|
|
| Does anyone know why the WI season closes at the end of November? There are many more options when fishing muskies later into Nov. such as Madison, Pewaukee Area, Green Bay, etc. that a later closing date would be beneficial. Is there any chance the DNR would ever consider a later closing date? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | i don't remember many times when you could fish after thanksgiving even if you wanted to. the water starts to get pretty hard about that time of year. i guess i'm not a proponent of muskies through the ice at least for up here.
you can always drive to indiana. they could use some more people on their water cause it's pretty quiet down there ....  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32879
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I think that date is as traditional as the 9 day deer season. It's VERY hard to change tradition up here... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 327
| Minnesota changed the 9 day deer season to 7 so ther'll be less bucks and more does taken , they should have a doe season only like they do for bucks . Just keep it open until about June !! |
|
| |
|
Location: Athens, Ohio | It's all a plot to get more folks to "Fish Ohio". C'mon down. m |
|
| |
|
| there is an effort currently underway sponsored by the Capital City chapter of Muskies Inc to extend the season south of Hwy 10 so that it lasts until ice-up.
i'm not sure exactly where things are at with it, but i know they're working to get it on the agenda for the spring Conservation Congress hearings.
i'm sure someone from the club who's been involved and has more info on it will chime in...
|
|
| |
|
| Minn sced to close Dec 1st starting 07 |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2361
| Nothing wrong with a closed season imo.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1243
Location: Musky Tackle Online, MN | happy hooker - 10/20/2006 2:23 PM
Minn sced to close Dec 1st starting 07
Has that been officially announced? And what's the purpose of naming December 1st as the closing date? Just to pick an arbitrary date or is there logic behind it?
Aaron |
|
| |
|
Posts: 786
Location: Minnesota | Agree with Aaron. I have seen high 30F-40F days in Dec perfect for some fishing. My opinion would be different if a lot of people kept muskies but most do not.
JMO,
James |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1243
Location: Musky Tackle Online, MN | My understanding is that the reason for the December 1st date is to eliminate fishing for them through the ice. I have no problem with wanting to end ice fishing for them (if this is the goal). But why not simply put that in the regulations. You can not angle through the ice for muskies.
By setting a date such as December 1st you're doing two things. You're ending open water fishing early during warmer falls when that's not the goal of the regulation. And during cold years, when lakes freeze up early, you're still allowing ice fishing for them during that first ice period. Again, if ending ice fishing for them is the goal, there seems to be a much better way to do it.
Maybe I'm not undertanding the true intentions here or the reasoning behind it. I've asked this question of others before and have never been given a reason that makes sense. But then maybe I'm just missing something......
Aaron |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2894
Location: Yahara River Chain | lambeau, is right. There will be a question on the April Conservation Congress Hearings and that is to have the muskie season remain open until the end of December, south of HWY 10. The Capital City Chapter of Muskies, Inc has endorsed the idea, but it was put forth by Scot Stewart, WDNR Madison Area Fisheries Manager.
So make sure that you attend the April Hearings (2nd Monday, I'm not sure what date that falls on) and be heard. For those outside of WI or unable to attend, I'm sure that you will be able to chime in with your thoughts as well. I will post a email address as soon as I have one to post. Will be seeing Scot on Thursday and will let you know when I know.
Gerard
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2894
Location: Yahara River Chain | To answer JJS original question, "Does anyone know why the WI season closes at the end of November?"
I think the reason it closes Nov 30th is it is noramlly the time ice forms on the lakes, for sure most cases in the north. Please bear in mind that when the WDNR made this season, there was (most likely) no muskies in the lakes in the southern part of WI.
Edited by muskie! nut 10/22/2006 6:21 PM
|
|
| |
|
| I would be in agreement to just end the season at the end of December and have the regs state no ice fishing for muskies. I don't think that the law should be based on "well, that is usually when lakes are iced over". It doesn't make sense, especially in the day of catch and release. While it is a small number, I am sure that bait shop owners and tackle suppliers would welcome any extra business during the last days of open water fishing, especially in the northern areas.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2894
Location: Yahara River Chain | Since when does the WDNR ever make sense?
