|
|
Posts: 3511
Location: Elk River, Minnesota | Tried to do a search for this, but it seems as though I was unable to get the search function to work yet...
Anyone know for sure if this is happening this year? What are the dates? How do you think it will affect the general opener up north over Memorial day weekend?
Thanks
Steve | |
| | |
Location: The Yahara Chain | It doesn't go into effect until 2009. | |
| | |
Posts: 2893
Location: Yahara River Chain | Not this year. The WDNR is working out the language for the new regulation. It will be in the 2009 regulations and you can start fishing then. | |
| | |
Posts: 1168
| Anyone willing to give the over/under on guys getting pinched on this in 2008 who don't read their regs? | |
| | |
Posts: 97
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan | I bet even is they read the regs some people will still try to get away with it and say they didnt know | |
| | |
Posts: 32959
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I doubt it. The Wardens here don't give in much to stupid excuses. | |
| | |
Posts: 272
| Other than people not wanting to stick their neck out and perhaps be labeled as a whistle-blower....is there some other reason why more names of the people who pushed for this are NOT coming to the surface "publicly?"
Representative Meyers is a public figure, so he's fair game. But I'm sure he didn't do this all by himself.
Edited by muskie-addict 1/2/2008 12:53 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 32959
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I think it was tourism folks applying pressure for the most part. | |
| | |
| Even though it doesn't go into effect until 2009...
How do you think it will impact the Memorial Day opener? Do you think it will reduce the number of boats out on that Saturday morning?
Steve | |
| | |
Posts: 272
| sworrall - 1/2/2008 1:04 PM
I think it was tourism folks applying pressure for the most part.
.....meaning its just "tourism" people in general, a faceless entity pushing for this? I'm hearing names of fishing guides thrown around privately as specific people who lobbied hard.
Minnesota and Canada must just sit back and laugh. We're going backward. | |
| | |
Posts: 32959
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | We don't publish 'rumor and innuendo'. If a Guide 'lobbied hard', then so be it, I am not aware of any articles, press releases, or other items confirming that.
I was told the lobby behind this was Tourism based.
| |
| | |
Posts: 566
Location: Elgin, IL | No, they don't give in much to really good excuses either.  | |
| | |
Posts: 32959
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Well Mark, you know what they say about excuses....hehehehehe. | |
| | |
Posts: 272
| sworrall - 1/2/2008 2:12 PM
We don't publish 'rumor and innuendo'. If a Guide 'lobbied hard', then so be it, I am not aware of any articles, press releases, or other items confirming that.
I was told the lobby behind this was Tourism based.
So "tourism people" is a sufficient answer when the WHO question comes up?
I realize this is not a site that publishes paper literature like some other outdoor sites are....but do we really need to wait for a press release? Are we really content to just be THAT un-proactive about following up on this? It doesn't take a news conference to figure out who is behind this. I actually found out in general conversation on a PM about something else.
There is no "rumor or innuendo" in KNOWING who it was behind this. Wouldn't the readers on here like to know who it was that pushed for this so they could choose for themselves whether or not to support the guides and/or their brick and mortar businesses as well?
*edit
I'm not calling out anybody on M1st with this post. I'm not expecting M1st to seek and publish it either. I'm really just wondering why names have not been exposed on here. By anyone, moderator or average joe sixpack musky fisherman. It baffles me. Am I the last one?
Edited by muskie-addict 1/2/2008 8:17 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 32959
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | It is sufficient for me, yes. Business and Tourism interests in Eagle River and the surrounding area seem to be the obvious, since the politician responsible was undoubtedly working for his constituents. That's what they do, pretty much. If there was a 'muskie angler' lobby behind this, I haven't heard anything and I do keep my ear to the wall, so to speak. Fact is the legal structure we have in this State allows for this sort of thing to happen. You are looking for someone to 'blame', right? Blame the guy who authored the bill, and the person who signed it into law. As far as rumor and innuendo, all 'I heards' are just that until confirmed by at least three credible sources. There's your standard. Then you have a 'story', what to do with it? With what motivation? | |
| | |
Posts: 272
| sworrall - 1/2/2008 8:58 PM
If there was a 'muskie angler' lobby behind this.......
No offense, but sure seems obvious there was a muskie angler lobby behind this. After all, the bill allows for a new, longer musky fishing season......and this very topic was brought up, by guides, with the CC and spring hearings and shot down at least twice.
To answer your last question, the motivation would be to inform people, so they can choose to avoid spending money with the guides and business people behind it. Otherwise, they win, without consequence, and "we" take it in the shorts.
-Eric
Edited by muskie-addict 1/2/2008 11:09 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 32959
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | So you want to use this information to bash and punish individuals by suggesting others here 'boycott' their businesses, right? You want to cause harm to individuals who, using politics and legal avenues, got a change made in the DNR regulations, right?
| |
| | |
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | somebody tell me how easy it is to catch a musky during the spawn .... and without a spear? ... the congressman is representing an area that lives off of maybe 5 months of tourism a year ... "if" we get snow which hasn't happened much in the last 10 years. his constituency is resort and tourism and the people who "live" off of the visitors to the area support him and voted him in .... it's an industry with a dnr who stocks and polices along with a natural reproduction to boost ... he's doing his work for his broader level of supporters ...
now, will it hurt or won't it ... who knows ... it is surprising to see that the dnr isn't involved in the legislation and they are likely wondering why ...
but, my question to you musky-addict is this .... what's the secret to catching spawning muskies? .... this new season .... i don't get it ... are they easier to catch? cause my experience has been that they could give a crud about eating a bait when they're spawning and usually wait awhile before eating ...
i just don't see this as that big of a deal ... so a guide gets a few more dates and can buy a few more bags of potatoes and groceries ... and a city sells more hotel rooms and fish fries ... and a few more tourists catch a couple fish ... wtf? ... i'm a catch and release guy ... but sometimes i read the b.s. on the internet and then don't wonder why people look at the musky fishermen like the idiots we show ourselves as sometimes ...
oops ... there i am being out there and honest again ... it must be winter
Edited by jonnysled 1/3/2008 1:55 AM
| |
| | |
| You know I am really surprised this hasnt gotten more attention. At least here anyway. What bothers me the most was how they did it, not why they did it.
I would have liked it to been voted on at the spring hearings. But of course it never made it to the ballot because it got shot down locally before it had a chance.
These people took a system we had in place for things like this, and made a mockery of it. Setting a bad precedent of how things will most certainly be done in the future. If things dont go our way lets go buy a politician.
I would at least like the clowns who supported this to come forward and have the marbles to own up to it and be there to face some people that are pretty pissed off. But that wont happen, why should they stick their neck out, they already screwed us, so what would they have to gain by it now.
They may not be easier to "catch" but they are going to be alot easier to "snag". And at a critical time, and for what? A few dollars more. Shameful!
| |
| | |
Posts: 1939
Location: Black Creek, WI | Shane Mason - 1/3/2008 5:40 AM
What bothers me the most was how they did it, not why they did it.
Would the method (how) have been accepted had it been used to achieve a 54" Size Limit on Green Bay?
Just a thought.... | |
| | |
| Very good question Jason, glad you asked, I think I covered that answer pretty well in the Green bay Recap thread but I will copy it to here.
"One last thing I wanted to say, I have heard a bit of talk on "why dont we just buy ourselves a politician like they did for the early season they backdoored on us?"
Bad Idea! The precedent that was set there is one I will not support. In fact if it did start down the dark path you are going to see skid marks leaving as far as my voice goes.
This is not how to get things done, and I for one would hate to stoop to that level. I still want to be able to sleep at night."
Hope that answers your question | |
| | |
| If the people hoping to profit off this were just kind of hoping it would go away or get swept under the rug, its not likely at this point. Its been covered pretty well over on the "the Next Bite" website so I really dont feel like rehashing other posts, Its a good read with input by those who are looking out for the best interest of the fishery, not their own pockets. Thats kind of the reason I am so baffled by its lack of coverage here. Biology aside, common sense alone tells you this is a bad idea. In Minnesota and Canada they dont start the seasons untill well after the spawn, to protect the fishery, for the benifit of everyone. Not just guys who "want to buy a few more groceries" "Minnesota and Canada must just sit back and laugh. We're going backward." pretty much says it best.
| |
| | |
| Wow Shane, you are much more of an upstanding person than I am!
If I could get Dan Meyer to piggy back some high size limits on a bunch of Oneida Co. lakes I'd be buying him steak dinners and lap dances right now!  | |
| | |
Posts: 32959
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Shane,
You made my point for me, as did Mr. Long. I was hoping that muskie-addict would continue his line of thought so I could make the point that the process used to acquire the C&R season up here is legal and has been in place for a very long time. Look to the deer baiting issue for another example, the DNR outlawed baiting, and the legislature re-instated the practice with tighter controls set by the DNR. Why? Basically the same setup we have with the C&R Muskie season; they COULD have tried to open the season on the first Saturday in May as it used to be, but instead, did what could be construed as a compromise move with the C&R only special season.
One doesn't 'buy' a politician for an item like this; one simply works with that persons office to try and get what one wishes. That statement also insinuates that the politician and the folks who pushed for the change are dishonest or worse, when in fact they were simply clever. Why is it when something happens that folks don't like the insults begin to fly...I PROMISE you, the opposition to the proposal set forth by the Coalition a few days back for Green Bay don't look at that attempt to change the law much differently than we view the C&R season change debacle.
