|
|
| Am I the only one who is concerned about the rash of dead "record" fish in MN in the past two summers? We had two on Mille Lacs, one on White Bear and one on Miltona last year. All killed by anglers who thought they had some sort of record. I know the Miltona fish in the previous thread was not intentionally killed, but wow was that some horrible reporting! That fish was not a record in any sense of the word. The writer clearly insinuates, the fish would have been if not for the gov't shutdown. Last year the Star Tribune incorrectly reported, in a piece regarding the WBL fish, that the state record was 54" instead of 54 lbs. I am perfectly fine with an angler keeping a trophy size fish and, of course, there is always going to be some hooking mortality, but it seems like, with all the talk of record size fish in MN, more claims of record catches are popping up. There is not now, nor was there ever, a MN record for length. I'm not sure why we have to keep hearing about how "the fish was one inch longer than the current record." I know that I have some responsibility in the "Record Quest" but these are examples of irresponsible journalism by both the Star Tribune and The Grand Forks Herald. Let's get the word out about how records are kept and awarded. An article like the one in the Grand Forks Herald is misleading and could result in the needless death of more non-record giant fish. I have sent emails to both papers and both responded quickly. We can get this corrected if we keep an eye out and make a little noise.
Edited by Ben Olsen 7/13/2011 11:09 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 40
| Ben, I totally agree with you. Everyone thinks that a mid 50 inch summer fish is a record! Then they send it to the paper's and they publish it as a new state record if.... BTW every year the Tribune post multiple stories of multiple species being new state records! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 793
Location: Ames, Iowa | I think a big part of the problem is that more fisherman, given the success of state muskie programs and C and R- which naturally lead to big fish publicity- are targeting muskies without the proper equipment and experience. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 255
| Send the publication the verified correct information and ask that they read it and they will be educated for next time. Or they can write an update to the previous story. Education is a strong tool. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 994
Location: Minnesota: where it's tough to be a sportsfan! | I totally agree with this post. What Ben is saying if there is going to be a change of thought process' for the news media and thus the public we will have to carry this ball to the end zone. There are enough floaters in our waters w/o having fish needlessly slain because of a mistaken identity. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2089
| Bennie -O, right on Brotha. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 437
| I read the recent GF Herald article about the big fish "waiting record certification". For what? In no stretch did that fish meet any of the criteria of a record in MN. There are no length records for released fish, and this fish wasnt released. It was weighed at 50 or so pounds on an uncertified scale, sorry folks, they dont gain weight when they reach a certified one. So what in the world is the record? Dont get me wrong, its a tremendous fish and happy for the guy who caught it, but come on. I am not sure if the angler was pimping this as some sort of record or if it was the news publication so I am not going to flame the guy who caught it. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 247
Location: Uxbridge Ontario | I personally have never been a big fan of the MNR policies stating that the fish must be killed in order to validate the record. Im not exactly sure how a certified record could be made without killing the fish either, as muskies are not the "catch and hold onto for extended periods of time" kind. I know when the Sturgeon records are looked into (at least live release) guy literally tie them off to a dock and wait for an MNR official to come take measurements and weight. This can take hours, but to my knowledge sturgeon are hardy enough to endure the pen treatment.
But all comments aside, a fish "these days" needs to be notably larger than and past record fish. The weight of old time record vs size/ girth IMO dont seem to measure up to new age fish weights vs size/girth. If you are even close to the same measurements as the record, it will not be as heavy. I'm just saying. |
|
| |
|
| StarTribune is atrocious when it comes to its reporting and editing. They laid off most of their editors a long time ago...not that it was stellar before that. |
|
| |
|
| You're definitely not the only one concerned Ben, I think we're seeing this boom in muskie fishing taking it's toll on the muskies themselves. I'm in season 23 of musky angling, I've seen a big shift in "the angler" and the way things are on the water and in peoples heads. Don't blame yourself for the record quest at all, you have taught those willing to listen, those willing to care for the fishery the way you do, all they need to know but it takes them to be able to apply it on the water. There are those of us who wouldn't keep the state record, what % of us that is who knows, but not every musky angler especially an old toot like me needs the limelight or a pat on the back, I used to get those after bailing hay for 14 hours a day. If the record drives you to fish them well have it. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1901
Location: MN | I had posted on the Sallie fish the same sentiments regarding the poor reporting and total lack of understanding of what the record really is, but I would additionally pin that cluelessness not only on the papers/reporters, but on certain anglers themselves. Here was a guy who had fished for muskies "all his life" and had already mounted 3 fish, and he doesn't even know what he's talking about. Education is key. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 313
Location: Bemidji, Lake Vermilion | + 1 Ben. |
|
| |
|
| Kind of like this guy. He speared two monsters this last winter and thought both should be state records. Its pretty easy to see that fish isn't 53lbs by the pic.
http://www.petoskeynews.com/sports/null-fish-tale-brutus-man-lands-... |
|
| |
|
| it was weighted at 53 pounds maybe not on a certified scale but i hardly see ur case in disproving the guy |
|
| |
|
| Guest - 7/13/2011 6:14 PM
it was weighted at 53 pounds maybe not on a certified scale but i hardly see ur case in disproving the guy
Obviously we will never know for sure, but the picture combined with the length and girth measurements don't add up at all. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 697
Location: Minnetonka | Amen Mr. Olsen. The ill-informed find their way into almost everything, and some people just need an end to their means, I guess. It's really unfortunate that their "ends" have fallen short of the record in all cases. Please stop bonking 40 lb MN muskies. 
Edited by Hammskie 7/14/2011 10:01 AM
|
|
| |
|
Location: Sawyer County, WI |
Who "certifies" fish in MN when the state government is shut down ? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 264
| Ben Olsen - 7/13/2011 11:07 AM
Am I the only one who is concerned about the rash of dead "record" fish in MN in the past two summers? We had two on Mille Lacs, one on White Bear and one on Miltona last year. All killed by anglers who thought they had some sort of record. I know the Miltona fish in the previous thread was not intentionally killed, but wow was that some horrible reporting! That fish was not a record in any sense of the word. The writer clearly insinuates, the fish would have been if not for the gov't shutdown. Last year the Star Tribune incorrectly reported, in a piece regarding the WBL fish, that the state record was 54" instead of 54 lbs. I am perfectly fine with an angler keeping a trophy size fish and, of course, there is always going to be some hooking mortality, but it seems like, with all the talk of record size fish in MN, more claims of record catches are popping up. There is not now, nor was there ever, a MN record for length. I'm not sure why we have to keep hearing about how "the fish was one inch longer than the current record." I know that I have some responsibility in the "Record Quest" but these are examples of irresponsible journalism by both the Star Tribune and The Grand Forks Herald. Let's get the word out about how records are kept and awarded. An article like the one in the Grand Forks Herald is misleading and could result in the needless death of more non-record giant fish. I have sent emails to both papers and both responded quickly. We can get this corrected if we keep an eye out and make a little noise.
