|
|
Posts: 492
Location: midwest | Dnr saying more muskies need to be harvested.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OX1mSzq2EK4 |
|
| |
|
Posts: 20179
Location: oswego, il | Do you think VHS may have been tied to overpopulation? Since then hasn't the size structure of the fish improved on LSC? I am not advocating harvest, just throwing out a perspective.
I had a similar experience with conservation officers on vermillion. Told me they heard muskies tasted pretty good smoked. Asked if I seen people keeping smallmouth. I told them seen some kept, they made a beeline to my Resort passing many boats and performed a cabin by Cabin search. Then sat in the bar until 11pm.
7' ugly stick light. One of the best crankbait spinning rods ever made.
Edited by ToddM 6/8/2016 9:32 AM
|
|
| |
|
Location: MN | What's the point of a throwable if you have no one to throw it to and no one to throw it to you? Had the same thing last year when I got checked fishing solo. Never asked for a life jacket but wanted to see my throwable.
My guess is that CO fishes and thinks the Muskies are eating all the fish he likes to target. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2384
Location: On the X that marks the mucky spot | Dumbest thing ever. However did the fish population make it before humans started fishing for them? Muskies "need" to be harvested because all fish "need" to be harvested according to some people. And from the DNR no less...
Granted this is all coming to us from the only state in the Union that allows muskie spearing. |
|
| |
|
| I was checked last year and was a little surprised the CO did not ask for my throwable, although I was fishing by myself. I noticed he glanced at my fire extinguisher and gave a nod. Same with my life jacket which was on the driver's chair. Didn't say anything, but looked and nodded. I had just got a different boat and because it was over 16', had to buy a throwable, which is why I noticed he didn't ask and it was not visible.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Nershi - 6/8/2016 12:32 PM
What's the point of a throwable if you have no one to throw it to and no one to throw it to you? Had the same thing last year when I got checked fishing solo. Never asked for a life jacket but wanted to see my throwable.
My guess is that CO fishes and thinks the Muskies are eating all the fish he likes to target.
The throwable isn't for you. It's to render aid to someone else should you ever be in the position to do so.
Edited by Pointerpride102 6/8/2016 6:37 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 4269
Location: Ashland WI | Pointerpride102 - 6/8/2016 6:31 PM
Nershi - 6/8/2016 12:32 PM
What's the point of a throwable if you have no one to throw it to and no one to throw it to you? Had the same thing last year when I got checked fishing solo. Never asked for a life jacket but wanted to see my throwable.
My guess is that CO fishes and thinks the Muskies are eating all the fish he likes to target.
The throwable isn't for you. It's to render aid to someone else should you ever be in the position to do so.
That's what he meant. How can he render aid when there is no one to render aid to? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | 14ledo81 - 6/8/2016 9:50 PM
Pointerpride102 - 6/8/2016 6:31 PM
Nershi - 6/8/2016 12:32 PM
What's the point of a throwable if you have no one to throw it to and no one to throw it to you? Had the same thing last year when I got checked fishing solo. Never asked for a life jacket but wanted to see my throwable.
My guess is that CO fishes and thinks the Muskies are eating all the fish he likes to target.
The throwable isn't for you. It's to render aid to someone else should you ever be in the position to do so.
That's what he meant. How can he render aid when there is no one to render aid to?
Are you always the only boater out on the water? Say you fall in when fishing solo, when a neighboring boater, also solo, comes by and tosses you his throwable.....bet you'd be glad they had it. If you happen to be near someone who goes in the drink, a throwable is a great item to have. As unlikely as that scenario is to occur, it's not a bad safety item to require.
It's also good to have if you're boating with more than one person. Rather than write boating regulations for solo boating and boating with multiple people, just require a throwable and be done with it. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 815
Location: Waukee, IA | There was a recent discussion here about LOTW and some Minnesota/Wisconsin waters turning into numbers lakes with shorter and skinnier fish being caught. Well, there's your remedy for that matter. An overabundance of apex predators is just as bad for the food web as too few. The order of magnitude rule is pretty accurate across nature, each rung of the food chain needs 10X the total biomass of prey per lb of biomass in their population. A lake with 1,000 muskies averaging 20lb will need 200,000 lb of prey species present to not only survive but also not destroy their own food source.
The maths are easy, balancing these populations in vivo is the hard part.
Edited by tkuntz 6/9/2016 6:11 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2384
Location: On the X that marks the mucky spot | thuntz, you are obviously new and don't know the history of either muskie program so I will refrain from say anything more about this. Go to the research area and brush up with some of the past threads that discuss some of the dynamics of each program. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 815
Location: Waukee, IA | I didn't say anything about encouraging keeping them, never kept a single one, never will. Sent you a PM, Treats.
