|
|
Posts: 1245
Location: Madtown, WI | This makes me sick....this DID get signed...only one small section was vetoed.
This is from an email I got from Tim Simonson from the WIDNR.
Looks like POTENTIALLY (per Tim:I'm not yet positive this will take effect in 2008….I think we still need to promulgate administrative code before it takes effect….my opinion - waiting to hear from legal.) as early as next spring folks will be targeting pre-spawn muskies in WI!
I personally don't like this idea one bit.
Cory
---------------------------
The only thing that was vetoed was the requirement for EVERYONE to use barbless hooks during the NEW musky catch and release season, which will start on May 3, 2008, north of US Highway 10.
______________________________________________
From: Staggs, Mike D - DNR
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 12:02 PM
To: Staggs, Mike D - DNR; DNR DL WD FH Fish Brd; Stark, Randall J - DNR; Van Haren, Thomas - DNR
Cc: Simonson, Timothy D - DNR; Hennessy, Joseph - DNR; Scheidegger, Karl J - DNR
Subject: RE: Budget Items relating to musky and bass seasons FW: Budget Vetoes
I forgot to mention below that anglers fishing for musky or bass during the catch-release seasons must also use only artificial lures.
_____________________________________________
From: Staggs, Mike D - DNR
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 10:57 AM
To: DNR DL WD FH Fish Brd; Stark, Randall J - DNR; Van Haren, Thomas - DNR
Cc: Simonson, Timothy D - DNR; Hennessy, Joseph - DNR; Scheidegger, Karl J - DNR
Subject: Budget Items relating to musky and bass seasons FW: Budget Vetoes
Importance: High
FYI: We were surprised to learn that the budget also included a new musky catch and release season for the period between the opening day and whenever the musky season opens north of Hwy 10 for inland waters (no change for MI boundary waters, unclear yet on MN boundary waters).
More troubling however was misdrafted actual language relating to use of barbless hooks. The legislature intended to require the use of barbless hooks only for those fishing for bass or muskies during any catch and release seasons - but as written and then approved by the legislature below, the statute would have required EVERYBODY to fish with barbless hooks during either the newly created musky CR season or the long standing bass CR season in N WI. It would have been very helpful if somebody had consulted with us prior to this happening, but such are the foibles of including non-budget policy items in a large omnibus budget bill.
We have brought this to the attention of the administration and they have decided to veto the word "during" in each of the new subsections (demarcated in red below). The belief is that the new wording "while fishing a catch and release bass fishing season" or "while fishing the catch and release muskellunge fishing season" can be construed to apply only to those actually fishing for bass and/or muskies, and it is my understanding that is how LE will enforce this next spring.
Bottom line is that there will be a musky catch and release season on inland waters north of Highway 10 from May 3rd until May 23, 2008. Barbless hooks will be required of any anglers fishing for muskies during this period. Barbless hooks will also be required for any anglers fishing for largemouth or smallmouth bass in the Northern Bass Management Zone from May 3rd until June 20, 2008.
Please share this information with your affected fisheries staff so they will be aware of this new rule and be able to answer any questions that may arise from the public. We'll figure out how to get the word out to the public as the season approaches.
29.426 Catch and release bass fishing. No person may use any hook, bait,
or lure, other than an artificial lure that has a barbless hook, while fishing *during*
a catch and release bass fishing season established by the department.
29.428 Catch and release muskellunge fishing. (1) The department shall
establish a fishing season that authorizes catch and release muskellunge fishing on
inland waters north of USH 10 other than the boundary waters between this state
and the state of Michigan. The catch and release muskellunge fishing season
established under this section shall begin on the first day of the general fishing
season established by the department and shall end on the day before the first day
of the regular muskellunge fishing season established by the department.
(2) No person may use any hook, bait, or lure, other than an artificial lure that
has a barbless hook, while fishing *during* the catch and release muskellunge fishing
season established by the department under sub. (1).
Edited by C.Painter 10/30/2007 10:16 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 639
Location: Hudson, WI | I'm obviously no biologist, but maybe it won't be that bad, Corey. I think the water will still be cold enough that the majority of fish can be released without incident. Definitely a chance to have a 10 fish day. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 714
Location: Rhinelander, WI | Wow, different than the way I interpreted the Governor’s Veto press release which stated the following:
Muskellunge Fishing Season and Catch and Release Bass Fishing
Sections 712m and 712r
Section 712m prohibits a person from using any hook, bait or lure, other than an artificial lure that has a barbless hook, while fishing during a catch and release bass fishing season established by the Department of Natural Resources. Section 712r requires the department to establish a fishing season that authorizes catch and release muskellunge fishing on inland waters north of U.S. Highway 10 other than the boundary waters between this state and the state of Michigan. It also prohibits a person from using any hook, bait or lure, other than an artificial lure that has a barbless hook, while fishing during the catch and release muskellunge fishing season established by the department.
"I am partially vetoing sections 712m and 712r because they would apply to more people than those who are only fishing catch and release for bass and muskellunge."
