|
|
Posts: 64
Location: st clair shores, MI | Keeping muskies is no crime
Legal catches no threat to fish survival
August 23, 2007
A dozen readers e-mailed or called in with strenuous objections to a story we ran Sunday about a Lake St. Clair record muskellunge that was caught during a fishing tournament and kept for mounting.
All criticized the anglers who caught the 41-pound, 14 -ounce fish, arguing that every muskellunge should be released and muskellunge tournaments should be outlawed. From the tone of the e-mail you'd think the people who kept the muskie had committed a criminal act.
Advertisement
While I'm not a fan of fishing tournaments and am an enthusiastic proponent of catch-and-release, I'll have to disagree with those correspondents on this one.
First, it's legal to kill a muskie 42 inches or over in Michigan. Anglers who don't like that need to recruit other anglers for a campaign to get it changed by the Natural Resources Commission.
Second, most Lake St. Clair muskellunge tournaments are catch-and-release. The few catch-and-kill events still around allow anglers to weigh in only fish that exceed a given size and which are bigger than fish already on the leader board. That means that the handful that are killed have no effect whatsoever on the muskie population.
Third, the vast majority of muskies killed in Lake St. Clair aren't caught in muskellunge tournaments but by casual anglers who hook one incidentally while fishing for bass, walleyes, perch or whatever else they can catch.
Biologically, there's no reason not to hold fishing tournaments as long as they don't harm the resource. And while I'm loathe to admit it, there's no biological reason for people not to kill the occasional muskellunge for food or mounting.
As for the activities of the Michigan Ontario Muskie Club, Mike Thomas, a fisheries biologist at the Department of Natural Resources research laboratory on Lake St. Clair, credits that organization, which holds most of the tournaments, with being the prime mover in creating today's magnificent muskellunge population.
MOMC pushed hard to increase legal size limits on muskellunge over several decades. And MOMC initiated the catch-and-release ethic that now sees nearly every fish caught by its members put back, an example that is spreading to anglers who aren't MOMC members.
"There's lots of good evidence that catch-and-release has created this fishery," Thomas said. "I give the muskie club a tremendous amount of credit. ... They've even built their own (tanks) so they can keep fish alive, weigh them and then release them. So if they kill a few fish for trophies, it doesn't upset me," he said.
Thomas added, "Some of the people who are the most vocal about catch-and-release don't recognize, or don't want to recognize, that some of the fish they catch die after they're released."
I agree with the reader's argument that the minimum size limit for muskellunge should be raised, although not to the 48-52 inches they suggest. I think 46 inches would be a good limit, because muskies reach 25 pounds at about 46 inches and that's a true trophy fish.
But Thomas said he isn't sure that raising the muskellunge size limit would be a good idea.
"I know a lot of the muskellunge anglers would like that, but we manage Lake St. Clair for multiple species, bass and perch and walleyes as well as muskellunge. We already have so many big muskies that it's not out of the realm of possibility that they are already impacting the perch population, and more big muskies could impact other species," he said.
I like to release exceptionally large fish because I want to see their genes passed on to future generations. But I also know that while they might have the proven ability to reach large size, many of them are also near the end of their lifespan and add little, if anything, to the overall welfare of their species. There aren't any mounted fish or animals in our house, because I prefer memories to cadavers.
You rarely hear anyone complain about anglers keeping walleyes. Face it -- if walleyes didn't taste good, few anglers would fish for them. But despite nearly 100 percent catch-and-keep, walleye fishing continues to be good to fabulous year after year.
Realistically, there's no reason not to kill a few fish to eat (or mount) from any legal gamefish species. What we need to teach other anglers and our kids is that bag limits are just that, limits and not targets. Even though the law says you can take X number of fish home, why do it if you're not going to eat them within a couple of days? Freshly caught fish are great, but if you're going to eat frozen fish, it's a lot cheaper and easier to buy some. The same is true for mounting fish. While I can understand wanting to mount a record fish like that 41-pounder, less-exceptional fish can be measured, released and then duplicated with fiberglass replicas.
Meanwhile, we all need to get a grip and recognize that there's little profit in playing holier-than-thou, whether the subject is Lake St. Clair muskies, Lake Erie bass or Au Sable River trout.
. | |
| | |
Posts: 1530
| SAD part is the lake is 2/3rds canadian. the guys on the south shore dont want weigh in tourneys at the level it is today. cant their be a little respect for this. canada is another country. yes its great to see cpr ethics improving but theres a long way to go. unfortunately the free press writer is biased and tainted. he cant even get the solid facts. vhs has done a bad number. we lost thousands of 35-45 inch muskys. so if we continue to over harvest there will be a huge whole in trophy class muskys. theres several tournies held each season that dictate musky to be brought in and weighed,,, then released??? | |
| | |
| Yes, catch and release education can never be under estimated in a historical catch and kill area of MI. Not to mention the numbers of gaffs and airborn releases on LSC. Keep us posted on the impact of VHS! | |
| | |
Posts: 32955
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I don't see any bias in that article, what I see is editorial opinion and some material to back that opinion with facts. He provides credits for the story and sources of information, and repeatedly offers his take, which is strong to the CPR end of things. This is a well written piece dealing with the reality of the situation.
