|
|
| This may have been beaten to death
Do you think GB can sustain the pressure? Certainly from a size standpoint it can. What about strictly in terms of fish numbers.
I believe 99% of fish are CPR'd out there, still I've witnessed 2 45+" floaters this yr. This in 2 trips.
Can the numbers of fish in the Bay, with their fall pattern and all figured out, be a sustainable fishery?
Interested to hear your comments. | |
| | |
Posts: 734
Location: Watertown, MN | Suspend
I think that is great ?, never fished there but heard last nite that there was something like 38 boat fishing this small area, great bite, but think things are going to change with that much sustained pressure in a small area, fish will start moving off and using other structure. Another question is how many fish are being harvest out there by other non musky anglers who have got on this pattern? Look and Mill Lacs and Vermillion, once great fisheries and still are but as some people have stated the pie is getting split up alot more, and people who were catching many big fish, numbers are slowing going down.
Troyz | |
| | |
Location: Green Bay, WI | Great question. I think the answer is yes...for a couple of reasons.
First, I think the numbers *seem* to be sufficient to buffer the angling pressure. I haven't heard a formal population estimate for the lower bay (don't know if one even exists), but I have heard some generalizations for the ENTIRE bay system. While indeed the pattern seems to be "figured out" in the lower bay now, I can assure you that there probably aren't as many fish caught out there as you think. For example, I was trolling out there pretty much all day Saturday, and didn't see more than 5-6 fish caught in the area that I was fishing. And there were probably 30 boats out there, all within a 1-2 square mile area of me. With binoculars, you can pretty much see when someone is netting a fish. So while there are some fantastic catches out there daily, I would venture to say that there are many boats out there that don't catch even one fish all day.
Second, all of the guys I have spoken to that know the bay system (from Green Bay up past Chambers Island and beyond), pretty much say the same thing--that the fish we see here in the fall represent only a small proportion of the total muskellunge biomass in the entire bay. I have spoken with experienced guides who tell me that they think that many of the fish in the bay never even see a lure. I don't know how you'd prove that, but from the places these guys tell me they are fishing, I don't see how or why the fish would travel 20/30/40+ miles to get to the Fox River. There just doesn't seem to be the need to do that. There are vast quantities of forage available for them out in open water, and in the 15-20 times I have been fishing out there, I can't say that I have seen more than one or two guys trolling more than three or four miles from the landing. So I think that as far as sheer numbers go, there are very likely MANY times more fish up where guys aren't fishing, than there are were most guys are fishing.
Of course the non-musky anglers can have a say in this as well--as they certainly catch their share of fish. But that happens in the spring as well (maybe more so), as thus far hasn't seem to have hurt the numbers. But another thing to consider is that the pattern may not be the same next year. The guys I have met since joining the Titletown club tell me that this is an especially good year for the lower bay, and that the last couple of years were nowhere near as good. So who's to say that next year will be as good?
But the original poster raises an excellent concern, and that's one of the main reasons guys need to really perfect their CPR skills out there. In 15 or so trips out there in the last 2 months, I have not seen one dead musky--though I in no way doubt that there are fish that are lost. I have witnessed poor fish-handling skills out there on occasion, but all we can hope for is that experience gained by these anglers helps hone their release skills. As always, education is the key to successful CPR, and it also takes practice. Who knows--maybe the practice these anglers receive handling fish in the bay will benefit other fish they catch down the road?
One thing's for sure though--as we get farther out from the early stocking efforts of '89, it will be very interesting to see the growth potential of these fish. And as it has been suggested that these fish stick pretty close to the waters where they were initially stocked (PP102's fish was caught within a mile or so of where it was stocked in 1996!), I would hope that there are stocking efforts at several places in the bay system...and not just near the mouth of the Fox River.
Great thread!
TB
| |
| | |
| Good post tcbetka. The biggest concern should be teaching people how to handle the fish. I have seen many fish caught and kept out of the water for 5+ min. just to get a photo. Not a good thing. Even Larry Smith could use a lesson. On an episode he did for the news he netted a fish and brought it staight into the boat to get the hooks out. In case some of you don't know fish can't breath out of the water. We have a good thing going!!!! Lets keep it that way. | |
| | |
Location: WI | Interesting thread, I spend several days a week down there, I have not seen a floater yet, but have seen many that I figured would be floating eventually.
I dont know how many times I have seen fish brought into the boat to be worked on, then the 5+ minute photo session, because everyone in the boat wants a picture with the fish.
A friend of mine came up with a good way to put it in perspective. Take some middle age overweight person, now make them run around their car several times, then stick their head in a bucket of water and see how long they make it.
As far as sustainability, good question. Time will tell, we have 2 monster year classes right now coming up the 40ish and the 45ish which are a result of the Paper Mills settlement. I am curious to see what shape it will be in after those year classes have run their course in another 10 years or so. One thing I do know is there are still too many fish being kept. Fact: if you kill a fish at 50" it will never get any bigger.
