|
|
Posts: 714
Location: Rhinelander, WI | This is for WI inland waters only, goal would be to not affect waters where trolling is currently legal. There are lots of different options but lets start here. Please explain or expand below.
Is there much interest in this? My main interest is to clarify the silly position fishing rule.
There is a movement afoot to get this changed, but I am not sure what would be best. All I know the current reg. is to open for interpretation.
Nail A Pig!
Mike
| |
| | |
Posts: 714
Location: Rhinelander, WI | This may be useful, the current regulation is as follows:
2007-08 Wisconsin Guide to Hook and Line Fishing Regulations.
Page 6 and 7 - Statewide Fishing Restrictions
It is illegal— to motor troll except in counties and waters listed in the section titled Special Regulations—Listed by County (see definition of motor trolling on page 16).
Page 16 - Motor Trolling
“Motor trolling” is trailing a lure, bait, or similar device used to attract or catch fish from a boat while being propelled (forwards or backwards) by a motor or a sail or while being towed by a boat being propelled by a motor or sail. Motor trolling is illegal except in some counties and waters as listed in the section titled Special Regulations—Listed by County, beginning on page 19. Casting and immediate retrieval of a bait or lure while positioning a boat is not trolling. “Backtrolling” is only legal in waters where motor trolling is allowed. “Position fishing” is fishing from a boat where the fishing line extends vertically into the water while the boat is maneuvered (forwards or backwards) by a motor used to position or maintain the position of the boat over underwater structure. Position fishing is allowed statewide in all waters.
Nail A Pig!
Mike
| |
| | |
Posts: 157
Location: Wausau/Phillips WI | Most lakes in WI are too small and crowded at the best times. It's bad enough now without someone [complaining] because i'm in the way of their trolling run. I've learned that there is a certain percentage of guys that don't have any form of on-the-water etiquette. On a big lake after Labor day maybe it would work.
| |
| | |
Posts: 67
Location: St. Germain, Wi | I chose electric only. What I really want is to be able to trail a sucker while casting and moving with the electric. Its hard for me to accept that is trolling. Hopefully we will be able to use suckers in the future. I would very unhappy if they prohibit live bait. Jim | |
| | |
Posts: 32919
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I don't think etiquette is the largest potential problem; this is a water-use issue not terribly different in my mind than the Jet Ski crowd angry because there is a tournament on the water they want to cruise.
I think lakes 500 acres and smaller would potentially be 'small' enough to create more controversy over water use by trollers. Tollers/Casters share the waters just fine on lakes and rivers of all sizes across the country, so this isn't even a 'real' objection from a reality based viewpoint; it's more of a concession to the anti-trolling folks than anything else. | |
| | |
| Sorno and i discussed this issue while fishing with Howie Meyer over the weekend.
prior to this i was mostly in favor of legalizing trolling due to the fact that there's no research (that i'm aware of) that supports trolling as having a greater impact on the fish than casting.
but then Howie pointed out aspects other than just the fish on lakes such as the one we were fishing (approx 200 acres). it was pristine, quiet, and had a sense of slowness to it. he commented that a boat trolling laps around this very small lake would significantly change the aesthetic value of the experience. he then simply said, "it's good to preserve some of this somewhere."
he changed my mind and i'd vote against broadly legalizing motor trolling in northern Wisconsin if it were up for a vote at the Conservation Congress hearings. i'd consider a proposal for allowing it on large lakes (over 1000 acres?).
| |
| | |
Posts: 189
Location: Barrington, Il | You should be allowed to troll on all waters of Wisconsin regardless of size. I voted for limiting number of lines per boat only because I think that would pass easier than just allowing trolling across the board. You do not need planer boards to catch fish. In fact you have better control without them.
I don't see how allowing trolling will add pressure to the waters. Not everyone is going to troll. If you don't like to troll, don't do it. Just don't tell me I can't just because you don't want to.
Why limit the size of the lakes? You are worried about a troller on Labor Day? What about all the water skiers, pontooners, and jet skis? There is pressure everywhere, fish around it. Nobody told you fish in the middle of day labor day weekend.
Trolling is only another tool to be used in your arsenal.
| |
| | |
Posts: 8820
| Oh how your perspective changes! A year or so ago I would have said let people troll. Today I say leave it alone. I don't think it would hurt the fish, decimate populations, etc. Truth be told the no-trolling law is pretty dumb in terms of conservation.
But you know what? I'm turning into one of "those guys". One of those guys who appreciates the serenity of a quiet northwoods lake (enough to plant roots there in fact) and now wishes to preserve it. In fact, I would probably fight for this if given the opportunity. On a large lake? Fine, whatever. But I fished with Howie on one of his little black lagoons, shared the lake with exactly one other boat all day. The only sound we heard besides our own boat was some idiot on the shore with a leaf blower (dude, it's the northwoods, what are you DOING??)
Perhaps the law is more about keeping things the way they have always been -- quiet, peaceful, unscathed, unspoiled and QUIET. And maybe, JUST MAYBE upholding tradition despite the fact that all logic points elsewhere isn't all that bad after all. You wanna troll? Go down South and troll all 'ya want. You wanna troll up here? Here's a couple oars, knock yourself out. | |
| | |
Posts: 1996
Location: Pelican Lake/Three Lakes Chain | What Lambeau said.
Northern WI is a unique place with the 100-500 acre potholes. It is a serene setting, I really don't cherish the idea of two or three boats dragging baits around these lakes all day. It would kind of destroy the setting. It has nothing to do with increased pressure on these lakes, just a different, noisier, more intrusive pressure.
The larger lakes I am all for trolling being legalized. Trolling is just another tool, no better or worse than casting, just a tool. I am not even sure how often I would use it on the bigger lakes, but it is a tool I would love to have in the box.
| |
| | |
Posts: 3504
Location: Elk River, Minnesota | Just a question here...
would motor trolling be any different than your local pontooner out on a nice slow cruise around the lake? No coubt I can understand wanting to keep the quiet serene environment, but if the pontooners can be out there, what is the real difference?
Also, with these new 4 strokes that many have gone to, your not going to hear the trolling boat going by. And...I really don't think everyone and their brother is going to start trolling just because they can. I am sure many out there are like me and cannot stand just sitting there waiting for the hit....and would rather be doing something active while in the boat.
I say legalize it, but limit the number of lines per person (to 2 lines max) with a maximum of 4 lines per boat. On smaller bodies of water, trolling multiple lines becomes a pain for turning, and too much to deal with...especially if you are by yourself.
Steve
| |
| | |
Posts: 32919
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | So, to follow up and play Devil's Advocate, we need to make sure those who wish to use those small lakes for jet skis and skiing cannot do so either? No trolling strictly because one wishes for the preservation of the peaceful nature of things is summarily thrown out the window when a jet ski or speed boat or pontoon shows up and motors around.
One cannot argue that 'quiet' anglers have as more right to the water in equality to Speed Boaters and pontoons and runabouts or any other motorized craft then do potential trollers. It won't fly for obvious reasons. It could be argued that a back bay on Pelican is nice and quiet in the fall, too...
Perhaps a law should be passed to preserve smaller lakes ALL the time and for ALL users, and make them electric motor only. But then, would you drag a sucker along under electric motor power if trolling there was legal? Would those anchored up see THAT as invasive and shattering the peace of the moment?
Any new regulation that has a ghost of a chance of passing to allow us tolling up here has to be REALLY carefully thought out and consider the feelings and practical arguments of all water use groups. Including those who think 500 acre or smaller lakes should remain 'no trolling' just to keep that peace.
| |
| | |
Posts: 714
Location: Rhinelander, WI | I recently heard something that is a little bothersome regarding trolling with large spreads.
It’s about what sometimes happens when a small or average fish is caught on Lake St. Clair. With a large spread out many trollers are refusing to drop the boat out of gear, because they don’t want to end up untangling and resetting lines. Many guys on St. Clair are combating this by getting huge livewells, the boat is slowed enough to net the fish and then the net, with fish in it is lifted into the boat and placed into the livewell, the boat is then sped back up and the fish is unhooked in the livewell. Guys without the huge livewells are bringing the whole works into the boat and the fish is unhooked in the bottom of the boat.
Is that happening on Green Bay?
Would this be a problem on WI inland waters with our average low fish size, and the drive of Musky fishermen to be as efficient as possible?
Is this a good idea period with all the other issues Wisconsin muskys have to deal with?
I have to say right now I am leaning on electric only, mainly just to clean up the position fishing law. Plus it gives a little more opportunity without many of the problems outlined above.
I really just don’t have a good feel for what makes the most sense.
Nail A Pig!
Mike
| |
| | |
Posts: 32919
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | That's a tactic used by St Clair Charters as I understand things, and not all of them by any means. I don't think I've seen or heard of that practice that anywhere else. That's not a reason to not allow trolling any more than proper netting and fish handling VS improper netting and fish handling should effect casting, in my very humble opinion. | |
| | |
Posts: 37
| I'm just a part-time NW. Wisc resident and I don't like trolling, but I think VMS makes a great point. On the lake that I am on a small Class B lake (230 acres), okay muskie population (.3 legal muskies per acre according to DNR), and there is motor trolling allowed. This summer, I sat on the porch with pencil and paper and did a survey of water use. I surveyed for about 6 beers (hour and a half). This is what my informal survey saw:
1 boat trolling
4 boats casting
11 pontoon boats cruising laps
2 jet skis (but they went round and round)
1 boat tubing
1 boat skiing
1 sailboat
In my opinion, motor trolling isn't what will ruin the serenity of the setting. If there are pontoon boats on the lake, they will be traveling the lake, just like a troller would.
If the argument is conservation related, there should be reasoning associated with it. If the argument is related to your serene experience, then every pontoon owner that goes for an cruise around the lake should be restricted as well.
There should be a scientific reason for not allowing trolling, otherwise allow it.
Thank you for allowing me to share my opinion.
Mike Wallace | |
| | |
Posts: 8820
| SWORRALL: "So, to follow up and play Devil's Advocate, we need to make sure those who wish to use those small lakes for jet skis and skiing cannot do so either? No trolling strictly because one wishes for the preservation of the peaceful nature of things is summarily thrown out the window when a jet ski or speed boat or pontoon shows up and motors around. "
Steve, I believe that's already a reality. Did you notice that some of the Presque Isle lakes have very limited hours on jet-ski usage? 11:00 - 4:00 I believe. There are similar restrictions on water skiers, wake restrictions, additional shoreline no wake zones as well.
As it stands, we as anglers already have a lot more rights than the general boating public does in when and where we are allowed to be on the lake.
And let's stir the pot a bit -- Why IS that? Are those regulations like the ones I've mentioned there for all the users of the lake, or are they really meant to satisfy the landowners/lake association members? Nobody complains much about the fishing boats, but put a jet ski out there and look out... And there are a lot more of them than us. Seems of the law was "fair" it would lean in the direction of the majority of users, but it does not. Seems to me the laws lean directly towards the revenue stream. | |
| | |
Posts: 1293
Location: WI | On smaller lakes most people cast anyway so I don't see the lake size as an issue. It's legal to troll in all of the lakes in my county and they're all smaller lakes and you barely ever see anyone doing it. It's a dumb, outdated law in my opinion. | |
| | |
Posts: 189
Location: Barrington, Il | Why do you think every lake will be inundated by trollers if this passes? There might be a few more people come up north just because you can troll but every lake will not be affected. You will still have your small quiet lakes if that is what you want. Even on a 200 acre lake will you hear an engine all the time? And so what if someone wants to blow the leaves off their lawn.