I guess “partially vetoing” meant deleting one word “during”. Man you have to love politics and lawyers.
So what does this mean for our naturally reproducing musky waters north of Hwy 10?
Any expert biological opinions out there?
There goes three solid reasons for early spring fishing trips. Opening day south of Hwy 10, Opening day of MI musky fishing, and the northern WI musky opener.
And there goes my May walleye fishing, as now I will feel the need to musky fish so I get the chance at unpressured fish on my favorite lakes.
The violators wont be out harassing fish all by themselves, if you can call that a good thing. Of course they will be out using barbed hooks, “really I am fishing monster pike with this 9” suick.”
AMAZING we have to work for 2 years to get a law to protect fish and with NO biological input from the State Biologist this potentially damaging rule change is slipped into a must pass budget, and made law in less than 9 months. POLITICS are AWESOME!!!!!!!!!
Nail A Pig!
Mike
Edited by MRoberts 10/30/2007 10:42 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32953
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Great. Some more almost impossible to enforce regulations. So if I am on Pelican or any other water I pike ( I like eating Pike) fish early tossing smaller spinnerbaits ( which I do and have never caught a Muskie yet) how do I 'prove' I'm not fishing bass or Muskie? On lakes I target very early pre-spawn bass or late post spawn bass, that's easier to tell what it is I am fishing for. I'll have my son custom build some barbless hook bass spinnerbaits, I guess.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8859
| Well, let's be honest for a minute -- during the spawn, what are 'ya gonna do, snag them? They're not going to open their mouths or chase baits very much anyway. The whole thing is kinda stupid -- beginning of May some years you may find there's still ice on some of the lakes. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 639
Location: Hudson, WI | Steve, I asked my neighbor who is a warden for St. Croix County about that issue last year. Just to verify, I called another warden in Eau Claire to see what they both would say. From what I gather, if you are fishing a lake with a solid (and reputable) population of pike, you are totally fine throwing anything you want. The law is absolutely impossible to enforce, straight from the mouth of 2 different wardens. That said, the guy in Eau Claire said, "If you're out on Bone or Deer (lakes without a lot of pike) throwing a magnum bulldawg, there'd be trouble." |
|
| |
|
Posts: 691
Location: nationwide | I am probably in the minority here but I am estatic about it. I no longer have to chase "sub-species" for the first weeks of the fishing season and can target muskies from the regular fishing opener. And grinding off the barbs on a few lures is no biggie either and they will be replaced with barbed hooks once the standard muskie opener comes along Memorial Day weekend. I am figuring this will be changed somehow by next May.
Corey Meyer |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Jeff,
I've seen plenty of muskies eat during the spawn. There is a spot here in Point where one can go and see a big pile of giant fish all in one area spawning. I've seen countless fish caught here and some real sows to boot. It does seem like another tough to enforce policy....man are we good at drawing those up! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 31
Location: Syracuse, New York | It will be interesting to see how this type of regulation may impact musky populations. Here in NY, many waters have carried an open C&R season for bass year round and the bass populations have not suffered. If anything they have largely improved during this time period. Musky populations are completely different, however. If I knew it was not affecting the fishery, I would certainly love to target muskies in the spring. Plus it may help businesses. Like I said, it will be interesting to see the ramifications of this type of legislation. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 714
Location: Rhinelander, WI | In all honesty, my untrained, opinion is this probably won’t adversely effect the musky population. I have fished the May 15th MI opener for almost 10 years now. We have had some great days (nine fish day one year) and some rotten days, but never have we caught what we thought was a fish that was harmed by the catching. I.E. leaked milt or spawn all over the boat. MI is north of WI and the regular WI opener can range from May 1st to May 7th so that is only 1 to 2 weeks later. Every year will be different depending on weather.
What really bothers me is the process and the Biologist where NOT EVEN ASKED if it was a good idea.
I think hitchcos hit the nail on the head as to why “Plus it may help businesses.”
So trophy muskies be #*^@ed, (Eeven though trophy muskies are drawing people to Green Bay by the thousands) we can recoup some of the musky tourist dollars that are heading to MN by opening our musky season even earlier. Even if there is a potential risk to the musky population itself.
We can’t get the legislators to say or do BOO about helping build a robust numbers and trophy musky fishery alike in WI, but they will jump on and promote an issue like this with no biological support.
That in a nutshell is what bothers me the most about this.
As far as the unenforceable issues of this, I see it as a wash. It’s no more or less enforceable than the current closed season. Same issues as far as fishing for pike. At least now the law breakers wont be out there alone taking advantage of lower pressure overall.
Nail A Pig!
Mike
Edited by MRoberts 10/30/2007 11:55 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32953
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | 'As far as the unenforceable issues of this, I see it as a wash. It’s no more or less enforceable than the current closed season.'
It's way less enforceable. Basically, everyone fishing a lure larger than a couple inches long is open to an interpretive ticket for it not being barbless, forcing the Warden to look at every bait on every rod, and forcing me to build baits used only during that time frame.
