Michigan Sea Grant

Steelhead fishing is a favorite cold-weather pastime for many Michiganders. When autumn winds blow, some steelhead leave Lake Michigan and run upstream. Conventional wisdom states that they follow the salmon, which spawn during the fall months. Although steelhead certainly do gorge on salmon eggs, it is probably a combination of temperature, water level, and photoperiod cues (day length) that prompts steelhead to run upstream.

Whatever the reason, good numbers of fresh steelhead can show up in rivers in fall … or not. Winter months can also provide fast fishing … or not. Mid-winter thaws can encourage fall-run steelhead to move farther upstream and begin spawning in some years, but steelhead activity levels can remain very low for months at a time during severe winters. In short, timing is everything with steelhead fishing, and timing can be hard to predict.

Spring has historically been the most popular time for steelhead fishing because March and April tend to be peak months for a fresh run of spring spawners, but the most popular time to fish is not always the most productive time to fish.

When is the best time to fish for steelhead?

Since 2020, dedicated anglers have been using Great Lakes Angler Diary to record steelhead catches and other data on steelhead fishing trips as part of the Michigan River Steelhead Program. As a result, we now have four full fishing seasons of data, providing an unprecedented look at how fishing success fluctuates from month to month and year to year. Participants recorded at least 50 fish each year on seven key river systems in the Lake Michigan basin. Michigan Sea Grant hosted a Zoom meeting for registered participants on Dec. 16, which featured a detailed discussion of catch rates in these Lake Michigan tributaries.

It may come as a surprise, but February had the highest catch rates in two out of four years in Lake Michigan streams. February also had the highest average monthly catch rate over the past four years, due in large part to our recent string of mild winters. Of course, things will probably look very different for February 2025 given that many river reaches were covered with ice this winter. Even so, the steelhead diary program has shown that savvy anglers can beat the crowds and find excellent fishing throughout the winter months when weather conditions are favorable.

Why are people concerned about steelhead populations?

The Michigan River Steelhead Program also surveys registered participants each year, and our 2024 survey found that angler satisfaction had dropped relative to the two previous years. To be clear, it didn’t drop by very much. Satisfaction was slightly below neutral in 2024 and similar to what it was in 2021. On average, people thought that fishing wasn’t as good as it had been — but it wasn’t terrible either.

Thanks to the efforts of our volunteers, we were able to take a very detailed look at different measures of fishing success to see if we could explain the changes in satisfaction. The first thing we looked at was overall catch rate, which is the total number of steelhead caught divided by all of the hours fished.

It turns out that our fourth year (Fall 2023 to Spring 2024) did have the lowest overall catch rate, but only by a tiny margin. Year 3 had an overall catch rate of 0.216 steelhead per hour and in Year 4 this dropped to 0.212. This is a difference of four steelhead caught per 1,000 hours of fishing effort, which is such a small difference that it would be impossible for an individual angler to notice.

Another approach was to look at monthly catch rates. October and November catch rates were below average for Year 4, but fishing improved in December and was fairly steady through winter and spring. The weak fall run was certainly a topic of conversation, but steelhead anglers know that fall runs have always been inconsistent from year to year.

When we looked at size-specific catch rates, things got a bit more interesting. It turns out that Year 4 catch rates of large steelhead dropped dramatically. In Year 4, our volunteers caught one steelhead over 24 inches long for every eleven hours spent fishing. In previous years, volunteers only had to fish for six hours to catch a steelhead over 24 inches long. That is a difference big enough to worry about!

It is easy to understand why anglers would be concerned about such a big drop in catch rates of large fish, but the silver lining is that catch rates for smaller fish actually increased dramatically in Year 4. The story got even more interesting when we looked at stocked and wild fish in different size groups.

Skippers and super skippers

One key aspect of data collection for Great Lakes Angler Diary is that we ask anglers to measure every steelhead and check for fin clips. Fish lengths can tell us a lot about populations. For steelhead, nearly all fish in the 15- to 19-inch range have spent one summer feeding in Lake Michigan. Anglers call these fish “skippers” because they are typically very aggressive and jump repeatedly when hooked.

Last season, anglers were noticing the increased number of fish in the 20- to 24-inch range, as well. Fishing reports on the Baldwin Bait & Tackle website started referring to these fish as “super skippers,” which makes a lot of sense. Fish in this size range are a bit bigger than the typical fish that spent only one summer in the big lake. Many of these super skippers have spent two summers feeding in the big lake, but there are also fast-growing one-summer fish and older slow-growing fish mixed in.

