# why not muskie?



## marlin (Apr 27, 2005)

Hello, people. Like everyone else, I have found this site very informative and its members are very knowledgeable. Question: it seems that a majority of the OGF members are in agreement that catching a muskie is strictly C&R. Any particular reason why? Granted I'm never tried muskie and may never catch 1, but it seems pretty comparable to northern pike, which correct me if I'm wrong most people wouldn't mind eating. Am I missing somethin'? BTW, I'm not :T


----------



## tvfisherman (Apr 16, 2004)

I can't speak for everyone but I've only eaten 1 muskie and frankly, it wasn't that good. I found it more difficult to get the bones out than northerns and really wasn't worth the effort. But that's just my opinion, I'm sure others will have their reasons, that's just mine.


----------



## Mushijobah (May 4, 2004)

Also heard they weren't the easiest fish to eat. I do believe the purpose for them being stocked is for us to catch them. And since there is a keep limit, the ODNR definetly took meathunters to mind.


----------



## Corey (Apr 5, 2004)

Chock fulla Bones!!! Although all members of the Pike family are good eating, it takes an experienced person to properly remove the bones. The average angler tries it once or twice and then sticks with species that are easier to filet. This is why you see so many Pike recipes that call for baking or pickling, whick help to disolve the numbers of small bones. Anyway, there are many other great tasting fish out there that are far less trouble to prepare so why not eat them. It takes intensive breeding and stocking programs to maintain the fisheries for these toothy gamefish so that's another resosn that most anglers choose to C & R them.


----------



## got_a_buzz_on (Mar 17, 2005)

if you stop and think about the money and time that goes into raising a muskie to a releasable size you probably wouldnt keep it. i mean these are great fish that used to thrive in our waters. now they are limited to what the state puts in for us. it makes me sick to see ppl dragging these fish out of places tails in the dirt. oh we steak them...they're real good. yeah sure they are. eyes and crappies probably out number the muskies.......5,000,000:1 i would be willing to say that it is a higher ratio then that. i mean GMAB why would you take a fish out that took 9-10 years to get that big when a 3 yr old eye or crappie would be just as good to eat and probably better. i dont know i have never eaten a muskie nor will i. when it comes down to.....i want to have it mounted attitude....there are great replicas that are made now. so to tell you the truth i would bet most people take fish not for the tasting but for the bragging. too bad they dont stop and think that someone else might have already let that fish swim free so that they could catch it. (its sort of like eating a brook trout when you could eat a rainbow from the state)

GABO


----------



## bassin mickey (Apr 22, 2004)

Well said GABO. Also the only one I ever caught was by accident. I was afarid the eating was going to be the other way around, so that baby got released right by the side of the boat in the water, compliments of a pair of long needle nose pliars.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

Marlin,

Your question is a good one.

I think you have to look at why any individual fisherman goes fishing. Everyone has their own reasons for going. A fisherman that is targeting muskies is most likely doing so for the fishing experience not the food value of the fish. If a fisherman is in quest of a fish dinner I don't think they would be targeting muskie, there are many species that are far more plentiful and make better table fare. The middle of the road is the fisherman that just fishes and eats whatever he can catch. If these fisherman catch a muskie it may well be consumed, but this is an accepted fact and allowed for in our fishing laws. 

Any angler has just as much right to catch and consume a muskie, as a muskie angler has to catch and release one. They belong to all of the fisherman. If the fisherman that would keep a muskie to eat could catch more of them I'm sure more would be kept for the table or to show their buddies, but fortunately it takes a lot more than just wanting to catch one to do so consistantly. The vast majority of the fisherman that actually target muskies do so only for the fishing experience and then stop and get a fish sandwhich at micky d's on the way home.

Kim


----------



## gar (Mar 21, 2005)

i have kept one of the muskies that Ive caught it was my biggest at 48 inch at piedmont lake.Ive released the other 3 keepers that ive caught.The taxadermist that did mine keeps all the musky meat and has a musky roast and eating musky is pretty darn good.not everybody catches musky and some never will. ther are good numbers of them in ohio and at piedmont lake.there also is a limit on them.If you are fortunate to catch one of these toothy critters that that is a keeper then keep it if want.there are plent of them out there for the keeping you just have to catch one, if keeping them was so harmful to the population they would tighten up the regulations more. for the record ive released 3 musky into the lake that ive caught close by in the creeks that i seign for chubs so ive kept a nice one and put 3 back in its place.


