTER the record..... Cool thing is, most if not all of us here I would hope will put her back in the water and leave the records to the bean counters. It will be just braggin' rights among friends, as far as I am concerned! Have no intention of keeping one, if I can avoid it. Just my personal choice.

I have yet to actually see any fish which I could honestly say went over 50", but I know they are there. Saw one in Silver last year that would push it..... I was on the lake the day Jordan Medley pulled in the 46" fish at Silver. Talked to him before and after, and fished the same spots..... I also caught one which I listed as 44, but if I had a partner that day, I am sure she would have taped better than what I got curled in the net. Make no mistake, I think ALL of our lakes have the potential to produce one over 50" this year. Haven't fished Evergreen yet, so I can't vouch for that system.

Saw one on Newman last year that would easily push 48". It was on one of my first trips out there. Watched her on the surface sunning for maybe 5 minutes, but couldn't entice her to hit anything. All but hit her on the head......

Hey Mark, does that mean we have to head over to one of 57's tournaments to help them out?

Hey dougw, certainly give Evergreen a shot when you get the chance. Evergreen also has a pretty good largemouth bass population and some walleye but not really sure how good the walleye bite is,it seems to depend on who you talk too.Some say its good and others say don't bother. My only concern about Evergreen is to be sure to use the launch located on the east end. I made the mistake this past summer of going to the west end. I was coming back from a family fishing trip on Cd'A and we wanted to drop the boat in for some tigers,well long story short,I took the road that leads to the west launch,passing a winery. I then passed a building that looked liked it could rival Area 51. It had multiple warning signs around the premesis stating things like "Warning,You are under surveillance" "Do not enter" "Your on camera" and so on. As I continued my drive and rounded a bend in the road,I found a few quality folks that I'm guessing the sign was directed too. Lets just say they appeared to be under the influence of some form of narcotics and didn't seem to happy to see the family and I driving down the road. I told my buddy who fishes that lake often and he cut me off before I could finish and replied with "Oh,you went to the westside launch." Anyhow,didn't want to drive this off topic but I'd hate to see anyone else encounter a similar situation. The other launch seems to be just fine.

Back on track.
I've seen what I believe to be a state record or very close tiger at Mayfield but sadly I don't even have a good story. Basically we were fishing and a massive tiger slowly cruised by but he wasn't even following our baits. I then made casts toward him but he wouldn't even budge. Just kept swimming and gave me the fin

dougw wrote: Hey Mark, does that mean we have to head over to one of 57's tournaments to help them out?

That's exactly what I was thinking Doug!:-$

We always welcome the members of the Mountain Muskie gang. Whats better for competition then more of your hard earned money in the pot? A chance to rub elbows and swap stories with the fine folks of the Tiger Pac. See some new water and be there to watch your Tiger Muskie brothers land, measure and release some of the state's largest fish. So come on over and see how the "Wetsiders" tease Tigers.

I will have to agree with Kevin the next record fish will be caught by soneone not fishing for Tigers, with the wrong lure in an odd area and have no idea what they have landed. It's part of "Murphy's Law".

I believe that there would be a lot of 50" fish every year come out of the NW if only people would use bigger lures. There seems to be the idea that Tigers will not hit large Musky lures. I think most Musky guys around here have been throwing smaller lures and catching tons of Muskies but not so many huge fish. If everyone were to throw the top end size Musky lures all the time I believe the average size of Tigers would be amazing. The numbers would decrease but then one has to sit down and evaluate what they want from the whole Musky experience--many fish or giants. With all that said, I think Tigers have a harder time growing over 50" compared to Muskies but there are surely several in every lake. Merwin is my choice.
Ed

edw wrote:I believe that there would be a lot of 50" fish every year come out of the NW if only people would use bigger lures. There seems to be the idea that Tigers will not hit large Musky lures. I think most Musky guys around here have been throwing smaller lures and catching tons of Muskies but not so many huge fish. If everyone were to throw the top end size Musky lures all the time I believe the average size of Tigers would be amazing. The numbers would decrease but then one has to sit down and evaluate what they want from the whole Musky experience--many fish or giants. With all that said, I think Tigers have a harder time growing over 50" compared to Muskies but there are surely several in every lake. Merwin is my choice.
Ed

Ed,

I have to agree with you. I am one of the crowd that uses the larger lures as you say. Early in the season, I will use smaller ones, then gradually switch over to the big lures. I seldom tell people to throw bigger lures though, for fear that they will not be as "successful." It's all a matter of how you define success. I would rather people catch a few more, than to see them go home without seeing a fish. After someone nails down a few, they will have to decide how they want to fish, according to what they catch.

It seems our VP of Chapter 60 nailed it on the head. You have to pick a lure you have confidence in, and stick with it. A person could spend thousands of dollars on filling his tackle box, trying to find the magic lure. The magic is truly in the amount of time your lure is in the water. When I am out, I rarely have the lure in the boat as much as in the water. If you need a break from casting, troll. If you just want to sit and have lunch, pitch the lure out and leave it sit. I have seen success just having the wind/ current push the lure. These fish are opportunistic. They don't have an opportunity to nail a lure that is sitting in the boat. It all about time on the water when you have a fish that is so scarce.

Washington stocks at one fish per every two acres, for much of the state. I have heard optimum for pure-breds is even less than that. They say optimum is 1 fish for every 4 acres! Think how frustrated people would get if that were the stocking level here. Kind of wish we had pure-bred muskies in one of the lakes. I think Curlew would be 'the' lake for that. Then WDFW wouldn't have to bargain for eggs every year, they could set up to harvest their own. That will likely never happen though.....

Doug

I know I'd throw larger lures more often if my shoulder would handle it! I can do it for about a half hour then I'm back to the smaller stuff. I've seen a number of 50+ fish in the last couple years...........a giant in Mayfield, a couple that followed me up last year in Merwin and a piggy in Tapps that ignored everything I threw at her. It could happen any time, but not a lot of 50+ fish are caught every season. I hear of a couple every year. I think it will either be Curlew, Merwin or Tapps. Mayfield is rumored to have a poaching problem, if that's the case it would not be my choice to produce the first 50+ for a club member. Lots of time on the water, sharp hooks, quality gear and a good knowledge of the lake your fishing is what will put a giant in the boat. Mike.

I hear you Mike! My back starts getting pretty sore from standing and casting all day. It's tough getting old! Did you get my email about fishing the Chapter Challunge at Lake of the Woods?

Here's a picture of our biggest spinner so far. Weighs 1 3/4oz, probably 2 ounces when the skirts get wet and 8 inches long.

Is it a propeller headed Cousin ITT or a sexy Can Can dancer?

#7 Gold fluted Willow (nice and thick) Black bullets separated with gold discs - #2/0 stacked Treble - two silicon skirts on nickel weights.



Getting back on track, I'm gonna catch my 50 inch Musky at Pinewood Reservoir out here in Colorado.