I bet the WDNR needs a drop dead certain day for closure so that the warrdens have written law to work from. I can't ever imgine that the DNR would ever go along with a "floating" closing date. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 149
| I agree with the Nov 30 closing. A 'floating' date would never work, and would be a nightmare for enforcement. And the argument 'I've fished open water in December' that many here seem to be using works both ways.
I ice fish in northern Wisconsin on very safe ice in late November during most years. Looking back in my log, there are several years where I've ice fished on safe ice in early to mid November as well. In 1996 I ice fished on November 8, and the lake certainly had solid ice for some time before that as it was quite safe to walk out on the 8th.
Bottom line is that there are too many seasonal and local variables to have any type of a floating date. Nothing wrong with Nov 30. |
|
| |
|
| EsoxCPR,
You get to take advantage of the seasonal fluctuations with respect to ice fishing, why would it be so hard to extend that to open water fishing? I don't see where the difficult for enforcement is, any individual lake will either have open water or it will be frozen over. You can't ice fish for muskies in WI regardless. Seems pretty simple to me. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2894
Location: Yahara River Chain | I can see a warden writing a ticket for a person breaking ice with a boat and fishing muskies. Another gray area like "postitioning" fishing. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1185
Location: Wishin I Was Fishin' | What is wrong with ice fishing for musky? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 149
| "You get to take advantage of the seasonal fluctuations with respect to ice fishing..."
Not sure I follow your logic on that one. I don't take advantang of anything except open seasons. If I want to walleye fish November 20, I couldn't care less if it's from a boat or through the ice. You seem to want to compare a closing date for a fishing season to a method used to fish, and that simply isn't making any sense, nor is it comparable. Now, if I got to 'take advantage' by wanting to walleye fish on March 15 after the season is closed your comparison would be a valid one. There isn't anything wrong with ice fishing for muskies, and I've done it in late November several times.
The fact is, that for whatever reason the WDNR biologists have determined that musky season should be closed from Dec 1 through the first Friday in May (southern) or the last Friday of May (northern). I'm quite certain it doesn't have anything to do with a certain method of fishing, but is there simply to protect the resource. There are other examples of fish where closing seasons are for extended periods of time. Take sturgeon as an example of a species that is fairly rare to catch with a very long closed season that has more to do with simply protecting the resource than just protecting them only during spawning.
It's also quite logical that if musky season in Wisconsin were open well into or through the winter, far more muskies would be harvested than are with the current season framework.
Edited by esoxcpr 10/25/2006 6:23 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 688
Location: Northern IL | It wouldn't bother me if the season was open all year,, (below 10) because the rule is protecting a fish that is STOCKED.. Look at the states where they rely solely on stocked fish, most have NO closed season, heck they even allow sucker fishing,,,, and that evil "TROLLING"., the bottom line is: People who don't troll, (1923 law) don't want you to troll, but they’ll sell you suckers all day knowing many fish are gut hooked... protecting fish, my rear end!!
As stated above "It's VERY hard to change tradition up here" and I'll add "minds" as well.
Show up in April and vote to change the rule to "Muskie Season Ends At Ice".
Jerry Borst
Spoonplugger/Instructor |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2894
Location: Yahara River Chain | Jerry Borst says "Show up in April and vote to change the rule to "Muskie Season Ends At Ice".
This will not happen. Why? Let's look at Lake Monona. Monona Bay can freeze up enough to have folks ice fish on it and the main lake is wide open. Then the questions is, "Is that lake open to muskie fishing or not?"
Folks on this and other boards complained about the "positioning fishing" being too gray to enforced. Why? Because it is not writen out in black and white. The date certain closure does that. If we are worried about ice anglers taking muskies maybe we better increase the size limits on those lakes first?