I think it's bad policy to allow the legislature to change DNR management practices. I think it's bad that our DNR Secretary serves at the pleasure of our Governor. I think it's bad policy to underfund the single most important entity to the health of our north woods economy, which once you pass Rhinelander is almost purely tourism based. I think it's a shame we can't work with the tribes more closely to negotiate walleye limits that would again draw out of the area anglers to our resorts and hotels. I thnink it's a shame that the weather has been horrible for winter sports up here for 10 years, and that the Tourism interests have to fight with conservationists and our DNR to ty keep folks coming to the area. Witness the ridiculous unfunded mandate to the DNR which resulted (long story, it was covered by OutdoorsFIRST extensively) in the newly proposed tournament fees and permit structure, driven by Lake Association and 'water use' special interest groups.
But it's now what it is. What is to be done for it, I ask. 'Covering the subject' on the Next Bite or any website won't get anything changed, it simply allows for venting frustration and encourages the polarization of the various interest groups instead of creating action attempting to acquire change. Folks like Tom and Norm and Mike who actually try to get something done are the poeple who impress me. Note they didn't insult the opposing viewpoint or parties publicly, they instead lobbied for what they and their supporters felt is the right thing to do, in the process moving folks from the opposition to their point of view.
Democracy at work. | |
| | |
Posts: 1939
Location: Black Creek, WI | Shane, thanks for the excellent response. Very good answer, in my opinion.
Oneida Esox, thanks for keeping it real. My guess is that although Shane himself wouldn't have pursued a size limit change in that manner.... I bet he'd still be happy with the outcome and less critical of the process had that road been taken by others.
I think its time to quit worrying about HOW it got done and perhaps investing more energy in how the angling community will/should deal with it. | |
| | |
Posts: 272
| Steve, you can use whatever emotionally loaded, internet buzzwords you choose. Call it a bash. I'm calling it spending money with your conscience if this is something you feel passionate about. Kinda like buying a T-shirt that WASN'T made by a six-year-old in a Bangladesh sweatshop....or dolphin safe tuna. Its making an informed decision.
Sled, if talking about this makes me an idiot in the eyes of grocery getting guides, then so be it. I'm happy to wear that dunce cap.
I don't know what the secret is. And, yup, the spawn bite is definitely a roll of the dice. But, its clear someone thought it was worth trying for them during the spawn, and wished to capitalize on it, and plan on doing so....or we wouldn't be having this discussion.
If you had to choose "A" or "B".....would you NOT choose to leave the fish alone?
Its funny, in the conversations I have with people I fish with, especially ones outside the state, they continually say, "Sheesh, Wisconsin just continues to go backwards, don't they." But in some circles, the "what's the big deal" crowd shows up.
Edited by muskie-addict 1/3/2008 9:51 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | i think the argument started with needing to put out a list of guides so that people could throw stones their way ... it was a legislative move by a state congressman from eagle river who was trying to help his constituency ... the economy in the nation is struggling and i think we all can say that right? ... now imagine an economy that drives off of the "extra" spending money of people who now don't have as much ... if there are more weekends and more events than there were the prior year then it has the potential to increase the volume of people, their money into the economy this guy represents ... i really don't think it's the conspiracy folks make it out to be ...
trying to use the kiss the fish argument to fight against it i think is futile. trying to identify a smoking gun list of supporting guides ... what good is that going to do even if there were such a thing?
i fish a stretch of river for opening day almost every year for the past 10 years ... it's been relatively cold over the past number of years on average making it post-spawn but sometimes close ... we've caught into the double digits of fish and mostly males with a few females ... there were two years where the water temps. suggested it would have been at or just before the spawn ... skunko ... same guys, same water same, same, same ... this on a stretch where the record was 17 fish in 3 days between 3 guys with many more lost ... big, healthy population of muskies ...
so ... the definition of idiot in my post was toward a lynch mob trying to make a list of guides and then try to hurt their business by bashing them. you laid the claim toward yourself not me ...
i'd rather tell dan that trying to extend a season for muskies which will be harder to catch during that time of year, let's put out a campaign to try to help the country (specifically those in the south) understand how good the smallmouth bass fishery is in northern wisconsin and start some awareness and/or tournament campaign to coax them north for a break from the summer heat ...
| |
| | |
Posts: 32959
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Why does the DNR and ultimately our lawmakers manage our fisheries? What is the goal, to satisfy US, and those who think as we do, or to satisfy the general fishing public, the businesses they support, and all of the combined interests who pay the taxes that pay for the management programs in the first place? If you think the new C&R season is not good for the fisheries, then DO something positive to get the season changed back. I promise you, no one who CAN get this changed will give you more than an irritated 2 minutes if you are spouting insults and hollering 'boycott!!!'. Remember the folks from PARR? I do. That damage has lasted a couple decades and may never be reversed.
'Bash'--- exactly right. it's an internet word, but not a buzz word. Self explanatory. We don't allow that here, because we want folks from both sides and the MIDDLE of any issue to feel welcome here.Maybe then, just MAYBE, we can assist in getting the viewpoints from all sides of the issue expressed and get folks together to implement change or at least understand why change is difficult to acquire.
What I've been trying to say I find myself saying alot. You want to talk frustration, try dealing with good folks, all with what they feel are valid and well placed interests, who disagree over something like this. One or two from each side will want to throw stones and hurl insults to try to win the day, and that sir, just plain doesn't get anyone anywhere. There's your 'secret'. | |
| | |
| Sorry Steve, I think this is another case where we will have to agree to disagree. And I have said I will not publicly throw anyone under the bus. However if someone asks me, I will tell them, and let them make an informed decision as to what is in their best interest.
Being that I am a guide up north I know I will take more than my share of heat for this, so be it. Sometimes fighting for the things you believe in aren't always the most popular.
I have stated before, had this been done the right way, gone through the proper channels and not forced down our throats on a budget bill, you wouldnt have heard a peep out of me on this. But the fact is it was defeated at the defeated at the local level democratically to even be introduced to be on the ballot. Then the only dept of the DNR that was in on this was the tourism bureau, no biologist support that I have heard and I have been doing alot of digging. If we would have had a vote, with a biologist signing off, not one peep. But I see there are a few folks other than me who can smell a fart too. Thats what all the fuss is about.
Sorry for those of you who see this as the way to get things done. To me it was a slap in the face to the guys who do go through the proper channels and do it the right way. I know its hard and frustrating, but it is for everyone. Shortcuts arent the answer, even with the best of intentions. | |
| | |
| Ah...guys....
Would anyone be willing to answer the ORIGINAL question about how you think it will impact the normal opener?
Never thought I'd see this much debate with a simple question...funny how things can get changed and the original topic lost in the shuffle. I see no sense in arguing over the whole thing (who dunnit and why)...if you want change, get together as A GROUP and start forming A SOLUTION to it...if it is considered a problem.
I just had a simple question about it which was asking for simple opinions about how the early season might affect the memorial day pressure on the water....
Thanks
steve
| |
| | |
| I think it will have little to no effect...fishing in the northern half of the state can be tough as it is depending on water temps etc ON the normal opener which is a 3 day weekend for most people to get away and go fish...I don't think this new C&R season will change peoples annual trips on Mem. Day weekend to go fishing...
imo.
| |
| | |
Posts: 32959
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | VMS,
To answer your question, not much.
Shane,
Please show me where we disagree. By the way, I'm a 'guide up north' too. | |
| | |
Posts: 272
| Steve-
You must have some special word scrambling filter on your end that turns my posts into violent actions or something.
If you look back, I have maintained through this entire thread, that this information may be in the interest of anglers, so they can make informed decisions on where/how/who they spend their money with.
Where's the bash? Who's throwing stones? Stating a fact, that someone did something, is not throwing stones or bashing. Its called the truth, and sometimes it hurts.
I get this feeling like you're seeing me as the tazmanian devil uncontrollably spinning my way north to flatten the city of Eagle River. For the life of me, I cannot figure where that is coming from.
I never asked you or M1st to publish ANYTHING about this. I asked why names haven't been mentioned by anyone. It seems that this is stuff that in this day and age should be....would be... "out there" and I was wondering why it wasn't.
Edited by muskie-addict 1/3/2008 11:55 AM
| |
| | |
| VMS my old buddy i'll try to answer your question.
i am opposed to the catch and release season. i am very upset at how it got passed and very upset at the 2 guides in ER that put their own personal pockets in front of the fish.
sled, neither one of the 2 people that i believe are responsible for getting Meyer to push for it in the budget bill have any trouble getting potatoes for the table at all.
i am greatly opposed due to the biologists not being consulted and a study done on its effect to the fish. i am also worried about unethical people going into the shallows and snagging fish that are spawning with lures. i can see that happenning.
as far as "what if "when it comes to the GB coalition. i too would pull out if its not done right.
the original 54"resolution was proposed and pushed before VHS was discovered in WI and in lake michigan i believe.as stated so many times before, the resolution passed more than 3 to 1 in 25 of 26 counties it was proposed in. then it got shot down in the great lakes committee. definitely not the will of the people. now the variables have changed with the possible onset of VHS . an emergency rule needs to be put in til we see whats going to happen.
but anyway back to the question.
i think musky fishing early in the season relates to success or lack of on water temps. i have fished the open season lakes in april several years in a row. when we do well, it seems to be warmer. 1 year we caught a musky that had been caught about 3 weeks prior. so my guess is it will all relate to water temps.
warm should equal good fishing. but if it warms to fast like it did in 2006, then its almost like a cold front to the fish.
hopefully the early season catch and release season is overturned.
but thats my opinion.
dannyboy
dannyboys guide service
musky crazy
laona,wi
715-674-2061
| |
| | |
Posts: 32959
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | 'There is no "rumor or innuendo" in KNOWING who it was behind this. Wouldn't the readers on here like to know who it was that pushed for this so they could choose for themselves whether or not to support the guides and/or their brick and mortar businesses as well?'
