|
|
Location: varies | With the minimum size limit pushed to 54" next season (Yay!) in Minnesota, Im curious as to when we might see a real impact on this increase in size limit? 5years, 10? What are your thoughts? Are other states pushing for larger sizes as well? Thanks. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1901
Location: MN | I don't know how you would get any sort of quantitative measurement that you can track from year to year or after a certain period of time, considering that so many fish are simply caught and released and not ever recorded, registered or even mentioned. But you can be assured that there will be more for the catching, so your odds may go up depending on where you fish.
|
|
| |
|
Location: varies | probably right. I was thinking that catch sizes overall might creep up over time. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1126
Location: Minnesota. | 54"!!! Man, I love that number...*silly winky thingy*
Inside joke...After 35 yrs. trying I boated one last July. It changed me...really!!!
With thanks to all involved with the fisheries management profession! It changed me...!!!
Jeremy. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2280
Location: Chisholm, MN | Immediately! Every 50 incher not kept will help the fishery right away! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 131
| This topic turned into a big argument on another site....I myself am for it.... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 18
| I am a supporter of the 54" minimum. I just don't see this restriction helping our fishery when the DNR has basically discontinued stocking muskies in MN. If the DNR had continued to stock lakes (Mille Lacs, Tonka, Vermillion)in the same manner that turned these lakes into GREAT muskie fisheries I would be doing cartwheels right now. They should have put that restriction in 8 years ago and continued stocking yearlings and adult muskies. Now, its like saying to can't kill a female Dodo bird. There just will not be a population of 54"er in any (STOCKED)lakes in MN to worry about. Not like we had 5-8 years ago. Putting back a 49 or 50"er is always a good thing. But if there is not a future generation of muskies growing behind them it really won't matter. The remaining large fish will reach maturity and die and that will be it for a very long time. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 20180
Location: oswego, il | What could possibly be the argument raising the size limit 4" on this body of water? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1284
Location: WI | It's going to suck if a nice 52" dies on me and I have to release it for the turtles. I haven't had a big one die yet, sure hope it doesn't happen now. That said, I think it's a good thing as most of the kept fish are incidentals. I wonder if the walleye/panfish guys will know the muskie size limit went up or not? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 80
| will 54" minimum signs be placed at lake accesses? without that, I don' think the every day Joe will have a clue about the new law. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2280
Location: Chisholm, MN | I'm sure they will have signs. |
|
| |
|
Location: varies | ^or at least White out and Sharpies...budgets you know. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 131
| Todd it just got outta control..... It was one guys option on how a larger size limit was going to do more harm then good .The larger fish were going to eat all the smaller muskies and wreck the fisheries. I'm not trying to stir anything up ,but there are people out there that don't think it's a good idea. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8719
| So wait a minute..
Let me see if I have this straight. We should kill the big muskies so they don't eat the small muskies, thereby giving the small muskies a chance to grow big. And then when those got big, we would kill them too? I don't get it.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 535
| im all for it but it would be nice to actually have people know what the size limit is. there is lots of landing that don't have the size limit at 48" even and don't even mention there are muskellunge present in the waters. Granted I know its the fishermans responsibility to know the rules and regs but a lot of them still think its 40". Lame |
|
| |
|
Posts: 131
| Sorry to have even brought it up. I really couldn't make to much sense of it either... the topic got nuked about a hour after it started... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1000
| This is a great first step. Next step is expanding our stocking program to take some of the pressure of these fish. TC metro fish are probably the most conditioned in the world right now lol |
|
| |
|
Posts: 18
| tolle141: It would be great if the MN DNR would expand their stocking program but don't hold your breath. We'll all be dead before that happens. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 19
| I have to agree with Doc Obvious, getting new lakes is about impossible. We have been trying/waiting to get something in the Brainerd Lakes area and the DNR comes up with the most ridiculous reasons not to stock. I wish Muskies Inc. would stop contributing any money to them until they do something for the muskies anglers. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1360
Location: Lake "y" cause lake"x" got over fished | BFD - 11/24/2014 9:48 AM
I have to agree with Doc Obvious, getting new lakes is about impossible. We have been trying/waiting to get something in the Brainerd Lakes area and the DNR comes up with the most ridiculous reasons not to stock. I wish Muskies Inc. would stop contributing any money to them until they do something for the muskies anglers.
only issue here is, if muskies inc stopped giving them money, NO stocking would get done at all. So giving them money for the little stocking they do do, is better then not at all. Muskies INC over the last few years has been picking up all the MNDNR's slack. We need muskies inc to keep giving them money or were all screwed |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1000
| Why has the MN DNR cut back on stocking? Was that a part of the plan or a change in budget allocation? |
|
| |
|
Location: varies | Unrelated, yet related that on kare11 news last week some group including resort owners are suing the DNR on Mille lacs. Saying their turning it into a pike and bass fishery and not managing walleye. May be far fetched? But at least it draws attention. Maybe us musky folks have to do the same. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2378
| Letting guys kill all the pike and bass equals turning it into a pike and bass fishery? Morons.