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 405
| What Date?
|
|
| |
|
| If you can get your boat out in the open water regardless if a portion is frozen over, the season would be open. If you can't, its closed. Pretty simple in my mind. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1168
| If we get an early hard freeze, everything ices over and signals the end of the muskie season. Then catch a little bit of wind, perhaps rain, and warmer temps a couple days later does it re-open? Some rivers will stay open year round near "hot pipes," spillways, rapids, etc. I just think a standardized date is the way to go. If you have different bodies of water freezing at different times and basically a rolling season end date it would cause nightmares for enforcement.
There are many many fish harvested in the winter as it is by guys that just don't know how to identify them. On some well known muskie lakes there are even locals who won't acknowledge they are in there. To me this is the bigger concern...educating people to know what they have caught so they can be released during the winter. Weather there is a Dec. 1 closing date, Jan. 1 closing date, or simply close it at ice-up it won't matter...that harvest would still occur. We can do so much more in protecting these fish during that time through education of the difference between a pike and a muskie than we can do by changing season dates. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | By the last 1/3 of November, we usually have 3-4" of ice up by me. I ice fish with small suckers and a single trebel. I don't understand why Wisconsin has a closed season for any fish. Alot of states don't close at all. |
|
| |
|
| Alot of states don't close at all.
most of those states don't have viable natural reproduction for muskies.
i sure as heck wouldn't want an open season on muskies up north during the spawn!
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2894
Location: Yahara River Chain | JJS "If you can get your boat out in the open water regardless if a portion is frozen over, the season would be open. If you can't, its closed. Pretty simple in my mind."
JJS, What about shore anglers??? If we did what you suggest, now we have two sets of rules. One for someone in a boat and another for someone on shore. Is this fair?
|
|
| |
|
| I hate being politically correct.
Close the freakin' season and find something else to do and let the muskies eat and get bigger and fatter for next year.
That way we don't have to worry about discriminating against the people north of Hwy 10 by showing favoritism to the people south of Hwy 10.
Enough already. |
|
| |
|
| MuskieNut,
Sorry for the confusion, if you can get a line in the water rather than a boat, then the season is open. This should take care of the discrimination issue. |
|
| |
|
| I really don't understand where the resentment or opposition to a longer season comes in here. On lakes south of Hwy 10, it is usually rare to have lakes safely iced over before x-mas. Moreover, none of the lakes south of hwy 10 have successful natural reproduction. What is the possible problem with extending the season? The past several years we've had favorable weather conditions in Madison in December during which I've been scratching my head thinking, "what's the reason again why its illegal to go muskie fishing right now?"
As I understand it, the Nov 30 closing date in S. WI is completely arbitrary and is not grounded in any soundable policy argument or rationale. The main counterargument of enforcement problems on behalf of the DNR wardens is completely without merit due to the fact that the same dividing line for an earlier opening season has already been established. If wardens are able to enforce an earlier open season south of 10, why wouldn't they be able to enforce a later closing season south of hwy 10? The other counterargument that I really don't understand is when guys say that the fish need to be given a break from angling. What? And northerns, walleyes, bass, and panfish don't? Why would non-naturally reproducing muskies need to be given a break more so than any other fish species? If harvest isn't a problem during all the other months of year, why would the least-fished month of December present a problem? Another very weak counterargument is that this later closing date will allow ice angling for muskies. Again, the current closing date already allows for ice angling for muskies on most northern wisconsin waters prior to Nov 30, and last I checked this hasn't been a huge cause of concern or caused major population collapse. So why would it be a huge cause of concern southern wisconsin waters where there often isn't safe ice by the end of December anyway? Maybe there'd be a week or two of ice fishing for muskies. So what? That's what's happening in Northern Wisconsin already, and I don't believe that the sky is falling.
The idea of discrimination between anglers north of 10 vs. south of 10 is ridiculous. There is nothing keeping anybody from driving a couple hours to the south if you want to go muskie fishing.
