|
|
| 47 lakes and river change to a 48" min length.. Let's now hope that every 48" fish does not get the club to the head... Now that it has changed to 48", I would be in favor of limiting to 1 fish per year.. Guess that still would not stop the "clubbing pontooner" from killing fish, as there are new people on that vessal every day!!! | |
| | |
| http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/rlp/regulations/fishing/fishing2007.pd...
| |
| | |
Posts: 3518
Location: north central wisconsin | I saw postings at a few MN landings last year, regarding meetings to attend educating on this change. They have it right. Let the managers manage and get it done! The fact that they handed some of the smaller rivers the same regulations, speaks even higher to their desire to provide/maintain great Musky fishing accross the board. Check out the pike regs on some of the even small lakes over there too. I'd love to see a slot similar to some I've seen there, on my home water, and some more of the trophy potential waters here in WI. Big pike rule!!
Edited by Reef Hawg 2/19/2007 10:28 AM
| |
| | |
| also note
100% mandatory release on upper Mississippi River section | |
| | |
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Good deal, many of us have supported a minimum of a 48" limit for a long time for the waters over there. This will slow the numbers of harvested fish quite a bit. I really liked seeing the C&R only on the upper Mississippi, that is some incredible but potentially fragile muskie water.
We've had a ton of negative comments here about the fellow on the pontoon on Mille Lacs; who's hiring this guy if he's encouraging harvest? If he indeed has new people every day who are harvesting muskies that seems to run contrary to the norm over there. Is there any possibility he might listen to reason and hook up with a good taxidermist providing replicas? If not, is this boat headquartered out of a resort? Maybe the resort owner would respond to some replica/CPR/conservation education. I'm not sure how much actual biological harm is done by this particular guide, but it would be nice to get the guy to at least discourage unnecessary harvest especially in light of the work that went into getting the limit increased to 48".
Congratulations to the MNDNR and everyone who worked on raising that limit. | |
| | |
Posts: 1243
Location: Musky Tackle Online, MN | I want to thank EVERYONE that took the time to send an email, write a letter, make a phone call, etc. in voice of support for the higher size limits. It truly made a difference. There were a few waters that were proposed that didn't make the jump, simply because of not enough support...or actually, too much opposition is more likely.
As far as the pontoon troller. He has said that he doesn't encourage harvest, but he also doesn't discourage it. He makes no effort to educate on the importance of catch and release. His stance is that it's everyone's right to keep a legal fish. So if his client wants to keep it, he's all for it. As a guide, he needs to be an educator, which he clearly is not when it comes to the health of the fishery.
Aaron | |
| | |
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I also will not be able to physically restrain someone from harvesting a legal fish. I can't legally do that. I do let the angler know out of the chute that MY boat is CPR. I REALLY encourage the angler to let the fish go and as a result have not had a fish harvested in my boat since 1984, so in a way I AM forcing my CPR ethic on my guide clients. In the past, I've given up guide fees for the day to get an angler to buy a replica and let a good fish go.
Again, congratulations on the size limit increase!
| |
| | |
Posts: 2089
| Lots of people deserve a huge congrats on this one.Way to go! Steve | |
| | |
| Sworral,
If you stop in the liquor stor in Malmo, you will see why people continue to hire this guy.. He has some extremely impressive pictures.. People stop in for a case of beer, see the pics, and wonder how they can catch a fish like that... In the pontoon it is easy, sit on your bucket and wait for the next rod to go off.. Like AWH (aaron) ststaed, he definatly does not discourage people from keeping fish. Most of the people on his "vessal" are first time musky fisherman. He does go out of a resort, but I will not mention the name here, as I really have no idea if they support his ehtics or not..
