|
|
| I have to admit that there are a few things that need to be addressed about the welfare of the musky in Wisconsin such as size limits, better regulation of spearing harvest totals for Native Americans, and legislation for eliminating single hook rigs.(Whew...Now that's one heck of a run-on sentence.) But I've been getting the feeling from some topics that are going on right now on the other Boards. That many guys think Wisconsin's Musky Fishery is going down the tubes. Everything from genetics, to overharvesting, and improper fishing techniques. There's no doubt that things have to change, but to say that Wisconsin's strain of fish are inferior I think is ludicrous. They say that our fish's genetics are being diluted by improper stocking of undersirable strain of fish. Maybe some of that is true, but I would like to see hard fact evidence that this is so. Plus, from what I can see is that the DNR is actually doing a very good job managing the Great Lakes Strain of Muskies in Wisconsin. There's been a couple times in the last couple years that some 60" fish have surfaced in Wisconsin. Maybe some of those negative comments are directed at Wisconsin fishing to help scare away some of the competition amongst anglers.
I don't know the motives behind the doom and gloom of Wisconsin's waters. But I just want to say that I suspect that some super fish will still surface from our waters. I guess it's tough when you're on top with the largest muskies and some of the biggest whitetail deer around. I guess everyone likes to see someone on top topple down. How do you feel about this? (I looking forward to some intelligent and well thought out feedback.)
catch ya later,
Krappie | |
| | |
| Krappie,I also think Wisconsin is getting the short end of the fishermans stick!(word of mouth type)I have been reading/listening to people saying poor genetics,To much pressure,spearing,going to Canada/MN.instead,blah,blah,blah,blah!Well in my opinion maybe some should start doing something rather then complaining!Myself,Jason Schillinger and over 100 other locals raise musky fingerlings every year(all our own money)and plant every fall.The system we plant WE are working on getting a 45"size limit on as we speak,because 99% of the kill fish are 38"to42"!Wisconsin is still a strong fishery and getting better!I know of several 50"+ every year(legit)that are coming from places you would never suspect!I know many,many that have not EVER done that going out of the country,but scored in Wisconsin!So I guess my point is to TRY and do something to give back to Wisconsin,as Wisconsin has in reality gave alot out!Time for the complainers to get off the HighHorse and quit complaining and help Wisconsin(US)out!And if all else fails Mn.is the land of 10,000 Lakes,with great fishing?So? Jeff
P.S-I guess Wisconsin bashing is a sore spot! | |
| | |
| Hey Handyman I couldn't agree more. I guess we can't complain if we don't give it a legitimate effort to fix things!!! And by ignoring the problems or issues of our sport is not going to help it neither. I give you guys that are actively involved in the stocking programs a huge ATTA Boy!!!! It's organizations such as local muskie clubs, Muskies Unlimited, and Muskies Inc. that make the musky fishery what it is today. Hey our fisheries are getting better today than they were 20 years ago. And they will only get better if we put forth effort of conservation and educate the public of what'sgoing on. Instead of making assumptions, why not fund research and development for the DNR or Muskie Clubs. Put a legitimate scientific approach in assessing the programs. And determine what is being done that's good and what's not working. There maybe some old wive's tails and rumors put to rest. Or there may be some issues brought forth that weren't even seen as problems. Whatever the case there's nothing to lose!!!!
catch ya later,
Krappie
| |
| | |
| I think the source of the bashing is that the fishing may be whatever you said it is (I have my own opinions), it does seem as though so many other DNRs across the muskie world are being more proactive to protect and enhance their fisheries.
Take This Into Account: along with spearing you have a limit of 32" state-wide (unless I am mistake, which is entirely possible) versus other states which are:
Minnesota - 40"
Illinois (most waters) - 48"
Indiana - 36"
Canadian Trophy Waters - 54"
*on lakes such as Eagle, LOTWs, etc.Now you tell me, just looking at those numbers, where do you think your best shot at bigger and more fish are going to come from??? This is very very basic reasoning, but if you figure most of the fish that are kept and killed are going to be on the smaller size range of the limits (more fish that are caught will be on the smaller size I would surmise)....which by very simple logic would potentially dictate that your chances of getting a bigger fish would be higher on waters with a higher limit. It's simple logic, and possibly faulty, but you where wondering why people are bashing WI, this could be one reason.
