|
|
Posts: 929
Location: Rhinelander. | I can see why kentuck and long were on wish list for bigger limits. My ? is why sand? If we are only asking for a few lakes to recieve a bigger limit we could certainly find a lake that has a chance of putting out huge muskies that is better then sand.
Pfeiff |
|
| |
|
Posts: 529
Location: Not Where I Want To Be | It could possibly have something to do with them all being in the same general area.
Just my thoughts. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Sand has the potential to kick out big girls, and does every year, including some very impressive hybrids. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | steve ... which "sand" ... ?? i assume big sand? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Yes. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | Don ... i would think Big Sand also because it's connected with a waterway to Long Lake. that combination makes perfect sense to me. kentuck, north and south twin, long and big sand are a great handful of lakes with outstanding current results that should support this ballot to allow them to reach their fullest potential. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | Big Sand definitely has some big fish in it, and some great potential. Problem I see is it also has a lot of fish in it which may be counter productive in getting *numbers* of large fish in the system. It may be able to support more large fish, and numbers though as the forage base is pretty good. I spend a considerable amount of time on the lake so I think I know it pretty well in terms of big fish compared to any other lake in the area. Perhaps the lake would have more large fish in it if there wasn't so many smaller ones being kept. With it a popular panfish lake plenty of fish are kept out there.
I would still love to see a 50” limit out there though.
Could a 50” limit be detrimental to the lake? I doubt it.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1289
Location: WI | Is this Sand Lake in Vilas or Sawyer? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 393
Location: Hopefully on the water | It is the Sand Lake in Vilas county. Not the one off of Hwy 70 and 27 in sawyer that I think you are thinking of. Been to both and would like to see the 50" proposal pass for Vilas on the above lakes mentioned. All have potential for big fish and good fisheries. Remeber to get out and vote on Monday the 13th at the hearings. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| I am very dissapointed that North Twin and LVD weren't in the mix but I guess it's a start. All have lots of fishing pressure and recieve high numbers of harvest. Lets hope this is a start to trophy potential lakes.
Mr Musky
Edited by Mr Musky 4/12/2009 8:27 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 929
Location: Rhinelander. | Its the sand by phelps. I know its connected to long as I fish it half dozen times a year. As far as kicking out lots of big girls I am not sure. I just think if they were only going to target 3 lakes for this that North Twin would have a better choice.
However its a start and will see what happens. I understand lots of people that live on kentuck are really against it and plan to be at the meeting.
Pfeiff |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4266
| I am very familiar with all of the lakes that you are talking about, and I know for a fact that Big Sand has put out huge fish in the past and still puts out a few every year. It also has an abundance of stunted panfish in it, so perhaps they should introduce more muskies into that fishery and let them eat their way to trophy size.
Though it's connected to Long, you can't really navigate the channel from one to the other. The boat landing on Long is probably the worst in the county. They improved the parking area, but once you launch, you still have to get out of your boat and push it over the ever-present sand bar that runs around the bay there. There are 3 creeks that run into Long in that bay, so there is always a good supply of silt. That landing keeps people off of that lake, and that's fine with me.
Making North and South Twin 50" also would be fine with me. The more, the better.
I recall one year at The Mid-West Muskie Classic, we were in shorts on Friday morning and had snow and freezing rain by that afternoon and the rest of the weekend. The only fish and winning fish was a 52"er out of Big Sand. The guy who caught it told the guys in the snowfence pen to let her go, but his partner jumped in the pen and killed her saying that he was going to get her mounted with a copy of the check in his mouth.
Anyway, Big Sand has a good population of mid to upper 40 inch fish, and I think it's a great choice for a 50" limit. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| "The guy who caught it told the guys in the snowfence pen to let her go, but his partner jumped in the pen and killed her saying that he was going to get her mounted with a copy of the check in his mouth"
I hope that team is banned from the Mid West Classic. To win a check off that fish then kill it it pretty pathetic to me.
