|
|
Posts: 8717
| Todd, there are unethical guides everywhere. I'd venture to say that there are a lot more unethical guides in places where you can't expect to fill your schedule. Without a big name and a line of lures to promote, many of the less-known guides likely struggle to earn enough to make their boat and truck payments, much less feed their families. In an area where the job prospects are few-to-none, for a lot of guys, it's guiding or... Well, pretty much nothing. Putting a fish in the boat at any cost in hopes that your clients will hire you again becomes a lot more important than it is when you're a big name and your calendar fills up anyway.
If there was stronger natural reproduction, and much more substantial stocking, harvest and delayed mortality wouldn't be as much of an issue. But as it stands now, the fish aren't being replaced nearly on the level at which they are being harvested.
It's a slippery slope on how to fix it. Tourism dollars are a very important part of the local economies. If you start charging more for licenses, boat tags, or implementing permit fees for this and that? A lot of those folks may just go elsewhere, especially when your fisheries are not what they once were and not getting any better.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32786
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Mr Musky - 2/20/2015 11:32 AM
I agree with Travis on the walleye deal, there will be a lot of harvest of the big females now that they will be accessible year around vs the post spawn period. Muskies get pressure out in the basins now and they are released but when folks start figuring out how EASY is it to pick of these giant footballs on Tomahawk, Big Arb, Trout all summer long you bet they'll be keeping them for stringer mounts, cabin mounts, many will eat them. I can see the guides really promoting this pattern as well and it will bring more tourism up north because there are so many walleye anglers down here in the valley that just lick their chops at the thought of trolling up north for them. With little NR and limited stocking the lakes will take a beating.
It's amazing, trolling will take us back to the 70's. I had no idea time travel was so simple.
What makes those big fish inaccessible now? Basin casters beat that population up pretty well over the last decade. Release rates up here are in the mid 90% range. Because trolling will become legal with one line, now the huddled masses will take it up, perfect the presentation, and kill everything? Why hasn't that happened anywhere else?
'Allot of harvest of the big females'...does trolling becoming legal somehow make people expert trollers and able to catch all the Muskies no one ever sees otherwise? No one ever sees them? That's weird.
Guess what the hot 'big walleye' bite was across the country last year...
It wasn't trolling. It was finding big walleyes on the sonar using SI or SC (depending on brand) out on deep structure or basin, stopping and casting rip jigs at them.
Casting Moonshine or Rapala ice lures or rip jigging rubble piles you couldn't troll across effectively boated some real giants even where folks didn't think there were many. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | TGFSW |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | esoxaddict - 2/20/2015 3:32 PM
Todd, there are unethical guides everywhere. I'd venture to say that there are a lot more unethical guides in places where you can't expect to fill your schedule. Without a big name and a line of lures to promote, many of the less-known guides likely struggle to earn enough to make their boat and truck payments, much less feed their families. In an area where the job prospects are few-to-none, for a lot of guys, it's guiding or... Well, pretty much nothing. Putting a fish in the boat at any cost in hopes that your clients will hire you again becomes a lot more important than it is when you're a big name and your calendar fills up anyway.
Sorry EA but I think it is unfair to make these statements about the lesser known guides. Fame has nothing to do with ethics. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| "What makes those big fish inaccessible now? Basin casters beat that population up pretty well over the last decade. Release rates up here are in the mid 90% range. Because trolling will become legal with one line, now the huddled masses will take it up, perfect the presentation, and kill everything? Why hasn't that happened anywhere else?
'Allot of harvest of the big females'...does trolling becoming legal somehow make people expert trollers and able to catch all the Muskies no one ever sees otherwise? No one ever sees them? That's weird."
Steve im talking WALLEYES IN THE BASIN not muskies. You mean to tell me there's guys casting cranks out in the basins for giant walleyes and rip jigging out there? I have yet to see a guy do it in my area. Every walleye guy is parked on structure. 90% release rate on giant eyes up north? Where do you get that info from? I highly doubt if it is 65%.
Edited by Mr Musky 2/20/2015 4:45 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | sworrall - 2/20/2015 8:50 AM
Guns don't kill people, people do.
Exactly. Trolling will not ruin a fishery, but people will. The DNR shouldn't have given extra tags as people cannot control themselves, and they shouldn't open up trolling for the same reason. Until you can get it under control (selective harvest and over bagging) you shouldn't give them another tool which could make it easier to harvest walleyes in special cases. Notice I said could and not would.