There has been plently of complaints about this guy, but what are you going to do?? I just don't understand why one would kill the resource they are making money on??? | |
| | |
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | If the liquor store will display fish pictures, maybe they will also display a CPR piece from Muskies Inc and a brochure from a Replica taxidermist. Change is a process, not an event. Maybe this fellow has no concerns about the fishery at all, maybe he does, but if his clients begin insisting on releasing the fish caught on that boat, a change will have occurred. I'll stop in there at the resort and the store next time I'm in that area and see what the store owner has to say.Maybe a little promotion in exchange for promoting CPR might be offered...  | |
| | |
Posts: 2089
| Gene Miller, the pontoon troller in question, OWNS said liquor store.He's also the local postman.You can't go anywhere around the lake and mention muskies, without his name coming up.To the locals, he's a hero and the best Muskie Man around.How much info you want? Steve | |
| | |
| FYI, there is 2 pontoon boats operating out of Barnacle Bills Resort..... that is the service that advertised "Even your Grandma can catch a muskie!"..I've been guiding for 13 years with 100% CPR... And a few pretty decent ones too! The hardest one to release is your first big one ...the rest of them is easy!!!Don't break the toy... | |
| | |
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Steve,
What do you mean, "How much info do you want"?
So he owns the store; will he reject placing a MI poster in there if approached in a reasonable manner? Maybe something on CPR promoting his store can be offered, too. Add a benefit to him, maybe he reacts positively.
If not, then let's take a look into other options that might be eventually more effective than what's been done to date. If a group of 'concerned anglers' does enough footwork, even the non muskie angling locals might see the light eventually.
Politics can definitely suck, but in this case, are probably the fastest and most effective method of getting the CPR ethic in the foreground. | |
| | |
| I think what Jonesi means "How much info do you want" is that this is just the tip of the iceberg.. He has plently more unethical practices up his sleeve than just keeping fish.... I know he keeps fish, but I have also heard of many more rumors of other stuff...
BTW.. it is quit funny that any bar you stop at on Mille Lacs, if you start BS'ing with some of the locals, they do think he is the "musky superman.." | |
| | |
Posts: 434
Location: searchin for 50 | I was just wondering is it WRONG to keep muskies? and if so, why is it wrong to keep them. I know all about replicas. Just was wondering the thought process on this. I have only kept 1 muskie and that was because it inhaled the bucktail and basically committed suicide. | |
| | |
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | That being said, what can be done to begin the process of reversing the harvest mentality on that boat and out of that resort? It's been done elsewhere, and major advances have been made in CPR and respect for higher size limits. This might be achieved in a positive manner, in fact that's the only way to approach this IMHO as the opposite approach has already been proven ineffective.
If the same people responsible for promoting the angler's portion of the new 48" limit in Minnesota began a campaign around Mill Lacs (perhaps in concert with Muskies Inc) to educate the local anglers and tourists alike, there WILL be a positive effect. Are the locals talking negatively about the new size limits?
What else might be done? | |
| | |
Posts: 2089
| Yeah, what Josh said.How does one approach "God"?Pick your battles ring a bell?Gene is not the only pontoon troller either as Wayne mentioned.For that matter, Garrison Sports runs launches with a dozen people dragging suckers on single hooks rigs(not heresay, saw with my own lookers) along the Wealthwood weed edge.So many issues and I'm getting too old to fight 'em all.I think I'll just fish. Steve
Edited by Steve Jonesi 2/19/2007 2:07 PM
| |
| | |
| This guy was actually camped next to us at the cassino campground durring the Mesikhomer vermillion tourney,,,Alot of his trips are 'work partys not seriouis musky guys' akin to the walleye launch crowd,,,also heard more then once the clients have had to drive the boat back. He 'claims' to have a partnership in a local 'repo' biz and that he tries to get people to get repos instead because that would mean more $ to him. at least thats what he says | |
| | |
| I hope to see 100% cnr someday soon, no matter what the size.