I have a cabin on a 200 acre lake up north that no one fishes in the fall. I would love to troll it. Be alot easier than running to town to pay $5 each for suckers and than trying to keep them alive. I get so tired of this holier than thou crap. | |
| | |
Posts: 32919
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Addict,
I was not speaking to them only running wide open on the lake. The regulations by Lake Associations you mention are placed to protect the fishing crowd from the zoom crowd in the morning and evening when looking at Skiing and jet skis, but there's nothing to stop folks from motoring around slowly and aimlessly enjoying the ride, as they most certainly do. I think some folks need the break from the jet skis in the early AM and evening just to keep from going postal. | |
| | |
Posts: 8820
| If you want to blow leaves off your lawn, why go up North? Stay home in the suburbs and you can go out on Saturday afternoon and blow your leaves around with a chorus of a few hundred other neighbors out doing the same thing. People go up North to get AWAY from that kind of nonsense and enjoy some peace and quiet in a place that we haven't managed to $^%& up yet with our noise, and our "screw you I want to do whatever I feel like doing without any consideration for anyone else" attitudes. | |
| | |
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | exactly what Norm said ... N. Wisco is a place unlike the others and should stay as such. plenty of trolling options for musky fishermen other places ... keep it the way it is. | |
| | |
Posts: 4266
| One of the lakes that I fished this weekend is 900 acres, 100 feet deep, very steep banks and cottages (I should say mansions) are going up where ever they can fit.
Somehow the walleye population has been decimated by an abundance of Rainbow smelt, who eat all of the walleye eggs. The smallmouth are thriving, but the DNR refuses to stock any more walleyes, and they don't know how the smelt got in there 
Phase 2: The story comes out that the DNR has been stocking thousands and thousands of lake trout in the lake because..."There are plenty of walleye lakes in Wisconsin. Where else can you go and catch lake trout?" That is why the smelt were introduced and walleye stocking stopped.
When I posed the question if the DNR planned on allowing trolling for lake trout, the answer was, no. Then how do they think that people are going to be able to catch these free-roaming, open water feeding fish? And, wouldn't it also make sense to stock muskies in that lake? They already feed on the rainbows and browns that the DNR has been stocking for decades. Seems the DNR needs some education in angling techniques as it applies to certain species.
Sounds like a row-trollers paradise.
I think that I'm going to start a movement that people that are handicapped should be allowed to troll. They can use crossbows and shoot deer from cars, why not a special disabled permit that would allow trolling?
I'd rather see a one line trolling lake with a jet ski ban, than the other way around.
Beav | |
| | |
Location: Lake Tomahawk, WI | I think Worrall mentioned it in another post - "the only reason trolling is illegal (in WI) is because of tradition."
Same reason swallow rigs are legal (and much more commonly used than I used to think, until last fall), that WI is limited to a 9 day gun deer season, and that many local businesses think higher size limits would kill the tourism industry.
Straight up dumb.
Highest concentration of muskie lakes around, but no room for trollers.
Watch ski boats do laps on a 150 acre lake, but trolling would spoil the Northwoods.
Allow people to sit on shore with a bunch of gut-rigs out, but by all means don't let someone run their motor with a lure in the water.
Very simple - Raise the size limits and let people catch and release muskies however they choose.
JS  | |
| | |
Posts: 91
| My father has terrible rheumitoid arthritis and can only cast for about ten minutes at a time and I have also met sportsmen with only one arm who can't cast like the rest of us and think that trolling could be expanded to possibly larger lakes and or a limited season. Maybe a license like a handycap sticker could be put on the registration for these fishermen. I do agree there are places so pretty and peaceful and not large enough for multiple boats to be pulling planner boards around 60' apart. Early and late season months with less recreational traffic and larger bodies of water could serve well as possibilities for trollers. As far as sucker fishing goes keeping your line vertical is a little hard to maintain at times especially if your suckers are real lively or you are fishing unfamiliar water and come up on a reef or weed edge unexpectedely. Sometimes I fish vertical also with a bobber and if a Muskie is looking but not taking I will motor the boat away from the sucker 30 or 40 feet so the Muskie might not be as gun shy. If I am moving the boat while freespooling and not pulling the sucker is that considered trolling? | |
| | |
Posts: 3504
Location: Elk River, Minnesota | If this is something that comes up at the conservation hearings in april, I feel Steve Worral has it right...you need to keep all boaters in mind and create a situation that satisfies all of them. A trolling boat is no different than the pontoon on a cruise, or for that matter the jet skies racing around the lake. The fact is.. trolling alone is not going to hurt the fisheries so long as there is some sort of regulation in place for the number of lines. I'd be all for it, one line per person, or a max of 4 per boat..that way, planers can be used (although some lakes you would not be able to run them due to size alone) and tangled lines should be able to be kept to a minimum.
Regulate the lines, and with enough support, I feel this could pass without too much trouble.
Steve | |
| | |
Posts: 272
| "Guys without the huge livewells are bringing the whole works into the boat and the fish is unhooked in the bottom of the boat.
Is that happening on Green Bay?"
Roberts: not sure what you mean by this, or at least, what caused you to bring it up.
If any trolling changes are passed, I think it should definitely pay respect to the serenity of WI's smaller lakes, with lake size being a big factor in "if" and "where."
If nothing else, the "position fishing" rule with it's miles and miles of gray area needs to be cleared up. Lots of people dragging suckers around in N. WI, and most of them are doing it illegally. Yet, every corner gas station sells suckers....and very few people actually fish them totally legally. And every warden has his/her own take on it. Needs to be cleared up.
I just think it would really, really suck to fish some of my little gem lakes, most of which are under 200 acres, and see a six bird spread coming at me at dawn on an October morning. Yeah, it would be fun to do, but I think it would ruin alot of what makes Wisconsin....Wisconsin.
You could ban planer boards, but how long will it take people to get around that rule by using sub surface items like dipsey divers or something similar.
I say fix the silly position fishing rule so dragging a sucker around while casting with the trolling motor is legal, and allow trolling, limited to two lines, on lakes bigger than 750-1000 acres.
The numbers of lakes, scenery, and the small size of the secluded lakes is what makes N. WI what it is. I agree with the "what's the difference between a pontoon cruising and a troller" argument, but, do we need pontoons AND trollers on our little lakes?
| |
| | |
Posts: 5874
| VMS - 10/30/2007 8:13 PM
The fact is.. trolling alone is not going to hurt the fisheries so long as there is some sort of regulation in place for the number of lines.
Steve
Show me some kind, any kind, of scientific study that suggests that the number of lines determines whether a fishery is hurt or not. Where is all this one line per angler hoo haa coming from? I will support any and all oppositin to any rule change reducing the number of lines an angler may use in WI.
No trolling on the northern lakes is nothing more than tradition. I'd rather they keep it no trolling, than introduce the notion of one line per angler. Next thing you know, it will be one line per, statewide. | |
| | |
Posts: 714
Location: Rhinelander, WI | TTurn,
From: http://dnr.wi.gov/org/land/wildlife/HUNT/Disability.pdf
Permit to Fish or Troll with an Electric Motor
Class A permit holders automatically receive authorization to troll with an electric motor. Persons, missing a hand or an arm, or those have permanently lost significant function of hand or arm, may qualify for a trolling permit. Apply, you must complete and submit application form #3600-162 (Permit to Troll) to a DNR
Note: Permit holders must also possess a valid fishing license to make use of this permit. Persons in the boat who do not possess trolling permits are subject to normal trolling restrictions.
See: http://dnr.wi.gov/org/caer/cs/disabled.htm for more info.
Muskie-addict,
The reason I brought that up was because that is what they are doing on Lake St. Clair. It has evolved that way as the fish got bigger and bigger. Apparently guys don’t want to kill the spread by messing with a small fish. It’s less efficient.
Guys are heading to Green Bay to specifically target BIG muskies, I was wondering if that same thought process was going on there. I.E. “it’s just a little one, scoop it into the boat so we don’t waste anytime unhooking it properly”
I agree with Steve poor fish handling by a relatively few people shouldn’t be a reason to not pass a trolling law. BUT I GUARANTEE, if people are seeing this in Wisconsin it will come up as a reason to not legalize trolling on inland waters.
Shep,
I believe the line limit thing is more a political compromise than a biological thing. One of the reasons given for outlawing backtrolling was the large spread of lines. Northern WI traditional people have a big problem seeing the big wide spread of lines. By limiting lines the spread would naturally stay smaller.
Personaly as a compromise, I like the idea of limiting the number of lines per boat (ONLY WHEN TROLLING), that way it still allows the casting and trailing of a sucker up to a maximum. With a four line max, 3 people casting could still have one sucker out (cause if the sucker is out you would now be trolling) 2 people could have 2 suckers out and 1 guy could have 2 suckers out. Remember we still only have a 3 rods per person max.
I still don’t know where I stand but am throwing things out there that I think could PASS. Compromise has to happen if anything is going to change.
Nail A Pig!
Mike
| |
| | |
Posts: 3504
Location: Elk River, Minnesota | O.K shep...I'll play along here for a bit...
Let's say your out on your own...planer boards and as many lines as you'd like, whatever the number is for WS. You catch a really nice fish. Is one going to clear all the lines first? What kind of stress will the fish be under if it swims into one or more lines? What kind of stress does the fish receive if the boat is left in gear and it's basically being drug in?
Then...what if you happen to somehow get multiple fish at the same time (I know...not the greatest of possibility, but it can happen). Then what? Now there are multiple lines, multiple fish, and you are all alone. Do people really think they can handle that much equipment without issue?
I am playing devils advocate here a bit, but regardless if it is one line per person or 2 lines per person, that is plenty and 4 off a boat is plenty with extra people in it too...you gotta be able to move about the boat don't you? Will you catch more fish with 3 lines than 2 or even 4 lines as compared to 2? Maybe, but at what expense to the fish with all those extra lines out there? Can your local 150 acre lake handle a spread of 4 lines on planer-boards? Can anyone handle 4 lines on their own effectively? Not trying to argue, but just bring up points that I feel should carry some consideration.
Lastly, about trolling hurting a lake.... Take a look at MN lakes...trolling is allowed, but one line per angler. I would like to have 2 lines since I feel that is feasible to handle while trolling..but any more than that I feel would be too much for one person. Personal opinion there, but I will stand by my statement that trolling alone will not hurt the fishery so long as a limit to the number of lines takes place. I feel there is a certain safety aspect to this for the fisher as well...
Steve
| |
| | |
Posts: 663
| Maybe one of you guys can shed some light on this. I remember a number of years ago (10-15?) when backtrolling was allowed in N. Wisconsin for a time. If I remember correctly the idea was to allow walleye anglers the ability to use this technique. Of course musky fishermen ended up adopting the methods and were quite successful. Later the law was rescinded and back to the no-trolling regs we have today. What was the reason for cancelling the backtrolling regs? | |
| | |
Posts: 714
Location: Rhinelander, WI | Pete, I wrote this on the Sucker thread, it is purely my opinion based on talking with a number of different people over the years. Any more info would be awesome, if you ever talk to Rollie, I bet he would have some thoughts on this topic.
Backtrolling was eliminated for a few reasons.
1st The Wisconsin Fishing Traditionalist had a major problem with the success a number of guys where having once they figured out how to backtroll effectively. They thought two few people where catching and keeping, at the time, to large a percentage of the big fish. (Walleye and Musky)
2nd Many people had problems with the wide spread of lines guys where using while backtrolling once people started figuring out how to use planer boards and down riggers even on the many small N. WI waters.
3rd backtrolling effectively made the “Tradition” of trailing a sucker while casting illegal unless the boat was moving backwards. There for the “Traditionalists” who where not in favor of backtrolling in the first place had to resort to backtrolling to fish sucker the way they always had in the past. And they WERE NOT HAPPY from the very beginning.
Nail A Pig!
Mike
| |
| | |
Posts: 203
| leave it alone. Rowtrolling is legal!! And fun!! | |
| | |
Posts: 5874
| I have trolled alone many, many times, with three rods. Fish getting tangled in lines hasn't really been an issue for me. Depending which line gets hit, I will clear one or both of the other lines. Hasn't really been a problem for me. If I get bit on a board rod, I'll clear the boat or down rod on that side, and leave the other board rod alone. It only takes a few seconds to clear that rod. If I have a boat or down rod on the other side, I would probably clear that, too, in a few more seconds. Then I would grab the rod from the holder, and fight the fish. We're talking a few seconds here. I'm not dragging a fish around behind the boat.
What kind of stress does the fish receive if the boat is left in gear and basically drug in? The same whether I have one rod or two, or three. What does the number of rods have to do with the stress of being retrieved? I don't take the boat out of gear even when I clear the other lines.
I've had doubles. I ususally get the closest fish in first, un hook it, and then go for the next, if it's still on. I know I can handle that amount of equipment.
