|
|
Posts: 8788
| http://lakelandtimes.com/main.asp?SectionID=9&SubSectionID=9&Articl...
Hmph
suckers anyone? | |
| | |
Posts: 2753
Location: Mauston, Wisconsin | Crap! What a knee jerk reaction- Read the last few paragraph's. (I'd put them up but it would probably be a copyright vioation & get this post pulled.) This goes right back to the big debate over stocking, chronic wasting disease, etc. All actions to date were what many sportsman considered knee jerk. They then come up with a rational plan for the stocking issue (great work by the WI DNR biologist's).
Now we have another issue being addressed by WI DNR management with a similar approach. Why not just ban all fishing? Or how about banning fishing in VHS water's. That will certainly solve the problem. Or even better yet just kill off all of Wisconsin's +10,000 lakes & start over. Next we'll have to scrub dowwn all our equipment- How about chemical shower facilities at each launch. I guess you could say I'm not pleased with how they are approaching this issue.
That sure will put the screw's to the late fall sucker bite. Why not ban individual harvest of bait- i.e., only licensed bait havesters would be permitted to harvest from waters that are tested and proven free of VHS- Also why can't the DNR require bait shops purchase from certified VHS sources!
I can see how individuals harvesting their own wild bait may infect other waters with their bait. If it's such a big issue for an specific individual- let them get a "freakin" harvest license and have them pay to have the WDNR test their source.
"Staggs said biologists are deeply concerned about the long-term impact of the disease."
Hey WI DNR management wake up! The fisherman who buy licenses in this state are also very deeply concerned about VHS. I am one, and I certainly don't see the rationallity to your plan! I would expect better planning and and sound scientific explanation for your actions.
To say you're deeply concerned is not justification for this action. Neither is "That's true, fisheries officials said, but it could be another 10 years before the risk presented by VHS is understood." I personnaly expect more for my taxpayer dollars and license fee's. I have been a resident of this state and paid tax's here for 59 years.
This was a big concern and disscusion topic at the MuskieFirst PI outing, and everyone I talked to was very concerned!
Maybe we just have to accept that mother nature & man's infuence are inevitable. Next, they'll want to ban all water consumption to stop the drought that is affecting a major portion of this state!
So I guess I personnally am challenging our WIDNR management & staff to clarify the scientific reasoning for each action. "Where's the meat"? This newspaper article certainly doesn't do it, in fact it makes me wonder about the compentency of the senior DNR management in this state.
Al
Edited by ESOX Maniac 10/29/2007 12:20 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 8788
| Well, Al...
I agree with you, MOSTLY... The truth is they are not sure how the virus is spread, which means your suckers in your livewell may start the day fine, but then once you fish with them in a lake that has VHS in it, you refill your livewell, etc. THEN what? I don't know about you, but we had a sucker over the weekend that we kept rigged up, in and out of the livewell for two days. We fished that bad little fishy in three different lakes. (He sucked obviously, as the muskies didn't want anything to do with him.) I don't think VHS has found its way into any of the PI lakes, but what all of us did up there all weekend is a perfect example of how WHS could be spread. This new law, if made permanent, basically means that sucker fishing is now something we all "used to do". I'm certainly not in favor of that, in fact it dissapoints me greatly. Sucker season is something I wait for all year. (God knows why, since I lose more fish on the %^#* things than I catch)
But the thought that over the weekend any one of us could potentially have introduced VHS to one of "my" lakes? It makes the idea a lot easier to swallow, as erradicating it is sort of like wishing you had a parachute after you jump off a bridge... | |
| | |
Posts: 2361
| Maniac, you should do some serious thinking and re thinking before accusing anybody of knee jerk reactions. | |
| | |
Posts: 2753
Location: Mauston, Wisconsin | FSF- I already did, If the context of the article is true, then it is knee jerk. Why not just kill off all the fish in the VHS zone- that worked for the CWD?
Jeff- Yes, I agree we were doing the same thing. I see this as very similar to the CWD plan or even better the stocking discussion. It wasn't until we raised our voices, that the WI DNR management stepped back and let the real grunts study the problem and come up with proposals. This needs the same treatment. This is like amputating all your fingers because one is broken. First fix the broken one, then look at the others. I know time is of the essence, but ten years is also a ridiculously long time to say that's when we may know.