IMHO, this will add another silly law enforcement issue for our already overburdened Wardens.
And, since it was mentioned, what is the deal with forcing barbless hooks during THAT season? Is it the HOOKS we are to be worried about, and not the stress of catching a prespawn or spawning muskie? If indeed the hooks are the culprit then, why are they not later, and shouldn't they be banned altogether? Does our legislature/DNR consider a fish caught on a barbed hook 'harvested' because the hook on an artificial is going to kill the fish ONLY if it has a barb? Is one caught on a barbless hook 'not harvested'?
How about no hooks at all, and we just get the thrill of the strike? Much safer for the fish, I submit, tongue firmly in cheek...
Maybe velcro. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2686
Location: Hayward, WI | Steve Worrall - 10/30/2007 12:09 PM
Maybe velcro.
Yes, that's the best idea yet. From now on all stocked fish will have a piece of velcro stuck to the inside of their mouth. We can put the soft fluffy half in their mouth and stick the more coarse part with the "hooks" on our lures. You will be given a pack of velcro strips when you buy a license. When you catch a fish on a hook, you can stick the velcro piece in it's mouth. Fishing with real hooks will be allowed for two years to velcro-stick some of the resident fish in the lakes. The evolution of extremely long and limber rods, along with reverting back to stretchy mono lines will take place, to keep fish velcroed, and the slogan of musky fisherman statewide will change to "go velcro a pig."
Seriously, I don't know what to think about this law. In a way, it would be nice to fish for muskies early in the year. I've ran into a few muskies while walleye fishing early in the year, and thought it would be nice to target a fish that just took a swipe at your walleye. On the other hand, it seems like the season has been closed until the end of May for YEARS for a reason...
curleytail |
|
| |
|
Posts: 714
Location: Rhinelander, WI | In my opinion your missing the way I am looking at it Steve. Before “everyone fishing a lure larger than a couple inches long” could be pike fishing or musky fishing, in the eyes of a warden or in the eyes of another fisherman.
As a result many fishermen would see guys throwing larger sized baits and complain that guys are musky fishing out of season. Or they would see a musky size net and call the tip line. Now it is completely up to the Wardens discretion to inspect or not inspect a boat and they don’t have to hear it from every Tom Dick and Harry that wants to complain. Unless Tom, Dick and Harry are close enough to see barbs.
The wardens will still make the same call on whether the people in the boat are pike or musky fishing using the same rational they used before.
As to why barbless is better, I have no idea but someone must have been following the trout school of thought. Some well known anglers actually think barbless is MORE harmful to fish, as it allows deeper penetration.
Maybe they just wanted to keep something in the law that would keep the wardens on there toes and thinking. Heaven forbid a law that was easy to interpret.
Nail A Pig!
Mike
|
|
| |
|
Location: The Yahara Chain | Is there really any valid reason to not have the early season? They do it in a lot of states. I agree that barbless hooks are a silly side bar. Do the bass guys realize that they have to go barbless on their already established C and R season?
Here is a link with one bioligist's opinion on fishing for musky in early season.
http://muskie.outdoorsfirst.com/board/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=34...
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32953
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | No, I understand where you are coming from, Mike, but this is an aggravation and muddying of what was pretty obvious before. No muskie angling until the last Saturday in May. Now you can, but you have to use special tackle, making EVERYONE a potential ticket target and adding another 'let me see the (----) you are using' to the enforcement process. I get stopped on the water, the Warden checks my license, my fire extinguisher, my registration, my Guide license, my flotation devices, and now he has to look closely at my lures I am using or have obviously been using...ALL of them.
And for GOD'S Sake we shan't use a scope with any magnification at all ( but a red dot is OK, because it's, well, like it's, ummm...) to shoot a deer in Black Powder season, that just not right because w e w a n t t h e d e e r to....uhhh... If the rifle reaches out 100 yards, I can't see any reason...but...
Sir, lemme see that rifle, need to look through that red dot there to make sure you ain't using a scope with 3 power or anything, gotta be certain you can't easily place a good clean shot, there...seeing the deer clearly in the scope at 90 yards; why that ain't black powder hunting...
If one has a barbed hook, am I Pike fishing or getting a ticket? Was I using that for Pike, but the barbless for Muskie? What about lakes with ALL THREE, Pike, Muskie, and Bass? What if I am unhooking a Muskie but fishing for Walleye or Pike when the Warden shows up; would not be the first time, I bet.
Don't even get me started on the live bait angle that could be a problem here. A 6" shiner is...Pike bait? Bass? Muskie? None or all the above? JUST fishing Walleye here, sir!! A 1/4 ounce jig and creature....hmmmm. That catches 'em all, so the Warden will now have to know ALL about baits and which is for what specie and when there may be exception...geeeeeze this is stupid. Sorry, I just think the Legislature belongs the hell out of fishing and hunting regulation and this is a classic example of why.
AND!! Should not this regulation be in place for the entire state?? Why not?
