|
|
Posts: 692
Location: Pelican Rapids, MN | Now, I know the proper ethical answer, but I would like to know peoples honest opinion on this matter.
I received a call tonight from a gentleman looking for a guide trip. After chatting a while he was telling me about some of his guided trips on Vermillion, Leech, Bemidji etc. basically he has hit a good portion of HOT MN water.
He stated that 42 was his PB and he felt it wasn't large enough to hang. After a small bit of non-intrusive indirect questioning, he told me that each of the guides on said lakes were agreeable to him keeping a fish that he had caught on their outing.
When I told him my boat was 100% C&R he seemed taken back, and told me a story of his Vermillion guides thoughts on clients keeping fish - He said his guide's explanation was that he's not "HITLER" in his boat and if his client caught a fish it belongs to him. Which in essence is true as long as it's legal - But in today's scheme of things, I just thought every seasoned musky fisherman understood the importance of C&R. Maybe there is a silent part of this culture that isn't really into the conservation part, but his reaction as friendly and innocent as it was, it just seemed strange to me. |
|
| |
|
| I agree that it is his right to keep a legal fish if he catches it.
It is also your right as a business owner to deny him the opportunity to do so from your boat. If you feel strongly about the catch and release ethic, insist on it, openly and up-front - which I think you have done - and let the consumer choose whether he/she wants your services.
Let him get someone else to help him do it, or let him do it on his own. You can't stop him from doing it, but you don't have to help him, or make a profit on it either.
$0.02 |
|
| |
|
Posts: 182
Location: musky waters of SE, WI | If this guy fishes or fished all the big fish producing lakes you mentioned, will he continue to make trips to them after he catches his "wall hanger," always keeping one bigger than the last? He might be one of those guys looking to catch his one "giant" fish hes always been looking for, the one he'll put above his mantel, then once he gets it he wont really musky fish anymore. But i wouldnt understand if hes a guy that fishes skies all the time, you would think he would understand the importance of C&R. Idk thats what i was thinking. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 283
| this day in age I can't believe that there is actually guides out there that still let their clients keep fish. |
|
| |
|
| He's obviously doesn't understand the importance of releasing every muskie. If it wasn't for catch and release, we would all be catching sub 40" fish with very few over 40". The 48" minimum should help somewhat for guys such as this. I think you know the obvious answer that he is not welcome on the boat unless it's CPR only. I'm not a guide such as yourself, but friends new to the sport are told that all fish will be released in my boat. Got to drive the CPR mentality.
Edited by Baby Mallard 4/1/2010 9:56 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 143
Location: Lake of The Woods | pjvtrash - 4/1/2010 9:00 PM
I agree that it is his right to keep a legal fish if he catches it.
It is also your right as a business owner to deny him the opportunity to do so from your boat. If you feel strongly about the catch and release ethic, insist on it, openly and up-front - which I think you have done - and let the consumer choose whether he/she wants your services.
Let him get someone else to help him do it, or let him do it on his own. You can't stop him from doing it, but you don't have to help him, or make a profit on it either.
$0.02
Well said... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2894
Location: Yahara River Chain | Ever think those other guides didn't put him on big fish knowning that he would kill it? |
|
| |
|
| Take him fishing (and the $$$$). If he catches one, use your conservation salesmanship for a release. If he keeps it, the Muskie Gods won't look upon you unkindly, however you'll make your wallet happy. Also take him to your taxidermist for a %...in this economy I think there's currently more muskies than dollars. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 31
Location: Fairfield, IA | Agree with the others. I am not a fishing guide but you need to stand firm on what you believe in. He can catch his wall hanger on someone else's boat. If he is that hungry for one, he will find a way to do it, it just doesn't need to be on your boat.
Dave.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 3242
Location: Racine, Wi | pjvtrash - 4/1/2010 9:00 PM
I agree that it is his right to keep a legal fish if he catches it.
It is also your right as a business owner to deny him the opportunity to do so from your boat. If you feel strongly about the catch and release ethic, insist on it, openly and up-front - which I think you have done - and let the consumer choose whether he/she wants your services.
Let him get someone else to help him do it, or let him do it on his own. You can't stop him from doing it, but you don't have to help him, or make a profit on it either.
$0.02
Exactly! Jerry, I think you went the right route on that. If you're up front and explain your position, you can let them decide on whether or not you're the guy they want to book. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 720
| Baby Mallard,
He's obviously not a true "muskie fisherman" and doesn't understand the importance of releasing every muskie.
Wow, how's the view from up there.
|
|
| |
|
| The right thing to do, from a conservation standpoint, would be to relase your muskies. Nobody is questioning that. The "right thing" to do as a guide?
In my opinion, its "the best you can to encourage your clients to release their fish unharmed"
But let's be honest -- nobody is making a fortune guuiding. Even the BEST guides need every date, everey client, and every dollar, just to keep the boat running and the gear in one piece.
If it were me? I'd do everything I could to discourage harvest, promote replicas, and explain the rarity and age of a trophy class fish. And if a client chose to kill one? Well... Nobody said guiding was going to be easy. Your job is to educate and to put people on fish. What they do with them, as long as it is within the law? You might not like it, but harvesting a fish is a priviledge they paid for when they bought a license. They paid you $350 - $400 to take them out and catch that fish on toip of it. Tread lightly when you try to tell them what they can or can't do with that fish once they catch it. Don't forget -- you have a business to run, and it's the business that puts food on your table.
|
|
| |
|
| Who knows, maybe this guy will even read this thread, realize he is in the minority, and consider having a replica made instead of an actual mount.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 692
Location: Pelican Rapids, MN | muskie! nut - 4/1/2010 9:11 PM
Ever think those other guides didn't put him on big fish knowning that he would kill it?
I concur there! Isn't it taking a step back.
I did tell him, I was surprised that there is a guide in todays industry that isn't 100% C&R.
I then told him to call me with some dates he would be interested in, but I would not allow a fish to be kept out of my boat - and if he chose not to fish with me I would understand. He was a very nice guy - just disconnected I felt.
Edited by Jsondag 4/1/2010 9:43 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I wondered when someone was going to mention a replica. This fellow might not know they are available. |
|
| |
|
Location: SE Wisconsin | I think a replica would be an easy sell.