In the future, we will be able to tease apart these differences and assign ages to each fish. For now, we define 15-19” fish as skippers and 20-24” fish as super skippers.

Different trends for clipped and unclipped fish

Since 2018, all steelhead stocked in Michigan waters have been marked with an adipose fin clip. In 2020, pandemic restrictions prevented egg take and this resulted in a missing cohort of yearling fish in 2021. This missing cohort of stocked yearling fish had a clear impact on Great Lakes Angler Diary catch rates.

In Year 2 of our program (Fall 2021 to Spring 2022), the missing fish would have been skippers. Not surprisingly, catch rates of fin-clipped skippers were close to zero in Year 2 as a result; in Year 3, our catch rates for clipped super skippers were also very low due in large part to the missing cohort of stocked fish (Figure 2). This same missing 2021 cohort was also largely to blame for low catch rates of larger (over 24-inch) steelhead during Year 4, although the presence of some older fish from stocking years prior to 2021 helped to provide a few large fish for anglers in Year 4.

So, for clipped steelhead there was a clear and predictable influence of the missing 2021 cohort through time. Poor fishing for large stocked steelhead in Year 4 was largely due to the missing cohort. However, catch rates for large unclipped steelhead were also lower than expected during Year 4 and the reasons are not immediately obvious.

Although there is no evidence for any decline in steelhead natural reproduction over the past two decades (read analysis online), there is always the possibility of a bad year-class from time to time. Great Lakes Angler Diary might eventually provide some answers regarding year-class strength and the possible influence of factors like water level, prey availability, and mortality sources. However, the trends we have seen in unclipped skippers and super skippers suggest that catch rates of small wild fish may not be a great predictor of future fishing success for large steelhead.

We saw the lowest catch rates for unclipped skippers and super skippers during Year 3. This was despite a good run of skippers in Year 2 that might have translated to more super skippers in Year 3. Even more surprising was that the weak run of unclipped skippers in Year 3 was followed by sky-high catch rates for unclipped super skippers in Year 4.

In fact, Year 4 saw the highest catch rates for unclipped skippers and super skippers at the same time we saw lower catch rates for unclipped larger steelhead (Figure 3). Perhaps environmental conditions that lead to good runs of small steelhead also lead to poor runs of larger steelhead, or perhaps there is more at work.

Water temperatures rose rapidly in early April 2025, prompting steelhead that were in southern rivers to quickly spawn and migrate back to Lake Michigan. It is possible that many large, wild steelhead didn’t show up in catches because they were only in the river for or a short while. Steelhead don’t necessarily spawn every year either, so it is even possible that some large fish did not run at all.

Our data show that small skippers are more likely to run in fall than large fish — which could explain why they were not as affected by the early warm-up in spring. This is pure speculation, though. We’ll need to collect additional years of data and complete age assignments to see if we can shed more light on wild steelhead year-class trends.

Is there hope for the future of steelhead fishing?

Absolutely! Fall fishing reports were very encouraging, and the spring run seems to be off to a good start. Despite the low catch rate for large steelhead last year, there were plenty of smaller steelhead in the system.

This year will most likely be the last year that all Michigan steelhead receive an adipose fin clip. If you haven’t already registered at www.GLanglerdiary.org now would be a great time to sign on and get involved. In addition to submitting data online, participants are invited to complete an annual survey and participate in Zoom meetings featuring the latest results and presentations from guest speakers. Our next Zoom meeting is on the evening of May 19, and will feature Michael Guthard from Michigan Department of Natural Resources discussing their coded wire tag (CWT) recovery program and what it can tell us about steelhead straying in Michigan rivers.

The catch rates presented in this article are preliminary results from the Michigan River Steelhead Program. A more detailed discussion of catch rates, age assignments, and development of metrics to serve as indicators of year-class strength can be viewed on YouTube.

Michigan Sea Grant helps to foster economic growth and protect Michigan’s coastal, Great Lakes resources through education, research and outreach. A collaborative effort of the University of Michigan and Michigan State University and its MSU Extension, Michigan Sea Grant is part of the NOAA-National Sea Grant network of 34 university-based programs.

This article was prepared by Michigan Sea Grant under award NA24OARX417C0157-T1-01 from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce through the Regents of the University of Michigan. The statement, findings, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Department of Commerce, or the Regents of the University of Michigan.