Edited by BALDY 11/25/2014 12:44 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 4343
Location: Smith Creek | Due to insufficient muskie stocking, out of state guides are going to sue the DNR for loss of revenue and the emotional distress of having to relocate to Detroit. |
|
| |
|
Location: varies | Flambeauski - 11/25/2014 12:47 PM
Due to insufficient muskie stocking, out of state guides are going to sue the DNR for loss of revenue and the emotional distress of having to relocate to Detroit.
Well....if there is a silver lining in this grey cloud, at least you can buy a home in Detroit for like $9. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 19
| FAT-SKI - 11/25/2014 11:37 AM
only issue here is, if muskies inc stopped giving them money, NO stocking would get done at all. So giving them money for the little stocking they do do, is better then not at all. Muskies INC over the last few years has been picking up all the MNDNR's slack. We need muskies inc to keep giving them money or were all screwed
FAT-SKI
I don't know where you got that information, but that is not correct. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32799
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | There is quite a bit of misinformation in this thread.
Interesting how the MNDNR went from 'the best in the world' to what you guys are serving up and all that happened is almost exactly what was predicted in the 'it's the fish' debate a few years back. Look it up on the research board.
You have NO idea how fortunate you are to have the program you have in place. Learn about it (everything Muskie the MNDNR has done, is doing, and is dealing with trying to move forward) before complaining.
Then join the folks who actually do something proactively.... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 18
| Steve,
While I do respect your opinion, I had worked directly with the MNDNR for 5 years. The focus was stocking new waters. I put in hundreds of hours working with lake assoc., DNR officers, and muskie inc chapters. So, you can't say I don't know what I'm talking about because I do. I know more then most muskie guys who just complain and don't put in time to help grow the resource. In any case, You are completely wrong about the MNDNR. I think many MNDNR managers regret the muskie stocking programs that did back in the 80's. The only people who want a great muskie fishery and muskie fisherman. That being said, They have been beatin up by the other fishing groups to the point where they really don't want to deal with it. Take an honest look at how many quality muskie lakes we have in this state. I would hardly use the word "fortunate". Then you take the few lakes that were great successes and change the whole stocking program. I had a few friends from out of state who hadn't fished Mille Lacs in about 8 years. They spent 3 days on the lake from dawn till dusk and made one statement that really stuck, "Your lake is broken".
You can go ahead now and call me an idiot but you can't say I don't the DNR, the lakes, or that I'm not "proactive". I refuse to work with the DNR anymore and haven't for the past 5 years.....so I guess you can say I'm not proactive now. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2384
Location: On the X that marks the mucky spot | As far as I know the DNR hasn't cut back on the number of fish they produce. They've been making around 30k +/- for the past 20 years. (Funny how they "needed" a $12,000 feeder system to "boost production" in their Waterville site but haven't made more muskies. But I digress).
The Commissioner is the one to point the finger at when it comes to new lakes. He is more of a hunter/spearer and feels that we've "gotten too much" in the past.
Personally I've had enough at this time of my life and am retiring from working with the DNR until we get a new Commissioner. I have too much going on in my life and don't have the patience to do it anymore. In case of emergency, break glass and take me out to put out any fire that may arise.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32799
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | 'In any case, You are completely wrong about the MNDNR. I think many MNDNR managers regret the muskie stocking programs that did back in the 80's. The only people who want a great muskie fishery and muskie fisherman.'
You know why there have not been more muskie lakes introduced, right? How am I 'completely wrong' about the MNDNR? What did I say that's not accurate? I was responding to several comments on the thread.
Back when that fishery was relatively new other than the original muskie waters over there, this was addressed in detail, what the hurdles would be to 'keep the magic' that was the new reservoir syndrome on the stocked lakes, what opposition would do (and has done) to get access to spearing and to stop any new introductions. All has actually happened as was pretty much predicted; add to that a major recession style DNR budget killer, and there it is. And yes, MN IS VERY fortunate to have the Muskie lakes you have now. Maintaining them at the level they were at after first introduction wasn't going to be either possible (for a number of reasons) or as easy as everyone originally insisted.
