|
|
Posts: 218
| I just read the ballot for the annual "Spring Hearings" and curious how you think this will go. The question asks: "Do you favor allowing trolling statewide with up to 3 hooks, baits, or lures per angler?". So there is not an option for less than three hooks or anything about lake size etc. What do you think? Pass/Fail? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 285
Location: NE Wisconsin | Once everyone realizes, if they want to "troll" a sucker with any kind of motor they had better vote yes, I think it will pass. Trolling is trolling, no matter want kind of bait is on the end of the line. |
|
| |
|
| This is WI we are talking about. We can't assume reason and logic will get in the way of tradition. I mean this is the way it's always been done. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 285
Location: NE Wisconsin | The DNR has been charged by our Governor to simplify fishing regs. Motor trolling is currently mentioned 117 times in the regulation booklet, equivalent to about 3 pages. Wisconsin currently allows trolling in at least one water of 64 of its 72 counties. In 19 counties all waters are open to trolling. In fact trolling is allow in 29% of all Wisconsin musky water down to 17 acres, with no evidence of any problems. There is no rationale for this disparity between counties or waters. Also trolling is a legal fishing method in virtually every state in the union. I am sure the DNR would not purpose this reg just to eliminate confusion or complexity unless they were sure the resource would not be hurt. |
|
| |
|
| it's another tool used for fishing for any species, trolling all the way! I hope it gets the vote.  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 333
Location: menasha wi 54952 | Good points Johnnie. I agree with you 100%. I will be up ridding the 100 miler tomorrow. Talk to you about it over a beer!!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1120
Location: West Chester, OH | "Pass" because the momentum seems to have been gathering for some time. I'd feel better about it, if the line limit was lower.
My concern is w/the boat, dragging planers off both sides, that feels entitled to the piece of real estate that I'm trying to cast.
Can't legislate courtesy or common sense.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 189
Location: Barrington, Il | You don't need planer boards to troll effectively. Its about time it passed. And remember its not just about muskies. I'm sure there are alot of walleye fisherman that want to troll, too. |
|
| |
|
| Trolling should not be allowed in small vilas co lakes. The lakes are small, with three lines out per these lakes are going to be picked appart and fished out by mid june. Not to mention the size of boats vs the size ofthe lake. In a 150 acre lake, how many trollers can a lake support vs casters? Not a good idea. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2097
| How did the state pass that certain areas like green bay are allowed to troll? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| My vote will be NO unless it's put on lakes 1500 acres or larger only. I know the Wisconsin Musky Alliance has also voted against trolling statewide.
Edited by Mr Musky 2/26/2013 11:20 AM
|
|
| |
|
| I'm voting Yes all the way!! Wisconsin is THE most backwards state there is. You can troll any lake in Minnesota and they seem to be doing just fine. It's about time Wisconsin puts it's big boy pants on and joins the modern world. I think that new mine will destroy the fishery long before trolling ever will.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1145
| guest - 2/26/2013 11:28 AM
I'm voting Yes all the way!! Wisconsin is THE most backwards state there is. You can troll any lake in Minnesota and they seem to be doing just fine. It's about time Wisconsin puts it's big boy pants on and joins the modern world. I think that new mine will destroy the fishery long before trolling ever will.
How many lines is Minnesota allowed per person? Big difference there buddy. I say NO to the hearing question.
Regarding the mine, just read this article yesterday... Pretty interesting to say the least. http://mediatrackers.org/2013/02/25/epa-data-points-to-clean-water-... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| how big are the Minnesota lakes compared to wisconsin's potholes. Not room for both on some. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | The way it is worded...I say No as well. I HOPE it is a FAIL unless there is some wording about the size of lake where it is acceptable, and not acceptable. |
|
| |
|
| If size of lake is the issue, perhaps we need to start limiting the amount of casts you can make in a single day:) |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1145
| BenR - 2/26/2013 12:56 PM
If size of lake is the issue, perhaps we need to start limiting the amount of casts you can make in a single day:)
Is it really that hard to understand how it would effect small lakes? You don't have to agree with it.
I'd support one trolling line per person statewide. Not three. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 20248
Location: oswego, il | Take a look at the lakes that do allow trolling? Is everybody trollling? Not hardly. I am for trolling and moving suckers with a trolling motor. |
|
| |
|
| MartinTD - 2/26/2013 1:06 PM
BenR - 2/26/2013 12:56 PM
If size of lake is the issue, perhaps we need to start limiting the amount of casts you can make in a single day:)
Is it really that hard to understand how it would effect small lakes? You don't have to agree with it.
I'd support one trolling line per person statewide. Not three.
On small lakes I believe you can work structure better casting, I think you tend to be more thorough. I don't see trolling as being much of an issue. I would be curious to see on smaller lakes or chain of lakes where trolling is allowed whether casting or trolling wins more of the tourneys. BR |
|
| |
|
Posts: 682
Location: Sycamore, IL | I am sure that it will pass, as I just started building a row troller for the Vilas co. area:) |
|
| |
|
Posts: 566
Location: Elgin, IL | ToddM - 2/26/2013 1:39 PM
Take a look at the lakes that do allow trolling? Is everybody trollling? Not hardly. I am for trolling and moving suckers with a trolling motor.
I'm with "Bob" on this one....pass it, and let the fishermen do what we do best.
Not everyone trolls...either in the bars like Todd, or on the water.
The Fox Chain here in Illinois has no issues with either. In fact, I see more casting than trolling for muskies there.
I'm tired of constantly looking over my shoulder while position fishing with suckers up there, always thinking about tickets from the DNR.
Illinois needs concealed carry....and Northern WI needs trolling. Get with the times.
Edited by Northwind Mark 2/26/2013 2:22 PM
|
|
| |
|
| MartinTD - 2/26/2013 11:51 AM
guest - 2/26/2013 11:28 AM
I'm voting Yes all the way!! Wisconsin is THE most backwards state there is. You can troll any lake in Minnesota and they seem to be doing just fine. It's about time Wisconsin puts it's big boy pants on and joins the modern world. I think that new mine will destroy the fishery long before trolling ever will.
How many lines is Minnesota allowed per person? Big difference there buddy. I say NO to the hearing question.
Regarding the mine, just read this article yesterday... Pretty interesting to say the least. http://mediatrackers.org/2013/02/25/epa-data-points-to-clean-water-...
What about MI, not much difference there buddy. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 71
| What would this do to the sucker draggers? For those who would like to see the bill allow only 1 line trolled, would that also permit casting? On another note, what does it say about those who only want to fish 'their lakes, their way?' What evidence is there that says trolling will negatively affect the fishery? It seems as though those opposed are more worried about how it may negatively affect their fishing, rather than the fishery itself. If there is substantial reasoning for the absence of trolling, then, by all means, ban it. However, if that is the case, why then would other states and Canada allow trolling? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 243
| Trolling is legal in Michigan....on lakes of all sizes with up to 3 lines per person....and we still have fish in our waters. Can some jerk go to a small lake and troll circles around people casting? I guess it's possible, but I don't remember it happening in the 35 years I've been alive. I have lived in Michigan all my life and fish MI and NE WI almost exclusively and always cast even though I have the option at home (running suckers would be an exception). Trolling small lakes can be nearly impossible if they are weedy during a good part of the season and the perception that you will suddenly go from 1 fish a day to 20 a day is just not realistic. Hope to see WI open up trolling to at least allow movement of suckers under power.
Edited by IM Musky Time 2/26/2013 3:33 PM
|
|
| |
|
| Everybody talks about how big Minnesota's lakes are. There's Leech and Mille Lacs. What other lakes over 10,000 acres do you have? Minnesota has over 11,000 lakes and guess what? You can troll them all. If it was up to me I'd fish in Minnesota for muskies first before Wisconsin. Heck, it took us 30 years to figure out the 34 inch minimum length limit was lame even though year after year after year the reports coming out of Minnesota was that it was a huge success.
Getting people to break tradition in Wisconsin is an uphill battle. Trying to convince the crowds of people with the "We always dun did it like that" mentality is a tough job.
Sooner or later education will triumph. |
|
| |
|
| Its not how you catch em it's what you do with em after you catch em.does anyone honestly believe theres more mortality with trolling than with suckers?Dick Rose trolled the Cisco chain in 1980 for 42 days with zero muskies and on the 43day caught the Michigan state record!There will be some monster muskies caught in northern wis when trolling finally passes, great for the struggling economy.There are big muskies in open water that will bring the title back to the north woods.Most of these giants are dying of old age . it is a renewable resource!Regulate your fishery with size limits and bag limits. if anyone is really concerned about our musky fishery stop running tournaments in July and August when in some years water temps are in the high 70s,I would say survival rate is 1 out of 3.Common sense will let our fishery thrive.The only people that are against trolling are those that know nothing about it!Just thought I,d stir the pot!
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1638
Location: Minnesota | here in minnesota we get one line dont matter if your casting trolling or using a sucker. one is all you get, i seen a musky show he was using 6 lines im hoping one of the lines was his camra mans. it would be nice to use more then one line but we cant may be i neen to head east start fishing wi
Edited by muskyhunter47 2/26/2013 7:36 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | no |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1313
Location: E. Tenn | no..
Edited by miket55 2/26/2013 8:09 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 335
Location: Pulaski, WI | Maybe if they make the walleye season match the musky season and larger size limits. I find it hard to believe that allowing trolling of three lines per angler is not going to have any negative impacts on the fisheries, particularly smaller ones. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 67
| Agreed! |
|
| |
|
| All we have in Indiana are "small" lakes, and nobody trolling is cleaning out the lakes, and us trollers get along just fine with our casting friends. Trolling is great for folks for back problems! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 67
| No trolling in N WI! |
|
| |
|
| All for trolling. Limit the lines on smaller waters. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8823
| hambone - 2/26/2013 8:47 PM
All we have in Indiana are "small" lakes, and nobody trolling is cleaning out the lakes, and us trollers get along just fine with our casting friends. Trolling is great for folks for back problems!
Can you say "extensive stocking"?
There is not money, or time, or fish, or bodies on staff to manage stocking in N/WI lakes the eay IN lakes are managed. |
|
| |
|
| yes yes yes YES! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 143
Location: Palatine, IL | No. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8823
| No. I'll agree that it's largely based on "tradition", but some traditions are best left alone. A big part of the allure of N/WI lkaes is the complete lack of other anglers. And many of those anglers boycott those lakes in Vilas because they can't troll, or because they don't wat to abide by the restrictive "no wake" rules after 4:00 pm or before 10:00 am. Those lakes are empty and quiet and unfished because that's how the locals WANT them to be. And that's a big part of what makes them great. |
|
| |
|
Location: Sawyer County, WI |
No, not as it's written.
Regarding the earlier comment about Wisconsin being "backwards", when this B.S. mining bill passes it will officially be true.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 20248
Location: oswego, il | There is no guarentee that just anyone can toss 3 lined in the water and start catching fish. Good trollers will catch fish bad ones wont no,different than the casters. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | I keep seeing those arguing for trolling that us against it are worried about the fish population declining as a result of trolling. Where are you guys arguing this fact getting that idea? I know I didn’t say “I am against it because there will be no fish left”. Although I am willing to wager it will hurt several fisheries if trolling was opened up, but I am not talking muskies. The walleye fisheries will take a beating. While the musky guys are mostly C&R, most walleye guys are not. Most of our walleye fisheries have been hurt by overharvest by anglers (not Native Americans), and the trolling would only fuel that overharvest even more.
Back to muskies. I believe most of us against it are for the reason of small waters. It is already an issue of guys breaking the law and running 6-9 suckers off the side of the boat, and working up and down a breakline with no regard for anyone else. I run into it every year in Vilas, and have a few choice words for them when they work past me crowding me on the spot I am working. Make it legal and you will have many more doing that with suckers in the fall.
For sure there are lakes I would love to troll for some suspended giants, but feel if trolling was allowed on the small waters it will just cause a lot of confrontation amongst anglers that are not courteous. Ever try fishing the Fox River in Green Bay before the Bay itself got popular? Quite common for guys to be yelling at each other due to trolling to close, and quite common I had to quit casting the rip rap when a troller decided to move past me and the shore. Then I would get yelled at when I launched a cast into their lines!
Perhaps I am just unlucky, but I have had enough run ins already on waters that can be trolled in WI to have a bad taste in my mouth by those that are not courteous and troll on by me. Thought my dad was going to jump out of the boat years back on Franklin Lake when we were walleye fishing and two guys trolling right by on top of us. ;(
Allow it on the larger lakes where there is more room. Too many issue will arise on the smaller lakes with guys not being courteous. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 176
Location: Tomahawk, WI | No No No |
|
| |
|
Location: Madison, WI | Allow it on the larger lakes where there is more room. Too many issue will arise on the smaller lakes with guys not being courteous.
Travis...you provide a number of example where you are the one creating and/or escalating conflict: throwing some "choice words" or "casting into their lines" is just as discourteous as trolling too close to someone. if you don't want conflict with other people, don't contribute to it.
i've had way more times when i've been cut-off or some other poor fishing etiquette situation from someone casting than from someone trolling.
the small lake argument isn't based on evidence. and what evidence there is suggests it would be just fine. for example, guys motor-trolling on tiny Wingra in Madison or dragging suckers on narrow Twin Valley somehow manage to get along with the other trollers and shoreline casters.
yes, there are idiots out there who aren't considerate of others. whether they're trolling or casting, it's a small minority of the total number of people fishing and just something we have to deal with. the sky isn't falling.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 581
| I hope this gets passed.
I don't believe the "small waters" argument is a valid one. Motor trolling is permitted on small muskie lakes in Ashland, Bayfield, Barron, Burnett, Chippewa, Dane, Douglas, Eau Claire, Lafayette, Polk, Price, Rusk, Taylor and Washburn counties. There are a ton of muskie lakes under 1,000 acres in those counties, some of which get hit pretty hard and there doesn't seem to be any problems associated with trolling on those waters. So, why would it be a problem elsewhere?
I just don't like the concept of restricted fishing/hunting rights by regulations that serve zero legitimate purpose. And yes, the semantics of the trolling vs. position fishing law is really quite absurd if you really think about it.
But my guess is that this won't pass. There are too many folks believe that N WI is the one place on the planet where anglers can't be courteous on small waters, where muskies are more likely to die if hooked by trolled crankbaits, and where wilderness aesthetics are ruined by the appearance of planer boards. |
|
| |
|
| lambeau - 2/27/2013 8:04 AM
. if you don't want conflict with other people, don't contribute to it.
So? Just quietly submit to their oafishness?
Some of the dumbest posts ever seen on the boards always end up on the trolling arguments.
Really lambeau, so you think rude should rule?? That is what you are saying here. |
|
| |
|
Location: Madison, WI | Really lambeau, so you think rude should rule?? That is what you are saying here.
wrong. i'm saying rudeness isn't the answer to rudeness. casting a lure at someone's boat or lines doesn't accomplish anything beyond peeing the other guy off too...who most likely doesn't even realize he did something "wrong."
if you really want to deal with something like that, meet the guy at the landing and tactfully explain to him how trolling too close to you is poor etiquette. ask him to be more polite in the future, don't chuck a lure at him.
simple, direct, and it doesn't end up with people shouting "choice words" at each other across the lake and disturbing that sacred northern WI feel...
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | if you want to troll small lakes, go to Ashland, Bayfield, Barron, Burnett, Chippewa, Dane, Douglas, Eau Claire, Lafayette, Polk, Price, Rusk, Taylor and Washburn counties.
if you really love to multi-line troll go salmon fishing ... it's a hoot and a great thing to do in july and august when the water gets warm.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 134
| No - we have been down this slope before when they allowed back trolling. People and I know of some guides were using pontoon boats with three lines out per person and five people on the float. More fish were harvested and killed. The DNR abolished the idea after two years. Unless this state gets wise and puts a fifty inch limit on all muskies state wide I'm totally against. Especially trolling in Vilas and Onieda Co. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | The cast is a result of the other boat not thinking they are all that close when confronted through a polite confrontation. The cast always makes it clear they are wrong. In some cases it has been a flip type cast!
“Few Choice Words”… Perhaps I should have worded that statement differently the first time. I usually confront them without calling them any vulgar names, or the use of profanity in an attempt to keep it civil as it doesn’t help if you escalate the situation as you mentioned.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 4343
Location: Smith Creek | Jet skis should be allowed in the BWCA. There's no real logical scientific data that suggests jet skis would do any more harm in that area than any other. Darn backwards Northern Minnesotans and their stupid non jet ski allowing traditions! |
|
| |
|
| Don't you guys think this could actually help the economy in Vilas/Oneida? Herbie and the boys seemed to get along pretty well in the trolling days. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | dh buc - 2/27/2013 8:49 AM
No - we have been down this slope before when they allowed back trolling. People and I know of some guides were using pontoon boats with three lines out per person and five people on the float. More fish were harvested and killed. The DNR abolished the idea after two years. Unless this state gets wise and puts a fifty inch limit on all muskies state wide I'm totally against. Especially trolling in Vilas and Onieda Co.
That seems like pretty good evidence to me on why not to pass it. Keep in mind that this just doesn't affect musky, and in those days lots of big walleyes were kept as well.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 20248
Location: oswego, il | Portaging a jet ski in the bwca would be fun. So the aarguements are people are worried about ediquette and others the fishery. I just dont see it changing. Bad fisherman are going to continue to be bad fisherman, the rude ones will continue to be rude. I dont see a change in the law creating better and/or more rude fisherman. |
|
| |
|
| Lots of people looking at this through their own limited microscope and not seeing the big picture.
#1 Most fishing regs are based on tradition, not science. Science does not care how you fish, where you fish, or when you fish. Science is perfectly satisfied if you dynamite your fish, net, spear, poison or pump the lake dry and corral them. It is tradition that dictates methods and equipment, not anything related to science. Science checks population, estimates sustainable harvest, overharvest, need to protect spawning areas, spawning fish, or fry production. A dead fish is a dead fish regardless of its cause of demise. This is simple stuff when you look at it.
Most regs are NOT scientific in any way. We could all troll or net or poison or spear, as long as we observe sustainability of the resource, scientifically, we are all good.
#2 My regs are more open minded and with it than yours?? Once again a big myth. Trolling or not trolling, neither one is more reasonable than the other. Neither is better or worse, but to hear people tell it, trolling is enlightened and not trolling is backward??? Not true in any sense at all. Trolling is tradition in MN, not trolling is a tradition in WI, but neither is enlightened, or an intrinsically BETTER TRADITION. You guys get this confused a LOT!! Lots of opinions on this but very little science is involved.
#3 Some lakes have populations that will be very susceptible to trolling pressure when it is brought to bear by guides with clients, fisherman, and the opinion that the client or fisherperson, has the right to keep a fish if he wants to. Already happened in northern WI once, and potentially will happen again. NOT all lakes, just some lakes are susceptible, and some trophy fisheries are potential victims of a change in trolling regs, due to the impact on the trophy class of fish that have a sort of open water safe haven under current regs.
#4 Small lakes with limited, but trophy sized populations, loose both their trophy status and their esthetic, when trollers come in and start harvesting. And this will not be a loss of esthetics for all fisherman, just some of us. Those of you who live in IL, IN, Iowa, well, FIB is not a myth, and it will seem just like home to you guys. I like to get on a small quet lake and cast away, and not have boats buzzing up and down and around while I am doing it. There are a LOT of small lakes in the no trolling areas in WI now. Some of them exceptional. There are not a lot of exceptional small lakes in the trolling zones.
#5 I would hate to see flowages not currently being trolled, to be trolled in the future. No, it won't depopulate the lakes, but it will uglify them in a big way.
#6 As pointed out, the walleye impact may be much greater than the musky impact from trolling regs. This is the musky forum, and we are only viewing a limited slice of the impact with muskies. Hard to believe that the universe does not orbit around us, but....
