Muskie Discussion Forums
| ||
| Moderators: Slamr | View previous thread :: View next thread |
| Jump to page : 1 2 3 4 5 Now viewing page 5 [30 messages per page] Muskie Fishing -> General Discussion -> Muskies Inc FFS Position Statement |
| Message Subject: Muskies Inc FFS Position Statement | |||
vegas492 |
| ||
Posts: 1031 | Tyendinaga - 6/7/2024 10:19 AM ...and to nobody's surprise, the complications regarding the subject revolve around the complete lack of empathy and compassion for the environment and the fish, because "**** you, I got mine." So, you are against it because of cost? I was against it because of cost versus reward. So far I've used it for eyes and bass. Can't say that I've caught more fish. Can say that it has increased my confidence when fishing for those fish. I don't get the whole notion that someone with FFS lacks empathy and compassion for the environment. Care to elaborate? I work my butt off for my local chapter running events, writing grants and doing a whole host of other duties just so that we can keep stocking our local lakes. I feel like I do more than my fair share of heavy lifting to keep this resource going. Unsure how me having FFS someone makes me lack empathy and compassion for the resource. But here is what I will do. I'll write my random musings on here concerning my adventure with FFS on my local lake. Spoiler alert, I still feel like it's best application is ice fishing. I can't wait to go whitefishing with that thing, if we ever get ice. I also feel like it could be a great tool when vertical jigging muskies. I'm not as confident about sharpshooting. I troll those fish now, I know they are there, I know how to get at them. I'm not convinced that on my body of water FFS will make that large of a difference, but we shall see. | ||
| Tyendinaga |
| ||
Posts: 12 | I do acknowledge your participation and involvement in the actions that you describe. The bodies of water that are impacted by these efforts are inarguably better off as a result. What I am pointing out is: A: your opinion of the technology changed once you acquired it, immediately noticing the impact on your on-the-water efficiency B: you immediately demonstrate use cases where its efficiency is most applicable(ice fishing) C: the very suggestion to use FFS to vertical jig for muskies, is by very definition, sharpshooting In every scenario I have outlined above, you stand, almost inarguably, to catch more fish than a person not utilizing this tech for the sole reason that you KNOW whether or not the fish are there. Which means that you will handle more fish, which means that you will have a larger role to play in both pressuring the body of water and possible delayed mortality cases. There's a good chance some of those walleyes and bass were sitting in water you were never going to look twice at without transducer tech. Is our right to know WHERE the fish are more important than the sustainability of the practice? My point in all of this, is not to defame your character, but to ask you, and anybody who utilizes this technology, WHY should we knowingly practice behavior that will undoubtedly create a decline in an environment? WHY is the legal right to utilize commercially available products more palatable than the consideration of the long term damage to the environment these products will undoubtedly create? If we caught a fish every cast, this sport, hobby, passion, would lose almost all contextual basis. And for muskie especially, the hunt, chase, and pursuit is an integral part of the chance to even come across one. We have proverbially crossed the rubicon when it comes to finding these fish with what is available now. That's a huge loss culturally. I don't exactly find the idea that "well, it's legal regardless of your ethical concerns" comforting when it's hard to argue handling MORE fish will not cause a thin population to thin further, for every person fishing a body of water. | ||
| vegas492 |
| ||
Posts: 1031 | Mam. Lots to unpack there. I caught as many eyes and bass with the tech as I've caught in the past without it. No more. No less. Maybe because I know how to use side imaging well already for those applications. All the FFS did for me was reinforce what I already knew. Musky wise I already vertical jig for them. I know what my down imaging and side imaging need to show me in order to get me to jig as I know the fish will be there. When jigging I already use a Vex and or down imaging to see my bait and fish around the bait. FFS is just another view for me. None of this is new. Cruising a break line and looking for fish will not be new either. Just a different view. Maybe it helps me bag some extra fish. Maybe it won't. Guess we will see. Personally I've handled my fair share of fish. With all the release tools I have and with how I fish and release fish in warm water I'm not worried about killing a fish. No moreso than without the tech. | ||
| North of 8 |
| ||
| Lot of interesting information, thoughtful opinions from many view points. I don't plan on buying FFS but if I did, the one observation in the thread that caught my eye was checking on what, if anything, is chasing a sucker around. I think that would be really neat. Probably a dumb reason to buy, but if I did, that would be it. | |||
