|
|
| This is posted in hoping somebody (Ralph Florio) might respond. I am very concerned with the weed kills on Webster. I have seen other lakes go bad due to weed kills. I don't want to see Webster become another victim! I have been fishing Webster long enough to remember distinctive weed lines that skiers good find enough water to ski around. I have heard that there have been three weed kills this year, which is way too many. I am conserned that the lake aasociation is going to take away from the community all the $$ that the musky has brought it and RUIN the great fishery that has been created. Looking for more support. I have already contacted Jed Pearson(Indiana fishery biologist) and expressed my concern. The Musky Shakes--Mark C Filas | |
| | |
| Mark,
You bring up a good point, unfortunately we are just a small fish in a great big sea of home-owners that would rather see every Musky in the lake dead. They could care less about the fishing, they just want a spot to run their jet boats and jet skis at full throttle, and those pesci little weeds ruin their fun.
I don't fish the lake that much in the summer any more. The only time I get out there is if a client wants to get out there. I do all my fishing in the spring when the weeds are still good, and then again in the fall.
I am interested in what Jed told you about this situation. I have heard that the weed kill is supposed to be good for the weeds, it gets rid of the weeds that we dont want and makes room for the "GOOD" weeds. I don't know what to believe, all I know is that it definitely has an effect on the fishing.
Let me know what Jed said.[:(] | |
| | |
| Anon, I think you may be missimg the point. Nobody really likes the weed problem this lake has. I sure don't. Woudln't we all like to get rid of that millfoil and let the native weeds reestablish?
The city of warsaw treats their water supply lake with a weed killer that is friendly for consumption. The native weeds have reestablished and the water clarity has doubled on that lake.
As far as complaining about the weekend warriors I have casted at plenty of rude property owners who think they own the lake. They don't.
The musky may have ORIGINALLY been planted to control panfish populations but I can guarentee they are not stocked for that reason now. Tourism, a musky mecca, so deal with that![:0] | |
| | |
| Anon, First of all I respect all waters that I fish, probably more than most cottage owners. Second, I believe you will be proved wrong when you say that only the lake owners have a say. There will not be another year that there are that many chemicals dumped into the lake. Saying that the lake owners have the only say, is like saying they all could have their toilets flushed into the lake because they all agree on it. Mark | |
| | |
| I also have contacted the Dnr,and they will be looking into it more, due to the amount questions this practice is producing. Anon, about saying too bad, you must understand it is also about economics that lake is bringing in, by people not just fisherman. Look at this way fisherman and boaters are buying gas, food, eating at resturants, baits, and lodging. You ask how does this help in couple ways one is sales tax that goes to the city and state, and another way those small businesses that benifit hire people and deposit the money they make into local banks which inturn lend it out. Fortunately or unfortunately everything is conected. Good Fishing, Al | |
| | |
| Anon,
Please look at the general tone of this thread.The anglers discussing the weed kill here are genuinely concerned for the ecosystem, and the fish living there. I have seen over spraying ruin a lake, as the weeds are needed in a balanced form to create oxygen in the water and prevent winter kill on a wholesale measure.
It may not matter to you whether these anglers fish a healthy muskie population in Webster, but it does to them. If the law there is the same as most of the rest of the country, the water belongs to the public, and is the responsibility of the State DNR balanced by the lake association needs and requests. If indeed the stewardship of the lake lies totally in the lake assocaition's hands, then that association needs to take great care and be cetain all actions/treatments are for the TOTAL benefit of the waters.
To every issue there is a middle ground. Let's try to reach that in the future discussions here!
A personal note:
You appear to know very little about Muskie anglers. They are NOT leaving live bait containers in the lake, as there are none for suckers the size we use IF and WHEN there is any live bait used. Take some time to read some of the material here, and you will find the average Muskie angler is a conservationist, and a caretaker of the waters they fish regardless of who owns the property around the system.
[:bigsmile:] | |
| | |
| I think this whole thing is getting out of hand.
Let's forget about Musky's for now and just take a look at what is going on at the lake. I agree that we do need some kind of weed "CONTROL" we have to admit that this years spraying got out of hand, the DNR will be the first to admit that. What about all the people that live there and Bass fish or Crappie fish, I'm sure that this years spraying has affected "ALL" the fishing and not just the Musky fishing. We need a happy medium to keep this fishery going strong, and I think that is what everyone involved would like to see here. The DNR will tell you that they found a bunch (don't know the exact numbers) of "DEAD" pan fish (not Musky's) floating after the last weed kill, that is not good for anyone. When we start playing "GOD" and doing what we want to a lake then something has to give. As far as dead suckers laying around, I'm sure you are right about this, it's too bad that a few ignorant people will ruin something good for the rest of us. The DNR needs to get a handle on the situation and put some garbage cans out there and start policing the area and cracking down on the people breaking the laws.