I had been talking with Kevin Kapuscinski before he left about talking with people at the boat landings before they wet out. There is only a couple of landings, it wouldn't be that hard. Much like they are doing with the milfoil volunteers we now see at many boat landings through the year inland. I have found that with alot of people I have talked to really were not aware that these fish were as fragile as they are. Believe it or not most fisherman are not frequent internet users. And dont read the magazines. So on the musky boards you are pretty much preaching to the choir. It wouldnt take much to throw together a proper CPR pamphlet we could hand out much like the aquatic invader people. And a couple of people at each landing talking with fishermen. I think this would be a great thing especially during the spring walleye run where I have seen the worst handling of fish, mainly because alot of those guys have never caught a musky they really have no idea on the handling. I think our energy would be better focused on education right at the landing, rather than beating a dead horse on the internet. | |
| | |
Posts: 1185
Location: Wishin I Was Fishin' | Educating proper CPR is very important.
Other negative factors: VHS....1)only 1000 hold over fish were stocked because they didn't get any eggs this spring. 2)VHS induced fatalities? none proven yet, 3)there are a bunch of Georgian Bay fish at a hatchery in Canada waiting to come to Green Bay to diversify the gene pool but can't come yet because of the VHS, 4) the 54" length limit was shot down at a DNR meeting on the basis of not having a biologist in Green Bay at the time (maybe they shouldn't have drug their feet so long), 5) There continues to be a few certain individuals targeting muskies and killing 50"+ (why do you need more than one if you have your heart set on a skin mount?).
Some good things though: 1)A new biologist in Green Bay, 2)Wild Rose Hatchery is almost complete with a multi- million dollar renovation that will allow for many times the spotted musky production, 3)still a bunch of money from the paper mills for future musky stocking, 4)Local musky club support is rapidly growing, 5) We will continue to push for the 54" length limit. | |
| | |
| With the work of the local musky clubs, as Joe said, it will just keep getting bigger and better. What the clubs do with the stocking and the push for the size limit increases is nothing short of spectacular. Hats off to them.
The next big issue that we as fisherman can control is the education of the importance of safe handling and proper release techniques. With the safe handling and release of these fish, you will see more and more monsters being caught.
VHS we can not do anything about if it is here. The Good Lord will let nature run its course and it will be gone. The importance of VHS, if it IS here, is the spreading of it. That, we can kind of control, but we know so little about it. Maybe the weak will go bye bye and the strong survive. Who knows. | |
| | |
Location: Green Bay, WI | Excellent post and idea(s) Shane. This type of thing has been discussed at the Titletown MI club meetings briefly over the past few months, although other things have taken center stage recently. But I think this needs to be revisited ASAP. Our next meeting is tomorrow night, and so there's an opportunity to run it up the flag pole and see who salutes...
EDIT: Oh, and Joe I agree with you about the 54" size limit issue. I would favor it, and will bring it up tomorrow night as well.
TB
Edited by tcbetka 11/12/2007 11:34 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 83
| Catch and release is an important factor in Maintaining a fishery for a fish with a long lifespan. However, I tend to believe we may overstate the importance of fishing pressure. Considering the fact that we are talking about a huge body of water and probably a few thousand fish, If 50 are harvested, and 100 suffer delayed mortality from an encounter with an angler, It won't devastate the fishery.
The big danger is the spread of disease, which could knock out half the population in a very short period of time, pesticide use, and environmental change. There very well may be a crash, and fishermen will blame each other for "fishing it out". We may bear responsibility, but it will be what we sprayed on our lawns, the products we purchased from overseas, destruction of key habitat, and what we dump down our drains.
| |
| | |
| why is the 54" limit dead?
we had a unanimous vote in 2007 at the cc meetings and its supposed to be on the ballot in april.
did i miss something?
dannyboy | |
| | |
Location: Green Bay, WI | That's what I have been told as well, Danny. That's why I am going to ask about it tonight, as (apparently) there is some confusion as to whether or not it's dead. When I spoke with Mike Donofrio of the WiDNR at the MI tournament a month ago, he told me that he was unsure *where* the process was. No one has submitted any such rule-change proposal to the area biologists. From what I understand (and I may be mistaken on this), with respect to the DNR's process, any such proposal would need to be advanced through one of the local biologists--probably Dave Rowe in this case.
So I'm not sure just where things are right now...but I will find out today/tonight, and report back later.
EDIT: I did speak to one of the other local biologists and he advised that he did not know the status of this proposal. He also clarified that, while it did NOT need to be submitted to the CC through the DNR biologists, it generally will not get implemented as a regulation until it is forwarded to the DNR from the Conservation Congress, and they sign off on it. Obviously, there are other ways to get a new regulation passed (like a budget bill attachment, apparently), but he told me that was far less likely than doing it the old-fashioned way.