Release them all!! | |
| | |
| I think we could post on this guy all day, I personally don't think it will get you anywhere.. Mr. Worral, if you can convince him to change his ways, more power to you.. This is not a new concept to him though... As for Garisson Sports, that is another issue, Mille Lacs is the only lake in the world that has a walleye style lauch boat set up to catch muskies... I have NEVER seen a lauch boat throw back a keeper walleye, do you think this lauch boat will throw back any muskies?? I think the 48" reg. is GREAT, thank you MNDNR... Now lets push for 54". | |
| | |
| What about a Muskie Stamp, akin to a Pheasant Stamp?
If we made it $25 or something like that, with proceeds going back into stocking, that might discourage people on a pontoon or launch from taking the outing in the first place if it is a one-time deal.
Would be a great funding source, too.
Just a thought.
SteveV | |
| | |
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Interesting.
Is it 'bad' to keep a muskie? That's an excellent question. My answers to that question have been roundly and rudely criticized over the last year by a few far FAR off to the right, but that's the way it goes, I guess. I've worked consistently to encourage CPR since the early 80's while respecting everyone's opinions and ideals in the process. Why take that course of action? Because I have a basic understanding of what it takes to obtain change. As Steve Jonesi insinuates, it 'aint easy.
The MNDNR has spoken as to what the minimum size limit should be on 47 bodies of water. I bet part of that decision is based on the known fact many of us will release ANY muskie, up to maybe even a world record. I bet part of that decision is also based on an estimate of how many muskies will be harvested over that size, and what the actual effect on the Muskie population might be. There were dozens of 'activist'-to-average muskie anglers working towards this, and congratulations are due. What about the 49, 50, 52, 54, 55 or even 56" fish? That decision, by Minnesota law, is up to each and every one of you fishing there whether you are a MN resident or a visitor.
If this fellow leaves that decision up to the anglers on his pontoon, and you feel that's a bad thing and want to support and promote CPR to a larger size on Mille Lacs, or even total CPR on the water he guides, it's incumbent for YOU to do something about it. If you do nothing but sit behind a computer and throw obscene comments like some now think is the way to enlightenment, you have no stake in the game and have no right to complain if a 55 gets harvested on that boat. Educate the anglers at point of sale at the resorts and stores on Mille Lacs. Get to them in local media like Chamber publications, etc. If the target anglers are online, maybe one can do something there too. Muskies Inc can help, that's part of what they do. In some cases, a local fisheries biologist may assist you with information helpful to your position.
As far as the launch putting a dozen single hook sucker rigs in the water at a time, that's a HUGE issue. We've worked collectively as concerned anglers, DNR, muskie clubs, and industry folks in WI to eliminate that sure-kill scenario, and have taken no end of crap from the fringes who are great at yelling obscenities but not so great at actually putting some help on the line in the process. we pretty much have eliminated the practice except for a very few. Eventually, we will see it as nothing but history. I'd get after that practice soon, if you are serious about protecting Muskies on that water.
I said earlier that effecting change is a process, and I think I'm right there. Education is the key, avoiding unecessary conflict that will do nothing but alienate. That can be done one on one for limited effect, or in a big way, like Muskies Inc. Those folks are the historical/traditional experts at forwarding CPR, and in most cases 'get it' enough to be effective at that charge.
Bottom line, is if you want change, it will take effort to acquire it. You will have plenty of tacit support, but real roll-in-the-mud help is pretty thin out there.
| |
| | |
| jclymer - 2/19/2007 3:01 PM
I think we could post on this guy all day, I personally don't think it will get you anywhere.. Mr. Worral, if you can convince him to change his ways, more power to you.. This is not a new concept to him though... As for Garisson Sports, that is another issue, Mille Lacs is the only lake in the world that has a walleye style lauch boat set up to catch muskies... I have NEVER seen a lauch boat throw back a keeper walleye, do you think this lauch boat will throw back any muskies?? I think the 48" reg. is GREAT, thank you MNDNR... Now lets push for 54".
I'm pretty sure there are some launch style trolling boats on St Clair if I am not mistaken.