Edited by Sam Ubl 4/1/2010 10:21 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1348
Location: Pewaukee, WI | As was mentioned, impress upon him that a replica would last longer then a skin mount. I fail to see why he wouldn't opt for a replica if a photo and measurements were provided to the taxidermist. As a guide you also have to be an educator at times. Impress upon him why good sportsmanship comes into play here.  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1663
Location: Kodiak, AK | tuffy1 - 4/1/2010 10:14 PM
pjvtrash - 4/1/2010 9:00 PM
I agree that it is his right to keep a legal fish if he catches it.
It is also your right as a business owner to deny him the opportunity to do so from your boat. If you feel strongly about the catch and release ethic, insist on it, openly and up-front - which I think you have done - and let the consumer choose whether he/she wants your services.
Let him get someone else to help him do it, or let him do it on his own. You can't stop him from doing it, but you don't have to help him, or make a profit on it either.
$0.02
Exactly! Jerry, I think you went the right route on that. If you're up front and explain your position, you can let them decide on whether or not you're the guy they want to book.
And again, exactly! On a local LSC forum, muskie guys are often looked poorly upon for the "you must release all fish" mentality and jumping on someone for keeping a fish. As much as I (we) believe in C&R, if a guy buys a license and the fish is legal, he paid for the right to keep that fish if he wants to. At the same time, your boat, your rules. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1663
Location: Kodiak, AK | Jsondag - 4/1/2010 10:42 PM
He was a very nice guy - just disconnected I felt.
That's probably the perfect way to describe it. It describes my grandfather. He's been fishing for probably 70 years and to him, C&R isn't even on his radar. If it's a keeper, it's a keeper. Doesn't mean he doesn't care about the resource. It's just that he's not aware of the C&R ethos and about how widespread and beneficial it is....he's "disconnected." |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1530
| great topic. .its up to the guide service. growing up ,thru decades of shed wall heads nailed to red flannel gills in mounts that oil bled in a few years. we have come a looong way baby.it really is between the guide and fisherman period.. with the many great choices available and the cost of replacing fish in a water system to grow to trophy potential, i can see the moral, or ethical dilema.you can only do what your heart tells you. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 208
| Jerry,
I love the fact that you are CPR only but you can look at this a couple different ways.
First- If you refuse to take him out he's going to find somebody else who will and will also allow him to keep the fish if he choses to do so which bothers me.
Second- If you take him out you'll have many hours out in the boat to educate the fisherman on the importance of CPR, Replicas etc. which he may not get from someone else. You could actually look at this as an oppurtunity to save some fish long term vs. saving the one fish he may catch in your boat if he doesn't buy into your story.
|
|
| |
|
|
As a guide it's short sighted to condone or allow clients to kill fish.
There aren't enough trophies for everyone to take one home.
How many bookings will a guide be getting on MN waters when the 50"s aren't so numerous anymore?
Sooner or later the initial stockings that did so well will die off, keeping fish in the lake will be important for anyone in the guiding business.
JS |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1030
Location: APPLETON, WI | pjvtrash - 4/1/2010 9:00 PM I agree that it is his right to keep a legal fish if he catches it. It is also your right as a business owner to deny him the opportunity to do so from your boat. If you feel strongly about the catch and release ethic, insist on it, openly and up-front - which I think you have done - and let the consumer choose whether he/she wants your services. Let him get someone else to help him do it, or let him do it on his own. You can't stop him from doing it, but you don't have to help him, or make a profit on it either. $0.02 +1 to this. I don't agree with anyone keeping any musky. But he's not breaking the law either. It is his right but I don't feel you advising what you did is wrong. It's your boat and your beliefs and you have every right to stand by them. |
|
| |
|
| law and boat rules are two different things
take the $ and make sure he will get skunked |
|
| |
|
| Tell him to do us all a favor and go to cabela's and buy a mount he can put next to his 200 B&C buck he shot in a 40 acre fenced in ranch. I bet he could dream up a real good story to BS to his buddies about. |
|
| |
|
| Just tell you're selling the thrill of catching a big Muskie, not the carcass. If he wants a mount of it he can get a replica. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 136
Location: Chicago | Getting a large fish with a guide while it's fun and could be the largest fish you'll ever get, is not entirely of your own skills. So that to me is reason number one for releasing all guided fish. All you had to do is hang on and get it to the net. So along with your mount and if I get replica some time in the future there will be "guided by" on the plaque. So when your showing your fish off to people you can at least be honest. What you do with your fish on your time on the water while we don't always like it is still your right. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 692
Location: Pelican Rapids, MN | I agree that it is his right to keep a legal fish - but not in my boat - Just my policy.
I did inform him that I am close to a few replica taxidermists that are incredible artists and that if he did catch his trophy I could put him in touch with one of those guys. But then again, I was a child once and I wanted to "SHow my mommy what I caught" so I can sort of remember that mentality.
If you know me or have ever been a newbie in my boat, I have always tried to push replicas - Heck, I even keep a stack of Lax brochures in my boats glove box and when ever a fish is caught by a first timer or beginner, I hand them a brochure. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 3242
Location: Racine, Wi | NOFEAR - 4/2/2010 5:56 AM
Jerry,
I love the fact that you are CPR only but you can look at this a couple different ways.
First- If you refuse to take him out he's going to find somebody else who will and will also allow him to keep the fish if he choses to do so which bothers me.
Second- If you take him out you'll have many hours out in the boat to educate the fisherman on the importance of CPR, Replicas etc. which he may not get from someone else. You could actually look at this as an oppurtunity to save some fish long term vs. saving the one fish he may catch in your boat if he doesn't buy into your story.
That is a great point Nofear. You would have the chance to educate the person during the day, which may have a great impact, especially once they see how difficult it is to catch a big fish. They may appreciate the rarity and understand what special fish those big chicks are.
I know that I commonly have people say a similar thing, and it's amazing how many people actually understand after I send them to Lax's sight to look at the job he does (or many other of the guys making replicas) do. But, it can be a difficult sell at times. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 97
Location: Chaska MN. | The guides that i have fished with always had a C&R policy however they also said that if I landed a 60 in fish I could keep it and we would get it weighed, Now Im not sure IF I ever caught one that large I would kill it but I think that a person should have an option If it looks like a state record. If I were you I would stick to my guns and not waver on the C&R unless its a TRUE fish of a lifetime. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1425
Location: St. Lawrence River | I wonder if this guy is farmiliar with replicas. ? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 393
Location: Hopefully on the water | A few years ago I remeber a guide come across a couple of guys that caugth some large fish that they wanted to keep for a mount. This guide actually offered them money to put towards the replica of the mount and the guys that caught the fish took him up on it. Now I realize this is not something that any guide would want to promote (helping pay for a mount) but in this particular case it worked.