If I am throwing a Weagle, it will have barbless hooks. Ah, rats, all my baits will until June now, I guess.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 639
Location: Hudson, WI | I think the answer to all questions during the Barbless CnR season is "I'm fishing for pike." Warden: "That bucktail is 10 inches long. That's a musky bait." You: "Big Pike." |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1769
Location: Algonquin, ILL | Not sure how I feel about this but I think that we may be able to put a positive spin on this, I may be wrong but it is my understanding that " Spearing" is not permitted within ### Yards of a boat that is activly fishing, if this is truely the case then a bunch of boats fishing a known spawning area with barbless hooks could in fact save 1000s of fish in the long run
Just a thought
Edited by JohnMD 10/30/2007 1:30 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32953
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Nope, the law protects the Native Americans to the point of not allowing other boats on the lake while they are spearing at night in some cases. You really don't want to get in their way, it's a serious crime to impede them in any way.
But let's not go there again... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 31
Location: Syracuse, New York | I'll preface this by saying it is the NY perspective:
Enforcement of these laws must be based on what you did, not on what you might do...you cannot be ticketed simply for fishing with any specific lure or hook unless it has been completely and specifically restricted from that body of water. Now, if you catch a musky with barbed hooks and continue on the same pattern with the same lure you could be ticketed. in the same way you can currently use any lure to fish for pike (in season) while musky season is closed. However if you catch musky, you must release it and alter your tactics to avoid a fine.
Again, that's how things are enforced out here.... |
|
| |
|
Location: Grand Rapids, MI | Does anyone "in the know" have an idea if this includes all the border lakes that currently have their own set of rules since they're shared with Michigan?? |
|
| |
|
Location: The Yahara Chain | Will Schultz - 10/30/2007 1:59 PM
Does anyone "in the know" have an idea if this includes all the border lakes that currently have their own set of rules since they're shared with Michigan??
The rules are the same in those, no change to the Michigan/Wisconsin border lakes. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 360
Location: In the slop! | Wow! Talk about making a mountain out of a barbless molehill. I guess since I have fished barbless for the last 10 or so years, that part of the legislation is the easiest to swallow. As far as them doing MORE damage, I've heard that argument too. I don't believe it but I've heard it. If the hook penetrates too deeply it is because of the distance from the point to the bottom of the bend! Geometry is the culprit here.
I would be much more worried about protecting pre-spawn fish than worrying about barbs on hooks. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1936
Location: Eau Claire, WI | I ditto Worrall's thoughts on this.
I'm on the fence as far as legalizing of this season for bass and muskie, as I'm not a scientist and don't know what the effect if any there will be on the resource, but the way so many of these laws are written ( the blackpowder/scope issue is one of my personal favorites) make it obvious that the legislature does not belong in natural resources...That's why we have biologist, scientists, and should have resonable laws and regulations dictated by a DNR that works with the best interest of the resource and sportsman in mind.
Ah, yes.... one more reason to be a proud tax payer and voter in WI.
By the way...anyone know what state official introduced this one to get it on the budget bill? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 726
Location: Eau Claire, WI | For the sake of discussion...if a particular lake is classified as having no natural reproduction, do you guys see this as an issue for that lake? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 714
Location: Rhinelander, WI | Steve sorry I got your blood pressure up, but I understand your position far better now.
Jono, I don't think it would be a problem, which is why the Biologists have helped formulate a rule change question to extend the southern season until December 31. Most of the southern lakes have very limited reproduction and get stocked.
It wasn't that long ago that the musky opener opend the same day as the rest of the fish even north of Hwy 10. I believe it was changed in the 80s. Does anyone know why it was changed and if any sicence was used to do it?
One more thing if I am reading this correctly it says inland waters. Does that mean it does not affect Green Bay and it's tributarys?
Thanks
Nail A Pig!
Mike
Edited by MRoberts 10/30/2007 10:24 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32953
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Mike,
You actually provided a window of opportunity for me to vent a bit; it was refreshing, to be honest. Good question on Green Bay.
I beg to differ with the 'mountain/molehill' comment. This is a poorly written law that was jammed through on a horribly written budget bill and into law without hardly a how'dy do to our fisheries managers with the DNR or the angling public. The new law creates an enforcement nightmare worse than the more than ridiculous 'no trolling' laws that created something as amorphous as a rule to describe 'position fishing'. The barbless hooks thing IMHO was thrown in to reduce the inevitable back lash from the public and the DNR, with little or no scientific/biological backing. The intent when the law changed to open the season after the spawn in the North where the muskies spawned later was primarily to protect the Muskies during that timeframe. I fail to see where barbless hooks even enter that debate.
I'm not sure if angling for Muskies during the spawn hurts them a bit. I suspect, from studies I have read about other fishes, that the impact will be minimal. That is not my point; I'm complaining about additional enforcement nightmares and more ridiculous things to be concerned about for someone just trying to go fishing and stay within the law.