#7 Trolling is about making it easier to catch fish. My fishing shows me that trolling is more effective on a per hour basis than casting and yields bigger fish. Many will make the argument that trolling is difficult blah dah dah. Nonsense. Trolling is easy, and not rocket science, nor a sweaty workout in the boat. Netting makes it easier to catch fish, and netting during spawning season makes it EVEN EASIER, so why not allow those methods? Because they make it TOO EASY OR BECAUSE OF TRADITION??
#8 The one line per angler vs 3 lines per angler is a big trigger issue I think. There are a lot of anti trollers that probably could be convinced to allow trolling if this were put on the basis ONE MAN ONE LINE. A more controllable chaos on a small lake or weedline, and yet the choice is there for guys to run suckers if they want, or pairing up, run a sucker and cast, each in turn. In cold weather that would be pretty workable, and if three guys go out, both action and casting can be in play.
#9 At some point, it is a viable choice to decide that things have been made easy enough, and to retain some difficulty in the chase, capture and release of this particular game fish. Better tackle, rods, reels, boats, electronics, maps and mapping devices, education. You can argue that you want to make fishing easier, and that can be an interesting argument, but I think on the flip side, retaining potential difficulties, and tradition is also a valid argument. I don't think one side of the argument is potentially loaded up in favor of anyone. I certainly see the value of esthetics and deep water refuge for the smaller lakes of northern WI as being a valid and supportable argument, particularly in light of the number and range of trolling waters already available in the state.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | FSF - 2/27/2013 9:28 AM
#7 Trolling is about making it easier to catch fish. My fishing shows me that trolling is more effective on a per hour basis than casting and yields bigger fish. Many will make the argument that trolling is difficult blah dah dah. Nonsense. Trolling is easy, and not rocket science, nor a sweaty workout in the boat. Netting makes it easier to catch fish, and netting during spawning season makes it EVEN EASIER, so why not allow those methods? Because they make it TOO EASY OR BECAUSE OF TRADITION??
^my favorite ... well put! ... bonus to reading the whole thing is adding the new word "uglify" to my vocabulary.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 566
Location: Elgin, IL | I like item #8 and I agree, the 3 lines seems a bit much....so let's compromise.
On the other hand, I wouldn't get too worked up over this issue quite yet. How long did it take for folks up there to realize that single-hook rigs with the patented swallow method was bad? 
That also was a "tradition"....and very, very easy.
Edited by Northwind Mark 2/27/2013 9:44 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | trolling and single hook ... good correlation
i agree |
|
| |
|
Location: Lake Tomahawk, WI | Yes, get this asinine law off the books off the books once and for all. One of the highest concentrations of lakes in the country and you can't move your boat with a lure/bait in the water. Time to step out of the stone age, but not to worry, it won't happen. The bar-stool crowd will show up and vote it down, mark my words.
JS |
|
| |
|
Posts: 20248
Location: oswego, il | FSF, your pretty good fisherman and know how to troll if you so choose. My point has been that just because you can put a line or lines out and drag it behind the boat does not guarentee better success. You still have to know what you are doing. I also dont see the law turning everyone into a troller. Me, I am not one for tradition as it much like ideology is often times pounding the square peg into a round hole. I wouldlike to be able to drag a sucker along when I cast and have the option troll if I want. I would not have an issue making it one line if that got it passed.
Edited by ToddM 2/27/2013 9:58 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | J.Sloan - 2/27/2013 9:56 AM
Yes, get this asinine law off the books off the books once and for all. One of the highest concentrations of lakes in the country and you can't move your boat with a lure/bait in the water. Time to step out of the stone age, but not to worry, it won't happen. The bar-stool crowd will show up and vote it down, mark my words.
JS
i'll buy you a beer j ... :0) |
|
| |
|
Location: Lake Tomahawk, WI | Make it 2, Sled.
JS |
|
| |
|
| I would prefer to keep things as they are, no scientific reason, just personal preference. I like fishing in the fall when there is little motor noise. That will change.
However, I feel trolling is inevitable. If for no other reason than that the average guy today is out of shape and over weight. Lot easier to sit and troll than to cast for 8 to 10 hours. The reality is a lot of Americans are in really poor physical condition and it is getting worse, not better. Just the way it is. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4343
Location: Smith Creek | If trolling isn't legalized in Vilas and Oneida we'll lose all our muskie fisherman to North Dakota. It's already happening! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 566
Location: Elgin, IL | North of 8 - 2/27/2013 10:07 AM
However, I feel trolling is inevitable. If for no other reason than that the average guy today is out of shape and over weight. Lot easier to sit and troll than to cast for 8 to 10 hours. The reality is a lot of Americans are in really poor physical condition and it is getting worse, not better. Just the way it is.
That's the exact reason for me personally...it is getting worse. |
|
| |
|
Location: Madison, WI | unless NE WI imposes a 10mph speed-limit, the whole "boats buzzing around" argument is crap. there's already jetskis and power boats running around, and some guy trolling doesn't make any noise compared to the 200hp running WOT back and forth all afternoon.
the idea that allowing trolling will mean NE WI is suddenly overrun with fishermen isn't likely either. the same number of people will be fishing up there, it would just mean some of their boat's would be moving slowly.
chicken little's in rare form on this one!
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | you can troll in madison, the stocking class is hitting its peak and it's a shorter drive ... win, win, win!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | Why is there such strong feelings that there should be trolling in N. WI? Is it just the sucker deal? If not suckers why do you feel so strongly that it should be allowed?
As far as aging fisherman being allowed to troll that is a good point. However, I believe (I could be wrong) you can get a special permit that would allow you to troll if handicapped. Kind of like the crossbow permit.
Sloan I would buy you a beer as well, but rarely am I in a bar. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 3242
Location: Racine, Wi | I personally am for it. I haven't read the proposal, but for pete's sake, you can troll in a lot of the lakes across our state already, and we aren't seeing mass carnage. Ever been on Pewaukee on a weekend during the summer? Lots of guys trolling and casting, and the guys all get along just fine. Get on Okauchee, and you'll see more guys casting then trolling as it's a tough lake to troll, so guys cast it more often than troll.
Plenty of small lakes around that get trolled as well. No issues there between trollers and casters and that's on pressured water. Might take some getting used to for those who aren't used to having trollers around, but if a guys has no eithics to begin with, he's going to cut you off trolling or casting. That's not a method of presentation issue, it's an ethical issue that was inherent before trolling potentially became legal.
Is it easier than casting? Hardly. But those who are good at it will catch fish. Others that aren't as productive at trolling, will luck into one occasionally. If there are guides running a gazillion lines to pad their numbers and are bad for the resource, let them know and let their clients know. Pretty simple solution. Push their clients towards more ethical operations and the guides will have to change or lose money. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4343
Location: Smith Creek | So if Vilas allows trolling it will be more like SE Wisconsin? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| Well said FSF. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1220
| I'm trying to sell a used boat that has 140 hours on the big motor and 15 minutes on the kicker. I guess that makes me "not a troller" so I am going to pass except to say that something needs to be in there for the really small lakes not getting trolled out the first month of the season. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 20248
Location: oswego, il | Junkman, those trollers on pewaukee must be a real pain for you!;-)
So if its not about the fishery and ethics its then about keeping people out? Kind of like the hp limit here in illinois and the arguements going to no wake instead.
Edited by ToddM 2/27/2013 11:39 AM
|
|
| |
|
| As I said in my original post, for me it is a matter of preference. My favorite time is in the fall when the recreational boaters are off the water, there is a nip in the air and fishermen have the lake to themselves. It is a time of peace and quiet. That is a rare commodity today. That will change. Late in October last year I was on the water for almost 12 hours on a Saturday, weather was cool but not cold and the only time you heard a motor was when someone was moving from one spot to the other, fishing. I was tired at the end of the day, I'm over 60 and had stood and cast all day but it was also very relaxing. I don't think it will be that way when you can motor troll. Again, no scientific reasoning for my preference. On the other hand, I have been out when it was single digits, the guides are freezing up and so are my hands. Maybe I would be happy to troll on those days. Who knows, has not been an option in the past. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 3242
Location: Racine, Wi | Flambeauski - 2/27/2013 11:20 AM
So if Vilas allows trolling it will be more like SE Wisconsin? :)
I don't suspect the trollers are going to flock to the northwoods if they allow trolling. Will there be a few boats doing it? Probably. Is it going to become the overrun mecca of trollers. Not likely.
My point is that any fisherman that is ethical will be eithical whether trolling or casting. We don't have any issues down here and there is incredible pressure. That pressure won't come to the northern Wisconsin lakes. You'll have a few guys that troll, and I suspect the majority will still cast. The end isn't coming if they open up trolling. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 189
Location: Barrington, Il | jonnysled - 2/27/2013 9:35 AM
FSF - 2/27/2013 9:28 AM
#7 Trolling is about making it easier to catch fish. My fishing shows me that trolling is more effective on a per hour basis than casting and yields bigger fish. Many will make the argument that trolling is difficult blah dah dah. Nonsense. Trolling is easy, and not rocket science, nor a sweaty workout in the boat. Netting makes it easier to catch fish, and netting during spawning season makes it EVEN EASIER, so why not allow those methods? Because they make it TOO EASY OR BECAUSE OF TRADITION??
So dragging a sucker along a weededge or drop off is difficult? There is really no difference between dragging a sucker and pulling a lure.
And FSF, just because you came up with 8 reasons doesn't make you right.
^my favorite ... well put! ... bonus to reading the whole thing is adding the new word "uglify" to my vocabulary.
|
|
| |
|
| It's just nice to break up the day a troll for a little while, that way I can eat and drink more while fishing, got to keep my fat ass figure some how. I've even trolled for bass! |
|
| |
|
| lambeau - 2/27/2013 10:26 AM
unless NE WI imposes a 10mph speed-limit, the whole "boats buzzing around" argument is crap. there's already jetskis and power boats running around, and some guy trolling doesn't make any noise compared to the 200hp running WOT back and forth all afternoon.
the idea that allowing trolling will mean NE WI is suddenly overrun with fishermen isn't likely either. the same number of people will be fishing up there, it would just mean some of their boat's would be moving slowly.
chicken little's in rare form on this one!
You haven't been paying attention again. Everytime this subject comes up, a group of yahoos post saying they don't even fish WI anymore because of the backward regulations, no trolling, etc. They go to all these "enlightened" areas where they can fish as they please. If they haven't posted on this thread already, they will. And somewhere in there, they will claim how much money northern WI is losing due to it's archaic regs.
These yahoos are exactly the people that need to be kept OUT of northern WI. Specifically NE WI. If you would promise those guys won't show up in droves, some of the natives might vote to allow trolling. It is kind of an anti-immigration by regulation policy(unwritten in the books, but very effective). |
|
| |
|
Posts: 189
Location: Barrington, Il | And anyway why does fishing have to be hard? How many of you deer hunters are sitting over bait waiting for a deer to come to you? I guess the effort there is dragging a 50# bag of corn into the woods. |
|
| |
|
| Also, we should try and remember ethics is one word and has a meaning, and esthetics is another word, and has a very different meaning.
And your esthetic, rarely if ever effects my ethics, but your ethics can truly screw with my esthetic. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 566
Location: Elgin, IL | FSF - 2/27/2013 12:12 PM
lambeau - 2/27/2013 10:26 AM
unless NE WI imposes a 10mph speed-limit, the whole "boats buzzing around" argument is crap. there's already jetskis and power boats running around, and some guy trolling doesn't make any noise compared to the 200hp running WOT back and forth all afternoon.
the idea that allowing trolling will mean NE WI is suddenly overrun with fishermen isn't likely either. the same number of people will be fishing up there, it would just mean some of their boat's would be moving slowly.
chicken little's in rare form on this one!
These yahoos are exactly the people that need to be kept OUT of northern WI. Specifically NE WI. If you would promise those guys won't show up in droves, some of the natives might vote to allow trolling. It is kind of an anti-immigration by regulation policy (unwritten in the books, but very effective ).
OK...I promise. but can I still bring my Corona with limes? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 3242
Location: Racine, Wi | Why do the natives care if we can troll or not. They can troll already. Don't see it often, but have seen them trolling.
The ethics of others aren't going to change whether trolling or casting, or even pleasure boating. I can't tell you how many times I've had ski boats or jet skis fly over a spot I was fishing up north. Some people just don't know or don't care to know.
Trollers aren't going to ruin any asthetics. It's about the same as someone taking a pleasure cruise on the lake outside of them having baits pulling behind. I'm not so sure why this terrible trolling has been fine around the rest of the state, but Vilas and Oneida are off limits for some reason? I would have thought there would be droves of people calling to ban it if it were so horrible. You can go to the Round lake chain in Price county and troll. Yet, I have never seen a person trolling on any of the lakes around there that I fish. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | tuffy1 - 2/27/2013 12:25 PM
You can go to the Round lake chain in Price county and troll.
that sounds like a good plan ... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 20248
Location: oswego, il | So it is about keeping people out and lakes to yourselves. Thats settled. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8823
| BowHunter - 2/27/2013 9:04 AM
Don't you guys think this could actually help the economy in Vilas/Oneida? Herbie and the boys seemed to get along pretty well in the trolling days.
Ask Herbie why he LEFT Northern Wisconsin some time. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2097
| In ky you can troll unlimited lines, there are no issues. Most people prefer fo cast anyways. If part of the state allows trolling and some don't make it a statewide law that says you can troll 2-3 lines per person. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | ToddM - 2/27/2013 12:40 PM
So it is about keeping people out and lakes to yourselves. Thats settled.
Todd I haven't seen much in the way yet of why trolling is needed? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8823
| ToddM - 2/27/2013 12:40 PM
So it is about keeping people out and lakes to yourselves. Thats settled.
Is that such a bad thing? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4343
Location: Smith Creek | Trolling is necessary so the average joe can catch fish like Gelb caught, but without all the work. |
|
| |
|
Location: Madison, WI | I haven't seen much in the way yet of why trolling is needed?
it simplifies regulations and enforcement.
it increases fishing opportunities without harming the resource.
keep in mind that the DNR supports this change (strongly), and those reasons are very important from their perspective.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1220
| Back to Todd's question, honestly, I have never been treated badly by a troller on the water. They always seem to "get it" as far as I can see with respect to giving the guy who's casting all the room required. Something interesting I picked up listening to Spencer Berman however in his LSC seminar. I don't remember the math he utilized or the charts, but for a clearly prime water to troll, he seemed to be saying that his catch casting over trolling was more than four to one. If I am remembering it right and his formula for comparrison is valid...that's a pretty good vote for casting. I am going to try trolling someday...I am just waiting until my testosterone drops to the appropriate level |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | Junkman - 2/27/2013 1:00 PM
I am just waiting until my testosterone drops to the appropriate level :-)
... |
|
| |
|
Location: Madison, WI | esoxaddict - 2/27/2013 12:49 PM
ToddM - 2/27/2013 12:40 PM
So it is about keeping people out and lakes to yourselves. Thats settled.
Is that such a bad thing?
yes, yes it is.
you own a small chunk of woods on OUR lake.
Edited by lambeau 2/27/2013 1:07 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 4343
Location: Smith Creek | Why aren't jet skis allowed in BWCA? It would increase opportunities for people to enjoy that neck of the woods.
Why do we have trails in the National Forest that are foot traffic only? If we opened those up to motorized vehicles that would really increase opportunities to use the resource, no?
You know what the DNR tells people who want to ride their ATV's on the cross country skiing trails?
There's thousands of miles of trail available to you. Use that. Leave the skiers alone.
Edited by Flambeauski 2/27/2013 1:26 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 3242
Location: Racine, Wi | I'd love to row troll for a season. Gotta get a row troller though. Have done it in the past, but that boat is long gone. Loved it as much as regular trolling. I don't think row trolling would be a lost art. It's another form of fishing. If one enjoys it, keep at it. I don't think if they open up trolling state wide, people are going to flock to the counties that didn't have trolling prior to now just to troll.
Kinda like the CCW law in WI. People thought we would have the wild west, and that obviously hasn't happened. I think you'll see the same thing wiht the trolling issue.
****Edited to state I'm not a pro troller though. Matter of fact, I troll the big pond a lot, but cast more around here unless I have the kids out.
*********Dang, edited my edit, as I guess I am pro trolling just not a professional troller
Edited by tuffy1 2/27/2013 1:41 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | grow your hair long, braid it and grab a torch and a spear ... you'll fit right in and nobody will know. |
|
| |
|
| I'd like to see all the pro trollers here man up and row troll for a season if their so for trolling, thats another heritage that would be lost.
Times are changing, maybe everyone should fish without using a graph and gps for a year. I would love to troll for walleye in some N WI lakes and guess what, I wouldn't even keep them, it would just be a fun way to fish for them. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 20248
Location: oswego, il | I have row trolled, with the right boat its not that bad, good workout. Again its a matter of exclusion not about harm to anything. The bwca was kept the way it is not for a tradition but for a particular experience. That is not the case with trolling. Nobody is marketing any body of wayer as a place no one can motor troll. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | lambeau - 2/27/2013 12:59 PM
I haven't seen much in the way yet of why trolling is needed?
it increases fishing opportunities without harming the resource.
Not true based on what happen the last time trolling was allowed up there. Remember this isn't just a musky issue.
Increase in opportunity...maybe. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8823
| lambeau - 2/27/2013 1:06 PM
esoxaddict - 2/27/2013 12:49 PM
ToddM - 2/27/2013 12:40 PM
So it is about keeping people out and lakes to yourselves. Thats settled.
Is that such a bad thing?
yes, yes it is.
you own a small chunk of woods on OUR lake.
Fair enough. But owning that chunk of woods and paying property taxes on it year after year gives me a vested interest in what goes on on that lake. Some would say that it also now entitles me to refer to it as "MY" lake. But since you obviously consider it to me more YOURS than mine, simply because you live 150 miles closer to it than I do, let me ask you a question: At what point DOES it become "my lake", too? Is it after I build a house on it, or put in a pier? Or do I have to wait until we move there and that's where the post office sends my mail? What if we're just there for the summer? Does that count? Or is there always some element of not really having any right to have an opinion about what goes on up there because of where I am originally from? Is there a probationary period, where my opinion doesn't "count" as much as someone from Milwaukee would?
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | ToddM - 2/27/2013 1:47 PM
I have row trolled, with the right boat its not that bad, good workout. Again its a matter of exclusion not about harm to anything. The bwca was kept the way it is not for a tradition but for a particular experience. That is not the case with trolling. Nobody is marketing any body of wayer as a place no one can motor troll.
Todd it is not exclusion. You have options. If you want to troll you can go somewhere that it is legal. If you don’t want to be bothered by trollers you can go somewhere it is not allowed. This is not a matter of taking away any rights as you currently do not have the rights, or should I say privilege. By not allowing trolling we are not keeping anyone off of the waters as they can still be on that water. Just not trolling. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1145
| Flambeauski - 2/27/2013 12:59 PM
Trolling is necessary so the average joe can catch fish like Gelb caught, but without all the work.
That's about the only reason I can see aside from being handicapped. And... no. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 164
| Living in NE Wisconsin, I am against opening up all bodies of water to trolling. There already are places trolling is legal, why not leave some places alone. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 20248
Location: oswego, il | Just because someone can troll does not mean they will catch fish. I just dont see how trollers will bother people unless they troll in front and right by you. Casters can do that too. EA, owning property on a body of water does not give you extra say unless you own all the land surrpunding it or part of a club that does. You own a piece of shoreline on a lake we both have the opportunity to fish. |
|
| |
|
Location: Madison, WI |
you own a small chunk of woods on OUR lake.
...But since you obviously consider it to be more YOURS than mine, simply because you live 150 miles closer to it than I do, let me ask you a question: At what point DOES it become "my lake", too?
um, EA? i referred to it as "our" lake. not yours, not mine, ours.
and i understand that it's true you have a vested interest in the health and use of that particular lake. at the same time, it's still public water and not controlled by lakefront landowners. sometimes people get confused and forget that lakefront property is valuable because of the lake; the lake is not valuable because of their property.