Slamr
| |
| | |
| What I think is interesting is that eveyone thinks that larger size limits will be the fix all for all waters. I can't totally agree with that assumption. There's no doubt that higher size limits would help some fisheries, while some it would actually hurt. There are going to be waters that have lower densities of fish but bigger fish potential, some that fall in between and some that are going to have smaller fish but higher densities. Each lake should be assessed for it's potential and managed accordingly. Take for example of the latest 60 lb fish that was caught in Canada. The size limit for that fish wouldn't even make it a legal fish. So to assume that by placing higher size limits will in effect protect the larger fish may be completely opposite. If you over populate the water and don't have a forage base it's a lost cause. We are also placing the value of fish to the ruler rather than the weight also. What's better? A shorter but grossly fat fish or a long, skinny one. To me it doesn't make a difference. But fish are like individuals and you can have shorter fish that are considered trophies while some really long specimans are also trophies. Everyone is thinking that longer is better, but it's a combination of things. That also ties in with genetics of fish. There's the debate of certain genetic fish that aren't the fast growers. These fish are in fact thought as inferior. That these fish don't have to potential to grow into monsters, and they shouldn't be stocked in waters. Maybe the faster growing fish do attain trophy sizes quicker, but will they ever reach World Class during their lifetimes? Will the slower growing muskies actually reach World Class potential because of longer life spans? That's the main issue here. I just want some credible evidence from some source to fairly evaluate the nature of the musky fishery in Wisconsin. No theories and determination that it's fact before accurately assessing the situation. No quick fixes for all waters but a management plan that makes sense for each type of water. I think Wisconsin's walleye management plan that's in place right now is on the right track. I believe that some waters are managed accordingly for muskies, but no doubt there could be a better job on some.
catch ya later,
Krappie | |
| | |
| There are many topics within those threads that all relate to the perception of a inferior fishery. We could go on and on for each one of the topics independently.
What was most interesting in all those threads for me was the debate over strains and the theory of dilution of natural strains indigenous to the lakes they are transplanting. I think the basis for this argument was Bone Lake, the brood stock lake. Based on the numbers alone, it sure appears that Bone does not have the propensity to develop large fish equal to many other neighboring waters. Is this a product of the lake or is it the strain of fish in the lake? The numbers alone don't substantiate an argument that the strain cannot grow larger and more quickly in a the lakes they are transplanted to, but they do make a good argument worthy of further investigation in my mind.
Southern WI clearly has different kinds of water and different climate conditions then does Northern WI. The difference from north to south is more dramatic in IL. Hopefully efforts like Project Green Gene in IL will help the WI DNR and others to better understand the impact of transplanting the same strain in all climates and lake types in a state, empowering them to improve stocking programs.
My $0.02 (or less)
| |
| | |
| My opinion on how to improve are fishery here in the Northwoods or the entire state for that fact is to add and subtract some different laws and regulations. First let me state that I personally don't feel the same way a few of my neighbors feel about over-rated or under-rated waters here in Wisconsin, I've heard for action this is the place to be, but for big fish, your money is best spent else-where and that many top-notch guides that they know or their clients will not even boat a 45incher let alone a 50incher. Well I don't know which top-notch guides their talking about but the ones I know (Swanson,Bucher,Rizzo,Keister,Horstman,Meyer,Sheahan just to name a few) do this year in and year out with consistency. Anyway here's my list of changes in order of most importance I.M.H.O.
1st. Eliminate Native American Spearing(hopefully this can be done in a way as to benifit both sides)
2nd. Increase size limit to at least 40ins state-wide(more would be nice, but you have to crawl befor you walk)
3rd. Stop the stocking of un-genetically sound fish in our TROPHY eco-systems.
4th. Eliminate the use of the old-style gut hooks (Circle hooks not included)
5th. Practice catch and release (but not make it manditory, it should be a personal choice NOT a law)
This is my take on the subject and I'm always open to suggestion.[;)] | |
| | |
| Krappie,
I was surprised at the comments I read in the threads you mentioned, too.
My personal opinion, for whatever it is worth...
What you are looking for is exactly what is actually happening in Wisconsin. Many lakes have been boom-shocked and fyke netted to look at the muskie populations.
I have always had a problem with blanket 'fixes' for what is PERCIEVED to be a management problem. I saw the threads you refered to, and felt maybe there was some desire to start controversy there.