This is a very well written piece offering a carefully thought out and well presented position. If you read the article and come away with ANY negative feelings about the author's CPR ethics, you didn't read very carefully. | |
| | |
| I'd say I hope the guy enjoys his mount. I personally will never fault a fisherman who keeps any Muskie he caught legally, as he's within his rights to do so. I strongly doubt I would ever keep one myself, unless it was clearly the World Record. That fish would be kept just to set that record straight once and for all.
There are some people who believe every single Muskie should be released. There are some that think harvesting smaller fish may actually benefit the resource, and there are people like myself who think that if a person wants to keep a fish he has a legal right to keep, he should be able to do so without being overly pressured to release it. It would be very difficult to change the minds of any of these types of individuals into all agreeing on one principal, no matter which belief it was.
There were many large Muskies being removed from a lake in West Central Minnesota, and everyone knew about it. People got involved, and made that lake the first catch & release only lake in the State. That would be a more proactive approach to take. I wouldn't expect any changes to be made by calling or e-mailing the newspaper, as mentioned in the story above. I would bet that those same people could have done more to make their point by way of petitions and educating others about the benefits of catch & release than by complaining to the newspaper about it. Just my $0.02. | |
| | |
Posts: 1430
Location: Eastern Ontario | Steve you must understand that George ( woodieb8 ) is greatly involved in trying to improved the conditions of lake St-Clair. He has been for years, unfortunately he's on the Canadian side where things have improved immensely in the last 10 years. I guess everything was an improvement except the 2 rod rule as that is just joining the MI poachers and will do nothing to improve conditions.
If George says the writer is biased and not stating the real facts then that's what it is.
I know for a fact that this statement is false " Third, the vast majority of muskies killed in Lake St. Clair aren't caught in muskellunge tournaments but by casual anglers who hook one incidentally while fishing for bass, walleyes, perch or whatever else they can catch. " It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know it's the majority of MI charter boats with most taking part of those kill tournaments as well. They are out there every day. Every where else it's Johnny bass/walleye killing the majority of muskies.
| |
| | |
Posts: 32955
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | The writer spoke to a fisheries biologist at the Natural Resources Lab on the lake. He wrote:
'While I'm not a fan of fishing tournaments and am an enthusiastic proponent of catch-and-release,'
'I like to release exceptionally large fish because I want to see their genes passed on to future generations. But I also know that while they might have the proven ability to reach large size, many of them are also near the end of their lifespan and add little, if anything, to the overall welfare of their species. There aren't any mounted fish or animals in our house, because I prefer memories to cadavers.'
'Freshly caught fish are great, but if you're going to eat frozen fish, it's a lot cheaper and easier to buy some. The same is true for mounting fish. While I can understand wanting to mount a record fish like that 41-pounder, less-exceptional fish can be measured, released and then duplicated with fiberglass replicas.'
'Realistically, there's no reason not to kill a few fish to eat (or mount) from any legal gamefish species. What we need to teach other anglers and our kids is that bag limits are just that, limits and not targets'
'Meanwhile, we all need to get a grip and recognize that there's little profit in playing holier-than-thou, whether the subject is Lake St. Clair muskies, Lake Erie bass or Au Sable River trout.'
(Worth repeating, IMHO....)
'Meanwhile, we all need to get a grip and recognize that there's little profit in playing holier-than-thou, whether the subject is Lake St. Clair muskies, Lake Erie bass or Au Sable River trout.'
Not at all biased; in fact VERY supportive of CPR. The rest of the information discussed is basically quoted from the fisheries biologist, and I see no claim of incorrect infromation or bias accredited to that source.
The last statement is one to take to heart for anyone wishing to improve CPR there or anywhere.
I applaud George for his efforts, and would offer editorial support of that effort here. But one has to be careful with the facts and how they are presented when one decides to take an individual or group to task; sometimes a person or group that WAS a supporter and friend becomes either disinterested or joins the opposition in reaction.
| |
| | |
| "What we need to teach other anglers and our kids is that bag limits are just that, limits and not targets".
I agree completely. Well said, Steve. As far as getting a replica instead of mounting the actual fish, it would probably be easier to convince people to do this if the cost wasn't higher. The last time I checked, which was a while ago, it cost $12.00 per inch for a fiberglass mount from a reputable taxidermist. If I'm not mistaken, that's a bit higher than a skin mount. I'm sure someone can correct me if I'm wrong on this.
