|
|
| I have been on this site a few times recently and there always seems to be a heated argument going on involving the release of fish. This is purely a devil's advocate position, but what is the difference between keeping a legal fish and taking a large buck. That deer probably carries the best genes in the area, one of the arguments I see for releasing large fish. A lot of people say they take deer for the meat. In my experience the best tasting venison comes from a younger doe. The only reason I can see for taking a large buck is purely for the trophy vlaue. You want something to hang on your wall and show off. Can someone explain the difference between someone keeping a 50''+ fish and taking the 150''+ buck? |
|
| |
|
Location: Lake Tomahawk, WI | I think it lies mostly with the fact that, while both muskies and deer are renewable resources, it takes 5 years to grow a trophy whitetail, maybe 15+ years to grow a trophy muskie. Growth rates will vary between areas so those numbers are general.
Lot more deer than muskies too.
JS |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1058
Location: Medford, WI | Matt, I think the biggest differences is that muskies can be caught and released; whereas deer are killed instantly (or soon after they're shot).
(Jason makes a great point about growth rates and population size as well. Jason, are you going to be at the Milwaukee show at all? I need to pick up the new dvd and would like to talk to you again. I had talked to you or Gordy for a while in Medina, MN last year about smaller lakes by you and night-fishing.)
Edited by Medford Fisher 1/29/2008 9:47 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2894
Location: Yahara River Chain | The major difference is the fish is captured ALIVE and would have to be killed to harvest. Whereas the buck when captured is dead. The option to release a fish is possible and therefore we are (and do) releasing them. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 550
Location: So. Illinois | The quality of muskie reproductions makes it more appealing than getting a skin mount. They stand up better to time and you have the satisfaction of knowing the fish is still swimming. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1937
Location: Black Creek, WI | You can hunt trophy Whitetails with a CAMERA if you want to "release" them.
|
|
| |
|
Location: Athens, Ohio | Besides the issue of water-bourne toxins accumulating in fish flesh (i.e. mercury and lead), I've never had a problem hitting a muskie with my car on the highway. Shoot all you want of them, please, but leave me some fish to catch. m |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4
| Actually the doe has 80% of the genetics.
I think the main reason is because you CAN release the fish.
I whitetail hunt for the trophy rack but I also love every ounce of meat. Another factor is the deers life span is short and if it wasn't harvested there would be to many.
|
|
| |
|
|
You're talking about animals that have completely different niches.
Deer are plentiful, opportunistic, prolific creatures that are in need of culling off to be healthy.
If more peolple hunted, we'd have a healthier deer herd with more mature animals. (with the right management)
Muskies do not fit that mold. They are a low density, slow growing animal that can be exploited easily by killing, especially in natural, non-stocked waters.
The most notorious example would be Wabigoon,which took about 20 years to really recover.
John |
|
| |
|
| I am not talking about the twelve thousand button bucks and does that are running around. I said trophy bucks. 150''+ Trophies. Why not take a picture and let him keep breeding even if his genetics don't count for as much. Cull the deer herd by taking the does and small bucks. This does increase the quality of the herd.
True trophy whitetails are not prolific and plentiful. The monsters we all want are elusive and hard to find like the 50''+ muskie.
Edited by muskydeceiver 1/29/2008 10:47 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | 6 years old is an old buck here. 20 years on a muskie is very possible. I wouldn't say there are more deer in most places when looking at numbers per acre other than the fact there are ALOT more acres of land than muskie water; it's the fact you can see them easily and hit them with a car like Mikie brought up. And, they get alot bigger than a muskie and taste one heck of alot better.
We have so many deer here now we can get tags during the season for $2 for antlerless. I'll kill enough every year to fill my freezer, and feel really good about it. Don't need another rack in the house, that's for sure....
If there were 1 deer average per acre that would be way too many, but I'd eat well until a disease wiped 'em out....
|
|
| |
|
|
Deer as a species are prolofic and plentiful, muskies are not.
If your questioning how to manage for trophy bucks vs. trophy muskies, than there are similarities.
What do people do on "deer farms", or whatever you call them.
They pass up deer until they are trophies, much like muskie fishermen who release fish to become trophies.
Trophy deer hunting involves killing the trophy, that's hunting. There is no "release" option to hunting. Photography doesn't kill, but it's not hunting.
I guess if a hunter wanted to, they could should tranquilizer darts at deer.