Many of the lakes in WI already have a special size limit, and the activity to show support for even larger size limits has been brisk. The DNR here is careful to manage the fishery for EVERYONE, not just us purists. Selective harvest of smaller fish from some waters will be very hard to change, if it IS warranted. If not, my bet is no change will occur on that water. Some systems simply will not benefit from a 50" size limit, but may from a 40" limit. Others may rarely put out a fish over 40" because of forage, etc. There are a few tiny lakes around here that kick out many skinny
35" fish, and have for years, but rarely a 40". Has NOTHING to do with the smaller fish being harvested, they rarely are.
Wisconsin has an excellent cross section of diverse muskie waters-- numbers, size and numbers, and trophy potential. we have Winnebago, the Wisconsin River and all the lakes and pools formed there, and Green Bay, too. I am certain the Fisheries Managers are addressing the muskie populations and the angler's concerns as best as is politically possible. Every Spring they openly ask for our input, all we need to do is be the dominant voice. We almost never are.
| |
| | |
| Has the DNR ever experimented with a change in the forage base to see how that effects a fishery? | |
| | |
| I live/fish in Michigan and our statewide limit is 42". I think this is much better than a smaller size limit, say in the upper 30"s, because I think it means there are more bigger fish out there. I know many of you WI guys are writing letters to raise the limt in your state. To add some zing to your appeal to the legislators, the guides/pros/resort owners/ baitshops/etc might emphasize that musky fishing is really getting popular, and bigger fish in WI lakes will surely bring more tourist dollars to WI businesses. If you want to ensure your lobbying success, get your County Boards of Commissioners to pass resolutions supporting the concept, those resolutions will get to the legislators, too.
Of course, if you WI guys call our raise to 42", we MI folks will bump our limit to 44".
| |
| | |
| A user, you are right, it will never be the smae again. It is actually better than it was just a few years ago, and hopefully the trend is that it is getting better. We are in the infant stages of studying this whole genetic thing, coupled with taking a look at each musky water individually for its' needs. We as anglers need to quit complaining and start working. It is really quite easy, i've done it. We now stock a genetically superior strain(some real hawgs are showing up) of fish each year into the WI river system each year with the help of local club members. This is something many more clubs could do, if they put their minds to it. The comment about 2 lines, actually it is three, but what does that matter, you can only cast one at a time and trolling is only allowed on a few lakes. | |
| | |
| I have lived here in Northern Wisconsin for 28 years, and cannot say I have seen any influx of Yuppies, especially out on the lake.
There have been no young upwardly mobile professional people abusing the muskie population here, least ways none that I have seen. [:bigsmile:] [:bigsmile:]
Will go along with the property thing though, can't believe what has happened to the value of my land! | |
| | |
| Those aren't Yuppies, those are the Baby Boomer's kids, or the Baby Boomers themselves. Seems a man's brains exit his ears when he gets on a jet ski. Those things are nothing but snowmobiles with no where to go!
They CERTAINLY are not unique to Wisconsin, I bet![:bigsmile:] [:sun:] | |
| | |
|
I agree with Jason Schillinger with the fishing is getting better in Wisconsin! Each year I see more and more fish, and on certain lakes larger fish. With almost all of musky anglers practicing catch and release it will continue to get better each year. However, something needs to be done about the Native spearing of muskies, especially through the ice when they have no quota. The spearing of walleyes does not burn me as much as the muskies simply because the Natives do have a walleye restocking program, and I don't know of such for muskies. Krappie and I have both witnessed thw result of 4 50"+ muskies being taken from a 400 acre lake max in one winter. It hurts it!
I keep hearing that WI is not good for big muskies anymore. I disagree. This past year I caught my largest fish since I started (5 years), with the fish being 49". I also lost a fish that was well bigger than this one. If you can't catch big muskies anymore in Wi, why is it every year more and more very large fish are being caught through the ice by fisherman?
I believethe biggest impact on our fishing here is due simply to the angling pressure. Each year I go out and have to fight with at least five more boats on the lake to fish my prime spots. Steve Worrall said muskies are dumb, but they do get conditioned. If a fish sees a thousand lures pass over there head everyday eventually they learn that that lure is bad news. I also think the muskie has one thing in common with a human, and that is elapsed time. I think the muskies know when the weekend is here by a conditioned reponse by using elapsed time, and tend to be a lot more cautious for this reason. However, if you were to fish during the weekday it sure seems a lot easier to catch those same fish. I, along with a ton of other people, for the most part are weekend warriors. Of course it is going to be harder for us to catch fish.