A few years ago, when the cost of a fishing license went up in MN, I heard people state that they were going to "keep every fish they could", as they were "paying for them". I wonder if some of those fishermen were the ones who later complained about not catching as many fish as they used to? | |
| | |
| George is a friend of mind and I respect him as a fishermen and a hisotrian of the legacy of Muskie fishing in Lake St.Clair from yesterday and today. VHS has deleated numbers of Muskies in ST.Clair and I think fishermen, or the average joe, or newspaper writer doesn't understand the ramification that VHS has done or will continue to do in our lakes in Canada, Michigan, or Ohio.
I think that if there is a need to fish and have tournaments that the Big Girls which is the 41# should of been release just to save the intgrity of the strain that is left in St. Clair.(Period)
I am happy for the fishermen that caught the big fish, in my opiniuon he could of taken a picture, got a repoduction from Rick lax, and release this great fish that has made it through such precarious odds with the VHS strain. Does anybody know the percentage rate of mortallity of fish that are caught in warm water?
We need to take a stand as fishermen in any club to educate, protect, and to insure that this strain will be here tomorow as wells as today.
Thanks for reading my friends!! 
Jack (Uncle Niles) | |
| | |
Posts: 32955
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | No one has said George is anything but a great guy. I simply pointed out the article supported CPR pretty strongly, while also recognizing the reality of the current regulations, based on an interview with a fisheries biologist from that area. George was being unfairly critical of someone who's trying to help ( and has the ability to do so IN THE MEDIA) you achieve your goal of better CPR practices. I read that article several times, and see a friend of conservation in the author who 'gets it' as far as what has to happen to effect change over there.
As I read this, some of the Canadian folks don't like the Charters and really don't like tournaments. Work with your Ministry, and see what they can do in negotiation with the Michigan DNR. Work with a writer or two up there, get your vision of what you think the management strategy should be out there in the average guy's line of sight. Keep up the hard work you obviously have been doing, and remember that not everyone shares your vision and goals, and those folks need to be convinced with level headed education, carefully executed PR, and a campaign that wins over those who will make the changes you wish for.
One thing for sure, drawing a line on the debate floor and shouting insults at each other across that line won't get anything done. This author is on your side, for the most part, and was trying hard to point that out. | |
| | |
Posts: 2384
Location: On the X that marks the mucky spot | Ahhh Guys,
Isn't it mandatory for tournaments to get a permit in that state? If so, why not petition the DNR to make C&R mandatory for all muskie tournaments? I doubt that it'd be that tough to accomplish. I know that's the way it is here in MN.
Just a thought. | |
| | |
Posts: 1430
Location: Eastern Ontario | Steve this is the biggest problem with St-Clair which is the same as the St-Lawrence it is part of Canada and USA. We fought for years and hard to get the limit up on the Larry but the charter captains on the NY side had a lot of pull with their DNR and things just could not get done. If it was only for us the Larry would of had a 54 inch limit the same time the O got it. Now the same is happening on St-Clair the Canadian side has moved to a 100% C&R but it's taking a long time for the old guards to chance their skin on the opposite side of the pound. Like mentioned before 2/3 of St-Clair is Canadian and some of the better fishing as well so the charters are coming over and not respecting the 1 rod per angler law so how are they ever going to care for the fishery. And the kill tournaments are 20-30 years behind their time, it's just plain stupid to kill a bunch of fish for a few bucks. Everywhere else they can have C&R tournaments and almost all are released on the spot type and very few transport ones left. So what's so different with MI? The only other kill tournaments today are in Main where a new muskie fishery exist and they are already working on changing to a C&R format thanks to the help from our new Muskies Canada chapter just north of there in New Brunswick.
I'm sure you guys have some fisheries shared by states so you can imagine having the manage a fisheriy with a different country. | |
| | |
| TrophyMuskie - Very well said. Keep up the good work.
Keeping a large Muskie is a very selfish act - legal or not.
Not one bit of good ever comes from keeping a large Muskie. PERIOD.
It's a fact that every large Muskie that is kept is one that will never be caught again by all the kids out there that fish Muskies and are so important to the future of our sport. Putting that fish back gives every kid (and everyone) a better chance.
Just because something is legal does not mean that it's the right thing to do - or that it does not affect the fishery.
I applaud the work that the MN DNR and Muskie Fisherman in Northern Minnesota did to create the C&R only lake. With VHS heading West, there should be more proactive regulations put in place to prepare for the inevitable. | |
| | |
Posts: 32955
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | PERIOD!
This is the sort of rhetoric that alienates many of the very anglers to whom we are trying to teach CPR ethics right out of the chute. No one likes being called names. Education doesn't usually start that way, I don't think. Let's see, I want to convince a fellow who harvests too many fish in my opinion, so I start out by saying:
"Hey, you SELFISH person, don't harvest that 47.5" muskie, the largest you have ever caught, because of MY reasons. You have to do things my way because I say so!!!"