| xcskier_hunter |
| ||
Posts: 14 | Earlier you said "What I did notice is that I was able to eliminate water quickly, which led to being on better spots and ultimately fish that helped increase my catches of eyes and smallies," so if you actually "caught as many eyes and bass with the tech as [you've] caught without it," that would signal the fishery is in worse shape than it has been historically. Since you personally are investing time into stocking fish you are likely a net positive for muskies, so none of this is a criticism of you in particular. However, what I find particularly frustrating is people that use stocking as their only solution to increased angler efficacy and the fish mortality that comes with it. First, stocking cannot keep up as is so either way we are in an unsustainable situation. Second, in native lakes that still have natural reproduction, I don't believe it is sound conservation practice to use stocking as tool to counteract increased fish mortality. Is there any species humans have ever been able to breed that survived better than their wild counterparts? It'd be one thing if these wild and stocked fish never intermixed but I think it's clear they do to some extent. Once these wild populations are lost they may be gone forever. We've been incapable of recovering lost salmon runs. We thought we could enhance mallard populations with domestic ducks and now it's near impossible to find a mallard in the Atlantic Flyway without game farm DNA. Wild turkey restoration was a failure until people started capturing wild birds for relocation. Anyways, this is tangential to the topic but the amount of people unwilling to self-limit that claim just stocking more fish is a solution are making a dangerous assumption in my opinion. I'd rather see people finding ways to improve musky reproductive success where it's been observably reduced reduced over time. This is what trout fishermen have been successful in doing with river restorations. Perhaps we should also take a page out trout fishing's book and treat stocked and unstocked waters with different regulations. In Wisconsin this could look like different limitations on class A waters versus class B and C waters. I could accept this compromise but I have a hard time accepting zero technological limitations in the pursuit on 100% wild and native musky waters. I know some may argue we already irreversibly ruined the genetics in these places but I still think it's a worthy goal. On another note, it looks like Iowa will not be allowing game cameras of any kind on public land and will also make it illegal to use cell cameras on both public and PRIVATE land for hunting. Does anyone think it'd be harder to enforce some sort of electronics limit on PUBLIC waters than it is to enforce a cell camera rule on PRIVATE land? Many people say it's not feasible to limit electronics in fishing but I don't see it that way. Also, I'd strongly suspect that Iowa will remain the best whitetail hunting state in the country for years to come and technological limitations will not reduce the demand to hunt there one bit. Edited by xcskier_hunter 6/7/2024 3:23 PM | ||
| CincySkeez |
| ||
Posts: 606 Location: Duluth | Tyendinaga - 6/7/2024 12:03 PM If we caught a fish every cast, this sport, hobby, passion, would lose almost all contextual basis. And for muskie especially, the hunt, chase, and pursuit is an integral part of the chance to even come across one. We have proverbially crossed the rubicon when it comes to finding these fish with what is available now. That's a huge loss culturally. I couldn't agree more. It's the part that hurts the most. | ||
| esoxaddict |
| ||
Posts: 8743 | CincySkeez - 6/7/2024 3:38 PM Tyendinaga - 6/7/2024 12:03 PM If we caught a fish every cast, this sport, hobby, passion, would lose almost all contextual basis. And for muskie especially, the hunt, chase, and pursuit is an integral part of the chance to even come across one. We have proverbially crossed the rubicon when it comes to finding these fish with what is available now. That's a huge loss culturally. I couldn't agree more. It's the part that hurts the most. I can't see that that method catching on, or sticking around very long if it does. No8 brings up the method of watching a sucker to see if anyone is following it. That would be fun. It would bring some excitement to a method of fishing that isn't all that entertaining. I'd do that. But sharpshooting? What's the point? Even with traditional methods, you basically have 2-3 chances at a fish. 1. If it wants to eat you're gonna catch it before you've even see it 2. If it's "on the fence" it's going to follow your lure and if you're both lucky and have good figure 8 skills, you might catch it 3. You sometimes have a 3rd shot - different bait, different retrieve, slower, faster, different angle... 4. After that it's burnt. You can come back at sunset, or when the weather changes, tomorrow, during the next major, etc. It might still be around, might not. But you'd have caught it by now if you were going to. We're fishing for these things for a whole other reason. You're not looking to fill a frying pan or the freezer. If it was just about catching fish, there's a lot more of every other species of fish out there and they require a lot less gear and a lot less effort to catch. I recognize the potential for abuse and the damage that could cause the fisheries, but using FFS to find and catch muskies goes against what fishing for them is all about. Ethics, morality, fair chase, all valid points there, and as conservation minded anglers most of us get that. But the bottom line is what fun would it be to fish this way? And why would anyone do it if it wasn't fun? | ||
