Muskies proposal catches grief

Imagine a plan to import into Washington a fish species that’s so voracious and fearsome, even the walleye clubs are scared.

Let’s just say the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife didn’t get a universally warm reception to a proposal that would unleash muskellunge into Silver and Newman lakes in Spokane County.

Not that many people knew about the plan. There was no press release about the comment period that began July 20. Nevertheless, the reaction spawned by a few anglers who caught wind of the proposal generated significant objections.

The proposal was withdrawn for reconsideration and rewriting on Aug. 15, again without public notice other than a posting on an obscure SEPA/NEPA portion of the agency’s Web site.

The concern expressed in writing by anglers is that muskellunge, better known as muskies, could find their way via the illegal bucket brigade into other waters and begin reproducing out of control.

After all, northern pike did not fly or swim over the Continental Divide into Lake Coeur d’Alene a few decades ago and walleyes didn’t walk into Hayden Lake, where anglers have been hooking them with a regularity that has discouraged fish managers who work to keep the lake’s sport fish populations in balance.

Muskies are a coveted trophy species east of the Rockies. Many Inland Northwest anglers who fish Newman, Silver or five lakes in North Idaho eagerly cast for a chance to catch a similar fish known as the “tiger musky.”

Both species grow to hefty proportions, but the difference between the two species is huge. Muskies can reproduce. Tiger muskies are sterile hybrids produced by using northern pike to fertilize musky eggs.

Fish managers have enjoyed the option of stocking precise numbers of tiger muskies into Western waters to provide a trophy fishery with no risk of the hybrid overpopulating or having an unwanted impact on other sportfish.

For 18 years, Washington has planted up to 11 lakes with tiger muskies. These efficient predators are now being stocked annually in seven lakes, not so much to control population of species such as pikeminnows and suckers, but to take advantage of that biomass in lakes such as Curlew to feed a fish species that attracts anglers.

Tiger muskies were stocked in Silver Lake with hopes they would develop an appetite for the prolific but largely unwanted tench fishery. Researchers say some of the tiger muskies planted three and four years ago have surpassed 36 inches, the minimum length for keeping one of the trophies. One Silver Lake tiger has been officially measured at 44 inches long, and released back into the lake.

The cost of providing tiger musky fisheries is low, yet about 16,000 anglers – 3 percent of the state’s licensed fishermen – spend significant time and money pursuing the fish.

“The tiger musky program is definitely worth keeping,” said Steve Jackson, Washington’s warmwater fisheries manager in Olympia. “It contributes significantly to the state’s economy.”

Trouble is, Minnesota is the main source of certified disease-free tiger musky eggs and fry and the state’s Department Natural Resources announced last year that it was planning to phase out its tiger musky production program.

Jackson began talking to fish mangers in many of the Western states last winter about the possibility of creating muskellunge fisheries in a few selected waters to create a dependable source of musky eggs needed to produce tiger muskies.

“We’re all concerned about the potential of losing our source for musky eggs,” Jackson said. “For now, Minnesota is reconsidering and may continue its tiger musky program. But new viruses are cropping up in fisheries farther east and there may be a time when we can’t import those eggs even if they’re available.”

Jackson is criticized in some circles for pursuing the musky broodstock program. This spring, he brought in 3,500 musky fry that are still being held at the state’s warmwater fish hatchery in Grant County pending the rewriting of a proposal that will likely focus creating a broodstock fishery solely in Newman Lake.

But the musky proposal is supported by fish mangers in nearby states, including Idaho.

“We’ve had difficulty getting tiger muskies for quite sometime,” said Ned Horner, Idaho Fish and Game Department regional fisheries manager, who ushered in the thrill of producing the state’s record 38-pound, 7-ounce tiger muskie in Hauser Lake.

Issues of availability and disease leave an uncertain future for importing tiger muskies from the Midwest, he said. “In addition to providing trophy fishing, tiger muskies have shown great potential for stocking in certain mountain lakes to help us control overpopulated brook trout in areas where we can’t use chemicals. But for the past few years, we haven’t been able to get more tiger muskies for that research.”

Some Washington anglers, as well as Tom Dresser, fish, wildlife and water quality manger for the Grant County PUD, have formally opposed Washington’s musky broodstock proposal.

Primarily they fear the risk of the exotic predators getting into other waters and preying on other fish species, including, possibly, endangered salmon and steelhead.

The Bonneville Power Administration alone will spend $700 million next year to boost endangered salmon and steelhead recovery, Dresser pointed out.

But the proposed musky program poses no significant threat, say fish managers, including Idaho’s Horner, who’s seen his share of disruption to native fisheries.

“Muskies have such specific spawning requirements, I don’t think we’d ever get significant reproducing populations in this area,” Horner said. Musky eggs drop to the lake bottom where oxygen levels are poor while northern pike are more successful spawners because their eggs adhere to vegetation, he said.

“Even where they are found in the wild, they are not prolific. Many, many hours go into catching one of these fish.”

Stay tuned.