Ben, I looked for the star tribune article on the WBL fish, and found it does say 54 lbs, not inches...is this the one your talking about?
http://www.startribune.com/sports/outdoors/100942674.html |
|
| |
|
| 619-No, that story is in response to the original write-up.(may have been online) The story had a pic of the fish and, I believe, it was written by a woman. It said that the 53" caught on WBL was one inch short of the 54" state record. She did, however, note that the actual record had an unusually large girth(paraphrase). P.S. The non-record fish from Sallie has continued to get press. Both the Star Tribune and WCCO TV news covered the story from a similarly flawed perspective. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 18
| Why would the press change the way they report. Sensationalism sells! |
|
| |
|
| The St. Paul Pioneer Press has also jumped on the B.S. bandwagon. The Sallie fish is now somwhere in the 54.5 to 55lb. range. That fish just keeps adding weight. Funny stuff for sure. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | I clicked on here thinking it was a football thread ... sorry. Just in-case there is record confusion, there are Zero Superbowl Championships in Minnesota. |
|
| |
|
| After reading the story on the Sallie fish I have now come to the conclusion that a number of us have released the Minnesota state record, a few of us several times and we just didn't have the smarts to thump it at tell all the papers the story.  |
|
| |
|
| Guest - 7/15/2011 7:41 AM The St. Paul Pioneer Press has also jumped on the B.S. bandwagon. The Sallie fish is now somwhere in the 54.5 to 55lb. range. That fish just keeps adding weight. Funny stuff for sure. a couple pounds shy? nothing a throat full of water hose wouldn't cure...  and Sled...it's not nice to pick on Grimace. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 203
Location: Alexandria, Minnesota | I think we should all make a trip to lake Sallie to track this kid down. We should bring a Knipex, Long Pliers, Jaw Spreaders, Extra Hooks, a Frabill and Muskies Inc membership for the kid, so maybe someday he will realize that keeping 1 fish in your lifetime might be O.K. but to be 22 years old and now have 5 dead fish on your wall is just a slap into to face to all of us that have practiced CPR for all of these years. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 264
| Dave Williamson - 7/15/2011 5:46 PM
I think we should all make a trip to lake Sallie to track this kid down. We should bring a Knipex, Long Pliers, Jaw Spreaders, Extra Hooks, a Frabill and Muskies Inc membership for the kid, so maybe someday he will realize that keeping 1 fish in your lifetime might be O.K. but to be 22 years old and now have 5 dead fish on your wall is just a slap into to face to all of us that have practiced CPR for all of these years.
http://blogs.twincities.com/outdoors/2011/07/was-lake-sallie-muskie...
ya this kid had no clue how to release that fish, if he even wanted too... |
|
| |
|
| They interviewed this kid on the radio and he said as soon as he caught it he rushed it to the dnr office which is basically on the lake but he does not mention that in the story above. I'm confused as to shy this story keeps changing everytime I hear it. |
|
| |
|
| Now you know how those of us who live/fish in the Lower Bay of Green feel. If we had a size limit to protect this caliber of fish, we'd still have some. You've joined the ranks of places people come to "break the record" and/or "get one for the wall."
Welcome to the club. Let us know when 2 large kept fish on a lake turns into dozens..... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Glass houses, gentlemen.
We all learned conservation from someone, hope this angler learns it from us. I'm pretty sure a baseball bat isn't the best delivery tool. |
|
| |
|
| "The writer clearly insinuates, the fish would have been <a record> if not for the gov't shutdown."
Just more proof we can get by with less government. |
|
| |
|
| not sure why this even makes the news... a big fish caught in mn thats a new one
and honestly if the kid has 5 musky on the wall ...o well maybe he just dont care about you? lol i dont see buck hunters shooting deer with paintball guns, some pple just dont care |
|
| |
|
Posts: 582
Location: WI | Guest - 7/16/2011 4:09 AM
lol i dont see buck hunters shooting deer with paintball guns, some pple just dont care
Comparing apple to oranges there guest. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 123
| What laws did the "Sallie Fish Guy" break by having 5 dead fish on his wall? I still can't believe we've come to the point where we're crucifying someone who operated completely inside the laws in place at the time, and I for one refuse to do it further. If you don't like that he has 5 dead fish on his wall then get off your but and try to get the regulations changed. That's much more productive then bad-mouthing someone on an internet website because their personal beliefs are different than yours. Never kept a muskie, never will, but I won't fault another angler for keeping a legally caught fish. I may try to educate him on the benefits of c&r for future reference, but as long as he has a legal right to keep that fish who am I to say differently. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Rick Wolff - 7/16/2011 9:34 PM
Just delete the post....big hitter!!!
OK. |
|
| |
|
| I don't have a problem with someone keeping the fish I have a problem with how this stories is being blown out of proportion. The fish is not a state record it's not big enough and it doesn't have the dimensions to make it one. I also have a problem with some claiming to be all for catch and release with four dead fish on your wall. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | So?
Complaining here logged in as an anonymous guest is going to accomplish something? How about proactive instead of reactive, and positive instead of negative tasking? Just a point.
If you want to stop harvest of 57" muskies, you need to get the DNR to set a 60" limit.
If you want to stop inaccurate reporting, you need to contact the media source via email and straighten them out...nicely.
If you want harvest to lessen, and CPR to increase, you need to proactively encourage conservation through education.
What have you done lately? If the answer is 'plenty', outstanding! If the answer is just complaining here, not so much.
Sort of preaching to the Choir. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 123
| Exactly Steve. |
|
| |
|
| The answer is plenty. All I was attempting to do by posting my last post was to try and echo the sentiment of most of the people that I know that have and issue with this whole thing. Lens creep made it sound like the only reason why anyone cares is because he kept the fish. "not the case" |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | No, he didn't. Read his post. He was addressing a specific portion of this debate. Context, please.
'Having a problem' begs the question as to how to solve same. It takes quite a bit of action to get a message across to those we need to, and my point is...those folks are rarely looking in on any discussion here. |
|
| |
|
| Well..this kid is about to become old news pretty quick I do believe. There's a fish being passed around on facebook caught this weekend in MN that smashes a state record..I'll let the guy himself decide if he chooses to post details but rest assured there's no doubter on this one...Oh yeah, and it was released successfully! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 123
| I believe MN requires that you kill the fish to be certified as a record, which is unfortunate, so no matter what the size Randy, it won't be THE record. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 692
Location: Pelican Rapids, MN | Just returned from a trip to LOTW to hear about all this hooplah. Being the only local musky guide in the area this fish was gassed, my phone was ringing off the hook when this fish was harvested weeks ago.
Five minutes after the fish was first brought to light, I got a call from a local news reporter. We chatted for a while about it, got a texted photo of it and the name of the taxidermist who had the fish. Before I went to Ontario, I contacted him and asked exactly how big it was. He said it was rounded up to 55 taxidermist inches nose to tip. and was about 22-23 inches around. Probably around 40 legit pounds. Not even close to a record.... unless he got it on 2 pound test....
He is obviously under a lot of scrutiny due to the fact this is his 5th skin mount. It sucks that this has to happen especially from a lake that has a smaller transient population of fish. From what I understand he has decorated the walls of his parents cabin over the last several years. Hopefully all of the personal "collateral damage" from the exposure will be a lesson to a self described hardcore musky fisherman - So I guess the topic at hand.... Harvesting one or five "big" fish for the wall legal? Yes. Counterproductive? Most definitely. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 313
Location: Bemidji, Lake Vermilion | Thx for the extra insight Jerry. +1 on the counterproductive. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Not all who fish on Muskie waters and not all who fish muskies a couple times a year are immersed in our subculture. Some flat don't know any better, assuming we do, of course.
Educate. Inform. Influence.