I think sworrall is trying to point out that alot of people are quick to complain about it but are not willing to do the hard work to solve the problem. Area guides who come on here and other places regularly promoting the virtues of Mille Lacs and their guide services admit that even they are not willing to do the work necessary to battle the problem.
Well ... if someone directly impacted by it such as the area guides won't take it head on then why would anyone else? In my mind, it must not be that big of a problem if the major Mille Lacs Muskie Stakeholders aren't willing to deal with it. | |
| | |
| What are we to do?
I would never hire these guys nor recommend them. My cabin is on the North End. Whenever the pontooners come up in conversation with locals, I "educate" as best I can. The fact is alot people (present company excluded) simply dont give a sh@t. I control only what happens in my boat. I commend all of you guides on your efforts be CPR only. Make sense to me as your livlihood depends on it! | |
| | |
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | One has to start somewhere. I think the point here is that there's an issue been brought up regarding the pontoon boat trolling guides and the harvest of numbers of muskies. I've seen plenty of negative reference, but no real attempts to begin a process to deal with this segment of the Mille Lacs Muskie world. If it's truly a big problem to the population of big fish in Mille Lacs, then I'd think a group might be put together to look at what might be done to lower the impact.
There's a pretty active movement to deal with the darkhouse issues, which might just pale in comparison to the damage done by a launch business pushing single hook sucker use.
| |
| | |
| Minnesota dnr is "dead" and I mean "dead' set against a musky stamp
they are convinced it would cost has much to administer it has it would take in with no gain at all to the program'
might actualy work in reverse and show politicians how 'few' muskie anglers there are.
also because most muskie anglers release their fish some might not buy the stamp because who needs it you can say your fishing pike this would also not reflect the true number of muskie anglers.
its also felt there could be more harvesting has some anglers might feel the right now to 'fill' their tag/stamp once a year.
There is a study this year conducted by the U of Minnesota on how mant musky anglers there are in Minn, maybe after that is done we might have something to push for a stamp.
but,,,No way dnr wants a stamp right now!!!!!!!!!! | |
| | |
Posts: 2089
| Narrows,
I work hard for the Muskies on Mille Lacs EVERY DAY!!!!Give me a freakin' break.Most people have no clue as to the mentality regarding muskies on Mille Lacs.Walleye anglers STILL outnumber muskie anglers 20-1.I will not get into personal attacks and I will continue to educate, WITH TACT, every opportunity I get, be it the boat landing, bar or motel.Pick your battles or you'll lose 'em all.Any suggestions?I'm sure these guys wouldn't mind the hit to their bottom line in order to save a few fish.Yeah right.The economy isn't quite flourishing up there either.It's tough and getting tougher.Nuff said. Steve | |
| | |
Posts: 2384
Location: On the X that marks the mucky spot | Worrall, I couldn't have said it better myself.
One thing I'm going to be pushing for now that quick strike rigs will be legal is to outlaw the use of a single hook rig on any minnow over x".
Here's a question from a non-livebait fisherman. What's the bottom size limit that most people use for suckers? I you're using 36" suckers I don't want to hear it. I want a baseline I can go to the DNR with so we could possibly set a regulation in 2008-9. If we can put it in the books that you have to use a quick strike on any minnow of over say 10" then we've just done an end-around on the whole issue. Fight the battles in the manor that's easiest to win is my opinion.
Edited by Muskie Treats 2/20/2007 9:27 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | There you go, that's what I meant. Now if folks who actively guide or just fish Mille Lacs and other Muskie waters up there step in to help, even if it's just a letter or email, maybe the single hook issue can be solved.
Steve, I agree with the 'pick your battles' scenario. There several to choose from. I'm not saying any one person has to spearhead (although someone does), I'm simply saying that action at ground zero trumps everything else, and provides validity to arguments elsewhere.