'No offense, but sure seems obvious there was a muskie angler lobby behind this. After all, the bill allows for a new, longer musky fishing season......and this very topic was brought up, by guides, with the CC and spring hearings and shot down at least twice.
To answer your last question, the motivation would be to inform people, so they can choose to avoid spending money with the guides and business people behind it. Otherwise, they win, without consequence, and "we" take it in the shorts.'
---------------------------
The intent here, sir, is pretty obvious.
Good debate, actually, and I do so love a good debate.... | |
| | |
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | dannyboy ... i heard he was selling everything and moving to florida | |
| | |
Posts: 3511
Location: Elk River, Minnesota | O.k...QUESTION...
How has the fishing been on the Border lakes with Michigan? (please elaborate too...)
Reason I ask is if memory serves me correctly, Michigan, and waters bordering it open the first weekend in May. So...if being open is law in another year, (aye or nay for having it) will it make a HUGE or significant impact on the fisheries?
Lastly, and let us all be honest with ourselves here please...how many of you WOULD take advantage of the C&R season?
I can honestly say I would not since those first weeks are spent getting a MN cabin up and running for the summer, along with the traditional walleye opener. Then, a weekend off to get things prepared for muskeis before memorial day in Boulder Junction area. I am not for it either...guess I grew up with fish being protected during spawn.
DannyBoy!! Good to hear from you!! And thanks for the response!!
From what I can tell...this was a backdoor deal. Definitely sounds underhanded to say the least, but what do we expect of special interest groups and politicians? Seems to fit well with what we all see in most areas of the political arena.
Steve | |
| | |
Posts: 8865
| Is there any verified research out there that shows fishing during the spawn really poses a threat to the fishery?
I don't know where I stand on this one honestly. My inclination is to believe this won't amount to a hill of beans in terms of the fishery. If it means a few extra rooms booked, a few extra meals served, etc. than I can see some value in it. The resort/guide/tourism business ain't a goldmine up North, and the prognosis for it suddenly turning into it is not good.
We can argue until the cows come home about how the process is flawed, how politics shoudn't play a part in decision making, how such-and-such-a guide was in favor of the proposal or not. (Is it any wonder that the guides we all wish would participate here avoid these forums like the plague???)
What I am asking is pretty simple:
Is this a cause for concern? Yes, season openers were designed to protect spawning fish. But that legislation was imposed during a time when fish caught were fish eaten.
If someone can demonstrate legitimate scientific biological reasons why this is an issue we should concern ourselves with, I'd like to see them. Otherwise I have to ask:
Is this worth our time and energy? | |
| | |
Posts: 1767
Location: Lake Country, Wisconsin | Your point about the Michigan border waters is something I feel people are forgetting about here. I know quite a few anglers jump up there at the opportunity to fish early. They don't seem to have a problem with that season open earlier, but have a problem with this.
I can say I definetely would take advantage of it. For me, it might be nothing more then getting the boat out earlier in the year and making sure all the equipment is functioning properly while tossing a few musky baits. I don't think that this is a very big deal like some do. I think people have a legitimate gripe about how this law was enacted, but I just don't see the doom and gloom to the fishery that some are projecting. | |
| | |
Posts: 32959
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I'll probably do some fishing for the post spawn fish on the sand in the shallows if the law stays in place. Sight fishing using a small creature, used to do that alot when the season opened same day as the WI opener. The fish I caught were to a fish spawned out and on the feed, if that matters, and were usually the third week of May and a bit later. I fished walleyes and Pike earlier than that, most years.
Michigan waters bordering Wi waters are really very good, in fact, extremely good muskie fishing.
I think the overall biological impact will be small. I'll wait for a fisheries professional to say otherwise and explain why, and defer at that point. I know studies on spawning Bass and a C&R season were done, and some states opened a C&R season after the studies indicated no real harm done to the fishery. Since bass are nesters, and do not broadcast the spawn and get out of Dodge, it seems to me that a near impossible to catch spawning female would most likely spawn first, and get caught later. Perhaps the stress of capture added to spawning stress would increase angler related mortality...to what extent?
Anyone who would try to snag a spawning muskie wouldn't much give a hoot about a season, anyway, it would seem, since intentionally snagging muskies is very much illegal. | |
| | |
| hey sled let me know when they're headed out of town and we'll go pop a tab and wave goodbye!!!!!!!!!!!!!ha!ha!!!!!!!!!!!
VMS the michigan season always opens on May15 not our first sat. in may fishing openner. i havent fished those lakes at that time but some on here might be able to answer that.
as i stated on another board, i will not guide on the C&R season except on the open season lake upon request. i will continue to put sound biology and the fish first.
as i stated at the headwaters meeting last evening, i talked to about 50 of the 250 in attendance at the GB coalition meeting and not one was happy about the new C&R season. my guess is almost everyone in attendance is also against. but i cant prove it. something needs to be done.
dannyboy
dannyboys guide service
musky crazy
laona,wi
715-674-2061
www.dannyboysguideservice.com
[email protected] | |
| | |
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | i hear ya dannyboy ...
after reading this it's interesting to see people who agree and continue to argue with each other ... seems like displaced frustration over the "how" this was handled rather than disagreement amongst fellow anglers with a conservation mindset.
for what it's worth i'll definitely be out on the water but likely will be there to get the boat and all of the stuff working and make sure that i'm ready when the fish start to actively feed ... i tend to focus on water temps., weed growth and active fish and tend to pass on days that i don't think it's going to be worth it to fish ... so, if the water temps. are still really cold i'll hit the river and if it sucks i'll skip fishing altogether til conditions suit me and my style and do something else like catching big crappies in the wood ... or playing golf ...
i agree with above in that it's not going to be that disruptive so why put the energy into being so argumentative .... now, if there's a bunch of snaggers out there that would get my ire up ... of-course it would be illegal though and i would hope be treated as such. | |
| | |
Posts: 714
Location: Rhinelander, WI | A couple of observations and opinions.
I HATE the way this was made into law, yes it’s part of the process, but it shouldn’t be. Politicians live by the sword they should die by the sword. The system is in place and everyone is told that is what we have and we have to live with it. There are many items out there that the biologist want to get done, but they can’t because of the spring hearing process, and here biological changes are made without even consulting them after they are clearly defeated in the spring hearing process for a number of years in a row. You think fishermen are upset about this, I bet the DNR professional Biologists are fit to be tied and they have to remain restrained because of even more politics.
As far as will this affect the fishery, I sure hope not. The good thing is nothing has come to light that says it will.
Regarding the border Lake opener, we have been taking the day off working and fishing May 15th for probably 5 years now, some years are great some not so much. Best year numbers wise, 3 guys fishing out of one boat caught 9 fish. We also had 11 fish between two boats with one over 45 inches. We also have been skunked. It’s like musky fishing any other time of the year.
I also agree with Steve if people are going to snag fish they will do it regardless of a C&R season. They can’t legally keep it anyway. If it could be kept there would probably be more cases of snagging.
As far as extra tourism, I don’t see it and that’s were more opinions would have been nice. First off the C&R season opens the same day as the southern opener. Chances of a consistent bite are better the farther south you go that time of year, so my guess is most avid musky fishermen will continue with there southern opener traditions. Some who live north and normally don’t travel south might not travel which would be a net loss for the state. Most of the people that will be fishing this C&R season will be people that normally stick around for the walleye opener anyway, now we can cast for musky during the day rather than try and find deep walleye.
Considering the fish will see pressure starting the first Saturday in May there will be NO reason for southern musky fishermen to make the journey to Northern Wisconsin for that shot at unpressured fish on Memorial Day weekend. Again net loss in tourism dollars, though it’s hard to see that dollar because so many people are coming north for other recreational activities at that time. But I bet it will be there, there is no incentive for the pure musky enthusiasts. Especially considering this is the first big weekend we have to start sharing the lake with jet skies.
If this early season comes to pass, I will fish muskies. Unless it’s proven to me that the C&R season will hurt the fishery. The openers are traditionally good because the fish haven’t been pounded for 6 months. By not choosing to fish during May, I would be giving up that one, small though it may be, advantage. I will however still do the traditional family walleye opener, which will cut into my normal musky opener hours. The good thing is we fish walleyes on awesome musky water.
I have traditionally had three BIG fishing trips in May. The Northern Walleye opener with family and friends. The May 15th border lake musky opener and the Memorial Day Musky opener. With this new rule my family life gets easier as I don’t have to lobby for an all day musky trip on Memorial day weekend, like I have in the past. It’s just another weekend, in fact one better served by avoiding the lakes and all the not to smart people that come out of the wood work on that weekend.
Nail A Pig!
Mike
| |
| | |
|
In lakes with natural reproduction, this could have a dramatic effect on successful spawning.
Pre-spawn fish are much easier to catch than post-spawn. Large females can drop eggs prematurely if exposed to stressful situations, it even happens when capturing fish for hatchery purposes. Fish will dump eggs just from being handled by DNR before they can gather them.
Pre-spawn muskies can be very aggressive, as Bob Strand found on Leech. He used to get them to swim towards the boat by splashing the water with a paddle.
We aren't talking about bass, pike or walleye which are much more numerous, and by the way are also protected during spawning in MN and Canada, and I'm assuming WI?
I for the life of me can't understand why any fishermen would question the relevance of protecting fish during the spawn.
Seriously, what doesn't make sense about that?
John Skarie | |
| | |
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | john skarie - 1/3/2008 3:43 PM
Pre-spawn fish are much easier to catch than post-spawn.