Seems like MN is and has been for some time experiencing what WI has been roundly criticized by 'notables' for years, only the fish, when 'discovered' in MN by the 'general public' were newly established, and...big.
Join the club. Maybe folks from all over will be rude and abusive to MN activists while they fight to correct the backwards mentality instead of everyone pulling the same direction. Then again, maybe not. We can all hope... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 437
| Jsondag - 7/17/2011 9:03 PM
He is obviously under a lot of scrutiny due to the fact this is his 5th skin mount. Thanks Jerry for clearing up this aspect. There never was reference to the "other" mounts as to whether they were replicas or skin mounts. Everyone was assuming they were skin mounts and blasting the guy for it.
On a related note, not directed to you Jerry... IMO, he has a right to keep the fish. Would I do it? No, but we shouldnt sit here and chastise the guy for doing something that is perfectly legal to do. Like Steve and others have said, if we dont like it, do something about it to change it. Lobby for an increase to 60" or even 58". I mean really, a state record fish would have to be near those lengths anyway. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 198
| The news on the radio this morning was the guy weighed it at home at 54 lbs. Lots of publicity on this fish, might have something to do with the state shutdown and him not being able to get it checked by a DNR biologist, etc.
Sure sets a bad example for C&R.
I hope the huge tiger that was just caught and released gets as much media attention. |
|
| |
|
|
I guess I didn't realize that if something was legal than the public was not allowed to comment in a negative way. At least that's the idea that some of you are putting out there.
Yes you can kill and mount 5 muskies legally. Legally people can also give an opinnion on that whether it is negative or positive.
Abortion is illegal. Plenty of people give their opinions on that both positive and negative in the public arena. Before someone chimes in I don't compare abortion to killing muskies. Point being people who don't approve of things that are legal have a right and privalege to voice said opinion. People shouldn't be expected to keep thier opinions to themselves and try to change laws vs. being able to express views.
If you are going to put yourself out there telling people you have 5 muskies on the wall and expect nothing but pats on the back than you are delusional.
JS
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | after being part of the backwards-minded Northern Wisconsin bunch, i'm glad to see we have company over in Minnesota. this way, Illinois and Indiana each can have ont to fix instead of sharing the one. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | No one said negative opinions shouldn't be expressed, there's simply the points to be made we have little we can say to FORCE people to adhere to our personal conservation ethic, and a baseball bat methodology hasn't worked well in the past and probably won't into the future.
Your example actually makes my point for me. Would you advocate picking out someone in MN personally attacking her in a publication for exercising her rights because you disagree with the law that allows her that right? How, I ask, would that do anything but polarize those who have differing opinions and those on the fence against your ideals? Sure, you'd get ataboys from those who mirror your ideals, but that's not likely to accomplish change.
Do you disagree with the laws that set the limit on that water? Who sets those limits? Why are they set where they are; are those limits arbitrary or is there a reasonable explanation why they are where they are? Why ISN'T the limit at, say, 57" in MN? Why did Ontario set the limit lower than the actual length of this particular fish? IS it actually 'wrong' or damaging to the management strategies in place on that water to harvest a fish that size, and if it is, why is it?
Many of us here want to see a larger limit on BOGB. I think it will happen, mostly because of very hard work by a small group of anglers. We wanted a 50" limit on Pelican. We got it, but not by trying to make anyone who disagreed with us an enemy, or beating up anyone who harvested a fish in a large publication. I personally believe trophy management strategies might be open to some adjusting on some waters to mirror the fact the fish are getting bigger than anyone really thought they would, and the social acceptance of the 'trophy water' concept is now much more comprehensive than it has been in the past. That's what I hope is about to happen on the Bay of Green Bay.
|
|
| |
|
|
Never said I advocate "baseball bat" methods.
I also never said anyone in particular should be publically pointed to, but when you put your story out in the public by your own free will than you and your actions are fair game to be commented on.
If a woman put out a news release that she had multiple abortions than I think everyone could agree that positive and negative comments would abound on internet, radio and other media.
If a walleye angler came out and said he keeps his limit every other day of the season then I'm sure you'd get feedback from walleye anglers about that.
Point being, why is it so unacceptable to point out in public the negative afffects of killing muskies, especially multiple times, when the anglers are putting these stories out there for all of us to see?
As far as the law goes, you don't have to pass more laws for people to not take advantage of what the current law says you can or can't do. C&R is voluntary and will continue to be that way as long as people can express opinions about it. The idea that people shouldn't express opinions about legal activities that they don't agree with not what "free speech" is all about.
Obviously "thuggish" speech is counterproductive. More and more though people are taking an attitude that making any kind of comment regarding C&R about a killed fish story is not acceptable.
We really don't have to make out world quite that PC.
JS
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 444
| Good posts JS... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 897
| What I want to know is how possession limits factor into this all. At what point does your possession limit get reset to 0? Is this guy keeping more than one per year? If I could get onto the DNR website (down due to shutdown) I could get an answer! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2076
| Whynot, You could keep a 48"+ every day of open season |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | i say put him in a public square and stone him to death ... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 123
| The point I was trying to make in an earlier post wasn't about anyone not being able to state what their opinion was, but rather that stating your opinion will do nothing to change the situation. You can call this guy whatever you want, but how is bad-mouthing someone on this website going to have an effect on what he's doing? It will not. If a guy having 5 dead muskies hanging on his wall is enough to aggravate you to slander him on an internet website, then it should be enough to get you to pick up the ball, get some signatures, and try to put regulations in place to end the harvest of fish this size. That's all I was trying to get across earlier. Feel free to say whatever you like about this individual, but don't complain next time he does it if you did nothing to educate him or made no attempt to put changes in the regulations to stop him from doing something perfectly legal. That's all I was trying to say. Good fishing all. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 897
| IAJustin - 7/18/2011 11:30 AM
Whynot, You could keep a 48"+ every day of open season
No, you can't. Possession limit for muskies is 1 in MN, same as your daily limit. Just like for walleyes it is 6. That number doesn't get reset until the fish are eaten or otherwised used up. I'm wondering if mounting a fish resets that to 0? Never seen it in the regs, but I'm guessing when you drop the fish off at the taxidermist it resets. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 797
Location: North Central IL USA | Lens Creep - 7/18/2011 11:34 AM
The point I was trying to make in an earlier post wasn't about anyone not being able to state what their opinion was, but rather that stating your opinion will do nothing to change the situation.
I would guess people are just venting.
Personally I wouldn't have any dead fish carcasses on my wall.
2 reasons being:
I don't think a fish should have to die just so that I can get my jollies catching it and then hang it on my wall to brag about.
I'd want to put it back in the water ASAP so someone else could have the pleasure of catching it.
That's just the way I operate. To each his own with this stuff. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 366
| C&R may be legally voluntary, but there are plenty of guys who won't keep fish because of the attacks and social pressure against doing so, and not just because of the affects on the fish. Obviously, that is the goal for those who are unable to actually change the laws. I fully support C&R, and always try to pass that mindset onto others. But, it kind of makes me sick to think of being associated by other fishermen as the same types who stand out in front of abortion clinics with giant posters of blood and mutilation and shout at anyone who comes near the place. I don't think that most anti-abortionist exhibit that sort of behavior and I'm sure plenty of them realize that it might ultimately be detrimental to their cause, but there isn't much to be done to besides try and convince their self-appointed spokespeople to use better methods. Also, it isn't that hard to see how easy the anti-muskie harvest argument can so very easily be morphed into the anti-muskie fishing banter, especially when you put the ball on the tee and hand those people the bat. There are more and more people in this country who are developing feelings against things like fishing, than those who are picking the sport up these days unfortunately.