Does Min. and Canada see the fishing pressure that WI does? I doubt it. And if it does the lakes are much larger than what we have in WI, and handle more pressure than what a smaller body of water can.
Stocking! I don't know the in and outs about stocking. But does stocking a 200 acre lake automatically mean that lake will put out a 50 incher in the years to come? The biggest influence on the muskies size potential in a lake is the forage. We can stock all we want, but if the lake does not have the forage base the fish will not grow to giant proportions. Maybe we should look into stocking bait fish such as ciscoes, shad, and whitefish.
One last thing to say. Wisconsin musky fishing sucks. Don't come here for muskies. That way thre is more fish for me to catch, and less fishing pressure.
Good luck this coming season all.
Let em go, Let em grow! | |
| | |
| I've often found this whole debate interesting and a bit of a waist of time. It has always had an element of the "my Dad is tougher then your Dad" mentality. There are some "truths" here (at least I believe then to be truths) that should be explored.
I have fished Wisconsin all my life and have musky fished in this state for over 20 years. Jason is right, the fishing is better today than it ever has been. But what does that mean? For me it means that I catch more fish and bigger fish than I ever used to. Say all you want about Minnisota and Canada (I musky fish Minnisota some and Canada a bit more), but I know I can catch just as many fish here in Wisconsin up to 49"s that I can in any of those waters......at least the ones I'm familar with. Now, do I think my chances of boating fish over 50"s are as good in Wisconsin as they are in MN/CND, NO! I think it is clear that this state puts out fewer fish at or over 50"s than the other areas per amount of time invested. I believe if you want to increase your odds of boating a fish over 50"s don't come to Wisconsin. Folks from this state hear me say this and say, "Don't talk like that, you will discourage people from coming here". In the long run of things, I don't think it will matter. Most musky hunters still don't realize how litle their odds goes up (although they do go up) by moving to one of these others areas. These are folks that have the glint of "fools gold" in their eyes and sooner or later they will see that catching a TRUE 50" fish is no easy task, irregardless of where you are. If you want 50" plus fish, go to Minnisota, Canada, out East, etc. Your odds are better, but in terms of catch ratios in those areas when you consider ALL musky pressure, I think most folks would be SHOCKED to see how small the odds really are. On the other hand, if you want to catch fish into the 30# class and all those other great fish that come in between, the 20#ers, 25#ers, etc. then come to Wisconsin, its better then it ever has been!!!!!!!!!
Having said all that, the question still remains, "Why are we not catching more fish over 50"s in this state"? I think many of the reasons have been hit on above. For me the biggest ones are genetics and single hook rigs, I think there has been a change in thinking in both areas and we will reap the benifits of those changes in the years to come. And if and when we turn things around in this state in regards to 50" fish look out, we will be falling over each other at the boat landings trying to get on the lakes because those fish, in general, will be bigger and heavier then most 50" fish out of other waters. And for me at least it's the weight that determines a trophy not the lenght........bring on the fat girls, Baby!!!!!!!!! | |
| | |
| At risk of making a broad, sweeping catagorization here, comparing state waters to state waters is impossible. As a born and raised Wisconsinite who relocated to Michigan's U.P., when I think of Minnesota or Canadian musky fishing I think of places like Mille Lacs and LOTW. Comparing our northern Wisconsin waters, most of which are under 2,500 acres and are much more subject to fishing pressure factors and have limitations in forage base and size simply isn't fair. If you're looking for 50"-plus fish you need to fish big waters, on a whole again, with big forage. The one inland system in Wisconsin as large as either of the mentioned lakes is the Winnebago system which has only limited populations. In my opinion it's comparing apples and oranges in most cases. I believe Wisconsin will produce it's fair share of 50+ inch fish again soon because anglers, myself included, are targeting the one rich opportunity we have – Lake Michigan and it's bays. I've seen more 50+ inch fish in the last two years of fishing the Great Lakes than I have in 10 years of inland fishing. I fully agree an increase in size limits can't hurt and would support legislation to do so. Increased catch and release practice would help even more. But, in my humble opinion, the charm in the smaller Wisconsin fisheries is the experience, not always sheer size. [;)]
Merle J. Alix
aka Unky Mer | |
| |
|
Doom and Gloom in Wisconsin??