There was, just a few years ago a vociferous demand over here to have our DNR folks mirror the Minnesota program. Not so much anymore, and nothing has really changed that wasn't inevitable.
I'm going hunting.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1360
Location: Lake "y" cause lake"x" got over fished | BFD - 11/25/2014 3:11 PM
FAT-SKI - 11/25/2014 11:37 AM
only issue here is, if muskies inc stopped giving them money, NO stocking would get done at all. So giving them money for the little stocking they do do, is better then not at all. Muskies INC over the last few years has been picking up all the MNDNR's slack. We need muskies inc to keep giving them money or were all screwed
FAT-SKI
I don't know where you got that information, but that is not correct.
---
Soooooo .... Correct it then. Don't just tell me I'm wrong, tell me why I'm wrong. Inform all of us so we can all be up to date.
All I know is when I was part of muskies inc. There was copious amounts of complaining about how little money for stocking the DNR had. and how we were picking up slack, more specifically on specific lakes or projects. I have been out of the muskies inc game for about two years now. Maybe things are different. I guess I wouldn't know anymore. All I can go off of is what I experienced myself when I was there. I have also heard the quote of "we have got to much in the past" from the commish as treats stated. These are just my opinions on what I saw and witnessed |
|
| |
|
Posts: 19
| Fat-Ski,
If Muskies Inc was to fold up shop today, the DNR would continue to stock fish in the designated muskies lakes according to plan. Does Muskie Inc help to stock supplemental fish, absolutely, primarily in the metro area and western portion of the state. Muskie Inc is a responsible for helping out with a small portion of the fish statewide.
Our chapter along with a private business has tried to give them money in the past to stock additional fish in some of the longville lakes and has been turned away. I don't think its as much of a money issue as it is actually getting available fish for stocking and gaining public support for new waters. I should have clarified that we should not keep giving them additional funds for studies and equipment until we see some progress on gaining additional muskie lakes |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32799
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | FAT-SKI - 11/26/2014 12:08 PM BFD - 11/25/2014 3:11 PM FAT-SKI - 11/25/2014 11:37 AM
only issue here is, if muskies inc stopped giving them money, NO stocking would get done at all. Not true, the MNDNR would continue to stock as was mentioned in an earlier post by Treats. He knows. So giving them money for the little stocking they do do, is better then not at all. Again, not even close to accurate and pretty rude, too Muskies INC over the last few years has been picking up all the MNDNR's slack. Define 'slack', and I'd suggest you drop the attitude if you intend to represent MI...that isn't what they are about and never will be; MI has been there to assist with Muskie programs across the country as a positive and cooperative force in concert with biologists and fisheries managers, and isn't even CLOSE to 'picking up the MNDNR's 'slack' We need muskies inc to keep giving them money or were all screwed The cooperative effort has been productive, but keep spreading this crap, and you may find your fisheries manager less willing to work with your club and other 'Muskie activists' FAT-SKI I don't know where you got that information, but that is not correct. --- Soooooo .... Correct it then .OK, see above Don't just tell me I'm wrong, tell me why I'm wrong. Inform all of us so we can all be up to date. Again, see above. You are seriously uninformed and misrepresenting MI AND the MNDNR.All I know is when I was part of muskies inc. There was copious amounts of complaining (since when is bar talk and complaining reality?) about how little money for stocking the DNR had See my Great Recession remark. What the hell, did you miss that international event?. and how we were picking up slack, more specifically on specific lakes or projects. I have been out of the muskies inc game for about two years now. Maybe things are different. I guess I wouldn't know anymore. All I can go off of is what I experienced myself when I was there. I have also heard the quote of "we have got to much in the past" from the commish as treats stated And that is reality, as one group can't manipulate and/or control the entire fisheries program for long, no matter how badly they want to. Continued good PR, careful cooperation with fisheries folks, and upward applied pressure is what is needed. Not everyone thinks all the lakes need Muskie stocking or would agree with the expense of doing so...tough to win that battle, and the more stupid and angry the comments are online the more you lose. Yes, the DNR's across the country watch this sort of thing . These are just my opinions on what I saw and witnessed I can't express how this strikes me as prophesy fulfilled from just a few years ago. While you bite the very hands that feed you, please remember that you have one hell of a fishery over there that's worth preserving as best you can, and it takes the DNR, State Government, and a powerful lobby to move forward in a meaningful way. Not easy to accomplish because that takes money, people willing to work hard and not just a handful as those guys WILL burn out. Either you are all in, or not. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32799
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | BFD - 11/26/2014 4:24 PM
Fat-Ski,
If Muskies Inc was to fold up shop today, the DNR would continue to stock fish in the designated muskies lakes according to plan. Does Muskie Inc help to stock supplemental fish, absolutely, primarily in the metro area and western portion of the state. Muskie Inc is a responsible for helping out with a small portion of the fish statewide.