I hope that the VHS issue is restricted to those lakes & rivers already identified. But I seriously doubt it. Banning transport from VHS infected waters and serious enforcement on those water's is much more realistic than what is being proposed. Maybe the major effort needs to be testing of lakes- especially the major/most popular ones first - I know, funding for testing +10,00 lakes & rivers is a major issue.
How do they expect us to get all water out of the boat? Boats are designed to keep water out. When it gets in, there are so many nooks & crannies that I don't see this as remotely feasible. Maybe the boat manufacturer's need to design better boats, i.e., one that let's all the water out. I think I'm just going to buy some ShopVac stock. I trust the WI DNR will provide the electricity at the launch.
Al
Edited by ESOX Maniac 10/29/2007 12:47 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 178
| TO: Al Warner (a.k.a. Esox Maniac):
Al, I am going to highlight a key quote in the Lakeland Times article and ask that you read it very carefully. Here it is...
"The board tabled action on a permanent rule that had been proposed by the state Department of Natural Resources. The rule would have applied only to waters known to be infected or waters connected to infected waters."
I realize that not everyone understands the difference between the Natural Resources Board and the Wisconsin DNR Fisheries program managers who advise them. But there is a big difference, and it matters in this instance. The DNR Board is comprised of citizens who governors past and present have appointed to make final decisions on DNR policy. Rarely are these board members resource management professionals themselves; but they are intelligent, civic-minded people who care greatly about our natural resources. Mr. Staggs IS a fishery scientist by training, and he leads the WDNR's Bureau of Fisheries Management. The Lakeland Times article stated that the DNR Board (governor-appointed citizen advisors) tabled a less broad-sweeping proposal by the state DNR (Mr. Staggs and his professional staff) and opted for a more conservative approach to deal with VHS. That is their prerogative under our system of government in Wisconsin.
I am offering no comment on this action; but I thought it was important that Al Warner (a.k.a. Esox Maniac) and everyone else know exactly who made the policy decision that Al finds so distasteful.
Dave Neuswanger
Fisheries Team Leader, Upper Chippewa Basin
Wisconsin DNR, Hayward
| |
| | |
Posts: 8788
| Dave, I suspect offering any sort of opinion on this action would be sort of like putting on a deer suit and running around the woods on opening day. | |
| | |
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | But if you need a deer suit....Ulbians got one! | |
| | |
Posts: 32890
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Dave,
Thanks for the clarification, I should have mentioned that. | |
| | |
Posts: 2753
Location: Mauston, Wisconsin | To: Dave Neuswanger
Fisheries Team Leader, Upper Chippewa Basin
Wisconsin DNR, Hayward
Dave: First, let me appologize that what I wrote infer's that I am talking about yourself or WI DNR managers in general, in fact that was not my intent in the post above. When I say DNR managers above I am talking specifically about those that made this decision, i.e., including failing to follow the recommendations of the trained professional staff like yourself and others I have nothing but the highest respect for the WI DNR trained proffesional staff- what I called "grunts" in the above post.
I have no intent of disparaging Mr. Staggs or his staff, only to impress on those who manage the WI DNR that the words attributed to him are not enough to gain my approval of the actions taken WI DNR BOARD.
I just got home from a week long muskie fishing trip to Presque Isle Wisconsin. It was a beautiful trip. I personnally spent ~ $1000.00 on this trip. None of the water's I fished were marked as VHS water by the WI DNR. I personnally have fished for muskies with suckers for only 8 days in the past 11 years (3 last year and 5 this year. .... However, I know muskie fisherman who have been doing this their entire lives. I think the DNR Board has to seriously reconsider their actions. What's the impact on the economy? We are not talking about just muskie fisherman, but all fisherman whom use live bait. I can't wait to hear the walleye fisherman weight in on this new rule. One walleye fisherman I talked to in Preque Isle said they were spending more money for bait than they were spending on gas driving to & from Milwaukee (our discussion was about the cost of bait).