Edited by lambeau 2/27/2013 2:54 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 556
| Who cares what HERBIE says !!!! I don't agree with the trolling thing---but what HERBIE says has no bearing on it. Personally---I hope it gets voted down!!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 667
Location: Roscoe IL | esoxaddict - 2/27/2013 1:53 PM
Fair enough. But owning that chunk of woods and paying property taxes on it year after year gives me a vested interest in what goes on on that lake.
Jeff,
Aren't the lake front property taxes totaly insane!!! We're paying over $1000 a month now, not to mention the increased power and gas bills this year... OUCH!
MK |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4343
Location: Smith Creek | They are "our" lakes, but the DNR sees them as more mine than yours if I live in Vilas. Just like the lakes in the county you live in are more yours than mine. Obviously the public who resides there doesn't want trolling, so go where you can do what you want. If all the muskie fisherman start going to Dane county so they can troll and the tourism in Vilas dries up the public will see the error of their ways and legalize it. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1767
Location: Lake Country, Wisconsin | Little pot hole lakes (which are obviously quite common up there) have no business being allowed to use multiple lines per man for trolling....One line? different story perhaps. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | DNR's stance on it.
http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/fishing/questions/trollhist.html
|
|
| |
|
Location: 31 | lambeau - 2/27/2013 12:59 PM I haven't seen much in the way yet of why trolling is needed? it simplifies regulations and enforcement. it increases fishing opportunities without harming the resource. keep in mind that the DNR supports this change (strongly ), and those reasons are very important from their perspective. x2! And I bet one of the big reasons is the extra cost and confusion involved with the enforcement. In other words, the WDNR expressed their concern of this misallocation of funds.
I personally think the good far outweighs the bad, and that all lakes and rivers should be open to trolling. Do you really think that if they were opened up, there would be some kind of mad rush of trollers? I think not… point of reference; I use to fish some of the smaller lakes in Rusk County (open to trolling), and back then I was almost exclusively a castor… and it was a complete nonissue. |
|
| |
|
Location: 31 | Perfect....
"We have evaluated muskellunge, northern pike, and walleye angling success for anglers casting or still-fishing versus anglers trolling. Based on available creel survey data, we have been unable to identify significant differences in angling success or harvest between the two techniques (i.e, casting versus trolling)." "At these meetings a slight majority of anglers remain opposed to trolling." Sounds like if you want trolling get out and vote?
Why is motor trolling not allowed? First some history of motor trolling in Wisconsin. From 1923, no motor trolling was allowed on inland waters of the state. Five waters were opened for trolling in 1958. During the next few years a few other waters were opened. In 1964, all waters in seven northwestern counties as well as Racine County were opened. In 1970, many waters larger than 500 acres were added, except for muskellunge waters. Motor trolling has been a matter of discussion in Wisconsin for many years. There are differences of opinion regarding the sporting aspects of this angling method and its effect upon fish populations. Many people believe trolling depletes fish populations. In some lakes, motor trolling has increased user conflicts because of the increased acreage used by trollers. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources's (DNR) position is that as long as the daily bag and size limits are followed, the method of capture is irrelevant. We have evaluated muskellunge, northern pike, and walleye angling success for anglers casting or still-fishing versus anglers trolling. Based on available creel survey data, we have been unable to identify significant differences in angling success or harvest between the two techniques (i.e, casting versus trolling). DNR has attempted to address the issue of trolling from a biological perspective. We have made several proposals over the years to allow trolling at public hearings held each year in every county of the state on the same night in April. Formal public input on fishing regulations is taken at these public hearings (i.e.,"town hall"" meetings). At these meetings a slight majority of anglers remain opposed to trolling. DNR continues to evaluate trolling and educate anglers on the results of these trolling studies. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| " increases fishing opportunities without harming the resource." If thats the case then why do we have a 11/30 close date in the northern zone? Why not be able to ice fish for them like we do pike and walleye all winter? Are they less special or more special that they stay open. Were putting them back anyways? Why not add another 3 months of fishing. I can quickstrick suckers on my Beaver Dams. Why are those regs in place and everybody is fine with that? Or will that be the next item list on the CC ballot? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | if there are limits and it doesn't matter how they are taken why not add spearing as a means to get your limit?
that would open up more opportunity too ...
Edited by jonnysled 2/27/2013 3:51 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 4343
Location: Smith Creek | jonnysled - 2/27/2013 3:50 PM
if there are limits and it doesn't matter how they are taken why not add spearing as a means to get your limit?
that would open up more opportunity too ...
Spearing would be way too much work. Dynamite would be even easier. |
|
| |
|
| Like I said before. Wisconsin is THE most backwards state in the nation and it's not even close. You can't troll Wisconsin's lakes but if you want to you can break out your 250hp motor, throw back a few beers and drive around the lake going 50mph like a total dumbass creating wakes big enough to almost overturn smaller aluminum boats.
It's totally fine if you want to have jet skiers, yahoos, wake boarders tear up the lake all day making it almost impossible to fish. That's fine, but dang those guys who slowly cruise by going 3mph with lines in the water. Those are the guys that pee me off!
Like I said before. The definition of backwards = Wisconsin.
|
|
| |
|
Location: 31 | jonnysled - 2/27/2013 3:50 PM if there are limits and it doesn't matter how they are taken why not add spearing as a means to get your limit? that would open up more opportunity too ... Seriously you don't get it? I suppose that's why the lakes remain closed to trolling…
The WDNR specifically states; “we have been unable to identify significant differences in angling success or harvest between the two techniques (i.e, casting versus trolling).”
So, they've obviously researched this and determined that there is no discernible difference between the "two" techniques… not the “three” techniques.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| I dont know what is so hard about just allowing it on the larger lakes that can handle it and leave the smaller lakes alone. If it's legal on Trout or Fence Lake he'll yeah i'll go pull some boards, plenty of room for both. Now if you take a lake like Brandy Lake good luck casting with a couple boats trolling out there!
Edited by Mr Musky 2/27/2013 4:26 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8823
| ToothyCritter - 2/27/2013 3:07 PM
esoxaddict - 2/27/2013 1:53 PM
Fair enough. But owning that chunk of woods and paying property taxes on it year after year gives me a vested interest in what goes on on that lake.
Jeff,
Aren't the lake front property taxes totaly insane!!! We're paying over $1000 a month now, not to mention the increased power and gas bills this year... OUCH!
MK
Yeah, Mike, it's a chunk of change! I'm planning on going through a LOT of firewood. It will be easy the first few years, because I've got a lot of land to clear. After that, I'll be the guy driving around with a chainsaw after every storm! "Hey, do you want that tree? Can I have it??"  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | Guest - 2/27/2013 4:14 PM
Like I said before. Wisconsin is THE most backwards state in the nation and it's not even close. You can't troll Wisconsin's lakes but if you want to you can break out your 250hp motor, throw back a few beers and drive around the lake going 50mph like a total dumbass creating wakes big enough to almost overturn smaller aluminum boats.
It's totally fine if you want to have jet skiers, yahoos, wake boarders tear up the lake all day making it almost impossible to fish. That's fine, but dang those guys who slowly cruise by going 3mph with lines in the water. Those are the guys that pee me off!
Like I said before. The definition of backwards = Wisconsin.
yah, Wisconsin sucks especially Vilas and Oneida Counties ... |
|
| |
|
Location: The Yahara Chain | BenR - 2/26/2013 12:56 PM
If size of lake is the issue, perhaps we need to start limiting the amount of casts you can make in a single day:)
The Homers got a good laugh out of me....along with some nonsense from the other side.
The lake will be fished out by the end of May.
The noise will ruin my northwoods lifestyle.
The craziness of the back trolling days....newsflash....a lot has changed since then. You won't have a pilgrimage of trollers heading up to Vilas/Oneida.
I'm really disappointed in some conservative folks on here who think it is okay for the government to limit my choices when angling. Northern Wisconsin is the only place in that I know of that doesn't allow trolling. It isn't the only state with small lakes.
It is long over due to allow trolling on all Wisconsin waters.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 566
Location: Elgin, IL | Flambeauski - 2/27/2013 3:07 PM
If all the muskie fisherman start going to Dane county so they can troll and the tourism in Vilas dries up the public will see the error of their ways and legalize it.
Yep. That would be a shame. Then you might see alot of FOR SALE signs on businesses and such.
Can I get a definition of what a yahoo is?
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 41
Location: PA | Isn't motor trolling is allowed in 49.5 states... |
|
| |
|
| Bytor - 2/27/2013 4:37 PM
BenR - 2/26/2013 12:56 PM
I'm really disappointed in some conservative folks on here who think it is okay for the government to limit my choices when angling. Northern Wisconsin is the only place in that I know of that doesn't allow trolling. It isn't the only state with small lakes.
It is long over due to allow trolling on all Wisconsin waters.
Once again, a basic error in thinking. WI is actually the place where government DOESN'T LIMIT YOUR CHOICES WHEN IT COMES TO ANGLING!! You can choose to fish motor trolling waters, or non motor trolling waters, or you can choose to row troll anywhere in the state, north, south, and in between. Can you say that about the surrounding states? Why do they not allow you the choice of fishing non motor trolling waters? Seems kind of like those governments are the ones limiting your choices. WI is all about freedom of choice, but you want to take it away from anglers and mandate their choices for your own selfish purpose. Cruel you! |
|
| |
|
| FSF - 2/27/2013 5:40 PM
Once again, a basic error in thinking. WI is actually the place where government DOESN'T LIMIT YOUR CHOICES WHEN IT COMES TO ANGLING!! You can choose to fish motor trolling waters, or non motor trolling waters, or you can choose to row troll anywhere in the state, north, south, and in between. Can you say that about the surrounding states? Why do they not allow you the choice of fishing non motor trolling waters? Seems kind of like those governments are the ones limiting your choices. WI is all about freedom of choice, but you want to take it away from anglers and mandate their choices for your own selfish purpose. Cruel you!
There is some "interesting" logic on this thread, but this one takes the cake. So, prohibiting trolling in the three counties with the highest concentration of freshwater lakes in the world actually "enhances", rather than "restricts", our fishing rights and opportunities? You really believe that? |
|
| |
|
| I don't think he is from WI, my guess is the south. BR |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | Guest - 2/27/2013 6:40 PM
So, prohibiting trolling in the three counties with the highest concentration of freshwater lakes in the world actually "enhances", rather than "restricts", our fishing rights and opportunities? You really believe that?
yes, absolutely
|
|
| |
|
| Guest - 2/27/2013 6:40 PM
FSF - 2/27/2013 5:40 PM
Once again, a basic error in thinking. WI is actually the place where government DOESN'T LIMIT YOUR CHOICES WHEN IT COMES TO ANGLING!! You can choose to fish motor trolling waters, or non motor trolling waters, or you can choose to row troll anywhere in the state, north, south, and in between. Can you say that about the surrounding states? Why do they not allow you the choice of fishing non motor trolling waters? Seems kind of like those governments are the ones limiting your choices. WI is all about freedom of choice, but you want to take it away from anglers and mandate their choices for your own selfish purpose. Cruel you!
There is some "interesting" logic on this thread, but this one takes the cake. So, prohibiting trolling in the three counties with the highest concentration of freshwater lakes in the world actually "enhances", rather than "restricts", our fishing rights and opportunities? You really believe that?
Hey, some of these people also believe a 69lb came came from up there also. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | UP Musky - 2/27/2013 8:28 PM
Hey, some of these people also believe a 69lb came came from up there also.
worth another read
Edited by jonnysled 2/27/2013 9:02 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 285
Location: NE Wisconsin | To those who think 3 line trolling is too much pressure on smaller WI lakes. What do you think about 3+ line tip up fishing on these same small lakes for days at a time. Sometimes the lines aren't taken out all weekend. If 3 line trolling is too much pressure, how about all of those tip ups set exactly on the spot on the spot, for many hours a day and then day after day, right on the right spot. If you have ever fished a small NE WI lake with 3 tip ups and are opposed to 3 line trolling those same lakes, you're blowing smoke. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1760
Location: new richmond, wi. & isle, mn | Our side of the state motor trolling been allowed as long as I can remember. Never really seen a problem with it. I too troll at times for a change of pace,take a break, or just check out open water. I believe trolling is an art . A lot more then just drinking beer and dragging a bait around . Respecting Vilas and the other traditional musky counties I understand the tradition. Some things that have bothered me more is the three lines . Boats will sit on their favorite crib or pile with nine lighted bobbers for weeks every night till the bite is done "aka fished out". I've always liked the fact that Wisconsin had the different regulations and fishing opportunities. When I have a n opportunity to fish with my dad for muskies lately It's been trolling. He'll be eighty this summer and working bulldawgs is not in his arsenal. I guess I understand both sides of the fence. I hate to see the states go back to macromanagement because they think it will be cheaper to manage. I don't believe its smart to throw the whole state under one legal blanket. |
|
| |
|
| jonnysled - 2/27/2013 8:15 PM
Guest - 2/27/2013 6:40 PM
So, prohibiting trolling in the three counties with the highest concentration of freshwater lakes in the world actually "enhances", rather than "restricts", our fishing rights and opportunities? You really believe that?
yes, absolutely
That's just ridiculous.
How's about we ban bucktails in Sawyer County, and then ban suckers in Iron County, to further enhance fishing opportunities in Wisconsin?
Sound silly, perhaps? Well, it's the exact same logic.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1767
Location: Lake Country, Wisconsin | WHY exactly should anglers be allowed to use 3 lines again? and how in any way is that good for the resource?
If it is simply an ice fishing thing...then make different rules for ice fishing?
if not, then what exactly is the reasoning? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32922
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Guest,
Trolling is already prohibited. This is about leaving it that way or changing things. Bad analogy. |
|
| |
|
| Guest - 2/27/2013 9:30 PM
That's just ridiculous.
How's about we ban bucktails in Sawyer County, and then ban suckers in Iron County, to further enhance fishing opportunities in Wisconsin?
Sound silly, perhaps? Well, it's the exact same logic.
Those who know me, probably wonder why I haven't jumped on this already, but I'm here now, and, I fully endorse your proposal. When can we ban those suckers?
I really like the way you think. And no, I won't be upset if you try and ban suckers state wide, but Iron County??? Great place to start!!!!!!!!!! |
|
| |
|
| sworrall - 2/27/2013 9:58 PM
Guest,
Trolling is already prohibited. This is about leaving it that way or changing things. Bad analogy.[
The example was not offered as an analogy, and FSF's point wasn't dependent on what's currently law, so I don't what's "bad" about it. If you are following along, the example was offered as a response, taking FSF's reasoning to its logical conclusion: FSF says that having "choice" between trolling and non-trolling counties "enhances" fishing opportunities statewide.
I am saying that if we had a county or two where bucktails or suckers (thanks FSF for being candid on that) were prohibited, we would also have additonal "choices" and thus further "enhance" opportunities statewide.
Why not try to explain the differences in logic between those two propositions? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32922
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | 'I am saying that if we had a county or two where bucktails or suckers (thanks FSF for being candid on that) were prohibited, we would also have additonal "choices" and thus further "enhance" opportunities statewide. '
There IS no 'logic' involved with this statement.
There is no 'logic' involved with not allowing trolling.
Logic has nothing to do with any of this.
Tradition certainly does. Many folks up here value tradition quite a bit. I'm not going to try to call this because the vote may be close. I personally don't have a preference.
By the way, when debating with FSF, it's a seriously inadvisable tactic to 'lead with your chin'. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8823
| Guest - 2/27/2013 6:40 PM
FSF - 2/27/2013 5:40 PM
Once again, a basic error in thinking. WI is actually the place where government DOESN'T LIMIT YOUR CHOICES WHEN IT COMES TO ANGLING!! You can choose to fish motor trolling waters, or non motor trolling waters, or you can choose to row troll anywhere in the state, north, south, and in between. Can you say that about the surrounding states? Why do they not allow you the choice of fishing non motor trolling waters? Seems kind of like those governments are the ones limiting your choices. WI is all about freedom of choice, but you want to take it away from anglers and mandate their choices for your own selfish purpose. Cruel you!
There is some "interesting" logic on this thread, but this one takes the cake. So, prohibiting trolling in the three counties with the highest concentration of freshwater lakes in the world actually "enhances", rather than "restricts", our fishing rights and opportunities? You really believe that?
I depends on how you define "opportunity"... Personally, I cherish the opportunity to spend a Saturday in July fishing on a small Vilas County lake and not hear a sound except for the loons, and not see another boat all day long. There are few places like that. We can troll just about anywhere. We can dodge pleasure boaters and jet ski's anywhere. I can take my life into my hands fishing the Fox Chain on a weekend, where there are actually so many boats that there are crashes every season. There's no shortage of places where you can troll to your hearts content. Why not leave the few pristine places where you can only troll with oars alone? So a few people can catch more fish? You can troll in Adams County, and Iron County, and in Michigan. None of them are far away. Maybe the tradition isn't about keeping the fisheries healthy, or holding fast to the "old ways" as much as it is keeping the lakes quiet and unspoiled. I'd bet the people who are against that are the ones who have never been able to enjoy it. |
|
| |
|
| sworrall - 2/27/2013 10:42 P
By the way, when debating with FSF, it's a seriously inadvisable tactic to 'lead with your chin'.
LOL, not sure whether "debate" is the right term, but point taken.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 3907
| Troll but limit lines and kick the keeper size limit WAY up then limit the number of tanker fish any one guy can take per year.
Tradition is usually not in the best interest of the fishery. If it were, to hell with spears, I would be fishing for food with home-made explosives. And I would do great. But many legal issues, dontcha know. If you want tradition in WI then use gill nets and spears. That was the original tradition, like it or not.
So the answer is to troll with home-made explosives. End of the thread.
|
|
| |
|
Location: Madison, WI | i've spent a lot of time at the family cabins on lakes in MN where trolling is allowed. when someone trolls past the end of the dock, everyone smiles and waves at them (same for slow-moving pontoon cruises). but when a jet-ski buzzes by, everyone curses under their breath.
the idea that banning trolling keeps lakes "pristine" where jet-skis drive around is laughable.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | do they keep rowing when they wave? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1145
| On many of the small lakes I fish in N WI there are these "slow-moving pontoons" you speak of. Although they will often repeatedly cruise within 20 yards of guys casting when the entire rest of the lake is wide open. In effect making laps around the fishermen. I typically do not smile and wave at these folks. Other party boats that keep there distance are great. Often times I think they just want to see what you are fishing for, what you are using, etc... I'd be willing to bet there would be quite a few pontoons pulling 3, 6, 9, maybe even 12 lines behind to give them a shot at a fish too. Then when they get one they will use thier walleye net to lift it into the boat and proceed in having no idea what they are doing. Sounds like good times.
It will happen too. But at least now they will have the "opportunity" to catch a musky, considering they do not have any of the right gear for casting.
Edited by MartinTD 2/28/2013 6:40 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | By the way here is where you can troll in WI. Doesn't seem too limiting to me.
Trolling is currently allowed on the following inland waters:
•All waters of Barron, Bayfield, Burnett, Dane, Douglas, Grant, Iowa, LaFayette, Polk, Racine, Richland, Rusk, Taylor, Washburn and Waukesha Counties;
•the Wisconsin River including sloughs, bayous and flowages from County Highway A downstream (east of Tomahawk, WI in Lincoln County), excluding Lake Mohawksin, and excluding that portion of the Castle Rock Flowage north of the County Highway G bridge;
•the Chippewa river including sloughs, bayous and flowages up to the flowing portion of all tributary streams from the Holcombe flowage, Chippewa county, downstream;
•the Fox River from Buffalo Lake downstream to the DePere Dam, and
Additional waters
The following named lakes and rivers, their flowages and sloughs, also allow trolling.