Mr Musky |
|
| |
|
Posts: 82
Location: deep in the slop | if I am not mistaken, they replaced the slabs on concrete on the launch for long....on a side note, has anyone been out on sand since they treated it last year? Hows the Milfoil? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | Milfoil was on the rebound by the fall. Unless the lake assoc. continues to apply the chemicals to keep the weeds down I think they'll keep coming back. It was definitely a different lake to fish last year without the milf! |
|
| |
|
| The lake association was unable to obtain another DNR grant this year. At the moment we are scrambling to raise $ privately to do a partial treatment of the south shore this year. App. 130 acres of mil foil was not directly treated last year.
Given that Big Sand flows to Long, and Long to the Deerskin River, which finds it way to the Eagle Chain, you would think that it would be a high priority lake for funding. Unfortunately, the system for fund approval is not reliable, and is based more on the the financial footing of the lake association, and less on how the particular water is connected to the whole system. Combined with a horrid economy and less available funds to go around in '09, we are on our own to treat the lake.
Sean Murphy
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 177
Location: Lake Forest, Illinois | sorry, I wasn't signed on for above post. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4266
| Replaced the concrete on Long? It still doesn't matter. You have to deal with less than a foot of water when you get out of the washout hole.
I talked to a guy who spends the summer and fall on Sand, and he said that the milfoil was down but coming back and that lots of the native cabbage went with it.
Did they do anything with the milfoil on Long? I actually didn't mind the milfoil there because it's so steep. It didn't do much but create a band of weeds around almost the entire lake. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 258
Location: Mayville, WI | Milfoil was down, but I think most of that had to do with the winter as only half the lake was treated but it was down across the whole lake. Plus, the later spring gave it less time to reach the surface. The same scenario should repeat this year, depending on how much they can treat w/o the grant. Native cabbage (white-stem pondweed) was actually on the rebound and present more than in 2007.
sc |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | Beav from what I could tell the milf was treated on Long in spots unfortunately.
I agree with scmuskies about the cabbage on B.Sand. Without the milf it was allowed to thrive. Along with that was the cootntail came back well also. I did notice around the Aug. timeframe though that the cabbage was getting sparse especially after the Alliance tourney. I think a lot of it got ripped out from fisherman. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | Mr Musky - 4/10/2009 8:47 PM
I am very dissapointed that North Twin and LVD weren't in the mix but I guess it's a start. All have lots of fishing pressure and recieve high numbers of harvest. Lets hope this is a start to trophy potential lakes.
Mr Musky
Because LVD is a Boundry Water, I highly doubt you'll see a 50" limit on it. I'm shocked that folks don't propose the Twins, Presque Isle or Trout Lake for a 50. |
|
| |
|
Location: Lake Tomahawk, WI | The people in Phelps were ready to riot when Twin went from 32 to 34. I think that they don't propose a raised size limit there because they know it would be met with a lot of hostility. Which is a real shame because it has a good of a potential as any lake in the state for producing big fish.
JS |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | I hear you JS, the folks at Northern Highlands Tackle in Boulder Junction were asking people to sign an Anti-50" petition a few years back. Folks are just too affraid of change up there.
Edited by Gander Mt Guide 4/15/2009 12:23 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| Gander, I thought of the boundry situation after the fact as well.
I see Big Sand and Long passed for the "Yes" in Vilas Cty. Wonder where that will go next. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 929
Location: Rhinelander. | The weeds on sand will only continue to be a problem. Thats why I wonderd why anyone would encourage anyone to fish it. The more boats fishing it the more likely weds will be moved to another lake. They will also wash into long lake and they will have the problem to. I think the folks in the phelps area could be talked into twin going to a bigger size limit. I know many people there and I think they are softening on the issue. None the less good job on getting things passed. Who picked these lakes?
Pfeiff |
|
| |
|
Posts: 663
| The original proposal was sponsored by Bill Jacobs, president of the Headwaters MI chapter. My understanding is that he did consult with fisheries biologist Steve Gilbert who agreed that those lakes had "the right stuff" to make a 50" limit reasonable choices. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | In regards to weeds spreading from Big Sand to other lakes. Sand is already heavily fished, and other lakes are not all of a sudden showing up with milfoil. The anglers that fish Big Sand for the most part take precautions to ensure we are not spreading the weeds to other systems. Lots of anglers out there making sure they get the weeds off of the trailers prior to going home or jumping to other lakes. The milfoil will not be an issue in other lakes as long as us that fish the lake take the time to pick the weeds off.