That should work.
Not.
Why is it so hard for some folks to see what it takes to sway public opinion? I truly don't understand why folks think they can acquire significant change in social behavior with a sledgehammer. Sure, us extremists agree that most if not all muskies should be released, but what if you cannot get support for that from a purely biological and scientific point of view on the water on which you are hoping to get regulations changed? What if, indeed, the biologists managing that water actually encourage harvest?
What if just because somethings legal it is not the wrong thing to do? What if there is no real biological effect on the population of muskies from harvest? You need to be sure you are saying what's real, because everyone can read, and everyone can call the fisheries biologist in any area and get the true skinny.
And, even if you CAN get support for change from the local fisheries managers, the huge hurdle of public opinion has to be overcome.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An example of an opposition post, perhaps, to indicate what I mean.
If VHS IS inevitable, why conserve at all? According to some posts here VHS will effectively wipe out the Muskie population wherever it's present. Bonk 'em now, so they don't go to waste rotting and stinking up the waterways. It's just plain stupid and selfish to waste a resource like this. After all, you can't seriously be encouraging wanton waste, can you? I applaud anyone who harvests a Muskie in VHS waters so the fish is not wasted!!
See how offensive that sort of rhetoric is? And, I might add, no more and no less accurate than Guest's post. Both stances can and should be challenged with the facts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If there's support from biologists to get size limits higher, use that support and carefully stated educational materials sticking to facts and avoiding emotion. If there's NO support biologically, be VERY careful to state conservation ethics reasons and gently steer the public your direction. Been there and done that more times than once. | |
| | |
Posts: 8863
| guest - 8/29/2007 12:14 PM
TrophyMuskie - Very well said. Keep up the good work.
Keeping a large Muskie is a very selfish act - legal or not.
Not one bit of good ever comes from keeping a large Muskie. PERIOD.
It's a fact that every large Muskie that is kept is one that will never be caught again by all the kids out there that fish Muskies and are so important to the future of our sport. Putting that fish back gives every kid (and everyone) a better chance.
Just because something is legal does not mean that it's the right thing to do - or that it does not affect the fishery.
I applaud the work that the MN DNR and Muskie Fisherman in Northern Minnesota did to create the C&R only lake. With VHS heading West, there should be more proactive regulations put in place to prepare for the inevitable.
Suppose the kid that catches it wants to keep it?? Is it ok THEN? What if you want to use it to feed your family? Is it ok THEN?
It must be nice to be able to look at the world in terms of black and white, right or wrong, everything in absolutes.
| |
| | |
| Keeping a large Muskie is a very selfish act - legal or not.
Not one bit of good ever comes from keeping a large Muskie. PERIOD.
i understand the passion, and agree with you that proactive regulations are the right course of action.
however, i try not to get too judgmental, if for no other reason than that it's not a very good technique to persuading others.
for example, this last weekend i was telling my brother's father-in-law about Sorno's big tiger catch-and-release. he was amazed that it was released and said that whenever he gets one over 40" he keeps it because it's just so cool to hold and "have" a fish that big (he's primarily a panfisherman but does cast for muskies once in awhile).
i didn't call him selfish and say he's no good - all that would have done is piss him off and not change his views one bit. instead, i talked about replicas and reproduction and how cool it is to choose to release a fish like that. i shared the upside of releasing fish without castigating his current beliefs. it's a slow process, but it convinces people over time.
| |
| | |
| A couple years ago a guy wrote a letter in to Esox Angler, and for whatever reason it's kind of stuck with me. He mentioned that a kid fishing near him happened to catch a fairly decent sized Muskie. It wasn't a fish most of the readers here would think much about, but when you're a little kid, even a 40+ inch fish is truely special. Anyway, according to the letter writer, the kid was going to take the fish to a taxidermist and a few Muskie fishermen nearby bad-mouthed him for keeping that fish, the one Muskie this kid may catch in his lifetime. It angered the gentleman so much that he wrote the letter to EA in frustration about that situation. He mentioned that there are fishermen out there who catch 100+ fish per year, and then chastise an individual for keeping a single Muskie. He felt, as I do, that there was no way that all 100 of said fish would survive being caught and released. There would surely be some delayed mortality. While that number of fish could never be determined, I believe the writer was right. If you think about it, the guy keeping one fish per year may be less detrimental to the fishery than a guy who catches 150 and releases every one. Who knows?
There has to be a "happy medium" between the extremes. Maybe if we all really were extremely concerned about the fish's well being, we'd quit fishing for them entirely and save the fish from going through the stress of being hooked and caught? Is that where we're heading?