I personnally think we have stupid way of managing our natural resources and the DNR, i.e., via politically appointed civic-minded people that should not have the final say. I could have proposed what they did, why waste the funds for trained staff? Yes- my original post was also a knee jerk reaction to this article.
No one stopped the Zebra mussel from entering Wisconsin, no one stopped CWD, no one stopped purple loosestrife, no one stopped the spiney water flea, no one stopped eurasian milfoil, no one stopped the rusty crayfish and my prediction is no one will stop VHS. "No one" is the WI DNR Board!
I know the WI DNR staff trained profesional's have been and are working their hardest to find answers that will help mitigate these invasive organisim's. As an concerned citizen I will always do my part. I now have ~$30.00 of perfectly good muskie suckers flopping around in my live well as the water is draining down my driveway. They will be relocated from my livewell to the garden.
To: All who read this post - seriously consider the rule they have passed.
"This means the operator of any boat removed from any body of water in the state must immediately drain off all water from the boat, boat trailer and any fishing gear, including from any bilge, ballast tank, live well or any other container with the exception of containers of potable water for human consumption."
How many of you fish in the rain & snow? What is the intent of this rule? Is it to kill the VHS virus? Does the boat have to be absolutely dry before launching into another lake? I submitt that native and migratory water birds will also be transporting the virus from lake to lake, etc. Try stopping them with a new rule!
But, we all have a right to have our concerns heard and addressed. We don't know what it is, we don't know where it's at, but we can stop it this way is hardly what I would call a cohesive plan.
This rule is going to be an enforcement nightmare for the WI DNR. Exactly how are they going to prove it's lake water and not rain water or melted snow in my bilge? Remember, in a court you have to be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
I fully agree with the rule that the DNR BOARD tabled, I don't agree with what they passed.
Al
Edited by ESOX Maniac 10/29/2007 4:45 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 2384
Location: On the X that marks the mucky spot | Small price to pay to potentially save some additional bodies of water. | |
| | |
Posts: 50
Location: Central Wi. | Treats, I'm with you. I say we try our best to do what we can, instead of do nothing at all. | |
| | |
Posts: 2753
Location: Mauston, Wisconsin | Treat's - I did it because I care. The $30 is not really the issue. Were my suckers infected - I bought them from Rollie & Helen's. To my knowledge I was not on any VHS infected lake (Presque Isle & Clear). I seriously doubt they are infected, but I don't want to take a chance of violating a new DNR rule, even one I don't necessarily agree with. I was actually in the process of putting the suckers in another container, i.e., one with fresh aireated water (large aquarium), i.e., one where I usually keep my ice fishing shiners/suckers/minnows. I guess that's also out of the question now.
How much volume of VHS contaminated water does it take to contaminate a lake?
How long does it take for the sucker to be infected and subsequently be capable of infecting a lake?
My shop vac is out by the boat!
Al | |
| | |
Posts: 178
| Al Warner (a.k.a. ESOX Maniac) asked: "How much volume of VHS contaminated water does it take to contaminate a lake?"
DAVE: Good question, Al. What many fishery scientists (including me) BELIEVE (nobody really knows) is that it will require some kind of "threshhold volume" of VHS-contaminated water to spread the disease from lake to lake. In other words, most of us think it will take more than the wet carpeting on the bunk rails of our boat trailers, or more than the moisture on a water bird's legs, to introduce a sufficient quantity of virus to infect the fish in any given body of water. But nobody knows what that "threshhold volume" is. Is it the water resident in the cooling system of our outboard motors? Is it a minnow bucket full of water? Is it a moist DNR fyke net? Is it an entire live well full of water that someone forgot to drain after their last trip to an infected water? (The virus remains viable in water for two weeks.) Nobody knows. What constitutes "threshhold volume" is probably highly dependent upon the situation. If no fish are near the point of viral release at the time, and the virus becomes diluted to an ineffective concentration, a boatload of contaminated water may have no effect. But let's say a crappie angler empties a minnow bucket full of VHS-contaminated water near a boat ramp along a rocky shoreline at dusk in May, and then dozens of walleyes come into that exact location less than an hour later to spawn. In such a situation, it is conceivable that the walleye population and eventually the entire fish community could become infected with VHS. That's the sort of thing folks are worried about. But the unknowns are significant.