BOTTOM LINE:
CAN'T WE "ALL" JUST GET ALONG!!!!!!!!!!![:halo:] | |
| | |
| You missed my point badly, and again made accusations that muskie anglers are messing up 'your' lake. Suckers are definitely biodegradable, bait containers are not.
Yes, I DO think the DNR may have issued permits to allow spraying without proper monitoring or study,that happens sometimes. If indeed the lake is devoid of vegetation, there is potential trouble on the horizon. Lack of winter oxygen, sediments disturbed, water clarity and quality declining,possible fish kills and nasty algae blooms in the summer and fall. I have seen the effects of overkill with weeed spraying up close and personal.
If indeed the kill was carefully applied to CONTROL, not totally kill off, vegetation, the angler's argument here is moot. From the description of the waters I have read, it sounds like the former.I will try again to find middle ground; how was the spray applied, what was the chemical used, and how extensive was the weed kill? Are there surviving weedbeds? Is the spraying timed so as to not destroy the reproductive capacity of necessary aquatic vegetation?
Who monitored the effects? Were there tests done on water quality before and after the weed control program? Was cutting discussed or tried? Was selective spraying used, or was the entire system treated?
Let's try to discuss the issues with out the personal jabs, and see where it goes.
Also, I stand by my comments that most muskie anglers are concerned, conservation minded people. I am NOT saying the lake Association is not, I am simply stating a strong opinion. You mention you want the anglers to contribute. What do you have in mind there? Most of the angelrs here are pretty generous people, and willing to help keep any waters they fish at top quality levels. How should the anglers who fish the area (all anglers, not just Muskie fishermen) contribute? | |
| | |
| Guys:
I'm already old and gray and somewhat used to playing the part of an arbitrator. Everyone posting here on this thread has valid points worth llistening to and acting upon. I'll guarantee you that nobody would want to live just across the road from decaying suckers left on the shore. They also wouldn't want to live across the road from a lake of decaying panfish, bass and other species either so it is imparative that the DNR, lake owner's association, and all fishermen of all species work together for what's best for the lake, and all it's living specimens, plant and animal alike. I think we can all agree on that, at least I hope so. If the dialog can continue without unnecessary personal attacks, as it has pretty well so far, I'll wager that a satisfactory solution will evolve. That's just one of the reasons forums such as MFirst are so valuable to us all. I live in Wisconsin and have never fished Webster, but I still hope the folks there in the Hoosier state arrive with a satisfactory solution for everyone.
Mike K. | |
| | |
| Just remember , unless you ARE a lake owner , your opinion doesn't mean anything.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That is the statement I was referring to. I absolutley agree,leaving the suckers at the launch is not accetable behavior. I disagree it takes 'ignorance' to leave a suckers on the shore. There are plenty of intelligent litterbugs; I see them every day out on the highways. Leaving the suckers there was perhaps rude, but not ignorant.
The former comments also referred to trash, bait containers in specific.
There are several anglers here who have also done well on Webster this year, that is not the core issue, and I see no mention of that in any of the anglers posts.
I am still curious about the weed control program, is there anyone out there who can answer the questions I asked in my last post?
I am glad the conversation has settled down some, but the original issue has not been resolved. How about we get a report from an informed property owner as to what actually was used, to what degree, and to what end, so those who originally asked the question can make sense of the situation. [:bigsmile:] | |
| | |
| It would be interesting to see what Jed Pearson, the local DNR biologist, would say about Steve's outstanding questions. I too am very concerend about what the lack of available oxygen is going to do this winter and hope that we don't have an extened period of ice and snow cover which will exacerbate the problem. There was a minor fish kill last year, but the weeds were only controlled not totally anilalted like a napum (sp?) bomb this year.
Hey Mr. Anon, why not sign your name if you are going to stir the pot? There's a person on the MI board that fits the profile of Mr. Anon who signs his name. I think we know who you are and I think we share a common goal of a healthy fishery so why not sign your name and be proud? BTW - There were 23 boats who fished a tournament two weekends ago from which the procedes will stock the lake. We're not all sapping off "your lake". | |
| | |
| Does anyone know Jed Pearson well enough to please ask him to come here and give an OFFICIAL view of the situation? (Mr. Pearson is head of DNR in Indiana I do believe.)
Slamr | |
| | |
| I should stay away from this post, but I have a habit of jumping in with both feet, so here goes. I don't claim to be an expert in anything. I can only tell you what I have seen since the 1960's.
Every Muskie lake I have ever fished where they used a chemical to kill the weeds, the Muskies ended up with Red Spot. After seeing several excellent Muskie lakes in PA go down hill after spraying, I heard they were going to kill the weeds in Chautauqua Lake. I went and begged them not to use chemicals in Chautauqua and told them, the Muskies would end up with Red Spot. They sprayed and 2 or 3 years later most of the Muskies died from Red Spot.
I have not fished Chautauqua for almost 20 years and have not heard anything about the lake, butI do no it happened.
Fred Mc Clintock
www.dalehollowmuskies.com[:devil:] | |
| |
|
Webster weed-kill