John Skarie
isn't that speculation john? ... where do you fish pre-spawn? ... what kind of numbers do you catch then vs. otherwise, what baits or tactics ... or do they just charge the boat?
there are always some incedental big fish caught here early by walleye anglers but it's not like they are trying to devour anything and i've been doing this long enough to have an opposite experience when confronted with muskies in spawning mode and its correspondind cold temperatures ...
does anyone else find it as easy as john to catch fish in pre-spawn conditions? ... and by this i mean casting and retreiving which will be the case ... not snagging or spearing them on the banks where they're laying ... | |
| | |
Posts: 170
| Hey Sled...how ya doing?
I must say that John Skarie is as close to my thoughts as possible on this whole mess. Not to say "how" it came about...that's the part that really reaks!!
Why disrupt the spawing? WI continues to strive for "positives" when it comes to muskies, and now this? | |
| | |
Posts: 8865
| john skarie - 1/3/2008 3:43 PM
In lakes with natural reproduction, this could have a dramatic effect on successful spawning.
Pre-spawn fish are much easier to catch than post-spawn. Large females can drop eggs prematurely if exposed to stressful situations, it even happens when capturing fish for hatchery purposes. Fish will dump eggs just from being handled by DNR before they can gather them.
Pre-spawn muskies can be very aggressive, as Bob Strand found on Leech. He used to get them to swim towards the boat by splashing the water with a paddle.
We aren't talking about bass, pike or walleye which are much more numerous, and by the way are also protected during spawning in MN and Canada, and I'm assuming WI?
I for the life of me can't understand why any fishermen would question the relevance of protecting fish during the spawn.
Seriously, what doesn't make sense about that?
John Skarie
John I presume you know a lot more about this than I do. After reading that I have a few questions:
- You say the effect on spawning could be "dramatic". Do you expect that a significant number of pre-spawn females will be caught during this time? Significant enough for the effects to be dramatic?
- Has anyone determined whether its both the males and females that are agressive during this time, or is it just the males?
- What percentage of the time can we expect to encounter pre-spawn conditions during the time period in question?
- What about DURING the spawn? Are the females really catchable, or are they driven by other biological processes that would prevent them from chasing and eating a lure?
Obviously, catching a female a day before she's ready to drop her eggs isn't going to do her any good, but how likely is that particular scenario? Will enough people be out there that it REALLY matters?
| |
| | |
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | pre-spawn and overly agressive just haven't been something i would put together ... i'd love to learn otherwise if it's true ... this is the first time i've heard of such a situation truly.
| |
| | |
Posts: 32959
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | So much of this debate hinges on when the fish spawn. Many years that process is in play by the time the regular fishing season opens in the North. In my experience, many more times than not by the first Saturday in May the fish are in the middle of or past that point. By the second Saturday, most of the lakes I fish the spawn is about done. Now if we have ice the first week May, that can be different, but usually the water warms very quickly then, and the process accelerates. Personally, I liked the idea of the Muskies spawning unmolested, but have no real basis for that emotional response.
My question was if there will be any significant biological impact on the overall population. I bet there are some creel numbers out there as to catch rates, etc from the past. I'm hoping that we can get an answer from one of the many biologists that visit here. I'd be happy to take the answer via emial or PM, and post it with total anonymity.
[email protected]
And don't get me wrong, especially Mike, I agree that the change in regulations is wrong---- not necessarily because of the science (don't know enough about it)-----but because of the method it was acquired. The system is flawed.
That said, if the system works that way, in a Democracy one can expect folks will use the system to get what they want. I won't hold anyone in Eagle River responsible except the lawmaker and the guy who signed that legislation. The rest of the blame goes right to each and every one of us Wisconsin voters for accepting this system in the first place. Think we are in the majority complaining about it?
It's ironic, so many folks on one hand are openly critical of the DNR and encourage all sorts of oversight including that of total laymen when it suits them (remember the big debate last year and the year before?), and then cry foul when that very exercise is successful and results in an action that is not what they would expect or desire.
Ahhh, the old 'be careful what you wish for' adage again... | |
| | |
Posts: 170
| Good questions to John...
I guess my thought process that I'm stuck on, is sure, there probably is not "much" data to support it, but wouldn't common sense dictate that if a muskie (male or female) chases down a bait...or in spring, just coils up and eats and or lazily inhales the bait, that this would put "some type" of stress on the fish during the fight at a very critical time? I would think yes... How about one that eats, and gets off? Stress??? I'd think so. Now how about the one that get's caught...lifting for pictures with eggs ready (or almost) ready to drop?? Not good. The list of "what ifs' could go on for quite a while...probably from both sides, but I would rather error on the side of caution...it's only a few extra weeks...let the girls do thier thing! | |
| | |
| depends on how "pre" you are talking though really...look at indiana/illinois/iowa waters where there is no closed season and you can get into some good action on feb/march and even april Pre Spawn fish...now the days before leading up to the actual spawn and into the spawn good luck getting females to eat...you can get some males to eat but mostly they are the 28-36 variety...seems to me we are wasting quite a bit of talk over this subject, it is what it is, and unless it gets changed we can't really do anything can we? to me I don't see this new C&R season as all that big of a deal...as stated, we have the southern waters that open 1st saturday in May and typically are going to be better fishing than northern C&R waters. I just don't see a mass exodus to north of highway 10 to go look for pre spawn or in most cases I would imagine spawning fish which are very hard to catch. For those living up there will they go out and try to catch muskies, probably some, but muskies aren't exactly easy to catch pre spawn, during the spawn or the days shortly there after....seems like a waste of time to bicker over it at this point....imo. | |
| | |
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | there should be plenty of numbers available from the dnr project lakes in saynor that are open regardless ... any way of having their numbers published steve? they are in a hand-written book on-site and i've seen them but never looked or tallied anything in relationship to this statement of more aggressive fish. | |
| | |
Posts: 444
| I still dont see the harm, yes it was done in an incorrect manner but that's how it works in this country. I beleive it wont have an ill effect on the overall muskie population, look at salmon and trout, when do you fish for them? When there in the river, Why are they in the river? to spawn. Each year i see more salmon/trout fisherman and see more trout and salmon each year. Also the DNR doesnt set the seasons for a state, the state legislature does.... | |
| | |
Posts: 999
| Heck if we want to keep the tourism up year around in the northwoods why dont we keep the walleye and northern pike season open year around, that outta bring up a few fisherman during the closed season!
Mr Musky | |
| | |
Posts: 32959
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | The walleye 'season' up here doesn't do much for tourism anyway. Who's going to Vacation in Rhinelander to fish walleyes with a limit of 1 over and 1 UNDER 14" or similar? That's a large part of the problem; muskie angling is growing in popularity, while not near as many folks fish up here for 'eyes. There is some pretty good Pike fishing to be had, but that's not a big tourism draw either. Plus, much of the 'closed' season takes place when safe ice is history and open water not yet a reality. Also, I bet if the season was extended, the daily bag would fall even more. | |
| | |
Posts: 999
| I agree with you totally Steve! I guess what bothers me so much about this early season is that yeah everybody is like well big deal the fish will be inactive, probably wont bite but we'll get the boat all ready to go and whatnot until they do become active. Well for me I look at the Musky opener the same as the Gun or Bow opener! The anticipation the getting ready the big Memorial day 3 day weekend. You know some lake is going to be hot! The muskys haven't seen a bait all year, the past few years they've been active on the opener! To me their taking the tradition out of it. Those musky's that are dumb on opening day wont be so dumb anymore because their going to have seen so many baits before they decide their up to speed enough to feed. Whether that may be the first Sat in May, the second week, third week who knows..... It just doesn't seem right. I hate change especially this kind of B.S. change because of a politician.
Mr Musky | |
| | |
Posts: 32959
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | For a whole bunch of years opener was opener. The later opener really is a fairly recent deal. Anyone remember when it went into effect? Hardly anyone even mentioned the C&R Bass season.... | |
| | |
Posts: 999
| The Memorial Day weekend (Sat) opener for the northern zone has been in effect for at least the past 15 years. As far as I can remember. I dont think that bass season was mentioned because that was recently changed to what a June 14th opener or something? It use to be the first Sat in May just like walleye/pike. What was the date on that change?
Mr Musky | |
| | |
Posts: 999
| As long as we are on the subject of season date changes Steve, what is going on with the proposal to keep the musky season open until 12/30 in the southern zone? Why isnt' there more talk about this on the boards? I think we should support a longer season with extra days at the end then at the beginning. How could this have any negative effect at all on muskys?
Mr Musky | |
| | |
Posts: 285
Location: NE Wisconsin | MN
1) Late Opener
2)High Size Limit
3)One Line Limit
4)History of Limited Sucker Fishing
5)DNR sets Regs
6) Numerous 50+ inch fish caught annually
Ontario
1)Late Opener
2)High Size Limits
3)One Line Limit
4)History of Limited Sucker Fishing
5)Ministry sets Regs
6)Numerous 50+inch fish caught annually
WI
1) Early Opener (2009)
2)Low Size Limits
3)3 Lines per Angler
4)History of Extensive Sucker Fishing
5)Bureau of Tourism sets Regs
6)Comparatively few 50+ inch caught annually
Coincidence??? I Think Not!!!
But apparently many here like the regs like this?????? | |
| | |
Posts: 999
| Johnnie,
I agree with you one hundred percent!!! I do not like the regs in WI at all!!! Wisconsin is set up to accomadate Tourism and dollars off of natural resources such as musky fishing and I dont think that will ever change. It's sure not rocket science why I go to Canada every year! Let's see 27 fish in the boat 2 guys one week not to mention a half dozen fish lost and 80 follows to boot, fish that actually follow 20 times around!!!!!
Mr Musky | |
| | |
| bn
The Iowa Great Lakes has a May 20 thru Dic 1st season for Muskies
Muskies Inc. mag "From the Muskie Biologists" section
While WI hasn't had any large fish kills to date due to VHS, the disease is very new here, having been detected for the first time in May 2007. Fish appear to be most vulnerable to VHS in the spring, when water temperatures are cold and (emphasis for consideration) fish immune systems are stressed from the rigors of spawning.
| |
| | |
Posts: 32959
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Johnnie, what have you done lately to change any of that?