Maybe having a few pictures with you of some of the replicas you have or of other and if you could get a picture of a older skin mount you can show the guy the difference of how they look over time. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 25
| I know of a guide that will cover the cost difference between a skin mount and replica if a client wants to get a fish mounted, otherwise it is C&R only in his boat. He also has a size limit for this policy and the water that he guides has a higher limit, 50 inches I believe. I understand that this could quickly cut into a guides bottom line on lakes with lower limits, but it might be enough bait to get the guy in your boat with the hopes of educating him on the importance of C&R. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2089
| Then a guy catches a sure State Record and gets heat from both sides.Of course both guide and client would be crucified for killing the beast. I always told clients they could keep any legal muskie they caught.......as long as they could swim back to the boat landing with it. Always got a chuckle. |
|
| |
|
| I don't think you need any coaching but the affirmation that you are doing things right is always good. I think you unquestionably handled the situation very professionally and ethically.
As an aside, as far as these other guides not putting him on fish because he wanted to keep one. Now that is extremely unethical!
I was fishing with a guide for a few days several years back and one morning we nailed 2 big fish back to back the conditions were perfect and the fish were growling but we were immediately taken away from his most productive areas so he didn't burn out his spots for his next group. IMHO, the guide was an idiot for doing this and thought we didn't know any better. I decided right then and there he would never get another dollar of mine and I quit referring him. |
|
| |
|
| Steve, just curious (and I'm definitely not trying to start something) but what if the giant fish you put in your live well a few years ago was determined to be a certifiable state record. Did you or your clients have any thoughts on keeping it back then? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 131
| I have a friend who would love to go muskie fishing with me . But his only objective is to put anouther trophy on his wall. I'm not talking about a record fish , a high 40's would do it for him , thats just the way it is . A quality picture or a replica just won't cut it . Heck he paid about 10,000 to shoot a treed mountain lion . We go back and forth all the time on this topic . He knows if I take him hes not going to be able to keep it and I'd love to put him on to a big fish . So as of now I just tease him with the pictures. Someday he will get it . well maybe |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1764
Location: Ogden, Ut | Guest - 4/2/2010 8:47 AM
Steve, just curious (and I'm definitely not trying to start something) but what if the giant fish you put in your live well a few years ago was determined to be a certifiable state record. Did you or your clients have any thoughts on keeping it back then?
When I visited w/ Jody later that summer after he caught and released that fish, he told me that he never intended to keep the fish. He was more interested in knowing 'exactly' what he had just done. I firmly believe that a piece of paper confirming it held no more power over him that the personal knowledge of his accomplishment.
S. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2089
| Guest-
There was discussion about keeping the fish as it was indeed State Record class(Various formulas put the fish between 59 and 61#), but JODY made the decision to release her. We went through such lengths to care for that fish, I don't think keeping it was ever an option. Believe it or not, he took grief from people for NOT killing it. I took questions at the time because I had 100% C+R on my website and what would that mean if he had kept the fish. All water under the bridge and she still swims. I just feel blessed to have actually handled a near 60# fish, and one of the fondest memories of my fishing "career" was standing in the water with the fish and watching her swim away. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1030
Location: APPLETON, WI | Steve:
That is awesome...!! |
|
| |
|
| >Now, I know the proper ethical answer, but I would like to know peoples honest opinion on this matter. <
OK…here it is. I do hire a guide from time to time on new waters, and I’m very clear on the importance of C & R. I’ve never kept a Musky to date. With that said, you’re free to run your business as you see fit but I would not hire a guide that had a rule of 100% C & R only. Because in the end I view that as a decision that is mine to make each time I’m out, not the guide’s.
|
|
| |
|
| I can certainly relate to wanting to know if it was in fact a state record or not myself too. It's even better that it was released, tip of the cap to Steve and Jody! Fish like that confirm that MN has larger muskies now than at any time in its history and everyone involved should be very proud of this accomplishment. |
|
| |
|
| Hawkeye, the answer is a very easy one. It is certainly your legal right but it is also the guides legal right not to accept your business unless you accept his 100% release policy. State or world records could complicate things but that's it in a nutshell.
It is obviously very important for guides to state this policy upfront so there is is no misunderstanding. |
|
| |
|
|
C&R only camps and guides are much more common in Alaska, Canada and within Trout country in the west. More and more common in muskie country now.
It very much is up to the guide whether or not clients keep fish.
It's up to the clients which guide they hire.
Guides and camps do it to keep the fishery they depend on to make a living worth fishing. Not only for the clients but for everyone else that utilizes the resource.
JS
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2037
Location: lansing, il | I agree with Hawkeye. Its nobodys business to tell anyone else how to run their business as long as they are within the law. People guide for different reasons. Some guide to make a living and put food on the table for their family. They might take clients any way they can get them and if it means letting a guy keep a legal fish, he may not have the luxury of being able to refuse the 300 or so bucks for the day so he will let him. Others do it as part time income to help make ends meet. Some do it as a hobby because they are well off and can afford to spend the time doing it and dont really care if they make money, break even, or use it as a write off at the end of the year. so they can probably stand more firm on the ethics end of things and take a pass on customers that may not agree with the way they operate. I think it is kinda hard to say what a guy should or shouldnt do because everyone is in a different situation.
Personally i am all for 100% C & R of Musky and I think it is the way it should be. That is what i practice in my boat when I take people fishing with me. However I am not a guide or guiding for a living or hobby. Actually thats a lie, I am 99.999% C & R. If i were staring down a legit W/R, i honestly cant say what id do at that moment.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1207
Location: Pigeon Forge TN. | Everyone has a bunch of good advice for or against CPR.
Actually individual rights is what makes this Country. I, however, am like Jerry, No musky is kept from my boat either and that is MY right since it is my boat plus I respect the rights of the other boat owners. If you would want to keep one while I was fishing with you, that is your right and I don't have to agree but I would try to persuade the CPR.
I release all fish not just musky. Yes, I love to eat fish, but I buy mine in the restaurants or grocery store and that is my right. So we are all different. My self, if I ever catch a record holder, it too, will go back in the water. I will get a replica made and as long as I know what I caught that is all that matters. The fish took too long to get to that point and after surviving all the elements to get there than it deserves to die of old age.
My $0.02 |
|
| |
|
Posts: 59
| It should be a policy in every guides boat to release every fish I believe. I also think replicas look better and they last way longer.