For anyone who has seen my posts here over the past few years, you've probably seen my signature at the bottom of every post I make. It is a line taken right from the By-Laws of Muskies Inc., and it is a personal belief of mine. I am all for C&R, but I will never speak bad about anyone who catches a Muskie by legal means and decides they want to keep it. I'm sure I will lose a few fans with that statement, but it is what it is. Thanks.
Edited by Derrys 8/29/2007 2:04 PM
| |
| | |
Location: Contrarian Island | keeping one musky is not going to harm a body of water..now if 100 guys go out and everyone keeps a musky that might do some harm...but c'mon...anyone can purchase a license, they are entitled to keep one musky if they choose to do so...same for the guys who legally hunt trophy deer, bear, moose etc etc, buying a license and doing so legally within the guidelines of whatever state or province dnr rules are set is not going to hurt ...i don't keep muskies, never will, unless maybe it's a state record! but i agree with others on here and Brett says it well...there is a middle ground to all this...
C&R works, even if only 99% of the muskies are released it sure beats what happened decades ago....
go fish.
Edited by MSKY HNR 8/29/2007 2:15 PM
| |
| | |
| When the guy who keeps every Muskie over 40" faces his peers who don't think it is 'cool' to hold and 'have' that fish, they will stop. Being an apologist for that kind of behavior will only reenforce it. | |
| | |
Posts: 32955
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Guest, who exactly are his 'peers'? You?
Who is being an 'apologist'? RECOGNIZE REALITY, and deal with it, like those of us who actually have tried to effect change. Or, sit behind a monitor and anonymously get all pious. Sort of like that wish in one hand thing to me.....
I believe Mike stated he presented another set of options, which is the best first step in the educational process. You can be an anonymous 'make it so' all you want, try it to someone's face and see how effective you are. Folks like you make change harder to effect for the rest of us, and that's a fact. I've BEEN in the trenches getting laws changed for hunting and fishing conservation efforts. Statements like yours were roadblocks to progress, not pathways.
Derrys, HNR, addict, and lambeau have it right. MI has proven that time and time again, as have other conservation minded clubs and groups.
I'm headed over to St Clair this November to actually CAST for muskies with a friend and a buddy of his who is a Charter Captain there who is strong CPR. I'll let you all know what I encounter. | |
| | |
Posts: 8863
| Let's get something straight, just for the record:
I am a C&R advocate, as most of the people on this site are. I don't know that I would ever keep a muskie, unless it died, and it was truly a giant fish. I will do what I can, as always, to educate anglers who may not know any different about the benefits of C&R, the relative rarity of a big muskie, and the time it takes to grow one that big.
I do not expect I will EVER intentionally kill a muskie, unless I am at risk of serious injury (i.e. hooked to a thrashing fish)
That said? Under the right circumstances, I would be very tempted, possibly even persuaded to shoot one in front of some self righteous jerk, just for the satisfaction of knowing I just ruined their day.
Think about that for a minute. Think about the fact that your behavior, your attitude, and the way you come across influences everyone you come in contact with. As others have eluded to, influencing peoples attitudes and behavior is best accomplished by doing so in a positive and constructive way. It's very difficult to convince someone to change their views. It's impossible if they think you're an a**hole. | |
| | |
Posts: 32955
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Leave it to addict to say what I said far more directly. | |
| | |
| That's NOT a fact and you know it. I think the history of C&R for Muskies and the current state of the Muskie range points out exactly who is a roadblock and who is a pathway. | |
| | |
Posts: 32955
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Really? I say it IS a fact, and stand by all my statements. The 'current state' of the muskie range is what, exactly? Ontario lead the way in protecting natural populations on potential trophy waters, IMHO, as a result of what appears to be enlightened Ministry of Natural Resources management. I heard a TON of complaining from Canadians when that happened who were afraid the new laws would chase off Muskie anglers and Walleye anglers from the States who didn't like the new lower limits and slots. Bet they are not complaining now; the fishing in Ontario is obviosly fantastic and the anglers are filling up resorts. Many of Wisconsin's potential trophy waters have been increased steadily to up to 50", despite the antiquated and ridiculous way conservation laws have to change here. We tried to have a LARGE number of lakes upped to 50 and LOST big time...read on for why we lost.
Minnesota has how many trophy waters at 50" or above? Isn't Mille lacs at 40"? Shouldn't it be at 54"? Shouldn't Vermilion be at 54" too? How about the grand Rapids area waters, Bemidji, etc? Change will come there too, mostly because of folks like Treats and others who actually engage themselves in the process. Maybe you do, maybe not, hard to tell, but that's the 'machinery' of things..
When Norm and Mike and I (mostly Mike and Norm) went after the 50" limit on Pelican, the public meeting with the lake association was very interesting. Quite a few of the objections to the new limit were voiced from local and summer cabin MUSKIE FISHERMEN who quoted extremist rhetoric they had heard to the syllable, and accused us of spreading that stuff and looking for the change only for our personal interests. It took me 10 minutes of careful, level, patient conversation quoting REAL statistics, support from fisheries biologists and more, and stating we were not after the limit increase for our personal gain or interests, we were truly concerned about the muskie population in the lake and where it was headed, to swing the conversation to the facts of the matter.