Our chapter along with a private business has tried to give them money in the past to stock additional fish in some of the longville lakes and has been turned away. I don't think its as much of a money issue as it is actually getting available fish for stocking and gaining public support for new waters. I should have clarified that we should not keep giving them additional funds for studies and equipment until we see some progress on gaining additional muskie lakes
frustration is understandable, but I think you are offering a fatally flawed approach. The DNR doesn't NEED MI, but MI REALLY NEEDS cooperation from the DNR. Slapping at them won't get you very far.
Muskies Inc should NEVER be part of anything like that, especially broadcast on a message board. Talk about a potential PR nightmare... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 89
| I live in Iowa and only vacation in MN. I am a member of muskies INC.
I guess my thought is, how often does I'm gonna take my ball and go home work?
You think the dark house guys did that? They have a fraction of the support we have and they have made great strides.
America is like a brothel. Our current political system is like a giant line of prostitutes. They all have hands out and you give them your money you get what you want. Those that have figured that out have made great strides. Those that have not are pushed to the side.
Does the dark house association stock fish? I mean maybe they do but I have never read about it?
So yes STOP STOCKING FISH. START buying politicians. Give them votes, give them money, give them influence. Watch our lobby gain influence and use our system to FORCE what we want down the throats of others. We want a DNR head favorable to our cause? Lobby it, Either buy his leadership and force his hand, or have him replaced, or use the legislature to shove our agenda down his throat against his will.
For the price of a couple lures each we could buy the lobby to get back 100 fold what we spent. (Our own #*^@ money we already gave them anyway).
Play like the dark house guys or the environmental guys, or anyone else who has used our system to take from you and shove their agenda down your throat against your will.
We can stock our fish, be nice guys, and think somebody some day will see how nice we are and help us. The outcome will be a long languish on the vine.
Just a dismal reality of the world we live.
Hmmm......
Maybe I should stop reading the newspaper or watching house of cards? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1360
Location: Lake "y" cause lake"x" got over fished | Just for the record I represent NO ONE other then myself.
It is very possible I misinterpreted the information I thought I was receiving. If you want, delete my posts if you thought I was being rude. That was not my intention nor do I have any negative thoughts towards MI or its followers. Especially since I used to be one. I think MI is a much NEEDED resource for us as outdoorsman and anglers. Trust me I know that they do a SH*T load of good things not only for the BA fishery that we have here, but also for the youth community around the country. I am not bashing MI in ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM. I apologize if my typing skills made you interpret my thoughts incorrectly. I was just relaying information that I received and probably perceived incorrectly. My bad ... If I was coming down on anyone it was NOT Muskies INC |
|
| |
|
Location: Sawyer County, WI |
Cynical ? Sure. True ? So close to true that it's impossible to dismiss.
If we could get the general public to get out and vote with the same zeal and fervor they possess for a 5AM doorbuster sale at Cabela's maybe things would change for the better. Sadly, the average American is brainwashed by the media outlet that is aligned with whichever of the end of the political continuum they believe in.
You get the government you deserve folks.
Long TIme Lurker - 11/27/2014 6:29 AM
I live in Iowa and only vacation in MN. I am a member of muskies INC.
I guess my thought is, how often does I'm gonna take my ball and go home work?
You think the dark house guys did that? They have a fraction of the support we have and they have made great strides.
America is like a brothel. Our current political system is like a giant line of prostitutes. They all have hands out and you give them your money you get what you want. Those that have figured that out have made great strides. Those that have not are pushed to the side.
Does the dark house association stock fish? I mean maybe they do but I have never read about it?
So yes STOP STOCKING FISH. START buying politicians. Give them votes, give them money, give them influence. Watch our lobby gain influence and use our system to FORCE what we want down the throats of others. We want a DNR head favorable to our cause? Lobby it, Either buy his leadership and force his hand, or have him replaced, or use the legislature to shove our agenda down his throat against his will.