Inland waters by definition doesn't effect Green Bay, but what does THAT mean...are we protecting the fish there early, or sending the anglers out there with a box full of newly changed hooks? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 360
Location: In the slop! | Steve, I understand your concern about the enforcement nightmare and I don't think Wisconsin needs another one either. However, barbless hooks are not the demon they are being made out to be in this thread. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32953
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I don't see where anyone is demonizing barbless hooks; just the regulation that requires them.
There IS some evidence that in certain fish barbless can be as damaging or more so as barbed, but I don't think that's the case with Muskies. I don't know of any study on Muskies and barbless hooks, at least. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 663
| Just curious as to how the bass fishing community is reacting to this. I guess a guy can't use nightcrawlers or minnows to fish for bass until the catch & keep season. Oh wait, maybe he's "walleye" fishing. On the musky side you know darn well that guys will be chucking 5" chubs on jigs and claim that they're walleye fishing. For that matter what about all the countless muskies that get caught by walleye fishermen early? Should'nt they be required to go barbless too just in case they happen to catch a musky or bass? What a mess. These knuckleheads could screw up a one float parade. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 299
Location: Nowheresville, MN | Legislature enacting a fishery protocol without biological basis, hmm....sounds familiar....Let's see.... Oh Yeah....Minnesota's "Accelerated Walleye Program"... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 178
| Folks, take a look at the two new rules written by Representative Dan Meyer (R) of Eagle River, and note those words that I have highlighted for emphasis with ALL CAPS.
29.426 Catch and release bass fishing. No person may use any hook, bait,
or lure, other than an artificial lure that has A BARBLESS HOOK, while fishing a catch and release bass fishing season established by the department.
29.428 Catch and release muskellunge fishing. (1) The department shall
establish a fishing season that authorizes catch and release muskellunge fishing on inland waters north of USH 10 other than the boundary waters between this state and the state of Michigan. The catch and release muskellunge fishing season
established under this section shall begin on the first day of the general fishing
season established by the department and shall end on the day before the first day of the regular muskellunge fishing season established by the department.
(2) No person may use any hook, bait, or lure, other than an artificial lure that
has A BARBLESS HOOK, while fishing the catch and release muskellunge fishing season established by the department under sub. (1).
Would it not be relatively easy to modify a large artificial musky lure with three treble hooks by filing off ONE barb on ONE of those three trebles, thereby making it a lure with A BARBLESS HOOK? I point this out only because it demonstrates why state legislators should not be unilaterally writing and passing laws that govern fishing and hunting. The final language leaves a giant loophole because anyone who understands the English language, especially judges, will likely consider A BARBLESS HOOK to be synonymous with ONE BARBLESS HOOK.
Even if providing the opportunity to catch and release muskellunge in the spring is a good idea, lawmakers might have extended a courtesy to those of us who manage this resource by asking if such a rule reflected sound science, and then asking how it might be written, unambiguously, to ensure practical enforcement.
Dave Neuswanger
Fisheries Team Leader, Upper Chippewa Basin
Wisconsin DNR, Hayward
Edited by Dave N 11/21/2007 2:53 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1270
| I think the "barbless hooks do more damage" theory comes from a study on smallmouth with live bait where the hooks penetrated the throat and gullet deeper without the barb. with artificials and particularilly with muskys I don't see that as an issue because they are generally hooked in the mouth, not the throat, gullet, or other vital organs.
That said I think the barbless thing is a stupid law.
Does anybody know what would be classified as barbless? Would a hook with the barbs pinched down classify or would the barbs have to be filed off?
This is just another reason why individual laws should be voted on on there own merit. There is no reason under the sun why a C&R fishing season, whether you are for it or against it, should be in a "budget bill". |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32953
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Dave, reelman, exactly. |
|
| |
|
| HMM sounds like there are great legislators in WI that stick their collective nose where it doesn't belong just like in minnesota, sorry to here about this guys. Same way that a spearing ban was lifted in my favorite state. It sucks |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2112
Location: The Sportsman, home, or out on the water | @$#!! %^&*(( &^*()$
That is how I feel about it. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 133
Location: Lake Tomahawk, Musky Central, USA | I'll feel confident in saying that the DNR needs more money....especially to try and fix their lil VHS problem which to my beliefs they are at fault for.
What was the basis on their decision? I didn't see one.
And, yes, I'm sort of lucky I wasn't around when the spearing conversations were here.