Do you actually think 1 line per angler is the reason for all the big fish in MN? You don't think way less pressure, better genetics of the stocked fish, and higher size limits, is the real reason?
I understand you are playing devil's advocate a bit. But I like trolling, with three lines. I've yet to see a scientific study showing that 3 lines is harmful to the resource.
As far a multiple boards out on small lakes? It doesn't natter how many boards are out. What matters is how far the farthest board is out. For some, they could have 3 out per side, or one out per side. But the spread would be the same. Personally, I don't run my boards out too far when muskie fishing. It's not like muskies shy out from the boat like walleyes. | |
| | |
| I think smaller lakes in northern wi should never have trolling...maybe it's personal preference but it's nice to be on a 200 acre lake in nov and not hear a sound..
are there some bigger lakes up there i'd take a stab at trolling if i could..you bet...but i guess if i had to pick i'd say leave the law alone...except figure out the wording to allow suckers on quick strikes to be legal and no "gray area" and i'd be happy...
| |
| | |
Posts: 5874
| bn - 10/31/2007 10:56 AM
I think smaller lakes in northern wi should never have trolling...maybe it's personal preference but it's nice to be on a 200 acre lake in nov and not hear a sound..
are there some bigger lakes up there i'd take a stab at trolling if i could..you bet...but i guess if i had to pick i'd say leave the law alone...except figure out the wording to allow suckers on quick strikes to be legal and no "gray area" and i'd be happy...
Works for me. I wouldn't care if they keprt the nontrolling lakes that way. Outlaw single hook killrigs, and clean up the wording of the trolling reg, and I'd be satisfied. I am happy trolling the lakes/rivers that I can now. I wouldn't go up north anymore than I do now if trolling was opened up. Probably less if they limit me to one line! | |
| | |
Posts: 189
Location: Barrington, Il | JSloan, right on. Tradition-you have to work for your fish. Its real hard work to sit on shore by a fire drinking beer with single hook rigs out. These are the same guys who put out bait to deer hunt.
All these complaints about "my 200 acre lake in fall being disturbed by trollers". Do you really think the world is going to rush up there and start trolling? There will still be hardly anyone fishing in late Oct. or Nov. If someone is trolling a lake you want to fish, go to another if it bothers you.
"My Lakes" "My peace and quiet" "Stay in the suburbs and blow your leaves" Addict-when did you buy the whole northwoods and want to dictate what others can do. Aren't you from Chicago, too. Next time you want to go up north let me know and I'll tell everyone to put away their leafblowers for the weekend.
| |
| | |
Posts: 8820
| Millsie,
Yes, I AM from Chicago. I live in the suburbs, white bread suburban McMansion strip mall Wal Mart Parking lot 2 kids and a dog Wisteria lane hell. I work downtown in the loop. It's friggin' disgusting. The people and the additudes, complete disregard for everything and everyone. There is a reason they hate us up North, Millise, there's a reason why they look at those IL plates on your truck and call you names I can't repeat here. There's a reason why they celebrate in secret when we run our boat up on a reef at WOT. Not saying you do this, but it's the noise, the lack of respect, the desire to bring our $^%& up there with us instead of respecting that things are just fine, and always have been just fine without us and our Illinois BS. I didn't buy the whole northwoods, just a part of it, on a nice musky lake, in an area that hasn't changed much in the last 100 years. And if I was rich, I'd buy as much of it as I could, and leave it alone.
What the locals (many of whom are good friends of mine) hate more than anything is "those rich %^*&'s from IL who come up here and try to change the Northwoods." I have more respect for those people who have lived their whole lives up there to not come up there and be the guy they wish would go home, trying to change things because I want to troll, or I want to run my jet ski all over the lake at 8:00 in the morning. It's not about "MY" peace and quiet or "MY" lake, as it is "THE" peace and quiet, which is what makes the Northwoods special, and I suspect that the people who live there would all agree that things are fine the way they are, and some rich FIB coming up there wanting to change things because of what HE wants to be able to do is a sure sign that he's not going to last very long up there. Again, not an accusation, just an observation from making friends with several of the locals in my area. They call Minocqua "Monoxsious" for a reason, and I'm not about to be that reason. I have more respect for the Northwoods than to turn it into that.
Edited by esoxaddict 10/31/2007 2:22 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 581
| I guess I just don't "get it." I don't understand why a slowly moving boat (trolling) disrupts the peace and serenity of the northwoods any moreso than any other fishing boat motoring at 20-40mph from spot to spot. Is it the slow speed? Is it colors of the planer boards? Maybe if they were camoflauged?
Lost Land and Teal lakes in Sawyer County have a 10mph speed limit. Known as the "quiet lakes". Can't help but slowly motor from spot to spot. Apparently, however, all those muskie boats slow motoring around the lake ruining the peace and serenity?! Or, is it just when someone puts a bait in the water behind the boat that the serenity is destroyed?
Sorry, I don't get why trolling gets such a bad rap. Some folks believe it is a lazy man's method of fishing, and I think that is because those same people don't appreciate really what it is that goes into successful trolling. But now the aesthetics are offered as the reasons to ban it?
I've got relatives from MN who occasionally have come over to WI to fish. Walleye guys mainly. Good guys. I had to politely explain to them that trolling was illegal in WI, and they asked me why.....I honestly couldn't articulate a decent reason....But I can assure you that I'd have gotten some goofy looks if I tried to tell them that its because it disturbs the peace, or that it ruins the northwoods experience. Again, why does motoring slowly with trailing baits disturb peace/serenity more/less than motoring quickly spot to spot and then having 2-3 guys casting with 2-8oz baits crashing into the water?
Beauty, as they say, is in the eye of the beholder.....apparently some cringe at the idea of a troller moving at 3.5mph with a couple planer boards out, due to the ugliness of it all. But I just don't understand how a law prohibiting others (who may think that trolling is a more peaceful manner of fishing) from trolling can be justified in that fashion, and I have yet to hear any other reason that would justify it.
Edited by Matt DeVos 10/31/2007 9:06 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 50
Location: Central Wi. | If you want to troll, head out to the middle of Lake Michigan and knock yourself out. | |
| | |
Posts: 32919
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I would like to troll right here in Northern Wisconsin, thanks. But that's just me. | |
| | |
Posts: 578
Location: Sheboygan Falls, WI | .
Edited by C_Nelson 6/7/2008 9:01 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 32919
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Just my opinion, 5 and 6 will be very hard to get past the CC. | |
| | |
Location: Lake Tomahawk, WI | Chuck, I don't understand the reason behind #1, please explain.
Thanks.
JS | |
| | |
Posts: 578
Location: Sheboygan Falls, WI | .
Edited by C_Nelson 6/7/2008 9:02 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 663
| Let's get behind Chuck's plan, find a friendly legislator and have him attach it as a line item in some budget bill. That way we avoid all those nasty rules, regulations, and scrutiny of the DNR and the public.  Seriously though, Chucks idea has merit. I'd love to see further discussion on it. | |
| | |
Posts: 350
Location: WESTERN WI | I it ain't broke, don't fix it!!! | |
| | |
| Got esox, that is the problem; it IS "broken". The use of sucker rules on non-trolling lakes are so grey they look like Bret Favre's beard. | |
| | |
Posts: 1996
Location: Pelican Lake/Three Lakes Chain | Just my thoughts, if you are going to try to promote trolling in a reg, why limit it. Make it year round, make it three lines, but do not try to add size limits with it. That is much akin to adding fishing regulations into a budget bill.
Stick with a proposal to legalize trolling, maybe limit the number of lines, but I surely wouldn't limit time of year. If you want the tool, why limit it to a time of year. | |
| | |
Posts: 189
Location: Barrington, Il | Addict,
I've had a cabin up there for 20 years now. I lived the backtrolling days, i was part of the problem when single hook sucker rigs were prevelant. I killed many fish with suckers and none with trolling. I understand the peace and quiet of the northwoods. i don't even like being there in the summer. I just don't understand how allowing trolling is going to disrubt it. Every fisherman is not going to run up north to troll just because they can. Your lake will still be quiet. How many of the locals you have made freinds with still use sinle hook sucker rigs? I'd be more worried about them killing fish than someone trolling.
This will also clear up the position fishing problem. Those that want to fish suckers and cast won't have to worry about getting a ticket. THIS is a big problem. The pressure in the fall will still be about the same. Some will troll, probably more will still fish suckers. Warderns can worry about something else.
Trolling has nothing to do with the FIBs trying to make the northwoods into the suburbs. I understand what you are saying. But this is trolling-slowly pulling lures around lake. My dad has arthritis so bad he can't cast anymore and can barely get in the boat, so I guess he has to stop fishing for muskies now. He is the one that taught me to fish and to love the outdoors. Maybe you or I will be there one, too. Do you have kids? Too young to cast large lures? How about trolling with them and handing them the rod when a fish is hooked. Think you'll have a partner for life?
There are so many more benefits to allow trolling than negatives. JSloan, I want to buy you a beer sometime. You are the voice of reason.
Jeff | |
| | |
| Rules that limit the number of ways you can catch fish DOES have a conservation impact in places where people keep everything they catch. You really want to give the knucklehead that keeps every muskie he catches more ways to get them in the boat? To help the fishery, we should make it as hard as possible for that guy to catch a fish! Right?!?
Sloan has it right. But that might not fly in Wisconsin because there is just enough democracy involved in the DNR's decision-making process to make it difficult for them to make unpopular changes (even if the reason for the unpopularity is a illogical one).
I'm all for a 45" statewide minimum, with 50" (or more) on "trophy waters" and lower limits on the lakes that would benefit from it.
Also, if a quiet lake wants to ban trolling, why wouldn't the lake association just do that same as they did with jetskis?????? No-wake rules, motor limits, etc. are all local rules. Just make another one than bans trolling if it's that big of a deal! Seems stupid to me that people would be that concerned about trolling (it's quiet, slow-moving ... peaceful) but if a lake association wants to ban it on "their" lake more power to them.
I do think that it could make sense to go from the current 3 rod/angler rule down to 2 to avoid the 6 rod spreads. But people should realize that 6 rod spreads don't make sense on the small lakes where it would most irritating and it would probably never be a big deal.
-Guest | |
| | |
Posts: 1
| Trolling is not nearly the threat to quality muskie fishing that the 34" min size is. I say allow trolling and move the size limit up to 45 or 50".
As for trolling having a negative impact on the lake's peaceful environment, nonsense. If that is even a consideration, we must first ban jet skis and recreational boaters. I can't count the number of times I've been buzzed around at 35 MPH or more while casting.
More on the size issue below:
Muskie Size Limits FAQ
Mike Roberts
Published March 23, 2006
A)An estimated 92 % of all muskies are released, but the mean length of harvested muskies is only 37 inches (Simonson and Hewett 1999). As a fish grows larger than 40 inches, the odds of its being kept instead of released keep increasing. Based on data in Casselman (1999), it takes a female musky an average of 9 years to reach 40 inches and another 7 years to reach 50 inches. It may be caught many times during this time, but each fish can only be harvested once. Casselman et al (1996) suggest that with a 2% increase in mortality, recruitment would need to be doubled to maintain the number of trophy muskellunge in a population. Relying solely on voluntary release is not an effective way to grow big muskies.
http://muskie.outdoorsfirst.com/article.asp?aid=1029
Edited by Warrior 11/1/2007 11:02 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 8820
| Truth be told there is a lot less pressure now than there was 20 or 30 years ago, a LOT less. Towns that used to have 20 or 30 resorts now have one or two, because all the resorts were sold off to people like me, wanting to build their dream homes in an unspoiled place. What was once the source of 20 - 30 fishing boats on a weekend is now the source of 2-3 boats, most likely (hopefully) piloted by people with a personal stake in keeping things from becoming a zoo. It's the best its ever been. If we could on board with increased size limits, it would be even better, a LOT better.
I don't see trolling being a huge disruption, and I don't think hundreds of trollers will suddenly go way up North. Not at FIRST anyway. But it's an untapped fishery -- motor trolling will put baits in places where baits don't now go, where lots of big fish have never seen them. The end result would be an INCREDIBLE trolling bite. When word of that gets out? That's when there's going to be trouble. That's when the masses will make their pilgramage to the Northwoods in search of Musky Mecca. If you don't think it will happen, look at what's happened in MN over the last 5-10 years.