I am still planning to question our club members about it tonight though.
TB
Edited by tcbetka 11/13/2007 1:27 PM
| |
| | |
Location: Green Bay, WI | Here's the thread:
http://muskie.outdoorsfirst.com/board/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=34...
Note Dennis Radloff's post toward the end of the thread. Pretty well answers the question.
And for those like me who didn't understand the full process, here's a link that summarizes nicely:
http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/caer/ce/news/DNRNews_Lookup.asp?id=5...
...scroll down to the section entitled "Spring wildlife and fish rules hearings April 16" for more information.
TB
Edited by tcbetka 11/13/2007 1:43 PM
| |
| | |
| the way i understand it is that it will be on the ballot.
i read dennis' post and that is what i gather from it.
if its not going to be we better get a rally going here.
why did we even bother last year if its not gonna be on the ballot? we got out, pushed this and got a unanimous vote to get it on the ballot.
yes im getting mad.
where do we go next?
dannyboy | |
| | |
Location: Green Bay, WI | I am trying to reach the area biologist here to discuss it--I will see how much support he will give for it. As I understand it, if the DNR biologists are behind it, we are half-way there.
EDIT: Danny, give me a PM with your contact number and I will give you a call to discuss what I have found out thus far.
TB
Edited by tcbetka 11/14/2007 8:22 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 714
Location: Rhinelander, WI | Sense it passed the resolution process last year there are two ways it can get on the actual rule change ballot this year.
1st Local DNR biologist runs with it because of the support and writes the rule change question. This then needs to be approved by the WDNR board to go on the ballot.
2nd Conservation Congress Committee submits the proposal as a rule change, don’t know who writes it or who takes it to WDNR board.
Suggestions to get to the bottom of it ASAP would be to contact the local WDNR biologist, if the guy is new he probably has a LOT on his plate and maybe didn’t even know where this issue was or how important it is to the Musky community. Be a squeaky wheel and OFFER as much support and help as possible.
Second I would contact your local Conservation Congress members and find out what happened to the proposal over the last year.
My guess is the CLOCK is TICKING as I bet the ballot needs to be finalized very soon, if it hasn’t been finalized already.
Good Luck!
As to the orginal question, what would worry me the most is it appears like the majority of the catches are comeing from a relativly small area. Even though Green Bay is HUGE, and many fish will be lost out in the bay forever. The ones that make the trip up the river every fall and spring are the ones getting pounded, that could be a little worry some in my mind. That's why I feel the above 54" limit is so important.
Nail A Pig!
Mike
Edited by MRoberts 11/14/2007 8:38 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 714
Location: Rhinelander, WI | One suggestion if the early season incidental catches are causing lots of problems because of poor releases.
Local musky clubs could set up a Musky Assistance program where by they get volunteers to patrol the Fox during the spring walleye run. Have all the proper release tools on board including a camera, and offer help to people if they are unprepared for a big musky and are struggling. Many spring walleye guys may not have a hook cutter, jaw spreader and big pliers or a big net.
If done PROPERLY it could potential save a few musky and build angler relations. Offer to take a picture of the anglers catch and send them the pictures later.
Key thing would be HELPING without PREACHING, or it will never work.
Nail A Pig!
Mike
| |
| | |
Location: Green Bay, WI | I just talked to him. It's not too late for anything, the way I understand it. This is a process, and the wheels are turning. But the process will take time...
If the CC sees fit, they can submit it to the DNR board directly. The board will then of course ask for the input of their biologists, so having the biologist on-board is paramount.
On the other hand, the local biologists can simply run with it as you said, and pursue it on their own. That hasn't happened yet, for a couple reasons. But our biologist told me they will be discussing it at the upcoming Wisconsin Musklleunge Management Team meetings this winter. I know several of the folks on the WMMT and can assure everyone that they are extremely qualified & skilled in their field. I have every confidence that they will resolve the issue.
I don't want to go into everything our biologist & I talked about, because it isn't appropriate on this forum. However I can assure you that this is a VERY important issue to the local biologists right now, and they are intimately aware of how the public feels about repeated harvests of 50+" fish from the GB system.
After my conservation with him, I am very reassured that they are addressing the issue directly, and have more than one alternative to facilitate resolution of this issue.
Tom Betka
Research Director
Titletown Chapter, Muskies Inc.
| |
| | |
| tom,
shoot me an email or call anytime:
[email protected]
or 715-674-2061
and by the way thanks for your hard work and follow up on this.
this is very important to me and anyone who cares about green bay muskies. 50"ers are getting taken daily and sometimes by the same folks who don't know how fragile the resource is.
dannyboy | |
| |
|
Sustainability