|
|
Posts: 20178
Location: oswego, il | Your making the assumption that trolling will negatively affect fish populations therefore there should be a fee.
I lime Mike's idea, make it 100 a year. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 3518
Location: north central wisconsin | Why don't we allow trolling along with fisheries biologist management on same set of lakes, while leaving the rest as is for 10 years and see what happens. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 39
| The gov asked for more input, got it, came to a compromise, why i'isnt signed? Total nonsense, and all you that see trolling as the end of the WI fishery as we know it, pls provide a specific eaxample why? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 39
| A specific example of a fisheries dimise because of a new trolling rule. Anyone? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 3518
Location: north central wisconsin | pls? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 20178
Location: oswego, il | CEK - 2/21/2015 10:11 PM
A specific example of a fisheries dimise(or demise) because of a new trolling rule. Anyone?
The lake will fill in completely with bottle caps in two years. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8716
| I don't think you'll get far forcing the walleye guys to pay more for a license to stock muskies that eat all their walleyes. On the other side of that coin, I don't think the musky only guys will want to pay more for a license to stock more walleyes.
If I could check a box on my license application for an additional $10 to go directly towards stocking, I'd do it. I think a lot of folks would, as long as that's where the money actually went.
I know this would never work, for many reasons. But if there were a few local hatcheries where one could go and buy fish and then stock them wherever they felt like stocking them, our fisheries would be in a LOT better shape. The clubs could buy fish and put them wherever. The lake associations could buy fish and stock them. Landowners could buy fish and stock them.
How many guys here would stop on the way to your favorite lake and buy a couple muskies to turn them loose at the landing if you could?
Like I said, it wouldn't work for a variety of reasons. But if the angling public at large had the opportunity to buy fish for stocking in the lake(s) of their choice, we'd have more fish in more places than we knew what to do with.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8716
| CEK - 2/21/2015 10:11 PM
A specific example of a fisheries dimise because of a new trolling rule. Anyone?
Three minutes after you ask a question which you KNOW there's no example for because there hasn't BEEN a new trolling rule in 30 years...
I don't have any verifiable documented studies that show hitting someone in the head with a hammer would cause them to sustain a substantial injury, but that doesn't mean the act would be harmless.
Come on, man. What are you, a lawyer? Use your head. And maybe a hammer..
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | why does ever situation result in this special interest wanting to give phriggin money to someone in government?
CEK ... google search back trolling in the 80's and it's not always about you (muskies) |
|
| |
|
Posts: 430
| You know I can understand that this debate will go on for ever. There will always be that group that will say it devastates the fishery and they will have enough influence to stop this from getting passed. My question then is there any way they can fix this stupid sucker regulation??? I would be curious to know if the guys I see dragging suckers on floats while casting are the same ones who vote down the trolling.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | Chris, my guess is that the primary reason is all about the Walleye ... specifically Vilas County but the Northern Section of Oneida County too ... they used to have a tourism interest for fishing. It's all but disappeared along with the Walleye population. People can say this or that about how all the musky $$$ happy horse-schitdt has bailed out the economy schmonomy but there was a time when fishing was a big draw to the northwoods and it isn't anymore. Those same people saw what happened during the back trolling days. The second reason I do believe is tradition and row-trolling on smaller quiet lakes (the ones you don't see jetskis).
the way to fix the sucker thing is to position fish like the rule says ... learn to run your boat other than constant-on. simple solution ... if you get a ticket then you are not position fishing.
Edited by jonnysled 2/22/2015 7:46 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 3518
Location: north central wisconsin | Selfishly, then, I say just open up trolling everywhere but the lobbying counties up north, at least this year. Then at least the rest of us can drag a sucker/crawler around, and not look over our shoulder when the bucktail blades are still spinning while taking a phone call as we move along a weedline.
Isn't trolling permitted on a couple of the best walleye fisheries in the north, Rainbow Flowage/Willow Flowage?
Edited by Reef Hawg 2/22/2015 8:39 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | yes, it is ... but most touristas are afraid of flowages. there are stumps and stuff in em ... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1275
Location: Hayward, Wisconsin | EA:
An even easier way than you are proposing DID happen in the early 1900's via the FISH TRAINS that used to transport milk cans full of fish all across the north, including muskies. All one needed do was meet the train at the depot and off load the milk cans to their wagon and transport them to any lake they wanted. There were no requirements for getting fish other than being there. Have several old photo's somewhere in my files of said trains.
I would wager that many of the current "muskie lakes" were created in this manner. The DNR has no idea which were "native muskie lakes" and which were created by stocking, other than the obvious ones immediately connected to the Wisconsin and Chippewa Rivers.
Of course there is no way your idea would/will happen today...even if it would work...which I think it would. We are stuck with whatever "populations" we now have, whether they reproduce or not...and most don't! |
|
| |
|
Location: Sawyer County, WI | jonnysled - 2/22/2015 7:00 AM
why does ever situation result in this special interest wanting to give phriggin money to someone in government?