If I had stood in front of those good folks and told the crowd they were selfish and no good ever comes from keeping any muskie, etc, we would have lost. Big time lost, too. that's exactly what happened at the CC meetings when the original DNR supported 50" limit proposal was aired. The proposal lost so badly statewide losing isn't even close to the right word.
The final vote was for the 50" limit at the Pelican Lake Association meeting; you could have pushed Mike and Norm on their hinder with a feather.
Some folks are still bent out of shape about that, and I know of at least three 48 to 49" muskies that were released this year strictly because of the new regs. One fellow told me when he measured his personal Best at 48.5, he would have beat me with that fish if I had been there, but he let her go to grow. | |
| | |
Posts: 1430
Location: Eastern Ontario | One last time here. We are talking about lake St-Clair which is a completely different situation then anywhere else. As well we are not talking about ONE muskie but hundreds. The kill tournaments are killing less fish these days but still a handful of them every time out and those are all 50+ inch fish. Man that's even more 50 inch fish killed then the entire state of WI.
You need to look at it from our Canadian counterparts down there, they push C&R and try to do everything possible to improved the fishery. Then you have tournaments as well as charter captains from the other side of the lake that come over and abuse and kill your fish. And most are doing it while fishing illegally.
You guys need to see how the charters handle the muskies to understand that they are killing fish on almost a daily bases.
All I know is I fished St-Clair 4 days and caught 8 fish and saw dead fish every single day out and I've fished over 1000 days and caught thousands of fish elsewhere and this year I found my second floater.
As well no one is been overzealous when it comes to communications with the MMOC and I mean talks have been going on for years and years. If you go see their site today you will actually see some C&R information as well as the slaughter pictures removed but they are still having kill tournaments. | |
| | |
| What exactly is the MMOC? An internet search only yielded "Michigan Metabolomics and Obesity Center", which I'm absolutely positive you are NOT refering to.
What suggestions do you have for solving this issue? Surely they are aware of the benefits of catch & release, but if they are working within the law, then you'll need to work on getting the law changed. You may have an easier time doing that than changing someone's mind once it's made up.
| |
| | |
Posts: 64
Location: st clair shores, MI | MOMC is the Michigan Ontario Muskie Club the web site is lscmomc.com.Instead of bashing the Mi. fisherman and this beening a U.S. vs. Canada issue why dont more ontario fisherman attend the club meetings and work together on this.By the way during the last H.P.Y.C. tourny the second place fish was a 54 inch 33lb fish killed by a canadian fisherman that was offered the cash by a MI charter captain to get a replica made if he released it and he declined.And to boot this guy was running 16 rods when the fish was caught i know that for a fact cause i was fishing next to him when he caught the fish.He sure didnt have 16 people on the boat.It feels childish a stupid to point fingers but i just feel i had to point out its not just U.S. guys breaking the laws.And again we need to all come together and work on this to get anything done.A good place to start is to attend some of the MOMC meetings and discuss new buisness plus there is free pizza and beer.To find out when the meetings are go to lscmomc.com and look at the events it has the dates of all the meetings. | |
| | |
| Thanks agarofalo, I'll have a look. I live on the ND/MN border, so I'm a bit familiar with discrepancies and such pertaining to common waters. There were quite a few angry citizens a few years ago when the ND DNR decided to open the Boundary Water season two weeks before our friends across the river could fish it. I do fish LOTW on occasion, and I know they have certain issues that arise there too. Strange that the gentleman turned down a free replica costing hundreds of dollars just to kill that fish. As wierd as that sounds, it was his right to do so. Fishing with 16 rods is another matter. I hope this situation improves quickly. | |
| | |
Posts: 32955
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Richard and agarofalo,
Gentlemen, I feel your pain. I understand what your concerns are, and am simply trying to steer everyone in a direction where mutual respect and understanding leads to cooperation and change.