| vegas492 |
| ||
Posts: 1031 | I'd be a little careful on the whole "look at suckers" with FFS thing. One thing I did notice on the bass when using FFS. Some fish would just bolt when that FFS hit them. Like they scurried really, really fast. (I did not notice fish scurrying away when fishing walleyes in the spring.) Since our encounters with bass are more numerous, I didn't much care about the fish that got out of Dodge, quickly. But when musky fishing? Kind of the last thing I'd want to do is hit a fish hunting a sucker with those pings. I know myself, and I'll probably make a quick sweep here or there when musky fishing suckers. But I'll have that unit turned off 98% of the time. Turn it on quick for a sweep and then shut it down. Just my $.02. | ||
| vegas492 |
| ||
Posts: 1031 | Dead water seems to have been brought up since I mentioned it. I'll expand. When bass fishing, I eliminate dead water all the time. I can do it visually, I can do it with side imaging and down imaging. I've done it for years. FFS didn't all of a sudden lead to me eliminating dead water. In fact, I'd say it made me go through areas slower when looking at the screen. In the past, I'd set the side imaging to 80 feet, then cruise outside areas I wanted to fish. If I saw fish I'd come back and fish. With FFS, it was a much slower crawl to see those spots and get the same information. At least it was for me. Some bass spots that I fish are not very big. Either they are there, or they are not. Spring time fish. Maybe that changes with the summer, but typically I "scout" an area before I fish it. Then there is musky fishing and "dead" water. I fish a lot of weeds. Not just edges, but weeds. I won't even put that thing in the water in weeds. There is simply no point. Summer time and fall, I'll troll more than cast. Another application where I won't even have that thing in the water. It won't pick baits up out that far. And with how I have it on the boat, it would be a pain to keep that pole vertical in the water. Just random musings...... | ||
| dbach17 |
| ||
Posts: 85 Location: Des Plaines, IL | I look toward the Amish on this discussion in some ways. The Amish are allowed to use modern amenities where it is necessary/essential for them to make a living. I just got new doors from ProVia (outstanding) made by the Amish, but they are absolutely using machining/power tools to create these. I have an almost four and seven year old. I would guess I get to fish 20-30 days most years if I'm lucky. There are many days I catch nothing. What FFS allows me to do is find fish location quicker and know that I'm not just casting at nothing all day. I'm not there to find a fish, follow it and cast at it all the time. But I'm absolutely looking for where that fish is relative to weeds, how they are moving, etc. Personally, I've never become as proficient with side imaging and saying "that's a fish" but I absolutely know what I'm seeing on a live sonar feed. When I'm trolling, I can find depth curves of baits easily by pointing it behind me (awesome for this). I can point it forward to make sure I'm staying on a break, a weed edge, etc. I just want to catch some fish once in a while, I'll gladly put in my time. I hope that my kids can find some enjoyment out there with me too. And for as much as I loved going out with my grandpa and uncle, and I do remember just the trips even if we didn't catch any, I remember the successful ones "better." Generally, I've found the musky community to be so strange and off putting in a lot of ways. For instance, we are talking about preserving this resource, but I am pretty confident that some arguing this would argue the exact opposite when it comes to other areas of conservation or life. Here's a great example: smoking is bad for you. There is nothing good about smoking a cigarette. In fact, it has negative impacts on public health and economics through increased insurance premiums. Should we ban cigarettes? Personally, I don't smoke them, never have and never will. But if we can't even ban something that's so clearly bad, how the heck can we argue for a ban on fishing electronics? I understand the perspective of people that don't want to use FFS or hate it. I hate horror movies. I don't watch horror movies. I don't think that people who watch them are bad people. I think the judgement of others that seems to accompany this debate makes it far worse. As