Treats, let me know if we can help with an article or press release. | |
| | |
Posts: 2384
Location: On the X that marks the mucky spot | Actually, what would be beneficial is the report the WDNR did on hooking mortality w/ single hook sucker rigs. I know that it was published in a Muskie Hunter, but I'd like to be able to present the official study. If anyone has a copy or knows where it is let me know.
| |
| | |
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Muskie Symposium, 2006. Entire presentation and supporting paper ought to be there. | |
| | |
| First, I want to thank the MN DNR for bumping up the limit to 48". I also want to thank the great guides on Mille Lacs (Jonesi, Ronnstrand, Thomas, Hammernick, Tauchen, etc) for releasing many giant muskies (this gives me that much more of a chance of catching one of these monsters again)..
Mr. Worral you are correct, this was suppose to be a positve post, but I turned it negitive by posting about the pontooner in the first place.. I do not have the time to make changes between a fulltime job, working on my master's degree, wife and kid.. My spare time will be spent on the water or ice, not trying to make changes in the musky world.. Musky fishing is my hobby, not my living, so I guess I do not have the time to make any changes... All I have time to do is complain behind a computer screen at break time at work... Hopefully someone with more time will be able to address the issues...
Mr. Worral, I do not have the time to coordinate and lead any changes, if someone wants some support, I would be more than happy to support improvements in any way that I can find time for.. | |
| | |
Posts: 291
Location: Minneapolis | Treats - I like your idea about making a quick-strike rig mandatory for any minnow longer than X". I think 8" would be a good maximum size for a single hook. Personally, I prefer suckers over 10" (LOTS over, usually), but sometimes Bob the Minnow Man only has little ones.
What you're really looking for is what's the maximum size minnow someone might reasonably fish on a jig, because you want to keep that legal. | |
| | |
Posts: 162
Location: Bemidji, MN | I found this one on circle hooks: http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=18131234
but it deals more with hooking efficiency.
Here's a great Q/A sheet from WDNR, but the lengths need to be altered: http://dnr.wi.gov/fish/musky/Musky%20length%20limit%20faq.pdf
The one in the symposium abstracts is here: http://muskie.outdoorsfirst.com/articles/02.20.2007/978/Abstracts;....
But, I still can't find where quick strikes are addressed. This one is also single hooks, and long-term mortality is like 83% Not good. BUT. I haven't dug deep enough to find a long-term hooking mortality study done with artificial lures. I am sure it is out there, but before you go pointing fingers at the bait guys, and changing regs, make sure your ducks are in a row, and no one has a study on long delayed artificial lure induced death. This 83% came from a study done at a hatchery, on small fish. If you look at actual growth and survival of muskies up to trophy size, I am willing to bet the farm that it is way lower than 83%. Point being, science isn't exact, the way you set up the experiment can serioulsly skew the outcome. I am all for CPR, but the reality of it is that we are also guilty of killing fish no matter how careful, and we don't want to regulate ourselves out of a sport all together. All we need is some bunny-hugger-peta-type with a bunch of cash doing a study on bucktail hooking mortality.
My opinion is educate, don't regulate. You won't see me keep a musky unless I am 100% sure that it will settle the Louie Spray argument once and for all, but the reality of it is, some folks will, and by law they have the right (unfortunately). I hae seen the term "Golden Cow" thrown out there for muskies and I have to agree, so people do take it too far. I have a degree in fisheries management, and have learned a bit about the whole food web and nutrients cycle and all that good stuff ( I am not claiming to be an expert), and biologically speaking, there ARE good reasons to kill a large fish, because they become basically a stopping point for nutrients that are no-longer available to the system. BUT if the fish is removed, instead of being allowed to die and decompose, this can be bad too, because said nutrients are no longer available. It's a complex issue, and while I agree that Mr pontoon is doing a great disservice to the fishery, I can't agree with no-harvest at all. What happens when you over manage the fishery for big fish, and you can't stock little ones becasue the super-tankers suck the fingerlings down like spaghetti? Laugh if you want, it can happen. Any healthy lake system is based on a give and take economy, just like Minnesota's ridiculously large deer herds, no predaters = Bad! In the case of muskies, people are the predators.