What IS known is that VHS has spread to a couple inland lakes -- one small lake in central Michigan (a 45-minute drive from Saginaw Bay in Lake Huron), and also in the westernmost of New York State's finger lakes (less than an hour drive from Lakes Erie and Ontario). It is presumed (not known) that boaters spread the disease from the Great Lakes to these waters. But if VHS actually was spread by water birds, one would think it would be turning up in more inland locations already. It SEEMS as if a very specific set of circumstances must exist wherein a threshhold volume of VHS-infected water is introduced near a concentration of vulnerable fish. But again, the uncertainty is stifling.
So it all boils down to risk assessment and management -- a special field of study that I find fascinating but know almost nothing about personally. I can look at this situation and understand how intelligent, well-meaning people could hold opposing views. That's one reason why I really have no comment on the ruling.
So, there's one biologist's perspective, for what it's worth. Al, thanks for the kind words in your earlier apologia. No offense taken... just wanted everyone to know who exactly had made the final call on agency policy.
Be careful out there folks.
Dave Neuswanger
Fisheries Team Leader, Upper Chippewa Basin
Wisconsin DNR, Hayward
| |
| | |
Posts: 2427
Location: Ft. Wayne Indiana | I think it is a great idea....
It's all about protecting the fishery....
We need to look at the future and get away from the "what about right now attitude" | |
| | |
Posts: 272
| "None of the water's I fished were marked as VHS water by the WI DNR."
Pretty sure VHS doesn't make a public announcement when it enters a lake. How could you possibly know if it isn't present?
"What's the impact on the economy? We are not talking about just muskie fisherman, but all fisherman whom use live bait."
Hmmm, lemme see here. Some people impacted by regulations on bait sales and transport.....or EVERYONE effected by VHS invading the northwoods. Ummmm, yeah.
Pretty sure that's a lopsided battle there.
I'll be doing my part, that's for sure. We all have a stake in this. | |
| | |
| There is so much discussion on this board about protecting the resource that I find this thread a little odd. The good of the whole should always outweigh the wants of the few. What is the potential impact of doing nothing?
Here is another vote for doing away with citizens and politicians impacting decisions of the DNR.
| |
| | |
Posts: 714
Location: Rhinelander, WI | There is NO doubt this is scary stuff. Probably not as scary as the media makes it out to be as there goal is to scare at all cost as it sells news papers and get viewers, but I digress.
In my opinion it is scarier than all the other envasives listed above COMBINED!
Here’s a possible, probably not probable but possible situation.
Angler comes from infected water with infected water still in livewell, buys 5 suckers at Vilas county bait shop, puts suckers in live well. Suckers become infected.
Lake one sucker is smoked by a big musky. During fight sucker infects said musky, sucker falls off during the fight and floats to bottom where it is later picked up and eaten by a big female pike. Pike is infected. Next fall thousands of infected eggs are laid by the musky and the pike, Every fish that eats those eggs or hatchling is subsequently infected and the cycle continues until the fish build an imunity. Not to mention the water that is infected by those fish.
Lake two same scenario!
Lake three same scenario, but the angler is done for the weekend so they release their unused suckers to feed the muskies rather than waste them by dumping them in the woods. Now, more fish are infected especially if the suckers survive to spawn a few seasons.
Same scenario works but could be far worse if talking crappie minnows just by pure numbers and fish contacts.
Until more is known about this disease and how it spreads doesn’t it make sense to take the most proactive approach? It’s easy to reduce restrictions later. It’s kind of too late if those restrictions are not taken in the first place, and the disease spreads, isn’t it?
That being said it will still spread, because there are just too many people that really don’t give a darn.
My $.25!
Nail A Pig!