You have alluded yourselves to the fact not enough has changed recently and that the 'parties' involved seem to strongly disagree; maybe there's the possibility we can find some common ground here. | |
| | |
Posts: 1530
| AGARAFALO. unfortuanetly this is what been attempted to be highlighted. over rodded boats. the person mentioned has been charged 2 times before in other yornies. the momc have a 6 rod limit for there boats regardless if theres 8 on board. . the fellow mentioned is a member of the m.o.m.c. there are approx 5 can members yes theres folks who have tried to ask over the years, actually were members. they have been refused. as stated before theres another derby coming. 3 years ago there were 75 charges laid for fishing infractions. if the guys would like to investgate and have dialoge we welcome m.o.m.c. members to come to a muskis canada meeting. they are in emeryville ont. the knights of columbes every second wednesday evening at 7pm. all are welcome. lets resolve the real issues. lets keep our fisheries good
every second wednesday evening of the month. thanks again | |
| | |
Location: Grand Rapids, MI | Guys, this is can be a heated subject or not. I've been in plenty of discussions that got off on the wrong foot concerning this subject with MOMC but in the end everyone wants what is best for this fishery. MOMC has improved dramatically over the years, not all fish over the minimum are taken to the scale they use radios and everyone is informed what the best fish is and all others are released. Many/all of the fish taken to the scales are transported in livewells then weighed and released. Is this best for the fish? NO, everyone knows and recognizes that. Will the Michigan DNR and the Ministries ban tournaments? NO. Could we work with them to ban weigh in tournaments? NO again, since that would basically be saying that for a tournament your license is no good and you can't harvest a fish if you're in a tournament. Would it help to increase the size limit to 48 or 50 inches when these tournaments already have a self imposed 50 inch or higher limit for taking fish to the scale? Obviously NO.
There is still room for improvement but this is not likely to come from the OMNR or MI-DNR. This will come from continued education and level headed discussions not bashing the MOMC or HPYC. You see, I agree with many of you that this is wrong but it is legal. There are great examples being used in Minnesota of how a release tournament could be run without judge boats. These tournaments might consider this if it was explained how well this type of tournament is run and that it nearly eliminates any possible cheating.
I also don't buy into the claim made by Richard that these tournaments are responsible for killing fish all over the lake. As mentioned above, delayed mortality is a bigger concern. Mis-handled muskies are dying by the thousands each year on St Clair at the hands of the average perch, bass, walleye and muskie angler. MOMC and HPYC tournaments probably kill 20-30 fish over a year. Fish handling out there on big boats is terrible and goes something like this:
Fish netted and dumped on the deck of a boat... stepped on to hold them down... unhooked... camera found... photo taken... fish torpedoed back into the water. All this while the boat is still going 4.2 - 5 mph. Educating people that this is likely killing 10-20% of these fish and they should consider making changes to their release methods is a greater benefit to the fishery than stopping these tournaments.
Education is key and the only way to assure that we'll have a world class fishery for the next generation.
Will Schultz, President
Michigan Muskie Alliance
Edited by Will Schultz 8/30/2007 11:44 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 8863
| Will,
How does the average musky fishing schmuck educate the people who are doing this without alienating them?
We can complain here, and it might make us feel better, but I doubt it will cause anything positive to happen. Education is the key, no doubt about that. It's how all of us here got to the point where we are today. But HOW?
We can;t just scoop up the floaters, wrap them in a box, and deliver them to the people responsibile for their demise along with a note that says "see what you have done?"
Or can we? | |
| | |
Location: Grand Rapids, MI | esoxaddict - 8/30/2007 1:24 PM
Will,
How does the average musky fishing schmuck educate the people who are doing this without alienating them?
That's the million dollar question isn't it.... How do you reach "Joe Angler" with the message? If I had the perfect answer it would already be happening. | |
| | |
| I do not fish tournaments, but as I recall, Paul Hartman's are considered by the vast majority of Muskie tournament fishermen to be the absolute best way to go. A photo of the fish on a color-coded bump board, and it's back in the lake. I believe his tournaments also give back a ton of money to the fishery. Is there any way a guy could get a detailed description of his rules and regulations and somehow discuss it with the MOMC? Might do a little good.
Muskies Inc. had catch & release brochures at one time. Maybe they still do, I'm not sure, but what about passing out some type of literature at the boat launches? Maybe cook up some burgers and brats for people coming off the lake and offer them free and include a brochure? I gotta believe there is some good that can be done to help bridge the gap between the parties in question if people choose to make the effort.
Of course there's always that remote possibility that I actually have no idea about what I'm talking about.  Good day gentlemen. | |
| | |
Location: Grand Rapids, MI | Derrys - It's been done, well... except for the burgers and brats. The reason I chimed in was to make everyone aware that communication has not been an issue concerning the tournaments.
The greater problem seems to be that feelings get in the way of facts and science...
Edited by Will Schultz 8/30/2007 1:02 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 8863
| Will Schultz - 8/30/2007 12:52 PM
...
The greater problem seems to be that feelings get in the way of facts and science...