Ok, enough rambling | |
| | |
| Why not just use what Illinois has in place for more than three years as the same language you would propose in MN. The IL reg is quick strike on any live over 8 inches. The actual reg is located on-line at http://dnr.state.il.us/fish/digest/digest.pdf | |
| | |
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | jclymer,
I wasn't intending to be critical of you and hope you didn't take my comments that way. I WAS pointing out that there are issues on waters in Minnesota very much like we have in Wisconsin, and that those issues will eventually command some sort of action if the trophy potential of waters like Mille Lacs is to be preserved. If one was to read posts elsewhere by a few MN and Canadian based muskie 'anglers', one would think MN experiences NO harvest of Muskies whatsoever. and yet, behold! The same people accused of uneducated and unnecessary harvest---the average guy who goes out on MN water armed with a single hook rig or 'trolling' on a pontoon and doesn't know any better--- is a problem on Mille Lacs. As in any program, the first step is to admit there is a problem.
By posting that this problem exists, you HAVE done something positive; a discussion of the issues may just lead to positive action.
I don't think there's any question that single hook rigs kill fish. Circle hooks are better, but still are unnecessarily dangerous to the fish. Quick Strike rigs are the way to go, and if all that needs to be done is get those on that launch with some CPR material, that won't require more regulation.
Mike Roberts put that Q&A together during a VERY extensive project he and Norm Wild undertook to get the limit on Pelican Lake here in Oneida County WI raised to 50". I worked with them on that effort some, and am pleased to report that this spring when muskie season opens here, Pelican will sport a brand new 50"size limit thanks to Mike and Norm. A few concerned folks got together and worked for change, and in this case won the day. Several others who are regulars here have worked toward similar goals and have been successful despite our ridiculously complicated advisory system the DNR must deal with in order to make management changes.
Wisconsin has a much broader history with Muskies than Minnesota, so we have experienced the complete timeline of muskie management. The beginning of the CPR mentality took hold here in the early to mid 80's, and we've made huge strides toward improved trophy opportunities as a result. It's getting better every day, thanks in part to muskie conservation groups and in part to enlightened management and the willingness to enter into the slippery slope landscape of engaging the public some of our fisheries managers across the state have exhibited.
We are working here in Wisconsin to increase some waters to 54", some to 45", and some to 50". One water at a time backed by the full support of the local fisheries managers and our state DNR, and for good reason. We tried to get it done with a 50" limit on a large group of lakes and rivers, and failed miserably because educating the necessary number of people to get that regulation passed was not feasible. To be honest, we got our fanny handed to us on that first attempt.
Bottom lining it, I believe that the muskie community is delighted to see the muskies in 47 water bodies in Minnesota protected to 48". Now local issues can and should be addressed, and that by those who know those issues best and can work within the social framework of the community to effect change.
There are several folks over there who you can count on to try. That's the way it alway is it seems, a couple folks have the drive and make the time to represent the hopes and trophy desires of the rest of us. I recognize that, and applaud those people for the work past and future. I just wish more of the folks who are quick to the critical and even faster to the attack on this medium would step into the fray a bit more. Their participation adds power.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now a Rant!:
I've been thinking this over a little, wanting to make a point to the radical element on either side of the CPR issue. This has nothing to do with Minnesota or any place in specific. I'm just weary of the fringe elements pounding the virtual table and name calling while insulting the many who HAVE stepped up, all the while hiding behind the computer monitor and accomplishing nothing. All of us are in this together, for better or worse, and though we might have differing viewpoints on how to accomplish our goals, the fact you don't necessarily agree with one angler's view doesn't empower you to behave like a rude, unkempt punk. If the desire to accomplish trophy management is real enough for those individuals, one might think think they would be present at the meetings with the MNDNR, WIDNR, MNR, and with the public trying to effect change instead of roundly insulting those who were. I would have expected such stout supporters of trophy Muskie management to be at the recent Symposium, learning what it takes to get things done locally and on a North America wide basis. I would have expected to see those names at the round table discussions, the lake association meetings, the DNR/MNR offices near the waters they fish, and front and center working toward their goals even IF those goals are at the extreme fringe. Even if one is proven to be misguided in the end, working very hard to accomplish an end goal of better trophy management is far more laudable than sitting on the fringes spewing personal insults and obscenities. I challenge those who have taken that path---you know who you are--- to actually channel that energy in order to accomplish better trophy management in your area. If not, then you have no stake in the grand scheme, and IMHO, you should just plain shut your piehole and go fishing. | |
| | |
| Steve good rant!!!
