|
|
Posts: 331
Location: Stevens Point, Wisconsin |
FYI,
Would be a great step FWD by WI DNR is this goes through! IMHO
By Jim Lee
Gannett Wisconsin Newspapers
MADISON -- Quick-strike rigs would be required of most musky anglers using live bait under a fishing regulation change proposed by the Department of Natural Resources.
Musky anglers will vote on the proposal, along with several others affecting their sport, during this spring’s statewide fish and wildlife rules hearings set for 7 p.m. on April 16 in each county.
A favorite technique of musky anglers -- particularly in autumn -- is to trail a large sucker behind their boat while casting artificial lures. In the past, the traditional method would be to attach the bait to a single hook inserted in its mouth.
When a musky attacked the bait, anglers often waited up to a half-hour for the musky to swallow the bait so a proper hook set could be obtained. This often resulted in a musky that could not be released with a favorable certainty of survival.
Quick-strike rigs, which have become increasingly popular, typically contain a single hook inserted in the suckers mouth, along with a trailing treble hook attached to the sucker's back. Thus when a musky strikes the bait, there is a good chance an immediate hook set will be successful and the odds improved that a musky can be safely released if desired.
The proposal, which would require all anglers to use a quick-strike rig when using live bait larger than eight inches, is among 25 potential fishing regulation changes to be voted on, including:
-- Extend the musky fishing season in the southern zone until Dec. 31. The boundary between the southern and northern zones is Highway 10. This change would prolong the musky fishing season on Lake Winnebago and most associated lakes from the current Nov. 30 ending.
-- Eliminate current restriction that places a 36-inch maximum on landing net openings. The change is sought by musky and salmon anglers.
-- Increase the minimum length limit for muskies caught on the St. Louis River and St. Louis Bay in Douglas County to 50 inches.
-- Increase the minimum length limit for muskies caught in connecting waters to Madison lakes to 45 inches.
-- Change trout and walleye bag and length limits on Keyes Lake, Florence County in an attempt to reduce the smelt population.
-- Remove five miles of the Prairie River (from R&H Road to Highway 17) in Lincoln County from Category 5 to Category 4 at the request of local anglers.
-- Establish a 14 to 18-inch protected slot for bass on Mission Lake in Marathon County.
-- Reduce the daily walleye bag limit on Butternut Lake in Price County to one fish more than 14 inches.
-- Change the northern pike regulations on Crystal Lake, Sheboygan County, to no minimum length with a five-fish daily limit.
-- Require a background check on applicants for angler education instructor, similar to what is required of hunter, boating, ATV and snowmobile safety instructors. In those fields where a background check is currently required, about 19 applicants annually fail, according to the DNR.
The Conservation Congress has submitted proposals for fishing rule changes, including:
-- Raise the minimum size on angler-harvested muskies on the Wisconsin River in Lincoln County between Kings Dam and Pride Dam to 40 inches.
-- Close the catfish fishing season on the Winnebago system from Dec. 1 to April 1.
-- Change northern pike regulations on the Winnebago system to allow the taking of two pike daily, with one larger than 26 inches. Current regulations allow two fish with a 26-inch minimum size.
Prior to the voting on fish and game rule changes, hearing attendees will vote on delegates to the Conservation Congress from their county.
All voting will be by electronic ballots. No hand counts will be taken.
Those registering for the hearing will be given a white ballot for DNR rule change proposals and a blue ballot for Congress questions. Only pencils may be used to mark ballots. Only those registering at a hearing site will be allowed to vote.
Citizens may also introduce resolutions that can be voted on in their county. If acted on favorably, those issues may become statewide ballot items at future hearings.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2068
Location: Appleton,WI | I believe these are some steps forward for the WI DNR and am excited to see a few changes. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1270
| It sounds like this law would have as much gray area as the current "position fishing" law. The last thing we need is another law! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I'd vote for the new quick strike regulation. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 107
Location: milwaukee | I'd also vote 'yes' for the quick-strike reg. Based on what I read here, the guys that have been perfecting circle hook (not 'single', 'circle') techniques will be able to continue on. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 299
Location: Nowheresville, MN | "Eliminate current restriction that places a 36-inch maximum on landing net openings. The change is sought by musky and salmon anglers."