Creel surveying makes for a poor argument on the health of a fishery, and a sign of fishing ethics unless they are run differently by you than me. I have only been "surveyed"on two lakes by me in 20+ years. Each for only a year. One was Kentuck when they opened the walleyes back up for harvest, and the other was Twin. In neither case were they there at the crack of dawn, nor past dark. So if you did anything you thought shady it was easily avoidable by either leaving the water before they got there, or waited until they left. With walleye bites usually being best early morning and late evening into the night during summer it is the best times that are not getting captured in the creel survey. Also both lakes have more than one landing, and there was only one person on one of those landings. Therefore the others went unchecked. Creel surveys also do not capture those with cabins on the lake, and in a prior post I specifically expressed concern over those anglers. There is also no follow up creel survey in a reasonable amount of time on the same body of water. This would be necessary to get a good feel and handle on what is happening on lakes.
There just isn't a whole lot going on by me by the way of lake surveys. Either that or I am fishing when they are not around. Either way to use creel surveys as an argument here holds no validity. Maybe send Keith my way for a few years.
Several lakes I know have prime open water bites mid summer. I am talking 3-8' down over 40+ feet of water. I stumbled into it while night fishing suspended muskies. These were BIG walleyes. This is the pattern that I am afraid will get exploited and mis-treated with the use of trolling. Maybe not as who thinks to run that high while walleye fishing.
There is a reason a lot of walleyes fisheries collapsed, and I don't feel it has a lot to do with stocking or the lack thereof or the spearing. Lots of lakes have natural reproduction, but only if the large females are allowed to live. Take too many too quickly, and you are left with what we have got.
What came first, the chicken or the egg? What was the downfall to Minocqua. Was it the bass, or was it anglers harvesting too much therefore letting the bass to thrive and take over. Not letting the walleyes come back.
As far as we practice catch and release anyway, and shouldn't worry. The more fish you catch, and the more times you catch a fish, the more probability you have of that fish succumbing to delayed mortality. Take Kentuck for example again. The boom of the Tiger musky let out of the bag. The hot bite chasers came in droves to get their piece of the pie as Tigers are cool. They were, for the most part, released when caught. They can only take so much of that. How many Tigers are caught each year out of Kentuck now?
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 3136
| Pontoon trollers "honey grab the kids and the ciscoe kids we can now do laps all day long for skis"
The postman and his 25ft pontoon is movin over from mile lacs pronto. There's fib money on the footage to be had 
Edited by happy hooker 2/20/2015 5:46 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8717
| CiscoKid - 2/20/2015 4:15 PM
esoxaddict - 2/20/2015 3:32 PM
Sorry EA but I think it is unfair to make these statements about the lesser known guides. Fame has nothing to do with ethics.
They're not all bad, don't get me wrong. I've had more than one call off a day because the water was too hot. But when you're famous and under a microscope, you have to adhere to the highest standards. Guiding out of a resort that you own on a lesser known lake in a lesser traveled area puts one under a lot less scrutiny. I think that's where the tendency arises to bend the rules a bit. Or even a lot.
You're right on another point. Some of the worst offenders are the landowners. I don't get it. Why fill the freezer when the fish are right outside your door? We fish until we get hungry. Then we keep a few for supper and we go eat them. The only thing we keep outside that is a few nice gills to go with our eggs the next morning. Gotta have bluegills and eggs!
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 688
Location: Already Gone | happy hooker - 2/20/2015 5:42 PM
Pontoon trollers "honey grab the kids and the ciscoe kids we can now do laps all day long for skis"
The postman and his 25ft pontoon is movin over from mile lacs pronto. There's fib money on the footage to be had :)
Whoomp there it is...I blame the Fibs for everything!  |
|
| |
|
| We better stop fishing. It's bad for the fish. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| Some property owners feel they own the lakes and the fish in them, heck some feel they own the structure in the lake! A couple years ago Travis and I got chewed out for casting musky baits towards the cribs that the local landowners anchor up on each nite to fill their livewells. |
|
| |
|
Location: Sawyer County, WI | As a property owner I'd be happy if some fisherman (and you know who you are) would quit bouncing lures off my boat, engine, and dock. I don't own the lake, but those things I do own.
I get that you want to fish the dock and that's cool, just please keep the lures in the water. Alternatively, I suppose I could walk out to the dock and start chucking pounders. I guarantee you my aim is better than yours ! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32786
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Mr Musky - 2/20/2015 4:32 PM
"What makes those big fish inaccessible now? Basin casters beat that population up pretty well over the last decade. Release rates up here are in the mid 90% range. Because trolling will become legal with one line, now the huddled masses will take it up, perfect the presentation, and kill everything? Why hasn't that happened anywhere else?
'Allot of harvest of the big females'...does trolling becoming legal somehow make people expert trollers and able to catch all the Muskies no one ever sees otherwise? No one ever sees them? That's weird."