However, throwin Xraps before dark on the walleye opener here, we did see quite a few big muskies on my lake that I will be lucky to ever see again. I think that's just how it goes. Not one fish was interested in our baits that early in the year...they were like bucks in the rut. It only leads me to the conclusion of ??. That's all I can say until I read up on this a bit more in depth. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32953
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | VHS and the spread across the US of the virus has absolutely nothing to do with anything our State can do or could have done to stop it from finding it's way to our inland waters from the Great Lakes. My opinion; the Feds don't do enough to stop introduction of exotics and disease agents into our Great Lakes from ballast and bilge water in the commercial ships from overseas. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 929
Location: Rhinelander. | First off I'm not sure yet how I feel about this ok> Again I am not sure how I feel about this. To play devils advocate here let me ask whats so bad about it? If catch and release works as well as we think. You know we will face that question by those that decide to fish for them early. I know many muskie anglers that fished for them allready. If stopped they just said they were fishing northern pike. I believe I have even seen that posted here. We will also be asked here that the population was fine years ago when the season opend that early so whats the big deal? I know I'm not going to debate it at the bar or boat landings. Good luck with this one. Barbless hooks, you really want to start with it. Once they get barbless hooks written into a law it could spread to the entire season,do we want that? Maybe we need to just ask to have it unchanged and let it be as it was |
|
| |
|
| First off, the way I understand it the reason the season changed to the later date in the early 80's was not for biological reasons but it was pushed by one warden in Hayward that was encountering anglers on LCO sighting and snagging and keeping big fish that were up shallow.
After the season was changed many resorts actually saw a decline in May business.
Over the years the proposal has come up many times from different places to have a C&R season only to get put down by the CC or others. On several occasions different biologists, fish managers, and DNR personnel have stated to me and others that there is no biological reason or evidence of it that an early C&R season would harm the fishery. Yet it always failed being enacted. So while I too do not agree that the politicians should be involved with this, just maybe it was the ONLY way it would have gotten done?
Personally I do not feel it is an issue that will have a negative effect on our musky fishery but could help the northern WI economy out and give us another fishing opportunity.  |
|
| |
|
| I applaud Mr. Meyer for finding a way to get things done.
Mr. Meyer found a way to provide Fishing related businesses with added revenue and provide Muskie Fisherman with more opportunities to fish in this state. At the same time he included protection for the Muskie fishery via a C&R only season (that could/should be extended) and through barbless hooks. While I'm not convinced going barbless is necessary, it would certainly help when anglers are not equipped with the proper release tools. This also furthers the education process that releasing all Muskies is a viable regulation , and that barbless hooks aid in the release process (as do bolt cutters etc.)
Should the DNR feel that these regulations are threatening to the Muskie fishery they have the ability to work through the NRB to change these regs immediately - as they did for the sturgeon fishery earlier this year. While I support the early C&R season (an oppty to fish with kids on action lakes near hayward), if the WDNR were to demonstrate reasons why this may be harmful to the Muskie fishery, I would change my view on the subject. I'd encourage the WDNR to identify specific waters where there is danger to the fishery and get those waters in front of the NRB immediately. (One lake at a a time - if necessary. See Pelican Lake size limit)
The debate on whether the barbless regulation is enforceable shouldn't be an issue. If someone is fishing without barbs - write them a ticket and let the courts decide. Also - this can be better defined in the DNR Reg booklet before the season opens.
Mr. Meyers work should be applauded, he used all the tools available to him to provide businesses and fisherman in his area added oppportunities to practice their livelihood while protecting the resource. The changes aren't perfect, and the WDNR has more than enough time to provide any added necessary controls before this takes effect.
I just wish Mr. Meyer had included a Musky stamp and raised the statewide minimum size limit at the same time.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32953
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | 'I just wish Mr. Meyer had included a Musky stamp and raised the statewide minimum size limit at the same time. '
I'm really glad he didn't try that one. That's the job of a fisheries manager to decide, not a lawmaker, IMO.
"Politicians should be changed as often as diapers, and for the very same reason." |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8859
| "Politicians should be changed as often as diapers, and for the very same reason."
brilliant |
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| Why does the pike and walleye season shut down at the end of February each year? O ya to protect them during their spawn. Why not have it a catch and release season, barbless hooks only between Feb 30th and the May opener??? That way we could really enjoy the late season ice fishing and it would bring in more revenue. Makes sense to me. If they want to harass the hell out of the musky's when they are up shallow then we might as well harass the pike and walleye too when they are spawning.
Mr Musky |
|
| |
|
| Mr. Musky,
Nice to see you recommending the harassment of any fish while they are spawning. (that should endear Musky anglers to other fisherman)
In most lakes (not all) the Muskies have completed the spawn by the opener. If not the WDNR has the tools to change this across the board - or on an individual lake basis. On a large percentage of lakes there is no natural reproduction - so why close the season at all?
Nothing has been taken out of the WDNR hands, they just have to act if they feel protection is needed. They looked at the sturgeon fishery and acted based on scientific reasons this summer - bypassing the conservation congress. They changed the season and size limits. The WDNR should be applauded for this. I hope they look at Muskies with the same seriousness.
If it's something that the biologists feel is a problem, I expect to see action on their part. IMHO there are a few lakes that should be exempt from the early season (LCO & Trout are two that come to mind from discussions with the WDNR).
It will be interesting to see how this plays out, but I'm hoping the WDNR uses it in their favor to protect spawners in some lakes where necessary while channeling early season fishing pressure to lakes that can support it. (ie: hi density lakes)
I know several kids that will get exposed to some fantastic action lakes during this early season. I hope that there isn't an overreaction that closes the early season back down.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| Guest,
That statement that most musky's are done spawning are done by the opener (I assume your talking walleye opener) is not true. Things have been ahead of schedule these past few years because of the abnormally warm early springs. Other years there's still ice on some lakes for the opener in northern WI. My point I was trying to make is that other species are shut down at that time to protect them while they spawn or finish up spawning. Other guys who fish the northwoods would agree with me on this.