What?? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Didn't know that, eh? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8781
| So technically a Frabil Big Kahuna is not a legal net??? |
|
| |
|
| Doesn't a cradle violate that restriction?
Add me to the list of people who didn't know that regulation existed....or why?
Beav |
|
| |
|
Posts: 9
| I am for most of these chages including quick strike rigs, going to higher size limits for muskies in Wisconsin on certain lakes is always a good thing and extending the musky season in the southern part of the state.
I would also like to find out how I would go about getting a higher size limit on muskies on Silver Lake in Kenosha county and have that on the voting as well this year. Thanks in advanced.
Doug Kloet
http://www.muskymagictackle.com |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1270
| As for the 36" opening on landing nets I did not know that nor did the 5 Wardens I asked about it this winter!
I will say it again that there is to much gray area in the proposed law.
What constitutes a quick strike rig?
Must the hooks be set immediatly?
If so what is considered immediatly?
Does this also pertain to ice fishing?
Does a 9" night crawler now have to be on a quick strike rig?
How does a circle hook fit into this regulation? Even though they are not tha popular in musky fishing circle hooks are gaining popularity in catfihing circles.
Education is the key to this, not a new law. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1270
| The Stowmaster musky net would not be legal either!
Like I said when I first heard of this "relaxing" of the size restriction on landing nets I asked every Warden I knew and saw at the shows and none of them knew there was any limit and they all said that they were not going to be writing tickets wether the limit changed or not! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8781
| Education will not solve the problem of the guys out there who use single hook sucker rigs, let the fish swallow the hook, and then just cut the leader thinking that
A. the hook will dissolve
B. the fish swam off therefore it is fine
You can try to educate people, but the ones who are doing it will continue to do so because that's what they always did, and they will not believe that the fish die because they see them swim off with their own eyes. In this case the only way is to just outlaw single hook rigs. I don't think there's much gray area in a law that states "when using live bait over 8 inches a quickstrike rig must be used."
Can a fish swallow a quickstrike rig? Certainly, if you let it. But the rig ittself is designed to be used in a way that doesn't allow that to happen. When the fish takes the sucker you set the hook.
As for circle hooks? I don't se that becoming an issue as long as the 8" rule applies.
Edited by esoxaddict 3/19/2007 12:38 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1270
| So does my 9" night crawler now have to be on a quick strike rig?
What is the purpose of requiring a quick strike rig if the hook does not have to be set immediatly? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | The point of a quick strike IS to have 'quick' hookset. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1270
| Sworrall, I agree with you and I only use quick strike rigs but my point is that unless the law is written a lot more specific that that it is above this law would be so full of gray area that enforcement could be a nightmare! I don't think that any of us want another law written like the position fishing law. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | The rule change is designed to end single hook, J style swallow rig use. Education as to what a Quick Strike rig is about will be paramount. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1270
| Sworrall, Not trying to argue but since no one will answer my simple question about a 9" night crawler I will assume that no one knows for sure. This tells me that nobody really knows the particulars of this proposed law. As I said before it sounds liek a lot of gray area. |
|
| |
|
| About time, larger than 8 inch live bait as stated |
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| Im still not understanding the 36 inch maximum on the net, are they even sure they dont mean a 36 inch minimum on the opening of the net?
Mr Musky |
|
| |
|
Location: The Yahara Chain | reelman - 3/19/2007 4:17 PM
Sworrall, Not trying to argue but since no one will answer my simple question about a 9" night crawler I will assume that no one knows for sure. This tells me that nobody really knows the particulars of this proposed law. As I said before it sounds liek a lot of gray area.