And are you considering the HUGE difference between the varying waters in MN and WI? (no)
Blanket statement that isn't dealing with reality.
Since when does Tourism set our fisheries regs? This was a LAWMAKER from Eagle River, not a Tourism director. You need to differentiate between the State Bureau and influence groups in the North and make more accurate comparisons.
Most State's 'Natural Resources' (talking fish and game here) are heavily promoted and 'exploited' for Tourism, both for in and out of state tourists. What else would anyone expect?
Most of MN is at 40" right now, correct? There was a lot of work involved in getting a 48" limit in MN on some waters, right? How many lakes in MN have a limit at 50"? How many in WI? How many at 45"? How many in WI? How many Muskie lakes in WI, and how many are relatively infertile and under 600 acres? How many of the same in in MN?
I sure hope we are not going to argue the entire WI waters thing again, go to the research board and read up...please.
Mr. Musky, put that Canadian Lake in the center of Minneapolis and Milwaukee and Chicago with our Wisconsin water chemistry, weather, etc. Then, after a couple years, do another comparison.
Guest,
What does VHS have to do with a C&R season in Wisconsin? The temps at which VHS is the most dangerous is earlier anyway, most years. If you are trying to say the fish are stressed from the rigors of spawning, you are correct, but the reference is to the immune system. Are you trying to say the fish will catch VHS 'easier' if they are caught and released?
| |
| | |
| guest, there are more musky lakes in Iowa than the 3 with that particular closed season.... | |
| | |
|
I really don't care about the what if's when it comes to pre- or during spawn fishing.
If you fishery means so little to you that you can't wait until the spawn is over to fish then you deserve what you get.
Do you guys honestly think that the regs are the way they are based on nothing but whims or gut feelings ?
I have a little more faith in the wisdom of biologists that I know who have touted the importance of protecting fish during the spawn, then any internet typer that needs to have a specific study to look at saying you must protect fish during the spawn or the fishery will die to concede that it's good idea to let them spawn in peace.
JS
P.S. Where is the study that says it won't hurt???? Can't find it ,can yah?
| |
| | |
| bn
Your the one who made the generalization that Iowa had an all year open season, I simply pointed out the Iowa Great Lakes indeed do have a closed season. If you don't think the major Muskie water in Iowa counts, I guess I have to disagree.
From the wordage of the quote it sounds like the vulnerability to the future posssible disease threat from VHS is increased from a stressed immune system do to the rigors of spawning.
You stated you had no biological knowledge that it was stressful to catch and release Muskie during the spawn. If Muskies are more vulnerable to disease because their immune systems are stressed because of spawning I don't think it's a stretch to assume that adding to that stress by C&R during this time is not a wish choice for questionable extra income by opening the season early. | |
| | |
Posts: 32959
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | JS,
Hope you don't think I'm saying I like this idea. Since we have to deal with it for now, I'm just interested (like always) in the facts of the matter, and would like to see what biologists have to say about what this might mean.
AND...we as Muskie anglers didn't CHOOSE to have this season, John. We voted it down several times, in fact. Figure it out, most of us are trying to assess the IMPACT of what is now law for the 2009 season.
Some are screaming the sky is falling, some are thinking the impact will be near zero, and I'm thinking the fact of the matter is somewhere in between.
Guest:
I think it's as much a stretch to say spawn stressed fish's immune systems will be more likely to cause angler related mortality due to the C&R season, only because I haven't seen a thing yet to indicate that's a fact. By your logic, I'd 'assume' (bad thing to do, most days) that the season should not open until the fish have totally recovered from spawning. Maybe Wisconsin had too early an opener in the North all along, right? Perhaps we should be waiting another week. if that's a fact, I'd back a LATER opener...good luck with that now. What about walleyes, we fish those through the spawn, and that statement about VHS applies to walleyes, too.
Or, is it that we should leave them to the process so the NR process is successful? Is that what protecting the fish during the spawn was about, or was it an overall conservation move covering all the above when Wisconsin made the change?
I'd like to see what the fisheries folks have to say, if I don't see anything here I'll get on the phone and make a few calls.
| |
| | |
Posts: 999
| Steve, Touism does affect size limits on lakes, take North Twin for instance, a lake that has mega trophy potential but it still has a 34" size limit because that's what the resort owners wanted so little Johnny could come up on vacation "tourism" and keep his 34 incher. And the reason some Canadian lakes are so great is because they are protected and managed well. Just as Minnesota lakes are. I dont think WI will ever change until we can get the power back into the people and the DNR not these stupid politicians and legislator idiots that are ruining deer hunting in WI along with many other activities.
Mr Musky | |
| | |
Posts: 32959
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Mr. Musky, the PEOPLE were the ones who voted down the 50" limit on Twin. The DNR supported it and the 'people' didn't. That proposal failed for many reasons, but mostly for lack of education of the public, and it wasn't just the resort owners who squashed that deal.
How many MN lakes and rivers have a 45" limit right now? How many have a 50" limit right now? How many with a 40" limit? How many of the WI lakes and rivers have 50,45, and 40" limits?
Canadian/Ontario waters were the some of the first to really set the bar and protect trophy potential, cut limits, and implement slot limits on Walleyes and Pike. Even that was a fairly recent change, in the overall history of the sport. For a very long time the limit up there was 30" and one a day with a two fish total bag.
I might also point out it was 'the people'...and our democracy...in action that made the recent change allowing a C&R season. | |
| | |
| I was reading this post and cant figure out what the topic is? Can anyone explain? Is it they may be having a earlier opener in Wisc. Earlier that Memorial Day weekend? Anyone? | |
| | |
Posts: 3165
| Does anybody know of any lakes in this area with no known natural repo??? dont have to name hotspots just lakes that have a history of being dependent on being stocked.
I guess if I got the early bug I might head up that way from Minn and try it. I guess that does make a case for the tourism.
If I came it would have to be on a llake with no known repo I know we wouldnt like it here in Minn if people were throwing baits at spawning fish
maybe a list of lakes in this area not known for natural repo would be helpful | |
| | |
Posts: 714
Location: Rhinelander, WI | First I have to disagree with Steve W. on the following comment:
“The walleye 'season' up here doesn't do much for tourism anyway. Who's going to Vacation in Rhinelander to fish walleyes with a limit of 1 over and 1 UNDER 14" or similar? That's a large part of the problem; muskie angling is growing in popularity, while not near as many folks fish up here for 'eyes.”
At least on the first Saturday in May there are many people that choose to drive north to fish Walleye, even with the low bag limit numbers. In our group alone we have guys come from Milwaukee, Chicago, and Iowa. My experience is limited to Pelican Lake for this weekend, but it is the busiest weekend of the year as far as boats on the water fishing. I have no doubt of that. I also know of many other groups that continue to do their traditional opening weekend.
I do agree that the week long walleye trips have gone to the West and North, and for the most part Northern Wisconsin has become a Weekend fishing destination for many if they even make the trouble to make that trip.
Bass isn’t an issue because the Season has always opened on the First Saturday in May, a number of years ago they made it C&R from that day until sometime in June. It was never closed entirely until June. The barbless hook thing is going to me much more difficlult to deal with when fishing bass, as in May walleye and smallmouth are in the same locations.
I will say this again, in my opinion, adding a Musky C&R season from the First Saturday in May to Memorial day weekend will not have a great affect on musky fishermen deciding to make the trip north. Especially as the southern waters keep getting better and better. I bet 90% of the people fishing the C&R season up here will be people that live up here, and as Hooker say there may be some musky nuts from MN and even MI who will drive the shorter distance to cast for ski.
I truly believe the net affect of this will be less musky fishermen coming north on Memorial Day weekend. My guess is guys who normally do that will make plans to go hit the MN opener a couple weeks later instead. The chance at unpressued fish is a major factor in most Musky fishermen trip planning.
Hey this is great for the local guys that want a chance to fish musky in Northern WI before Memorial Weekend, as far as a great benefit to tourism I don’t think the few people that pushed for this where really thinking. Maybe that’s why it was voted down at the spring hearings for at least 2 year in a row.
I have said this before, but one benefit will be it takes the advantage away from the guys that specifically target Musky in May and claim they are “Pike Fishing” anyone who wants to fish musky now can without violating. Not a good reason, but it’s there.
Hooker check out the following web site for your list of lakes:
http://dnr.wi.gov/fish/musky/muskywaters_countylist.html
Category 3 - the population has no known natural reproduction of muskellunge. Stocking of muskellunge is required for maintenance of a population.
Category 4 - the population has no known natural reproduction of muskellunge. Stocking of hybrid muskellunge occurs. A hybrid muskellunge is a cross between a muskellunge and a northern pike, often called a "tiger musky."
I don’t like this new rule but like I said before I will probably fish musky in May on some waters. As Steve said most of the time it will be Post Spawn. We can tell that by the spearing. They are usually done spearing Walleye and Musky by the end of April. If fish were actively spawning I would make the choice and leave them alone.
Nail A Pig!
Mike
Edited by MRoberts 1/4/2008 10:03 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 8865
| john skarie - 1/3/2008 11:11 PM
I really don't care about the what if's when it comes to pre- or during spawn fishing.
If you fishery means so little to you that you can't wait until the spawn is over to fish then you deserve what you get.
Do you guys honestly think that the regs are the way they are based on nothing but whims or gut feelings ?
I have a little more faith in the wisdom of biologists that I know who have touted the importance of protecting fish during the spawn, then any internet typer that needs to have a specific study to look at saying you must protect fish during the spawn or the fishery will die to concede that it's good idea to let them spawn in peace.