Steve im talking WALLEYES IN THE BASIN not muskies. You mean to tell me there's guys casting cranks out in the basins for giant walleyes and rip jigging out there? I have yet to see a guy do it in my area. Every walleye guy is parked on structure. 90% release rate on giant eyes up north? Where do you get that info from? I highly doubt if it is 65%.
The release rate quoted is for muskies.
The mythical schools of 'giant walleyes in the basin' as far as catching them right now, they are being caught if they are there in any number. Most of the folks up here I know feel bad keeping one over 26 or so, and quite a few are released now. It's getting better, and is no where near as bad as the overblown stuff in this thread would make you believe.
The lakes up here ain't that big, you can see across most of them. Position and drift fishermen have that figured out already. Casting cranks? Where did you get that? Rip jigging...yes, you had better believe it. Incredibly effective, and you target the fish on SI or DI you want to catch...and catch it.
Should ban that...fast.
Far as trolling goes, I can do with...or without it. Either way, the fisheries will not be impacted much. We need better, more progressive management. Only reason we havn't had that is money. The State was and still is broke.
Geez, the fishing in the entire rest of the country must suck awful, because the entire rest of the country can troll. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32786
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | CiscoKid - 2/20/2015 4:49 PM sworrall - 2/20/2015 8:50 AM
Guns don't kill people, people do.
Exactly. Trolling will not ruin a fishery, but people will. The DNR shouldn't have given extra tags as people cannot control themselves, and they shouldn't open up trolling for the same reason. Until you can get it under control (selective harvest and over bagging ) you shouldn't give them another tool which could make it easier to harvest walleyes in special cases. Notice I said could and not would.
The sky is falling, the sky is falling...maybe. Where else is this a problem where trolling is allowed?As far as the Tzone and extra doe tags, the DNR wanted those deer killed. Wolves and a beyond belief nasty winter put us in a corner that won't be easy to get out of. In other words, stuff happens.Creel surveying makes for a poor argument on the health of a fishery, and a sign of fishing ethics unless they are run differently by you than me. I have only been "surveyed"on two lakes by me in 20+ years. Each for only a year. One was Kentuck when they opened the walleyes back up for harvest, and the other was Twin. In neither case were they there at the crack of dawn, nor past dark. So if you did anything you thought shady it was easily avoidable by either leaving the water before they got there, or waited until they left. With walleye bites usually being best early morning and late evening into the night during summer it is the best times that are not getting captured in the creel survey. Also both lakes have more than one landing, and there was only one person on one of those landings. Therefore the others went unchecked. Creel surveys also do not capture those with cabins on the lake, and in a prior post I specifically expressed concern over those anglers. There is also no follow up creel survey in a reasonable amount of time on the same body of water. This would be necessary to get a good feel and handle on what is happening on lakes. Keith was creeling in the winter, as I said. He was there very early, and left after dark. Hard to run a snowmobile on open water, don't you think? he checked people randomly, and always went to anyone he could see moving or heading in, and was extremely efficient in hitting a very high percentage of the folks on the ice that day. I know, I fished quite a few of the lakes he creeled. Later each season he was responsible for setting and running nets to gather walleye and muskie roe for the hatchery as one of two crews, and then stripped suckers to raise and then feed them. He knew how many were raised and where the fish were stocked. Then he want to the shocking boats for several weeks, which was repeated in the fall looking for surviving walleyes from stocking and NR.
There just isn't a whole lot going on by me by the way of lake surveys. Either that or I am fishing when they are not around. Either way to use creel surveys as an argument here holds no validity. Maybe send Keith my way for a few years.
And your claims hold validity over creel surveys checking hundreds of anglers...how? Your powers of observation? Or is this all 'I am afraid this might happen' stuff? You had no clue what else Keith was doing or when, so I hope that's clearer now. Interesting work that he enjoyed, he just plain ruined his body doing that and trout stream reclamation and the pay frankly didn't do much for his family so he decided to go to work for OFM. I'm glad he did, but the Woodruff crew misses him.
Several lakes I know have prime open water bites mid summer. I am talking 3-8' down over 40+ feet of water. I stumbled into it while night fishing suspended muskies. These were BIG walleyes. This is the pattern that I am afraid will get exploited and mis-treated with the use of trolling. Maybe not as who thinks to run that high while walleye fishing. That's a common deal over deep water. The walleyes are frequently very high in the water column even mid day.