Are you serious? I don't think anybody is going to care how big your night crawler is. I will bet my last nickel on the fact that a warden will never measure a night crawler.
The purpose of the law would be to help protect the resource. J hooks that are swallowed kill the fish. If it means that circle hooks that are swallowed can't be used, so be it. Quick strikes are a much safer method. Everybody that supports C and R should support this. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | The obvious intent is Live Bait used for MUSKIES. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Do we know if the way Musy Time has presented it is the way it will be brought up at the hearings? Not criticizing Musky Time for posting (thanks for doing so!!), but it looks like that is what was printed in the newspaper, and it may not be how it is written for a proposed law. Anyone know?
One other thing....I think if you have a ton of questions, you should attend one of the hearings and you can voice your opinions and get the questions you want answered.
Edited by Pointerpride102 3/19/2007 6:01 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 52
| I'm not for any new laws myself but the educational factor of this might make the wardens work a lighter. I think that although the rigs work, it's simply going too far. What do you do if you are around sturgeon? I think they use big single hooks on them and there are, for example, sturgeon in some of our musky waters. Would this apply to Native Americans as well in the spring who use set-lines and single hooks?
I've used circle hooks with great success. But I really think this might be going too far.
Was wondering if the proposed slot limit for pike in northern pike got in? Lake Superior needs it. |
|
| |
|
| If someone wants to kill a fish, they'll find a way to do it. It's not the J hook's fault that people use them the way they do. I use single (non circle) hooks all the time, they are perfect for forage smaller than 8 inches. 99 percent of the shops don't even carry the style hooks anymore. I'm afraid of more laws that are grey. It will affect me and I don't kill fish. I use quick strikes with large suckers always, but not when I'm using a bluegill or a chub and I'm casting them. It's too grey and will cause futher unnecessary contraversy in the future. Wash this one away, it's dangerous.
My suggestion is to spend the same amount of effort educating people on proper morals and more ideal size limits for all species.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1270
| I agree that anybody concerned woith C&R should use quick strike rigs. I do myself. My problem is a law that is written so vaugly that know one knows for sure what it means.
I'm sure when the position fishing law was written it was clearly to prohibit trolling, but it has morphed into 100 different meanings depending on which Warden you talk to. I would not be opposed to this law IF it was clearly written to pertain to muskys only and did not have any gray area. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Here is how the proposed changes are worded and how they will appear on the ballot. These were the musky related changes that I could find. I couldnt fint the 54" proposal for the Green Bay system, but I hope this helps:
(If approved, these proposed rule changes would take effect on April 1, 2008, unless otherwise indicated.)
Question 1: Eliminate Maximum Size Restriction for Landing Nets
Currently, landing nets must be 3 feet in diameter or less in order to be legal. There are many commercially available landing nets available that exceed 3 feet in diameter, particularly for muskellunge and salmon anglers. This proposal would eliminate the size restriction on landing nets and would allow the use of any size net to aid anglers in landing a legally hooked fish. Landing nets of any size are already prohibited for the capture of fish that are not already hooked.
?? Do you favor eliminating the size restriction on landing nets?
Question 2: St. Louis River and St. Louis Bay Muskellunge Regulations
The St. Louis River and St. Louis Bay are large water bodies capable of producing large muskellunge for anglers. Increasing the minimum length limit to 50 inches would help meet proposed goals for 20% of angler caught fish to be larger than 45 inches and 5% larger than 50 inches.
The capacity of these waters to produce meaningful numbers of large muskellunge is currently not being realized. The population is low density, the water body is large and forage is plentiful. Recent angling reports indicate that some fish are reaching the 50-inch mark but more intensive fisheries netting surveys and angler diary reporting show that very few fish are currently larger than 45 inches. A high-quality, low-density population can be maintained without impacts to other fish populations.
Minnesota has already approved and will institute a 50 inch minimum length limit for Minnesota waters of the St. Louis River and St. Louis Bay in 2008. Increasing the minimum length limit to 50” on the Wisconsin side would also maintain consistency between the states. Anglers and law enforcement agents would not have to deal with different regulations depending on what location they fished on these waters.