JS
P.S. Where is the study that says it won't hurt???? Can't find it ,can yah?
Easy there, John. I never said or even impied any of what you are accusing me of in your post, and I don't believe anyone else did either. I'm asking questions because I don't have the answers, and before I form an opinion I'd like to have some basis for it in fact and science rather than emotion. Have you forgotten that us "internet typers" here are also musky anglers? Just like you, we have a vested interest in the success of Wisconsin's muskie fisheries. If you're just looking to attack someone who doesn't care about the WI muskie fisheries, I'd suggest you try a golf forum, and not one related to muskie fishing.
And this:
"Do you guys honestly think that the regs are the way they are based on nothing but whims or gut feelings ?"
No, I do not. But they're not what they are due to sound biological concerns, are they?
Personally, I probably won't fish pre-spawn no matter WHAT the season dates are, and I suspect most of us here won't either. There's plenty of water South of highway 10 to keep us all occupied until things warm up in the Northern region.
But I'm also not willing to get my shorts all in a bunch over this and start tossing accusations around before I have one shred of evidence that this will ever cause a problem. I don't THINK it's a good idea, but I've got nothing to base that on other than emotion. I'd rather KNOW it's not a good idea and have some factual basis for why I feel that way. Knowledge is a powerful thing, John. Emtionally charged nonsense is still just that -- nonsense.
| |
| | |
Posts: 32959
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Mike,
The level of tourism surrounding the walleye opener has dropped off the edge from where it was before the TAC regs. I remember clearly the line of cars (solid) on HWY 45 all day Friday and Sunday evening, all folks coming up for the opener. Now the traffic is not really even noticeably more than any other weekend during the open season.
The number of guides making a living fishing walleyes has fallen off as a result.
Resorts all over the North closed or sold off; this was a good portion of the why.
It wasn't pretty to watch. And now with the snow in the winter a thing of total chance, tourism here is more dependent on Muskie angling and Deer season than ever before. Of course, the CWD scare drove off alot of out of state hunters, too.
Still doesn't make how this went down feel very good.
| |
| | |
Posts: 714
Location: Rhinelander, WI | Steve, points taken and there is no doubt the majority of resorts are gone. But there’s still a very large number of people fishing opening weekend. Opening weekend traditions are probably the majority of fishing traditions left in Northern Wisconsin, as far a things that draw people to the area, (other than tourneys). This new rule effectively eliminates a opening weekend for one of the fastest growing segments of the fishing industry.
I still think this will result in a NET LOSS of musky tourism in northern Wisconsin in the month of May. Guides may be able to book a few more dates that I will admit.
(Tongue Firmly In Cheek) Another UP side is there can now be musky tourneys every weekend in May except the first, north of Hwy 10 as long as they are immediate release and you use barbless hooks. No more having to have a tourney Memorial Day weekend on Sunday and Monday to avoid a season opener. THAT’S GREAT!!!!!!!!!
Nail A Pig!
Mike
Edited by MRoberts 1/4/2008 10:59 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 32959
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | That one didn't occur to me. I hope no permits are issued, at least the DNR can still deny a permit. | |
| | |
|
Esox Addict;
My post was not directed at anyone specific, but the sentiment of many people saying that there is no scientific evidence to support not fishing during spawning periods, that those regs are based on guesses, etc.
That line of thinking is ridiculous.
First of all, people need to realize the purpose of a "study". They are done to find answers to things that aren't clear to scientists, not so you can support things that are "common sense" to people in the science fields.
My comments are not based on emotion. I have a degree in Aquatic Biology, I've worked on fisheries crews in Walker and Bemidji both as an employee, intern and volunteer. I've been in the field with some of the leading muskie biologists in the world. I've handled hundreds of muskies collecting eggs and milt, and had the opportunity to discuss issues like this with people who know have opinions based on training and experience, not emotion.
So your dismissal of my thoughts as emotion without knowledge is quite a stretch.
John Skarie
| |
| | |
| You sure posted that as emotion. Not nice emotion, either. Relax, we are all on the same side. I don't see anyone dismissing anything. I see alott of questions. I hope we get some answers from a WI fish guy. | |
| | |
Posts: 8865
| Apologies for that insinuation John. As I mentioned earlier, I presume you know more about this than I do. I never implied that catching muskies during the spawn is harmless -- common sense will tell you that any sort of stress you put a female muskie through during and immediately prior to that time can be a detriment.
What I am asking is is this new legislation REALLY the problem many are making it out to be? I don't see that extra few weeks of open season being a huge impact for many reasons:
1. During most years, water temps have warmed to the point where spawning is presumably complete well before this time anyway
2. I suspect the people most likely to actually be out there catching fish will voluntarily refrain from fishing during the spawn
3. I do not believe that a significant amount of fish will be caught and their particular abilities to spawn sucessfully compromised
Will some female muskies be caught and potentially harmed during a time when they are getting ready to spawn? Probably.
But does this represent a detriment to entire fisheries, overall spawning success, or even a reason for serious concern? Or are there more important things we should focus our attention on?
One thing mentioned above that I had not thought of was tournaments. I agree that holding a tournament during that time would be outright stupid. | |
| | |
| common sense will tell you that any sort of stress you put a female muskie through during and immediately prior to [the spawn] can be a detriment.
there are lots and lots of things that common sense tells us. at times, research shows common sense to be just plain wrong, sometimes even the opposite is true. on issues such as this one, common sense should not be our guide. research and science should tell us what's best.
of course, it wasn't science that put this early season into law in the first place. but it's law and will go into effect as of spring '09, so it's worth asking what the science says about the impact of catch and release on fish who are mid- or post-spawn.
i know there's been quite a bit of research on the impact of captures on bass reproduction, but most of what i've seen has indicated the impact is a result of eggs and fry being eaten during even the very brief time that the male guarding them is gone before it's released. muskies don't guard their eggs/fry, so there's no direct application there.
there is good information available that says a combination of multiple stressors can result in post-release mortality. one good thing about the early season is that the water is quite cool, reducing one factor that may contribute to delayed mortality. in southern areas with year-round or early-open seasons, the fish are routinely captured during the time they are attempting (albeit unsuccessfully) to spawn. these fisheries don't seem to experience high fish mortality rates. but again, this doesn't apply directly because it's about whether or not the fish itself survives the experience; assuming it does, we don't know what (if any) impact it would have on the success of it's reproductive efforts.
anecdotally, fishing for muskies used to be legal in May even in the north. some of the lakes didn't receive any stocking support, but managed to maintain viable populations in spite of fishing pressure (that usually was catch-and-keep!) during times of the year that could have included the spawn.
it'd be helpful for those who know about applicable research to share it.
i'm in no way suggesting that this change was a good thing, just that those who say it might be a bit extreme to suggest that this means doomsday for naturally sustaining populations could be right as well.
there are way too many variables involved for us to know the impact perfectly. at least these are fish that are hard to catch! the reality is probably somewhere in between, it's likely not a good thing and it sure won't help spawning success, but hopefully it's not the end of the world either.
| |
| | |
Posts: 108
Location: Toronto, ON | Frankly, WI's reg's look completely outdated. That, along with an obvious culture of catch-and-keep, can't do anything to help the musky fishery in WI. Perhaps if WI made the long, slow change to a high size limit, "fish-friendly" (i.e. C&R only on some lakes) fisheries management plan, people from MN and Canada would actually travel to WI for more than cheese and Packer's games.
Musky fisheries management here in Canada are hardly perfect--far from it--but the size limit increases (they still have a ways to go) and seasonal restrictions at least make sense. We still have far too many muskies killed for no apparent reason....nobody is eating them and repro's from Advanced Taxidermy here in Canada are far superior to skin mounts. Education is the key, it just takes time; for those who go off the deep end, I like to remind them that we all started off with the "wrong" or insufficient release tools and more importantly, release knowledge. Personally, the "it's my right" argument for keeping a musky is ludicrous....if we change the law to C&R only, what happens to that argument? | |
| | |
Posts: 32959
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | If you change the law to 100% C&R in the States almost anywhere across the board, the most important question is what happens to management. We have to be careful and aware of what we are wishing for and apply that standard only where it is needed, like Bay of Green Bay.
More than 90% of the muskies caught in Wisconsin now are released, according to recent study, so statistically we don't have much or even perhaps any more of a 'catch and keep' culture than you, if one is to take your comments at face value. If we can get the limits to 50" on trophy waters, and 45" on waters where that limit makes sense that figure would jump up, IMHO.
And, Devil's Advocate here; why is it ludicrous for the average guy to say 'It's my right' if it IS his right? Is it any less ludicrous to say he shouldn't, if there's no patient and reasonable explanation as to why? Alot of folks just don't know.
Education, and protection of waters that need/warrant protection, I think you are correct. | |
| | |
Posts: 108
Location: Toronto, ON | Steve, to ME it's ludicrous because of my value system, for better or worse. That "right" only exists in relation to the law or regulation that allows it....I'm suggesting that musky fishermen, WI, ON, KY, MN, wherever, shift that thinking away from reg's and laws and towards a best practice paradigm as it pertains to the interests of the fish and the fishery. Of course, that requires that education factor which often is confused for a personal attack...either way, it needs to happen if the gains of the past 15-20 years are to be realized across all musky fisheries and in fact, steadily improved upon. Just my 2 cents. | |
| | |
Posts: 32959
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Point taken, thanks.
We have a little different situation than most Muskie destinations, with hundreds of Muskie lakes to fish, and each having a unique history and potential and most very small in comparison to Canada or even Minnesota. We have more Muskie lakes, but MN has more Muskie acreage.