----------



## bigfishtommy (Oct 25, 2004)

Why are people arguing over this issue? The law states what people can keep. End of story!

Tom


----------



## got_a_buzz_on (Mar 17, 2005)

your right there is no reason to argue. just like there is no reason to keep a muskie.

GABO


----------



## beatsworkin (Apr 12, 2004)

And they're off!  :T :T :T


Lundy, that was well said!


----------



## Reel Man (Jul 4, 2004)

Marlin stated that he wasn't looking to start an argument only to get reasons why people don't eat them. There is no right or wrong answer only a thought process that works for the individual writing it. It seems there are several reasons people don't keep them.

1. They are hard to clean with many bones.
2. It's a game fish that sportsmen like to turn loose to catch another day.
3. The availability of Muskie and the difficulty to actually catch one compared to other species would dictate that there are many more easy targets to catch if a person just wants to eat fish so someone looking for a meal doesn't target a Muskie.

People do keep them for the following reasons.

1. They are a beautiful trophy fish and it is common to have them mounted.
2. Some people do actually want to eat them or are just plain hungry and this is what they happened to catch.

There is no right or wrong answer only reasons for actions as far as this topic is concerned. The only time a finger of wrongdoing can be pointed is if someone catches more then their limit and keeps them. 
There is no reason for argument if no law is being broken only an explanation of why you do what you do and then acceptance of each person's reason for what they do.


----------



## Pharley (Apr 11, 2004)

Funny how each thinks he owns the fish in our waters. Although I never have and never will, keeping a muskie is your choice. It is not like the muskie are the Lochness Monster or Yeti, they are seen/caught every day in Ohio. I have all kind of problems with the type and size of fish people keep, but we all fish for different reasons. 

I would request that you release ALL muskie and bass, all saugeye under 18", and all crappie under 9", but that is just me.


----------



## marlin (Apr 27, 2005)

It seems that the bottom line is that it's a matter of preference. I posed the ? out of curiosity. I will say that even though it may be legal, such as keeping undersized fish that is within regulations, doesn't make it right all the time. Thanks to all for the well-thought out responses.


----------



## Darwin (Apr 12, 2004)

> It is not like the muskie are the Lochness Monster or Yeti,


I personally have eaten all three. The "Yeti" is kind of stringy and taste like chicken. The "Lochness Monster" reminded me a lot of frog legs. As far as the muskie goes, those bones make great "toothpicks" after your meal!  

Seriously though, as long as your not breaking the law you have every right to keep it or turn it loose. The only one I have caught went back in after a quick "Kodak Moment"


----------



## blance (Apr 5, 2004)

Not so sure the C&R argument has as much to do with the taste of the meat as it does preservation of the fishery. It's pretty well documented that Muskies will not reproduce in our lakes any more. Reduction of wetlands and development of shoreline areas have taken away most of their productive breeding grounds. The fish wil still go through the motions and give it try, but the result is generally considered unsuccessful. Now there has been some discussion on rivers as a possible successful breading area. Rivers seem the most likely place where sucessful reproduction can occur due to lesser encroachment by development. The DNR of the states (well PA in particular) are looking at ways to reduce or stop the stocking of muskies in lakes. In part because it's believed they wil eat all the "panfish" and in part due to budget constraints. The primary diet of a musky is soft rayed fish like shad. Muskies will eat bluegill and sunfish, but generally only when their food of choice is unavailable. Given the number of years it takes a fish to reach trophy size, taking larger fish out of the fishery could be devestating for many years to come. I have an example just down the road from me. Our local river sustained a good musky population (whether natural or via stocking in the upstream lake(s)). Over the years people have done well catching them and word had gotten out locally. A few people caught some trophy fish last year and decided to keep them to be mounted. Today, two years later, this stretch of river cannot begin to come close to the musky fishery that it was two years ago. A few fish are caught here and there, but that's nowhere near the size/numbers taken just a few years ago. Now a days it kills me to see the yahoos down there with their live bait rigs intentionally trying to gut hook the fish for a trophy inspite of the closed season when they are supposed to be breeding. Not so opposed to people fishing for the muskies in this river as I am to people that are just out to kill a fish and hoping it's a trophy. I gave up hunting years ago because I wasted more meat than I ate and I couldn't see killing just for the sake of killing. Now if I could find a way to CNR while hunting, I might take it up again. That said, if I caught a 50+ inch musky would I kill it??? That would be a tough decision I would have to make at that time. As I sit here now, I say I'd go for a fiberglass replica, but when forced with a decision on the spot who knows what choice I would make.