Edited by tkuntz 6/9/2016 8:59 AM
|
|
| |
|
Location: Grand Rapids, MI | That's disappointing but they're just law enforcement and aren't biologists, it's too bad though because that's often the only contact the public has with the DNR. I'll be addressing this with our law enforcement chef.
Edited by Will Schultz 6/9/2016 9:53 AM
|
|
| |
|
Location: MN | Will Schultz - 6/9/2016 9:27 AM
That's disappointing but they're just law enforcement and aren't biologists, it's too bad though because that's often the only contact the public has with the DNR. I'll be addressing this with our law enforcement chef.
What is your law enforcement chef's favorite dish to cook? |
|
| |
|
Location: MN | Pointerpride102 - 6/8/2016 10:47 PM
14ledo81 - 6/8/2016 9:50 PM
Pointerpride102 - 6/8/2016 6:31 PM
Nershi - 6/8/2016 12:32 PM
What's the point of a throwable if you have no one to throw it to and no one to throw it to you? Had the same thing last year when I got checked fishing solo. Never asked for a life jacket but wanted to see my throwable.
My guess is that CO fishes and thinks the Muskies are eating all the fish he likes to target.
The throwable isn't for you. It's to render aid to someone else should you ever be in the position to do so.
That's what he meant. How can he render aid when there is no one to render aid to?
Are you always the only boater out on the water? Say you fall in when fishing solo, when a neighboring boater, also solo, comes by and tosses you his throwable.....bet you'd be glad they had it. If you happen to be near someone who goes in the drink, a throwable is a great item to have. As unlikely as that scenario is to occur, it's not a bad safety item to require.
It's also good to have if you're boating with more than one person. Rather than write boating regulations for solo boating and boating with multiple people, just require a throwable and be done with it.
I understand that and never said they should change the law. I just think it's strange that both times I got checked while fishing solo last summer they asked to see throwable but not the life jacket. Maybe because that is the one they catch people without most often? Same thing in this video but it is tough to say if the CO could see a life jacket in his boat. I wasn't trying to start a debate, I just thought it was odd.
I gotta say if I ever boated up to someone in distress I don't think I'd need a throwable to assist them, in most conditions anyway. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2004
|
Pointerpride102 - 6/8/2016 6:31 PM
Are you always the only boater out on the water? Say you fall in when fishing solo, when a neighboring boater, also solo, comes by and tosses you his throwable.....bet you'd be glad they had it. If you happen to be near someone who goes in the drink, a throwable is a great item to have. As unlikely as that scenario is to occur, it's not a bad safety item to require.
It's also good to have if you're boating with more than one person. Rather than write boating regulations for solo boating and boating with multiple people, just require a throwable and be done with it.
Don't forget to not break your fishing partner's rules... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 20179
Location: oswego, il | ARmuskyaddict - 6/9/2016 12:36 PM
Pointerpride102 - 6/8/2016 6:31 PM
Are you always the only boater out on the water? Say you fall in when fishing solo, when a neighboring boater, also solo, comes by and tosses you his throwable.....bet you'd be glad they had it. If you happen to be near someone who goes in the drink, a throwable is a great item to have. As unlikely as that scenario is to occur, it's not a bad safety item to require.
It's also good to have if you're boating with more than one person. Rather than write boating regulations for solo boating and boating with multiple people, just require a throwable and be done with it.
Don't forget to not break your fishing partner's rules...
Aren't you in sink or swim status if you break a boat rule? I don't believe the throwable comes into play here.
I have not needed a throwable but I have rescued a few people from.capsized canoes. One family had been in some cool.water clinging to a tree. Good to always have handy regarless.
Edited by ToddM 6/9/2016 1:24 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Nershi - 6/9/2016 11:12 AM
Pointerpride102 - 6/8/2016 10:47 PM
14ledo81 - 6/8/2016 9:50 PM
Pointerpride102 - 6/8/2016 6:31 PM
Nershi - 6/8/2016 12:32 PM
What's the point of a throwable if you have no one to throw it to and no one to throw it to you? Had the same thing last year when I got checked fishing solo. Never asked for a life jacket but wanted to see my throwable.
My guess is that CO fishes and thinks the Muskies are eating all the fish he likes to target.
The throwable isn't for you. It's to render aid to someone else should you ever be in the position to do so.
That's what he meant. How can he render aid when there is no one to render aid to?
