|
|
| The Numbers were released yesterday for the ceded territory and they are not good.
Walleyes-48776
Muskies-1555
These numbers do not include nor are counted against the fish speared through the ice this past winter[:knockout:] [:blackeye:] [:(] | |
| | |
| Oh man, kind of makes you wonder if our efforts to help fisheries are moving forward or backwards. Regardless of where those fish are from, 1,555 muskies is a hard number to replace with such a slow growing resource. With this many fish being taken, what are the effects this has on a lakes balance?
-Phil Cali | |
| | |
| Folks this has been a touchy subject in the past....PLEASE keep civil on this one..
Thank you! | |
| | |
| Chuck, where can we find more specific information? I’d like to know how many were speared out of what lake. Thanks | |
| | |
| I am also of the belief that the native american spearing is not the correct thing to do. How ever I would like some realistic numbers as to how many Muskies are kept by sportfishermen in the state on an annual basis. If the number of total fish taken is to high overall both parties should cut back an equal percentage. What has happened with native Am. spearing is basicsally beyond our control. I have been tothe landings, chased the spearers all over the lakes and all I got was very, very, tired. I hope you guys don't beat this to death in here, but with the spearing and sportfish harvesting we all just have to do a better job of promoting our catch, photo & release philosophy. Just a few words from an old vetran of the spearing wars. I have attended meeting after meeting and written lot's of letters. All to no avail so far. That does not mean I have given up, just means I am not quite as militant as I used to be. With this subject being so volitile, please keep the comments on a civilized plane. We do not need a vicious war of words in this forum. Listen to Jason and keep an even keel when posting on this thread.
Let Em Go...Let Em Grow.....Mike | |
| | |
| I agree I would like to see some numbers on how many muskies get thumped by fisherman each year in Wisconsin. Impossible number to get accurately. But I bet it may not be far from the spearing number, lets assume they are the same for discussion sake.
The question I ask is this: Would the distribution of muskies speared skewed to the larger size for spearers versus the fisherman? I don't know the answer but have a therory.
Also, the lake distribution or impact per lake would definately be skewed, the spearing having a greater impact per lake.
Here in Madison obviously all fish that are killed are from fisherman, but lakes like Little Arb?? Not sure.
I don't want to stir the pot just remind people that yes both fisherman and spearers impact the fishery, just in different ways depending on your perspective (location).
Food for thought....
Cory | |
| | |
| Both of those numbers have left me speechless. 50,000 walleys and 1600 muskies... and there are people out there that think this will not have an impact on the various fisheries that they are taken from. Chuck, thank you for keeping us informed of the limits. But please correct me if I am wrong, these numbers are limits (frightening ones at that).. nothing has been speared yet.. right?
| |
| | |
| It is my opinion that our(musky fishermen) first goal should be to get regulations into place to find out how many are speared through the ice.
A few years ago Tony Rizzo told me that over 60 muskies were speared on Arrowhead lake in one ice season. Arrowhead is a small lake.
| |
| | |
| yes I would like a link to the numbers,it would be nice to see what l;akes got speared. | |
| | |
| The numbers for Deer lake here in Polk county this winter are rumored to be 48 fish speared through the ice. That is a lot of fish for under 1000 acres. I haven't been able to confirm this yet. I do however know that the lake was speared this winter.
Let Em Go...Let Em Grow.....Mike | |
| | |
| Thanks for keeping us posted, it's kind of hard to find any informaton on this any more. Everyone is afraid of the controversy. And to think they need all those fish for "Ceremonial Purposes"[:blackeye:] [:knockout:] [:(] | |
| | |
| Hello All, Great job on NOT letting this subject get UGLY. I've been involved and have followed this from the begining and getting ugly doesn't work and is (I.M.H.O.) counter-productive. First I should clarify a few things, the declaration totals are just the numbers they are saying or intending to harvest, that doesn't mean They will hit their mark. Spear-fishing hasn't started yet. For example, last year their declaration figures were as follows, 2001- declared 47,590 walleyes, they harvested 22,473. 2001 muskie declared 1,579- 233 harvested. Weather plays a important role in their success just like it does with hook and line fisherman. Again,these number do NOT include any winter harvest that has taken place and as far as I Know there are NO totals given for them, and they do NOT count towards any of their numbers. Once their season is complete and the totals are annonced I'll post the results here, until then all we can do is hope for the best. (or worst)[:blackeye:] | |
| | |
| Chuck,
I do not know you, but from what I have read (and heard from others), you are a logical, knowlegable, and responsible sportsman and conservationist.
I would like to hear your opinion on the benifits of Native Indians Exercising their Treaty Rights (specifically spearing), if you believe there are any.
When I left Wisconsin 10 years ago, the shock of Native Americans spearing game fish was just starting to wear off and people were starting to see benifits from the increased study of these ceded waters.
Are benifits from increased fishery management activities being realized, or not? If not why?
The reason I ask this question is that last summer I returned home (Wisconsin) and was able to take a 2 week fishing trip up north to some of my favorite lakes. I found the fishing to be poor.
I know there are a lot of possible reasons for this, but any time I asked bait shop owners, the Spearing issue was raised.
Thanks,
Steve | |
| | |
| Steve, thank you for your kind words, I appreciate it. To answer your question as to the benefits (my opinion) that Native Amreican spear-fishing has caused I can only think of one. The amount of biological studies and fishery management that has insued has greatly increased (census creels, fish hatcheries and stocking programs I believe couldn't hurt) Although some of their numbers that they (DNR and Tribal) release makes me some-what sceptical, for example, the declared numbers 48,000 and almost 1,600 are what they feel is 50% of the SAFE available harvest. Now the first, 48,000 is a stretch, maybe I'm wrong but if 48,000 at 50% is safe and sport-fisherman CAN take (not to say they do) the other 50% I can't see how it's safe to be able to take almost 100,000 walleyes PER YEAR and it keep a healthy and populated resource. Now for muskie, this is where God himself would have to convince me that it would be SAFE to harvest over 3,000 muskies per season in the ceded territory (not the whole state)and NOT HURT OUR RESOURCE. That is the only benefit I can think of and sometimes it's QUESTIONABLE. [;)] | |
| | |
| For those interested in the numbers, I have tried to send a copy of the "tolal" sheet of muskies speared from the beginning the open water spearing, 1985. Don't know if it will upload or if it will be readable if it does.
For those who want their own copy of the spearing totals every year contact:
Great Lakes Indian Fish & Wildlife Commission
Biological Services Division
P.O. Box 9
Odanah, WI 54861
715-682-6619
www.glifwc.org | |
| | |
| Chuck and Joeltinker,
Thanks for the information and your opinions. With the trend in muskie managment moving towards lake by lake regulation, my thinking was that the increased study would help in making the correct decisions for muskie management. It sounds like, however, there has not been enough study or enough credible study to convince you about the amount of harvest.
I hope my trip this summer will be more productive than last year.
Please keep posting us information on this topic.
Thanks,
Steve
| |
| |
|