Maybe because that strategy has worked so well for other industries in this state.  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32784
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | esoxaddict - 2/22/2015 2:40 AM
CEK - 2/21/2015 10:11 PM
A specific example of a fisheries dimise because of a new trolling rule. Anyone?
Three minutes after you ask a question which you KNOW there's no example for because there hasn't BEEN a new trolling rule in 30 years...
I don't have any verifiable documented studies that show hitting someone in the head with a hammer would cause them to sustain a substantial injury, but that doesn't mean the act would be harmless.
Come on, man. What are you, a lawyer? Use your head. And maybe a hammer..
Lots of scientific evidence hitting someone on the head with a hammer would be very bad for them. Not what would be considered a rare murder weapon.
Not so much on the other requests. And there will not be, because it ain't real. There's good fishing in lots of places and even in places where the walleye and muskie population rely 100% on stocking (there's your sign...), in fact better than we have up here, for Muskies and walleyes where there's been trolling forever. That's it. End of 'the sky will fall' arguments.
Everyone gets it that some folks don't want the trolling annoyance in the North. Everyone knows or certainly should know by now in this debate that there is no evidence that the fisheries will be negatively effected. It is pretty simple when you boil down the poo soup here....a large number of folks don't want the annoyance.
If it was three lines I'd oppose it like crazy, because that would annoy me dodging a spread like that on the little lakes I fish. One line? Not too bad, I don't think.
I am willing to admit the things I don't like about trolling up here have little to nothing to do with the health of the fisheries. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 238
Location: Rhinelander | The northern WI biologists I have discussed this topic with are not in favor of legalizing trolling......
They have more than one reason but the common theme seems to be if/when more fish(delayed mortality of muskie) walleyes kept our DNR will not have the resources to preform PE's.
With the suspected drop in population of game fish, revised bag limits will take years to implement.......this could be devastating on the smaller bodies of water.
Please keep in mind Oneida and Vikas county are big summer tourist attractions that folks from the Fox River Valley and Green Bay area vacation in. A lot of these fisherman are very experianced trolling fisherman from fishing Green Bay and the Winnebago/Poygan chain, their home waters.
It wont take them long to tap into the few remaining walleye in these small northern waters. Just one limit a week of walleye per week, per family group and it take long and walleye may become a thing of the past in 500 acre and smaller lakes in northern WI.
Experianced musky anglers shouldn't be a problem releasing fish caught casting or trollling. I'm afraid of the nightly pontoon cruisers that now throw out a shad rap or two behind the boat and accidently hook a muskie. Could be line break with bait stuck in muskies throat or a 5 minute release/picture session putting a muskie back. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1120
Location: West Chester, OH | esoxaddict - 2/22/2015 3:22 AM
How many guys here would stop on the way to your favorite lake and buy a couple muskies to turn them loose at the landing if you could?
Oh, me! Me! Me!!
Heck, I've been giving money to the lake association for bluegills & perch. Muskies are much more exciting.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32784
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | HH,
You are aware of the walleye initiative underway...right?
New limits take years to implement? You mean zero instead of one or two? There are lots of waters with bag limits 1 over 14 or 15 and one under, one over 18", or 2 over 15" etc., and they change yearly.
New limits are set by a determination of the TAC using GLIFWC ( good portion of past survey funding came from them, I hear things were tough there too) and DNR data reacting to spearing quotas and then actual take every Spring.
Every year.
One has to look at the sign at the landing opening day to see if it's 1 or 2 on most lakes.
Tourists from the Valley clearing out all the walleyes because they troll...Winnebago? The rivers? With one line allowed here and huge difference in how lakes in the north fish VS the bigger waters in the Valley, how can anyone claim that there will be a scintilla of difference? Those same anglers are expert jiggers, rip jiggers, and slip bobber fishermen too, some of the best in the walleye world.
I'm sure the Fox Valley tourists will arrive in flotillas paying $800 a week for a cabin so they can troll all day and bag 1 14" walleye and 1 over 14".
If I lived in the valley I'd not fish walleyes here at all.
And most don't. In fact, most don't vacation here anymore at all. Spearing, crappy budgets for the DNR and hatcheries, the emergence of big LMB populations, etc. took out the walleye population in SOME lakes, not all. We still have some good fishing up here on quite a few lakes. Pelican is the best it's been in 20 years right now. Most of my favorite walleye lakes still hold good numbers and never have crashed at all like Minocqua did. The Rainbow is absolutely loaded with walleyes.
And we got where we are up here with walleye populations without any trolling allowed.
Before the freezeout last year, Thunder had some of the biggest walleyes in the area. Trolling is legal there. You can keep 1 over 18". Giant bluegills too, but she froze out last winter killing off a big portion of everthing but Pike if the dead fish after ice out indicate anything.