Just because the easy way to pressure people into not keeping fish is to chastise anyone who does, doesn't mean that it is actually the best long-term tactic to create the best muskie fishing conditions any of us could hope for. Because you really have to think about what you truly want... no muskies to ever be harvested, or simply the best muskie fishing possible for those of us who love to do it? If it's the former, then the only eventually logical tactic to employ is to stop any sort of interaction with them.
Ryan
|
|
| |
|
| Drawing the parallel between what WI has battled for 70 years and what MN is now is battling is an interesting one.
On the C&R thing.....I think its easy for everybody to sit back and be all brave and gruff at your keyboard. I've been guilty from time to time. But I think there are new folks who come into this sport every day, and like cattle needing water on a day like today, they're going to seek the source of what they need. In their case....its info. Which means websites and discussion forums. It should also be said though that communications via internet generally are not sent/received always as they are intended.
On the one hand I think its unfortunate that convo's like this turn into skin mount bashing because I think it just makes everybody look bad. But on the other hand, I think it helps to be vigilant and ready to help "christen" the newbies on how our subculture prefers to treat the catch of a great fish. Read: please release it.
This story wouldn't be a story if 1) there hadn't been all this recent record banter, and 2) if it hadn't been known that he had 4 other mounts. Those two facets are the buzz words here.
Lastly, if folks hadn't been vocal about catch and release......we wouldn't have the very high % of catch and release we enjoy today. We'd still be stuck in the early 90s mentality of being angry that the size limit went from 30 to 32". |
|
| |
|
Posts: 692
Location: Pelican Rapids, MN | Just in from a ridiculously hot morning of guiding and following up on this post. The young man who caught this fish is from Arizona and even though he thinks of himself as a hardcore musky fisherman, he is not. I wouldn't even label him as a weekend warrior. He's just a wide eyed kid that's gotten lucky and thought he had something special...several times. He obviously has very little understanding of "back of the boat" ethics and the unwritten code of musky fishing. Nor does he understand rules and regs for any type of records. Unfortunately a lot of folks out there pitching baits don't.
It is an individuals right to keep a legal sized fish if they so chose - But like I said before, it's a truly counterproductive practice for a fishery to endure, especially one like the lake this fantasy fish was harvested from. There are many anglers on this site alone that have had a accurate catch that trumps this one, and my guess is most if not all of them got put back. If not, that's their choice - we may not agree with it, and find it downright infuriating, but alas aside from a sideways congratulatory thumbs up and a polite suggestion of "next time... maybe release the fish" there is not much we can do besides maybe embarrass the poor fool by berating them online into making better decisions.
The MN DNR and Catch and Release ethics have built this Minnesota fishery - I say keep the guns blazing and don't forget for a second what we might lose if we don't. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | 'The idea that people shouldn't express opinions about legal activities that they don't agree with not what "free speech" is all about.'
No one has said anyone shouldn't object to the fish being harvested. It was simply suggested that HOW you object could directly effect the success of your objection's placement here and on other media in changing public opinion for the better. 'Free speech' has absolutely nothing to do with it. the actual text? {Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. } Nothing that happens here in the process of publishing MuskieFIRST or any other copyrighted publication has a thing to do with constitutionally protected free speech, and the Supreme Court has upheld that concept multiple times.
Links:
http://whatswrongaroundus.blogspot.com/2008/01/freedom-of-speechlet...
http://www.businessweek.com/2000/00_09/b3670155.htm ---read this one before you blast a person or company online
http://blog.grantneufeld.ca/2007/06/free-speech-on-message-boards.h... --related to abusing someone here who is operating within their rights/privileges
There's lots more...Google it.
Define 'PC' John...apparently your definition differs from others, and that... is the rub. If you want to be more abrasive than is allowed on an internet forum about muskie regulations in MN, get yourself a soap box, go to the local DNR office, and holler all you want out in front of the building. Letting you in to disrupt business in the actual offices...they don't have to, and probably won't.
In response to the last entry-
Abuse or block this person's privileges or rights, libel them, and you may end up in court defending yourself, and OFM will be the bearer of that bad news, unfortunately. There are far more legal land mines in operating a publication like this than the casual observer may realize. I'm sure neither of us has the time or inclination to end up there....and we'd both lose, spectacularly. So we recommend (and if need be enforce) you take reasonable care how much you try to 'embarrass any poor fool' at the risk of finding yourself in that category for lack of knowledge of the legal landscape involved in this process.
my only point was:
There's a line that shouldn't be crossed in the attempt to influence public opinion to win the day, and one that shouldn't be crossed that all but guarantees losing.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 444
| Steve, I think you need to research the meaning of Slander and libel yourself and then look into how many times a internet sites as been sued for it...
I would like to see you explain to our Vets sometime that free speech is for "soap boxes" and the "blog o sphere", maybe you can do a little deal at operation Muskie....
Edited by thescottith 7/18/2011 1:44 PM
|
|
| |
|
| Sometimes you "hardcore" musky guys get so caught up in this catch vs. keep debate. Its called reproduction. Big fish are going to die. Younger fish replace them. Thats why they set size limits so these younger fish can become the big fish. Its pretty obvious 99% of the musky population will never grow to anything over 60 inches. I for one, a northern wisconsin musky nut have never caught a 50 inch fish. When that day happens or should I say if that day happens that beast is goin in the boat. Way to much time, money and sleepless nights spent on this species to not harvest a true trophy. But i've been more then fine releasing those sub 50 inch fish hoping they grow bigger. Boys relax. Its just a fish. Even if you guide and you depend on this resource for your income we are never going to run out of "muskies". Let the strong survive. And why not leave this kid alone. He legally kept the fish. End of story. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1150
| Guest - 7/18/2011 1:58 PM
Sometimes you "hardcore" musky guys get so caught up in this catch vs. keep debate. Its called reproduction. Big fish are going to die. Younger fish replace them. Thats why they set size limits so these younger fish can become the big fish. Its pretty obvious 99% of the musky population will never grow to anything over 60 inches. I for one, a northern wisconsin musky nut have never caught a 50 inch fish. When that day happens or should I say if that day happens that beast is goin in the boat. Way to much time, money and sleepless nights spent on this species to not harvest a true trophy. But i've been more then fine releasing those sub 50 inch fish hoping they grow bigger. Boys relax. Its just a fish. Even if you guide and you depend on this resource for your income we are never going to run out of "muskies". Let the strong survive. And why not leave this kid alone. He legally kept the fish. End of story.
If every "hardcore" musky angler decided to keep 4 trophy fish... I have to believe the fishery would be depleted rather quickly.
Imagine if Jerry Sondag harvested every big fish he's caught in that area with his clients.
There is no doubt the angler has the right to keep the fish. But for a self proclaimed "hardcore" musky guy. Where are the ethics? Granted, the kid said the fish died after eating a bulldawg, but then again he also claimed that he "tried to revive the fish for 6 hours." That's absurd. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | 'I would like to see you explain to our Vets sometime that free speech is for "soap boxes" and the "blog o sphere", maybe you can do a little deal at operation Muskie'
Seriously? Actually take a look at the links I provided before you accuse me of not displaying proper patriotism or grasping Constitutional Rights properly.