?? Do you favor increasing the minimum length limit for muskellunge from 40 inches to 50 inches on the St. Louis River and St. Louis Bay, Douglas County, Wisconsin (border water with Minnesota)?
Question 10: Muskellunge Regulation Extension to Madison Lakes Connecting Waters
The current restriction on harvest of muskellunge in lakes Monona, Waubesa, and Wingra is a 45 inch minimum length limit. The fish that frequent and migrate within the Yahara River, Upper Mud Lake, Murphy Creek, and other tributaries are of lakes Monona, Waubesa, and Wingra origins. This regulation provides a consistent level of protection from harvest while fish frequent these waters. The regulation allows fish to recruit into the trophy class consistent within the spirit and intent of the lake regulations.
?? Do you favor increasing the minimum length limit from 34” to 45” for muskellunge in all tributaries to Lakes Monona, Waubesa, and Wingra, including the Yahara River upstream to the Tenney Locks, and Murphy, Nine Springs, Starkweather, and Wingra Creeks?
Question 36: Extension of Southern Zone Muskellunge Season
The objective of this proposal is to gauge public interest in increasing muskellunge fishing opportunity for anglers by lengthening the season from November 30 until December 31.
The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources has greatly expanded the range of muskellunge in Wisconsin by stocking. Originally, the range of muskellunge in Wisconsin was concentrated in north central Wisconsin, waters in the Chippewa River basin, and in the Mississippi River. The expansion of the range has included southern Wisconsin waters and anglers can now enjoy fishing for muskellunge 41 lakes and 4 rivers managed for muskellunge south of Highway 10. Interest in musky fishing has also increased dramatically in recent years and we notice more fishing pressure directed at muskellunge in the fall months right up to the close of the season on November 30. Musky anglers have requested the Department to extend the season, so they can have additional opportunities to pursue muskellunge in the late fall. The Department believes that this species is adequately protected by appropriate regulations in this part of the state, so we do not think this proposal will hurt the populations.
?? Would you favor extending the muskellunge season in the southern Wisconsin zone from November 30 until December 31? The opening date of the season would remain the first Saturday in May.
Question 37: Use of Quick-Strike Rigs When Using Live Bait Larger Than 8 Inches In Total Length
The objective of this proposal is to gauge public interest in requiring the use of “quick-strike” rigs when fishing with large live bait for large predatory fish such as muskellunge. A recent study conducted and published by DNR scientists concluded that when single hooks are used and fish such as musky are allowed to swallow the bait, mortality was more than 80% within one year, even when the line was cut and the fish was released quickly.
Use of live bait for angling of muskellunge is popular in Wisconsin. A traditional method utilizes a large hook through the bait fish’s snout, which requires the muskellunge to swallow the bait prior to hook set. Adult muskellunge (>76 cm; 30 in) were held in lined hatchery ponds and caught while fishing with live bait on 10/0 size single hooks. The leader was cut and the muskellunge was released when hooked in the stomach. Survival was monitored for up to 1 year. No immediate (< 24 h) mortality occurred. However, 22% of hooked muskellunge died within 50 days and 83% died within 1 year. Necropsies revealed extensive trauma to the stomach and other organs from hooks, along with systemic bacterial infections. Highest mortality on both hooked and control fish occurred over winter through spring. This peak mortality may be associated with natural stressors that occur during the spring spawning period. Mortality rates observed in this study are considered unacceptable for trophy management of muskellunge. Although use of live bait for muskellunge is traditional in Wisconsin, terminal tackle such as quick-strike rigs that hook fish in the mouth should enhance the chances a released muskellunge will survive.
A suggestion is to adopt language similar to that used in Illinois:
When using live bait, all live bait in excess of 8 inches in total length shall be rigged with a quick set rig. The hook shall be immediately set upon the strike. A quick set rig is defined as follows: a live bait rig with up to 2 treble hooks attached anywhere on the live bait, with single hooks prohibited.