It isn't the method of catching that's in question, and it's not any longer whether N WI will be managed for walleyes properly. That said, the DNR budget still sucks and we live in the Ceded Territory. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 238
Location: Rhinelander | Yes I have heard of the walleye initiative, should be a big help our northern walleye fisheries. To be honest I do not know the finer points but what I do understand it was started to help a diminishing walleye problem, right?
The northern lakes you mentioned in your post are all larger bodies of water.....I am concerned with the 500 acre and smaller.
I do not claim to be a biologist.....so I ask plenty of questions to the men that study fish year round. A dead fish is a dead fish...no matter if it was caught jigging, slip bobber or trolling. My opinion and a few others, is trollling will open up areas of summer walleyes that remained almost untouched. These fish could become extremely vulnerable and may not last long in the smaller bodies of water if targeted. With one line trolling on the horizon we fear three won't be far behind.
I very well could be wrong about trolling, but men that know a lot more than I have some of the same concerns.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32784
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I noticed all the 500 acre lakes in Minnesota have been decimated by trolling.
Wait...
And the limit is 1 or 2 no matter how they are caught. No matter how they are caught. If you fish for walleyes in those lakes and you have any walleye catching skillset at all, the fish can't hide, you can see across the lake.
And people are catching them anyway. Ice anglers figure 'em out too. The last couple winters have been good for the fish because of snow and slush, keeps the crowds from moving around freely.
I really do not care either way how the trolling debate ends as legal here or not, I've lived here for over 40 years without trolling and almost never soak a sucker here in the Fall. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 39
| Mr Addict, in all seriousness, I don't just look at only WI when weighing this issue. MN and Canada, have had a one line per angler trolling for how many decades? Are either of them looking to repeal their one line trolling because of the destruction of their fisheries? How is WI different? Oh yes, small lakes will be decimated. Really, does anyone have a historic example? Have you ever been on Lake Wingra in Madison when 6 boats are trolling 6-12 lines per boat? How do they all get along? Remember when we all heard the word Jet Ski? They were suppose to be the ruin of all things north woods. I agree, they are annoying, but now we have them, and those wake board dudes, man, too much money, and no common sense, yet we all survive, even the fish.
I am hearing a lot of fear that many folks secret "honey holes" will now be exploited by the evil trollers.
And a trolling stamp? Seriously? How about a stamp if you have more than one piece of electronics in your boat, or a stamp if your boat is capable of over 40mph, or how about a stamp if you have more than 10 rods in your boat? Or the best yet, if your boat and tow vehicle exceed 50k, pay the DNR a tax for that.
The emotion with this issue is unbelievable to me. Maybe I don't know enough history, but after reading some of these posts, I feel we should ban center fire ammo for deer hunting because its not fair! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 20178
Location: oswego, il | Went to the auto show this weekend, seen a sticker on a suburban, 75k, the Cadillac version 91k!
One thing for sure, anything new will only hurt northern Wisconsin and no place else.
Edited by ToddM 2/22/2015 8:41 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 211
Location: Wisconsin | With the exceptional walleye fishing on the Winnebago system, Green Bay, and the wisc. river system people are not going to flock to the north woods to troll up their 1/2 walleye a day. These systems have made it unnecessary to drive any distance to catch walleye. Especially with the 5/day limits. Ice fisherman will destroy a body of water much faster than the trolling community. Most are off all winter and seem to be less concerned with selective harvest. |
|
| |
|
Location: Sawyer County, WI | ToddM - 2/22/2015 8:40 PM
Went to the auto show this weekend, seen a sticker on a suburban, 75k, the Cadillac version 91k!
One thing for sure, anything new will only hurt northern Wisconsin and no place else.
75K ? I sure hope it came with the model who was showing the car |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32784
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | One can now easily spend $150K on a rigged boat and tow vehicle.
Liking my 170T more and more every day. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8716
| CEK, You're using Wingra as an example, which has one of the highest musky population densities of any lake in the state. You're using the Yahara Chain, which is stocked heavily and has been for some time.
You are comparing that to lakes of similar size, with some of the lowest population densities in the state, many of which have not been stocked in 20 years, and likely will not be stocked.
Let's not even talk about the differences in forage, water chemistry, growing seasons, treaty harvest...
About the only similarities between the two are that they both contain water and fish. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 63
Location: Maribel WI | My only issue with opening trolling up to all lakes regardless of size is that is eliminates any advantage a person can get by doing a little extra work. There is no benefit to being a row troller, or to tirelessly fish open water - even on a 600 acre lake.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | so, based on what i've read ... then, what is so bad about spearing? just another method, right? |
|
| |
|
Location: Sawyer County, WI | jonnysled - 2/23/2015 7:32 AM
so, based on what i've read ... then, what is so bad about spearing? just another method, right?
Just another method that apparently isn't subject to bag limits. |
|
| |