So what you're saying is we're on common ground... | |
| | |
| Paul Hartman's are considered by the vast majority of Muskie tournament fishermen to be the absolute best way to go. A photo of the fish on a color-coded bump board, and it's back in the lake. I believe his tournaments also give back a ton of money to the fishery. Is there any way a guy could get a detailed description of his rules and regulations and somehow discuss it with the MOMC? Might do a little good.
rules:
http://www.mnmuskietournament.com/cassrules.html
sample pics:
http://www.mnmuskietournament.com/vermilresults.html
http://www.mnmuskietournament.com/mlacsresults.html
| |
| | |
| Wow, even better than I thought. I've never met Paul, but I commend him for putting on the kind of tournament that he does. Thanks Michael for posting that. | |
| | |
Posts: 1530
| hi guys the bump board and back in the water would be the dream of the muskies canada guys. we have a can am challenge yearly. the rules are a measurment a scale sample for the mnbr and release.. wills thoughts and how those tournies are run is an absolute way to enhance the future. unfortunately we are not there yet for some. i hope these thoughts are implemmented | |
| | |
Posts: 64
Location: st clair shores, MI | lambeau, the paul hartman color coded jig method is an outstanding way to run a tourny.If someone could supply me with a color coded jig i would be willing to present this system at the next genral MOMC membership meeting and work on trying to get this kind of a system going on St Clair.I would have to figure out what it would cost to set this system up and run this every month.And with the number of boats that fish each tourny, the large size of the St Clair and how many fish are caught how do you work the judge boatsThe only thing that worrys me is the judge boat part because i along with many others out here have had 20 fish days and if i was to get into fish i would need a pesonal judge boat.Even if we could get half the tournaments out here to go this system it would be better.But again how will the judge boats work on a 26000 sq mile lake? | |
| | |
| Have a guest judge in each boat? I'm sure there would be a way. Sell them on the program first, and you could decide that later. | |
| | |
| the measuring boards are Dunwright bump boards, available through most major retailers or direct from Dunwright. my guess is that Dunwright or some other bump-board maker would be willing to give a discount to a tourney organizer making a large purchase such as this would require. of course, as tourney participants buy the boards, you'd recoup the costs.
Paul Hartman has a supply of them available at the tournament so that every boat gets one - you either buy one for yourself to keep and re-use in subsequent tournies (this is what i did last year) or use one of his (with a returnable deposit). he simply color-coded every other inch at the top end for ease of reading. he also rounds everything up to the next nearest half-inch.
one thing that should start being done for people using their own bump boards is for the judges to inspect the bump board at the start of the tourney. it would be very easy to change the scale on your board so it read an extra inch longer and that's not something judges would notice in the pictures.
as for judge boats? Paul divides the water into zones and places judge boats in different areas so they're nearby any potential catches. Vermilion and Mille Lacs are huge bodies of water too, and his system seems to work fine out there. one important aspect: once you've called the catch in, you are allowed to continue fishing while the judge boat comes to find you; it sounds like this would be important on St. Clair too.
| |
| | |
| If I read the rules correctly, then unlike many judge boat tournaments, the judge boats in Paul's tournaments come to inspect your PHOTO and maybe your boat, and NOT the fish itself, which should be swimming away nicely long before they arrive. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Thanks. | |
| | |
Location: Grand Rapids, MI | agarofalo - 8/30/2007 9:31 PM
with the number of boats that fish each tourny, the large size of the St Clair and how many fish are caught how do you work the judge boatsThe only thing that worrys me is the judge boat part because i along with many others out here have had 20 fish days and if i was to get into fish i would need a pesonal judge boat.Even if we could get half the tournaments out here to go this system it would be better.But again how will the judge boats work on a 26000 sq mile lake?
agarofalo - if you're serious about taking this to MOMC I will buy a Dunwright board for you to take to a meeting. I'll put the color tape on it and send it to you. I live too far away in GR to drive over for a meeting but I would be happy to do this if it gets the ball rolling. PM me if you're interested.
If the tournament had a 45 or even 48" minimum it would cut down on the number of times a judgeboat would need to be used. Mille Lacs is about 1/2 the size of St Clair and they make it work there. Why not St Clair?
As far as cost goes, as Lambeau mentioned there could be a deposit for people that use the "official" bump board. It's a one time cost on the boards for the tournament provider. The anglers would simply pick up their bumpboard at the captains meeting. This is also another way to eliminate cheating instead of allowing someone to purchase the board. On each board put a number that must appear in the photo, then you'll know the board is the "official" board that was given to them at the captains meeting. You can contact Dunwright about pricing in large quantities - http://www.dunwrighttackle.com/accessories.shtml
Derrys - The fish is not witnessed by the judge boat, the photo is witnessed. The judge boat also makes sure the fish isn't still in the livewell.
Edited by Will Schultz 8/31/2007 12:56 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 1430
Location: Eastern Ontario | Wow guys thats some great thinking, if I remember right the Dunright boards are like $30-40 so not that expensive. I also believe the organisation needs to keep the board and hand out at every touirnament to keep them legit as well as adding a sticker or something diferent for every tourney. Cheep digital cameras can also ne handed out at the captains meetings so you know for sure those fish are caught that day. | |
| |
|
Detroit free press article about St Clair musky