?? Would you favor requiring use of quick-strike rigs when using live bait larger than 8 inches in total length?
Question 82: Size Limit on Muskellunge on the Wisconsin River
A large number of muskies are being harvested from Lake Mohawksin and the Wisconsin River between Kings Dam and Pride Dam in Northern Lincoln County. At present the size limit is 34”. These fish are being harvested before they reach their peak spawning and growth potential. Allowing these fish to reach 40” prior to harvest will benefit the natural reproduction and size ratio of muskies on the water stated above.
?? Would you support a 40” size limit on muskellunge on the Wisconsin River between Kings Dam and Pride Dam in Northern Lincoln County? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1270
| Don't a lot of quick strike rigs have a single hook on the front of the rig? As I read it those rigs would be illegal.
What constitutes "immediatly set upon the strike"? Will you need to keep the rod in your hand to set it immediatly or can you have it in a rod holder and take 5 or 10 seconds to pick up the rod and set the hook? If 5 or 10 seconds is OK what about 30 seconds or a minute?
Does this mean that if you are using a bait over 8" ice fishing you would need to have the tip-ups right next to you so that you could "immediatly set the hook upon strike"?
As I have asked many times before, does this mean that I need to rig a 9" night crawler on a quick strike rig? Traditional crawler harnesses use single hooks and as I read it would be illegal if this law passed. And a 9" crawler is not as big as you think, often times after being trolled for a bit a crawler can be 12"+.
AGAIN I WILL STATE THAT THERE IS WAY TO MUCH GRAY AREA IN THIS LAW. ENFORCEMENT WOULD BE A NIGHTMARE FOR THE WARDENS. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Reelman,
I agree with some of the points that you bring up. There is some gray area. Instead of just saying that this is going to be a useless law, my question to you is how would you write the law so there would be less gray area?
My intent is not to attack you reelman, but with all the complaining about how poor the WI fishery is and how the WI DNR sucks at managent and blah blah blah we need to offer ideas on better wording for things or other ideas. To gripe and complain about everything and not offer CONSTRUCTIVE suggestions will get absolutely nothing done and just burn bridges with the people in the DNR.
So do you re-write the law to say just live minnows/suckers that reach 9 inches? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Let me try to make understanding this a bit easier...
The idea is to take out single hook sucker rigs.
If this passes I don't expect enforcement to be much of an issue unless you are using one. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1270
| I understand that the idea is to try to get rid of single hooks for muskys but the way it's written an over zelous Warden could write out tickets for a bunch of different things. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 52
| Might really be an all-or-nothing situation. Go all the way and forget the 8-inch limit so that would take care of that grey area and measuring suckers when you buy them. I think the Chip Study had some information about this as well.
Right now I think education should continue first and see how that goes. |
|
| |
|
Location: The Yahara Chain | Pointer, thanks for digging that up. You couldn't find the Green Bay 54" proposal because it is not officially on the ballot, the process was started to late. The 54" Green Bay proposal will have to entered by somebody at each meeting, it will be more or less a "write in" proposal. AFTER it passes it would probably go into effect in 2008.
"The objective of this proposal is to gauge public interest in requiring the use of “quick-strike” rigs when fishing with large live bait for large predatory fish such as muskellunge."
I take the first sentance to mean that they are feeling the public out and it really isn't a final law. We as concerned musky anglers should vote for the "quick set" rigs. If this gets voted down J hooks will be here to stay.
Justin Gaiche - 3/19/2007 6:57 PM
If someone wants to kill a fish, they'll find a way to do it. It's not the J hook's fault that people use them the way they do. I use single (non circle) hooks all the time, they are perfect for forage smaller than 8 inches.