That sort of pressure, even 5 additional boats on a 200 acre lake, will be a detriment. I guess I'm not opposed to it on the bigger lakes, but smaller lakes just can't handle that kind of pressure -- they are good because few people fish them, and they are limited in how they are able to fish them. Since its difficult if not impossible to get increased size limits passed, the only way we can ensure those tiny little lakes will still be great fisheries is to leave them just the way they are.
| |
| | |
| Addict, would you support or be OK with trolling on smaller lakes in conjunction with a higher size limit? | |
| | |
Posts: 7068
Location: Northwest Chicago Burbs | I always love the debate on trolling as a legal means of muskie fishing. Sort of like how people see sucker fishing.....EASY! As in if you throw some lures in the water, drive around and around, you're going to catch a fish. I started getting "into" muskie trolilng a few years back on small lakes, and I can tell you this: it is MUCH EASIER to catch a muskie throwing a bucktail at a weedline all day than it is to troll on a small lake for muskies. Add in the thought of running a 6 line spread, and your level of difficulty way up, then try to do it with any kind of speed, force multiplier goes through the roof!
There's a reason that people refer to me as "Ahab" when my boat is trolling.....setting, pulling, re-setting, pulling lines is NOT an easy task and its a team effort where everyone has to be working together. Add in trying to keep the boat in waters where the breaks arent so uniform....or there are jagged rocks.....or high weeds......or logs and trees.
Hooks kill fish. You can cast those hooks, troll those hooks, whatever.....but if you're fishing for them, you're going to kill some over time. Yes, if you drag a fish around for 10 minutes, flop them on the deck to unhook them, then torpedo them back into the drink, your relese survival numbers are going to go waaaaay down. But, the same applies for casting, fighting fish to exhaustion, letting the fish flop on the deck while releasing them, and the torpedo release.
I think the rules are.....it really doesnt matter what I think of the rules. If someone has a vote for me to cast, I'll troll it in. BUT, regardless of what happens, any of you who think that trolling is easy can come out and set my lines on Webster or the Chain when we're running 5.5mph. I bet you're as tired from this as you would be from casting....
People arent going to flock to lakes because you can troll there. Let's get real for a second. If big muskies exist in lakes, people will find ways to catch them, casting or trolling. In my loud and obnoxious opinion we ALL as muskie fisherman need to get away from this "keep the pressure from MY LAKE" bs. Why are you hoping no one will fish YOUR lake? Get off it, you dont own the lake, and you dont own the fish. If you dont like other boats on YOUR lake, go somewhere else. If there arent enough muskie waters, get involved in promoting the expansion of muskie populations into other lakes. | |
| | |
Posts: 8820
| If we could get higher size limits passed in Vilas, I wouldn't care as much. I still think trolling should be limited to lakes over a certain size however, maybe 300 acres and above. Considering the amount of water you can cover compared to casting or even row trolling, I do think there needs to be a limit no matter what the size limits are.
And Slamr, nobody said it was easy. But even you have to admit that running 6 lines trolling ups your odds of contacting fish by a pretty big margin. It's no less work, and it's not something any idiot can go and do, but chances are if you troll you're going to catch a lot more fish. You can't say that there won't be a lot more fish caught if we allow trolling.
Edited by esoxaddict 11/1/2007 11:25 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 7068
Location: Northwest Chicago Burbs | I don't see trolling being a huge disruption, and I don't think hundreds of trollers will suddenly go way up North. Not at FIRST anyway.
*because though the fishing in N.WI has been improving since the late 1980s....this has caused MORE people to go there?
But it's an untapped fishery
*anyone who has driven in N.WI can look around, see a ton of lakes with these "untapped fisheries" and yet they dont flock there now.
-- motor trolling will put baits in places where baits don't now go, where lots of big fish have never seen them.
*you mean like Howie and Adam do on their deep clear lakes....as Adam how full his lodge is in really late fall? People flocking there?
The end result would be an INCREDIBLE trolling bite.
*Jeff, I've seen you drive a boat trolling....your experience level is probably where that of these "pilgrims" would be. See my above post about the ease of trolling.
When word of that gets out? That's when there's going to be trouble. That's when the masses will make their pilgramage to the Northwoods in search of Musky Mecca.
*and that is a bad thing? or now is it that you own land up there, you dont want to share the waters with others. you dont feel as though that water that others have taken YOU on in the past, is ok for others to fish? if there is great fishing, people should go to it. good for them! i hope they catch fish! i hope the local commerce booms because of it! i hope we all see a boom in new fangled gear that we can all use because of the increase in muskie interest! you dont want any of that?
If you don't think it will happen, look at what's happened in MN over the last 5-10 years.
*have you been there? and if you have, isnt it a great thing that MN has the fishery it does? isnt it great that having a great fishery in MN gives muskie fisherman another destination to experience great fishing? or is that a bad thing?
If all these muskie fisherman have great trolling fishing in WI....and they go there.....you're assuming then that they wouldnt have been fishing elsewhere? Because unless you are assuming that, then there will be less fishing in other places....or should people just NOT FISH cause they might be on a lake you like, or that you bought property on? | |
| | |
Posts: 7068
Location: Northwest Chicago Burbs | If we could get higher size limits passed in Vilas, I wouldn't care as much.
*so what you're really saying then is that you think that its easy to catch fish trolling, so more fish being caught means more people killing fish...so really what you're saying is that you dont want people catching fish.....
Kinda selfish dont ya think?
and you talk about lake size...if the lake is 300 acres....how much do you think is really "trollable"? ever tried shallow water trolling? See my post about trolling hardness, and multiply by another factor of 5. | |
| | |
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Shallow water trolling? Last I heard about your trolling skills was you had to head halfway to Michigan over 200 fow....hehehe!
| |
| | |
Posts: 7068
Location: Northwest Chicago Burbs | Pointerpride102 - 11/1/2007 11:26 AM
Shallow water trolling? Last I heard about your trolling skills was you had to head halfway to Michigan over 200 fow....hehehe!
SOOO much easier when you dont have to worry about hitting the bottom. | |
| | |
Posts: 8820
| If I wanted to fish with 10000 other people I'd have bought something on the Fox Chain, or in Madison. Is it selfish? Probably.
"or now is it that you own land up there, you dont want to share the waters with others."
The fact that there is hardly anybody up there is why I bought land up there, Slamr. I don't mind sharing it with a few others, as long as they treat it with respect, and don't make it less enjoyable for everyone. As for fishing those places others have showed me? It all depends. Howie's little black lagoons, for example? If you ever see me on one, you canr est assured that I called him first and made sure it was ok. You may call it selfish, I call it knowing a good thing when I see it and wanting to keep it quiet and unspoiled so it remains a good thing. You've fished the Fox Chain, right? Do I REALLY need to tell you why having nobody on a lake is a good thing? | |
| | |
Posts: 7068
Location: Northwest Chicago Burbs | I get the whole thing about peace and quiet....I really do. There's a reason that we pick the location we do for our fall outing. What I'm saying is that a. its selfish to want to keep others off your water and b. its a little off base to think that trolling is going to make people drive to small lakes that they've never gone to before, now that they can troll.
St.Clair has amazing fish catching opportunities, it's basically the same distance from Chicago as N.WI is, and not that many people go there just to troll.... | |
| | |
| More fish are being caught today than 20 years ago. More larger fish are being caught today than 20 years ago. A higher percentage are being released today than 20 years ago. So, that tells me that people have been educated on catch and release.
So, what is the problem with trolling where people think more fish are going to be caught? Do you really think that a person is going to start keeping big fish NOW because they can troll? I don't think so.
What is boils down to is what was stated in a post above. "Generally those that lack knowlege in something are the most affraid of it or the strongest against it."
As far as a "season" goes, why not have a season after Labor Day when the tourist season is over? Musky anglers hit the water hard in the fall searching for the "big one". Those anglers are also the most educated on catch and release. Afraid of guides keeping fish for their clients? Look at how many guides are strictly catch and release with NO fish kept in their boat.
Some may say "trolling is not fishing". Well, I beg to differ. Slamr makes perfect points as to the difficulty of successful trolling. It is not just throwing baits behind the boat and going. Do YOU know how far back you have to let 65lb braid out to get a Depth Raider down 15'? Do you know how to maneuver your boat in tight corners?
Some may say "trolling is boring". Well, I think that casting all day without seeing a fish is boring too. Why should I not be able to change things up a bit and take a break and mentally unwind and troll for an hour or so. What is boring about a rod doubling over, the board flying back and the drag scream and a big (or small) fish come sky rocketing out of the water? Don't tell me that it takes the fight out of the fish because a musky is not known to be a notorious fighter.
You know me. | |
| | |
Posts: 157
Location: Wausau/Phillips WI | I'd change my mind on allowing trolling if we'd change the deer season to open on Nov. 15th each year like Michigan.
| |
| | |
| This is laughable. Clearly those oposing trolling on this thread don't know much about trolling therefore it must be just awful for the fish and the fishery and all the poor people who want to enjoy the lake. All the WI oposition to trolling isn't much different than the the MN oposition to sucker fishing. Both have missunderstandings about the other but neither wants to learn how it could be another effective method of fishing they may learn to enjoy. Perhaps since trolling and sucker fishing are so awful we should just take the hooks off our baits and enjoy that we were able to get the fish to strike because we certainly don't want to hurt the poor fishy by slamming hooks into its face and taking its picture? | |
| | |
Posts: 1293
Location: WI | Instead of a statewide 45" size limit, limit it to one fish per year with a tag like deer hunting. Not a new idea at all. | |
| | |
Location: Lake Tomahawk, WI | Chuck,
I understand the logic behind having a fall-only trolling season, but still don't think it makes sense. I know the idea is to avoid boating/use conflicts, and appease the boating crowd, but really they won't be the ones voting at the CC hearings. It wasn't pontoon boaters and jet-skiers who voted down higher size limit proposals, it was muskie fishermen. So I guess I still don't understand why not allowing trolling in the summer would help get it legalized. In fact, I would bet summer-only trolling would pass before fall-only trolling.
Kahler, yeah the stamp idea has been bounced around. I kind of like it, as I thought a protected slot might fly. Tough to get things like that through. I also was thinking of a trolling stamp, that carried a 50" size limit statewide for any muskie caught trolling.
It's all been beat to death, hopefully some level heads will prevail and we will be able to utilize multiple techniques in our pursuit of these great fish. I'm out, heading to the Big Belts and chase mulies for a week. Thank for listening to my well thought out, well constructed, senseless rants.
JS | |
| | |
Posts: 734
Location: Watertown, MN | I would love to see trolling back in WI, but I would definitely put but strict laws into place
1-Minimum size of water at least 1500 acres, any smaller lake caster can cover the water by traditional means, this would put trolling back into play on the big water with ciscoes and open water fish on these waters. You can legally troll LCO, Grindstone and other Saywer cty water, and I don't see everyone flocking to these waters for trolliing or destroying these fisheries.
2-Limit the lines to 1 per person, or 2 per person 4 max per boat, this would prevent what happend on Twin, 4 people to boat 12 lines.
Troyz
Edited by Troyz. 11/2/2007 9:11 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 189
Location: Barrington, Il | Slamr,
You took the words right out of my mouth. | |
| | |
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | this is a fun ... er, uh ... good read. implied understanding and ownership are my two favorite subjects ...
driving a boat on a gps gridline path ... "fish on!!!"
row, row, row your boat ... trolling is legal now ...
trolling pewaukee or okauchee is a far cry from trolling the typical northwoods lake ... i did say "typical" ...
this post ought to bring a little more banter to the discussion .... or not.
i'm totally against trolling outside of the current regulations ... there are plenty of places to do it already. it will bring more to the waters of n. wi., it will make fish and easier target, it will catch fish at higher speeds and kill more than with prior regulations, it will dummy down the fishing (in the example of the smaller lakes of n. wi.), it will cause more disruption cutting people off and getting in the way of or vice-versa with the recreational boaters ... and on and on and on ...
we could always just put a bucket of corn down, shoot the deer and feel like the accomplished hunter too eh?
but, then i really don't have an opinion on the subject ...
just drive to st. clair ... i hear it has amazing fish catching opportunities, and is basically the same distance from chicago as n. wi. is, and not many people go there just to troll ...
but, like all good things ... they usually change ... | |
| | |
Posts: 32919
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I'd like the opportunity to troll some of the lakes up here. I voted for trolling legal, but on larger lakes. Ask Mike Keopp if he's 'dumbed down' when he's trolling. No data whatsoever indicating trolling kills more muskies than casting, either, and why is that OK for the fish rowing but not OK if under power?