Edited by Slim 4/2/2010 1:27 PM
|
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | a guide who is making a living off there being fish in a lake should not be taking fish out of the lake unless they are donating money each year to said lake for stocking.... how many guides that harvest fish can say they also put fish back in....i doubt too many.
I agree with everyone else, it is up to the guide (or really anyone who's boat it is, guide or not) to set the rules for what happens on the water...take it or leave it.
Edited by BNelson 4/2/2010 1:50 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2037
Location: lansing, il | I agree with you 100% Brad, If you are going to take, then you should put back. It only makes sense. However that is not for you or I to decide for someone else unless we want to spend the time and effort lobbying to make it law.
They may or may not even realize that harvest can possibly have an effect on the longevity of their own business as well. But again, is that for you or me to decide for anyone else, without knowing their situation or living in their shoes.
|
|
| |
|
| Slim - 4/2/2010 1:25 PM
It should be a policy in every guides boat to release every fish I believe.
I don't think there's any way to mandate 100%release with muskies even though it's long overdue with guides and their respective resource. All we can do as stewards of conservation is recommend that all guides seriously consider this as a better option than killing a trophy. I think records complicate this for a lot of people but the days of progressively keeping their personal best or 40lb trophy for mounting are a thing of the past.
For instance, in a perfect world every muskie guide would have this policy and there would be no picking and choosing by the customer based on whether they would they kill a fish or not Perhaps the leading muskie guides should consider some type of a association or partnership that addresses this. For sure a sticking point (for some) would be a record caliper fish having to be released. |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | John, yes that is just my opinion and doesn't matter at all in the grand scheme of things but if a guide is going to harvest fish, and is making 250 to 500 bucks a day so there are fish in the lake it would be ethical to me they give money to stocking the lake they are making money off of, and taking fish out of......just an opinion of course.
it would be great if all guides were 99.9% c&r
Edited by BNelson 4/2/2010 3:01 PM
|
|
| |
|
| When you get right down to it, guides should be putting something back into the resource anyway. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 572
| interesting,,,,I have no problem with guides setting their rules as long as they are known up front.
As for camps, I wish they would all make it known up front that they have rules different from the government regulations. If they do, I have no problem either going by their rules or going somewhere else. Twice I have gone to a camp to find out after arriving that they had exceptions or rules different from the government regulations. One camp didn't want anyone to keep a northern pike over 35 1/2 inches, which could have been a problem if I had caught one.
Interesing enough to me, I didn't care for either camp owner who had special rules. So, why would I ever want to support them? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2894
Location: Yahara River Chain | What I find amazing is that if two people totally agree, but one person has made the decision for the other, that is unacceptable. Am I missing something?
Edited by muskie! nut 4/2/2010 4:30 PM
|
|
| |
|
| You may be. Two people might agree to a point---if both are proponents of catch and release. But if one is 100% C & R, in ALL cases in his boat, then a second person who is not may not want to have that decision made for him ahead of time, and should probably fish out of a different boat. Perhaps the question is---DO they truly agree on 100% C & R? Or does one believe that C & R is good 99.9% of the time, but not absolutely inflexible. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1030
Location: APPLETON, WI | How about if the customer doesn't like the guide's policies and procedures - he can continue to browse the Yellow Pages and find a different guide...? Seems pretty simple and logical to me. If the guide tells you up front that everything caught in his/her boat is 100% C&R... and you don't agree with it (for whatever the reason) then that's the end of the story. The fact that it's *legal* to keep a musky if it's over the legal limit has nothing to do with it. It's the guide's choice, it's their decision and it's their belief. |
|
| |
|
| I think it make sense for guides to decide to do only catch and release. They practice it themselves, it helps the fishery so that more people can catch larger fish and with the advent of quality replicas, there is not good reason to keep one to mount.
However, the one thing that should be done is to inform the client, before the trip, that it will be C&R only. Back about 20 years or so, my nephew, who was in his early teens got excited about fishing for muskies on the Chippewa Flowage, where his grandpa had a cottage. My brother in law was a walleye fisherman, so he hired a guide to take them out and teach my nephew how to fish for muskies. As luck would have it, he landed a beautiful, upper 40s fish. The guide took a quick photo, that didn't turn out, and released the fish. He had never mentioned to my brother in law that he only did C&R. He said he probably would have still hired the guide but he would have had a chance to explain to his son. As it was my nephew just sat and stared at the fish as it swam away. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 143
Location: Lake of The Woods | Guest - 4/2/2010 2:57 PM
When you get right down to it, guides should be putting something back into the resource anyway.
What would that be? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 208
| Guest - 4/2/2010 2:57 PM
When you get right down to it, guides should be putting something back into the resource anyway.
We all should be or what we take for granted today will ge gone tomorrow! |
|
| |
|
| Perhaps the people who hire guides should be putting something back in the fishery...if they would not hire them, there would be no guides....BR |
|
| |
|
Posts: 692
Location: Pelican Rapids, MN | Bottom line is anyone utilizing a very limited resource, wether it is for fun or profit should be giving something back. If anything just to secure the future of said resource for one's continued use.
It is amazing, if this was a saltwater species there would be incredible restrictions - Which in my opinion would be a great thing! |
|
| |
|
| Jsondag - 4/2/2010 8:11 PM
Bottom line is anyone utilizing a very limited resource, wether it is for fun or profit should be giving something back. If anything just to secure the future of said resource for one's continued use.
It is amazing, if this was a saltwater species there would be incredible restrictions - Which in my opinion would be a great thing!
What does this have to do with saltwater? It is much easier to stock a lake than an ocean...The ocean is a limited resource for the most part, you can make as many muskies as you can afford....BR |
|
| |
|
| Obviously the guide has the right to refuse his service to the angler who will not agree in advance to releasing every fish. But can the guide afford to turn down people who say they only want to keep a fish if it is a true trophy? What are the odds on catching the true trophy on any one trip? One compromise solution might be for the guide to say it is his policy to release every fish that is not a true trophy according to the standards of his fishing community. Thus he might agree that the client may keep any fish over 45". Or every fish over 48". The problem with total catch and release is that eventually the angler is going to say, "Why go out?" "I need more than just the fun of the catch to motivate me to spend my money." If only 48" fish are removed from a lake or river, how much of a problem does this create? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1030
Location: APPLETON, WI | Cast - 4/2/2010 8:53 PM The problem with total catch and release is that eventually the angler is going to say, "Why go out?" I never say that... If the only thing motivating you to go out and enjoy a day on the water is the possibility of hanging a fish on your living room wall... in my opinion, you're not doing it for the right reasons. There's a million and one other reasons why we all essentially need to agree to disagree. Having a day off work and being out on the water means a lot more to me than putting another nail in the wall just so I can hang up a dead fish I'd much rather see swim away, anyway. Not sure if there's any right or wrong answer. We're just a bunch of avid outdoorsman who love to fish... and love musky. I vote to close this thread. I think I hear the sound of someone beating a dead horse.  see? ...told ya. |
|
| |
|
| Put a fork in it. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 143
Location: Lake of The Woods | A fish is worth a hell of a lot more swimming than it is dead! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 742
Location: Grand Rapids MN | I'm to poor of a fisherman to not keep the odds in my favor!!! So I let them all go...