•Adams County - Mason; Wisconsin River (including Castle Rock and Pentwell Flowages)
•Ashland County - Kakagon River and Slough
•Brown County - Fox River
•Buffalo County - Chippewa River
•Calumet County - Lake Winnebago
•Chippewa County - Chain; Long (T32N, R8W) including Herde Lake. On the Chippewa River (including Lake Wissota, Old Abe, Chippewa Falls, and Cornell flowages and tributaries of the river from their mouths upstream to the first dam or lake), motor trolling is permitted, but only up to the first road, bridge orrailroad bridge. On the Holcombe Flowage and tributaries, motor trolling is permitted up to the flowing portion of the tributary streams.
•Clark County - Arbutus
•Columbia County - Columbia; Wisconsin River (including Lake Wisconsin all impoundments and sloughs)
•Crawford County - Wisconsin River
•Dodge County - Beaver Dam; Fox; Sinnissippi
•Door County - Clarks; Kangaroo
•Dunn County - Menomin; Tainter. Chippewa River including streams flowing into the Chippewa River from their mouths up to the first road or railroad bridge, motor trolling is permitted.
•Eau Claire County - Altoona; Eau Claire. Chippewa River (includes Dells Pond and tributaries upstream to the first dam or lake), motor trolling is permitted (including tributaries, but only up to the first road or railroad bridge).
•Florence County - Halsey
•Fond du Lac County - Lake Winnebago
•Forest County - Butternut; Franklin; Lucerne; Metonga; Pickerel; Pine; Wabikon
•Green Lake County - Big Green; Maria; Puckaway; Fox River
•Jackson County - Arbutus
•Jefferson County - Koshkonong; Rock Lake
•Juneau County - Wisconsin River (including all impoundments and sloughs, except that portion of the Castle Rock Flowage north of the County Highway G bridge); Kilburn Flowage
•Kenosha County - Elizabeth
•La Crosse County - Neshonoc
•Langlade County - Post (Lower); Post (Upper); Rolling Stone; Pickeral
•Lincoln County - Spirit River Flowage; Wisconsin River from County Highway A downstream, excluding Lake Mohawksin
•Marathon County - Big Eau Pleine Reservoir upstream to highway 153 bridge; Wisconsin River (including all impoundments and sloughs
•Marinette County - High Falls Reservoir; Noquebay
•Marquette County - Buffalo; Mason; Fox River (downstream from Buffalo Lake)
•Oconto County - Christie; Machickanee (Stiles Pond); White Potato
•Oneida County - Columbus; Rainbow Flowage; Sugar Camp; Thunder; Willow Flowage
•Outagamie - Fox River
•Pepin County - Chippewa River including tributaries up to the first road or railroad bridge
•Portage County - Little Eau Pleine Flowage east of county highway "O"; Wisconsin River (including all impoundments and sloughs)
•Price County - Pike; Round
•Rock County - Koshkonong
•St. Croix County - Cedar
•Sauk County - Redstone; Wisconsin River (including Lake Wisconsin and all impoundments and sloughs)
•Sawyer County - Big Lake Chetac; Grindstone; Lac Court Oreilles; Nelson; Round; Whitefish; Windigo
•Shawano County - Shawano
•Sheboygan County - Sheboygan Marsh (including Sheboygan Lake and its tributaries upstream to the first road crossing)
•Walworth County - Beulah; Como; Delavan; Geneva; Whitewater
•Washington County - Big Cedar; Pike
•Waupaca County - Partridge; White
•Waushara County - Poygan; Fox River
•Winnebago County - Winnebago Pool Lakes (includes Butte des Morts, Poygan, Winnebago, Winneconne); Rush; Little Lake Butte des Morts; Fox River
•Wood County - Wisconsin River (including all impoundments and sloughs)
|
|
| |
|
| You sconnie guys are funny. |
|
| |
|
| To FSF: I'm pretty sure you can row troll in any state you want. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | It apperas a lot arguing here have forgotten the fact we are not proposing to take anything away from you as you currently cannot do it in some areas. Your arguements for trolling may make more sense if it was currently allowed, and we were looking to take it away.
Neuman you mentioned the good far out weigh the bad. How so? What is the good? The ONLY reason to allow trolling is to simplify the rules. The bad...think back to when backtrolling was allowed. The argument is it is different times now and that wouldn't happen again. I ask how sure are all of you that it wouldn't happen again? How many 40-60# muskies will be caught trolling that will fall victim to the "it ws badly hooked and thus didn't survive" excuse? Most are claiming guys aren't going to start flocking to northern WI to troll. Are you so sure on that? Lots of prime waters up there to troll that I know guys have mentioned "just imagine if we could troll this lake what we may catch". I know if it is allowed I would be doing it because man there is some great opportunity to capitalize on some fisheries. Again I said CAPITALIZE on some fisheries. If I am allowed to do it I will, but I would rather it not be allowed as you only need a ew bad seeds that don't respect the resource to ruin it for all.
There are lots and lots of anglers out there that don't have the same C&R mentality that us onhere have. Walleyes...Most people target to eat. There is no doubt in my mind that trolling would change the fisheries up there.
DNR claims there is no advantage of one method over another...I take that for what it's worth. Where is the facts behind that statement come from? Is it based on catch rates in S. WI waters? Can those waters really be compared to N. WI waters? Is there the amount of walleye anglers on those waters equivalent to the waters in question? How can you say trolling in Vilas will be no advantage over casting in Vilas if you currently cannot practice both to compare. Also bag limits are set based on estimated catch rates, spearing quota, and population estimate. If a DNR currently accounts for say 4000 walleyes will be harvested by anglers in a given year on a given lake they set the bag limit to ensure it maintains a healthy population. However what is missing is most of those walleyes are probably caught in spring and fall when they are shallower and easy to target. Now throw in you can troll, and the number you catch in the summer will drsatically increase. Sure you can still only keep your limit, but where as in the past you may not have hit your limit you now do while trolling. So by the end of the year rather than the typical 4000 harvested you now have 6000 harvested. The DNR may then decide the lake can not sustain that kind of harvest, and reduce the bag limit from 2 to 1 the following years. Guaranteed the fisherman will not like that route. However rather than look at why it was reduced they will blame the Native Americans and their spearing when in reality it was reduced because of their improved success. All the while they were still following the bag limit as the DNR suggests shouldn't be a problem if people adhere to it.
Some waters flat out cater to trolling, and some flat out cater to casting.
I would rather be proactive in trying to keep resources healthy than to be reactive when a resource starts suffering. Trolling will either have no affect on a resource, or will negatively affect it. Not trolling will always have a positive affect on a resource compared to trolling.
One more thought on the no advanatge. I will take North Twin Lake although I would consider it large enough to troll and would accept it there. Can you tell me trolling would have no advantage over the non-trollers in mid summer when the walleyes are holding in deep water and relating to ciscos? |
|
| |
|
| I would rather be proactive in trying to keep resources healthy than to be reactive when a resource starts suffering. Trolling will either have no affect on a resource, or will negatively affect it. Not trolling will always have a positive affect on a resource compared to trolling.
It's perfectly okay to dislike trolling, and the "tradition" argument is reasonable enough in it's own way I suppose.
But please don't spread misinformation: the DNR (You know, those fish biologist and fisheries management types?) says very clearly that it would not harm the fishery. This is evidence-based, not a "best guess" situation. Trolling has not harmed fisheries in other areas of WI or other states.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | 12LinePete - 2/28/2013 7:48 AM
I would rather be proactive in trying to keep resources healthy than to be reactive when a resource starts suffering. Trolling will either have no affect on a resource, or will negatively affect it. Not trolling will always have a positive affect on a resource compared to trolling.
It's perfectly okay to dislike trolling, and the "tradition" argument is reasonable enough in it's own way I suppose.
But please don't spread misinformation: the DNR (You know, those fish biologist and fisheries management types? ) says very clearly that it would not harm the fishery. This is evidence-based, not a "best guess" situation. Trolling has not harmed fisheries in other areas of WI or other states.
Not spreading misinformation at all. How can trolling improve a fishery? I said it will either not change it or hurt it. That’s a pretty accurate statement I would think. Also trolling most definitely hurt fisheries the last time it was in effect in N. WI. THAT is a fact that cannot be disputed! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| Yeah I will say the Pontooners sure took trolling to a "new level" on the north shore of Mille Lacs! I seen quite a few of them loaded with people, big mast systems covering tons of water. Ohh and how can I forget the dead rolling giant ski's being towed on a rope off the back of them. That really worked out well for that system didnt it??? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 566
Location: Elgin, IL | Travis, you make some really good points. Probably the best ones as far as the No-Troll idea.
FSF wants to save Traditions on one hand, and ban other Traditions just as fast....
It's a good discussion, I can see both sides. I am still wondering if I'm a yahoo....or if I'm an overweight slob that would love trolling up there because I'm lazy.
But what I'd like first, is to see the WI DNR clarify the law regarding Position Fishing (with suckers) That should be job 1.
Edited by Northwind Mark 2/28/2013 8:32 AM
|
|
| |
|
| I need some help flushing out the hypocrisy that is infesting this thread. The way I see it the biologists see no harm in allowing trolling state wide. I thought we wanted trained biologists making the decisions as to what is allowed. I see moderators and posters making that statement all the time. However, when these people disagree with the biologists we should all get an equal vote. AHHHH, the hypocrisy. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 581
| CiscoKid - 2/28/2013 8:12 AM
How can trolling improve a fishery? I said it will either not change it or hurt it. That’s a pretty accurate statement I would think. Also trolling most definitely hurt fisheries the last time it was in effect in N. WI. THAT is a fact that cannot be disputed!
The DNR flat disagrees with the accuracy of your statement. They've stated that there is no evidence to suggest that trolling will harm any fishery.
The DNR must be missing all of the evidence of decimated fisheries from the backtrolling days in the early '90's. You should submit all of those undisputed facts at your disposal to the DNR so that they can have a more informed position on the matter.
But before doing that, take a look at the link: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/fishing/documents/rules/MotorTrollingPropos...
Note specifically the Q&A's and the evidence cited, for instance:
Common Questions and Answers:
Didn’t backtrolling in the 1990s impact musky size structure in Vilas County?
Back-trolling was allowed from 1990-1994. Some people believe that this caused irreperable harm to musky populations in Vilas County. However, the average length of the largest fish registered in the Vilas County musky marathon was larger after back-trolling versus before.
* * *
Also, the number of fish 45” (registered by Muskies, Inc., members) has continued to increase. The years immediately following back-trolling (1995-1999) showed no impact.
Edited by Matt DeVos 2/28/2013 8:59 AM
|
|
| |
|
| Great link Matt. I suspect those firmly AGAINST trolling won't let the facts compiled by the trained professionals get in their way. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| Matt I suspect that is because the fishery's are rebounding from the backtrolling and single hook sucker rig years. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 136
| Can someone explain what happened in the 90's when backtrolling was leagal? I keep hearing it was terrible, but never here what or why? |
|
| |
|
| I am sure Cscokid is compiling his four year catch data from before, during and after back-trolling was legal for those four years and we will be able to once and for all see how devastating it was to those fisheries. |
|
| |
|
Location: Lake Tomahawk, WI | A few observations from the early 90's bactrolling days...
Fish were killed, yes. But, guides/clients/anglers killed fish regardless of how they were caught. Trolling didn't kill any more fish than casting or live bait fishing. Actually killed A LOT less than casting/live bait fishing, mostly because the majority of anglers who invested the time/money to figure out how to troll effectively were on the cutting edgo at the time, which also meant CPR. Again, trolling doesn't kill fish, people do.
Another observation I recall from those days were the massive amounts of suspended fish. This was the time of the rusty crayfish's peak on many lakes. Weed beds were gone, and baitfish were all over the basins of the lakes. Also, cisco numbers were much higher than now, not sure why that is. Maybe the current warming trend - warmer lake temps/lower water levels? I'm not sure, but definitely haven't seen the numbers of ciscos the last several years.
Anyway, just a few of my notes from that time period.
JS |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | Thanks Sloan for your input on what you saw at that time. I would like to hear from others.
Why was trolling only allowed for 4 years? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 275
| Plenty of lakes to troll on, no need to change a great thing. I think most of the fun and satisfaction of catching a musky is taken away by trolling. There is so much more pleasure in musky fishing to me than lazily driving a boat around and reeling in an already hooked fish. I've been involved with local government making (non-fishing related) changes in my area, and in most cases if not all they should have left small town "preferences" or "tradition" alone. Just my two cents.
Jaimy |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2687
Location: Hayward, WI | I've hesitated replying to this since I agree some with both sides of the arguement. I think rather than give much opinion I'll share what I have seen from a trolling perspective.
I've lived and fished in Chippewa and Sawyer county, WI. Both areas allow trolling. Most waters in Chippewa could be trolled and about 1/2 of them that I regularly fish in Sawyer can be trolled. On the waters that allow trolling, I have never seen pontoons with masts, charter boats dragging multiple fish around, etc. Even if somebody is trolling it's not often that you hear their motor as most trollers are using a kicker or 4 stroke outboard and unless they are right on top of you, can't easily be heard.
Most people still are not trolling even on lakes where it's legal. Some are, but I would say maybe up to 25% are trolling. Most musky guys are casting and most walleye guys around here seem to anchor and toss out slip bobbers.
My limited experience in Vilas has been that I have not encountered a lot of people on the water. I'm somewhat aware that this can depend on the area of Vilas you are fishing. Anyway, I think the lack of people on the water comes from... lack of people in the area. Allowing trolling isn't going to attract more people to the area I don't believe. Also, I fish a couple waters from 3,000 to 5,000 acres. Most guys that troll toss out a few flat lines or maybe a small set of inline planer boards. I don't think you'll see the huge spread of mast system trolling unless you get on Lake superior, Green bay, Mille Lacs, etc.
The trollers have kept their distance from me just as well and often times better than casters. Any form of pleasure watercraft is a much greater concern to disrupting my fishing than a trolling fisherman, 95% of the time.
Do I think trolling should be allowed statewide? I'm not really sure. One thing I do know is it would be nice to be able to fish suckers in the fall (vertically) without having to wonder if I'll get in trouble or not. My guess is allowing trolling in WI won't hurt the fishery, though I do agree it may not be a bad idea to allow it on lakes over a certain acreage and not allow it on small lakes, just so people aren't getting in each other's way on tiny lakes.
Overall, my experience in fishing lakes where trolling allowed is not a lot different than lakes where it isn't allowed.
Tucker |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | I'd like to see it passed so we don't have to hash out whether or not we are trolling suckers argument on here every fall...; ) |
|
| |
|
| Reading the blurb from the DNR I note one glaring omission in their so called data, they have none that compares populations of gamefish before and after trolling was allowed. They also do not break down lake types into those with and without suspended forage, nor do they assign trophy fish to trolling or not trolling methods in various lakes. Well, we all know we can't have every bit of data we would like, and hate to say it but fisheries science is some of the holiest of all science, because there are tremendous gaps in data and difficulty in obtaining data.
The paper does note that the fish harvested in non trolling waters are an inch bigger than the trolling waters. It also notes that 64% of musky fisherman trolled at some point in the season in the trolling water now existing, but indicates 91% will troll if all waters are opened to trolling. That seems to me that trolling will increase pressure, since I do not believe that increase can totally be explained by changing systems. And where is the focus of that increased pressure going to be?
The paper also makes the somewhat humorous suggestion that trolling may be associated with an improved size structure, due to it's comparison of WI waters, vs MI, MN, Canadian waters, LOL, so I am guessing the next thing will be that the world record association(whichever fairy tale you believe in)will come out in favor of trolling throughout WI to increase the size of WI muskies.
I have little faith in most of the comparisons done by the DNR on this matter, and I am surprised somewhat by the tilt of opinion in this paper. It is clearly NOT a DNR issue in terms of some certain lakes getting raped and diminished in quality, nor is it an issue for them as to whether the potential for conflicts increases. Looking at this I am projecting that many of the conflicts are going to be native vs tourist based conflicts, and I see quite a bit of the push FOR trolling, to be mounted by outsiders, both resident and non resident, but not in-county residents. I have rarely heard bar talk(the true fish and game scientists, as we are all aware) by residents, complaining that they can't troll on local lakes.
It seems disingenuos of the DNR to present data like this, when the trolling waters have been trolled for years, and the non trolling waters have not been trolled, and then saying catch rate is the same. Show the catch rate and population figures, before and after some small lake gets opened up to trolling, and the guides start going through it for fish pictures and publicity, and the meat hunters have also run through it and cleared out a hithero sheltered population, of not only musky, but also walleye and smallmouth, and then we can talk apples and apples instead of apples and oranges.
Color me skeptical. |
|
| |
|
| "It also notes that 64% of musky fisherman trolled at some point in the season in the trolling water now existing, but indicates 91% will troll if all waters are opened to trolling. That seems to me that trolling will increase pressure..."
No, it was a survey of muskie guys who were already musky fishing, it simply shows a shift in how they might target them, not an increase in pressure. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 639
Location: Hudson, WI | curleytail - 2/28/2013 10:46 AM
I've hesitated replying to this since I agree some with both sides of the arguement. I think rather than give much opinion I'll share what I have seen from a trolling perspective.
I've lived and fished in Chippewa and Sawyer county, WI. Both areas allow trolling. Most waters in Chippewa could be trolled and about 1/2 of them that I regularly fish in Sawyer can be trolled. On the waters that allow trolling, I have never seen pontoons with masts, charter boats dragging multiple fish around, etc. Even if somebody is trolling it's not often that you hear their motor as most trollers are using a kicker or 4 stroke outboard and unless they are right on top of you, can't easily be heard.
Most people still are not trolling even on lakes where it's legal. Some are, but I would say maybe up to 25% are trolling. Most musky guys are casting and most walleye guys around here seem to anchor and toss out slip bobbers.
My limited experience in Vilas has been that I have not encountered a lot of people on the water. I'm somewhat aware that this can depend on the area of Vilas you are fishing. Anyway, I think the lack of people on the water comes from... lack of people in the area. Allowing trolling isn't going to attract more people to the area I don't believe. Also, I fish a couple waters from 3,000 to 5,000 acres. Most guys that troll toss out a few flat lines or maybe a small set of inline planer boards. I don't think you'll see the huge spread of mast system trolling unless you get on Lake superior, Green bay, Mille Lacs, etc.
The trollers have kept their distance from me just as well and often times better than casters. Any form of pleasure watercraft is a much greater concern to disrupting my fishing than a trolling fisherman, 95% of the time.
Do I think trolling should be allowed statewide? I'm not really sure. One thing I do know is it would be nice to be able to fish suckers in the fall (vertically) without having to wonder if I'll get in trouble or not. My guess is allowing trolling in WI won't hurt the fishery, though I do agree it may not be a bad idea to allow it on lakes over a certain acreage and not allow it on small lakes, just so people aren't getting in each other's way on tiny lakes.
Overall, my experience in fishing lakes where trolling allowed is not a lot different than lakes where it isn't allowed.
Tucker
Couldn't agree more. I've never had it bother me on any of the metro lakes or rivers or any of the Polk County lakes, where trolling is allowed county-wide. Truthfully, you can pick apart a piece of structure a lot more effectively by casting. Plus, it would simplify the simulataneous sucker/casting regs.
Won't affect me either way, and I really don't care. I hate trolling and probably won't do it anyway. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | Sure seems like pressure will increase based on this thread alone by how many are for it. I am sure those for it plan to fish some lakes they generally currently do not fish as now they will be able to troll it.
Fishing that super deep, clear lake is daunting to some unless they could troll it. Pressure will definitely increase on some of these waters.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 258
Location: Mayville, WI | You have a pool of 100 muskie angler, currently 50 cast & 50 troll. This reg passes and now 30 cast and 70 troll. You have the same 100 guys fishing for the same species, just with an added tool. Pressure has not increased, just the change on how they are targeted has.
Sure, some individual lakes may see more or less pressure, but it will even out. I'm personally on the fence on this one. I enjoy row trolling, but if it passes it will probably make it easier to decide which boat to bring. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 275
| Moltisanti - 2/28/2013 11:35 AM
Won't affect me either way, and I really don't care. I hate trolling and probably won't do it anyway.