There is a reason a lot of walleyes fisheries collapsed, and I don't feel it has a lot to do with stocking or the lack thereof or the spearing. Lots of lakes have natural reproduction, but only if the large females are allowed to live. Take too many too quickly, and you are left with what we have got. You are seriously misinformed. The decline of the population in Minocqua was during the time Keith was working as a fish tech up in Woodruff. I think sled already covered what's wrong there. He has it right. Spearing, harvest from anglers, bad spawning habitat and reduced NR, and a #*^@ed poor stocking budget to keep up with it all is and has been the issue. That's why the new 'initiative', which is really restoring part of the budget when you remove the rhetoric.
What came first, the chicken or the egg? What was the downfall to Minocqua. Was it the bass, or was it anglers harvesting too much therefore letting the bass to thrive and take over. Not letting the walleyes come back.
The bass are thriving as much due to environmental positives including warmer and more fertile water, perfect bass spawning substrate, and the fact very few anglers keep them. If that chain was managed as a big LMB fishery, it would be UNREAL in a couple years. Already is if you are willing to fish out of the box a bit. The idea walleyes will be able to reduce the LMB population was roundly poo pooed by Dave N. a couple years back, and I think he is right, the decline of the walleye fishery and increase in LMB on the Chip mirrored what happened on Minocqua, you would not believe what happened in a couple years.
As far as we practice catch and release anyway, and shouldn't worry. The more fish you catch, and the more times you catch a fish, the more probability you have of that fish succumbing to delayed mortality. Take Kentuck for example again. The boom of the Tiger musky let out of the bag. The hot bite chasers came in droves to get their piece of the pie as Tigers are cool. They were, for the most part, released when caught. They can only take so much of that. How many Tigers are caught each year out of Kentuck now?
I don't know. Do you? So now we shouldn't catch fish? Where does this madness end?
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | so, if there are so many tactics that are so wonderful then why do people want to troll? ... so far it's been argued as not effective and really hard to do.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | to echo what Steve says above ... the DNR presentation compared the effect of a smaller number of big females vs. a large stocked population of 15-18" females and put the logic out that although they believe in the big female thing, the shear number of smaller fish (if allowed to spawn) make a bigger impact on the NR of the population so they are out to protect the early spawners and not focused on the big females.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 3518
Location: north central wisconsin | I completely agree with Steve on this one, in the terms that trolling will definately not destroy the fisheries. I live on a system that has been one of the top walleye systems in the state since the late 1960's. Trolling has been legal here forever. The bottom dropped out of this fishery that ranges from 80 acre mill ponds to the second largest lake in the state(Petenwell flowage), in the mid to late 90's and the walleye population left decimated, by years of promoting it as an endless resource with contests held during the spawn. These fish were taken casting/jigging, and to a lesser degree, trolling. In 2000 a slot limit was proposed and put in place the following year, where it has been now made relatively permanent from Tomahawk down to the confuence of the mississippi give or take a stretch here or there. There are now big females available again, though still far fewer 15-19" legal fish. The same type of regulation was put into place on a few of the local inland lakes with liited NR. The fishery has rebounded not because of a change in tactics or people leaving the fishery alone, but through regulation change.
Allow the fisheries managers to progressively manage their systems up there, and much more will be done to preserve and rehabilitate those fisheries, than not allowing someone to fish a certain way with the thought it will be made worse than it already is. Please, take a look outside the borders of Forest, Vilas and Oneida counties and put some effort into some regs that protect big fish unilaterally, no matter how they're caught. Lots of 100-? acre ciscoe dwelling potholes in MN that allow trolling with fisheries in fine shape. Why are the same types of lakes in two counties of WI so vastly different than those in other parts of the world in terms of vulnerability? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | set lines anyone? ... start saving milk jugs? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 3518
Location: north central wisconsin | Growing up, when we had our place in vilas on Pioneer Lake, the outlaw gang out of the resort that tried their best and succeeded to diminish the walleye population, refered to them as 'snow tipups'. Same gang that made sure the kept division in the Vilas county musky marathon had plenty of entries. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32786
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | jonnysled - 2/21/2015 6:40 AM
so, if there are so many tactics that are so wonderful then why do people want to troll? ... so far it's been argued as not effective and really hard to do.
You already know the answer to that one. It's a popular method of fishing. Entire sections of sporting goods stores offer fishing products dedicated to the method.
If the N Wisconsin walleye population was 'fished out' as some folks claim, I'd say the methods in place catch fish pretty well. What's the difference how fish are caught if management is not keeping up with harvest...which is the problem?