Like I said, this issue has little or nothing to do with the fish and everything to do with social water use issues.
What does deer baiting have to do with this? Is it OK to hunt deer in a harvested corn field and feel like an accomplished hunter? How about a 1/4 acre clearing planted with 'out of the box' deer oriented plants? How about a potato field?
Always if the argument is based on social mores, it's something else we need to argue about...
'Look over THERE!!!'
| |
| | |
| jonnysled - 11/2/2007 8:05 PM
this is a fun ... er, uh ... good read. implied understanding and ownership are my two favorite subjects ...
driving a boat on a gps gridline path ... "fish on!!!"
--do you even know how to set up a gps PLOTTED course (not gridline path)?
row, row, row your boat ... trolling is legal now ...
--why is row trolling any better than regular trolling?
trolling pewaukee or okauchee is a far cry from trolling the typical northwoods lake ... i did say "typical" ...
--yeppers, not as big and generally more structure up north.
this post ought to bring a little more banter to the discussion .... or not.
i'm totally against trolling outside of the current regulations ... there are plenty of places to do it already. it will bring more to the waters of n. wi., it will make fish and easier target, it will catch fish at higher speeds and kill more than with prior regulations, it will dummy down the fishing (in the example of the smaller lakes of n. wi.), it will cause more disruption cutting people off and getting in the way of or vice-versa with the recreational boaters ... and on and on and on ...
--clearly you know NOTHING and it is repeated NOTHING about what goes into successful trolling. That is VERY obvious by your comments and take on things. Afraid of the unknown. So, more fish WILL die on St Clair, Georgian Bay, all Canadian lakes, all Minnesota lakes, Green Bay, some northwest Wisconsin lakes, southern Wisconsin lakes, Michigan lakes, Indiana lakes, Illinois lakes, Kentucky lakes, Utah Lakes? I guess that the guys that are trolling in all of these other areas are a bunch of DUMMIES then? So, all of you guides that John wants to hire, remember this, according to him you are a bunch of DUMMIES when you troll. Why would trolling on smaller lakes be different than larger lakes? It is actually harder to troll in a smaller area.
we could always just put a bucket of corn down, shoot the deer and feel like the accomplished hunter too eh?
--they taste just as good being shot that way too.
but, then i really don't have an opinion on the subject ...
--you posted, you brought it up, so you must.
just drive to st. clair ... i hear it has amazing fish catching opportunities, and is basically the same distance from chicago as n. wi. is, and not many people go there just to troll ...
--so does northern Wisconsin, Green Bay and southern Wisconsin. What is your point?
but, like all good things ... they usually change ...
--yes they will. | |
| | |
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | pick the smaller lakes that have a max. depth of 30' with a single weed edge ... and tell me fishing isn't "dumbed down" trolling ... again, i said "typical" and expected the thought to be understood ... it would be quite different than pewaukee or okauchee (that was another point i thought would be understood) ... i think Mike Koepp would understand it ...
it's like using a golf cart on Augusta ... unless you are truly handicapped ... it breaks a very good tradition. if it changes it would be a shame and serve selfish needs and not sport.
barrel o' doughnuts, a bear and a bow ... is that what we want to happen to our sport on the northwoods lakes?
Edited by jonnysled 11/3/2007 9:09 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 32919
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | That's your opinion, and I beg to differ. Trolling is no less complex and no easier than casting or position fishing live bait. Are we to regulate the fisheries based on 'tradition'? Hasn't worked so well in the past, if you think about it.
In case you missed it I voted for trolling on the larger lakes, but not based on what you are handing out. I suggested that to mollify social mores stalwarts.
What does bear hunting have to do with this? In case you are unplugged from that sport, you are TALKING about tradition when baiting bear. It's more sporting to run 'em up a tree with dogs? That also is a traditional method of harvesting a bear here. | |
| | |
| Just because you can troll a lake does NOT mean that trolling is the best method to fish that lake. Most musky anglers will be able to tell you what lakes would be good for trolling and what lakes would be very difficult or not worthwhile.
Also, why should row trolling be allowed on smaller lakes then?
A barrel, donughts, a bear and a bow. Great, now unless the guy KNOWS how to use the bow AND shoot it accurately, it will not make a difference how many bear are sitting eating doughnuts. Even if he knows how to shoot a bow and shoot accurately, he still has to have everything come together just right to be successful. Ask how many musky trollers are successful everytime out.
Quit while you can on this one. | |
| | |
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | i'm sure the outdoor "sporting" will continue to be built to support the weekender, so let's bait and troll so you don't have to work too hard ... shooting a doughnut stuffing bear with a bow at 20 or 30 yards or a deer over a bait pile .... yep, that's sport ... lol ... soon, maybe we'll be like texas and have feeders ... the herds are trained to hear the sound of stainless ... they come in and it's a yardage contest for a rifleman ... true sport ...
why not give the fish in the smaller lakes of n. wicso a chance and make it a game ... you know kind of like it is now and has been .... or, we could just spread lines and drive the boats around ...
this is ridiculous .... and you are right ... i should quit .... and will if the sport becomes nonsense which sometimes it seems to tend toward.
| |
| | |
Posts: 32919
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Traditionalists also said sonar would 'ruin' muskie fishing. then it was the trolling motor. then it was the GPS. That's plain not sporting or a challenge to take GPS coordinates from another angler and just go to the spot on the spot...and then use an electric motor and a sonar to stay on it, that's not sporting at all, some said. there was a strong effort for awhile to ban both the sonar and the electric motor.
Your 'nonsense' is another man's sport, Sled. I have the choice to hunt a baited stand or not, I have the choice to try to take a black bear without dogs or bait, but I don't have the choice whether I can troll up here. That may or may not change; either way I'm fine with it. I'd like to see it changed, and have explained my reasoning. If that's 'nonsense' to you then so be it, it sure isn't to me.
What you are saying is trolling is 'easy' and isn't sporting. You are not correct when one considers the details and skill level needed to be really good at it. And Chuck has an excellent point, I can think of many many lakes I wouldn't troll, they just are not layed well for the technique, or the fish are not accessible most of the year, or...there was a big fish caught on an area lake today that wouldn't have fallen to ANY trolling presentation. Neither would have the 7 caught by this guy and his boat partners over the last couple weeks.
I don't think trolling, wanting the ability to troll, or talking about either is ridiculous, really.
| |
| | |
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | i'm differentiating amongst lakes ... there is a difference. if you are a handicapped sportsman, you should be provided some unique capabilities to approach the sport, otherwise we might as well go to a trout pond or have the birds released for us before we get there and then beat our chests for what we've accomplished. when does the line get drawn ... it should be at some point ...
there are bodies of water that make sense (and noted in this thread) ... it's got to stop somewhere though ... hopefully it will never get legs and won't go anywhere ... hopefully | |
| | |
Posts: 32919
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Sled....come on now. trolling is NOT that easy. Try it. | |
| | |
Posts: 2865
Location: Brookfield, WI | I like trolling. Really. I do. I wish I was out trolling right now.
I have been fortunate enough to troll with Joel, Koepp, Slamr, and Mike Phelps. The first three have a lot of experience with it, and I've been lucky enough to watch Mike as he learns to master those skills. His sticktoitiveness is really impressive.
I've done it the most with Joel, and the guy is an artist of the weed and break lines. He paints the edges with his baits. He might not realize it, but I pick up quite a bit from him when he explains the whys of the depths, types of baits, speed, etc. It has really made me realize the science of it.
Sled kind of makes it sound like you can chuck some baits over the side, start dragging, and then reel in the fish. That has not been my experience at all, limited as my experience might be. I think a lot of guys don't do it because of the difficulty involved with doing it well. That might actually be the real meaning behind many of the "I would rather cast, trolling is boring" statements. If you work as hard at it as I have seen these guys work, I really don't understand how it could be considered boring or less sporting. I also think those proficient at it are more likely to be very conscientious when it comes to handling and releasing fish.
The best part is sometimes these guys let me drive. I enjoy getting bossed around, and I feel useful as well as hopeful. Some day I'd like to have Sorno boss me while we troll around out in Utah.
Slamr really is Ahab.
Kevin
Put 'er in the ol' vise. | |
| | |
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | trolling on certain waters ... yep, no doubt ... all the sport you want to have. trolling on smaller lakes up here ... it doesn't make sense ... and that my guess is the answer for why we have the regulations we currently have.
i grew up in minnesota and have a trolling background ... just don't like it around here on the waters i fish, never felt it was a needed or required tactic on the smaller lakes.
so, i'm not against it at all .... where it applies. the good thing about wisconsin's current regulations is the balance. all you have to do is drive to the bay or drive south and you can troll ...
trolling is easily abused ... seen it first-hand and hope not to see it up here ... | |
| | |
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | "limited as my experience might be" ... exactly
this one is a little more complicated ... and it doesn't apply just merely saying the science of trolling is justification ... steve, mike, joel and any other successful trollers knows that ... there is a valid argument based on the type of waters and you guys are well aware of that. going the route of adding a few lakes that might apply or to go the route that chuck suggests is "reasonable", but to just start trolling willy-nilly is not a smart thing to just turn the switch on in northern wisconsin. the current catch and keep, resorting, spearing etc... doesn't need any more pressure added to what's already a tough balance to keep.
we've seen individual bodies of water succumb to pressure ... and this would change a few lakes in a matter of just a few years.
somebody show specific information supporting how it won't ... otherwise, it simply is what it is ... | |
| | |
Posts: 32919
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Show me how it will Sled, you are the one with the burden of proof trolling will somehow 'harm' the larger lakes here; that's your position. I don't think that's fact and have seen nothing to the supporting your position anywhere.
And I agree, trolling is what it is; just another way to catch fish. | |
| | |
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | you missed it again steve .... read back. i did not say "large" lakes ... frankly, i'm shocked you've missed this in what i've written.
trolling in northern wisconsin as fast as the pre-spawn fishing ... quick, unfounded, unwarranted, knee-jerk changes that won't change anything ... you can sell some of the audience but not many from around here.
spearing is just another way to catch fish too, so is netting ... give me a break! ... WOW | |
| | |
Posts: 32919
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I SAID REPEATEDLY I VOTED FOR LARGER LAKES.....remember? I didn't miss anything. Now read your responses. And watch your language, please.
You say trolling is dumb and insinuate it's a talentless technique, you say it will hurt the fisheries, you insinuate we are trying to just approach this 'willy nilly'...none of that is fact. Don't bunch this in with what the legislature did on the early Muskie season, and DON'T try to insinuate that's something I'd support, I don't and never would.
What, spearing and trolling are comparable??? I bet quite a few folks here would find that insulting. I find that sort of insinuation counterproductive to a reasonable debate, which is why I keep responding here. I get it, you don't like the idea of trolling on the 'small' lakes in the North. Give me an argument that applies to that without all the sidebar stuff.
| |
| | |
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | my responses were to the subject and not toward you steve ... until you singled my name out in your recent responses calling me out.
i won't drink the trolling kool-aide ...
if you pick the large lakes ... which ones?, who decides? how to they decide what is "large"? and how do you justify it?, and once it starts, where does it stop? ...
are the rules (pre-spawn, trolling) for the resource or for the fishermen and the business? ... i say a future with a pile of doughnuts in a pile put there for the weekender will change "hunting" and "fishing" sports to the detriment of the resource and need to be very carefully considered ...
here's a question ... fishing for big money on water that allows trolling ... what would you do? don't tell me it's rocket science and something that isn't "easier" to do ... cause i been there, done that and it plain and simple is not true and anyone out there knows it if they've done both much at all.
i'm sure it's all ok though ... | |
| | |
Posts: 32919
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Your responses were as they were, and I responded because of the content.