I'm with Moltisanti on this one, I don't like trolling and I won't do it anyway, but how many of you who are opposed to this would troll if it was allowed?
Jaimy |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | BMuskyX - 2/28/2013 12:20 PM
Moltisanti - 2/28/2013 11:35 AM
Won't affect me either way, and I really don't care. I hate trolling and probably won't do it anyway.
I'm with Moltisanti on this one, I don't like trolling and I won't do it anyway, but how many of you who are opposed to this would troll if it was allowed?
Jaimy
I absolutely would as I would be foolish not to. No doubt it would increase my success on some waters once I figure out what I am doing. There is a reason Gelb chooses to row troll. One of the reason I am against it is the same reason I would do it.
Edited by CiscoKid 2/28/2013 12:29 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 4343
Location: Smith Creek | CiscoKid - 2/28/2013 12:27 PM
BMuskyX - 2/28/2013 12:20 PM
Moltisanti - 2/28/2013 11:35 AM
Won't affect me either way, and I really don't care. I hate trolling and probably won't do it anyway.
I'm with Moltisanti on this one, I don't like trolling and I won't do it anyway, but how many of you who are opposed to this would troll if it was allowed?
Jaimy
I absolutely would as I would be foolish not to. No doubt it would increase my success on some waters once I figure out what I am doing. There is a reason Gelb chooses to row troll. One of the reason I am against it is the same reason I would do it.
Agreed. I troll plenty now. I just do it where the DNR and citizens decided they wanted it allowed. I don't have to look far to find places to troll.
Edited by Flambeauski 2/28/2013 12:38 PM
|
|
| |
|
| Row trolling seems like it is a 1800's thing not something you do in 2013. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 275
|
Agreed. I troll plenty now. I just do it where the DNR and citizens decided they wanted it allowed. I don't have to look far to find places to troll.
Exactly! You don't have to look far, so why have the same regulations on every body of water. There is plenty of lakes to troll, why not let the other half keep a few casting only lakes? No one is trying to take trolling away from any lakes that it's allowed on now!
Jaimy |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8823
| I think Travis brings up a very good point. There are small lakes that have fantastic populations of muskies that are basically untapped. They are as such, because the best way to target those fish in those particular ecosystems would be to troll. I have no doubt that opening those lakes to motor trolling would definitely have a negative affect on those fisheries.
As for the mess that "position fishing" has created in people's minds? It's really pretty simple. A warden can tell if you're moving your boat around a piece of structure with suckers that are vertical most of the time vs dragging them around behind the boat. I only know a few guys who have ever gotten tickets, and that's because they were clearly not operating within the provisions of the law. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 639
Location: Hudson, WI | CiscoKid - 2/28/2013 12:27 PM
BMuskyX - 2/28/2013 12:20 PM
Moltisanti - 2/28/2013 11:35 AM
Won't affect me either way, and I really don't care. I hate trolling and probably won't do it anyway.
I'm with Moltisanti on this one, I don't like trolling and I won't do it anyway, but how many of you who are opposed to this would troll if it was allowed?
Jaimy
I absolutely would as I would be foolish not to. No doubt it would increase my success on some waters once I figure out what I am doing. There is a reason Gelb chooses to row troll. One of the reason I am against it is the same reason I would do it.
In some cases it would increase your success. In others, it wouldn't. I can go out and troll the Croix anytime I want, and will do it on some occasions. But #1, to troll effectively is not to put a rod in the holder, sandwich in one hand, beer in the other. If that's the way you troll, you ain't going to be making much of a dent in the muskie population because your chances of getting bit are not good. Probably less than a guy tossing a bucktail on his spinning rod off of a pontoon ( aka the common setup for Lake Minnetonka.)
Good trolling, 2 lines to a guy...you probably have a deep diving crank on a board on the deep side, a bucktail on the shallow board, shallow invader or something being pumped in tandem on the shallow side by one guy, and the other guy with a medium depth bait, on the outside. Driving 3-4 mph, eyes on the electronics, weaving in and out of boats, constantly cleaning weeds off, re-setting boards. Not to mention you're not going to see a fish or set the hook on one. It's just a royal pain in the ass and it's not fun anyway.
There is a lot of structure that trolling would be far less effective anyway. |
|
| |
|
Location: 31 | BMuskyX - 2/28/2013 12:20 PM Moltisanti - 2/28/2013 11:35 AM Won't affect me either way, and I really don't care. I hate trolling and probably won't do it anyway. I'm with Moltisanti on this one, I don't like trolling and I won't do it anyway, but how many of you who are opposed to this would troll if it was allowed? Jaimy I would!!! One huge benefit would be the buzz and excitement it would create for the local businesses in this depressed economy… I'm sure they could use a shot in the arm these days. Time to get out and vote, let the majority rule! |
|
| |
|
Location: 31 | BMuskyX - 2/28/2013 1:15 PM Agreed. I troll plenty now. I just do it where the DNR and citizens decided they wanted it allowed. I don't have to look far to find places to troll. Exactly! You don't have to look far, so why have the same regulations on every body of water. There is plenty of lakes to troll, why not let the other half keep a few casting only lakes? No one is trying to take trolling away from any lakes that it's allowed on now! Jaimy “why have the same regulations on every body of water.” I'll throw it right back at you... why not have the same set of regulations for every body of water? Think of the extra administrative work being done by the WDNR yearly, and the game wardens having to keep track of which lakes to enforce for nothing more than a silly outdated tradition. Why is row trolling acceptable but not motor trolling?
“There is plenty of lakes to troll, why not let the other half keep a few casting only lakes?” There is nothing being “lost”… nobody is taking casting out of the equation.
Obviously the WDNR is of the opinion that it's time to let go of a tradition, or they would not have said what they said.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2687
Location: Hayward, WI | Why NOT have the same set of regulations? Well, the lakes in my area have different regarding bag limits and size limits, some even different seasons than others. All are based on the lake and what the DNR feels is the best way to manage that particular body of water.
I sure hope the wardens we have are capable enough to know the laws on the lakes in their areas and enforce them properly. Heck, if they aren't sure, they can take a look at the regs at the landing which post bag limits and whether or not trolling is allowed. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4
| NO! Musky fishing in Oneida and Vilas is pretty darn good these days. LEAVE IT BE! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8823
| Jerry Newman - 2/28/2013 1:48 PM
[...] I'll throw it right back at you... why not have the same set of regulations for every body of water? [...]
The simple answer is because every lake is different. |
|
| |
|
| Wisconsin needs to focus on more important things like legalizing marijuana. Those laws are "old tradition" too. When is the last time you heard of someone that got into a car crash because they were high? Oh that's right, it doesn't happen.
If you want to troll go to a lake that allows it. Just say "NO" at the spring hearings this year. |
|
| |
|
| Guest - 2/28/2013 2:08 PM
Wisconsin needs to focus on more important things like legalizing marijuana. Those laws are "old tradition" too. When is the last time you heard of someone that got into a car crash because they were high? Oh that's right, it doesn't happen.
If you want to troll go to a lake that allows it. Just say "NO" at the spring hearings this year.
This is a perfect example of the thought process behind "no trolling", love it. BR |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4343
Location: Smith Creek | BenR - 2/28/2013 2:11 PM
Guest - 2/28/2013 2:08 PM
Wisconsin needs to focus on more important things like legalizing marijuana. Those laws are "old tradition" too. When is the last time you heard of someone that got into a car crash because they were high? Oh that's right, it doesn't happen.
If you want to troll go to a lake that allows it. Just say "NO" at the spring hearings this year.
This is a perfect example of the thought process behind "no trolling", love it. BR
I compare it to public urination. A real pi$$er to enforce and it really doesn't hurt anything, and it would create more urination opportunities, especially for the elderly and others with weak bladders. So we should just allow it. In fact, I plan on going outside and making a statement right now.
Edited by Flambeauski 2/28/2013 2:30 PM
|
|
| |
|
| BenR - 2/28/2013 2:11 PM
Guest - 2/28/2013 2:08 PM
Wisconsin needs to focus on more important things like legalizing marijuana. Those laws are "old tradition" too. When is the last time you heard of someone that got into a car crash because they were high? Oh that's right, it doesn't happen.
If you want to troll go to a lake that allows it. Just say "NO" at the spring hearings this year.
This is a perfect example of the thought process behind "no trolling", love it. BR
Thats right. And I don't need you trolling by when I am in a secluded bay burning one down; not bothering anyone and enjoying the serenity. Lol. |
|
| |
|
Location: 31 | curleytail - 2/28/2013 1:57 PM Why NOT have the same set of regulations? Well, the lakes in my area have different regarding bag limits and size limits, some even different seasons than others. All are based on the lake and what the DNR feels is the best way to manage that particular body of water. I sure hope the wardens we have are capable enough to know the laws on the lakes in their areas and enforce them properly. Heck, if they aren't sure, they can take a look at the regs at the landing which post bag limits and whether or not trolling is allowed. Understood, and the lakes in your area are regulated individually with a real purpose, not because of some tradition. I guess you agree that the WDNR has a pretty good handle on that aspect of it, but not so much their desire to be more consistent/simplify a lot of their regulations with statewide trolling.
I'm assuming that occasionally there are new game wardens, transfers etc. I would find the trolling and positioning laws to be a little confusing myself, statewide trolling would certainly simplify things for them and perhaps they could move on to more important things besides watching the angle of somebody's sucker line while they're casting?
I'll be the first to admit that I want to see trolling because I'm interested in fishing there, kind of selfish… but I'll also be injecting thousands of dollars into the local economies. Now, some of you guys should admit that you selflessly want to continue your traditional casting, and have less pressure on your lakes so you can catch more fish… very understandable.
I'm going to make a few phone calls to get something going with the walleye crowd… who probably overwhelmingly would vote in favor of trolling. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 639
Location: Hudson, WI | I keep hearing about this nightmare known throughout angling lore..."the backtrolling days." Sounds like comedy to me. Can you imagine how ridiculous you would look in a 620 dual console speed trolling at 5mph backwards? |
|
| |
|
| Jerry Newman says.
"I'll throw it right back at you... why not have the same set of regulations for every body of water? Think of the extra administrative work being done by the WDNR yearly, and the game wardens having to keep track of which lakes to enforce for nothing more than a silly outdated tradition. Why is row trolling acceptable but not motor trolling?
“There is plenty of lakes to troll, why not let the other half keep a few casting only lakes?”
There is nothing being “lost”… nobody is taking casting out of the equation.
Obviously the WDNR is of the opinion that it's time to let go of a tradition, or they would not have said what they said. "
It is probably best not to get into a discussion, when you respond faster than you think. It can cause grave injuries when the venue is the wrong barroom, or tavern. Luckily, safer on this discussion board, it only damages your reputation for having any sense, well, if you had a reputation like that to start with.
Three quick things.
Owl Lake has a 28" size limit, and not very many 28" muskies, last time I looked. Perhaps that can cover the uniform statewide regulation nonsense.
As to the "nothing lost", we have "fly fishing only water", we have bow season, we have muzzleloader seasons, thus the case for limited seasons, limited methods, and special areas, have already been made by the WDNR, and the consumers, in the realm of both fishing and hunting.
As for row trolling being accepted, I think most of us accept row trolling as a tougher, more primitive way to fish, even with modern updates on some of the equipment, and even on the quietest lake, how far away can you hear a row troller?
|
|
| |
|
| "even on the quietest lake, how far away can you hear a row troller?"
It depends on what they've had to eat, if you're downwind I'd guess a good ways. Things tend to slip out when grunting on the oars...
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | Jerry Newman - 2/28/2013 2:28 PM
curleytail - 2/28/2013 1:57 PM Why NOT have the same set of regulations? Well, the lakes in my area have different regarding bag limits and size limits, some even different seasons than others. All are based on the lake and what the DNR feels is the best way to manage that particular body of water. I sure hope the wardens we have are capable enough to know the laws on the lakes in their areas and enforce them properly. Heck, if they aren't sure, they can take a look at the regs at the landing which post bag limits and whether or not trolling is allowed. Understood, and the lakes in your area are regulated individually with a real purpose, not because of some tradition. I guess you agree that the WDNR has a pretty good handle on that aspect of it, but not so much their desire to be more consistent/simplify a lot of their regulations with statewide trolling.
I'm assuming that occasionally there are new game wardens, transfers etc. I would find the trolling and positioning laws to be a little confusing myself, statewide trolling would certainly simplify things for them and perhaps they could move on to more important things besides watching the angle of somebody's sucker line while they're casting?
I'll be the first to admit that I want to see trolling because I'm interested in fishing there, kind of selfish… but I'll also be injecting thousands of dollars into the local economies. Now, some of you guys should admit that you selflessly want to continue your traditional casting, and have less pressure on your lakes so you can catch more fish… very understandable.
I'm going to make a few phone calls to get something going with the walleye crowd… who probably overwhelmingly would vote in favor of trolling.
Jerry, honestly, I am concerned over walleye overharvest especially of trophy class walleyes. Also I am concerned about the flux of trolling on the small waterbodies for suspended muskies, and the direct result more trophy class fish being caught and kept or dying of delayed mortality. Certain lakes will be susceptible to the method. Again Gelb row trolls as it is the most efficient means at contacting trophy fish in WI. Now add in hundreds of other anglers doing it, some of which do not practice C&R all the time. Would not take long to really hurt the size structure of a 300 acre lake when fish that have not been contacted that often in the past are now being hooked more frequently. Some will die of delayed mortality, some will die from anglers keeping them, and some will live. More boated will equal a higher chance of that fish dying.
Yes I am a bit concerned with my basins being more pressured as well as I am sure a lot of guys would love to troll Vilas to tap into the suspended fisheries. Right now us casters will set up drifts so we don’t cross the path of the other drifting boat across a basin. Not sure I can handle setting up a drift to have a troller zig-zag downwind of my drifting line a few times covering that water before I get there. If that’s being selfish so bit it. It’s not exactly an accepted practice in N. WI. Very similar to it being an accepted practice in more southern states to fish on top of one another, and when they come to N. WI and do the same thing people get upset. Not that they are wrong, or we are wrong for getting upset, but it is not the “normal” practice for the area.
Fisheries is my #1 concern though. Walleyes more so than musky.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| Well we know the stance of Vilas county lakes. Whats the take on the rest of the Sawyer County lakes? Currently there's only a handful of LARGE lakes that can be trolled over there with the exception of Whitefish. How bout the Chippewa Flowage? There was a motion to allow trolling there a few years ago and to my knowledge that got shot down bigtime. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4343
Location: Smith Creek | http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1993-05-16/sports/9305170046_1_t...
Interesting article about the backtrolling days. Bucher and Spence taking some shots at Rizzo and vice versa.
Spence's quote about people sitting on shore cooking hamburgers while muskies swallow the single hook rig is particularly funny. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| Sounds alot like the same discussion were all in! LOL.. I'll side with Bucher compromise on the larger lakes and 1 line. |
|
| |
|
Location: 31 | Mr Musky - 2/28/2013 3:37 PM Sounds alot like the same discussion were all in! LOL.. I'll side with Bucher compromise on the larger lakes and 1 line. Agree! Although I can appreciate what you're saying Travis, these no troll fisheries are a state resource, and if they were opened to trolling and then over harvested, the WDNR has shown a willingness to protect the resource by implementing tighter size/bag limits. Although your crusade is valiant, perhaps it's time to let the WDNR be the ones concerned. I think they already are, or they would not have said; "We have evaluated muskellunge, northern pike, and walleye angling success for anglers casting or still-fishing versus anglers trolling. Based on available creel survey data, we have been unable to identify significant differences in angling success or harvest between the two techniques (i.e, casting versus trolling)." "At these meetings a slight majority of anglers remain opposed to trolling." SO, if you're interested in trolling these waters, get out the vote! I'm not taking the bait from one of the previous posts… for clarification, the only regulation that I was referring to and in favor of is statewide trolling.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 71
| It is interesting to me that some of the same people talking about the economic recession in N. WI are also the same ones against trolling in order to keep their lakes to themselves. I live in the TC and would go up to fish N. WI were I allowed to drag a sucker on a non-vertical line. I would also patronize a resort of my choosing during an off-peak season, patronize the bait shops by buying their $10 suckers, patronize the local bars and restaurants, or at the very least the grocery and liquor stores and the gas stations. However, since I am unable to do so, I choose to stay around my parents' cabin in Barron County and fish there. There are lots of guys out there that are in the same boat as me. It would seem to me that trolling could bring additional revenues to a depressed area. The only opposition seems to be from those who want "Their Waters" to be left alone, effectively cutting off their nose to spite their face. |
|
| |
|
| My vote is yes if they do it like Canada 1 Line per angler I think that will be fine I think 3 would be a bit of a problem on 500 acre lake .
SAINT |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2687
Location: Hayward, WI | 1 line per angler for trolling wouldn't bother me toooo much. But, is that only 1 trolled line but still 3 non-trolled lines? How many would want to give up dragging a couple suckers, throwing out 2 slip bobbers for walleyes, setting tip ups in the winter?
Maybe multiple lines is a crutch for being a bad fisherman, but I would be sad to not be able to set tip-ups anymore and one line only would just about completely do away with sucker fishing.
Edited by curleytail 2/28/2013 4:03 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 189
Location: Barrington, Il | CiscoKid - 2/28/2013 8:12 AM
12LinePete - 2/28/2013 7:48 AM
I would rather be proactive in trying to keep resources healthy than to be reactive when a resource starts suffering. Trolling will either have no affect on a resource, or will negatively affect it. Not trolling will always have a positive affect on a resource compared to trolling.
It's perfectly okay to dislike trolling, and the "tradition" argument is reasonable enough in it's own way I suppose.
But please don't spread misinformation: the DNR (You know, those fish biologist and fisheries management types? ) says very clearly that it would not harm the fishery. This is evidence-based, not a "best guess" situation. Trolling has not harmed fisheries in other areas of WI or other states.
Not spreading misinformation at all. How can trolling improve a fishery? I said it will either not change it or hurt it. That’s a pretty accurate statement I would think. Also trolling most definitely hurt fisheries the last time it was in effect in N. WI. THAT is a fact that cannot be disputed!
How did back trolling hurt the fishery? Yes there were some big fish caught and kept but that was also the time of single hook sucker rigs that did way more damage to the fish than trolling ever did.
And wouldn't be a shame if some 40# or even 50# fish got caught. Isn't that why we fish for them? |
|
| |
|
| Jerry Newman says,
I'll be the first to admit that I want to see trolling because I'm interested in fishing there, kind of selfish… but I'll also be injecting thousands of dollars into the local economies. Now, some of you guys should admit that you selflessly want to continue your traditional casting, and have less pressure on your lakes so you can catch more fish… very understandable.
The pro trolling crowd needs to get their act together, and figure out whether they will "inject thousands of dollars" into the local economy, or the pressure won't increase any. Kind of difficult to make BOTH arguments. See previous post adressing typing faster than your're thinking Jerry.
And yes Jerry, we all want to "SELFLESSLY" continue our traditional casting, while you yourself, want to SELFISHLY troll our unpressured waters, see previous post about typing faster than you're thinking Jerry. Uhm, you may not be cut out for this kind of discussion kid...
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 189
Location: Barrington, Il | BMuskyX - 2/28/2013 10:43 AM
Plenty of lakes to troll on, no need to change a great thing. I think most of the fun and satisfaction of catching a musky is taken away by trolling. There is so much more pleasure in musky fishing to me than lazily driving a boat around and reeling in an already hooked fish. I've been involved with local government making (non-fishing related) changes in my area, and in most cases if not all they should have left small town "preferences" or "tradition" alone. Just my two cents.
Jaimy
Sowhat you are saying is that because you don't like to troll nobody should be allowed to do it. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1145
| Mr Musky - 2/28/2013 3:37 PM
Sounds alot like the same discussion were all in! LOL.. I'll side with Bucher compromise on the larger lakes and 1 line.