Come on, admit it... you've all thought that before!  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 28
| Although it's a close call, I probably wouldn't hire a guide with a no-keep rule. But considering the odds of catching a trophy, however defined, it's admittedly not the greatest hiring criterion.
In any event, if I ever mount one, it needs to be the real thing. Never quite bought in to the replica movement, they look too synthetic and fake to me. If I ever make the decision to memorialize a fish of a lifetime, it just needs to be the real thing when I'm looking up at the wall. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 814
| scp, while it is your right to keep a legal trophy. Would'nt it be more memorable to watch it swim away? Knowing that you just gave someone else the opportunity to live the dream you just did? What about the guy or gal that released that fish so you could have your shot? What about the up and comers? Just something to think about. While reproductions aren't for everybody I sure know photos speak a thousand words. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 618
Location: Michigan | I am 100% CPR, but am just going to play devil's advocate here for a second. As a guide that is 100% CPR, what would you do if a client wants to keep a fish?? Lets say the client kept quiet about keeping a fish while talking with the guide, but when that giant fish is landed the client says he or she is going to keep it, legally what can you do about it? I don't know too many guides that have a client sign a contract about 100% CPR so I am just asking what can really be done if a client wants to keep a fish. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 123
| I don't think it matters if he caught it making it "his" fish, or if he paid you to take him fishing. You've clearly stated your position and the rules you've set as the boat operator/captain/guide, and in that scenario it should still be your call. If the subject hadn't came up before him catching a fish, that would be another story. Do you state your full feelings on this matter to all of your customers when you guide? If someone catches a 57x30 would you still follow your policy? I'd be sure to cover all the bases with my customers beforehand to avoid possible conflicts later on. Have a good season Jerry.
PS. Will I see you sturgeon fishing in 2 weeks? |
|
| |
|
| I believe it should be mandatory for all fish to be released that are caught with a guide. It should be absolutely illegal to fish with a guide and keep a fish.
Because of his knowledge and time on the water a guide is responsible for putting many more fish in his boat every year than the average guy. Because of the numbers caught his mortality numbers are also going to be higher. So, IMHO, if you're going to hire a guide all fish caught should be C&R. I know, you're going to say that a guide is more experienced at C&R. Maybe so, but some will still die and because a guide puts more in his boat, more will die.
Spend the day with the guide, enjoy, learn as much as you can, THEN go out and catch and keep your trophy, if you want a skin mount.
BTW, a well done skin mount is every bit as good as a replica and in some ways superior. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 692
Location: Pelican Rapids, MN | JasonvKop, true story - In 2007, I was out with a gentleman that had a few fish under his belt. He booked me after he found one of my brochures at the local bait shop - The brochure clearly stated 100% C&R. We had a long day, and finally he got one. A plump late september 49.5 inch beauty. I netted it to hear him say "That is gonna look awesome on my wall" I high fived him as I said "lets get a measurement." As I girthed and measured her in the net, I asked who he was gonna get his replica from - as I like to offer my assistance in the matter. He said "Replica? I'm taking her home!" I repeated my policy, and he thought and explained how my policy was BS. I gave him a Lax brochure and my synopsis on why I have this policy - before I could finish he offered me a very sizable tip for him to keep the fish. I declined the then raised his offer - I declined once more - He the became very agitated and told me how it was his right to keep a fish that he caught and he was going to take it home - It must have been the flapping of his gums or something, but magically the net lowered and the fish slowly swam out. Admittedly, he was angered and told me how BS that was - He didn't even get a photo! I told him the last thing I wanted was to put that fish in the hands of someone who would kill it. I dropped him off at the dock and went back out fishing. Thinking I would never hear from him again I wrote him off as a loss, but low and behold, he contacted me the following spring informing me that he did in fact have a replica made since he had the measurements. He has actually fished with me 3 different occasions since, and has released every fish he caught without batting an eye. He said in hindsight, he was happy I let that fish go.
I originally posted this topic with a veiled motive. With such staunch conservation ideals as most claim, I just really wanted to see how may folks really believe it is okay to kill a musky. And admittedly. It is surprising to me to see how many people have come out and basically say that their cool with keeping a musky. Just ponder - Take the people who want to kill one for their wall + those who accidentally kill one + people that want to dispose of them + natural death and predation? It isn't just one fish here and there - it is an epidemic.
As for a 57X30 which roughly is 64-65 lbs and world record class caliber - in the past I would said it was a tough call. It would be cool to have my name in the IGFA books for musky and have half the masses on my jock and half despise me, but then again, Dale McNair released his WR class fish, and still received the praise and punishment - just not the printed kind. Tell you what, when I stick a 67x30 I'll change my policy to 99.9% C&R. |
|
| |
|
| Good Luck with your 67x30....LOL!! |
|
| |
|
| BTW...since you are interested I think it IS OK to kill a legal musky, even if it's not 57x30. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 692
Location: Pelican Rapids, MN | Obviously - your prior post and your guest status say it all. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 28
| Epidemic?
Don't overstate your position, it hurts your credibility. |
|
| |
|
| Jsondag - 4/3/2010 9:14 AM
Just ponder - Take the people who want to kill one for their wall + those who accidentally kill one + people that want to dispose of them + natural death and predation? It isn't just one fish here and there - it is an epidemic.
Yep. I think there are far more of those who "accidentally kill one" than we realize. Regular muskie guys, guides, and myself included. Practice CPR (cut out the P if your ego can take it) carefully and keep handling to a minimum is all we can do.