What size lakes? I suggested in an earlier thread over 500 acres. No idea what others might think, but I'm sure we will eventually find out. I'm sure I won't pick any lakes at all, not personally anyway. I bet you won't either, if this ever comes to a vote. I won't even begin to accept a fast track legislature LOOK OVER THERE attachment to any bill on this one, it should be up to us as sportsmen and our fine (despite your easy to take as not very nice reference) fisheries folks at the WIDNR. by the way, Sled, the WIDNR BANNED baiting for deer,not for the reasons you are selling, but because of CWD. The lawmakers in Madison reversed that ruling. Remember?? Pick on the right people, at least.
I'm not a weekender, and if I was, so what? Are you saying now you don't want those folks to fish in the North? That's a pretty considerable group of fellow Muskie anglers, isn't it? See how something like that can be interpreted?
Big money tournament? I'd follow the bite, and if it's jigging, I'd jig. If it's surface baits, I'd cast a Weagle or a Rumbler. If it's spinnerbaits in the slop, I'd cast then too. If it's an open water bite, I'd troll. That's exactly what is done in competition from what I see, and I work all of the open water season covering that sort of thing. I don't recall any events on the small lakes you are concerned about, so what difference does any of that make? | |
| | |
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | again steve ... i wasn't addressing you.
the "weekender" statement is aimed toward making the pinnacle of any sport "available" to the hobbyist. is that what it's about? or should these sports reward those who put in the work and the time as they typically have been throughout the years. economy drives legislation for sure, but it doesn't come without an expense to the purity of sport ... but, that it seems is what it becomes.
i think the north is unique ... and should remain so. it's the type of place where the game is played in a way that is rewarding, peaceful and enjoyable ... changing it is exactly that ... change. some things should stay the same because they are that good in their own way.
there are plenty of options for all of us to go troll big water if we like ... and i'd like to understand what the purpose for trolling more waters is ... so far in everything put on this thread the simple answer for that (other than self-servance) hasn't been answered.
| |
| | |
Posts: 32919
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I think the trolling ban in NWI is nothing more than pandering to traditionalists. I see trolling as a technique, and a difficult one to truly master.
I see the ridiculous 'position fishing' rule as a result of that pandering. I can't fish live bait at ALL (suckers on a quick strike) here without anchoring up unless I want to risk a ticket.
I see the anti-trolling rhetoric as emotional, not realistic or scientific. If we are to manage our Natural Resources by current emotional basis...wait, we DO to a large part.
I see Wisconsin as somewhat backward in this respect. We don't manage our fisheries by good science and biology entrusting that to the folks who are qualified as much as we should...instead we manage by popular demand, and that not by 'popular vote', but by vote at CC meetings, where only the highly motivated show up to speak, for the most part.
That's why we don't have a large group of 50" limit lakes up here. Same basic thing, Sled, just the 'other side' of the coin exerting influence that was largely emotional...
hope you see what I'm getting at. | |
| | |
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | my comment on the dnr being the dur ... has to do with them obviously being the "tail" of the dog in madison and not any disrespect to the agency (they get enough disrespect by their congressmen). when a business guy from Eagle River can have more influence over the fishery than it's management agency ... then it's time to scratch your head and wonder ...
| |
| | |
Posts: 32919
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Sled,
That's a fact. | |
| | |
Posts: 929
Location: Rhinelander. | I think the one line per angler and lake size requirement would be a must, Awhile back this was brought up and one angler stated he would troll the s--- out of a 200 acre lake. This is wrong. has to be a size resriction and maybe an hour restriction also to preserve the quiet for those that live on the lake.
Pfeiff | |
| | |
Posts: 929
Location: Rhinelander. | jonnysled you sia reasons for not to allow trolling in a few post back. One of the reasons is the catch and keep number of muskies. Wisconsin has a terrific catch and release record. The number of muslies that are kept in wisc. I believe does not really affect the sport here. To say wisconsin is backward is so wrong also. Wisconsin has over 900 musky lakes to register compared to less then 100 in Minn, fewere then that in any other state. They have many different size limits to manage all these lakes. Now they appear are willing to slot limits on some lakes. They have forged ahead and introduced the spotted musky here in several lakes.
Wisconsin is doing a very good job with the progarm. I guess if there is a problem its not always fast enough or big enough for some.
Pfeiff | |
| | |
Posts: 5874
| What next, HP limitations? I'm all for that. All you guys that don't troll, would have to get kickers, and then, well....as long as you got kickers, we might as well troll! Oh, wait, no trolling allowed.
Peace and quiet. I understand to a point. But the new kickers are so quiet, you can't even here them. Certainly less so than 90% of the big HP motors. There are no hour restrictions on a pontoon boat cruising the shore line, is there? Certainly makes more noise than a boat trolling a shore/break line.
Here is my suggestion. HP limit of 10 HP on all lakes 200(300?) or less. Speed limits on all lakes 1000 Acres or less, between the hours of 7PM and 10AM. Motor trolling allowed on all lakes. 3 lines per angler, 6 per boat, max. Abandon the Position Fishing joke rule, prohibit single hook kill rigs. Let the biologists set size limits based on science. Get rid of the Conservation Congress and the Spring Hearings as we know them. Prohibit attaching stupid stuff to bills in the legislature. | |
| | |
Posts: 8820
| SLED: "...i think the north is unique ... and should remain so. it's the type of place where the game is played in a way that is rewarding, peaceful and enjoyable ... changing it is exactly that ... change. some things should stay the same because they are that good in their own way. "
Amen, brother.
Yes, trolling is far more complicated than just tossing out some baits and dragging them behind the boat. Yes, trolling is a legitimate and viable method of catching more fish. Perhaps all of our judgement is a bit clouded on this one -- the trollers want to be able to troll, and with good reason -- some of those little gems in N WI could give you a string of multiple fish days were you allowed to troll, and big fish to boot. Running 6 lines ups your chances by 5 over casting, and you can get your baits in places you otherwise wouldn't. Add in the sheer amount of water you can cover, and an accomplished troller could and likely WOULD encounter HUGE success.
That said, I can see whay people want to troll in N WI.
Then there are the "purists"... a mold from which Sled and I are apparently both cut from. It ain't broke. More people catching more fish in more places does not always = a good thing. The jet-skiers/pontoon boats, big motor brigage, etc. element people are talking about? That certainly is a disruption, one that we accept reluctantly because we have no other choice. But suggesting that you may as well allow troling because the pontoons/etc are already out there anyway? Hey, the floor is already dirty may as well just crap on it too?
| |
| | |
Posts: 32919
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Uhhh, that last sentense is emotion all the way. Give me a REAL reason other than "I don't like the idea."
Our state has had natural resource management decisions put into the regs by small, vocal groups for a very long time, without any real basis in science or reality except tradition.
As I pointed out before, this sort of management is why we don't have 13 lakes here in the north with a 50" limit. Complain when this system defeats an important, biologically sound and well backed proposal you personally approve, then celebrate it when it stonewalls a proposal you reject with no scientific standing or backing based primarily on tradition and emotion, and you can hardly call yourself a 'purist'. | |
| | |
Posts: 8820
| Steve, I never said a word to support the way the system functions, nor did I imply that our resource decisions are made by the right people, or in the right manner. If they were, you would HAVE your 50" size limit. Upholding tradition is not in and of itself a valid approach to managing resources unless the end goal is preservation, conservation, and protection of the resource. 34" size limits are "traditional". So are single hook rigs and shooting muskies at boatside with a .22. It's not the tradition that matters here, it's preserving the aesthetic appeal of the Northwoods lakes. And whether we like it or not, nearly all the regulations we have or do not have at this point come down to who (hopefully the majority) likes the idea or does not like the idea.
If I could troll, I WOULD catch more fish in N WI. For the sake of preserving the aesthetic value mentioned above, however, I am opposed to the idea, at least on small lakes anyway. (Small being ohhh, maybe 507 acres?? )
If motor trolling were to be allowed on smaller bodies of water, there is no doubt that it could realistically put a strain on those fisheries in a very short time. That's my scientific and rational basis for my argument. Of course even if you could prove that it would have no impact on the fisheries or the quality of my fishing experience, I still wouldn't like the idea. There is a time and a place for trolling. "Everywhere" is not that place in my opinion. | |
| | |
Posts: 32919
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | As I said....:)
Think about it. Almost every other lake in the country and Canada is open to trolling. I just don't see any of those waters failing as a result of thousands of anglers rushing in the fire up the 9.9. On the contrary. | |
| | |
Posts: 929
Location: Rhinelander. | The reason you don't have 13 lakes with a 50 inch size limit is that more people spoke out against it then for it.. Lets be real on that. It was poorly presented to the public. It appeared that we the musky anglers were force feeding it to the d.n.r and john doe public and it did not fly. As musky fishermen we need to take the general population thoughts into consideration on any changes we would like. We need to present all the facts and do it right. If we do this we can get the home owners on the lakes and lake associations on our side..
This has been gone over way to often. I have heard all the arguements about it and tired of the the complaints about it. If its worth doing ....do it right, the proposal was not done right,plain and simple and it failed.
Pfeiff
| |
| | |
Posts: 32919
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Don, that's exactly what I said. | |
| | |
Posts: 929
Location: Rhinelander. | oops, sorry steve misunderstood your post at first reading. I agree.
Pfeiff | |
| | |
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | i don't understand why, how it's tied to the 50" lake limit? aren't the two mutually exclusive issues/topics?
and Don ... not sure where you came up with the "wisconsin is backward" theme ... surely didn't come out of my mouth or keyboard.
anybody reading should get this summary ... steve and i wholeheartedly disagree ... although we do agree on lakes below 500 acres ...
i'm interested to see how making trolling legal for lakes over 500 acres is going to 1. add more 50" limit lakes and 2. make fishing better than it is right now.
| |
| | |
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | also ... after a statement like "almost every lake in the rest of the country and canada are open to trolling" ... does this mean you are wanting "all" northern wisconsin lakes open to trolling or are you still on 500 acres and larger? ... doesn't make sense because if you make a distinction then there's a reason for it ... right? you can't have it both ways and get any support. | |
| | |
Posts: 32919
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | 1) I said Wisconsin's procedure for changing fishing and hunting regulation is backwards. The CC creates a situation where a very small vocal minority can effect changes that neither the majority of the anglers or the biologists managing the resource can make sense out of.
2) Almost every lake in the rest of the country IS open to trolling. No dire consequences, no end of the quiet late fall fishing, and the fish do just fine. No water use issues I am aware of, and in fact until it's really cold, not as many folks are trolling as one might think. Witness many MN and NW Ontario lakes.
3) I said I was in favor of new trolling regs on lakes over 500 acres. I said why, too. Nothing I've said since would confuse that issue. Read more carefully, or stick to what I actually say, and it'll be clear, I think.
4) I've been trying to make the point that traditionalists defeated the 50" proposal. That is an absolute fact. That speaks to the 'backward' theme I posted earlier. I made the point (carefully, I thought) that the very fact a vocal group of 'traditionalists' using a sky is falling argument could SOUNDLY defeat a proposal that would have been great for those lakes and was supported by the fisheries folks here indicates the depth of the CC issue. And, we have the legislature adding management regs into budget bills, the Governor vetoing just a word....what a mess. So I made the point that any self proclaimed 'purist' claiming trolling will ruin the peace and destroy the fishery has to examine their stance in the framework of our current system, and be ready to support those who defeated the 50" proposal in order to fight a proposed trolling reg based on nothing more than tradition and emotion. How did defeating that 50" proposal make fishing 'better'? Answer that question, and you answer yours. | |
| | |
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | a couple things i see this morning
1. there are "traditionalists" that don't fit that definition ... that are in-fact in support to higher limits where they apply and are against trolling on any more waters than currently allow.
2. an 8- point buck nose to the now snow-covered ground chasing the girls around the yard while i sit here at my "office" ... the best place in the world to work ... | |
| | |
Posts: 32919
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Define 'traditionalist' any way you wish, the system is what it is and it's abused. Many of us celebrate it when we look to forward our agenda and can win based only on emotive argument from a tiny minority, and then condemn it when others are successful in exactly the same manner defeating an issue we are trying to get passed.