Justin the problem is a lot of the people that are using the J hooks are not intending to kill the fish. They don't realize that it kills the fish. They gut hook it and release it. It swims away strong and they think they have released a healthy fish, not realizing that they tore a hole in the fishes stomach and given it a death sentenace. You can still use them when you are using forage smaller than eight inches. I fail to see how this law would have an adverse effect on your type of fishing.
I see so many people complaining about the native spearing, which none of us can ever change. That ship has sailed, The Supreme Court has spoken. IMO more fish are killed by swallow rigs than die by the spear. We now have a chance to eliminate a proven kill method. We as concerned musky anglers need to unite and VOTE for this proposal. It is for the good of the resource. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 299
Location: Nowheresville, MN | reelman - 3/19/2007 9:24 PM
Don't a lot of quick strike rigs have a single hook on the front of the rig? As I read it those rigs would be illegal.
10-4 Watson. They don't work worth a flip anyway.
reelman - 3/19/2007 9:24 PM
Does this mean that if you are using a bait over 8" ice fishing you would need to have the tip-ups right next to you so that you could "immediatly set the hook upon strike"?
Again, great induction. Show me a "LIVE" bait over 8" that won't spring off a tip-up as soon as you set it and I'll come and drill your holes. Large Pike are just as important as muskies. Remember Swedish hooks?
As far as your Enzyte induced creepy-crawly, when a google eye strikes your harness do you stop the boat, pull out a samich, and allow the fish to fully appreciate the delectableness of said creepy-crawly? Or is the hook set immediately by default do to the forward momentum?
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8781
| Bytor - 3/19/2007 5:35 PM
Are you serious? I don't think anybody is going to care how big your night crawler is....
Hmmm
Don't get around much do 'ya Troy?
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1270
| I use a lot of minnows over 8" for ice fishing for pike. Give me a great big Golden Shiner, 10" sucker, or 10" live smelt anyday for northern fishing. I can set my tip-ups to not trip with these minnows on. And most of the fish I catch are smaller (30") eaters, not monsters on these big baits. The monsters I let go. If this law were enacted I would have to keep my tip-ups right next to me so that I could "immediatly set the hook"
As for my Enzyte induced creepy crawlers, I prefer Viagra!, I use single hooks as do most of the walleye guys I know. According to this law I would have to switch to treble hooks just to be legal. Trebles will do more damage than a single hook will. And what about the 10 year old kid fishing with a crawler and a bobber? Technically he would have to be using treble hooks and set the hook immediatly.
Like I said I am not nesseccarily opposed to a law like this but it has to be worded much more precisly. I support our Wardens but I hate any law that's enforcement is "up to the discretion of the Warden", I would sooner have the law written out in black and white so there is no mis-understandings. I would bet that the Wardens would also prefer that the laws be written without any wiggle room or room for mis-interpetation.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | NO.
Bytor is correct, this proposal is to gauge the public support for the rule change.
This rule would be eventually written and directed specifically to Muskie angling with Live bait. Forget the Ice application and walleye/panfish guys; no effect there.
The new rule would be written carefully to avoid misinterpretation. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 189
Location: Barrington, Il | For those of you pushing education , how are you going to do it. The people using single hook swallow rigs don't read Musky Hunter or belong to Muskies,Inc. They don't go to the musky message boards. They use single hooks because that is what they have always used and always will. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | I educated my roommate who is not a big musky fisherman. His uncle is and was still using single hook rigs. I told him how the single hook rigs worked and he said he would stop using it. |
|
| |
|
| Not mentioning any names here but I know a guide who still continues to use single hooks today! I asked him why and he said it puts fish in the boat for his clients and that's all that mattered. Now his clients who many of them probably are first timers are going to think this is an accepted method and that's how their going to do it. Hands down it needs to be outlawed!
Mr Musky |
|
| |
|
Posts: 285
Location: NE Wisconsin | Question 37 on page 27 of the spring questionaire, is about the use of quick set rigs. If you look to the top of the page, it is NOT a proposed rule change, BUT an advisory question, meaning the DNR, namely the Secretary, from what I hear, is looking for public input on the question. No matter what the results are this year, it will not be a rule change next year!!!!
http://dnr.wi.gov/org/nrboard/congress/springhearings/
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8781
| Mr Musky -- I know of one who uses circle hooks for the same reason...