For the price of a couple lures each we could buy the lobby to get back 100 fold what we spent. (Our own #*^@ money we already gave them anyway).
Play like the dark house guys or the environmental guys, or anyone else who has used our system to take from you and shove their agenda down your throat against your will.
We can stock our fish, be nice guys, and think somebody some day will see how nice we are and help us. The outcome will be a long languish on the vine.
Just a dismal reality of the world we live.
Hmmm......
Maybe I should stop reading the newspaper or watching house of cards? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32799
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | FAT-SKI - 11/29/2014 4:40 PM
Just for the record I represent NO ONE other then myself.
It is very possible I misinterpreted the information I thought I was receiving. If you want, delete my posts if you thought I was being rude. That was not my intention nor do I have any negative thoughts towards MI or its followers. Especially since I used to be one. I think MI is a much NEEDED resource for us as outdoorsman and anglers. Trust me I know that they do a SH*T load of good things not only for the BA fishery that we have here, but also for the youth community around the country. I am not bashing MI in ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM. I apologize if my typing skills made you interpret my thoughts incorrectly. I was just relaying information that I received and probably perceived incorrectly. My bad ... If I was coming down on anyone it was NOT Muskies INC
You asked for someone to 'Soooooo .... Correct it then. Don't just tell me I'm wrong, tell me why I'm wrong. Inform all of us so we can all be up to date. '
I tried (best as I could) to do so, and was trying to do so in the correct spirit of the conversation. Good information all the way around, folks need to know what other folks are thinking. No worries from this quarter or any other, I'd wager.
I would restate the part about the Fisheries managers and DNRs, though. Some folks think a sledge hammer is a good negotiating tool. My experience is just the opposite. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 20180
Location: oswego, il | If someone thinks a sledgehammer is a good tool, use it to enter your friends house next time you go there. Don't bother with the door bell. The DNR does not lime to be undermined. Managing is their responsibility. MI is a great way, along with club alliances to help, gain the ear, respect and favor of the DNR. It is a slow process. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1276
Location: Hayward, Wisconsin | MN guys should be happy to have enough big fish to justify a 54" size limit! |
|
| |
|
Location: varies | yep. cant complain too much (sadly, we ALL still do) . I love the fact I can choose between several lakes and have a legitimate shot at hooking a 50+ on any given day and can be downtown in a major metropolitan that night! All minutes from home. Come to think of it, You out of state guys keep your size limits down, we'll gladly take your travel $ when you want to come over. hehe.
To have the number of musky waters Wisconsin has in Minnesota with the 54 SL...Man! that would really be something! maybe one day. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1000
| Would just be nice to have them add some more lakes to diffuse some of the pressure. They've done an epic job of creating the ones we have. Let's keep the good things going. |
|
| |
|
| I thought we did pretty well, MMPA and its members are in it for the long haul. This 54 statewide may have jaded us before its implemented for some reason. Its not going to hurt the size of fish, there's plenty of examples of that from MN to Canada. Its going to be a fishery controlled by big fish for the most part as would happen naturally. We need to find a way to sustain a quality fishery under continually tightening budgets. There's a trend opposing Muskies and everything we have gained over the past 50 years has been under constant resistance. If not from the usual Muskie haters its been from our own then the legislature and the DNR all with varying degrees. A good friend told me before I started doing this that getting Muskie fisherman to go in the same direction is like herding Muskies. We're getting better at herding Muskies too. I cant thank all of you who have supported MI and the MMPA to help us achieve this, its truly the result of your input and commitment and us directing that energy to the locations it will help Muskies the most. I'm impressed by how much we can get done when we need to. Treats this is the Cosa Nostra; we'll keep dragging you back in lol.. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 323
Location: Elk River, MN | So Basically, by raising the minimum to 54", the goal is to keep more of the larger population of Muskies in the lakes correct? The majority of fish over 48" are in fact females, which by keeping more of them in the lakes longer promotes more natural reproduction or at the least a larger population of big fish for people to catch. I don't see an issue with it, and most of the muskie fishing community already know and practice the benefits of 100% catch and release regardless of size. Make it 100% catch and release law, that will just ensure more fish are put back and people can stop complaining about stocking and worry about sustaining the populations we already have. People are focusing on the wrong things, what good is dumping more fish into lakes when you cant sustain the population you already have? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 21
| I guess if someone bought some musky fingerlings from a private hatchery and they accidentally jumped out of the boat into some lake, WHO WOULD KNOW??? |
|
| |
2015 minnesota 54" size limit