If there are any good reasons to close the muskie season south of highway 10 on November 30, I'm all ears. I'd really be interested in hearing them.
If you can't tell, I'd strongly support a longer season in southern wisconsin.
Matt DeVos
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | lambeau - 11/1/2006 12:03 PM
Alot of states don't close at all.
most of those states don't have viable natural reproduction for muskies.
i sure as heck wouldn't want an open season on muskies up north during the spawn!
We don't have the best naturally reproducing population either. Without stocking here, we'd be finished. Just because fish are spawning doesn't mean you'll be catching...these aren't walleye. Or we could leave the season open and protect the spawn. Leave it closed from May 1 to May 15. remember, boundry waters open in mid-may, not Memorial Day weekend.
Edited by Gander Mt Guide 11/1/2006 2:54 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 149
| It makes no sense to make a distinction between the lakes with 'natural' reproduction and 'stocked' lakes, as that would be an enforcement nightmare to have different closing dates on lakes that are right next to each other not to mention there are many lakes that fit both (and neither) of those categories.
Another matter entirely is how each lake's closing date is determined. Wisconsin has approximately 800 musky waters. About 18% of those (around 140) are sustained through natural reproduction alone. That leaves somewhere around 660 waters that may have some sporadic (or unknown) natural reproduction but may or may not also get stocked. The WDNR actively stocks about 220 lakes. That leaves a whole pile of musky waters (at least 440 lakes) that don't fit either finite category. How do you set different closing dates when the majority of the states musky waters are not completely sustained by natural reproduction and don't get stocked?
The date is fine where it is. It's reasonable and is easy to enforce.
Edited by esoxcpr 11/1/2006 4:26 PM
|
|
| |
|
| I personally would like to see the southern half extended to Dec 15th. We already have 2 opening dates in the spring...why not 2 in the fall.
Monona/Waubesa rarely freeze before Dec 1st...now I can go out there and cast regular dawgs for pike and probably tangle with a musky but why do they make us even say we are fishing for pike?
Dec 15th below highway 10 would be easy and allow more fishing time for southern waters...just think of all the influx of money into WI from the Flatlanders buying suckers at Dorn Hardware!!!! lol  |
|
| |
|
| Esoxcpr,
Who is suggesting a different closing dates between stocked vs. non-stocked lakes? I certainly wasn't. The distinction being proposed is between lakes south of hwy 10, and north of hwy 10 because it is warmer in southern wisconsin than northern wisconsin and therefore lakes don't freeze over as early on in the year.
Discussion regarding stocked and non-stocked lakes is only relevant because other states, with lakes that are totally dependent upon stocking, have open seasons year round. Meanwhile, historically and presently, the closed season in Wisconsin (and other states) is due, in large part, to protect spawning fish. Because protection of spawning fish is not a concern in lakes south of hwy 10 in Wisconsin (no natural reproduction), the concern over protecting spawning fish is not applicable.
Why is the date fine where it is at? You say that its reasonable. What are those reasons? Ease of enforement is not a good argument in my mind. If we're concerned about ease of enforcement, why do we have an earlier open season in Wisconsin lakes that are south of hwy 10?
I am all for governmental and agency regulations that are based on a discernable policy or rationale. But I am not a big fan of governmental or agency regulations that limit a sportsman's opportunities for absolutely no good reason. In that regard, I don't understand why anyone would be opposed to this proposal, especially since there are already regulations in place that allow for an earlier muskie season based on the hwy 10 dividing line.
Again, anybody. What is the policy explanation for an earlier open season south of hwy 10, but not a later closed season?
Matt DeVos
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1243
Location: Musky Tackle Online, MN | If the law stated that you may not angle for muskies through a hole in the ice, where would the grey area be? Why would this be any more difficult to enforce than a November 30th closing date?
Aaron |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2361
|
Enforcement is easy when divided by a highway. No problem there it is either open or closed.