I've never eaten one personally becuase I've heard people say they aren't that good and I don't really care for fish all that much. I love to catch them, but not for eating.

Barry


----------



## joe01 (Apr 16, 2004)

Blance,
That was well said. I think the only time I would ever keep a muskie is if it was 50+inch.
Other then that I love the poor mans shrimp Blue gills


----------



## siggy45 (Apr 14, 2004)

I have been chasing muskies exclusively for the past 7 years. Before that I chased walleyes, northerns, crappies all over the US and Canada. I have found that the musky population is a fragile one, that deserves respect and monitored closely. My buddy and I have logged approximately 350+ hours fishing for this fish in 2004 and caught between us 40 legals (32" up tp 52"). Due the math, 1 fish for every 8 hours of fishing. I do not get angry when someone decides to keep one to eat. However, if I spent the same amount of time fishing for good eating fish, I would get far more than 40 fish. If you spent the time and face the challenges that Musky Anglers do, you would understand what many are saying. Remember, that state only stocks between 2,000 and 3,000 fish per year in those lakes. For a lake the size of West Branch, that is not many fish


----------



## crankus_maximus (Apr 14, 2004)

I do not fish for musky. However, I understand the fragility of this species and why it needs to be handled differently. I will not ever keep a musky for any reason. I will urge my fishing partners to never keep a musky, no matter the reason. Even though the law states that you can do it, does not always mean that you should. 

Please, respect the fact that the musky is a rare fish and is not your typical meat or freezer fare. It is hard to catch with any consistancy. If these guys on here want to express why not to keep a musky, then I support them. I cannot see any valid reason as to keeping one. The trophy mount argument doesn't even cut it anymore with the quality of replica mounts. With some photos and measurements a replica mount can be made that will be more durable than a skin mount. 

I


----------



## joe01 (Apr 16, 2004)

crankus_maximus said:


> I The trophy mount argument doesn't even cut it anymore with the quality of replica mounts. With some photos and measurements a replica mount can be made that will be more durable than a skin mount.
> 
> I


Nothing ever compares to a skin mount. But Thats just me! Thats like saying I'll buy a fake deer compared to the ten pointer I shot and had mounted. Its not quality it's personal gratification to me. It may be a skin mount but at least it not plastic. I had to work really hard and put in a lot of time in; to pull my fish of a life time and I would never settle for a fake mount.


----------



## JIG (Nov 2, 2004)

I guess the Dnr is putting in the Muskie for us to keep a few. The record fish is alot of work for most and I would say I would keep 1 and only 1. They are a beautiful creature but are scavengers never the less. I would have too say 2000-3000 fish a year for ten to fifteen years is alot of fish. Would one hurt. Not likely! I would imagine that if you seen the number of fish in general in our waters you be surprized on the great number. Just because you dont see them on your graph or catch them doesnt mean they are not their.
All fish get wise to baits and lures. Thats one reason for the Muskie taking the crappies off you. They know you use light tackle. I have had 5 footers up close to my boat and they do ressemble the Lockness! Beautiful thing. :B


----------



## striperfreak (Apr 30, 2004)

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm fishy


----------



## Mushijobah (May 4, 2004)

Wheres sheephead master at?? He will stir up some arguements! Nothin wrong with keepin a muskie if you actually catch one. Now if you fish for muskie for its meat, maybe try catfish. It's a little better in my opinion.


----------



## fishcrazy (Apr 6, 2004)

Baked with a breaded batter. Blance was right, and survival rate of stockings are lower than 50 % 1000 in 2005,500 in 2006,250 in 2007. 

Fishcrazzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzy


----------



## got_a_buzz_on (Mar 17, 2005)

lets see if everyone that catches one keeps it.......................you do the math.

GABO


----------



## joe01 (Apr 16, 2004)

don't keep carp they don't stock them. If eveyone keeps a carp there will be none left for others to keep. lol.. You could say the same thing about Steelies I only C&R them,


----------



## bkr43050 (Apr 5, 2004)

joe01 said:


> don't keep carp they don't stock them. If eveyone keeps a carp there will be none left for others to keep. lol.. You could say the same thing about Steelies I only C&R them,


 Not exactly. If everyone keeps one then there will only be a 99:1 ration of carp to fishermen instead of the current 100:1.

P.S. Anyone who wants my one carp they can have it.


