Misc.: Signs, New Muskie Lakes, etc.

[Don Wittenberger]

Signs -- Would Mark Wells, Scott Hughes, or whoever is working on the muskie signs please call Steve Jackson at 360-902-2821. He needs to talk with you about this.

New lakes -- Before tiger muskies can be stocked in new waters, WDFW has to file a SEPA approval document and allow a public comment period. (SEPA stands for State Environmental Policy Act.)

It's my understanding WDFW plans to initiate this process for Lake St. Clair in the Olympia area. This doesn't necessarily mean this lake will be stocked, but it's being considered for an initial planting as early as this fall. This lake has nice structure and a WDFW concrete boat launch, but due to its limited forage base can't support as many tiger muskies per acre as our other lakes. Its location is closer to home for King and Pierce County anglers than Mayfield and Merwin, and perhaps it could absorb a bit of the fishing pressure Tapps gets now, so I like the idea of stocking this lake.

Someone else suggested Lacamas Lake near Vancouver, which is closer to anglers in the Portland - Vancouver area than Merwin or Mayfield. This lake's existing WDFW boat launch is too primitive for most trailer boats, but I'm okay with having some smaller muskie lakes that are accessible only to cartoppers and kayaks. For one thing, you don't have water skiers or hot rodders on those lakes. I passed this suggestion on to Steve J. and he'll ask the area biologist about it; however, the fact this lake drains into the Columbia River might rule it out.

Out of curiosity, I asked Steve J. about Alder Lake. The difficulty here is (a) it drains into a steelhead stream, and (b) it's emptied every winter to make room for spring snowmelt. However, a previously rejected lake on the Olympic Peninsula may get a second look.

Limits on hatchery production of tiger muskies -- I wondered what would happen if we had more muskie lakes. Could WDFW produce more fingerlings, or would the current production of 6,000 fingerlings a year have to be spread more thinly over a larger number of lakes? Steve J. said the limiting factor is the rainbow trout used to feed them while they're in the hatchery. It takes 100,000 trout fingerlings to raise 1,000 tiger muskie fingerlings. Cost isn't a big problem because trout fingerlings cost less than $1,000 per 100,000. Increasing tiger muskie fingerling production from 6,000 to 7,000 isn't too difficult, but a larger increase would require finding additional hatchery space to raise more rainbow trout. So, when we daydream about increasing the number of tiger muskie lakes in our state, we shouldn't take it for granted that hatchery production would be increased proportionately. It occurred to me, though, that if the 50" rule is effective to reduce angler mortality, perhaps we wouldn't need quite as many fingerlings per lake to maintain the populations, which might allow stocking more lakes with the existing production. I hope so, anyway.

Action item for Muskies Inc. meeting on Feb. 21 -- As I've said previously, I won't be able to attend this meeting for health reasons. As your representative on department and legislative matters, I'd like the club to take action at this meeting to authorize me to respond to the SEPA filing in favor of stocking tiger muskies in Lake St. Clair so I can act on this promptly in case the SEPA filing occurs. Anyone who would like to send me comments to consider for inclusion in the club response can e-mail me at dwitt546@aol.com. Of course, club members and other anglers will be able to submit individual comments during the public comment period if they so desire.

[Fisherman_max]

"Lacamas Lake near Vancouver, which is closer to anglers in the Portland - Vancouver area than Merwin or Mayfield. This lake's existing WDFW boat launch is too primitive for most trailer boats"


actually there is a very new (about 2-3 years old) boat ramp on the lake, it is located on the other side of the lake right were it turns into Round lake. it is called Camas heritage boat launch.

[Don Wittenberger]

Can it handle a bass boat?

[Fisherman_max]

oh yea, there are plenty bass boats runing around in the summer.

[kevinb]

Don,have you got any feed back from WDFW reguarding St.Clair or other possible lakes?

Kevin

[Don Wittenberger]

Nope. No news to report at this time.

[Fisherman_max]

i hope lacamas lake is under consideration. i want to be able to target tigers without traveling to merwin (which is kinda "out of the way"

or mayfeild


hey don did you say that lacamas lake may not be able to get musky's because the watershed connected to the comlumbia?

what about merwin and mayfield? they both go to the columbia

[Don Wittenberger]

In the case of Mayfield and Merwin, there are 300-foot-high dams between the tiger muskies and the river. Also, the occasional tiger muskie who survives the trip over the spillway or through the turbines has to travel much farther downstream to reach the Columbia. But hey, if you want to make a case for stocking Lacamas, don't argue with me (I don't make the decision) ... argue with the powers-that-be.