Mr Musky |
|
| |
|
Posts: 5874
| Uhm, there are lots of waters in WI that are open to walleye fishing during the spawn. That would be catch and KEEP fishing, too. So your point really is? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| Shep im referring to the Northern WI waters that are closed from Feb 30th to the first weekend in May. My point really is that it is closed for walleyes and northerns for a reason, the same reason Muskys dont open till Memorial day weekend in the northern zone. I am against this early catch and release season because I think way to many muskys are going to be snagged, there's just too many of them up shallow that early in the year and too many idiots out there dying for a big fish at any expense!!!!! If anything why aren't we keeping the musky season open till Feb 30th like Northerns and Walleyes both northern and southern zone? What sense does the Nov 30th closer make? It surely isn't going to affect a darn thing keeping it open longer rather then opening it sooner.
Mr Musky |
|
| |
|
| I am a Wisconsin native currently living in Minnesota, and I spend close to 100 days a year fishing northern WI, mainly targeting muskies on the Turtle Flambeau Flowage. I just became aware of Rep. Meyer's actions today thanks to a link to a Lakeland Times article that was posted on another fishing site, and I am outraged. I'm glad to see Dave Neuswanger expressing his disgust for the manner in which this seson was created, and I share it.
You folks are missing the bigger picture. At a time when the DNR is working so hard to restore the quality and reputation of the state's musky fishery and restore natural reproduction in lakes like mine, even a slight possibility that this might have an adverse effect makes it a terrible idea. This also sets a very dangerous precedent for future legislative interference with the DNR's statutory authority to regulate hunting and fishing. How ironic that at the same time the state senate passed a measure that would reduce political influence over the DNR by shifting the authority to appoint the DNR secretary from the governor back to the Natural Resources Board, this idiot from Eagle River has created a new fishing season by circumventing the established CC process and sticking it in the back door through the budget bill. We'd better hope the folks who think it won't harm the fish are right, or we'll all end up taking it in the back door.
I have notified Rep. Meyer (and every chamber of commerce in his district) that I have no intention of taking part in the early season and intend to boycott every business in his district until and unless this nonsense is repealed. I urge others to do likewise.
[email protected] |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | "Politicians should be changed as often as diapers, and for the very same reason."
Steve wants Robin Williams as President?
This is an enforcement nightmare in the making. They should have thrown trolling in there right away too.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32953
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Sure, he'd be about as effective as anyone else we have had in the job in the last 30 years, and would be just another actor in the White House...plus he would be actually interesting to listen to. George Carlin for VP. Dennis Miller for Defense Secretary.
End of the freaking world, but we'd go out laughing. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | I'm about as relaxed about Wisconsin fishing as anybody, I've come to the realization that fishing here is all about the tourism dollar. What I don't understand is why they allow rules that make an already understaffed Enforcement agency work harder. Is there plans to increase warden enforcement up there? Probably not and we'll be right back to using the "honor system" that's already happening.
Wisconsin's new motto: "Fish All You Want, We'll Make More" |
|
| |
|
Posts: 444
| I dont understand any of Steve's W's concerns, How often do you even see DNR?, much less have them harrass you were you have to agrue about fishing for pike vs muskies...has for barbless, big deal you change out hooks, takes 10secs, and is obvious barbless is smaller in diameter and would create a smaller hole and much easier to remove.i think this is a great opurtinity to fish early season muskies that wont have any adverse effect on the population, I also cant beleive you toss small spinners and have never caught a muskie, I catch them all time on small bass spinners, 3 inch crankbaits and even crappie minnows and night crawlers...
opener in may, Cant wait for a five fish day!! I'm going to call the DNR and thank them... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | How often do we see the DNR? All the time! I've been checked every single time I've been out up north. I get checked in the Point area all the time. I even got checked on a lake that I didnt think the DNR came to at all. It is going to be an enforcement nightmare. Plain and simple. One guy up in the front tossing for walleyes and the other guy in back tossing for muskies. One guy in the front tossing a jig and a minnow the guy in back tossing a Creature Jig. Who is fishing for what? Which hooks have to be barbless? If I hook into a musky while walleye fishing and the warden sees me land it, am I now fishing for muskies because I landed one on my walleye gear? Maybe these are extreme situations, but I see this being a nightmare to enforce. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 444
| you get checked everytime, BS!, I fished wisconsin for 20 years and have seen the DNR once...which was the only time my grandpa has ever been checked and he but in almost 60 years in northern WI, you guys are getting carried away.... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Why would I make that up? I've been checked every time I've gone out up north. I even know the warden by name. Heck I've been checked twice in one day. They are out there. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2323
Location: Stevens Point, WI | You've only been checked once in 20 years. Well, if you fish lakes that get a lot of attention, and or boating traffic, you will get checked. Pointerpride and I got checked two consecutive trips to the same lake this past year. That lake has a lot of resorts, but is also a very good fishing lake. If your on the right water and at the right time, you will get checked. Their is only two wardens per county if I am right, how can a warden be on every lake in the north woods? That is impossible. Even with super human powers. The wardens are out there, watching when you have no clue there even there.