A very well thought out, biologically sound proposal that is arguably economically very sound and has the full support of the fisheries scientists may be defeated by political process by a small group of folks using the same style and content of argument many anti-trolling advocates use.
Scrape away the rest of this, and that is the core of what bugs me.
Hope to see a buck like that tonight... | |
| | |
Posts: 8820
| Steve, you are clouding the issue with your obvious disdain for how the system panders to a vocal minority. Again, nobody is saying that there aren't great flaws in the way things get done.
I don't think anybody is applauding the system itself. We're not cheering "the system" when things go the way we would like, only the end result. Lake associations, politics, and all the bureaucracy that we have to deal with, it's there, and we have to deal with it.
That said, show me a well thought out, biologically and economically sound proposal that details how allowing trolling on a 200 acre lake will not have a negative impact on that fishery, on the local residents, and on the users of that lake, and I will support it.
I will add this: I think anyone with any sort of disability/injury that prevents them from being able to cast should be allowed to troll. Not trying to take fishing away from anyone here, but I am a firm believer that giving the general population more ways to catch fish is something that needs to be considered very carefully. | |
| | |
Posts: 32919
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I said 500 acres, so stop, really. And. there is NO information I can find that indicates trolling is any more detrimental to the fishery than casting or live bait fishing.
If a proposal is presented, it will go through the CC process. It unfortunately is probable it won't pass or fail determined by 'biologically and economically sound proposals that detail how allowing trolling on 200 acre lakes will not have a negative impact on that fishery, on the local residents, and on the users of that lake'. It will pass or fail based on emotion and activism, just like the 50" proposal of the past. | |
| | |
Posts: 8820
| "It will pass or fail based on emotion and activism, just like the 50" proposal of the past."
Ok, so let's look at that for a moment...
If that's how things get done, than what do we have to do to get the things we want done to happen? Activism? Are you saying that we have to show up and make noise whether we are right or not? | |
| | |
| That said, show me a well thought out, biologically and economically sound proposal that details how allowing trolling on a 200 acre lake will not have a negative impact on that fishery, on the local residents, and on the users of that lake, and I will support it.
I will add this: I think anyone with any sort of disability/injury that prevents them from being able to cast should be allowed to troll. Not trying to take fishing away from anyone here, but I am a firm believer that giving the general population more ways to catch fish is something that needs to be considered very carefully.
as i noted earlier, i'm no longer in favor of allowing trolling on small lakes in northern WI, but it's for purely emotional reasons. most times i'm a pretty rational guy who likes to rely on science and logic, but i'm also the guy who's likely to vote at the CC hearings in an emotional way on an issue like this.
notably, the burden of "proof" does not lie with showing it will not have a negative impact on the fishery/residents/etc. in fact, the burden lies on those who want to show it will have an impact.
the reason is in the second half of your statement above, EA. trolling increases fishing opportunities for many people: the infirm, the old, the very young, the people who just like it better. more opportunity is a good thing. therefore, the burden of proof is on those who wish to say the negative impact would outweigh the benefits of additional opportunity.
again, i'm learning to like trolling, and see a place for it on larger lakes up north. but i'm also the guy who likes tradition and i'm not in favor of it on the smaller lakes up there.
the beauty and the problem with the Conserv. Congress system is that i don't actually have to have a rational reason for voting one way or the other.
i'm very swayable on this issue, but saying "just because" doesn't convince me. and if you can't convince me during a long written discussion, you'll never convince the people who feel more strongly about it one way or the other when you get 2 minutes to present you case in person at the hearings.
| |
| | |
Posts: 3242
Location: Racine, Wi | Pointerpride102 - 11/1/2007 11:26 AM
Shallow water trolling? Last I heard about your trolling skills was you had to head halfway to Michigan over 200 fow....hehehe!
That's pretty funny. | |
| | |
Posts: 32919
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | 'Are you saying that we have to show up and make noise whether we are right or not?'
At the Spring CC hearings, that's exactly what happens, yes. Say your piece and vote, hoping to influence others at the meeting who may know nothing about your issue at all to vote your way. | |
| | |
Posts: 189
Location: Barrington, Il | Addict,
I challenge you to prove to us in detail how it WILL negatively impact the fishery, etc. on the small lakes. | |
| | |
Posts: 8820
| trolling = more fish caught
More fish caught = more fish killed (its inevitable that a certain percentage of fish we hook will die)
If you give more people more opportunities to catch fish, it stands to reason that it certainly will have an impact, ESPECIALLY on a small ecosystem. Open up trolling on a 200 acre lake, and how long before nearly every fish in it has been caught? And of angler X decides to troll that lake for the first time, and has a 5 fish day, what do you think he will do? What would YOU do? And suppose that same angler X decides to post the pictures of all of his fish here on MuskieFIRST, bragging about his 5 fish days on lake ____. How long before you have three or four guys, or perhaps more out trolling day after day after day? It doesn't take much anging pressure to affect a lake of that size.
Fishery aside, think about a 200 acre lake. Think about you personally fishing it, casting a weedline or whatever. Add in a couple trollers. Now what? You can't tell me that that won't affect your experience. You can't tell me that additional lines out, and being able to cover more water and a greater rate of speed isn't going to have an impact. And you can't tell me that even you wouldn't go out there, see three boats trolling, hang your head and say $^%&, so much for this lake today, lets go somewhere else.
You can't add more people, more lines, covering more water on a lake that's that size and expect it not to have an impact. | |
| | |
Posts: 32919
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Your entire post is absolutely RIFE with assumption.
1) There is absolutely no evidence that trolling is more effective a method of catching fish than casting for muskies on smaller lakes. Some days the casting crowd kicks the troller's collective fannies. It's simply another technique. In many cases, trolling would be far less effective than casting or drifting with Suckers on a small lake. What if the guy has a 5 fish day casting? Why is that different? Why would there be 'more people'? To hear it from some NO ONE is Muskie fishing WI any more.
2) Why would it be a problem if there were boats out trolling? They probably will not be trolling where you want to cast, in most cases. You would leave because you don't like others fishing in a manner you don't like on 'your' lake? That's a classic emotional argument.
3) How many are saying trolling should be allowed with 3 lines per angler on a 200 acre lake? So far I see 48, with a total of 48 voting trolling with some restriction. I voted limiting trolling to larger lakes. 43 folks voted as you apparently would. 86 pro trolling in some manner, 43 against. if this came up in the Spring hearings, and all 43 against showed up as a ratio in the state, your viewpoint would win the day. If, however, the 48 for trolling-no restrictions showed up and your crowd didn't...
4) If trolling is damaging as you seem to assume, would not all the lakes other than those in N WI that are smaller muskie waters be ruined by now? Just because it's LEGAL to troll doesn't mean everyone will, and all at once....
| |
| | |
| esoxaddict - 11/6/2007 12:43 PM
trolling = more fish caught
--- Do you have PROOF of this?
More fish caught = more fish killed (its inevitable that a certain percentage of fish we hook will die)
--- That is fishing. As fishermen we assume the risk of injuring or killing a fish when we hook it.
If you give more people more opportunities to catch fish, it stands to reason that it certainly will have an impact, ESPECIALLY on a small ecosystem. Open up trolling on a 200 acre lake, and how long before nearly every fish in it has been caught? And of angler X decides to troll that lake for the first time, and has a 5 fish day, what do you think he will do? What would YOU do? And suppose that same angler X decides to post the pictures of all of his fish here on MuskieFIRST, bragging about his 5 fish days on lake ____. How long before you have three or four guys, or perhaps more out trolling day after day after day? It doesn't take much anging pressure to affect a lake of that size.
--- How about a new poll asking how many people would troll "X" sized lakes? How many people would flock to northern Wisconsin to troll anyway?
If any angler did have a 5 fish day, I would like to see them duplicate it on some of these waters. I did it trolling up here a few years ago. Told some guys about it, took them out and could NOT duplicate the results in 3 years. We are getting them casting though.
Fishery aside, think about a 200 acre lake. Think about you personally fishing it, casting a weedline or whatever. Add in a couple trollers. Now what? You can't tell me that that won't affect your experience. You can't tell me that additional lines out, and being able to cover more water and a greater rate of speed isn't going to have an impact. And you can't tell me that even you wouldn't go out there, see three boats trolling, hang your head and say $^%&, so much for this lake today, lets go somewhere else.
--- Once again, how many people are going to troll a 200 acre lake? Okay, now this question. How many people are going to be able to SUCCESSFULLY troll a 200 acre lake? If it is going to be that difficult, why not allow it. That way once this passes guys will be able to use suckers on it without an issue.
No, I would not hold my head in disgust. Why, because with casting I will be hitting spots that they won't be. Don't you DARE tell me how I or anyone else would act. This seems to be more of a self benefiting argument for you than anything else.
You can't add more people, more lines, covering more water on a lake that's that size and expect it not to have an impact.
---Who is to say that there will be more people on a lake? Can you tell us how many people we can expect to see on the smaller lakes (and larger lakes) in northern Wisconsin? Please give us a number.
| |
| | |
Posts: 1270
| To all those who think trolling is so easy have you ever done it? It takes as much, and I will even say more skill than casting. Sure anybody can drag a bait behind a boat but to really do it correctly it is not as easy as you people think.
You think that trolling will be able to decimate the population because you think trolling is so effective. I am not a sucker fisherman but to me it sure does seem easy and a good way to catch a ton of fish. Maybe we should outlaw suckers? This is the sam logic as you guys are using.
If being to effective is a reason to not allow something then should we outlaw Double CowGirls or BullDogs? | |
| | |
Posts: 639
Location: Hudson, WI | Been reading this for a while, here's my two cents if anyone cares.
I fish Northwestern WI lakes where motor trolling is permitted, and I troll sets or cast depending on the conditions and time of year. As far as ease of fishing is concerned, trolling is not really dumbing it down if you're doing it right. Running even a 2-line set through productive water is as much if not more work than casting a bait and bringing it in. As far as mortality goes, what is the difference if a fish hits a bait propelled by a motor or propelled by you?
Sled brought up a point. What if you get a double? Personally, I have enough trouble keeping a fish pinned when I see it hit a bait and hammer a hookset, let alone one that grabs an artificial 40 feet from the boat while you're fighting another fish and can't get to it to set it.
All things considered, I don't see any possible way that trolling harms the population whatsoever. And if trolling disrupts the northwoods, lets concentrate our efforts on waterskiing and jet skis. | |
| | |
Posts: 639
Location: Hudson, WI | Reelman, are you my long lost brother? | |
| | |
| I agree with others that say trolling won't harm the fisheries per say...it's not like it's some magical way to easily catch fish... I don't think allowing trolling lakes in WI that you can't do it now is somehow going to decrease the populations just because trolling is allowed...my opinion like many others is purely based on emotion and just liking the fact we can fish some small lakes in the fall with barely a sound...now I agree that a boat or 2 or even 3 trolling the lake might not make it "that bad" but what if it's some loud, noisy, old 1985 merc on the back and he seems to take a liking to the weedline you are working...well that would make the experience less enjoyable for me...again, selfish, emotion based...i would vote it down.
do any of us really expect to see trolling allowed in our lifetimes up there?
i just don't see it happening.
| |
| | |
Posts: 8820
| Steve Worrall - 11/6/2007 1:02 PM
1) There is absolutely no evidence that trolling is more effective a method of catching fish than casting for muskies on smaller lakes. Some days the casting crowd kicks the troller's collective fannies. It's simply another technique. In many cases, trolling would be far less effective than casting or drifting with Suckers on a small lake. What if the guy has a 5 fish day casting? Why is that different? Why would there be 'more people'? To hear it from some NO ONE is Muskie fishing WI any more.
2) Why would it be a problem if there were boats out trolling? They probably will not be trolling where you want to cast, in most cases. You would leave because you don't like others fishing in a manner you don't like on 'your' lake? That's a classic emotional argument.