Plus, management here even on PRIME muskie water is not 'just' for us conservationists and elitists ( I'm a muskie elitist by many standards), it's broadly based to meet the generally accepted goals put forth by the public and tempered somewhat by our fisheries managers. Since we are but a small portion of that mix as Muskie anglers, our say in the matter needs be supplemented by local support and/or support from our fisheries folks, and even then it can mean little or nothing as far as accomplishing our goals at the end of the day. This case shines as an example of doing exactly the opposite of what the majority of us Muskie anglers would like, but there it is. | |
| | |
Posts: 108
Location: Toronto, ON | The fight needs to be fought. It's disappointing because of the $$$ that won't be realized because of poor management. Solid musky fisheries management a la Minnesota can and should be completely independent of any other other species management and should be targeting long term fisheries health and the expected revenue increases. I imagine, without any hard facts, that the investment by the MN DNR is paying off now. Hopefully, their current bounty is not "strip-mined" and is managed carefully. | |
| | |
Posts: 518
Location: Cave Run Lake KY. | 65 here monday should be a good bite on the Cave ! | |
| | |
| Frankly, WI's reg's look completely outdated. That, along with an obvious culture of catch-and-keep, can't do anything to help the musky fishery in WI. Perhaps if WI made the long, slow change to a high size limit, "fish-friendly" (i.e. C&R only on some lakes) fisheries management plan, people from MN and Canada would actually travel to WI for more than cheese and Packer's games.
whoa there!
"completely outdated"? you follow-up that statement by suggesting WI make the "long, slow change to a high size-limit, 'fish-friendly'...management plan."
the general perception out there is that WI has regressive size limits based on the state-wide 34" minimum. however, when you really look into it, WI is one of the most progressive states with more high(er) size limits than most anywhere else in the muskies range. if you're fishing a lake or river with quality potential in Wisconsin, it's very likely that the size limit is 40", 45" or even 50".
the "long, slow change" you suggest was started quite some time ago and there's been incredible progress made. the only thing lagging behind is people's perception of the state of size limits in Wisconsin.
at the same time i do completely agree with you that changing values towards release is just as, if not more effective than changing regs. the regulations help to limit harvest by casual or occasional muskie anglers who aren't reached by various education efforts.
here they all are as of the 2007 regulations:
http://dnr.wi.gov/fish/regulations/2007/documents/FishingRegs%2007-...
(list is organized by county, so there may be some slight duplication)
Adams Co.:
Wisconsin River 45"
Ashland Co.:
Lake Gallilee 40"
Bayfield Co.:
Bony Lake 40"
Eau Claire Lake 40"
Namekagon Lake 50"
Pike Lake 40"
Brown Co.:
Fox River 50"
Burnett Co.:
County-wide minimum 40"
Barron Co.:
County-wide minimum 40"
Calumet Co.:
Lake Winnebago 50"
Chippewa Co.:
Chippewa Falls Flowage 40"
Chippewa River 40"
Cornell Flowage 40"
Old Abe Flowage 40"
Lake Wissota 40"
Holcombe Flowage 40"
Jump River 40"
Clark Co.:
Lake Arbutus 40"
Black River 40"
Mead Lake 40"
Rock Dam Lake 40"
Columbia Co.:
Park Lake 40"
Silver Lake 40"
Spring Lake 40"
Swan Lake 40"
Dane Co.:
Lake Monona 45"
Lake Waubesa 45"
Lake Wingra 45"
Douglas Co.:
Eau Claire Lake 40"
Fond du lac Co.:
Fond du lac River 50"
Lake Winnebago 50"
Forest Co.:
Julia Lake 40"
Kentuck Lake 40"
Riley Lake 40"
Roberts Lake 40"
Wabikon Lake 40"
Green Lake Co.:
Big Green Lake 40"
Fox River 50"
Iowa Co.:
Twin Valley Lake 40"
Iron Co.:
Catherine Lake 40"
Cedar Lake 40"
Fisher Lake 40"
Gile Flowage 40"
Long Lake 40"
Mercer Lake 40"
Moose Lake 40"
Pine Lake 40"
Springstead Lake 40"
Trude Lake 40"
Turtle Flambeau Flowage 40"
Wilson Lake 40"
Jackson Co.:
Lake Arbutus 40"
Arbutus Canal 40"
Black River 40"
Black River Flowage 40"
Morrison Creek 40"
Potter Flowage 40"
Juneau Co.:
Wisconsin River 45"
LaFayette Co.:
Yellowstone Lake Catch-and-Relase Only
Lincoln Co.:
Bridge Lake 40"
Deer Lake 40"
Nokomis Lake 40"
Rice River Flowage 40"
Wisconsin River 40"
Marathon Co.:
Wisconsin River 40"
Oconto Co.:
Archibald Lake 40"
Anderson Lake 40"
Oneida Co.:
Bridge Lake 40"
Buckskin Lake 40"
Clear Lake 50"
Katherine Lake 40"
Julia Lake 40"
Nokomis Lake 40"
Pelican Lake 50"
Rainbow Flowage 40"
Rice River Flowage 40"
Shishebogama Lake 40"
Stella Lake 40"
Two Sisters Lake 40"
Outagamie Co.:
Embarrass River 50"
Fox River 50"
Shioc River 50"
Wolf River 50"
Polk Co.:
County-wide minimum 40"
Portage Co.:
Wisconsin River 45"
Price Co.:
Jump River 40"
Rusk Co.:
Chippewa River 40"
Dairyland Flowage 40"
Flambeau River 40"
Holcombe Flowage 40"
Jump River 40"
Main Creek 40"
Potato Lake 40"
Sauk Co.:
Lake Redstone 40"
Sawyer Co.:
Brunet River 40"
Chippewa Flowage 45"
Chippewa River 45"
Grindstone Lake 50"
Lac Courtes Oreilles 50"
Moose Lake 40"
Radisson Flowage 45"
Sissabagama Lake 40"
Winter Lake 40"
Shawano Co.:
Cloverleaf Lakes 40"
Embarrass River 50"
Red Lake 40"
Shawano Lake 40"
Washington Lake 40"
Wolf River 50"
Wolf River Pond 40"
St. Croix Co.:
County-wide minimum 40"
Taylor Co.:
Harper Lakes 40"
Vilas Co.:
All Lac du Flambeau reservation waters 40"
Allequash Lake 40"
Big Lake 40"
Big Muskellunge Lake 40"
Buckskin Lake 40"
Crab Lake 40"
Kentuck Lake 40"
Little St. Germain 45"
Little Trout Lake 40"
Papoose Lake 40"
Shishebogama Lake 40"
Sparkling Lake 40"
Trout Lake 45"
Walworth Co.:
Delavan Lake 40"
Washburn Co.:
County-wide minimum 40"
Waupaca Co.:
Cincoe Lake 50"
Embarrass River 50"
Little Wolf River 50"
Partridge Crop Lake 50"
Partridge Lake 50"
Waupaca River 50"
Wolf River 50"
Waushara Co.:
Fox River 50"
Lake Poygan 50"
Pine River 50"
Willow Creek 50"
Winnebago Co.:
Fox River 50"
Little Lake Butte des Morts 50"
Winnebago Lake 50"
Poygan Lake 50"
Lake Butte des Morts 50"
Lake Winneconne 50"
Wolf River 50"
Wood Co.:
Wisconsin River 45" | |
| | |
Posts: 108
Location: Toronto, ON | #*^@, ya got me. We still have many lakes or regions with 36" limits here in Ontario which to me, is embarrassing. Why would anyone need or want to keep a 36" fish??? The education is key and reg's that make sense including C&R ONLY bodies of water, or at least, 50"+ limits. No matter, for various reasons, I think more WI folks are traveling to MN or ON for their musky trips than vice versa. I hope that WI fisheries strengthen. | |
| | |
Posts: 7
| VMS, it will affect the memorial day pressure.
What happens when you go to a lake two or three times and get skunked, you dont go back. Well, when the general public starts fishing early, they will get skunked more often(most likely). So come memorial day, the preasure will be spread out like you see it the second and third weekends after the opener.
I actully like the season. I catch many muskies fishing for walleyes in May and they are all spawned out in central Wisconsin. The DNR strips eggs in early April here and the muskies look fine around the 10th of May. Maybe the rule could have been changed to use Hwy 8, but it is what it is. As far as the goverment making the changes, I like that. It works really good in Minnesota and we all know how good there fishing is. Minnesota does not have an early season, but thats makes sence over there, leech lake muskies spawn later then Wisconsin strain. I talked with my local DNR on this issue and he said there is no reason why they cant be fished for, the fish are all spawned out.
I think those that dont like the early season will change there minds when they get the chance to get out and work the bugs out of there new tackle and maybe catch a fish or two. Everyone fights to fish opening day for muskies, now we can work our way up to the better part of muskie season and peasure will be lighter on memorial day.
The reason why anglers dont think they will catch muskies early is because they have never had the chance to figure out the very early season behavor patterns of muskies. They can be caught, it might be a "shad rap", but they can be caught. The best thing is, we can start ChuckN baits and get the bugs out of our boats and muskie gear. They catch fish in the fox Chain in IL. in early March, and those anglers down there dont complain about it, they enjoy it. Last spring there was a guy on this site with a really big prespawn fox chain fish. Boy did that guy have a smile. I believe that guy was from Wisconsin and drove south to spend money and catch muskies. If I could afford it, I would drive to the fox chain in early April and give IL some my money, just to have a chance to fish muskies.
Some might disagree with me, but thats my 2 cents on that issue. | |
| | |
Posts: 32959
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Wisconsin has one of the best Muskie management teams in the world, employing a pretty good segment of the world's Muskie 'brain trust' when it comes to science and biology. I think most of us need to occasionally step back a bit and thank our fisheries folks for not abandoning us laymen out of hand for our holier-than-thou-we-know it all attitudes about Muskie management in this State.