Spawning musky are vulnerable and a tempting target for snagging, and from what I hear are pretty stupid when going about the act. Just because fish don't reproduce successfully, doesn't mean they don't spawn. There may be certain chemical conditions that might prevent it I guess, but in most lakes they do seem to have sex and shed their eggs. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32
Location: Sherry, WI | Not that I'd head south to fish muskies after November, but considering the reproductive status of the waters in question, the population support mechanism, and pre-defined boundary already applied to Esox species, I would wholeheartedly support an extension of the southern Wisconsin season. Heck, let's go for 31 January so we can be compromised back to 31 December! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32879
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I agree with Beav. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2894
Location: Yahara River Chain | Hey everybody, the question on the April Conservation Congress Hearing ballot will ask if you are in favor of keeping the muskie season open until December 31st south of HWY 10.
Not till the lakes freeze up, not let's shoot for a longer season so we can scale it back to the 12/31, not till Dec 15th, or not year round.
That will be the question, so let's hear if you are in favor or not & why - not that what you would like to see. If it gets defeated, then that will be the time to offer alternate ideas for the 2008 Spring Hearings.
|
|
| |
|
| I have to agree with Matt Devos and others on this issue...why would anyone who fishes muskies think below Hiway 10 until Dec 31st would be a bad idea?
There are many days in Dec that the lakes in Madison are wide open, and it's 40 degees and sunny..it's not "discriminating" against the northern half of the state or the anglers at all in my mind.
It would be nice to legally fish for them in Dec.
Our lakes down here are stocked, we have a 45" size limit in Madison to protect the fish, and I think most other lakes below hiway 10 are stocked as well....For Beaver and others who disagree, why do you disagree, is it a "just because I do" reason or something scientifically based that you think having one more month of an open season will hurt the fishery?
Just curios why musky anglers would oppose more opportunities to fish in their own state....instead they make us fish for pike or travel south to IL/IA or IN in Dec ....
|
|
| |
|
| my understanding of fish management practices in WI is that unless there is a biological reason for the DNR to make a certain rule, then the DNR defers to the desire of the public - to the desire of the consumers. a good example of this is higher size limits on certain lakes (Petenwell, Pelican, Madison Chain, etc.): it happened because people want to be able to catch big fish, not because the DNR set it higher for any biological reasons.
that's the one (and only, imho) good thing about the Conservation Congress System, it allows the consumers to make decisions about their use of their resources.
there is no biological reason to have the season close south of Hwy 10 (that i'm aware of) on November 30th, therefore, if the consumers -- us -- want to have it open to be able to fish, then we should vote in favor of it. the fish won't be harmed and it will increase fishing opportunities for those who wish to do so.
i'm voting YES.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32879
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Now THAT made sense. I guess looking at it from that perspective, I'd then vote yes. Lambeau for Governor!! |
|
| |
|
| Mike, you nailed it.
But I'll confess that I'm still surprised about those who are, or were, in opposition. I'd really like to see/hear any logical explanations as to why folks think this proposal is a bad idea. It seems that some of the opposition is as Brad says, opposed for no reason other than "I don't like it", and I think that's strange given the fact that this proposal is increasing muskie angling opportunities for everyone at no cognizable detriment to the resource.
Best,
Matt DeVos |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | Personally, I'd like to see the season stay open until water freezes. Statewide. Up north freezes up, you have down south, down south freezes up, you have the river systems, the rivers freeze up...game over until the openers.
Right now the big thing is enforcement after the Musky season closes. Guys get nabbed trolling 18" suckers on Pewaukee lake every year. Leave the season open until ice up...WHAAALA, end of problem. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2894
Location: Yahara River Chain | Gander Mt Guide, that's not the question that will be before us come April. I also don't think from an enforcemant standpoint, that the DNR would go along with a season has a floating season.