I would agree with epidemic. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 692
Location: Pelican Rapids, MN | I was using epidemic as an adjective, like wide ranging or extensive. Maybe my grammar was off. But as someone who is on the water everyday and sees this behavior constantly, I don't feel using an accurate word like that would overstate my position or hurt my credibility.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 123
| CSI- "Because of his knowledge and time on the water a guide is responsible for putting many more fish in his boat every year than the average guy." More than the "average guy" yes, but I also know some guys who put up numbers that most guides can only dream about, Jerry knows who I'm talking about. Also, don't many guides choose to not fish while they're guiding? Recent research with the "Project Noble Beast" deal is also showing delayed mortality to be far less than what was once thought, although the study is still ongoing. I still say it's up to the guide how he chooses to run his boat as long as he's operating under current law and obiding by it. I used to feel that anyone who wanted to keep a legally caught muskie had the right to do whatever they wanted to with that fish. Now I try to educate them about the value of that fish to the system and wouldn't suggest anyone keep one unless they were 110% positive it was the world record (just to put that whole controversy to bed). |
|
| |
|
Posts: 582
Location: WI | He said his guide's explanation was that he's not "HITLER" in his boat and if his client caught a fish it belongs to him.
Probably the most disheartening thing I've read here. For an individual making money off the resource I would think your actions would represent the best interests of that resource. Considering the growing number of boats coming to MN from both w/ in the state and outside the state to catch their 50, I would think it would be in every guides best interest to have a C&R policy. Like Jerry said if everybody got to keep their one trophy in addition to delayed mortality and nature taking its course, it would be epidemic. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I'm 100% CPR as a muskie guide now. Replicas are so good, I just feel there's no good reason to harvest a Muskie any more. I'd release a WR at this point ( not likely to catch one, so it's easy to say), and part of the reasoning would be to avoid all the sure to ensue chaos from the Muskie Police out there.
That said, there are waters managed for muskie harvest. Obviously, the main reason to let 'em go is to let 'em grow and reproduce, but if they do neither acceptably and the water is basically managed as put and take, I could care less if someone harvests a fish there. The trick is to foster wide spread public understanding why it's OK there, and not Pelican. I would compare these waters to a stocked public trout pond. I don't fish 'em much. I never guide on put and take sterile waters...sort of seems silly to me to.
The point is, it's a fish, not a two year old child and in my opinion everyone needs to remember that when arguing position and philosophy. We will push for management that meets our idea of what that population of fish SHOULD be managed for, and if trophy management is the goal, 100% CPR to the maximum potential should be encouraged. All variables need to be considered, and I find the folks in fisheries management better at that than we are. Once population and overall size distribution is accomplished managing for trophies becomes a social....not biological...issue.
When that happens, sometimes folks feel compelled to attempt to legislate their desires into practice (Bay of Green Bay) because fisheries folks don't necessarily see the need. If 'we' win in that sort of scenario, we are happy, but others who have differing management/harvest goals that are just as biologically sound as 'ours' may not be. Accepting the fact people will disagree and do so from informed view points is to be able to reasonably discuss/debate the subject.
It's not 'ethics' in a literal sense at question, it's acceptance of a 100% CPR philosophy, and whether a Guide can eliminate harvest in the daily operation of his/her business. Short answer is sure, but the client needs to have read and acknowledged that reality in the contract. |
|
| |
|
| Lens Creep - 4/3/2010 11:45 AM
Recent research with the "Project Noble Beast" deal is also showing delayed mortality to be far less than what was once thought, although the study is still ongoing.
I'm only vaguely familiar with Project Noble Beast but keep in mind that the fisherman participating in this study (mostly Mr. Landsman?) are probably very careful and conscientious of the muskie's well-being when practicing or simulating CPR for the study. I don't think I would go as far as to assume the majority of muskie anglers are that careful even if there intentions are good. For example, in the study are they holding these 52" fish vertically if even only for a second? Are they using nets with that thin crappy netting material...like the lower end Frabill nets some of the pros are using on tv? Are they taking them out of the net...taking pics...putting them back in the net to check pics...then taking them back out again for better pics or a video shot??? I really doubt it. Many of the pros even on tv will do that. However, most of that is edited out of course. I'm guessing their CPR tactics will not have the same effect on a muskie as others CPR tactics. The definition of CPR can have very wide parameters.
|
|
| |
|
| sworrall - 4/3/2010 12:22 PM
We will push for management that meets our idea of what that population of fish SHOULD be managed for, and if trophy management is the goal, 100% CPR to the maximum potential should be encouraged. All variables need to be considered, and I find the folks in fisheries management better at that than we are. Once population and overall size distribution is accomplished managing for trophies becomes a social....not biological...issue.
When that happens, sometimes folks feel compelled to attempt to legislate their desires into practice (Bay of Green Bay) because fisheries folks don't necessarily see the need. If 'we' win in that sort of scenario, we are happy, but others who have differing management/harvest goals that are just as biologically sound as 'ours' may not be. .
And that's precisely why "your" fishing isn't as good as "ours". There is no other way that makes biological sense to manage muskies except for trophies. Sorry, but making it into a social issue seems like a defeatest and wishy washy way to manage muskies. |
|
| |
|
| Guest - 4/3/2010 4:50 PM
sworrall - 4/3/2010 12:22 PM
We will push for management that meets our idea of what that population of fish SHOULD be managed for, and if trophy management is the goal, 100% CPR to the maximum potential should be encouraged. All variables need to be considered, and I find the folks in fisheries management better at that than we are. Once population and overall size distribution is accomplished managing for trophies becomes a social....not biological...issue.
When that happens, sometimes folks feel compelled to attempt to legislate their desires into practice (Bay of Green Bay) because fisheries folks don't necessarily see the need. If 'we' win in that sort of scenario, we are happy, but others who have differing management/harvest goals that are just as biologically sound as 'ours' may not be. .
And that's precisely why "your" fishing isn't as good as "ours". There is no other way that makes biological sense to manage muskies except for trophies. Sorry, but making it into a social issue seems like a defeatest and wishy washy way to manage muskies.
I am guessing you are from MN, rock on Al Franken, Rock on... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 719
| "I am guessing you are from MN, rock on Al Franken, Rock on..."
Now thats cold............but as long as you dragged Al into it
My view is simple...my clients release fish, I donate auction trips and $ every season to Muskies Inc to help grow the resource, I help folks catch fish via guided outings seminars, forums and articles....I also use those same resources to teach people the successfull methods of releasing fish.
In my boat last season there were about twenty-five "biggests and firsts" and every muskie landed was special. I don't think we killed any but I KNOW for sure special care was taken to get every fish back healthy including a few fish that maybe deserved a picture but were a bit overstressed so it was not a good option, the customers understod that. My view is that WE are all stewards of the fishing we enjoy and the better we get at the fishing part the better we need to be about the releasing part.
