We experience this fishery type in sandpits near rivers in NE which have historically flooded. ... TM are ambush predators I believe they’d serve as a less effective management tool and would also inhabit similar habitat as your BG and LMB - both species you’d likely prefer not to be diminished through predation. ....
EDIT: I researched TM a bit more and found some studies stating Gshd are a preferred, soft rayed forage item for TM, so TM recommendation seems to be accurate. I still wonder if TM will be midlake chasing schools of Gshd, but one should defer to the scientific study not my gut instinct. Studies also stated TM prefer forage 30-35% their body length. Once TM enter the 30 - 40" range they would be capable of handling Gshd up to 10-14" but this still may leave largest adult Gshd invulnerable to TM predation. That's where the BC seem to play an important role preying upon larger adults and Carp, Buffalo and Gar. 3/AC seems a prudent stocking strategy. Colorado is using TM to control White Sucker populations in their reservoirs and have reported reducing WS biomass by 50% and TM are growing fast...obviously.
See red! . Not so fast my friend!
I think your gut instinct is better in this case. In the studies you would have to examine just what the lake conditions were - the TM may not have had any option but to chase GShad. Also the population dynamics - the study lakes likely had a very large portion of available forage in GShad. Did the studies have the same situation as a pond/lake in question? My guess is the TM would go for the energetically best option first (BG &, LMB etc. ) . Then they would chase GShad in open water next.
Diets of Muskellunge in Northern Wisconsin Lakes
Michael A. Bozek
,
Thomas M. Burri
&
Richard V. Frie
Abstract
The muskellunge Esox masquinongy is an important sport fish in Wisconsin and elsewhere, but more information about its diet is needed to better understand its role in aquatic systems and its effects on other fish. Stomach contents were examined for 1,092 muskellunge (226–1,180 mm total length, TL) captured in the littoral zone from 34 Wisconsin water bodies from Jul 1991 to Oct 1994. Food occurred in 34.3% (N = 375) of the stomachs, with most (74%) containing a single item. Overall, the proportion of muskellunge with food differed significantly among seasons, with the greatest proportion occurring in fall (69.0%), followed by summer (53.5%) and then spring (25.4%). Prey items consisted of 547 fish, representing 12 families and 31 species, along with 35 nonfish items; fish composed 98% of the diet. Relative importance values of diet items varied by taxa, season, and water body, but
the main food items eaten by muskellunge in each season were yellow perch Perca flavescens and white sucker Catostomous commersoni. Black basses Micropterus spp., northern pike Esox lucius, walleye Stizostedion vitreum, cyprinids, and other taxa were less common in the diet. Prey fish ranged in size from 6% to 47% of muskellunge total length and prey length increased significantly as muskellunge size increased. Yet the size of prey in proportion to muskellunge size remained the same for all sizes of muskellunge.
The results of this study indicate that, if readily available, yellow perch and catostomids will compose a large proportion of the muskellunge diet. Additional studies assessing muskellunge diet among lakes having different prey community types and assessing diet in deeper offshore areas of lakes are needed to better understand the role that muskellunge play in aquatic communities.