Mike
| |
| | |
| Don't the infected fish usually die? I thought they get the virus and then they croak. | |
| | |
Posts: 32890
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Some die, some do not, supposedly the virus is carried by infected fish that do NOT die and passed along, at least in theory, apparently no one really knows. | |
| | |
Posts: 434
Location: searchin for 50 | I think this will be an enforcement nightmare. I f the warden sees you with a wet boat will he give you a ticket? Talk about crowded boat landings now, wait till everybody is drying theirs off while your waiting to get on/off the water. Not a pretty picture. As far as bait goes just buy a couple at a time(suckers) that way it won't hurt at the end of the day.Fresh bait always seems better anyways. | |
| | |
Posts: 2753
Location: Mauston, Wisconsin | Jeez - guys you still don't get it! This is like the stupid no feeding the deer rule- now everyone is feeding the turkey's, squirrels,etc...... Ignore the fact that deer get together without anyone feeding them. It's an idiotic rule.
Here's where I really have grief with this rule. I ice fish the Mississippi River every winter. Do I and every other fisherman who do the same thing (fish one body of water exclusively) have to kill all our bait every #*^@ed time we come off the ice. Even though I'm never ice fishing anywhere else. Why don't I fish else where? Because it is so freakin' big and has almost every species of game fish in it, including even muskies, I don't need to go anywhere else!
Do I want VHS in any more inland WI water? Hell no! What's needed is a VHS Zone rule-backed by big fines/penalties and rigid enforcement of same. Take some trucks & boats away.
Enforcing the rule the DNR Board concocted will be a nightmare. Massive amounts of money that should be funneled to VHS research is going to be funneled to enforcement in WI lakes & rivers where it's not needed. It's a waste of taxpayer money.
What about the shoreline fisherman? Even better yet what about people who have homes/cabins on the water, how are they planning on enforcing this rule on them?
Dave N. : Thanks for the reply. I know you can appreciate the different perspectives.
Al | |
| | |
Posts: 2361
| Jeez Al,
Sure glad you're not in charge. | |
| | |
Posts: 2361
| MRoberts - 10/30/2007 8:19 AM
In my opinion it is scarier than all the other envasives listed above COMBINED!
Here’s a possible, probably not probable but possible situation.
Angler comes from infected water with infected water still in livewell, buys 5 suckers at Vilas county bait shop, puts suckers in live well. Suckers become infected.
Lake one sucker is smoked by a big musky. During fight sucker infects said musky, sucker falls off during the fight and floats to bottom where it is later picked up and eaten by a big female pike. Pike is infected. Next fall thousands of infected eggs are laid by the musky and the pike, Every fish that eats those eggs or hatchling is subsequently infected and the cycle continues until the fish build an imunity. Not to mention the water that is infected by those fish.
Lake two same scenario!
Lake three same scenario, but the angler is done for the weekend so they release their unused suckers to feed the muskies rather than waste them by dumping them in the woods. Now, more fish are infected especially if the suckers survive to spawn a few seasons.
Nail A Pig!
Mike
Hey MR, I love that fall spawning scenario! Do you have those genetics stashed away on three of your secret lakes or are they commonly available now? Can we stock some of those fall spawners in the lakes with the spring spawners, thus doubling our reproduction efforts and having TWO aggressive post spawn bites?  | |
| | |
Posts: 2753
Location: Mauston, Wisconsin | FSF- At least I'm asking serious questions. Make a rule that's impossible to enforce- penalize fisherman who don't need penalizing, waste taxpayer dollars and still VHS will march on! This rule is not going to stop VHS.
Enough said: If nobody else get's it, that's to bad. I just can't fix stupid!
Al
| |
| | |
Posts: 714
Location: Rhinelander, WI | FSF good catch, I guess I "can't fix stupid" either.
I would go edit it to spring, but now you quoted it so it's just not worth it.
Nail A Pig!
Mike | |
| | |
Posts: 32890
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Bottom line is VHS is not a good thing. We need a TON more study on the virus and how it's transmitted, etc. I'm betting that won't be as much a priority as is regulation to try to stop what we do not yet understand completely. Sound like CWD to anyone else? | |
| | |
Posts: 2112
Location: The Sportsman, home, or out on the water | As my post may be killed, I will keep this short:
CWD was something most of you never heard of, until it came to your back yard.