others have stated, it's important to be ethical about this. But who's ethics? We live in a society that has been consumed by consumption. "Free market economics" drives the American experience. There's a great book out there by Michael Sandel called What Money Can't Buy - The Moral Limit of Markets. I'm rereading it right now and find it very appropriate for this conversation (he talks explicitly about hunting in it). If I ever get to the point of harassing a single fish all day, trying to snag it, etc. then I hope somebody calls me out and beats me up. But if I'm just out there trying to get one to bite and using FFS as my own version of what others do proficiently with side scan, then I'd hope that people would understand that even if it's not their cup of tea. | ||
| vegas492 |
| ||
Posts: 1031 | Nicely said. There is a difference between a blanked statement of FFSS is "bad" and FFS used to harass, follow and potentially snag a fish in the face is "bad". The issue to me isn't technology, it is how the technology is used. Guess I don't know many people who would drive around for hours at a time looking for a fish while having 10's of thousands of dollars of FFS on their boat, just to make a couple of casts and call that fishing. But, the other side, clearly things like that have happened and are happening on some lakes in the US. I don't know how it should be legislated or restricted. I do believe, though, that usage is a personal choice. | ||
| Kirby Budrow |
| ||
Posts: 2289 Location: Chisholm, MN | OF course, if it wasn't having a negative impact on fishing in many ways I wouldn't care. But it does. Vegas, driving around sharpshooting is very predominant in MN. It's all some people do. Dbach, somebody smoking barely affects me. But a bunch of people destroying the fisheries that I love directly affects me and future generations. | ||
| Tommy |
| ||
Posts: 88 | vegas492 - 6/10/2024 12:22 PM Nicely said. There is a difference between a blanked statement of FFSS is "bad" and FFS used to harass, follow and potentially snag a fish in the face is "bad". The issue to me isn't technology, it is how the technology is used. Guess I don't know many people who would drive around for hours at a time looking for a fish while having 10's of thousands of dollars of FFS on their boat, just to make a couple of casts and call that fishing. But, the other side, clearly things like that have happened and are happening on some lakes in the US. I don't know how it should be legislated or restricted. I do believe, though, that usage is a personal choice. Some people are definitely just driving around, but so long as they aren't targeting fish that are crazy deep, I don't have a problem with it. If you're focusing on fish in the top 15 feet of the water column, knock yourself out. I've done it. Don't do it all the time because casting is more fun. And never to fish that are deep. Like you said personal choice is what's important to me. Most musky fishermen have all the right release tools and do pretty well on handling fish. I'm not gonna worry about the 5% of donkeys who have no regard to anything. Life's too short. | ||
| sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32826 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | One more time to make sure those who are just adding to the last few posts know that MI's statement asks for conservation-minded ethical use of FFS, not zero use or a ban. I helped with the statement and I use Humminbird Mega Live for boat control all the time. Never have and never will drive around looking for muskies, but that's me. | ||
| North of 8 |
| ||
| Yesterday, saw some real old school fishing. Heading out in the afternoon, I saw two middle school aged boys under a bridge with short sticks. I wondered what they were doing, but as I approached saw they had fishing line on the sticks. One boy had not even bothered to take the little side branches off. No bobbers, no apparent weights, just a baited hook. As I passed under the bridge, one of the kids caught a nice bluegill. The had a large, multi-tray tackle box, so guessing they had rods somewhere but decided to try and catch fish in the rocks/boulders right next to the bridge abutments. The short rods allowed them to drop the line right at their feet. I fished all afternoon and caught one small pike that managed to get hooks from all three trebles. Hope the kids had fun and keep fishing. If we don't have fun, should get a new hobby. | |||
| vegas492 |
| ||
Posts: 1031 | Kirby, I don't fish your neck of the woods. Also, I have no reason to doubt you at all. You've seen what sharpshooting can do and has done to fish and the lakes in general. Personally, that doesn't interest me at all. Sharpshooting. I also haven't seen it used where I fish yet, though admittedly, I fish far less for muskies now than I did in the past. | ||
| gimruis |
| ||
Posts: 122 | nevermind Edited by gimruis 6/13/2024 11:27 AM | ||
| Jump to page : 1 2 3 4 5 Now viewing page 5 [30 messages per page] |
| Search this forum Printer friendly version E-mail a link to this thread |
Copyright © 2024 OutdoorsFIRST Media |