As far as weeds washing into Long. If you have been on the lakes you will know the channel is not navigable right now. Chances of weeds "washing" through are pretty slim if you ask me. If they do get into Long, as they are already there, shouldn't be a big deal out there. The make-up of Long will not allow milfoil to go rampage as it might on other lakes. The milfoil out there sets up in thin bands due to it being rocky, and quick dropping for the most part.
Not sure where I saw anyone encouraging people to fish on B. Sand. Not sure why Don is requesting people not to fish it. If that was the case the same request not to fish B. Sand should go to not fishing the Eagle River Chain and any other body of water with milfoil. But hey by all means don't fish B. Sand as that is more un-molested fish for me! 
Cool to see the 50" passed out there, and I thank everyone that voted for it and lobbied to get it. It's nice to see Bill Jacobs is taking a little bit at a time to get a few lakes at 50".
It appears to me the gripe is more about B. Sand getting the 50" size limit than perhaps another lake. I say don't gripe about the lake chosen, but rather embrace it and be happy we are working towards getting a couple at a higher size limit.
Edited by CiscoKid 4/16/2009 9:12 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 4266
| I have seen the movement of the milfoil from Sand to Long.
The channel may not be navigable right now, but in years past, you could motor through it with the only obstruction being a beaver dam that was destroyed on several occasions. The flow from Sand to Long is continuous. I some springs with high water, you dould see piles of weeds piled up on the shores of the bay in Long Lake where the touroughfare comes in.
Once in Long Lake, the natural currents go from the creek mouth to the dam in the SW bay on Long. That bay and the entire south shoreline from the creek mouth to the dam has had milfoil in it for many years. There used to be some very nice cabbage beds all over that area, but milfoil has invaded tose weed beds as well.
Once milfoil got into Long Lake, the chopped up milfoil from the SW bay in Sand continued to come through the creek constantly. I know Long well enough to know that if you get 3 days of strong SW winds blowing on Long, it wouldn't take much effort to spread milfoil from end to end. Seeing that milfoil is so prolific, I can see that the migration of milfoil is a much more viable trery than milfoil being transported. Since the boatlanding is in the NE corner, and milfoil transported by trailers would pretty much stay in that area because of the typical wind directions from the SW forcing it to stay there.
The amount of sliced and diced milfoil that is produced on Sand Lake every year is more than enough to colonize Long Lake with little or no problem. Fish migrate from Sand to Long with no problem, and I'm sure that the weed clippings do the same.
I think that the milfoil is actually a plus for Long Lake. As was mentioned, it gives a band of good cover and oxygenated water to the fish that was never there before, and maybe some of those free-roaming muskies and even walleyes will make contact with the weeds and set up there instead of retreating to open water. I'll find out more and more every year.
As far as the 50" limit being imposed on Long and Sand, I say BRAVO! Too little too late, but some is better than none. Having "lived" on Long Lake for many years, and fishing Sand for more, I have seen way too many of "Little Johnies first muskies go on the wall from Sand, and any muskie kept in Long because it was such a strange occurance for people to catch anything out of that lake. We were actually told to stay away from Long Lake back in the 70's because it was too hard to fish. But in less than 2 years, I had walleyes to 33", smallies to 22 and boated 6 muskies in the second year that were all 44-46", but I saw bigger fish than I ever had seen in my life, and that was 10 years of fishing the Twins, Sand and LVD.
Don p- You might see the weeds as a problem, but I see them as another angling opportunity, and now it's for bigger fish. Milfoil isn't a problem, it just requires a different frame of mind and a different approach.
Edited by Beaver 4/16/2009 10:35 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 177
Location: Lake Forest, Illinois | Steve Gilbert anticipates that Long and Sand will indeed become 50" limit lakes, while Kentuck may not. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| Sean, Could that go into effect for this year allready? |
|
| |
|
| Opening Day 2010 if they pass the CC vote and DNR votes next month. |
|
| |
Big Sand Lake size limit proposal