VHS was discovered in several states surrounding WI, but you never heard of it, until this year. It has been in a "trophy state" for 10 years. Yet, thier dpt of wildlife has yet to admit it. "Hmph" indeed. The history of politicians are only trumped by one other profession.
ok, maybe not so short:
If I had a livewell in my jeep, and i wanted to hop lakes mid-day, I would have to kill the "swimmers" I had out, when on the first lake. no problem, I get them at cost. what exactly am i supposed to do with the suckers I had on the first lake? Throw them in the bushes? were someone's dog will roll in them one week later? Have you smelled a dog that found a week-old sucker? several folks on this board know EXACTLY what that smells like (Cleo, yup, I called you out).
I am happy with this rule, if provided a trash can at every launch. Now, a municiple employee has to empty this can , weekly? I am not picking on anyone here, but if this guy knows someone else has to empty this can next week, and it is pretty "ripe", what happens if the next guy feels the same way? Overflow?
Then, you have a rain. washes all the dead suckers into the lake, or, at least, some trash. new problem.
Not calling anyone out, just pointing out what could happen.
Edited by muskynightmare 10/31/2007 10:52 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 8788
| 'ya could just whack 'em on the gunnel and toss 'em overboard. Keep a cooler in the truck with a 12v aerator, where your "untainted" suckers would live. Sure, it would be a bit of a pain to have to go back to the launch if you ran out of suckers on the boat, but its better than having to buy new ones every time you change lakes. | |
| | |
Posts: 2753
Location: Mauston, Wisconsin | Ok- I'm going to try a last hoorah at this issue.
What may have any chance to work here? EDUCATION! Education of the user's (fishing, boating and the shoreline user community).
Educate the user's as to what it is, and to how dangerous this invasive organisim is to a healthy fish population.....and how to help prevent it's transmission. We fisherman are for the most part pretty protective of our rights and our favorite fish and lakes or river's. If you say here's what you need to do under these specific circumstances to protect your favorite fishing activity most fisherman get it!
However, the water in the boat/motor/jetski user's is a big issue, with many unknown's. I agree that all user's in a VHS zone need to comply with the tabled rule.
I think the WI DNR website does a pretty good job of education about VHS on their website ->
http://dnr.wi.gov/fish/pages/vhs.html
However, the website doesn't help those who are not aware of it, or those who have no internet access/availability. What about lake resident's or nonresidents who use our water's, etc. Newspaper articles only raise awareness for those who read newspapers. Even then their content are sensationalized and subject editorial license, i.e., the editor's pen. I'm certain Mr. Stagg's probably made many other points in his discussion with the reporter.
This issue doesn't require a new rule- there is one already in effect. Is the one that was tabled different than the emergency rule that is in effect?
What's needed is a massive education campaign by the WI DNR & the State of WI itself, i.e., one which involves all the mass media outlets in this state, i.e., newspapers, radio station's and TV stations/local TV channels. I think most of them would be civic-minded enough to donate the space/time to help educate all citizens of this state.
This needs to be extended to boat launch notice's and public access point notices, phamplets, etc. Buy a license, get a phamplet, buy bait, get a phamplet. register a boat or jet ski, get a phamplet.
This education effort would be way more cost effective and might actually help hold VHS's advance in check while the biologist's have a chance to study the problem...... There is no way the WI DNR Enforcement could staff up to enforce this new rule. Trying to enforce this DNR Board decision is almost like the US Gov. creating TSA. Actually there's probably more boat launches in WI than there are airport's in the USA.
Are the existing VHS infected water's and access point's marked warning about the infection and clearly defining what steps are required for users of those water's?
If I fish a single river or lake exclusively this new rule makes no sense.
More food for thought: It seems like higher water temps above 54 deg. F kill this virus. However, what about freezing of potential bait fish, i.e., frozen smelt for ice fishing northern pike (I prefer live bait myself)? Where are these smelt that ice fisherman are using coming from? I see them in the local grocery store seafood section every winter. Now I wonder, did they come from the Great Lakes or another VHS contaminated source? Are the store's taking "out-of-date smelt (ones that legally can't be sold for human consumption) and relabeling them as "bait", i.e., not for human consumption. Did they come from off-shore? Can the grocery stores legally do this under the new rules implemented for VHS?
How did all of our invasive species get here?
Al | |
| |
|
statewide VHS rules...impact on sucker fishing?