I matched photos of a number of large fish caught in prior seasons to pictures of large fish caught last year.......the smiles the second time were as big as the first....and the fish were bigger!
Would I pass on a client that really wanted to keep one.....absolutly.....would I try to educate him first ....for sure.
Does that make me elitist......I don't think so, I think it makes me someone who wants the great fishing we enjoy to continue for a long time.
BT
Edited by bturg 4/3/2010 5:44 PM
|
|
| |
|
| guest - 4/3/2010 4:35 PM
Lens Creep - 4/3/2010 11:45 AM
Recent research with the "Project Noble Beast" deal is also showing delayed mortality to be far less than what was once thought, although the study is still ongoing.
I'm only vaguely familiar with Project Noble Beast but keep in mind that the fisherman participating in this study (mostly Mr. Landsman? ) are probably very careful and conscientious of the muskie's well-being when practicing or simulating CPR for the study. I don't think I would go as far as to assume the majority of muskie anglers are that careful even if there intentions are good. For example, in the study are they holding these 52" fish vertically if even only for a second? Are they using nets with that thin crappy netting material...like the lower end Frabill nets some of the pros are using on tv? Are they taking them out of the net...taking pics...putting them back in the net to check pics...then taking them back out again for better pics or a video shot??? I really doubt it. Many of the pros even on tv will do that. However, most of that is edited out of course. I'm guessing their CPR tactics will not have the same effect on a muskie as others CPR tactics. The definition of CPR can have very wide parameters.
Guest, In most lakes if a 52'' ski is caught, the least of its worries if it could worry in its nickel sized brain. Is being held vertically, or being in a cheap net, or if it smiled for the camera. You could also worry about the bass guy catching one in the july bathwater. or the ultra lite angler whos into the fight. If they let it go, they let it go. Some swim some die some get kept and make some cry, just be thankful that we get to go try. |
|
| |
|
| I’m going to play the role of Captain Obvious here for a moment, and make some ridiculously plain and simple statements, before making a soap-box summary statement. • It’s fine and dandy if a guide is 100% C & R in his boat, as long as he makes that clear before being hired for the day. I doubt that he'll lose any business over it. • It’s also OK not to hire a guide who is if that’s a problem for you. There are plenty of others. • Most people recognize that this web-site is pro C & R, so posting here to promote it close to preaching to the choir. • But, for the few that visit who are not sold on the concept, it never hurts to be reminded to consider it. However, if you’re going to make a post promoting it, understand that it’s a matter of being good for the future of the sport…NOT an ethical issue. If someone keeps a Musky of any size, they are not committing some ethical or moral sin. Theft, rape and murder are moral issues. Dog fighting is an ethical issue. Keeping a fish is not. Keeping or not keeping a fish is all about doing what’s good for the future of the sport of Musky fishing. It’s about good management. It’s about being realistic that in world today where boats are bigger, and have better electronics, and more educated anglers—if we do not release fish they could easily be desimated. But it is not a matter or question of ethics at ALL. Just think it's important to be clear on that, and not get self-righteous with people.
|
|
| |
|
| Guest #16---I think - 4/3/2010 6:16 PM
Very well put!!
I’m going to play the role of Captain Obvious here for a moment, and make some ridiculously plain and simple statements, before making a soap-box summary statement. • It’s fine and dandy if a guide is 100% C & R in his boat, as long as he makes that clear before being hired for the day. I doubt that he'll lose any business over it. • It’s also OK not to hire a guide who is if that’s a problem for you. There are plenty of others. • Most people recognize that this web-site is pro C & R, so posting here to promote it close to preaching to the choir. • But, for the few that visit who are not sold on the concept, it never hurts to be reminded to consider it. However, if you’re going to make a post promoting it, understand that it’s a matter of being good for the future of the sport…NOT an ethical issue. If someone keeps a Musky of any size, they are not committing some ethical or moral sin. Theft, rape and murder are moral issues. Dog fighting is an ethical issue. Keeping a fish is not. Keeping or not keeping a fish is all about doing what’s good for the future of the sport of Musky fishing. It’s about good management. It’s about being realistic that in world today where boats are bigger, and have better electronics, and more educated anglers—if we do not release fish they could easily be desimated. But it is not a matter or question of ethics at ALL. Just think it's important to be clear on that, and not get self-righteous with people.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 618
Location: Michigan | "But it is not a matter or question of ethics at ALL."
I could see it being an ethical question for some people as it is killing a living creature. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | 'We will push for management that meets our idea of what that population of fish SHOULD be managed for, and if trophy management is the goal, 100% CPR to the maximum potential should be encouraged. All variables need to be considered, and I find the folks in fisheries management better at that than we are. Once population and overall size distribution is accomplished managing for trophies becomes a social....not biological...issue.
When that happens, sometimes folks feel compelled to attempt to legislate their desires into practice (Bay of Green Bay) because fisheries folks don't necessarily see the need. If 'we' win in that sort of scenario, we are happy, but others who have differing management/harvest goals that are just as biologically sound as 'ours' may not be. .
---------------------------------------
'And that's precisely why "your" fishing isn't as good as "ours". There is no other way that makes biological sense to manage muskies except for trophies. Sorry, but making it into a social issue seems like a defeatest and wishy washy way to manage muskies.'
--------------------------------------
Much of the quoted portion of my post referred to as 'wishy washy' is exactly what just happened in MN, resulting in a new 48" limit. And it's why MN was successful in making it happen. The folks who got it done understand that. I'm hoping it's what'll happen on the Bay Of Green Bay, too.
48" ain't 50" or 54", guest. Folks are not heading to MN as a trophy destination to catch a 48. If anglers decide to come over there in force and a number of them harvest legal muskies, MN has a problem retaining the numbers of fish in the 52 to 55 range.
In fact, MN still has a potential problem with big fish harvest, and the same folks who fought to get the 48" limit know there's more to be done.
So I hope MORE guides go 100% CPR there, and on our trophy potential waters everywhere.
Hard not to quote Ron White here.
BT, I sure hope your are not thinking I said anyone with your attitude is elitist. Far from it.
I sure am glad I was forced through the SRA program.
|
|
| |
|
| jasonvkop - 4/3/2010 6:34 PM
"But it is not a matter or question of ethics at ALL."
I could see it being an ethical question for some people as it is killing a living creature.