And ask lambeau how much money the MuskieFIRST community has provided to the Operation Muskie organization through the auction held in the MuskieFIRST Chat room over the last three years through our venue.
My son is a veteran. Navy Corpsman, if that matters to you, and for the Marines as well.
I have clear understanding what the terms mean and what the issues related are to a web based publication. You obviously do not, but why would you, really? By the way, this isn't a blog.
Excerpt from the above Bloomberg article:
'The dispute raises tough policy issues--and they are arising all over the Internet. Angry about the flowering of lies, self-serving day-trader rumors, and other types of mischief on Web message boards, Corporate America is cracking down. In recent months, Raytheon (RTN.B), Varian Medical Systems (VAR), and more than 100 other companies have sued over statements made anonymously online. Targets include employees and nonemployees alike, and the offending postings are appearing everywhere from tiny sites such as Griffin's to the teeming financial message boards run by Yahoo! (YHOO), America Online (AOL), and Microsoft (MSFT). '
Sometimes I'm tempted....but Slamr keeps me in check. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 437
| Come on guys, questioning anothers partiotism all because of disagreements about C&R ethics?
The beauty of living in the US is that we CAN say these things without being killed, but lets not get so bent out of shape over it. There are FAR more serious things to get our blood boiling like making sure our men and women of the armed forces return, after all, if it weren't for them we wouldnt have the privileges we do.
Steve, just a side note, JS was having "spirited" conversation on another fishing board recently on this very same topic (at least I believe it is him) so I think it may be a phase right now. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | one less muskie to eat all my perch and walleyes ... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Sled...
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 437
| jonnysled - 7/18/2011 3:04 PM
one less muskie to eat all my perch and walleyes ... The clock is ticking to the person who references muskies dont eat walleyes.
1.2.3.... LOL |
|
| |
|
| opining about a subject is no substitute for actually going out and doing something. ironically there's a great editorial about it published on CNN today. http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/07/18/obeidallah.laziest.generation/index.html?hpt=hp_c2 But here is my growing concern: Are we becoming the laziest generation? Is social media becoming our opiate of the masses seducing us into being slacktivists, believing that simply because we make a cyber comment, we are somehow actually affecting our world? Will our generation leave a lasting legacy or just millions of snarky tweets? the people who rant about dead fish are just "millions of snarky tweets." the folks who are working to educate others in person, raise size limits, volunteer to help run conservation clubs, etc. are the ones "actually affecting our world." also, is it possible to make your points (on either side) without dragging Operation Muskie into it? to some of us that's sacred ground...one of those "leaving a lasting legacy" efforts, so let's please agree to leave it out of this kind of discussion.
Edited by lambeau 7/18/2011 4:24 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 444
| I mentioned operation Muskie because it is a group of Vets, anyway, My point is, I would love to see the look on any group of Vets face when you tell them free speech and the first amendment is for I quote " soap boxes and blogs"
|
|
| |
|
| Steve I read through your links. Prolly not closely enough to ace an exam, but I think I'd pass. Anywho.....
From what I can gather, its not so much the speech itself, its the location....or rather HOW the website is set up, that is what is getting people into trouble. That, or what they were doing and/or talking about was illegal. Correct? Or at least generally accurate?
Just trying to clarify.
-Eric |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | couple thoughts
1. great context use of the word "opining"!!
2. what was the thread about?
3. one side needs to punt ... i'll let everyone guess which one |
|
| |
|
Posts: 123
| "Imagine if Jerry Sondag harvested every big fish he's caught in that area with his clients".- MartinTD
I bet Jerry has probably killed many more than 5 fish, simply due to the numbers he has caught and a belief I have in delayed mortality. In reality, there's very good chance that Jerry and quite a few others here have caused the demise of more than 5 muskies in their angling carreers. It's almost a certain probability.
By the way, I only mention Jerry because he was named in an earlier post. I know Jerry and I'm sure his release practices are top notch. I'm just saying I know guys that have caught hundreds of muskies over the years and I'd bet anything that they caused the early demise of more than just five fish, even if the number of delayed mortality deaths was at the very low end. Just my opinion. |
|
| |
|
| http://blogs.twincities.com/outdoors/2011/07/was-lake-sallie-muskie...
just thought you guys would like to read his latest account of this supposed record |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Eric,
Not necessarily 'illegal', no, but some activities online may have been, as was the case with the Union mentioned.
Corporate and private companies in an environment increasingly intolerant of irresponsible online behavior are filing suit to defend themselves.
-----------------------------------
'when you tell them free speech and the first amendment is for I quote " soap boxes and blogs" '
That ain't no quote and isn't even close to what was said.
Interestingly, the angler told me in a telephone conversation the fish weighed between 50 and 51 pounds. The media seems to be all over the place on it.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 692
Location: Pelican Rapids, MN | I decided to go back in my log book and see just how many "Hard releases" I've had. I have kept an accurate journal of catches since I started guiding in '05. I have averaged 188 "Legal" catches per MN season (June-Nov) out of the boat since 2005. I mark a tough one with HR (Hard Release) and out of all those fish the highlighted number is 8. Plus, I'm proud to say I have never had a fish go belly up or do a death spiral when trying to release. Yes, I have had 3 or 4 of the HR's make me wonder if she survived. One 51 incher in 2007 really sticks out in my mind as one that probably ended up as turtle food after it ate a sucker with a loose treble off a quickset that ended up with some gill damage.
And of course just because a fish swims away quickly doesn't mean it will survive the stresses of a human encounter. If we were so hell bent on the safety of the fish we wouldn't fish them at all. I agree, accidents happen, fish die, etc.
But we can spread the word on better handling and technique. I've been in the boat many times where even experience fisherman land a fish look at the way she's hooked and say "This one looks like she's gonna be a goner".... No, all we need to do is cut the hook, not grip and rip and forego the glamour shot, drop the net and let her swim.
Like it's been stated a million times, our sport of musky fishing is very ego driven. Many of us, myself included search for accolades and pat on the back from a good catch. It's why we take pictures, buy replicas, lunge log, etc. A great catch is a special thing to celebrate, just use common sense when doing so.
Also, side note as I'm sure everyone is as tired reading all about this kid and his "Whopper" of a story... I mean fish. As I understand it an angler putting a 1 bag limit fish in the boat and transporting it is considered a harvested fish in MN regulations, and once it is harvested it is illegal to release. Plus, no camera???? What 22 year old doesn't have his cel phone glued to his hand 24/7? Surely he needed to tweet, text, facebook or something those few hours he was out?
Well, enough for me - Now I have to go to a child birthing class with my wife called Breast feeding 101. I'll see if i can get some good horizontal hold pics for you boys!!! GIGGITY |
|
| |
|
| http://blogs.twincities.com/outdoors/2011/07/was-lake-sallie-muskie...
interesting side of the story. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2076
| whynot - 7/18/2011 11:43 AM
IAJustin - 7/18/2011 11:30 AM
Whynot, You could keep a 48"+ every day of open season
No, you can't. Possession limit for muskies is 1 in MN, same as your daily limit. Just like for walleyes it is 6. That number doesn't get reset until the fish are eaten or otherwised used up. I'm wondering if mounting a fish resets that to 0? Never seen it in the regs, but I'm guessing when you drop the fish off at the taxidermist it resets.