Not really sure where to go as far as answering "what it the difference between killing a trophy muskie and a trophy deer".
JS |
|
| |
|
| now that sounds like a fun sport.
shoot a deer with a tranquiler dart and run after him in the woods or field until he drops.
unless you are a marathoner, you had better mix up one hell of a cocktail. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8782
| I'll try this one:
1. Deer: Cause many car accidents and injuries Muskies: Cause few injuries and no car accidents
2. Deer: killed with projectile, either from rifle or bow Muskie: Killed by blunt force to head
3. Deer: good table fare Muskie: Not so much
4. Deer: If left to own devices would breed to epidemic proportions Muskie: Not so much
5. Deer: Trophy is typically a male, who produces no offspring Muskie: Trophy is typically a female
6. Deer: Reproduce successfully wherever they are Muskies: Often don't
7. Deer: Can only be shot once Muskies: can be caught multiple times if released (can be shot once, though)
8. Deer: Will eat your landscaping Muskies: Won't
9. Deer: Covered in fur Muskies: Covered in scales and slime
10. Deer: Must often find it after you have shot it Muskies: Look in the net
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2378
| Hoop - 1/29/2008 12:42 PM now that sounds like a fun sport. shoot a deer with a tranquiler dart and run after him in the woods or field until he drops. unless you are a marathoner, you had better mix up one hell of a cocktail. not as odd as it may sound...there is a ranch in New Mexico running catch and release elk hunts where you shoot the animal with a tranquilizer http://www.pearson-ranch.com/game-park-hunts.html |
|
| |
|
| Baldy,
I do remember seeing something about the Pearson Ranch on one of the boards a while back. Nice catch.
I believe that they use a transmitter to track them, don't they?
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2378
| Not sure exactly how they do it...I didnt read too much. But they mentioned something about paintball elk hunts also...interesting |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1462
Location: Davenport, IA | Deer must be killed to make muskie lures. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 28
Location: mankato, mn | Hey baldy you've got me thinking now. Hmm, a catch and release hunting season. Just imagine the beautiful release shot you could get with the hunter holding the elk's tail with it's face into the wind as he comes to! haha...that's just too funny. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | What is the difference? Most guys going out musky fishing looking for the trophy go with the goal to release the fish. Most hunters I know go out with the goal to kill that trophy buck. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2894
Location: Yahara River Chain | As some have said the deer is a prey item and the muskie is the top predator in its environment. Maybe you should compare wolf vs muskie? Or Mountain Lion vs Muskie? Both are rare and muskies can be released after capture. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 335
Location: Minnesota | This is a good post! For argument's sake, deer might not have been the best choice of comparisons for reasons as stated above.
What about 15 inch crappies? We have seen the transformation in walleye fishing from most people keeping 26" walleyes to now most people releasing them. Most people release 50" plus muskies now whereas 15 years ago most 50 inchers I heard about were killed. When will we quit killing trophy crappies? A 15 inch crappie is just as much a trophy as a 30" walleye and a 50" musky. The baitshops and fisheries professionals all talk about how easy it is to fish out a crappie lake and then 8 years later the crappie population comes back.
I also like the angle muskie! nut is taking with comparing top predators to each other too. Wolves are a good comparison because there are people who hate wolves and shoot them illegally to leave them rot.
Just more to think about.
|
|
| |
|
| Maybe deer weren't the best comparison species, but I think some people are getting my point. |
|
| |
|
|
If your point is that because it's O.K. (or maybe a better term is common practice) to kill trophy deer, than it should be O.K. to kill trophy muskies, than I don't get your point.
If your point is something other than that, please elaborate.
JS
|
|
| |
|
| I didn't say it was OK to do either. I was simply asking what the difference is. Why is it OK to take a brute out of the timber, but not out of the water? Simply for arguments sake.
I also wanted to say that I have contacted individuals at the Iowa DNR about the possibility of raising the size limit for muskies in the Iowa Great Lakes, a system that has shown it is capable of producing very large fish. They always ask me why it is up to me to determine what a trophy is. They go on by saying that a 40'' fish is a trophy to a lot of people. I am going to join a muskie club and hopefully then I will be able to get more people involved in trying to get something done. Other than that does anyone else have suggestions on how to try and get something going.