based on the turnout we get at publicly held dnr meetings here in Minn,,Minn muskie anglers dont deserve the fishery we have, Thank god for the MN dnr,,,"oh wait a minute" in most of these waters god didnt put em in the dnr did | |
| | |
| Here's a fact I heard directly from someone who makes their living in the muskie world, Kimm at the Medina show. The last DNR samples and population estimates on the Mille Lacs population (using as an example and related to a post from last week) the pop in the 132k lake is around 5,000 muskies. I was floored by this, based on stocking per acre ratios, but considering the source I know it is legit. So much for the fish per acre or two ratio, eh? You begin to think about the number of days a multi-line operation(s) is out, potential "kept" harvest, and it is an issue. A big issue.
That is why the guides/anglers releasing monsters (they jump in 40 degree water to steer them on their way to a good release), passion around pontoon operations, "thump or not to thump" conversations, etc. all exist. That's why management is critical and 12 sucker/single hook operations is alarming, to say the least. Still, what they do is within the letter of the law. Bottom line it is not illegal, unless we as muskie purists make change happen. That's why all that's done is so impressive. Many people, AWH comes to mind for me, were encouraging emails to the Minn DNR a couple months ago on the 48 inch reg, so I sent one, and got a nice reply back from Backstrom at the DNR. Proved to me that every voice does count. Not patting myself on the back, but it may, just may have helped.
I like the quick strike concept being mandatory for live bait rigs over "X" inches. My two cents......should we stop at 8 or 10 inches? What about the other exocids? Many of us often target pike and big 'eyes too and are not 100% muskie anglers, so as long as it's out there is a suggestion, why not work to enact regulations that protect more than just the muskie? Anything over 6 inches? Just throwing it out there.....
Fun stuff, going to to a Muskies Inc banquet this weekend in the TC, will throw the topic around.
Chris | |
| | |
| How far up The Mississippi River do they go?
All the way to Bemidgi, I hope!
Any increase across the board is a good thing in my opinion.
I would love to also see a harvest stamp that was talked about once. You buy a stamp for $50 and you get to keep one a year, just for people who might catch that "fish of a lifetime". If the money went directly to stocking, I'd pay the $50 anyway.
What happens if you have a sub-legal fish go belly up? Do you have to give it the deep six, or what?
Beav | |
| | |
Posts: 85
| Sorry, that was me with the last post, didn't realize I wasn't logged in as a "guest".
I'm sure the 5000 pop in Mille Lacs will raise eyebrows, as it did mine. I thought of it this way....ever see Jonesi, Hammernick, Ronnestrand, Baldy, Tauchen etc trolling planers from Red Door to Isle? Heck no! Fish are related to structure, and most this particular lake is void of structure. Same would apply to Green Bay for example. North end of ML is miles long, but the productive water is a strip across it, not very wide, not very many square acres.
The proverbial phrase of "shooting fish in a barrel" comes to mind, Lacs is a barrel and the fish, as Aerosmith would say the muskies are "Livin' on the Edge"!
Chris
Edited by Chris H 2/20/2007 7:13 PM
| |
| |
|
MN 2007 Musky Reg's change!!