----------



## mrfishohio (Apr 5, 2004)

Hard to catch, not good to eat. Sort of makes it simple enough. Only one that was in my boat was caught by accident. I guess there's times when they are below some of the spillways & are often snagged(illegally). I don't know if they're eaten or not. 
I guess it's personal preferance, some people think they need to eat anything they catch. That was a prevelent attitude back in the day when food was scarce & people hunted & fished out of necessity to eat. It's alot easier and less costly to just go to the grocery store than to spend money on licenses, tackle, boats, etc for a meal. 
Nothing wrong with keeping a selective harvest of game you will eat, but no need to keep it all just to waste it or give it away. 
Good topic, nice responses 
A fish is still a fish, the only difference in value is the subjective value we place on them.


----------



## Whaler (Nov 16, 2004)

Muskies in Ohio are not rare and are not hard to catch! The State stocks them every year. You just have to fish for them if you want to catch them. They will hit anything from a maggot to the largest lures made . As far as eating them. I caught an eighteen pounder about twenty years ago and I filleted it and took it to work. We fried it up and made fish sandwiches out of it. Everyone was amazed at how good it tasted but it no way compares to Walleye and panfish for taste. Once you know how to remove the Y-bones they are tasty but I would not eat anther one unless it die don release. These are a trophy fish and should be treated that way. If a person catches one which he would like to keep for one reason or another go ahead and keep it . Just remenber to treat them as gently as possible and release them as soon as possible to prevent harming them if you aren't keeping them. As for a replica mount, I don't think so. That's just hanging a piece of painted fiberglass on your wall. As a matter of fact treat all fish gently when catching and releasing them and don't hold them out of the water too long like the idiots on TV do in the fishing shows.


----------



## bkr43050 (Apr 5, 2004)

Whaler said:


> Muskies in Ohio are not rare and are not hard to catch! The State stocks them every year. You just have to fish for them if you want to catch them. They will hit anything from a maggot to the largest lures made . As far as eating them. I caught an eighteen pounder about twenty years ago and I filleted it and took it to work. We fried it up and made fish sandwiches out of it. Everyone was amazed at how good it tasted but it no way compares to Walleye and panfish for taste. Once you know how to remove the Y-bones they are tasty but I would not eat anther one unless it die don release. These are a trophy fish and should be treated that way. If a person catches one which he would like to keep for one reason or another go ahead and keep it . Just remenber to treat them as gently as possible and release them as soon as possible to prevent harming them if you aren't keeping them. As for a replica mount, I don't think so. That's just hanging a piece of painted fiberglass on your wall. As a matter of fact treat all fish gently when catching and releasing them and don't hold them out of the water too long like the idiots on TV do in the fishing shows.


 That should get the attention of our fellow muskie fishermen. I would not call a fish that I caught once every trip or two "easy" to catch. But I guess easy is a matter of opinion. Me, on the other hand, well I have never caught one and that is mostly becuase I very rarely fish waters in which they inhabit.


----------



## HCF (Apr 7, 2005)

Alot of fun to catch but I only C&R. Would rather keep an eye or panfish to eat.


----------



## siggy45 (Apr 14, 2004)

Muskies easy to catch!!! I must be doing something wrong, as well as, a whole bunch of musky fisherman that I know. A member of our club is currently ranked number 3 at Muskies Inc. for the most releases. He caught 53 based on a lot of hours (Last year). It is well known that Ohio is one of the most difficult states to catch these critters. If we want to catch numbers, we go outside of Ohio.

If you catch a trophy and want to have a skin mount, go for it. That is what it's about especially at 12-15 dollars an inch for a quality replica. If you catch a 'ski at an Ohio Lake, take a scale sample, and get an envelope by the boat ramps and mail postage free to the DNR. The info is valuable they retrive from the sample to assist in protecting and helping this fishery.


----------



## TIGHTLINER (Apr 7, 2004)

They must call it the fish of 10,000 casts for one reason or another. Maybe we can get OGFs own 'fffffish' or 'BuckeyeTom to weigh in on this subject.......TightLines!


----------



## acklac7 (May 31, 2004)

"Muskies in Ohio are not rare and are not hard to catch! The State stocks them every year"

Muskies are native to Ohio and naturally occur in a few rivers that drain into the Ohio R. and Lake Erie. Back Hundreds of years ago Muskies,Walleye's,Sauger's Flatheads,Bluecats (the list can go on and on) migrated up the Scioto from the Ohio river. In the early 1900's much of the upper Scioto was severely channelized and impounded, destroying much of the natural habitat. Since then it is thought that many of the native species have been extirpated (sturgeon,walleye,muskies,northern pike) However somehow nature finds away and there are still native Muskies (and Northerns and Possibly pure Walleye) that are naturally reproducing in the impounded sections of the Scioto. Now they are rare....very rare....You think catching one at Alum is hard?....Try finding one in the Upper Scioto...It usually happens by accident and only happens like once every 3-5 years. At any rate Native Muskies, who's blood lines trace back centuries are EXTREMELY RARE...and I would ceartinely hope anyone who caught one North of Greenlawn would release it immediately no matter what the size....Here is a baby caught above Griggs a few years ago....