Edited by muskydeceiver 10/1/2008 12:23 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 327
Location: In the slop! | Good luck with the IDNR...... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8782
| A 40" fish IS a trophy to a lot of people. Not many of them are muskie fishermen, though. And while it probably won't do any good you might point him in the direction of a muskie magazine or even the Lax contest page here at MuskieFIRST, just to give him some perspective on what muskie anglers typically consider to be a trophy. |
|
| |
|
| the Iowa Great Lakes Hatchery is one of the largest exporters(State to State) of Muskies in the U.S. They export 10x of thousand yearly and now with the VHS resrictions one of the only States not linked to the Great Lakes that can export. They stock 649 every other year in Spirit and Okoboji for comparison. It's all about $ in Iowa not quality fisherys. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 406
Location: Stones throw away...finally!! | Good luck with the Iowa authorities. We have been trying for years to get a change. There is usually a spring meeting between all of the state chapters of MI and the DNR. Every year, same discussions...every year same turnout. They are not interested at all with anything we presented. They would rather sell them to neighboring states by the thousands. I have more or less given up on this state. I would rather drive 3.5 - 4 hours and fish MN than fish 20 minutes from home on an Iowa DNR "musky program" body of water. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Just for the sake of argument has been a real common thread lately. There isn't any real 'comparison', so if the intent of the thread is to eventually talk about raising size limits in Iowa, why not go there first? |
|
| |
|
| That wasn't my initial idea, just came to me on the last post. I did start this thread purely for the sake of an argument and getting some fires lit. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 336
Location: Lino Lakes, MN | I know that this is off topic a bit, but someone mentioned hunting with tranquilizer darts I figured that I'd chime in with my worthless 2 cents. I know that deer hunting needs to be done to cull the booming populations and I have absolutely no problem with hunters. Its just something that I cannot bring myself to do and as a result I catch a lot of crap from my family because the majority of them are die-hard deer hunters. I love the idea of being in deer camp and the camaraderie that goes with it...its just the killing that gets me. There are a few places here in Colorado and I believe New Mexico that offer "tranquilizer hunts". Its somewhat expensive but its something that I really want to do this coming fall. From what the owner told me, its beneficial to the DNR because they can take blood samples, tag, and do other research on the animals while still being able to release them back into the population. I love to shoot and I'm actually pretty good at it so this gives me a chance to test my skill against something else other than a paper target. Some may call me a wuss for not having it in me to kill a deer/elk/mule deer/etc but thats OK with me...I'm just looking forward to being able to hunt without having to actually kill anything(is it still considered hunting if I'm not actually killing?). Has anyone else had any experience with "tranquilizer hunting"? Was it worth the relatively high cost involved? It looks like it will be an elk hunt because the guy said that its next to impossible to get close enough and to put down a mule deer with a tranquilizer. Sorry to hijack your thread...it just got me thinking about alternatives to traditional hunting. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Here's what I use to tranquilize the deer..
7MM Remington Mag
7.62X54R Russian (M44 Mosin Nagant)
.270
Gets the job done.
Attachments
----------------
 DSCN0020.JPG (55KB - 152 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 434
Location: Omaha, Nebraska | Steve, I bet that gets the job done and then some. I use a Tikka T3 Hunter 270 WIN. |
|
| |
|
Location: Lake Tomahawk, WI | Those T3's are slick guns, love that .270 short mag.
JS |
|
| |
|
Posts: 408
Location: Omaha, Nebraska | The best thing is all those tranquilizers knock them out pretty well and for along time with minimal tracking required.  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2865
Location: Brookfield, WI | esoxlazer - 1/29/2008 7:26 PM
Some may call me a wuss for not having it in me to kill a deer/elk/mule deer/etc but thats OK with me...
Nah...knowing your propensity to fall and hurt yourself, perhaps it's best for everyone in the great outdoors that you're armed only with tranquilizers.
Maybe you should try hunting the bars with a handful of Valiums and a twelver of Hamms. Wait, that probably works best in the bars of Northern WI and MN.
Out there in granola land, you probably need a couple dozen Xanax and some wine, or at the least, that fancy CO microbrew everybody out there drinks.
Kevin
McCain vs Romney
\ Super
/ Tuesday
Clinton vs Obama
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 457
| To be perfectly honest, the only differences between the two are contrived by those who want to maintain a fishable tophy population.
There is no difference between the two, no matter how you slice it.