As much as I like to believe people will just "do the right thing" and that we don't need more laws?? Experience has shown me otherwise. People will do whatever they feel they can get away with unless the penalty for being caught doing it outweighs the benefit of doing it.
Add in those who you will never convince because they have released gut hooked muskies and watched them swim off, the "just a fish" crowd who doesn't care of they kill one or not and just want to catch them any way possible?
This law, if passed, would be good for the resource. They have the same law in IL and it hasn't caused any mass confusion. Guys aren't getting tickets fishing with 8-1/16" nightcrawlers, nobody is scrambling to buy 7" suckers so they can use single hook rigs. People stopped buying the single hook rigs, and when that happened the retailers stopped keeping them in their inventory...
|
|
| |
|
| Musky Magic,
Here are the guidelines for submitting proposals.
http://dnr.wi.gov/org/nrboard/congress/springhearings/
|
|
| |
|
| Also the 54 inch limit for Green Bay is looking for more "authors" for each county. This site has a list of people who will bring this topic up at their counties meeting.
http://www.titletownmuskiesinc.org/
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| Esox Addict, I dont believe alot of people are still using single hooks, 90 percent of musky fisherman who truly care for the fish wouldn't even think about using a single "J hook" kill rig. We treat them like fragile glass once in our hands! It's the other ten percent that I was talking about that we need to put a stop too. And I'd say 5 % are new people to the sport and need more education and the other 5 percent are the old generation musky fisherman that want to remain blind to all the studies and will never change. A LAW CHANGE WILL TAKE CARE OF THESE 10 PERCENT and I could be very far off percentage wise I dont know it was a logical guess.
Any thoughts?
Mr Musky |
|
| |
|
Location: Lake Tomahawk, WI | I hope they ban the single hook rig. Yeah, it's more regulations. Yeah, not a high percent of muskie fishermen use them.
But...
This fall was the first time I've guided late into the year, only had 4 days in mid-October before returning to Montana. On the 3 lakes I fished, observed 3 groups shore fishing using single hook rigs. A buddy talked to them the day before I was there, and 2 of the groups had a total of 7 fish from one lake (gullet hooked/cut leaders/swam away fine/turtles and eagles eating like kings). Quick strikes snag up too much when used in shore fishing situations, and would help eliminate this problem. Education is great, but this would be the ultimate form of it.
Maybe at the spring hearings we can hear from locals standing up and saying how this regulation will kill tourism in Vilas/Oneida just like they said a 50" size limit would.
JS |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Right on Sloan, I agree 100% |
|
| |
|
Posts: 691
Location: nationwide | Just as a note . . . . . . if you see a group of people shorefishing do not assume they are using single "J" hooks.
Not everybody who shorefishes uses "J" hooks, or single circle hook rigs either.
Corey Meyer |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8781
| I agree that there aren't great numbers of people using single hook rigs. But those who are using them are killing muskies whether they choose to believe it or not. And that's why I believe we need some legislation here, because education will only go so far. Even if its only 2% of musky anglers and only 25% of the fish they catch die, add it up and its significant.
As for getting the necessary suport, all we need to do is make our voices heard in an intelligent and non threatening fashion. It's cheaper to avoid killing a musky than it is to stock a new one. But its cheaper still to do nothing at all, which is exactly what will get done if we don't show our support for these sorts of things.
|
|
| |
|
| Corey,
I suppose I shouldn't assume ALL who shorefish use single hook rigs. But the vast majority of those I run into do indeed use them. I've hooked several of their rigs while rowtrolling and looked inside their boats at the landings and baitshops. Over here in Vilas/Oneida single hooks for shore fishing are the rule rather than the exception.
JS |
|
| |
Outdoors: Musky anglers consider quick-strike