Edited by Merckid 11/24/2007 6:16 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 444
| Well pointer arent you studying up to be involved in the DNR community? Lets see how much time you can waste sitting around, watching fishermen with your binocs, DNR resources are stretched really thin, maybe it's the one lake you fish...Mercid, two DNR a county? How many Muskie lakes in Ashland, iron or sawyer county? Then there going to Desinate there resources to spy on fisherman, i dont beleive it.... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Actually, I'm not studying to be a warden, sorry to disappoint. Yes I agree, the DNR is stretched very thin in the warden area. Not much we can do about that, but the fact of the matter is they are out there checking people. They cant check everyone, you must be one of the lucky ones. Regardless, this thing is going to be a nightmare to enforce, but on the other side, if its open, I'll fish it. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2323
Location: Stevens Point, WI | You just made my point more solid. You haven't been checked all but once in 20 years? Wouldn't you think that if there were more than two wardens per county you would be checked a bit more than that? I know in Langlade, Oneida and Vilas, there are only two wardens in each of those counties. Reason I know that, I talked to one of both of the wardens in all three of those counties this year. Usually, they split a county up, one warden gets the northern half of a county and the other gets the southern half. Or, east side or west side of the county. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 444
| that was my point, why even worry about getting checked and dealing with the DNR, two wardens a county were there good easly be twenty plus muskie lakes?my pint is there not going to harrass you....The DNR gets a bad rap like cops, so cool to hate them.. There just doesnt seem to be a solid, logic based reason were this is going to be hurtfull to the Muskie population,
Sorry pointer i must have miss read an earlier post, thought you were studying to work with the DNR... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | "How often do we see the DNR? All the time! I've been checked every single time I've been out up north. "
I've been a property owner in Land O Lakes for 20 years, a lake home owner for 6, I have never been checked while Musky fishing. I've never been checked ice fishing and checked twice walleye fishing. I total about 125 days a year. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Well apparently I look like a law breaker as I get checked often. I also cannot go through an airport without getting the pat down at every gate and 'random' searches....I guess I'm just unlucky, although I like seeing them out there. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1767
Location: Lake Country, Wisconsin | I'm not seeing this mass checkup of DNR either. I have been checked in WI one time, and that was in a county with fewer options of fishable lakes.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | punt, take a mulligan ... put the shovel down .... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32953
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I was checked about a half dozen times this year.Twice on lakes smaller than 300 acres with dirt unimproved landings. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | It's a possibility that because I fish two lakes more so than any others that the warden knows my boat and doesn't see a need to check. Pointer, if you fish alot of different lakes, wardens probably don't know your boat, thus all the checks. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | i guess i too can't imagine an "every time check scenario" ... 10 years and on avg. 4 days a week on the water throughout two counties and have never been checked and only seen one doing a creel study. absolutes are tough to push either direction ... and usually end with a blank stare on one end ... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32953
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Sled,
You just are SOOO honest looking...it's just obvious there's no need to check you!
Umm, well...sorta honest looking? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | that's gotta be it ...
at the moment chompin' at the bit to get on the ice .... everything is ready to go ....
what does a dnr official do to prioritize which lakes they work vs. which ones they don't do so much on? ... there are so darn many lakes i can't imagine they are able to make the kind of impact many of us would like to see. the ice fishing thing is probably the most significant area of abuse for multiple limits etc... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | I asked Mike that very question last season. He said the "famous" lakes with the most recorded violations get hit first, second were the ones with recent complaints of possible violations. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | I supposed considering that I dont fish up north all that often has some play in the equation, and that I only fish a few selected lakes. If you fish pressured lakes more often though I'd think you would be checked more often? Or I'm just a shady looking character. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 382
| PP,
That "Mexi-stash" is dead give away that you are a suspicious character!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 203
| Got a Question? How does a bill like this early season catch and release get brought up? Who is/are responsible for thinking of it in the first place.. is it anglers, gov., dnr.... Just curious as to who came up with the idea in the first place..i.e. who gave people like Dan Meyer the want to write it up?
bret
Edited by johnson 11/26/2007 9:17 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 275
| Does anyone know the website for the new law?
Tom |
|
| |
|
Posts: 654
Location: MPLS, MN | To me it seems that since MN and Canada do so well and we have such great fisheries for size and numbers that alot of folks who use to vacation and spend money in Wisc now go to MN and Canada. So with the economic shortfall the knee jerk reasction is to use something like this to try to get some of those vacation dollars back. Instead of looking at MN and Canada as models {that would take some years to build some of those fisheries back up or better than ever.} Political answer is this. |
|
| |
New catch and release WI early muskie season is LAW