Arguments against that are based in reality and supported by fisheries folks:
1) A substantial number of people in the North do not want trolling to be legal
Arguments for supported by fisheries folks:
1) Trolling is not a threat to the fisheries as is obvious when comparing the fishery in the no trolling zone to the fisheries where trolling is allowed
2) A substantial number of folks want to use the technique and voted in the majority to have trolling legalized
3) It's legal in the rest of this state, so it would, with some adjustments to appease the folks who don't like the technique as used in other areas of Wisconsin and objected to too many lines ( that's me), standardize the state regs
4) It would finally remove the 'gray area' (not gray at all, but some folks always claim it is) of pulling a sucker for muskies
A possible reasonable analogy to those who don't want trolling because it will harm already low fisheries populations:
How to manage a low population by limiting technique or limiting harvest...deer
A) There are fewer deer in Northern WI, the population is low due to wolves and a very bad winter, so rifle and crossbow hunting in several zones will be against the law in 2015 reducing the harvest of does and bucks accordingly, OR all archery hunting will be banned.
B) Regulate the harvest of does by not allowing many to be harvested, buck harvest will not effect the rebuilding of the herd
Both would work.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1283
| Trolling sticker like a trout stamp isnt a bad idea IMO. All proceeds should go back to stocking and education. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 3518
Location: north central wisconsin | achotrod - 2/21/2015 12:10 PM
Trolling sticker like a trout stamp isnt a bad idea IMO. All proceeds should go back to stocking and education.
Why would it be a good idea? So now I have to buy a deer license, but pay more because I have a compound bow instead of a recurve? If the compound has 80% let-off, I have to give $1.00 to the state stewardship fund? I can smell what you're stepping in here, but a stamp to allow trolling? How about a stamp for ice fishing walleyes all night for several days, taking shifts on each others tip-ups for an entire weekend. I'd argue a stamp to fish for and harvest bluegills on their beds may have more positive impact.. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1283
| I dont care about hunting and it has nothing to do with trolling. A stamp would keep a lot of people from trolling and the ones that do pay are putting back into the waters they are taking fish from. Its a win win imo. Same with a trout stamp. I dont fish for them so I never bought a trout stamp, but if there were a trolling permit I would buy one.
BTW got my first H2o tackle bait yesterday! Looking forward to trolling with it! |
|
| |
|
| how about a $100 stamp to vote in Cons. Congress hearings if you're not a fish or big game biologist...
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 3518
Location: north central wisconsin | The hunting argument has more to do with that type of suggestion than you might think. Other than having no sound science supporting it, a trolling stamp sounds like a great idea from a financial standpoint. As someone that spends alot of hours working on stocking and ways to pay for it, I am all for supporting the resource any way I can. However, stamps are now purchased by folks not already paying to use that particular resource. If stocking funds are the issue, I'd be for raising the fishing license fees for all users. I wouldn't blink an eye at $30 per year, and doubt others would complain much either, provided it gets spent properly.. I paid more than that to take the kids bowling the other day, and I couldn't get a strike with the bumpers up. And the jukebox was stuck on hit hits from 1992. I'm Rick Astley'd out.
Which crank? cranky nitro, or the deep diver? Rogers stuff is very nice, and productive.
Edited by Reef Hawg 2/21/2015 3:34 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32786
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | M Winther - 2/21/2015 2:37 PM
how about a $100 stamp to vote in Cons. Congress hearings if you're not a fish or big game biologist...
I'd support this one. |
|
| |
|
Location: Sawyer County, WI | sworrall - 2/21/2015 2:49 PM
M Winther - 2/21/2015 2:37 PM
how about a $100 stamp to vote in Cons. Congress hearings if you're not a fish or big game biologist...
I'd support this one.
I'd support this too if the same criteria were applied to the role of Secretary of the DNR. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1283
| Reef Hawg - 2/21/2015 2:41 PM
The hunting argument has more to do with that type of suggestion than you might think. Other than having no sound science supporting it, a trolling stamp sounds like a great idea from a financial standpoint. As someone that spends alot of hours working on stocking and ways to pay for it, I am all for supporting the resource any way I can. However, stamps are now purchased by folks not already paying to use that particular resource. If stocking funds are the issue, I'd be for raising the fishing license fees for all users. I wouldn't blink an eye at $30 per year, and doubt others would complain much either, provided it gets spent properly.. I paid more than that to take the kids bowling the other day, and I couldn't get a strike with the bumpers up. And the jukebox was stuck on hit hits from 1992. I'm Rick Astley'd out.
Which crank? cranky nitro, or the deep diver? Rogers stuff is very nice, and productive.
I would pay more for a license, but that forces people that do not wish to troll to pay more also. I dont think thats fair. That is why I say optional like a trout stamp.
I got The Cranky Nitro Penatrator. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 3518
Location: north central wisconsin | You'll like that bait. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1283
| Cant wait to try it. I hate hard water season. |
|
| |