I get a little burnt when I hear all the rhetoric of the CPR "elites". There's always something that could have been done different, no matter the circumstance. No matter what...It gets old. So a guy keeps a fish, I wish he would have made the choice to release it, but it is his legal right, and it is perfectly fine with me. I'll congratulate him on his catch, HELL, I may even buy him a beer. One thing I will not do is downgrade the aspect of him as a person, a fisherman, or any other thing, because he chose to keep a fish. Not in a million years would I hide under anonymous, or Nameless one, and post crap talking about it, or how he could have saved the fish, or how he should have released it, or how he's a terrible person that should burn in the deepest dpeths of Hades for keeping a 'ski.
I don't understand it, not one bit. I know for a fact that there is a pretty good mortality rate on "safely released" fish. I'd venture to guess that every single person who has ever fished for, and caught muskies, has killed one. Directly or indirectly, doesn't matter. I've seen 45+ fish gill hooked and bleeding only to be released to float in a matter of minutes. I've seen people that damage gills and rakers from the way they hold, claiming to release the fish unharmed. Twenty says that fish is dead in an hour. I've taken pictures of it, and know it happens. Anyone tells you otherwise it's a crock and they are trying to make themselves feel better about it, plain and simple.
There's not one bit of difference, regardless of the resource, where or how it is grown, nor the length of time. It is what it is. Killing a trophy is killing a trophy. There is no other way to equate it, though many will contrive some sort of faulty logic... |
|
| |
|
| I may be disliked for this, but the truth is that there is no difference between taking deer for food or trophy, and taking muskie for food or trophy.
Those of you who practice catch, photo, and release of muskie, could likewise practice find, photo, and let go with deer. You don't have to kill them to enjoy them.
Yet there is nothing wrong with taking deer--within the law--for food or to grace the space above the fireplace. Morally, it would be wrong to waste the creature, but if you use the meat, only vegens can criticize.
Nor is there anything wrong with taking a fish--within the law--to grace your table or your wall. I don't advocate killing muskie (nor pike either for that matter), but if an angler has obeyed the rules and done the work to catch the fish, then no one should have a fit if he takes the fish home. (In fact there are probably intelligent folks who would say it is insane to spend the kind of money and time it takes to become a proficient esox angler; and then release every catch.)
We can all argue and preach, but each angler should be left to his (or her) own decision on taking legal fish. If we want to protect more muskies, we should adjust the size and creel limits. That should be obvious.
One thing to bear in mind, if there is too much killing of muskies, and they become too scarce, we can all save a lot of money by buying a couple of Shakespere combos, some six pound test, some small hooks and bobbers, and go out and fish for gills. |
|
| |
|
|
Killing is killing, I don't think anyone claims there is a difference in the end result.
The reasons why I would kill a trophy buck, are very different than why I would kill a muskie.
First and foremost, I kill mammals to eat. If it's a trophy, great, I've got horns on the wall, they look nice and are an added bonus.
I don't fish to eat, at least not very often.
While I like to hunt, I much prefer to fish.
For me, hunting is for table fare. Deer, grouse, pheasants, etc. I prefer to eat them over fish.
If you look at hunters, many of them are conservationists who belong to Ducks Unlimited, Pheasants forever MDHA etc.
They do there part to make their passion better.
So do fishermen, by practicing C&R.
Not killing Muskies is the way we keep our fishery healthy, much like DU guys buying habitat.
Of course these things are very different, and people have different reasons for what they do.
The reasons why a muskie fishermen would release a muskie, and then turn around and kill a deer are actually quite obvious, and sensical.
JS
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2894
Location: Yahara River Chain | You know if you want to compare these two creature then all things must be equal.
What I am saying that if they were the same the scenario would be like the angler fishing for gills could not harvest a muskie, why? Because he would need a different license to do so. A small game hunter can not, repeat can not harvest a big buck (or any deer) that comes his way. Unlike fishing where the license is for all fish species. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Mr. Skarie is spot on again, with the exception for me being I DO like to eat fish. Our family lives basically on fish and game, with very little store bought meat. Not because of some conspiracy theory or to save money, just because we prefer wild game and fish to the store bought stuff.