----------



## acklac7 (May 31, 2004)

On the subject of keeping Carp, allot of people would be surprised to know that Carp were originally STOCKED as a game fish a WAY long time ago...However nobody kept them and the population skyrocketed out of control...Talk about poor fisheries management.


----------



## Mushijobah (May 4, 2004)

Also, arent the muskie in alum tiger muskie?


----------



## bkr43050 (Apr 5, 2004)

Mushijobah said:


> Also, arent the muskie in alum tiger muskie?


 I can't find any facts easily to support this but I believe that the muskie stocking program from the state is primarily pure muskie and not the tiger muskie hybrids. I know they did stock them at one time but I don't thin they are being stocked currently at least in the normal program. Hopefully one of our muskie fishermen with more knowledge on the topic will hop in and enlighten us.


----------



## Wetnet (Apr 12, 2004)

The muskie being stocked in Ohio are ALL pure, and they come from eggs taken from Clearfork. Recently, Ohio was given some of the excess stock from Kentucky' program. I know that some went to Alum, not sure about other Ohio lakes, but these Kentucky fish are silver in color and look different from the normal Ohio fish.


----------



## got_a_buzz_on (Mar 17, 2005)

the next muskie i catch i think im going to keep it and put it in my pond. lol

you know we used to trade fish for fish with other states. i wonder why we dont trade for more fish like muskies, whipers, and steelhead. we have the saugeyes and cats, panfish reproduce on their own. whipers......is there any fish that fights harder????

GABO


----------



## joe01 (Apr 16, 2004)

buzz on that was good.


----------



## Mushijobah (May 4, 2004)

i didnt understand that post


----------



## toboso (Apr 14, 2004)

I for one contend that musky is every bit as tasty as saugeye (but they're both second place to yellow perch!). An ODNR biologist once encouraged me to harvest one of my musky catches. First of all, he knows that I enjoy fresh fish and harvest wisely. He supported keeping an occasional musky for two reasons.

1. *Muskies are delicious.* This is contrary to many opinions and myths. Yes, it is a matter of preference. I don't think crappie are worth the bacon grease it takes to fry them, but that's me. My wife thinks channel cats are the best-eating fish on earth (can you say "******* girl"  ). Musky flesh is mild in flavor and firm in texture. It bakes and broils well, thus lending itself to many recipes. If you like tuna, swordfish, salmon, mahi mahi, there's a good chance you'll like musky.

2. *Harvesting a few muskies is NOT detrimental to the fishery*. Most Ohio muskies die of old age OR delayed mortality from the "catch & release purists". Yes, I release 99.9% of the muskies caught in my boat, but the "purists" are those who think their **** don't stink, if you know what I mean. You know those "summer peak" bites in June when everybody's catching fish (BIG fish, too)? How many of those fish suffer delayed mortality by C&R anglers due to improper handling, stress, improper release (location), etc? Just ask a biologist!

Muskies are stocked in Ohio mainly to control the Gizzard shad population. Sport fishing is a bonus. Because the are a threatened native species keeps them on the budget. Informed anglers know that muskies are expensive to stock--that's why there's only a handful of program lakes in Ohio. If they could, ODNR would stock muskies everywhere they stock saugeye.

As for cleaning a musky, I have found a simple and effective process. I fillet the fish as I would with any fish. Once filleted and skinned, I cut the fillet into quarters so that the Y-bones are isolated in anterior-dorsal section. That is the top/front section on the fish. The other 3 quarters are essentially bone-free--well, as much as any fish fillet is. The boney quarter can be further trimmed of the affected area, thus reducing the bone factor. I still reserve this piece of meat for myself and/or other knowledgeable fish-eaters who can deal with some bones safely.


----------



## Mushijobah (May 4, 2004)

I agree if you get one in a lake. If they have escaped from the lake, then they are a potential building-block to restoring natural muskies in our rivers. I personally would not harvest a muskie from a stream for that reason.


----------