3) How many are saying trolling should be allowed with 3 lines per angler on a 200 acre lake? So far I see 48, with a total of 48 voting trolling with some restriction. I voted limiting trolling to larger lakes. 43 folks voted as you apparently would. 86 pro trolling in some manner, 43 against. if this came up in the Spring hearings, and all 43 against showed up as a ratio in the state, your viewpoint would win the day. If, however, the 48 for trolling-no restrictions showed up and your crowd didn't...
4) If trolling is damaging as you seem to assume, would not all the lakes other than those in N WI that are smaller muskie waters be ruined by now? Just because it's LEGAL to troll doesn't mean everyone will, and all at once....
You say that there is no evidence that trolling is more effective than casting. Trolling is effective, and at times that will mean the difference between a great day and a zero day. Yes, it is another technique. Adding another technique, whether it works every day, or one in 5 days WILL result in more fish being caught. Trolling WORKS. Sure in some cases you'd be wasting your time, just like some cases you are wasting your time casting. Again, my point being that adding methods of catching fish means more fish will be caught. How can anyone dispute that?
As for why it would be a problem if more boats were out trolling, as I said in my last post -- we're talking about the small lakes here, more of ANYTHING be it casting, sitting on shore, live bait fishing, or dynamite will have an impact. Those lakes provide excellent fishing, because few people are fishing them and the methods in which they are allowed to fish them are limited.
You ask: "Why haven't the lakes where trolling IS allowed been ruinied?" You don't know how much better the fishing would be on those lakes if trolling were not allowed. Nobody knows at this point because the only way to find out is to open up lakes to trolling that haven;t been, and close lakes to trolling that have been open to it and do a long term analysis of the quality of the fishery.
The bottom line is that no matter what you do, taking more out without putting more in is not the way to improving the fisheries in WI, or anywhere else.
And just to be clear, it's not about "MY" lake, Steve. "my" lake is one of the bigger ones, where trolling would likely be allowed if there were lake size restrictions. And its also popular with the skiers and jet skiers.
| |
| | |
Posts: 8820
| Lambeau, watching people troll the hell out of Wingra is partly why I am opposed to trolling on small lakes. In fact I caught my first muskie trolling on Wingra. And it just doesn't seem very sportsman like to me. And let's really look at that -- 4 rods, two lines out on boards, and you say that that doesn't affect the experience of guys wanting to cast that lake? Suppose you wanted to get off the weedlines and cast off both sides of the boat, East to West down the center of the lake. If one or two people were trolling out there, that would be the end of your day unless you changed lakes.
And no Lambeau, I am not the "barbarian horde that's taking over" because I am not out to change it, disrupt it, bastardise it, or turn it into minocqua. My intention is to enjoy it as it is, for what it is, and how it is, and not interfere with the peace and quiet that drew me there in the first place. And for the last time, the land I own, its on a big lake, where pontoon boats, water skiers, and jet skiers like to do their thing. The lakes I wish to protect are the ones down the street, which I would feel the same about whether I owned land there or not.
The truth is I don't want to see any lake anywhere turned into a zoo. I don't even like hearing the MN guys complain about what's happened there over the last few years, and I don't even fish there. I think people in general have done too much damage, made too much noise, and generally messed up too many things that were fine as they were in too many places already, and that won't change no matter where I or own property. | |
| | |
| You don't know how much better the fishing would be on those lakes if trolling were not allowed. Nobody knows at this point because the only way to find out is to open up lakes to trolling that haven;t been, and close lakes to trolling that have been open to it and do a long term analysis of the quality of the fishery.
there are many many small lakes in other states that are open to trolling. just take a look at some of the lakes very close to WI across the border in the U.P.
some pretty dern good fishing in those lakes for many species, too.
it just doesn't seem very sportsman like to me.
so don't do it. but don't tell me whether or not it's "sportsmanlike" for me to do.
And let's really look at that -- 4 rods, two lines out on boards, and you say that that doesn't affect the experience of guys wanting to cast that lake? Suppose you wanted to get off the weedlines and cast off both sides of the boat, East to West down the center of the lake. If one or two people were trolling out there, that would be the end of your day unless you changed lakes.
i said it hasn't effected MY experience casting the lake.
and i HAVE in fact casted down the center of the lake when other were trolling. guess what? they drove around me with a friendly wave and a "how's it going?" that really ruined my day...
I am not the "barbarian horde that's taking over" because I am not out to change it, disrupt it, bastardise it, or turn it into minocqua. My intention is to enjoy it as it is, for what it is, and how it is, and not interfere with the peace and quiet that drew me there in the first place.
the simple fact that you (and other more people) are there inevitably changes a place from what it was into what it is.
enjoy it for what it is, but don't try to pretend that you leave no trace. we all do.
| |
| | |
Posts: 7068
Location: Northwest Chicago Burbs | And it just doesn't seem very sportsman like to me. And let's really look at that -- 4 rods, two lines out on boards, and you say that that doesn't affect the experience of guys wanting to cast that lake?
*you didnt seem to have an issue with doing it on Webster a couple months ago....I think it's pretty evident that you're not opposed to trolling as a whole, just to trolling on YOUR newly adopted get away locale. | |
| | |
Posts: 32919
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | 'My' was meant to be a collective term.
Sorry, outlawing a fishing technique because it 'works' is plain silly. Casting 'works'. Sucker fishing 'works'. If I elect to troll and CPR a fish, who's to say I would not have CPR'd a fish using other techniques?
Why would a regulation have to result in IMPROVING the fishing? That sort of thing has been very hard to get by the CC of late.
I don't know about whether the fishing would be better or worse in trolling legal VS non legal waters? Sure I do. Population estimates based on Fyke netting, creel surveys, and electrofishing are quite accurate. Lakes that are open to trolling do not seem to be suffering in the least from what I can see based upon the population of muskies present. Population density IS what it IS. Are you saying the population density in the lakes you wish to protect is higher than lakes elsewhere where trolling is legal, or are you saying the population is lower? Why would trolling be responsible for, or not responsible for either? You overestimate the effectiveness, I fear.
People are what they are. To try to keep them away from some place or another by making it less attractive is fine, but pretty counterproductive to our economy up here. My humble opinion, legalizing trolling would hardly create a blip on the radar screen in the North. | |
| | |
| (Swinging my watch)
(@@) Now that you are hypnotized, repeat after me, "there are no musky in U.P. lakes, there are no musky in U.P. lakes" When told there are musky in the U.P. lakes you will answer, "No there's not!!! No musky in the U.P. lakes. None to be caught casting OR trolling. Only U.P. lakes with musky are the border lakes. No reason to fish any others up there either."
(Snap my fingers)
Now go musky fishing. | |
| | |
Posts: 32919
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | You are dating yourself there, Chuck. No one carries a pocket watch anymore...:) | |
| | |
Posts: 8820
| 1. Your boat, your choice, not my place to say anything about where/how we fish.
2. Webster is 774 acres, quite different from a 200 acre lake | |
| | |
| (Swinging my watch)
(@@) Now that you are hypnotized, repeat after me, "there are no musky in U.P. lakes, there are no musky in U.P. lakes" When told there are musky in the U.P. lakes you will answer, "No there's not!!! No musky in the U.P. lakes. None to be caught casting OR trolling. Only U.P. lakes with musky are the border lakes. No reason to fish any others up there either."
(Snap my fingers) Now go musky fishing.
very funny.
nicely done.
| |
| | |
| Okay,
(swinging my i-pod by the cord) LOL
That probably works with these younger guys.
| |
| | |
Posts: 734
Location: Watertown, MN | Waves make the wind Blow!
Trolling is Bad for the fishery? hell mn should be falling apart by now. cause you can troll on all waters, any size and shape, nationalitity, wi or mn strain, stained or clear water, north of 694, and only between the hours 1201 pm to 1159 am
Troyz | |
| | |
| Please correct me if I am wrong here.
The way I see it, (as of this posting) 151 people are in favor of trolling and 44 are not. Now, that being said, for the people in favor, some concessions would have to be made. I think that a great majority of the 151 could come to an agreement on what would be acceptable regulations for trolling. 3.43:1 for people in favor of trolling of some sort.
For those opposed to trolling on smaller lakes, what would happen to the fishing with suckers issue? Isn't that why this discussion was brought up in the first place, to get rid of the grey area of that rule? These are not snotty questions, but ones that sitting back and thinking about all 2,168 views and 128 posts hit me. Why did this discussion and debate start?
I am one in favor of trolling on any size lake for the reason of fishing with suckers on any lake that I choose. One lake that I would not worry a whole lot about trollers on Steve is the lake between us. Even as a seasoned troller, it would be a night mare to troll. To many headaches to even mess with. Too much structure in all the wrong places for trolling, but not casting. Now, casting with a sucker out? That is a different story. | |
| | |
Posts: 8820
| Make it simple, no motor trolling allowed on lakes under 500 acres, done.
How to word the live bait fishing regulations so there's no room for misinterpretation: ???????
How high is up?
The fact that even the wardens can't figure out what is and isn't illegal IS a problem. But I don't know how to word it so there isn't some confusion.
Has anybody out there actually gotten a citation for trolling having a sucker out while casting?
Edited by esoxaddict 11/6/2007 2:54 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 714
Location: Rhinelander, WI | In my opinion, because the way the system works it IS up to the pro trollers to prove their case. The current law is no trolling so that is the easy vote. To get a new trolling regulation passed it will require good sound reasoning. And good info on how it won’t harm the fishery. Especialy coming from people that have strongly advocated for higher size limits in the past as a protection tool.
Here is what is going to be said:
“Guide X who fishes 200+ days a year now has a technique to put even more big fish in the boat and as a result more big fish will be kept, JUST LIKE IN THE 80s with backtrolling.”
I don’t agree with the above statement entirely but it is true that this tool will result in more fish caught by, people willing to take the time to learn it properly. That’s why most want it, correct? It is not easy, but it is a better tool for some situations. You can pound a nail with a crescent wrench, but a hammer sure makes it easier. You can catch fish casting crank baits over open water, but trolling will sure make it easier to get the baits where the fish are and keep them there. There is no denying that. The question that needs to be answered is “is that a bad thing?”
Nail A Pig!
Mike
| |
| | |
| Guest - 11/1/2007 11:55 AM
More fish are being caught today than 20 years ago. More larger fish are being caught today than 20 years ago. A higher percentage are being released today than 20 years ago. So, that tells me that people have been educated on catch and release.
So, what is the problem with trolling where people think more fish are going to be caught? Do you really think that a person is going to start keeping big fish NOW because they can troll? I don't think so.
What is boils down to is what was stated in a post above. "Generally those that lack knowlege in something are the most affraid of it or the strongest against it."
You know me.
Again, this is all that needs to be said to answer that question. | |
| | |
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | i say we all get together and play euchre for the outcome ... wow, this is a polarizing subject. there seems to be an either or position without middle ground.
one observation ... reelman, folks that have a point on the other side of trolling doesn't mean we don't know how (most of us are pretty experienced in approaching fish) because we also fish minnesota, canada and the current trolling waters of wisconsin ... so be careful not to make assumptions about those on the "other" side of the debate.
also, there is likely no "right" or "wrong" on this subject and this thread could be argued beyond reason without any conclusions drawn.
it is more akin to whether a pristine golf course should allow carts to me ... or keep things the way they are for nostalgic and traditional reasons. and ... not all "traditionalists" are meat-headed kill the fish kind of people who don't want larger limits ... so don't paint us that way.
tough subject .... i'm glad to see others in the discussion other than just steve and i arguing over a saturday morning ....
winternet ... this is a great subject! hope nothing happens lol | |
| | |
Posts: 189
Location: Barrington, Il | Wouldn't want to be able to catch more fish. | |
| | |
Location: Latitude 41.3016 Longitude 88.6160 | Trolling with ONE rod per person on all lakes, NO live bait-sucker fishing for Muskies !!!!!!!!!!!!! | |
| | |
Posts: 8820
| As long as there is some differentiation made between large and small lakes and a limit to the # of lines you can have out, I don't see a problem with trolling. But unrestricted? No way. Mike Roberts has a pretty good idea going on another thread.
Edited by esoxaddict 11/7/2007 12:34 PM
| |
| |
|
WI inland Trolling Regulation?