I really like pike fillets. We have literally dozens o f lakes in the area that are LOADED with Pike, so I have no problem tasking a couple for the table. We never have anything near our limit either in the boat OR the freezer. No point of keeping a bunch of fish in the freezer when I can go get a fresh meal in a couple hours soft or hard water season.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8782
| I gotta admit, a paintball hunt sounds fun. But that's just cruel. If you're going to eat it, or it's threatening you or your family? By all means shoot it, and don't let anyone tell you you shouldn't. But shooting it with a paintball gun, just to shoot it? I just don't think that's right. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 431
| Isn't shooting it just to shoot it the same as catching it just to catch it. Seems the real argument regarding the difference has already been made and it boils down to scarcity. I will add that I personally don't hunt anymore, but that's only because I prefer to trout fish during deer season. |
|
| |
|
| as a self-proclaimed elitist, I am getting tired of the, it was a "legal" fish excuse.
by no means am I advocating turtle food. but the legal fish claim is nothing but cherry picking the DNR regs for whatever serves our immediate interest. I highly doubt somebody who actively fishes muskies and owns musky gear, a computer and pays monthly internet access bills is fishing for muskies to put food on the table.
I realize that many muskies are kept by other species anglers, because they do not participate in these boards, I am not directing this post toward them. I am directing this to the musky fishermen who visit these boards, kill fish and fall back on the legal fish claim.
plain and simple. these fish take way too long to grow to trophy size. additional pressure with the growth of fisherman requires us to take our conservation of these fish to the next level. If not, trophy waters will only become less productive and we will end up thousands of dollars of fishing gear and too few of fish to go after.
for the record, the CEO's of the largest banks are all walking away from this mortgage crisis with as much as $160,000,000 golden parachutes. They did this without breaking a single law. It was LEGAL.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8782
| momuskies - 1/30/2008 12:41 PM
Isn't shooting it just to shoot it the same as catching it just to catch it.... .
No. If you were talking about two creatures with similar nervous systems and similar capacities to experience fear and/or pain, than it would be. But comparing a fish to a deer or an elk? Other than the fact that they are both living and they both have teeth, there's not a whole lot of similarities.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2037
Location: lansing, il | killer deer are out there, they all must die! and they taste good too!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=59AEqNPpYzY |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Fall back on? Cherry picking? So if the DNR regs on a lake in my area say I can take 1 walleye over 14", and 1 under, if I do that, am I 'cherry picking'? If the law states I can keep 25 in aggregate for my panfish limit, and I do THAT, am I 'cherry picking'? If I am allowed one buck archery and one rifle, and I fill my tags, am I 'cherry picking'? Am I less a conservationist if I take ONLY my limit when I can consume same because I TOOK that limit?
I see your point, but there's a TON of debatable ground there if one chooses to take that track, Hoop.
Don't like the current limits on the waters you fish? Educate yourself as to WHY the fisheries managers have set the limit there, see if there's any hope of wiggle room based on the realities of where those waters are and where YOU would like them to be, and if there IS any...go for it, and get something done.
If you can get your DNR to set a 100% cpr limit on your favorite Muskie water, there won't be any harvest. Good luck with that...
As far as I can tell, 'these boards' and those who visit them have never claimed to be 100% CPR. That's why we have this debate so often. Fact is, there are those out there who abide by the law, are basically conservationists, but feel it's OK to harvest a Muskie that is special to them. there are those who won't ever harvest one, for any reason. And then, there's a few who could care less what you or I think, and will do whatever they like within the law with no worries one way or the other.
Democracy at it's finest. |
|
| |
|
| Steve,
are you equating a walleye or panfish with a musky?
I don't know what the growth rate and spawn success rate for walleyes and panfish are, but with some confidence I'd argue they are nothing remotely close to muskys.
..also, like I stated in my post, I doubt muskys are being kept for the table, unlike why people fish for panfish or walleyes.
as for cherry picking, you bet. I would never bash anybody for keeping a fish if they needed it for their table. But killing it for the skin at this day and age is awefully selfish.
just curious, how well is the stocking effort going in WI? the DNR sat back and permitted the taking of fish until they ultimately needed restock the fish. I think they were legally taken fish.
The word "legal" caters to a slipperly slope. First you hear that its a legal fish, then you hear that if fish are takent the entire stock are runted, then you hear about delayed mortality and you should keep them. For god's sake, the growth of the industry cannot be denied. They are excuses for every fish.
Maybe the delayed mortality of released fish will propperly regulate the number of fish. See, 100% CPR advocates can cherry pick the regs and science as well.
I'm not a deer hunter, but I'm pretty sure cutting the head off a dear for a trophy and leaving the carcass in the field is illegal. Isn't that conceptually the same idea as killing a fish for its skin and throwing away the meat? Hence cherry picking.
|
|
| |
|
| Please forgive my type o's, I'm in need of an edit option. |
|
| |