Agreed. I would support one line per person restricted to lakes over 800-1000 acres.
Interesting article. It's hard to disagree with Rizzo's argument. He makes some valid points.
Most importantly, "more fish will be kept" (of all species I'd argue).
Granted a small percentage, but you can not tell me the following will NEVER happen. Incidental catches resulting from people multispecies trolling will be:
a) kept to eat.
b) kept to mount as any fish over 40" is the biggest fish Johnny has ever caught.
c) released to almost sure delayed mortality from clueless handling.
d) intentionally injured and released to die. (there are still people that hate muskies in thier lakes for eating all of thier ______. You might be surprised what some people will do.)
e) more trophy fish will be caught and kept.
That stuff will NEVER happen?
Some populations can not afford for it to happen! Amen.
Edited by MartinTD 2/28/2013 4:29 PM
|
|
| |
|
| Jerry Newman says and quotes the DNR,
"Although your crusade is valiant, perhaps it's time to let the WDNR be the ones concerned. I think they already are, or they would not have said;
"We have evaluated muskellunge, northern pike, and walleye angling success for anglers casting or still-fishing versus anglers trolling. Based on available creel survey data, we have been unable to identify significant differences in angling success or harvest between the two techniques (i.e, casting versus trolling).""
They say this but they are, as I pointed out comparing apples to oranges, since there is potentially a lot of difference between a lake that has been historically trolled, and a lake that has not been trolled.
When they come up with some hard data that shows opening a lake to trolling, that has been closed to trolling, will not effect the population, size structure or the fishing success in that same lake, then I think you will have a talking point that is valid.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 581
| FSF - 2/28/2013 4:21 PM
The pro trolling crowd needs to get their act together, and figure out whether they will "inject thousands of dollars" into the local economy, or the pressure won't increase any.
I'm sure that there would be some additional pressure. But between Iron, Vilas and Oneida counties there are 2,000+ lakes. Another 500+ in Sawyer. Obviously, the pressure would be spread out. Local communities though, certainly would stand to benefit economically.
Believe it or not, the two concepts aren't mutually exclusive. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 581
| FSF - 2/28/2013 4:33 PM
When they come up with some hard data that shows opening a lake to trolling, that has been closed to trolling, will not effect the population, size structure or the fishing success in that same lake, then I think you will have a talking point that is valid.
Don't you think that information was gathered by local biologists doing surveys before, during and after the dreaded back trolling days?
The DNR's position can certainly be taken at face value. But if you don't want to accept it, you could request past survey data from specific lakes from the local fisheries biologist.
Edited by Matt DeVos 2/28/2013 4:55 PM
|
|
| |
|
| Matt DeVos - 2/28/2013 4:39 PM
FSF - 2/28/2013 4:33 PM
When they come up with some hard data that shows opening a lake to trolling, that has been closed to trolling, will not effect the population, size structure or the fishing success in that same lake, then I think you will have a talking point that is valid.
Don't you think that information was gathered by local biologists doing surveys before, during and after the dreaded back trolling days?
Actually, no.
I think the backtrolling thing took the DNR unaware, and had unaticipated consequences and reactions. Nor do I think they got effective data in the face of rising size limits, increasing education, and decreasing harvest, nor do I think two seasons makes for hard data when talking about catch results. Every season is extremely variable, and as has been demonstrated in the past, year classes, and year class survival, also quite variable. I'm always hoping but never optimistic about DNR fish data unless it is really firm, and this data unfortunately I consider, very soft. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4343
Location: Smith Creek | Creel surveys are extremely accurate, right? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 581
| Guest - 2/28/2013 4:54 PM
Matt DeVos - 2/28/2013 4:39 PM
FSF - 2/28/2013 4:33 PM
When they come up with some hard data that shows opening a lake to trolling, that has been closed to trolling, will not effect the population, size structure or the fishing success in that same lake, then I think you will have a talking point that is valid.
Don't you think that information was gathered by local biologists doing surveys before, during and after the dreaded back trolling days?
Actually, no.
I think the backtrolling thing took the DNR unaware, and had unaticipated consequences and reactions. Nor do I think they got effective data in the face of rising size limits, increasing education, and decreasing harvest, nor do I think two seasons makes for hard data when talking about catch results. Every season is extremely variable, and as has been demonstrated in the past, year classes, and year class survival, also quite variable. I'm always hoping but never optimistic about DNR fish data unless it is really firm, and this data unfortunately I consider, very soft.
Yet, you are talking about the same data they use to effectively manage the resource, right? Spring and fall fish population surveys, creel surveys, etc.?
And just so I understand, are you also insinuating that the DNR completely missed the fact that certain fisheries were significantly harmed from '90-'94 due to the back trolling? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 581
| Flambeauski - 2/28/2013 4:59 PM
Creel surveys are extremely accurate, right?
I was referring to actual sampling through use of fyke netting, shocker runs, mark and recapture, etc., in addition to the creel surveys.
I know that I've been able to get a ton of info by requesting all survey information from different biologists from a number of different lakes. It would be interesting to see this type of info from lakes in Vilas/Oneida that got hit hard during the back-trolling days.
Edited by Matt DeVos 2/28/2013 5:11 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | Matt DeVos - 2/28/2013 4:39 PM
FSF - 2/28/2013 4:33 PM
When they come up with some hard data that shows opening a lake to trolling, that has been closed to trolling, will not effect the population, size structure or the fishing success in that same lake, then I think you will have a talking point that is valid.
Don't you think that information was gathered by local biologists doing surveys before, during and after the dreaded back trolling days?
The DNR's position can certainly be taken at face value. But if you don't want to accept it, you could request past survey data from specific lakes from the local fisheries biologist.
One would think, but I don't think it was (I am not sure though). I agree to be a valid research on whether it hurt or not there needs to be catch data before trolling was implemented, during, and then again after to truely compare how it affected lakes. Creel surveys are not done on every lake every year.
It would be nice to be able to read the "Beard 1993" report that was referenced as a reason for it not affecting fisheries. So if anyone has a link to how I can read it that would be much appreciated. Referencing reports/studies should not mean anything to a reader unless they take the time to read the referenced material. Why? Because an article written using a sited source can be using something out of context to get the authors opinion pushed. You would be surprised at how info is perceived after reading an article, and then read the source and find yourself thinking "How did they ever come up with that conclusion based on the cited material." |
|
| |
|
Posts: 130
Location: Madison, WI | Travis, you wrote the following:
"Also trolling most definitely hurt fisheries the last time it was in effect in N. WI. THAT is a fact that cannot be disputed!"
Making a statement like that - I assumed you had some basis. What is it?
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 581
| Here is some interesting data from 1996, comparing catch/harvest rates in '96 with harvest rates in '93-'95 for walleye (look at pages 14-15) in and also comparing similar info for muskies in '96, as compared to '90-'95 (page 16), within ceded territories.
http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/fishing/documents/ceded/walleye96.pdf
From this information, it is pretty tough to make the case that either walleye or muskie were harmed during back-trolling days. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | looks like vilas county needs a trout pond ... |
|
| |
|
Location: Sawyer County, WI |
I'm not in favor of it the way it is currently written. If it were for one line per angler I could live with it, otherwise no. We're on a "no trolling" lake right now so it could change the dynamic on the water quite a bit.
Mr Musky - 2/28/2013 3:02 PM
Well we know the stance of Vilas county lakes. Whats the take on the rest of the Sawyer County lakes? Currently there's only a handful of LARGE lakes that can be trolled over there with the exception of Whitefish. How bout the Chippewa Flowage? There was a motion to allow trolling there a few years ago and to my knowledge that got shot down bigtime. |
|
| |
|
| Matt DeVos - 2/28/2013 5:44 PM
Here is some interesting data from 1996, comparing catch/harvest rates in '96 with harvest rates in '93-'95 for walleye (look at pages 14-15 ) in and also comparing similar info for muskies in '96, as compared to '90-'95 (page 16 ), within ceded territories.
http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/fishing/documents/ceded/walleye96.pdf
From this information, it is pretty tough to make the case that either walleye or muskie were harmed during back-trolling days.
Matt, with all due respect to the WI DNR, they themselves call the data highly variable(ie 20" + walleyes were removed at rates varying from 0-277%), and try and normalize it by pointing out certain lakes throwing the data off, but the truth here is that this is a very limited number of lakes, and I can't see that this proves much of anything. Not even sure why it would be cited as proof that "backtrolling had little effect", but the existance of this data does little to convince me that anything has been shown in relation to lakes which would be newly opened to trolling.
Also, be it noted that we were talking about back trolling in the early 90's and that, as a fishing method, it was only somewhat utilized for walleye and other smaller gamefish and panfish and really hadn't been keyed in as a musky tool until a few guys got out there, took advantage of the regs and began exploiting some populations. Now we are talking about potentially opening lakes throughout the state to forward trolling, which is much more effective and easier to do with any watercraft, and will often include 3-9 rods, where as backtrolling (as practiced by most fisherman targeting smaller species, was generally difficult with more than 2-3 rods). I'm thinking, yes, there will be a difference. Think of clean lakes with well defined weedlines, or darkwater lakes with shallow weedlines, midlake humps, points, bars, and I'm thinking trolling will indeed clear the fish off them in a big way.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8823
| It stands to reason, FSF. There are a lot of lakes where the fish are suspended much of the year and only accessible to guys like Travis who will go out there and fish deep and fish open water. I've only had experience trolling maybe 10 days on the water, but thinking about what you could do to those lakes with a few boards, a few downrigger balls and an out rod on either side of the boat? You could cover a 500 acre lake in two hours, and cover every inch of it, contacting fish that ordinarily would not even see a lure during the season. And you KNOW that if someone went out there and had a 5 fish day that they'd be out there again and again and again. You could dramatically alter a fishery with one or two boats.
Not that you can't do that row trolling, but so few guys row troll with so few boats, that those lakes are and have been relatively unfished. I've fished enough of them to understand that the ONLY reason those lakes have quality fish is because there are only a handful of people fishing them, and often times those few people are fishing shoreline structure that does NOT hold the majority of fish in the lake. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1760
Location: new richmond, wi. & isle, mn | I'll vote for no "jake breaking on lakes under 500 acres " |
|
| |
|
Posts: 581
| FSF - 2/28/2013 9:22 PM
Matt, with all due respect to the WI DNR, they themselves call the data highly variable(ie 20" + walleyes were removed at rates varying from 0-277%), and try and normalize it by pointing out certain lakes throwing the data off, but the truth here is that this is a very limited number of lakes, and I can't see that this proves much of anything. Not even sure why it would be cited as proof that "backtrolling had little effect", but the existance of this data does little to convince me that anything has been shown in relation to lakes which would be newly opened to trolling.
Also, be it noted that we were talking about back trolling in the early 90's and that, as a fishing method, it was only somewhat utilized for walleye and other smaller gamefish and panfish and really hadn't been keyed in as a musky tool until a few guys got out there, took advantage of the regs and began exploiting some populations. Now we are talking about potentially opening lakes throughout the state to forward trolling, which is much more effective and easier to do with any watercraft, and will often include 3-9 rods, where as backtrolling (as practiced by most fisherman targeting smaller species, was generally difficult with more than 2-3 rods). I'm thinking, yes, there will be a difference. Think of clean lakes with well defined weedlines, or darkwater lakes with shallow weedlines, midlake humps, points, bars, and I'm thinking trolling will indeed clear the fish off them in a big way.
The point is that we're still looking for some form of data to suggest that the back-trolling days harmed the fishery. This data might not be conclusive, but it certainly is suggestive that there was zero harm done.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 275
| millsie - 2/28/2013 4:24 PM
Sowhat you are saying is that because you don't like to troll nobody should be allowed to do it.
You are allowed to fish where trolling is allowed now, I'm saying that others have the right to fish lakes without competing with trollers as well. Some trolling lakes.....some non-trolling lakes! Seems like a win win compromise.
Jaimy |
|
| |
|
Posts: 20248
Location: oswego, il | I think sled said it best earlier in this thread, when all is said and done it will be voted down. You can bet every single person not in favor will vote. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4343
Location: Smith Creek | BMuskyX - 3/1/2013 8:42 AM
millsie - 2/28/2013 4:24 PM
Sowhat you are saying is that because you don't like to troll nobody should be allowed to do it.
You are allowed to fish where trolling is allowed now, I'm saying that others have the right to fish lakes without competing with trollers as well. Some trolling lakes.....some non-trolling lakes! Seems like a win win compromise.
Jaimy
It is. But people who troll want to troll on waters they can't. No different than a snowmobile club telling the forest service they want to use the cross country ski trails. Their own trails are too noisy and overcrowded. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 89
| Wow I've heard some good comments. Some that bring attention to thoughts in issues that I am not aware of. But there are some people who really need their fingers stapled together. I can see both sides of the story. I do both, but I have watched a walleye lakes That had little structure and deep water forage get overharvested. On a small lake word travels way too fast. It was not only the trolling but the ice fishing that did the damage also. Too many people sit out there day after day with 3 tip ups filling there limits. I would love to troll statewide but I know there are issues.
" Just when I thought you couldn't be any dumber, You go ahead and totally redeem yourself!"
" Just when I thought you couldn't get any dumber, you go ahead and totally redeem yourself!"
|
|
| |
|
| I think those who make an economic arguement for trolling are not looking at the whole picture. One of the reasons folks still come in large numbers to Oneida and Vilas counties is for the relative peace on those bodies of water. Yes, on hot summer days you have pwc, skiiers, etc. but that is really not a big part of the fishing season. I have a place in Oneida county and maybe 10% of the muskie season sees recreational boating. Nothing at night and very little when the air temps are below 75. Take a look at the weather history charts and you will see that is not a big part of the season.
With trolling, you will have lot more motor boat activity, it will be at night, on cold days and in the fall. Many folks come north for peace and quiet. Motor trolling will not improve that. Motor trolling enthusiasts are far outnumbered by the casual fisherman who is looking to relax. I believe if this passes, you will see fewer, rather than more visitors. I do not have emperical data to support this opinion but I have been going to N. WI for over 4 decades and know what people tell me about why they come north. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1828
| I wonder if you [WI] guys would even be having this discussion if it wasn't for the 3-lines/person allowance. Trolling 6, 9, or 12 lines behind a boat, although tough to manage, could give darn-near every musky a tooth ache on a small lake in a day. To me, three lines per person is just silly. But I'm from MN, so what do I know? I personally can't imagine walleye fishing without trolling being legal. For muskies, I could do without it, if I had to.
I think it's nice to have certain lakes where NO motors are allowed whatsoever, just as it is to have some walking-only forests. With those relations I can understand the desire to have casting-only lakes. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | I love when everyone gets all riled up ... it means the ice will be off soon.
Edited by jonnysled 3/1/2013 3:07 PM
|
|
| |
|
| Is there water skiing and such allowed on these lakes? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4343
Location: Smith Creek | Gelb gets ready for Autumn muskie fishing by pulling water skiers around in August in his row boat. |
|
| |
|
| Yes, Ben there is water skiing allowed on these lakes. But, as I said in an earlier post, that represents a very small percentage of the musky season or the fishing season for that matter. With motor trolling it does not stop because the temp is under 75. I have a place on the water in Oneida county, a class A musky lake. We probably have 4 or 5 weeks out of the year where there is much water skiing or pwc activity. But, we have fishermen on the lake regardless of the weather from ice out to ice up. With trolling there will be motors running from early May to late November. Big difference there but I think you refuse to acknowlege it.
What I get a kick out of is how water skiiers are always a bugaboo for musky fisherman but yet the time of year and day when they are most active is when the water temps are such that we are told we should not be fishing for muskies. Please note, I don't water ski or have a pwc. |
|
| |
|
| I was just curious, the hiking, cross country skiing, sledding comparison seemed odd to me unless the casters are rowing to their spots;) BR |
|
| |
|
| For casters only a small percentage of time is spent with the outboard running. The last full weekend I fished last year, in late October, we spent about 18 hours on the water. At most, the outboard was running 45 minutes all together. Had we been trolling, it would have been reversed. Again, it is personal preference, I simply would prefer not to have motor trolling. But I have no scientific reason to oppose it. |
|
| |
|
| BenR - 3/1/2013 3:26 PM
Is there water skiing and such allowed on these lakes?
In our area, yes. But there are restrictions. Personal water craft hours are 11:00 am to 4:00 pm. Water Skiing is allowed between 11:00 and 5:00 pm. It is also illegal to operate a ski boat or personal watercraft within 200 feet of a shoreline (except when leaving from/returning to shore) or within 200 feet of another boat. |
|
| |
|
| So the only people who do not use motors are basically row trollers. BR |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8823
| BenR - 3/1/2013 6:02 PM
So the only people who do not use motors are basically row trollers. BR
You're welcome to use a motor all you want. But you must operate your boat in a "no wake fashion", defined as "as slowly as possible while still maintaining steering control" within 200 feet of any shoreline, including islands.
It would be pretty entertaining to see how one might troll effectively without violating any of the local ordinances... Pretty difficult to not be within 200 feet of something in a lot of places. |
|
| |
|
| I'm glad I read this thread. Never knew all I had to do was go out and aimlessly troll and have a legitimate enough chance to catch every fish in the lake in a single afternoon that everyone would worry about me doing so. Fish must just jump at any bait pulled by them. Never knew it could be so easy, or that there were thousands of people waiting to rush north as soon as trolling would be allowed. I feel enlightened to the fullest. |
|
| |
|
| Hmmm…just read through this thread. (And I did read through all 7-8 pages) I’m in no way a policy expert, so I have a question. If the DNR is (or isn’t?) the agency who decides on what fishing regulations are on the books regarding legal seasons, size limits, bag limits, etc---why would they need a public vote to make a change in policy (law) regarding what lakes can be trolled or not? |
|
| |
|
| This is also a real chance to work with resorts, I recall that trying to get higher limits many resorts were not in favor of. A partnership with resorts to create a situation to generate more business might go a long way in keeping their support for further positive regulations for muskie management. BR |
|
| |
|
| Question - 3/1/2013 6:43 PM
Hmmm…just read through this thread. (And I did read through all 7-8 pages) I’m in no way a policy expert, so I have a question. If the DNR is (or isn’t?) the agency who decides on what fishing regulations are on the books regarding legal seasons, size limits, bag limits, etc---why would they need a public vote to make a change in policy (law) regarding what lakes can be trolled or not?
What else would keep Wisconsin's vast array of armchair biologists occupied? |
|
| |
|
| Question, might it be that we live in a democracy? Just a wild guess there. |
|
| |
|
| North of 8 - 3/1/2013 7:04 PM
Question, might it be that we live in a democracy? Just a wild guess there.
That didn't seem to impact writing the rest of the rules into the books?? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32922
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | 'Hmmm…just read through this thread. (And I did read through all 7-8 pages) I’m in no way a policy expert, so I have a question. If the DNR is (or isn’t?) the agency who decides on what fishing regulations are on the books regarding legal seasons, size limits, bag limits, etc---why would they need a public vote to make a change in policy (law) regarding what lakes can be trolled or not?'
Why?
The Conservation Congress. Look it up. Not armchair biologists for sure...just attend one this April. Changes have been made and will continue to be made, and some of us here hope the DNR Fisheries folks will end up being able to do what they do best in the future.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 57
Location: Janesville wi | Rules and confusion turn people away from fishing. If state wide trolling gets rid of any confusion or grey areas I'm all for it.
Trolling and casters would learn to deal with each other. |
|
| |
|
| sworrall - 3/1/2013 8:07 PM
'Hmmm…just read through this thread. (And I did read through all 7-8 pages) I’m in no way a policy expert, so I have a question. If the DNR is (or isn’t?) the agency who decides on what fishing regulations are on the books regarding legal seasons, size limits, bag limits, etc---why would they need a public vote to make a change in policy (law) regarding what lakes can be trolled or not?'
Why?
The Conservation Congress. Look it up. Not armchair biologists for sure...just attend one this April. Changes have been made and will continue to be made, and some of us here hope the DNR Fisheries folks will end up being able to do what they do best in the future.