So..Like I said you "could" keep a 48"+ every day... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1901
Location: MN | "...wife called Breast feeding 101. I'll see if i can get some good horizontal hold pics for you boys!!! GIGGITY"
I don't care who ya are, that right there is funny |
|
| |
|
| Hi Guys
I understand that some are sensitive when it comes to the issue of keeping a fish. I've released every muskie in my life except for one and I'm certainly not going to apologize for it. I am an ethical angler who loves the sport, but if we look at the big picture, how many people do you know that keep four muskie in a lifetime? This is one person out of thousands, on the positive side how many people do we know that treat this sport with respect and try to enhance it. That's what is really important. We all share a love for muskie fishing yet there is so much negativity directed at one another, and I really think that's a shame. Just my thoughts. |
|
| |
|
| Everyone pays for a license that allows you to keep certain species of fish.... and MUSKIE is one of them................ The best thing we can do as an angling commuity is just do our best to educate people on how tough these resources are to maintain. Hopefully by just education we can increase the number of fish that get CPR.
But the bottom line is MN as well as every other state does allow a person to keep legal muskies. Until that changes people need not get mad at someone who does keep a giant fish.
Lets just all keep doing our best to teach people how vital this resource is!
Now everyone get off here and go catch some monsters! Im going fishing! |
|
| |
|
| Steve you have turned this post from meaningful conversation to soap box material it was fine until you chimed in. Secondly, it is not the media that is blowing this up it is the person who caught the fish. He was interviewed on the radio and after the radio host said 52 lbs he quickly corrected him with 54 lbs. This goes back to my original post, which you slammed me for, not everyone on here is mad because he kept it they are mad because of the circus it has become for a fish that is no state record. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin |
Challenges and answers from many points of view. I don't much care if you like mine or not, they are what they are...and yours are too. I didn't 'slam' you, I asked you what complaining here would do; your wording that you 'have a problem' with it, so I asked you what resolution you suggest. Was a challenge, not a slam.
I talked to the anglers on the phone, and my notes say one scale 50#, the second 51#, just looked at my notes again. I read two stories with different weights. It's up to the media at hand to get the facts, and not just the 'story'. Seems the story keeps changing.
|
|
| |
|
| Mr. Winther...great post..The point of this thread was to start a discussion about how we could clear up confusion regarding the MN record. It had nothing to do with first amendment rights...let's all calm down!
Mr. Crawford, I started this post by clearly stating that I didn't have a problem with this guy keeping the fish in question.
The only intended target(if there was one) was the press. I've contacted several media outlets over the past few seasons regarding inaccurate info and poor fact checking. While they usually respond, it's always after the damage has been done.
They seem to love a big fish story so, we all should share them any chance we get and remember to include our conservation ideals!
Lastly, Mr. Worall, please try to stay on topic! (teasing)
Good Luck! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Wish I knew which topic in this thread to stick to, Ben.
Sled...
Rock Stars? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 692
Location: Pelican Rapids, MN | Ben, it's funny. When this fish was caught, I was contacted by the 1st reporter to get wind of it. Made some calls got the accurate dimensions and told the journalist not to run this story as it is a total farce and the story will be hearsay. It still ran originally through the Pioneer Press and a wildfire ensued. It has been unbelievable and disgusting as well. Stories are still being pumped out with varied sizes, weights, blah, blah. The guy from the paper later told me that the angler and his dad wanted to put it on this forum to get "Validation" from the musky world. I told him, this too was a bad idea. I told him you could put a photo of a blind kid with no legs holding a 50 pounder and it will still be tore up by someone.
After a bit more communication, I told him again, not to run the story about a "Supposed" record because it would start an absolute $h!& storm. It has, and the emails and texts about it have kept on pouring in. If anything for me, it has sold a few guide trips for people looking to catch the next world record.... out of Lake Sallie.... Uh yeah... What a load of crap the modern media is! I think this thread needs to die like a 57 in the bottom of a boat! WHoops! Sorry, hope that doesn't cross the line! SOrry had to insert emoticon to show my sick sense of humor.
Edited by Jsondag 7/19/2011 10:54 PM
|
|
| |
|
| You got a tough job there, Steve! It must be excruciating to "bite your tongue" sometimes! We feel your pain and most of us really appreciate having this forum available.
Everyone should reread the original post. It was a call to action; not a call for anyone's head! |
|
| |
|
| Amen |
|
| |
|
| How about that Tiger Muskie this weekend! |
|
| |
|
| JJ - 7/19/2011 11:37 PM How about that Tiger Muskie this weekend! :) that's the saddest part about this...a dead fish that's not even close to a state record is getting more media attention than a released fish that is nearly a world record. seriously?
Edited by lambeau 7/20/2011 7:54 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 639
Location: Hudson, WI | Basically every non-muskie angling friend of mine has said, "Did you hear the state record muskie was caught...but it won't be recognized because of the state shutdown?" That was the angle the media tried to portray, facts be #*^@ed. The gloom and doom local media has tied absolutely everything to the budget problems, up to and including whether or not Leah McClain's fart would stink while the shutdown was going on.
Take the government's problems out of this and it's a non-story. Hell, I'd bet there are 10 fish heavier than that caught this year. |
|
| |
|
Location: Lake Tomahawk, WI | Jsondag - 7/18/2011 1:20 PM
Just in from a ridiculously hot morning of guiding and following up on this post. The young man who caught this fish is from Arizona and even though he thinks of himself as a hardcore musky fisherman, he is not. I wouldn't even label him as a weekend warrior. He's just a wide eyed kid that's gotten lucky and thought he had something special...several times. He obviously has very little understanding of "back of the boat" ethics and the unwritten code of musky fishing. Nor does he understand rules and regs for any type of records. Unfortunately a lot of folks out there pitching baits don't.
It is an individuals right to keep a legal sized fish if they so chose - But like I said before, it's a truly counterproductive practice for a fishery to endure, especially one like the lake this fantasy fish was harvested from. There are many anglers on this site alone that have had a accurate catch that trumps this one, and my guess is most if not all of them got put back. If not, that's their choice - we may not agree with it, and find it downright infuriating, but alas aside from a sideways congratulatory thumbs up and a polite suggestion of "next time... maybe release the fish" there is not much we can do besides maybe embarrass the poor fool by berating them online into making better decisions.
The MN DNR and Catch and Release ethics have built this Minnesota fishery - I say keep the guns blazing and don't forget for a second what we might lose if we don't.
Great post Jerry.
JS |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | The anglers involved in that catch created the story and fired up the media storm; whether you agree with the tactics or not, the fish was a major story and fired up both 'good' and 'bad' discussion. That monster hybrid would be as big a story IF there was a way to tie it to the shutdown.
Take the MN fiscal fiasco out of the equation, and to the general public it's just another fish. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 639
Location: Hudson, WI | sworrall - 7/20/2011 10:30 AM
The anglers involved in that catch created the story and fired up the media storm; whether you agree with the tactics or not, the fish was a major story and fired up both 'good' and 'bad' discussion. That monster hybrid would be as big a story IF there was a way to tie it to the shutdown.
Take the MN fiscal fiasco out of the equation, and to the general public it's just another fish.
That's fair. I guess I would expect mainstream media to be more responsible. Which is completely ridiculous on my part. |
|
| |
|
| I wish this stand up kid would of gotten half this much attention.
