Michigan Muskie Alliance

Public Meeting to Discuss Gun Lake Muskellunge Size Limit and Stocking Proposals

The Southern Lake Michigan Management Unit announces a meeting in the Yankee Springs area to discuss muskellunge management.

The meeting will be held on July 18th from 7:00-9:00 PM at the Orangeville Township Hall at 7350 Lindsey Road.

Muskellunge were a naturally occurring part of the fish community in Gun Lake in the early 1900’s. The muskellunge population slowly declined due to over harvest and a reduction in recruitment probably due to habitat alterations in the form of lake level control structures and shoreline development. Muskellunge need access to woody structure or marsh areas for spawning.

Muskellunge were stocked in the 1980s but was discontinued due to public concern that the muskellunge population was becoming too high and negatively affecting the rest of the fish community.

Today, muskellunge continue to naturally reproduce. On rare occasions, anglers catch musky that show visual characteristics of the original spotted or Great Lakes strain that once was vibrant in the lake. Anglers also catch a mix strain that is a natural hybrid between musky and northern pike also knows as tigers.

The proposal that is on its way to the Natural Resources Commission for information and approval this fall is to increase muskellunge minimum size limit from 42 to 46 inches on Gun Lake to protect this naturally reproducing population.

“Reducing harvest will give the remaining muskellunge a chance to persist and assist efforts in rehabilitating this population” – said Kregg Smith, Senior Fisheries Biologist in charge of Gun Lake.

At the meeting, the DNR would also like to hear the public’s interest in a small stocking program of Great Lakes muskellunge and possible habitat improvement projects. A low stocking rate and habitat improvement will assist in muskellunge rehabilitation of the lake.

For more information, contact Kregg Smith smithk34@michigan.gov or Jay Wesley at HYPERLINK "mailto:wesleyj@michigan.gov" wesleyj@michigan.gov at (269) 685-6851.

Very cool.

Has it been proven that the muskie that have recently been taken from there are indeed native GLS fish and is it also known that the original native strain is the GLS strain? Or could these be a naturalized population of the stocked northern strain fish that have reproduced successfully enough to sustain the population?

GLMUS was the historic population since N. strain didn't exist in MI outside the UP. What is in there now are naturalized NMUS

Thanks Will. This is not far from where I live so I will make an effort to make it to this meeting July 18th. I dont know if I have any real input to add but I would like to listen in on the discussion. Is there anything MMA would want to bring up at the meeting?

Is there much opposition to these proposals for stocking and/or raising the MSL by any other fishing groups? I cant see a downside to these proposals so the only real opposition might be from the walleye guys.

Do you think there are any remaining native GLS fish in there?

This is awesome news! I WILL be there. I urge anyone who is remotely able to attend this. From what I've been hearing, it sounds like a lot of the residents/locals would like to see some bigger fish in there.(bigger as in bigger than the many little hammer-handle pike) Let's make sure to try to outnumber the possible nay-sayers.

That's great news, why not go for a 50" size limit to protect and get the lake back to where it should be.

Oh, man, that is great news. It is on my calendar. Thanks!

MattG_braith wrote:Thanks Will. This is not far from where I live so I will make an effort to make it to this meeting July 18th. I dont know if I have any real input to add but I would like to listen in on the discussion. Is there anything MMA would want to bring up at the meeting?

Is there much opposition to these proposals for stocking and/or raising the MSL by any other fishing groups? I cant see a downside to these proposals so the only real opposition might be from the walleye guys.

Do you think there are any remaining native GLS fish in there?

I'm sure the DNR will cover anything that MMA would want to talk about. Support for the rebuilding of a native species is the most important part MMA members can play.

There will certainly be opposition, the lake association and other user groups were able to stop the very successful stocking that happened during the 80's and I'm sure many of those same people will not want to see it start again. Those of us that have fished the lake for many years will attest the lake and the fishery as a whole was much healthier when there was a good muskie population.

All MUS that have been caught in recent years (last 30 years) have been NMUS and not GLMUS. There is every indication that the original/historic GLMUS population was extirpated.

Steve S wrote:That's great news, why not go for a 50" size limit to protect and get the lake back to where it should be.

As part of the new regulations the optional size limit for biologists to place on a water is 46". The 50" size limit will be placed on broodstock waters or waters where any mortality would be of concern.

Thanks for all the info Will. This is pretty exciting news and hopefully if all goes well and we can get Gun Lake stocked with GLS fish again, maybe with a little habitat restoration we can have a naturally reproducing population of the native strain in a southern Michigan lake not name Lake St. Clair.

I will definitely make time to be at this public meeting in support of the cause and to hear more about the proposals. Very exciting.

Though I can not make the meeting I am in support of any stocking of Gun Lake and any restrictions applied to lowering harvest rates. larger size limit sounds good to me. Mike

I thought thats why the harvest tag was introduced, to keep the number of harverstered fish down? Isnt it too soon to see if the new tag system effected the fish at all. I guess I shouldnt complain, more fish mean better chance of catching 'em

mattman wrote:I thought thats why the harvest tag was introduced, to keep the number of harverstered fish down? Isnt it too soon to see if the new tag system effected the fish at all. I guess I shouldnt complain, more fish mean better chance of catching 'em

Along with the harvest tag in the new regulations there is an optional 46" size limit that can be placed by the managers. In addition, all broodstock lakes will be 50" size limit and closed to spearing. By special order size limits and gear limits can be placed on any water if deemed necessary.

Gotta ask, if Hudson is going to be a broodstock lake for northern strain in the U.P., will it get the 50" size limit?

Steve S wrote:Gotta ask, if Hudson is going to be a broodstock lake for northern strain in the U.P., will it get the 50" size limit?

The last manger for that area didn't want to place the 50" limit there because there were/are so many fish.

This meeting is on Thursday.