Thanks Steve...that helps. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8823
| Without rules, there'd be nothing left to fish for... If there's one thing that history has proven, it's that letting people do whatever they want, wherever they want and whenever they want will cause them to do exactly that. And they will do so without regard to anyone or anything except themselves and their perceived "rights"... |
|
| |
|
| wiswimbait - 3/1/2013 8:27 PM
Rules and confusion turn people away from fishing. .
No, not really, there have been rules and confusion throughout regulated fishing, and it is amazing that some of the more illiterate states have some of the more complex regulations, still plenty of fishermpeople.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 57
Location: Janesville wi | Seriously?
I'm not saying we should just let people do whatever they want. I was only talking of trolling. Trollers will still have to follow all the other laws like size limits so I don't think there will be nothing left. Some lakes are better for casting,some for trolling,and others for both. Guys will roll into lakes that fit their style.
I rarely fish out of a motor powered boat and I have no problem reading the book from cover to cover so the state wide trolling won't benefit me at all. The sky won't fall.
Edited by wiswimbait 3/1/2013 9:44 PM
|
|
| |
|
Location: The Yahara Chain | I had no idea that trolling was so easy and so loud.
I haven't scene one legitimate point made by the anti- trollers.
Can somebody please point me to studies that show where trolling 'ruins' a fishery. It is a method that is allowed everywhere else in the world, surely there are lots of examples of trolling destroying lakes all around the world. Can somebody please point me to such a study?? |
|
| |
|
| Bytor - 3/2/2013 1:38 PM
I had no idea that trolling was so easy and so loud.
I haven't scene one legitimate point made by the anti- trollers.
Can somebody please point me to studies that show where trolling 'ruins' a fishery. It is a method that is allowed everywhere else in the world, surely there are lots of examples of trolling destroying lakes all around the world. Can somebody please point me to such a study??
I was going to say the same thing, you guys here pounding trolling like its the easy way to catch a muskie, do you truly believe the muskies are going to jump right in? trolling is an art and to any guy that thinks casting a lure behind the boat and driving around in circles is trolling? you have no clue what it is. trust me your lakes get more abuse casting then trolling will ever do. good luck to whatever happens to your state but trolling is the last thing that hurts your fisheries. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | troll the rainbow ...
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1106
Location: Muskegon Michigan | If folks in Vilas county don't want trolling its none of my business. What they do on their side of the border does not make any difference to me. Trolling is legal in Michigan and that includes border waters on our side of the state line. If you guys in Vilas want to troll just fish the border waters and fish the Michigan side. This is the beauty of our country. Each state can have it the way they want it. There are plenty of lakes in Wisconsin where trolling is legal.
As for effecting the numbers and pressure? Ive been trolling here in Michigan for near 40 years and have never seen any effect either way. All this stuff about planer boards and too many lines. We can run three per man plus sliders. You dont do this on a small lake because you would spend more cleaning lines then catching fish. Its relative. On st. clair we go all out, boards sliders, maximum rods but on little 200 acre lakes we use two to four rods all boat rods no boards and only troll around the lake a couple times to rest from 3 to 4 hours of casting. In reality that is how its done.
My guess is very few people would change the way they fish anyway. Every year we get the same 4 arguments on this board. How big do they get, sucker rigs, world records fights and should you troll in Vilas county. What ever Vilas wants to do is fine with me, I dont have to fish there. Mike |
|
| |
|
Location: Sawyer County, WI | Can somebody please point me to studies that show where trolling boosts the economy ?
That argument is as silly as some of the arguments against trolling.
Bytor - 3/2/2013 1:38 PM
I had no idea that trolling was so easy and so loud.
I haven't scene one legitimate point made by the anti- trollers.
Can somebody please point me to studies that show where trolling 'ruins' a fishery. It is a method that is allowed everywhere else in the world, surely there are lots of examples of trolling destroying lakes all around the world. Can somebody please point me to such a study?? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 265
Location: Hudson,WI | muskyhunter47 - 2/26/2013 7:34 PM
here in minnesota we get one line dont matter if your casting trolling or using a sucker. one is all you get, i seen a musky show he was using 6 lines im hoping one of the lines was his camra mans. it would be nice to use more then one line but we cant may be i neen to head east start fishing wi
Nope, No muskies over here
I perfer to cast, but I'd like to be able to troll once in a while without needing some sort of degree to interpret the regs. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 566
Location: Elgin, IL | Bytor - 3/2/2013 1:38 PM
Can somebody please point me to studies that show where trolling 'ruins' a fishery. It is a method that is allowed everywhere else in the world, surely there are lots of examples of trolling destroying lakes all around the world. Can somebody please point me to such a study??
No, there is no such study. Just the opinion of some that think that every fish hooked while trolling will die. Therefore, decimating every lake and stream of any living creature.
If this ever passes, which it won't as written, I will offer to buy some of you some earmuffs to drown out the trolling noise. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 667
Location: Roscoe IL | My family, friends & I have been fishing Northern Wisconsin for over 20 years now. In the last 10 I have yet to see the DNR out checking anyone, much less catching a boat trolling when it shouldn't be. I do see locals engaging someone when they see something wrong now an again, and not in a bad way. This happened last year on a lake in Tomahawk, a boat was trolling in an area that's not allowed and when they stopped they pulled up close and nicely explained the law. No screaming, no ill will, just a hey did you know.. The DNR is spread out so thin, it's too bad really. But it's very cool to see others taking ownership. Things seem to be going pretty good right now, I say if it ain't broke don't break it. |
|
| |
|
| Northwind Mark - 3/4/2013 12:00 PM
Bytor - 3/2/2013 1:38 PM
Can somebody please point me to studies that show where trolling 'ruins' a fishery. It is a method that is allowed everywhere else in the world, surely there are lots of examples of trolling destroying lakes all around the world. Can somebody please point me to such a study??
No, there is no such study. Just the opinion of some that think that every fish hooked while trolling will die. Therefore, decimating every lake and stream of any living creature.
If this ever passes, which it won't as written, I will offer to buy some of you some earmuffs to drown out the trolling noise.
Why is a trolled hook fish going to die, and a casting hook fish not going to die? please explain this because it makes Zero sense |
|
| |
|
| It's not just about muskies,we have many lakes that the walleyes suspend and are virtually uncatchable by any other means.let the trollers target those fish and with the right slot limits 17-28inch our tourist and locals will be able to catch and release more fish,and keep them coming back to the north woods.the north woods really need the tourism. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 501
Location: S.Wisconsin | I say yes all the way...will I troll probly not but it would be nice to run suckers wile working structure and such. Just because its legal I doubt there will be a bunch of guys trolling puddles. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | I'd be ok with 1 line. That means 1 line, not one in and one casting. If you want to troll suckers, pay attention to that sucker line only.
I wouldn't be opposed to lakes 1000 acres or larger going to 2 lines, but then you'd leave it up to the anglers to know how big of lakes their fishing, so there lies a huge excuse.
Heck, people are trolling up here all the time anyways. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| "I say yes all the way...will I troll probly not but it would be nice to run suckers wile working structure and such. Just because its legal I doubt there will be a bunch of guys trolling puddles."
I'm totally against trolling on the smaller lakes but if trolling passes I will be the first one out there doing it because like mentioned in the other trolling post the bite isnt going to last long. Might as well pound the snot out of one little lake and head to the next. With a 500 acre or less lake fish cant hide from 9 lines. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | if they get trolling you will be line-limited (more than likely) ... do you still want to "work the shoreline" when you have to pick 1 sucker or 1 casting line? i highly doubt it will ever be 2 suckers and 1 casting line if motor trolling is legalized. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | Agreed. At most, 1 line and one trolling line. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 566
Location: Elgin, IL | 2 lines a man would be nice.
Then how many hooks per line?
Does a treble hook count as 3 hooks then?
I also wonder if this passed.....would it increase the number of entries in the Tournaments that are held up that way? Not that I care, just wondering if it would create more interest to enter if you could troll a line or two. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| And do you think the Salmon charters, bago trollers,GB trollers, and everybody that can currently troll would be cool with 1 or 2 lines? I highly doubt it. |
|
| |
|
| You guys are funny! We troll a 400 acre lake here in Indiana all the time, with 4-5 lines. We didn't fish it out, plenty of nice fish left for the casters. Indiana DNR stocks it @ 1 fish per acre, and we have caught a lot of nice fish there. The biggest danger to the Muskies there are the locals, they hate them! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8823
| hambone - 3/5/2013 12:54 PM
You guys are funny! We troll a 400 acre lake here in Indiana all the time, with 4-5 lines. We didn't fish it out, plenty of nice fish left for the casters. Indiana DNR stocks it @ 1 fish per acre, and we have caught a lot of nice fish there. The biggest danger to the Muskies there are the locals, they hate them!
That's the difference - the IN DNR stocks 400 fish in there every season. Many of the lakes in Vilas rely on natural reproduction alone. |
|
| |
|
| Mr Musky - 3/5/2013 12:46 PM
And do you think the Salmon charters, bago trollers,GB trollers, and everybody that can currently troll would be cool with 1 or 2 lines? I highly doubt it.
You make it sound like its not possible, pay attention now.
In Canada you know the country north of you?
Ontario we are allowed two lines in the Great Lakes with a total of 12 hook points per line, if you don't know math 4 trebles. Georgian bay is an exception where it is not part of the Great Lake you are allowed one (1) line with 12 hook points, yup you got it its easy to troll, remember trollers clean out lakes, and guess what they have salmon and walleye charters in georgian bay, you got it one (1) line per man that's it.
It works and works well to all guys here that are saying it doesn't work, are just crazy and hate change.
Now 3 lines per man like some of the states are, I can only imagine that in ontario, I wouldn't even know where to start. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | in Indiana we ....
lol |
|
| |
|
Posts: 273
| Chalk me up for a yes vote. It would definetely simply things and would make sucker fishing the way most people do it legal. |
|
| |
|
| jonnysled - 3/5/2013 2:50 PM
in Indiana we ....
lol
I have been to WI and IN, I can see the comparison:) |
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| I will say we have it pretty #*^@ good here in Wisconsin, our rules and regulations work just fine. I feel pretty bad for you folks who are only allowed one line. I can only hope things dont change around here. WE like it that way. |
|
| |
|
| Mr Musky - 3/5/2013 3:26 PM
I will say we have it pretty #*^@ good here in Wisconsin, our rules and regulations work just fine. I feel pretty bad for you folks who are only allowed one line. I can only hope things dont change around here. WE like it that way.
You sound like your speaking or have spoken to everyone in your state that fish, when you say WE you mean YOU, like I said before change seems to bother many. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8823
| Guest - 3/5/2013 5:07 PM
Mr Musky - 3/5/2013 3:26 PM
I will say we have it pretty #*^@ good here in Wisconsin, our rules and regulations work just fine. I feel pretty bad for you folks who are only allowed one line. I can only hope things dont change around here. WE like it that way.
You sound like your speaking or have spoken to everyone in your state that fish, when you say WE you mean YOU, like I said before change seems to bother many.
Change is welcome only when it's good. So far the only reasons I've seen to allow trolling in Vilas County are:
1. It didn't wreck the fisheries in (insert place that is not Vilas County)
2. Because I want to be able to troll there.
|
|
| |
|
Location: Sawyer County, WI |
You forgot the ever popular "it will boost the local economy" argument.
esoxaddict - 3/5/2013 5:59 PM
Change is welcome only when it's good. So far the only reasons I've seen to allow trolling in Vilas County are:
1. It didn't wreck the fisheries in (insert place that is not Vilas County)
2. Because I want to be able to troll there.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | Boosting and giving those who visit more options to fish, are two different things. What's hurting tourism up there is the cost to go, the reduced bag limits, bigger fish in other states, lack of longer snow seasons and crowding or preceived crowding on lakes.
Personally, I see no reason not to allow 1-2 line trolling up there. |
|
| |
|
| You guys are missing one of the big points the dnr is trying to push,uniform regs across the state .3 lines per angler and no separation from a 100 acre lake or a 10,000 acre lake ,same regs for the entire state. They will not differentiate from north to south.one set o f regs statewide so you don,t have to fish with a lawyer and a nun in Wisconsin anymore!finally |
|
| |
|
| In Indiana, the DNR stocks @ one fish per acre, but our fish don't reproduce naturally, and I doubt all of the fish they stock make it to adulthood. I also think the guys casting on our lakes do better than the guys that troll with 3 lines. It's just a different tool to hunt them. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | start an Indiana trolling thread |
|
| |
|
| Sorry for the wrong thread Mr. Sled. How about this? We also troll a bunch of lakes around Hayward WISCONSIN 5 to 6 trips a year, and seldom see anybody else trolling, mostly guys casting. They seem to have plenty of nice fish. Caught my 1st Musky on Star Lake over 30 years ago. We fished your county a lot then, beautiful land! Thanks for having us up! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 968
Location: N.FIB | when do they vote on this and when will we find out if it passes,I can see both sides on this and don`t care if it passes or not. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1296
Location: Hayward, Wisconsin | http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/fishing/documents/rules/motortrollingpropos... |
|
| |
|
| I have to admit there are times when I don't go to Vilas County simply because you cannot troll up there. It's fun to cast up there but if I'm going spend a week musky fishing for 6 straight days I would like to take a break and troll every now and then.
That's when we book our trip to Minnesota or Indiana even. 6 guys renting a cabin plus gas money and all the trimmings for a week must cost us close to $2500 dollars total. That's taking money out of Wisconsin and putting it into another state. That's real money lost because you cannot troll Vilas or Oneida.
Didn't a state record come out of Michigan this year weighing in at 58 pounds? They've been able to troll 3 lines in Michigan for the past 30+ years. It doesn't look like it harmed their fishery.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8823
| Guest - 3/6/2013 11:32 AM
[...]
.
Didn't a state record come out of Michigan this year weighing in at 58 pounds? They've been able to troll 3 lines in Michigan for the past 30+ years. It doesn't look like it harmed their fishery.
How do you know? Maybe 30 years of trolling is what makes fish like that a once in a lifetime catch. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 397
| I have fished around webster where they allow trolling. I fish some small lakes and have not felt pressured. I think that when main motor trolling limit it to 1 line per person. I know more is better, but it may make more people feel the want to go along with it |
|
| |
|
Location: Grand Rapids, MI | esoxaddict - 3/6/2013 2:55 PM Guest - 3/6/2013 11:32 AM [...] .
Didn't a state record come out of Michigan this year weighing in at 58 pounds? They've been able to troll 3 lines in Michigan for the past 30+ years. It doesn't look like it harmed their fishery.
How do you know? Maybe 30 years of trolling is what makes fish like that a once in a lifetime catch. Spearing and habitat degradation is what causes our low density, not trolling don't drag Michigan into this silly discussion. Just to correct the facts... three lines has only been legal for a few years on any inland waters, before that it was two lines. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 271
Location: Oregon, WI | Don't really have an opinion about the trolling issue, but it is a nice to take a break from casting and still be fishing. One thing is for sure, they need to get rid of the "gray" definition of trolling vs. position fishing when dragging meat. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 15
| the only thing i dont like about the topic is knowing that all the pleasure boaters with no respect and there pontoon boats zig-zagging around us fisherman can now through out a line or 2, and that boat that that would never know what to do with a muskie or how to handle it would could put a fish or two in the boat and those fish probably will die without the proper handling tools.. with that being said most of the people that are goin to be out trolling with 6-10 lines are serious anglers with the gear to properly handle the fish, muskie stuff aint cheap. i do believe that everyone does have a right to fish for all fish that we inherently pay for in what ever way shape or form... trolling is not a garrentee by any means i have spent many hour trolling on lakes that do not get any trolling pressure with no results. the fish might go crazy for it at first cause most these open water fish have never seen a bait come by them before but it will slow down. it will also take pressure off the weed beds that can get pounded day in and day out.
will it deter me from goin out because someone might be trolling the lake i fish... no.. will it take anything outa my pocket.. no..will it take more fish out of a lake... yes.. will it help increase the number of anglers... yes... will it hopefully increase revenue... yes.... do i agree with allowing it... YES! |
|
| |
|
| JLR - 2/26/2013 8:41 PM
Maybe if they make the walleye season match the musky season and larger size li. I find it hard to believe that allowing trolling of three lines per gler is not going to have any negative impaancts on the fisheries, particularly smaller ones. from what I've seen larger lakes have more fisherman with more experience and better equipment. I don't buy the big lake small lake argument. If 3 lines is so bad why not reduce it to 1 line in Vilas? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | Guest - 3/7/2013 12:04 PM
JLR - 2/26/2013 8:41 PM
Maybe if they make the walleye season match the musky season and larger size li. I find it hard to believe that allowing trolling of three lines per gler is not going to have any negative impaancts on the fisheries, particularly smaller ones. from what I've seen larger lakes have more fisherman with more experience and better equipment. I don't buy the big lake small lake argument. If 3 lines is so bad why not reduce it to 1 line in Vilas?
bingo ... because who wants to dunk a sucker and not be able to cast.
slippery slope this one |
|
| |
|
Posts: 656
Location: Forest Lake, Mn. | I remember back in the late 60's or early 70's, I was a kid, Lowrance came out with their little green box flasher fish finder. The first sonar unit made for freshwater fishing. Some of the more conservation minded folk here in Minnesota got all up in arms and worried that these fish finders were going to decimate the fish populations and a bill was introduced in the MN Legislature to ban the use of them. The bill didn't pass and the use of the little green box fish finder was allowed. Nowadays we have units with 10 inch full color screens, GPS, water temps, moon phases, 1 foot contour maps, radar, Sirius radio, all together in one nice unit. Well guess what? We still have plenty of fish in the lakes all over the country. The little green box didn't decimate the fish populations and their modern counterparts have not either.
You guys want to argue about trolling. That's fine, it's your state and you can regulate your fisheries however you want to but to argue that trolling is going to kill the fisheries is nonsense without any logic to it whatsoever. As has been pointed out by others in this thread trolling is allowed in every lake here in MN. It hasn't seemed to hurt the fisheries here for any species. We have great fishing here for walleyes, bass, pike, and muskies. In fact our muskie fisheries are so good that a lot you you guys from WS come here to fish for muskies. If trolling was going kill the fisheries in WS it would have happened years ago here in MN but it hasn't happened as you all know.
I understand you're concerned about over harvest. I agree with that concern but the keyword there is HARVEST. Regulate your harvest and not the fishing method. If you truly feel your fisheries are in danger then work to limit the harvest of fish. Change your bag limits, your seasons, your size limits, slot limits, etc. Doing those things will have more of an impact on the quality of your fishing than keeping trolling illegal. Over harvest kills lakes, you don't have to keep every walleye, pike, bass, muskie you catch as we all know already. Catching a fish by trolling will not increase the harvest over catching a fish by casting. Only keeping fish will increase the harvest and that doesn't matter if the fish was caught trolling, casting, jigging, position fishing, dead bait fishing, live bait fishing, backtrolling, flipping, pitching, drifting, or whatever method you care to mention.
I've trolled for hours, days even, without catching anything just as I've casted for hours and days without catching anything; all the while using the modern Lowrance 10 inch sonar/gps units and I've had days when the fishing was good with big fish or many fish caught and released. Trolling is no sure fired magical guarantee of catching fish and neither is casting nor is the use of the little green box flasher unit or it's modern counterpart.
Bottom line guys, the only thing that is going to kill a fishery is harvesting more fish than the lake can produce, either limit the harvest of fish or increase the stocking production, or both; but to say any particular method of fishing is going to kill a fishery is, as I said already, nonsense without logic.
If you don't like trolling and want it banned still. Fine keep it banned but at least be honest about it and say that it's banned simply because you don't like trolling but don't try and B.S. us and tell us that trolling is going to rape a lake.