David was adamant about releasing it, saying “I want it to live and get bigger, I don’t want anyone to kill it”
Not my words, but from an eight year old.
http://justbigmuskies.com/
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 174
| Before I state my opinion, I will admit to mounting my first 50"er 11 years ago, my first weekend muskie fishing, beginner's luck, at Leech. Never caught any fish of any kind, big enough to mount before that, in alot of years of fishing. I know, poor fisherman, am I. But since I got hooked into this on that first weekend at Leech, I have turned into a total C and R muskie fisherman. I have caught bigger, and let them go. I am more worried about the numerous 45-50" fish that get caught by people that are targeting muskie and mounted. I know there is still alot of them. I am from a little town in Iowa of 1000 people, some of us fish French alot in southern Minnesota. I know of three fish that were kept from that little lake that were 47, 48, and 50, just from our little town. Those same guys complain about French not being as good as it use to be, wonder why. My thoughts are that all of Minnesota should be 54" minimum, longer would be okay by me, but probably not doable.
Edited by oly67 7/21/2011 11:54 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2076
| oly67 - 7/21/2011 11:50 AM
My thoughts are that all of Minnesota should be 54" minimum, longer would be okay by me, but probably not doable.
AMEN! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 123
| I know a group had inquired about having a statewide 48" minimum back when most lakes were at 40", and the DNR said that they'd only be able to do 48" on a lake by lake basis and not statewide. I wonder if that's how they'd go about implementing a 54" minimum? Gotta start somewhere, so I'd be ok with it. I personally only know of 1 MN lake that is c&r only, but maybe they've got some more of those pushed through now as well. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 692
Location: Pelican Rapids, MN | dcmusky - 7/20/2011 8:02 PM
I wish this stand up kid would of gotten half this much attention.
David was adamant about releasing it, saying “I want it to live and get bigger, I don’t want anyone to kill it”
Not my words, but from an eight year old.
http://justbigmuskies.com/
That is a product of good parenting and being in the boat with a good role model with stand up values.
A little lesson about Lake Sallie - A lake surrounded by mostly summer homes of wealthy people from Fargo and the Twin Cities with a few other places mixed in. A mid level seasonal cabin ranges about half a million in todays market. To go the the local eatery you better pop your collar, carry your parents W2 and be ready to discuss how much frontage your daddy has. It has not been a managed musky lake by definition, and is full of a bunch of rich kids on their jet skis and wakeboard boats who could care less about a fishery. It was however managed to be a trophy pike fishery and has basically a musky overflow from other lakes attached. I got a call this morning looking for support for this kids story - I told them to let it go, all it is doing is causing a stir.
This morning another guide from central MN and I were discussing this phone call, the farce of a story and the damage it's going to do to the lake. If this big fish has sparked your interest, and you plan on hitting it, better do it now! The word is out and the once quiet, diamond in the rough is attracting every sandbagger, as a matter of fact I was alerted yesterday, it's getting "Colonal Sanders'd" as we speak!
Edited by Jsondag 7/21/2011 6:18 PM
|
|
| |
|
|
I don't think this story draws any more attention to the area lakes than local guides and the Lunge Log did and still do.
Pressure is all over MN, and will continue to be.
What scares me is the growing trend of muskie being seen as a put and take fishery.
People think that because they are stocked that it's O.K to kill a few and not be that worried about delayed mortality.
I see these sentiments on all the muskie forums and in the public more and more.
JS |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | You looking hard for it? The vast majority here are now CPR...way more than a decade ago. |
|
| |
|
|
More fish are going to the taxidermists every year in the Detroit Lakes area. A simple visit with them tells that info real quick.
The muskie first peeps are not the majority of muskie anglers in MN, neither are the muskie inc. members.
I guess if you say it isn't so, it isn't so.
JS |
|
| |
|
Posts: 793
Location: Ames, Iowa | I think guest JS has a point. With all of the success of C & R and the publicity big fish get both in mags and in the papers, plus the fact that many folks make only one trip per year up north, more folks who aren't us- hardcore muskie anglers-
look at keeping a 50 inch trophy fish. There are more big fish in Minnesota than ever before and that naturally leads to more big fish being kept. Like I said in earlier post here, there are more guys targeting muskies with inferior gear and tools- I see em at the resort near my place on Leech. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | 'I see these sentiments on all the muskie forums and in the public more and more. '
I responded to this statement. You posted it, I asked.
No question MN is seeing some harvest mentality, but then so is the rest of the Muskie world. Your experience seems to be increasing because opportunity is increasing; it's a battle everywhere trophy fish exist, and even is an issue in some areas where a 'trophy' is far less than 50". We've already covered what might be done to assist in educating folks.
|
|
| |
|
| The word is out and the once quiet, diamond in the rough is attracting every sandbagger, as a matter of fact I was alerted yesterday, it's getting "Colonal Sanders'd" as we speak!
Forgive my ignorance: what does "getting 'Colonel Sanders'd'" mean?
|
|
| |
|
|
"you looking hard for it?" is implying you don't think it is out there.
You didn't ask the question, you questioned my statement.
Whatever.
JS |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1150
| Guest - 7/22/2011 8:03 AM
I don't think this story draws any more attention to the area lakes than local guides and the Lunge Log did and still do.
JS
I completely disagree. I would be willing to bet more people saw the recent article on the Lake Sallie fish than have ever looked at the Lunge Log. All the while, other non-muskie fishing weekend warriors see the article on Sallie, go buy themselves a Mepps #5 and some other small stuff they can handle with thier bass rods and there after 'em.
As far as the getting "colonel sanders'd" as we speak. My interpretation was to LMAO. |
|
| |
|
| yah, and those "water swatters" go out there w their mepps #5s for a few hours and don't see a fish and what do they do...give up and go back to bass fishing cuz they can catch one in an hour...
more damage is done to a lake or area by guides posting pics and reports....heck some guides who have left the lakes they put on the map from the pressure that followed.
if you don't want people to fish "your lakes" then don't open your trap. pretty cut and dry but some don't get it. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 437
| poster child - 7/22/2011 1:22 PM
yah, and those "water swatters" go out there w their mepps #5s for a few hours and don't see a fish and what do they do...give up and go back to bass fishing cuz they can catch one in an hour...
more damage is done to a lake or area by guides posting pics and reports....heck some guides who have left the lakes they put on the map from the pressure that followed.
if you don't want people to fish "your lakes" then don't open your trap. pretty cut and dry but some don't get it.
To me the story about the Sallie fish and the media frenzy will do far more harm to the lake than what is in the lunge log. Look at the folks who are exposed to the lunge log. They are fellow musky anglers, muskies Inc members. These would TEND to be much more CPR oriented.
Now when looking at just anyone sitting in front of a TV or opening a newspaper and seeing this story, they may not be. I would be more worried about some rumhead from redby coming over with this 5 of diamonds and spinning gear than the flury of musky nuts with all the proper gear and release ethics. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1150
| Captain - 7/22/2011 1:37 PM
To me the story about the Sallie fish and the media frenzy will do far more harm to the lake than what is in the lunge log. Look at the folks who are exposed to the lunge log. They are fellow musky anglers, muskies Inc members. These would TEND to be much more CPR oriented.
Now when looking at just anyone sitting in front of a TV or opening a newspaper and seeing this story, they may not be. I would be more worried about some rumhead from redby coming over with this 5 of diamonds and spinning gear than the flury of musky nuts with all the proper gear and release ethics.