Are you always the only boater out on the water? Say you fall in when fishing solo, when a neighboring boater, also solo, comes by and tosses you his throwable.....bet you'd be glad they had it. If you happen to be near someone who goes in the drink, a throwable is a great item to have. As unlikely as that scenario is to occur, it's not a bad safety item to require.
It's also good to have if you're boating with more than one person. Rather than write boating regulations for solo boating and boating with multiple people, just require a throwable and be done with it.
I understand that and never said they should change the law. I just think it's strange that both times I got checked while fishing solo last summer they asked to see throwable but not the life jacket. Maybe because that is the one they catch people without most often? Same thing in this video but it is tough to say if the CO could see a life jacket in his boat. I wasn't trying to start a debate, I just thought it was odd.
I gotta say if I ever boated up to someone in distress I don't think I'd need a throwable to assist them, in most conditions anyway.
I think you hit it on the head with the throwable being the thing people are caught without the most.
I agree that assisting someone should be fairly simple especially on the TM, but I'd venture to guess if you polled people who were rescued whether they'd like the boater to toss their throwable vs not throwing it, I'd bet you'd see north of 90% saying to throw them the throwable. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1767
Location: Lake Country, Wisconsin | tkuntz - 6/9/2016 6:08 AM
There was a recent discussion here about LOTW and some Minnesota/Wisconsin waters turning into numbers lakes with shorter and skinnier fish being caught. Well, there's your remedy for that matter. An overabundance of apex predators is just as bad for the food web as too few. The order of magnitude rule is pretty accurate across nature, each rung of the food chain needs 10X the total biomass of prey per lb of biomass in their population. A lake with 1,000 muskies averaging 20lb will need 200,000 lb of prey species present to not only survive but also not destroy their own food source.
The maths are easy, balancing these populations in vivo is the hard part.
I'd love to hear more from these great internet minds who think LOTW fish are short and skinny because they are overpopulated.... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 897
| tkuntz - 6/9/2016 6:08 AM
There was a recent discussion here about LOTW and some Minnesota/Wisconsin waters turning into numbers lakes with shorter and skinnier fish being caught. Well, there's your remedy for that matter. An overabundance of apex predators is just as bad for the food web as too few. The order of magnitude rule is pretty accurate across nature, each rung of the food chain needs 10X the total biomass of prey per lb of biomass in their population. A lake with 1,000 muskies averaging 20lb will need 200,000 lb of prey species present to not only survive but also not destroy their own food source.
The maths are easy, balancing these populations in vivo is the hard part.
Who is this guy^^^ and where did he come from. EA have a kid? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Musky Brian - 6/9/2016 6:27 PM
tkuntz - 6/9/2016 6:08 AM
There was a recent discussion here about LOTW and some Minnesota/Wisconsin waters turning into numbers lakes with shorter and skinnier fish being caught. Well, there's your remedy for that matter. An overabundance of apex predators is just as bad for the food web as too few. The order of magnitude rule is pretty accurate across nature, each rung of the food chain needs 10X the total biomass of prey per lb of biomass in their population. A lake with 1,000 muskies averaging 20lb will need 200,000 lb of prey species present to not only survive but also not destroy their own food source.
The maths are easy, balancing these populations in vivo is the hard part.
I'd love to hear more from these great internet minds who think LOTW fish are short and skinny because they are overpopulated....
Well, there isn't much water for all those fish..... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 815
Location: Waukee, IA | Pointerpride102 - 6/9/2016 7:34 PM
Musky Brian - 6/9/2016 6:27 PM
tkuntz - 6/9/2016 6:08 AM
There was a recent discussion here about LOTW and some Minnesota/Wisconsin waters turning into numbers lakes with shorter and skinnier fish being caught. Well, there's your remedy for that matter. An overabundance of apex predators is just as bad for the food web as too few. The order of magnitude rule is pretty accurate across nature, each rung of the food chain needs 10X the total biomass of prey per lb of biomass in their population. A lake with 1,000 muskies averaging 20lb will need 200,000 lb of prey species present to not only survive but also not destroy their own food source.
The maths are easy, balancing these populations in vivo is the hard part.
I'd love to hear more from these great internet minds who think LOTW fish are short and skinny because they are overpopulated....
Well, there isn't much water for all those fish.....