Wisconsin boasts a couple of the most progressive Muskie conservation groups, frequently teaming with out of state groups to do good things in the Muskie world.
Now if we could just leave the management of Muskie waters in the state o WI to those experts...
And, I'm pretty sure Wisconsin does WAY more work in the 'field' regarding Muskie management than any of our neighbors.
ChuckN-wind,
I've had plenty of opportunity to fish early season Muskies. The season didn't always open later than the regular opener.
| |
| | |
Posts: 149
| I'd just like to expand on the notion that Wisconsin is 'behind the times' in musky management. As has been pointed out, nothing could be further fron the truth. looking at the list above kindly provided by lambeau, I figure the total to be about 191 waters with a 40" or higher size limit in Wisconsin. Now, a few of those are doubles as there are a few waters that border more than one county and are listed multiple times (Winnebago as one good example). So for the sake of argument let's say there are about 175 - 180 true individual waters in the state with a 40" limit or higher.
How many waters are there outside Wisconsin with those kind of limits? Probably not 180. Minnesota has 80 some waters total that contain muskies and a statewide minimum higher than wisconsin, but a net total of close to 100 fewer waters with a 40" limit than their neighbor to the east. Most other states I would say are in the same boat but with far fewer musky waters over a 40" limit than even Minnesota has.
I dare say that Wisconsin right now today very likely has far more waters with a 40" or higher limit than the rest of the United States combined, and has had so for quite some time. Even in Ontario there are still vast areas with 36" limits.
Whoever said it earlier was right. What's severely lagging behind in Wisconsin are people's perceptions. | |
| | |
| esoxcpr the list lambeau provided is a bit deceiving. (But thank you Lambeau for putting that up there)
On the list they are waters listed by county, there are many duplicates on that list, heck I counted 4 x for the wolf river alone. As well as many of these waters being part of the same system. So it depends how you read it.
We have come along way since the days of the 30" statewide limit, the days of the .22 in the taclklebox.
But I do see us going backwards as far as the early season goes.
I for one will not be participating or guiding during the new proposed season, except where it is legal to do so prior to the screw job. Politicians should not be deciding seasons. Sorry, just the way I see it.
I have yet to see any biologists sign off on this one, untill they do, my position will remain the same. | |
| | |
| A couple of things I find interesting on this list are the number of lakes that have protective size limits in Vilas county and neighboring counties where this will be I think most effected by it. But we will just use Vilas for example because that is where Rep. Meyer and the two guides I believe that are behind this are located.
You dont have to be a rocket scientist to begin drawing parallels here. Wasnt it these very same "tourism people" that lead the charge against higher size limits in the past?
lambeau that list when you read between the lines says more for our argument than I think most realize.
Where are the majority of waters in Wisconsin that are self sustaining fisheries? I want to see a list of how many waters in Wisconsin are considered self sustaining. And compare that against waters that will now be fair game, not always but at least sometimes during the spawn.
I would like to see a list of the % of lakes in the newly effected area that already have a higher protective limit compared to the ones that dont. I think those are the numbers that speak volumes about this.
Just because it will be legal doesnt always make it ethical. Heck its legal to kill a musky and eat it everyday. I am glad we have progressed beyond that, but it is legal. | |
| | |
Posts: 303
Location: WI | What would one do if.... 1) It's an unusually warm spring and lake temps are warmer than normal....you believe the muskies are now in post spawn, but it's only the early C&R season?? Go ahead and fish becasue the spawn is over? Boycott because the way it was implemented?
2) It's an unusually cold spring and the spawn has run into the 'regular musky season opener'....Do you stay off the water to protect these fish? Would some guides call there clients and cancel? Fish anyways?
3) There are bodies of water that has a population sustained by stocking only? Is it okay to fish there because you won't be harming fish that can't successfully spawn anyways?
I think there are going to be many 'what if's'.....
Personally, I'm still sitting on the fence....I don't like the way it got passed.....I don't like interferring with muskies that are spawning (successfully).....people that are snagging muskies don't care if there's a new C&R season or not (they'll do it regardless if that's what they do
I, just like everyone else, just want some scientific data (one way or the other)... | |
| | |
Posts: 32959
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I've been waiting for this conversation to hit this point before I posted this, and the last post and a few really heated exchanges last evening pretty well got us where I had hoped we'd end up. Mike Roberts already pointed alot of this out, but it was missed by quite a few of us, apparently.
Shane,
Here's a link to the Wisconsin Muskie Lakes, and a listing of classifications.
http://dnr.wi.gov/fish/musky/muskywaters_countylist.html
Vilas has 7 lakes that are confirmed no natural reproduction and are managed totally by stocking, and a number more that where NR isn't known but the population is managed by stocking.
Class A1, A2, and B Classification 1/2 will be waters one needs to make sure the spawn is over to fish by the definition you supplied of ethical, or choose to not fish at all during the early season. These waters, if it's been a very cold Spring, may be wise to avoid until Mid June, if we are to assume that some of the concerns posted to this thread are viable. I don't know too many folks who would avoid them opening day of the regular Muskie season, but that's a standard no one here has decided to take on as a personal ethical mantle; although the question HAS been asked.
Many of our lakes up here have populations of Muskies that are maintained totally by stocking and offer upper confidence levels in the 40" class or even less, because of water chemistry, forage, and more. See the Research Forum for a massive discussion on that front last year and the year before. See Dr. Casselman's opening speech at the recent Symposium
for a revealing take on what those little gems can mean to an adventurous muskie angler if one's perspective is based in reality. I fish a couple lakes here that are totally maintained by stocking, and a really big fish is 40". I can and do experience multiple fish days on these lakes, and I find that quite a bit of fun.
We don't know the motivation of the folks who got this law passed, but I see opportunity to fish what are 'put and take' or stocked populations during the early season.
No one has complained about the lakes and rivers south of HWY 10 where NR IS occurring and asked that we all avoid disturbing the Muskies there until late May in the event of a colder than normal Spring.
Each Lake is classified by population density and expectations of trophy/good fishing and some trophy potential/ etc. and NR catagories. Look at the link for an explanation of terms.
As an aside, I think there have been some folks who have posted here who do not have a good grasp at all of our Muskie waters over here. Oneida County, for example, has over 150 muskie destinations ( That's right, ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY PLUS if one counts all the rivers/dams and sections and lakes, plus unlisted waters I know of) with many sporting a stocked population with little or no natural reproduction, and many with an upper confidence of perhaps low 40" class due to the overall ecology of that water. A fellow who fishes Mille Lacs, for example, might be a bit more inclined to hit the 'elitist' button by our standards, and shriek that the end will come from this legislation, strictly because his 'reality' is based on that water, not the 150 lakes in Oneida County, Wisconsin. Minnesota has, in JUST a couple waters, more Muskie acreage that ALL the Inland Wisconsin waters combined, and the population of Muskies over there in several of the large waterbodies and many of the remaining smaller waters is just now coming to age. We've discussed this ad nauseam, read the Research Forum. 'Protection' of the fish on Mille Lacs, for example, is a COMPLETELY different thing than protection of the fish on 104 acre stocked to maintain the population Oscar Jenny Lake in Oneida. Anyone who thinks otherwise needs to sit with a fisheries biologist and ask alot of questions...and then LISTEN to the answers.
As another aside, the term 'elite' seems to stick in some folks mind as a negative; that's horsehockey. What units are, for example, the United States Elite Fighting Force in the services? Wasn't Michael Jordan among the Elite as a Basketball player? Elitist doesn't describe what is right or wrong; the term describes many things and should not be taken to be an insult. If one DOES take the label as an insult, stop a minute and ask ,"Why?". If you indeed ARE a 'releaselitist', is that entirely a bad thing? AHHHH, there we have it, right back to where you are from and you perspective, which forms one's personal 'reality', and what muskie populations you are trying to protect. One's ethics, if applied by FORCE to EVERYONE on any single Muskie water out there, might be just what the Trophy Doctor ordered, and might also spell the end of Muskie management on that water.
All too often, polarization on a topic like this occurs not based on what is really the reality of THIS water at THIS time and THE muskie population there, it's based on... | |
| | |
| If you want to know who is behind him, look at the people that contributed money to his campaign fund. It is public record, that is where you will find the answers. | |
| | |
Posts: 7
| Steve Worrall, you said "I've had plenty of opportunity to fish early season muskies. The season didn't always open later than the regular opener."
I have only lived in Wisconsin for 15 years since moving from North Dakota. I have not seen the opener any earlier then memorial day north of hwy 10. But from your comment, it sounds like there was an early season before.
Some questions for you?
If there was a early season before,when was it?
When did it change?
Why did it change?
What is your opinion on maybe just having it south of hwy 8, instead of hwy 10?
We sure have had more trends of warmer springs, since global warming is coming into the focus. I have already seen water temps in the mid 70's before memorial day weekend in central Wisconsin.
| |
| | |
Posts: 303
Location: WI | There was an article in the Minneaopolis Star Tribune today about an attempt by some to start the MN opener 1 week earlier.
http://www.startribune.com/sports/outdoors/13287951.html
Edited by PEteacher44 1/6/2008 4:54 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 32959
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | NNW,
Yes, Muskie season opened the same day as walleyes. Changed about the time you moved up, I think. Not sure on the why, I think because of rumored harvest totals during the early spring and a desire to let those fish spawn. The law is now the 'North, where the season was closed, opening south of Hwy 8 won't do much even if we could get it changed, and then where are we? I'd rather have a C&R season on Pelican than open her with the 'eyes, but that's me. | |
| |
|
Early wisconsin C&R season?