Before you do, though, here's a few things to keep in mind. First, salmon and steelhead are far more popular and economically important than tiger muskies. Second, vast sums of (mostly federal) money are being spent to restore the Columbia River salmon runs -- literally billions of dollars, which by and large comes out of BPA electricity customers' hides. Third, a large number of agencies and groups, including tribes, have a say in anything affecting salmon. Fourth, there's a lot of ignorance and irrational fear out there, and nowhere is it more concentrated than in the media. For example, a few years ago someone caught a small (approx. 30 inches) tiger muskie from the Willamette River in downtown Portland and it made the TV news there (in, needless to say, a very negative way). As Chapter 57's legislative and regulatory representative, I can deal with policymakers and perhaps even legislators, but taming a howling mob is beyond my powers of persuasion. In dealing with public opinion, I consider a certain amount of cowardice to be prudent, in terms of best serving our interests in the long run. I don't want to attract the wrong kind of attention to tiger muskies by letting them get into the Columbia. I'm nervous that we could lose the whole program that way.

Getting back to Lacamas Lake, I'm not familiar with this lake, but if a good factual case can be made that there's little or no danger of a significant number of tiger muskies escaping into the Columbia River, and if we can argue this to the satisfaction of the decision makers and the segment of the public who might object to stocking this lake, then I'd certainly be willing to support stocking it.

[Don Wittenberger]

Here is the latest info from Steve Jackson on St. Clair and Lacamas lakes.

St. Clair -- The Area Biologist hasn't filed the SEPA document yet, but Steve believes he intends to go forward with it, and we're probably looking at stocking this lake with an initial plant of tiger muskies in the spring of 2009.

Lacamas -- The Area Biologist doesn't want tiger muskies in this lake as he feels it has a well-balanced fishery now. Therefore, it is unlikely this lake will receive further consideration in the foreseeable future.

[kevinb]

Thanks Don

St.Clair:thumleft:

Lacamas:thumbdown

[Fisherman_max]

i think lacamas would get a yes if tigers preyed apon perch regularely, they are over stunted there and there is billions.

i guess i have to travel to merwin for muskies for the time being.

[kevinb]

Has the SEPA document been filed yet for St. Clair?

[Gone Fishin]

I know most of this discussion is on west side lakes, but I thought I would shift it a little bit. I know Sprague is just being restocked with trout and soon the warmwater species. I know at one point I was told that muskie were being considered for this lake also. Anybody know more about that?

[Don Wittenberger]

kevinb -- No.

Gone Fishin -- WDFW plans to manage Sprague Lake for warmwater species. Sprague initially will be stocked with bass, panfish, and rainbow trout. The trout are a transition species that will be allowed to die out after a few years. About 3 to 5 years after restocking, WDFW will put in the first tiger muskies, then will maintain a tiger muskie population in Sprague to function as the pinnacle predator keeping spinyray populations in check to prevent overpopulation and stunting. We're about a decade away from having a trophy tiger muskie fishery in Sprague. Based on past experience, they'll be in there for about 20 years before Sprague has to be rehabbed again.

[muskyhunter]

Heyah,
Took a little drive out to North Tapps Park to check out the water level...looks close to full pool. Maybe a foot to go! Heres the question of the day...WHERE ARE THE NEW SIGNS??? The size limit has been bumped up and there not any new size limit signs posted..WHEN? Who is supposed to put them up? When are they going up? Why aren't they up yet? Its April 6th ya'll...25 days till opening day. ....Thanks, that was my rant for the day....See yah

[kevinb]

Can I rant too? Left North Tapps at 7:30pm this evening. Still no signs.

[Deadeyemark]

It's in the works guys. As soon as I know something for sure, I'll let ya know.

[kevinb]

It's in the works guys. As soon as I know something for sure, I'll let ya know.

I'm heading to Tapps in a few.....I better see some new signs:-"
Just messing with 'ya. I owe it to myself since your going to Potholes again.

[kevinb]

It's in the works guys. As soon as I know something for sure, I'll let ya know.

I'm heading to Tapps in a few.....I better see some new signs:-"
Just messing with 'ya. I owe it to myself since your going to Potholes again.

Its late Sunday night....No signs! Where are my signs?:-"
Thats sarcasm. Pay back for Potholes,you better of caught some bass:^o

[Deadeyemark]

You'll get a peek at the new signs at the meeting tomorrow nite. Stever Jackson will be bringing one for show and tell.