I would think the only down side to have a muskie season remains open until Dec 31st south of HWY 10 is the possibility of ice anglers keeping a legal muskie as we know some (I said some) ice anglers keep everything that is legal to keep.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1245
Location: Madtown, WI | G.Guide..
I was at the WI muskie committee meeting this spring the first time it was brought up. We talked about doing "until ice up" as an option. And EVERYONE agreed that would be a nightmare from a monitoring standpoint. You think the trolling suckers rule is gray...you can just imagine what ice up would do....plus, this would be an ever changing state, one day open, next day partially closed...etc....
The last thing I want in this state is a rule that is as gray and as hard to police as the trolling/sucker rule.
Great way to word it by the way Lambeau!
Cory
Vote yes! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | what's gray about not being able to launch a boat? You can or you can't...that's the beauty. It doesn't need monitoring. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8772
| The only legitimate reason I could see for keeping the Nov 30 closed season date intact for the entire state would be to avoid the influx of anglers from the Northern half of the State during the last month of the season, especially in the areas just south of 10.
But I don't think that would have a significant impact on the fisheries.
I know I'm going to open up a can of worms here, but I'd like to see the opener extended for the Southern half of the state to match the N WI opening date. I understand that there's no natural reproduction, but that's only because the eggs don't survive. The fish still spawn, and in cold years especially the fish are still recovering from the spawn when the season opens. Don't know if there's any studies on this but I'd bet a fish that has recently spawned is a lot easier to kill.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8772
| Hey Gander -- you might not be able to get a boat in the water, but that doesn't mean you can't fish. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | Same as now....I'll easily be ice fishing before Nov. 30. Think the Nov closing date now stops guys from using suckers or large shiners through the ice?
Ice is a sure way to end the open water season without the need for enforcement. Warden drives by a lake, sees boats, it'd be ok to be musky fishing. As is now. The season closes Nov 30 and guys are still musky fishing. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 688
Location: Northern IL | "muskie season open until December 31st south of HWY 10", NICE! Now if we could do something about that trolling rule. lol
Jerry Borst
Spoonplugger/Instructor |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2894
Location: Yahara River Chain | Gander Mt Guide says "Ice is a sure way to end the open water season without the need for enforcement. Warden drives by a lake, sees boats, it'd be ok to be musky fishing. As is now. The season closes Nov 30 and guys are still musky fishing."
Then I have a question.
Q: A bay freezes over and folks are fishing on the ice. But the main lake has boats fishing for muskies. Is that muskie season open or closed?
It can happen here on Lake Monona where a small bay (Monona Bay) freezes early and the main lake is wide open, especially if there is a lot of wind after the bay ices over.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1243
Location: Musky Tackle Online, MN | muskie! nut - 11/3/2006 5:19 PM
Then I have a question.
Q: A bay freezes over and folks are fishing on the ice. But the main lake has boats fishing for muskies. Is that muskie season open or closed?
It can happen here on Lake Monona where a small bay (Monona Bay) freezes early and the main lake is wide open, especially if there is a lot of wind after the bay ices over.
I'm completely with GMG on this one. What's the purpose of a November 30th or December 31st closing date? Is it to not allow ice fishing for muskies? If not, what's the reason?
To answer the above question...if you have to fish through a hole in the ice, it's not legal to fish muskies. If you don't have to fish through a hole in the ice, it's legal to fish muskies. Why would this be difficult to enforce? Seems pretty cut and dried to me. It definitely would not be any more difficult than the "I'm fishing for pike, not muskies" before the season opens issue.
Aaron |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2894
Location: Yahara River Chain | How can the same body of water be off limits to one angler and not the other???? Either its open or closed. And why is an angler not able to fish for a muskie and the other is???? Just because he has a boat, he's allowed for fish for them????
As for your question about closing date, "why is it Nov 30", I don't know and don't have a clue why it closes on Nov 30th now. Maybe we can ask someone from the WDNR? |
|
| |
WI Season Closing