Maybe, but I am guessing most of these guys all eat fish or animals of some sort...It is all about feeling self-righteous, it is the new breed of muskie fishermen...BR |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2024
| guest - 4/3/2010 4:35 PM
Lens Creep - 4/3/2010 11:45 AM
Recent research with the "Project Noble Beast" deal is also showing delayed mortality to be far less than what was once thought, although the study is still ongoing.
I'm only vaguely familiar with Project Noble Beast but keep in mind that the fisherman participating in this study (mostly Mr. Landsman? ) are probably very careful and conscientious of the muskie's well-being when practicing or simulating CPR for the study. I don't think I would go as far as to assume the majority of muskie anglers are that careful even if there intentions are good. For example, in the study are they holding these 52" fish vertically if even only for a second? Are they using nets with that thin crappy netting material...like the lower end Frabill nets some of the pros are using on tv? Are they taking them out of the net...taking pics...putting them back in the net to check pics...then taking them back out again for better pics or a video shot??? I really doubt it. Many of the pros even on tv will do that. However, most of that is edited out of course. I'm guessing their CPR tactics will not have the same effect on a muskie as others CPR tactics. The definition of CPR can have very wide parameters.
To clarify a few points brought up here:
We are mimicking what I have deemed to be "normal" handling procedures for *specialized* muskie anglers. We play the fish as quickly as possible (transmittered fish were angled for no longer than 2 min 12 sec), use Frabill Big Kahunas, lift them vertically from the net for a second until we can slide our hands into position for a horizontal hold (as an angler would when preparing to take a picture), air expose the fish for 90 seconds to simulate photo taking and out-of-water measurements, take our data, and release the fish.
The above process is compared to a gentler alternative that eliminates or severely reduces air exposure.
As "guest" has mentioned though there is an entire spectrum of handling practices, but for the sake of the study these were the procedures we deemed as normal and something we could easily standardize. Also, angling is done by myself as well as other Muskies Canada volunteers.
Hope that clarifies things. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I kill lots of living things and clearly understand that in order for us to live as we do, folks who claim they don't are allowing/accepting by proxy, and are delusional. I even enjoy harvesting my own food. I do as best as I can to be ethical in the process, and will apologize to no one for enjoying my sport. I sorta hope to give the crappies hell next week, and there will be casualties.
I used to kill muskies and allow my clients to kill muskies. I don't anymore. Something changed, I guess.
This one is heading South.
Sorry, Jerry, good topic. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 73
| sworrall - 4/3/2010 7:13 PM
I sorta hope to give the crappies hell next week, and there will be casualties.
LOL....I hope to inflict some 'Crappie casualties' myself this weekend, Steve! |
|
| |
|
|
Self-rightous, that's an interesting term.
I'd really like to know where our muskie fisheries would be without all the self-rightous people that have let fish go for other muskie fishermen to catch.
JS |
|
| |
|
| They would be just fine..................... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 692
Location: Pelican Rapids, MN | This is getting ridiculous, sorry for ever bringing it up - All "guests" want to do is drop in their shrouded two cents for argument sake. It is too bad people are too embarrassed to come out of the closet.
As for "guest 16" in todays musky industry, conservation for prolonging the use of the resource is the main focus. In this case, the "honorable" thing to do is to release a caught trophy for future consideration. "Honorable" is a synonym of "Ethical". maybe you like that word better, but in my career - my life, the "ethical" thing to do is to release them all.
Maybe "Ethical" is too dramatic of a word for some, but I have based my life around this fish, so the term is fitting in this situation.
|
|
| |
|
| Jsondag - 4/3/2010 9:09 PM
This is getting ridiculous, sorry for ever bringing it up - All "guests" want to do is drop in their shrouded two cents for argument sake. It is too bad people are too embarrassed to come out of the closet.
As for "guest 16" in todays musky industry, conservation for prolonging the use of the resource is the main focus. In this case, the "honorable" thing to do is to release a caught trophy for future consideration. "Honorable" is a synonym of "Ethical". maybe you like that word better, but in my career - my life, the "ethical" thing to do is to release them all.
Maybe "Ethical" is too dramatic of a word for some, but I have based my life around this fish, so the term is fitting in this situation.
You can speak of honor or what not, but muskies are a renewable resource. Gone are the days of lore and really working to catch the fish. We have made it easy, the last place where a chance at a serious trophy exists and hard work is still needed is out east...They have not stocked the heck out of a bunch of lakes, that has made muskie an ordinary fish at this point. No longer the rare gem....it is turning into the fish of 10 casts, not 10,000.....BR |
|
| |
|
| Only topics where everyone agrees unyieldingly with the author's every opinion should be discussed?
That would be boring. And pretty unproductive. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 909
| pjvtrash - 4/1/2010 10:00 PM
I agree that it is his right to keep a legal fish if he catches it.
It is also your right as a business owner to deny him the opportunity to do so from your boat. If you feel strongly about the catch and release ethic, insist on it, openly and up-front - which I think you have done - and let the consumer choose whether he/she wants your services.
Let him get someone else to help him do it, or let him do it on his own. You can't stop him from doing it, but you don't have to help him, or make a profit on it either!
This pretty much covers it! I'm a guide too! And this is how its done from the first time I speak with a client!
Brian
$0.02 |
|
| |
|
Posts: 692
Location: Pelican Rapids, MN | Oh Come on...relax! - 4/3/2010 9:19 PM
Only topics where everyone agrees unyieldingly with the author's every opinion should be discussed?
That would be boring. And pretty unproductive.
I agree, that would be boring and would be divergent of the original question posted, which was not a try at promoting catch and release - It was about peoples honest beliefs or personal ethics when it came to these fish - and that is what I was looking for - Not dissection of verbatim.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 4080
Location: Elko - Lake Vermilion | 10 Casts is all I'll need to catch a trophy Muskie,........ #*^@,.... I may boat 90 muskies the next time I'm out !!........................ Cool !!
Jerry, thanks for being a stand up kind of guy...... now just............ GO FISH!
Jerome
Edited by Top H2O 4/3/2010 9:57 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Jerry,
I think you are getting answers to your question and many other questions paralleling are being asked/answered. The question begs divergence, and it's what happens when one asks what you admit was a 'loaded' question of a group this large and geographically/demographically diverse.
Great topic. Good discussion, for the most part, IMO. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 692
Location: Pelican Rapids, MN | Thanks, I enjoyed to diversity of opinion. Now freeze it will ya? My wife wants me to pay attention to her! HA HA |
|
| |
ethical question