My point exactly. |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | harm or damage to a lake can come in many forms....
reality to me is this.... can an article like this bring a few club babies to a lake hoping for "the whoppa" to hit their Mepps # 5 so they can club it and put it on the wall...yes, short term harm. most will go out, fail and leave w their tail between their legs...this article will be forgotten a yr from now.....
then there is the harm or damage that can come from increased pressure by guys who actually know what they are doing from pictures or posts or Lunge Log by anyone, guides, or just Joe Musky fishermen saying what lake or area it was...for the years to come.....
in the musky world I live in....I'm not really that concerned about the guys in the first part of this post... do you really think the boat launch is going to be overloaded with people bringing their bass rods and mepps to the lake .....or.....more good musky fishermen who know what they are doing?
imo any guide/fisherman who posts pics on the internet, registers fish in Muskies Inc, really can't complain when more boats show up on the lakes he or she fishes....far more "harm" or damage is done to a lake or group of lakes is done by the latter imo....this article will be forgotten a yr from now ....we'll be saying "oh yah remember that one article and kid w the big dead fish"
harm comes in many forms.
as far as that fish from Sallie being remotely close to the weight the kid is claiming...now that right there is funny stuff..
Edited by BNelson 7/22/2011 2:26 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| Boy I know of a Tavern owner in Pipe WI that has 6 over 50" up to 55" on his bar room wall from the early days of the bay when fishing was super easy. That guy never gave a rip either. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 692
Location: Pelican Rapids, MN | Ahhh BIG D.... First the "guest" replying and signing his posts JS is not me. Second, where I am guilty of playing a relatively harmless joke on another guide 3 years ago (which I did apologize for) and and yes, i did cast my lure into another boat that trolled 5 lines 50 feet off my port side back and forth a dozen times in 2007. I have also had many verbal moments with other anglers, many of which I apologized for after it happened. One thing I have never done is call a lake or a spot "mine." And your conclusions on why these events happened are incorrect. You're obviously someone who knows or follows me so why be a coward and hide behind a "guest" avatar?
I have done quite a bit to turn over a new leaf and get a better handle on my temper. These incidents obviously hold a dear spot in your heart, so why don't you give me a call or meet me in person? I can tell you exactly what happen and the reasons that caused it and you can stop hiding.
I have posted a lot of pics over the years and spent a lot of time on the lunge log in the past. I've not mentioned pressure before on here, so you must know me and heard it coming out of my mouth. Either you've had a beer with me at some point or sat across a table at a meeting. I'm guessing the latter. It is hypocritical to worry about pressure and guide at the same time. It's a hell of a double edged sword. So I'll ask a favor of any "Guest" who cares, PM me so we don't have to clutter up a post every year with you bringing this ancient history crap up.
Edited by Jsondag 7/22/2011 8:05 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | "you looking hard for it?" is implying you don't think it is out there.
You didn't ask the question, you questioned my statement.
Whatever.
Wrong, Oh apparent taker of the daily 'crabby old fart' pill... I asked a question because I don't see that sentiment on this muskie board much. And neither do you. It's legal, but very few here would harvest a 55 over there.
Phooo.
I was in the sun too long today.
And, I was completely confused about the White Album for awhile. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 454
| I will get ridiculed for my post, but I will do so anyway.
I agree that pressure can impact a fishery, but what the people north of the metro experience for pressure in MN is a far cry from "heavy pressure".
I know that all lakes are experiencing an increase in pressure due to the popularity of the sport, but come and spend a day on Tonka or another metro lake and you will love the solitude you have up north.
That being said........I support any initiative that is in the best interest of the resource and I hope that we can expand the number of lakes that are stocked in the near future.
Will Lake Sallie get more pressure due to this story? Maybe. Will it compare to the metro lakes in MN....not even close. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 60
Location: Lake Minnetonka | I sure wish I could be as happy all the time as my black lab is in the morning. I wonder what is going through her mind when she gets up.
Jerry-Whenever I finally quit talking about it, and actually take a trip up there, would love to have the opportunity to fish with you.
As we know, the muskie fishery in MN hasn't always been great. It finally started to reach its trophy potential this last decade through a combination of the stocking of Leech Lake strain of muskies and the catch and release mentality (among other things). During this time, the avid muskie fishermen in MN and the avid muskie fishermen from other states that came here shared the same general ideals and beliefs, like catch and release, that would allow these muskies to grow to trophy potential. In addition, many of these same fishermen, spent time and money through organizations like Muskies Inc. to help with this goal. We watched as the muskies grew each year like our children into a healthy trophy fishery in part because all of our efforts. You can see the pride and ownership we as muskie fishermen in MN, as well as muskie fishermen from other states take in our muskies with the passionate posts on this forum, and how we jump around like monkies trying to release a fish as fast as we can to ensure its healthy survival.
Because we, as avid muskie fisherman, have put so much effort into getting the fishery to where it is today and have put in countless hours trying to educate the public on catch and release, it makes us angry when someone who hasn't put their time in to grow the sport and resource, not only plucks one of the fish (legal or not isn't the issue), but then proclaims false state records and against the catch and release belief that we have been trying to educate the public about for years. He does more in 1 day through the media to set back what we have been trying to do, and makes us have to start all over in our fight to educate the public from square one. It's like we are farmers and tilled our fields, fertilized, planted, sprayed, nurtured and watered them. And as soon as they are ready, some guy comes in and says, "thanks for your hard work, I'm going to take this acre over here."
As muskie fishing becomes more mainstream and the sport grows (which is a good thing), I feel this sort of thing is going to continue happening. I already have heard from muskie fishermen in the Metro that it is happening, it just isn't getting the press. We have focused much of our efforts on increasing opportunity for muskie fishing, but I feel in addition to this, that since the time is now that the trophy fishery is here, we need to increase our efforts on maintaining what already do have as well.
I would submit the following 2 proposals:
1. Creating a dedicated Media Relations Committee in Muskies Inc and/or other like organizations. I know MI has Publicity listed, but I do not know if it is a dedicated committee that news and media outlets know to contact when stories like this come about so they can get our side of the story. You would think it would be nice if the media outlets know that when there is a story about muskies, they have a dedicated contact for a quote or a story. And also a dedicated committee that can be proactive and reach out to media outlets when stories like this come out to get correct information in the stories. The MN Darkhouse Association unfortunately has a good one and shows up in all stories, why can't we?
2. A minimum 55 inch size limit to harvest a muskie. I would think a muskie would need to be minimum this size to be a state/world record. I'm not a biologist, but I would also think, that if some where harvested at this size, the number would be small enough that it wouldn't be detrimental to the population. Tiger Muskies should be increased as well to a comparable number that a state/world record could be harvested.
Ok, got to go mow the lawn.
Edited by PostFrontal 7/23/2011 3:05 PM
|
|
| |
|
| Back to the original topic, another reporter makes the mistake of comparing a recent catch and released fish by length instead of weight when comparing it to the MN record. From the paper "Near Record Muskie" and "The fish was 54 1/2" long; compared to the Minnesota Muskie Record which is 56" inches. Congrats to the little angler though, great fish!
http://www.northlandsnewscenter.com/news/local/11-Year-Old-Girl-Sna... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 14
| I think all lakes should be C&R. With the quality of replica mounts these days there is no need to kill and mount a fish that will just get bigger and make somebody elses day just like it did for the person catching it. |
|
| |
"Record" confusion in MN