rubioloco
12/5/2008 12:33:00 PMI want to first say NICE CATCH!!! Those are some solid lakers.
I do want to ask something of not just you but also the rest of the brothers who fish Chelan for lakers. Let me say that I am not trying to be mean spirited or critical but more looking for a dialog with those in the know on thos lake. I will preface this as a guy who fished Georgian Bay (off Lake Huron) annually for salmon and trout. Included are lakers along with huge rainbow and browns. I have relatives who have fished the Great Lakes for decades targeting these same fish. So here is my question.
With lakers being long lived fish that grow huge in deep cold waters... why don't we self-impose a larger minum size to let the smaller young fish grow to be the large fish we all want? Maybe there is more to this fishery than I know but in ten years..the fish in your photo would be close to 10 - 12lbs. I know deep trolling catch and release is difficult or out right deadly to the fish but maybe we can do something to preserve the fish that will be trophies in a couple years.
What are your thoughts? I love this fishery and lakers are indeed cool fish. But I also know many of use would have done the same thing in the Sound years ago with the bottomfish if we knew it was not a commercially targeted fishery and that they too so long to grow. Hopefully this lake has a special set of circumstances that allow a heavier catch and take. But has anypne looked into that from the sport fishing side?
In clsoing I want to say again that those are some great fish and I love to read the reports from Chelan. I am envious sitting in a hotel in Philly on business wishing I was dragging a line...
Happy Holidays
I do want to ask something of not just you but also the rest of the brothers who fish Chelan for lakers. Let me say that I am not trying to be mean spirited or critical but more looking for a dialog with those in the know on thos lake. I will preface this as a guy who fished Georgian Bay (off Lake Huron) annually for salmon and trout. Included are lakers along with huge rainbow and browns. I have relatives who have fished the Great Lakes for decades targeting these same fish. So here is my question.
With lakers being long lived fish that grow huge in deep cold waters... why don't we self-impose a larger minum size to let the smaller young fish grow to be the large fish we all want? Maybe there is more to this fishery than I know but in ten years..the fish in your photo would be close to 10 - 12lbs. I know deep trolling catch and release is difficult or out right deadly to the fish but maybe we can do something to preserve the fish that will be trophies in a couple years.
What are your thoughts? I love this fishery and lakers are indeed cool fish. But I also know many of use would have done the same thing in the Sound years ago with the bottomfish if we knew it was not a commercially targeted fishery and that they too so long to grow. Hopefully this lake has a special set of circumstances that allow a heavier catch and take. But has anypne looked into that from the sport fishing side?
In clsoing I want to say again that those are some great fish and I love to read the reports from Chelan. I am envious sitting in a hotel in Philly on business wishing I was dragging a line...
Happy Holidays
Mike Carey
12/6/2008 7:33:00 AMIf Anton (Darrell and Dad's) doesn't see this post, send him an e-mail from his site (http://www.darrellanddads.com/). He'll explain the long story. WDFW removed all limits on lakers in Chelan a couple of years ago.
Mike Carey
12/7/2008 10:16:00 AMThis is from Anton:
I thought that I would explain about the catch and retain fishery for Mackinaw on Lake Chelan.
The landlocked Chinook (1974) and the Mackinaw (1982) are recently introduced fish into the system. The Chinook are a topic for a different message. The lake trout have come to dominate the upper part of the food chain in Chelan. There were concerns that the lakers (aka: Mackinaw) would eat all the available food in the system,prevent the WDFW from re-establishing the West slope cutthroat in it as well as prevent them from maintaining the kokanee population. Therefore, WDFW removed the retention limit on the lakers in 2001. If we don't reduce there numbers by recreational angling, there is a possibility the WDFW would resort to more intrusive population reduction methods such as wide spread poisoning or commercial fishing. The regional biologist has said that it is way easier to add some Macks if the population crashes as opposed to reestablishing an entire food chain if that crashes due to Mack pressure.
Take Care,
Anton
I thought that I would explain about the catch and retain fishery for Mackinaw on Lake Chelan.
The landlocked Chinook (1974) and the Mackinaw (1982) are recently introduced fish into the system. The Chinook are a topic for a different message. The lake trout have come to dominate the upper part of the food chain in Chelan. There were concerns that the lakers (aka: Mackinaw) would eat all the available food in the system,prevent the WDFW from re-establishing the West slope cutthroat in it as well as prevent them from maintaining the kokanee population. Therefore, WDFW removed the retention limit on the lakers in 2001. If we don't reduce there numbers by recreational angling, there is a possibility the WDFW would resort to more intrusive population reduction methods such as wide spread poisoning or commercial fishing. The regional biologist has said that it is way easier to add some Macks if the population crashes as opposed to reestablishing an entire food chain if that crashes due to Mack pressure.
Take Care,
Anton