Hilarious
1 cubic meter of water weighs 2,200lb. So 200,000 lb of fish, assuming neutral buoyancy would take up 90.9 cubic meters or 1X9.09X10 meters or 3.37x30.6x33.7 feet or a room of 8X20X22 feet, which is the size of the first floor of a small house. Pretty easy to fit that into a machine shed, let alone a lake. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | tkuntz - 6/9/2016 9:25 PM
Pointerpride102 - 6/9/2016 7:34 PM
Musky Brian - 6/9/2016 6:27 PM
tkuntz - 6/9/2016 6:08 AM
There was a recent discussion here about LOTW and some Minnesota/Wisconsin waters turning into numbers lakes with shorter and skinnier fish being caught. Well, there's your remedy for that matter. An overabundance of apex predators is just as bad for the food web as too few. The order of magnitude rule is pretty accurate across nature, each rung of the food chain needs 10X the total biomass of prey per lb of biomass in their population. A lake with 1,000 muskies averaging 20lb will need 200,000 lb of prey species present to not only survive but also not destroy their own food source.
The maths are easy, balancing these populations in vivo is the hard part.
I'd love to hear more from these great internet minds who think LOTW fish are short and skinny because they are overpopulated....
Well, there isn't much water for all those fish.....
Hilarious
1 cubic meter of water weighs 2,200lb. So 200,000 lb of fish, assuming neutral buoyancy would take up 90.9 cubic meters or 1X9.09X10 meters or 3.37x30.6x33.7 feet or a room of 8X20X22 feet, which is the size of the first floor of a small house. Pretty easy to fit that into a machine shed, let alone a lake.
Thank god you did the math, I was getting worried. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 196
| Pointerpride102 - 6/9/2016 10:04 PM
tkuntz - 6/9/2016 9:25 PM
Pointerpride102 - 6/9/2016 7:34 PM
Musky Brian - 6/9/2016 6:27 PM
tkuntz - 6/9/2016 6:08 AM
There was a recent discussion here about LOTW and some Minnesota/Wisconsin waters turning into numbers lakes with shorter and skinnier fish being caught. Well, there's your remedy for that matter. An overabundance of apex predators is just as bad for the food web as too few. The order of magnitude rule is pretty accurate across nature, each rung of the food chain needs 10X the total biomass of prey per lb of biomass in their population. A lake with 1,000 muskies averaging 20lb will need 200,000 lb of prey species present to not only survive but also not destroy their own food source.
The maths are easy, balancing these populations in vivo is the hard part.
I'd love to hear more from these great internet minds who think LOTW fish are short and skinny because they are overpopulated....
Well, there isn't much water for all those fish.....
Hilarious
1 cubic meter of water weighs 2,200lb. So 200,000 lb of fish, assuming neutral buoyancy would take up 90.9 cubic meters or 1X9.09X10 meters or 3.37x30.6x33.7 feet or a room of 8X20X22 feet, which is the size of the first floor of a small house. Pretty easy to fit that into a machine shed, let alone a lake.
Thank god you did the math, I was getting worried.
yeah, but he didn't use the "NEW" math so it's probably wrong........... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 431
| Im an sabermetrics guy so until somebody figures out what a musky's WAR is I don't believe any of this. |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | good at math but skipped English class I guess...?! 
"The maths are easy, balancing these populations in vivo is the hard part."
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 815
Location: Waukee, IA | That's how they say it in England (which actually makes sense because mathematics has an "s") so I skipped American class. I tend to usually just shorten it to math like most do, but occasionally I get a little wild. Living on the grammatical edge haha.
Edited by tkuntz 6/10/2016 9:31 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 548
Location: MN | ARmuskyaddict - 6/9/2016 12:36 PM
Pointerpride102 - 6/8/2016 6:31 PM
Are you always the only boater out on the water? Say you fall in when fishing solo, when a neighboring boater, also solo, comes by and tosses you his throwable.....bet you'd be glad they had it. If you happen to be near someone who goes in the drink, a throwable is a great item to have. As unlikely as that scenario is to occur, it's not a bad safety item to require.
It's also good to have if you're boating with more than one person. Rather than write boating regulations for solo boating and boating with multiple people, just require a throwable and be done with it.
Don't forget to not break your fishing partner's rules...
Jay I know you have no rules.....
Edited by Nick59 6/10/2016 10:47 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2004
| I get so confused trying to figure these fish out that I forget any possible rules. Plus, I'm not good at maths, so anything over a couple rules and I lose track. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16
| Slime King - 6/8/2016 7:55 AM
Dnr saying more muskies need to be harvested.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OX1mSzq2EK4
Just watch the video and make your own judgement.
https://youtu.be/gHBuqzTuER8?t=1192 |
|
| |
|
Posts: 69
| mrymar - 6/15/2016 8:37 AM
Slime King - 6/8/2016 7:55 AM
Dnr saying more muskies need to be harvested.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OX1mSzq2EK4 Just watch the video and make your own judgement. https://youtu.be/gHBuqzTuER8?t=1192
Nah, the regulars on here would rather fight like little children over PFD laws and semantics. |
|
| |