Edited by fishpoop 3/15/2013 11:09 AM
|
|
| |
|
Location: The Yahara Chain | Excellant points made by Mr. Fishpoop. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 656
Location: Forest Lake, Mn. | @Bytor:
Thanks for the support. |
|
| |
|
| Nice Post Paul!! Great points |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | Good points fishpoop, but don’t go assuming I or anyone else is against trolling because we simply don’t like it as that is NOT the case with me. I am fine with trolling as a technique. I have done it some in MI.
You are correct we need to manage harvest. I choose to fight this rule change as this is the MOST VIABLE way to manage harvest right now. Until we can get anglers to think about not keeping everything they catch, overbag, etc… we should not open up the trolling in N. WI. Opening it up prior to having the problem under control is the wrong way to go. Get the harvest under control first, and then open it up is what I am for.
|
|
| |
|
Location: 31 | CiscoKid - 3/15/2013 12:21 PM Good points fishpoop, but don’t go assuming I or anyone else is against trolling because we simply don’t like it as that is NOT the case with me. I am fine with trolling as a technique. I have done it some in MI. You are correct we need to manage harvest. I choose to fight this rule change as this is the MOST VIABLE way to manage harvest right now. Until we can get anglers to think about not keeping everything they catch, overbag, etc… we should not open up the trolling in N. WI. Opening it up prior to having the problem under control is the wrong way to go. Get the harvest under control first, and then open it up is what I am for. I hope you agree that Jordan Weeks knows a little more than we do regarding the over harvest concern... I believe he's addressed this pretty well with you on another site.
It's a given that things will most certainly change, and depending on your perspective, there will be some negative and some positive. However, according to Jordan Weeks the current trolling ban is the “poster child” for bad rules in Wisconsin... so according to this expert the positive far outweighs the negative.
|
|
| |
|
Location: 31 | fishpoop - 3/15/2013 10:57 AM I remember back in the late 60's or early 70's, I was a kid, Lowrance came out with their little green box flasher fish finder. The first sonar unit made for freshwater fishing. Some of the more conservation minded folk here in Minnesota got all up in arms and worried that these fish finders were going to decimate the fish populations and a bill was introduced in the MN Legislature to ban the use of them. The bill didn't pass and the use of the little green box fish finder was allowed. Nowadays we have units with 10 inch full color screens, GPS, water temps, moon phases, 1 foot contour maps, radar, Sirius radio, all together in one nice unit. Well guess what? We still have plenty of fish in the lakes all over the country. The little green box didn't decimate the fish populations and their modern counterparts have not either. You guys want to argue about trolling. That's fine, it's your state and you can regulate your fisheries however you want to but to argue that trolling is going to kill the fisheries is nonsense without any logic to it whatsoever. As has been pointed out by others in this thread trolling is allowed in every lake here in MN. It hasn't seemed to hurt the fisheries here for any species. We have great fishing here for walleyes, bass, pike, and muskies. In fact our muskie fisheries are so good that a lot you you guys from WS come here to fish for muskies. If trolling was going kill the fisheries in WS it would have happened years ago here in MN but it hasn't happened as you all know. I understand you're concerned about over harvest. I agree with that concern but the keyword there is HARVEST. Regulate your harvest and not the fishing method. If you truly feel your fisheries are in danger then work to limit the harvest of fish. Change your bag limits, your seasons, your size limits, slot limits, etc. Doing those things will have more of an impact on the quality of your fishing than keeping trolling illegal. Over harvest kills lakes, you don't have to keep every walleye, pike, bass, muskie you catch as we all know already. Catching a fish by trolling will not increase the harvest over catching a fish by casting. Only keeping fish will increase the harvest and that doesn't matter if the fish was caught trolling, casting, jigging, position fishing, dead bait fishing, live bait fishing, backtrolling, flipping, pitching, drifting, or whatever method you care to mention. I've trolled for hours, days even, without catching anything just as I've casted for hours and days without catching anything; all the while using the modern Lowrance 10 inch sonar/gps units and I've had days when the fishing was good with big fish or many fish caught and released. Trolling is no sure fired magical guarantee of catching fish and neither is casting nor is the use of the little green box flasher unit or it's modern counterpart. Bottom line guys, the only thing that is going to kill a fishery is harvesting more fish than the lake can produce, either limit the harvest of fish or increase the stocking production, or both; but to say any particular method of fishing is going to kill a fishery is, as I said already, nonsense without logic. If you don't like trolling and want it banned still. Fine keep it banned but at least be honest about it and say that it's banned simply because you don't like trolling but don't try and B.S. us and tell us that trolling is going to rape a lake. Standing O for this post! The green box story is priceless and along the lines of some Wisconsinites wanting to ban the Suick when introduced because it was an also an unfair advantage. Moving onto the obvious three lines trolling versus the one line in Minnesota forthcoming comparison; I don't see any plausible difference between allowing three line motor trolling versus the current regulation that allows for casting while floating two suckers. Three lines is three lines, especially during prime muskie fishing in the fall. If the ‘perceived problem” is allowing the three line motor trolling versus one line trolling, then I would hope that those opposed to lifting the ban would also be lobbying for “one line period”. That is the nature of the hypothetical question I posed on the other thread, even though that option is not on the ballot it hopefully sheds some light on the subject. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4343
Location: Smith Creek | Catching in MN is great. The fishing sucks, though. And trolling is a factor.
Jerry, you obviously have a lot at stake here, I'm not going to guess or assume why that is, but I know how you can troll in Vilas with no problems at all:
Have a seat on the floor, have Jordan Weeks smash your kneecap in with a sledgehammer.
Then apply for a special trolling permit from the DNR.
Then you can troll to your heart's content. Maybe even catch that 58 1/4 pounder you're after.
Edited by Flambeauski 3/15/2013 1:15 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 656
Location: Forest Lake, Mn. | Flambeauski - 3/15/2013 1:08 PM
Catching in MN is great. The fishing sucks, though. And trolling is a factor.
I would be very interested to hear your reasons why you feel that the, "fishing sucks and trolling is a factor?" Please explain that to me. I really don't understand your point. I don't see how trolling affects your fishing experience in a negative manner if the catching is great. Thanks |
|
| |
|
Posts: 656
Location: Forest Lake, Mn. | CiscoKid - 3/15/2013 12:21 PM
Good points fishpoop, but don’t go assuming I or anyone else is against trolling because we simply don’t like it as that is NOT the case with me. I am fine with trolling as a technique. I have done it some in MI.
You are correct we need to manage harvest. I choose to fight this rule change as this is the MOST VIABLE way to manage harvest right now. Until we can get anglers to think about not keeping everything they catch, overbag, etc… we should not open up the trolling in N. WI. Opening it up prior to having the problem under control is the wrong way to go. Get the harvest under control first, and then open it up is what I am for.
Muskies Inc started in the late 60's and I think it was in the very early 70's that they started to preach catch and release and unless I'm very mistaken they were the first in the nation to do so. As the 70's progressed other major fishing organizations, publications, and businesses started to pick up on the catch and release bandwagon. At some point in the 80's In-Fisherman started to preach selective harvest of fish, keeping small fish only or certain species of fish for eating and releasing everything else. As the years went by all the major fishing industry got on board and the idea of catch and release fishing was everywhere. Even the state DNR's started to preach it in their fishing regulations books.
It's now 2013. How many more years need to go by before the fishing public at large learns that we can't keep everything we catch? I don't know but I'd say you need to put more effort into it rather than blame/ban trolling. Your problem isn't with a particular method of fishing, trolling, but rather with the attitude of the WS fishing public as a whole. It's a cultural problem and not a fishing method problem
If you are having problems in WS with over harvest/poaching, etc then I'd suggest you put your efforts into more Game Wardens and stiffer fines and penalties rather than continue to ban trolling as that just putting your finger in the dike.
Lastly, I was NOT pointing the finger at you or anyone else in particular. So please don'f feel like I was picking on anyone. I'm not here for flame wars, fights, or drama. I was speaking only in general terms. |
|
| |
|
| fishpoop - 3/15/2013 1:37 PM
Your problem isn't with a particular method of fishing, trolling, but rather with the attitude of the WS fishing public as a whole. It's a cultural problem and not a fishing method problem
If you are having problems in WS with over harvest/poaching, etc then I'd suggest you put your efforts into more Game Wardens and stiffer fines and penalties rather than continue to ban trolling as that just putting your finger in the dike.
Great post and I think you hit the nail on the head. Wisconsin needs a cultural shift from the harvest mentality to a C&R mentality. Lots of people practice catch and release in Wisconsin but a lot more still keep anything they catch. It's etched in their brains to keep anything and everything. Northern Wisconsin especially, and they are the ones who should be the champion of catch and release yet everytime a new length limit proposal comes out the North comes out in full force to shoot it down. Until another generation or two goes by I don't see Wisconsin changing in their harvest mentality. I think this rule change is long overdue and it will be a very nice surprise if passed.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 656
Location: Forest Lake, Mn. | @Everyone:
It really doesn't matter to me personally if WS continues to ban trolling or decides to legalize it. It's not going to change my fishing or my life one way or another. I'm not posting about this to start fights, blame people, create drama, or anything else.
My only intent is to point out how silly some of the arguments against motor trolling are, and I'm sorry if that steps on some toes but some of the arguments are silly, based on what we already know about fisheries in other states and Canada that allows motor trolling. Also how silly it is to argue about motor trolling when you look at other technologies that have developed over the years that improve our fishing. Heck no one yells about underwater cameras, GPS, sonar, remote controlled electric motors, etc.
As I said already, if you want to continue to ban motor trolling then fine do so but be honest about the reasons for doing so. Just say it's non traditional in WS waters, or that we simply don't like it, or whatever. Just don't tell me that motor trolling is going to lead to a crash in the fisheries as a whole because we can see that it hasn't in other states nor has the advances in technology done so either.
If there is a problem with WS fisheries, and I don't know if there is or not, then address those issues by changing your bag limits, slot limits, size limits, stocking programs, public education about resources, enforcement of game laws, etc. Put your effort and $$ into what will do some real good. Just don't keep your finger in the dike and blame motor trolling. |
|
| |
|
| fishpoop - 3/15/2013 1:37 PM
Your problem isn't with a particular method of fishing, trolling, but rather with the attitude of the WS fishing public as a whole. It's a cultural problem and not a fishing method problem
If you are having problems in WS with over harvest/poaching, etc then I'd suggest you put your efforts into more Game Wardens and stiffer fines and penalties rather than continue to ban trolling as that just putting your finger in the dike.
Great post and I think you hit the nail on the head. Wisconsin needs a cultural shift from the harvest mentality to a serious C&R mentality. Lots of people practice catch and release in Wisconsin but a lot more still keep anything they catch. It's etched in their brains to keep anything and everything. Northern Wisconsin especially, and they are the ones who should be the champions of catch and release, yet everytime a new length limit proposal comes out the North comes out in full force to shoot it down. Until another generation or two goes by I don't see Wisconsin changing in their harvest mentality. I think this rule change is long overdue and it will be a very nice surprise if passed. I'd love to spend a week in Vilas again.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 4343
Location: Smith Creek | fishpoop - 3/15/2013 1:17 PM
Flambeauski - 3/15/2013 1:08 PM
Catching in MN is great. The fishing sucks, though. And trolling is a factor.
I would be very interested to hear your reasons why you feel that the, "fishing sucks and trolling is a factor?" Please explain that to me. I really don't understand your point. I don't see how trolling affects your fishing experience in a negative manner if the catching is great. Thanks : )
Walleye opener in MN on 100,000 acre lakes is more of a headache than walleye opener in Iron County on a 1000 acre lake. There's more to fishing than catching fish.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32922
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | 'Northern Wisconsin especially, and they are the ones who should be the champion of catch and release yet everytime a new length limit proposal comes out the North comes out in full force to shoot it down'
That's crap. It only takes a few folks to attend a CC meeting to swing a vote. It is those who DO support larger size limits and smaller bag limits who do NOT show up who are the issue. Don't generalize like that, it's just not accurate to do so.
We won the 50" limit on Pelican. The folks who cared enough to show up...did, this time.
'If you are having problems in WS with over harvest/poaching, etc then I'd suggest you put your efforts into more Game Wardens and stiffer fines and penalties rather than continue to ban trolling as that just putting your finger in the dike. '
What does one have to do with the other? And it's not because we 'don't care' or don't want to that we have enforcement weaknesses, it's because the DNR budget has been sliced by the economic disaster that was the latest recession to the point of nearly stupid.
I hate inaccurate, widely strewn generalizations. Keep it real. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 7077
Location: Northwest Chicago Burbs |
Great post and I think you hit the nail on the head. Wisconsin needs a cultural shift from the harvest mentality to a C&R mentality. Lots of people practice catch and release in Wisconsin but a lot more still keep anything they catch. It's etched in their brains to keep anything and everything. Northern Wisconsin especially, and they are the ones who should be the champion of catch and release yet everytime a new length limit proposal comes out the North comes out in full force to shoot it down. Until another generation or two goes by I don't see Wisconsin changing in their harvest mentality. I think this rule change is long overdue and it will be a very nice surprise if passed.
Really? More people keep muskies than release them?
And if trolling were legal...more people would release muskies? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4343
Location: Smith Creek | Yes, because once trolling is made legal the Southerners will show up and teach us Northerners ethics. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 656
Location: Forest Lake, Mn. | sworrall - 3/15/2013 2:04 PM
'If you are having problems in WS with over harvest/poaching, etc then I'd suggest you put your efforts into more Game Wardens and stiffer fines and penalties rather than continue to ban trolling as that just putting your finger in the dike. '
What does one have to do with the other? And it's not because we 'don't care' or don't want to that we have enforcement weaknesses, it's because the DNR budget has been sliced by the economic disaster that was the latest recession to the point of nearly stupid.
I hate inaccurate, widely strewn generalizations. Keep it real.
Steve:
You and I go back a long ways. You know me and that I'm all for protecting all fisheries.
I was replying to another poster that said he was against allowing motor trolling because of concerns that it would lead to over harvest of fish, which it will not. I was trying to point out that rather than spend his time, effort and $$ on fighting motor trolling that he should put his effort into something more productive and useful like lobbying to hire more game wardens and having stiffer fines and penalties for over harvesting. In fact that makes my point. I know there's a recession and major budget cuts but that is exactly why you should be lobbying for more DNR funds rather than a continued ban on motor trolling. Increasing funds for the DNR, enforcement, funds for stocking, etc will have a more positive effect than a continued ban on trolling, will it not?
Nor did I imply or say that you (WS) don't care, or that you don't want to, or aren't working to improve fisheries. You didn't get that from me.
There was nothing inaccurate, widely generalized, nor unreal about my comment. Sorry if you thought so. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32922
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | It was easy to interpret it that way, and some folks were, I knew where you were coming from. No worries anyway, it's a tempest in a teacup that will end with the vote and resulting decision one way or the other. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 656
Location: Forest Lake, Mn. | Flambeauski - 3/15/2013 2:03 PM
fishpoop - 3/15/2013 1:17 PM
Flambeauski - 3/15/2013 1:08 PM
Catching in MN is great. The fishing sucks, though. And trolling is a factor.
I would be very interested to hear your reasons why you feel that the, "fishing sucks and trolling is a factor?" Please explain that to me. I really don't understand your point. I don't see how trolling affects your fishing experience in a negative manner if the catching is great. Thanks : )
Walleye opener in MN on 100,000 acre lakes is more of a headache than walleye opener in Iron County on a 1000 acre lake. There's more to fishing than catching fish.
Ok, thanks. Yes walleye opener in Mn on Mille Lacs can be a zoo. lol I agree with you. But you're blaming trolling for over crowding. It's apples and oranges.
Go out on Mille Lacs on Monday after the opener and you won't have that problem. Most likely you'll have the lake to yourself or close to it. Go across Hwy 169 from Mille Lacs to Bordon Lake, about 1,000 acres or so and the same as your Iron County lake, on that same opening day and you won't have the problem either. Trolling isn't the problem there it's opening day madness and overcrowding. I don't fish Mille Lacs myself on opening day either. lol Just finding a parking place can make you swear.
I do agree with you, there is more to fishing than catching fish. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 656
Location: Forest Lake, Mn. | sworrall - 3/15/2013 2:47 PM
It was easy to interpret it that way, and some folks were, I knew where you were coming from. No worries anyway, it's a tempest in a teacup that will end with the vote and resulting decision one way or the other.
Glad you understand me and what I was trying to say. No worries.
This is a WS issue and WS will have to solve it. I think I've said all I can say about the subject. People will either listen to, and think about, my points or they will not.
I just hope you guys make good choices to improve your fishing for all species. I also hope we here in MN continue on with improving our fisheries too. |
|
| |
|
Location: Sawyer County, WI | Let's be honest here - (over) harvest isn't a Wisconsin problem, it's a human problem. While I don't have hard statistics (yet), the over bagging convictions I've seen in my area appear to be equally distributed between Wisconsin residents and those from out of state.
Show me a state in the nation where there aren't greedy SOBs. We have our fair share of them in Wisconsin, but I believe the most egregious examples of greed come out of Madison. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | fishpoop - 3/15/2013 1:37 PM
It's now 2013. How many more years need to go by before the fishing public at large learns that we can't keep everything we catch? I don't know but I'd say you need to put more effort into it rather than blame/ban trolling. Your problem isn't with a particular method of fishing, trolling, but rather with the attitude of the WS fishing public as a whole. It's a cultural problem and not a fishing method problem
If you are having problems in WS with over harvest/poaching, etc then I'd suggest you put your efforts into more Game Wardens and stiffer fines and penalties rather than continue to ban trolling as that just putting your finger in the dike.
Fishpoop you are right it is not a trolling problem with overharvest. But because we already have a lot of fisherman that don't make an effort to care for a resource trolling will aid in compounding the real problem. You don't fix a problem by making it eaiser to accomplish the problem. To allow trolling and then try and correct the problem of overharvest/keeping everything is backwards. Get overharvest/keeping everything under control first, and then open up to trolling or what ever other means a person wants to do to catch fish. Yes keeping trolling under wraps is a finger in the dike, but if you take that finger out and allow trolling guess what you are possibly aloowing? The hole could get larger in that dike and eventually break the dike.
Suggesting we spend time, money, and effort into trying to enforce laws, stricter penalties, and getting more DNR officials is not a viable option. We can all scream all we want for these things, in fact some of us have been, but we are not the ones that make the decisions. I wish it was that easy. Maybe you have some insight in how we might achieve what you suggest? I would love to know how we can get game wardens on our lakes to enforce laws. How we can make the call to hire a bunch more game wardens. This stuff is out of our hands. Meanwhile we can try and keep the finger in the dike and keep the trolling from coming until other pieces that could correct the problem are put in place.
I agree trolling is not the problem, but it could add gas to the fire that we can't control for the most part. Or in your terms it is letting the dike spring a few leaks because some people feel we need to remove that finger so our rules are simpler.
Also please use "WI" for Wisconsin. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | Jerry Newman - 3/15/2013 12:40 PM
I hope you agree that Jordan Weeks knows a little more than we do regarding the over harvest concern... I believe he's addressed this pretty well with you on another site. It's a given that things will most certainly change, and depending on your perspective, there will be some negative and some positive. However, according to Jordan Weeks the current trolling ban is the “poster child” for bad rules in Wisconsin... so according to this expert the positive far outweighs the negative.
Know more than us on the overharvest concern? It's a concern we are speaking of. An opinion. To tell me he knows my opinion better than myself is kinda silly isn't it?
I follow what Jordan says, and he follows what I am saying.
Since you are reading the other site then I know you read the following from Jordan:
"Travis, I understand your concern. We do have a process in place to implement emergency rules on waters that we identify (for example a 6 month closure to harvest on a system we believe is in peril). So, if the biologists up that way see something that they believe will destroy a fishery they have the ability to close it for a period of time in order to implemenet a more perminant rule."
"Finally, you are correct when you say we are short staffed and may not be able to respond/monitor all waters. This is unfortunately out of our control. We will do our best."
It is those two statements that keep me uneasy. We are told they will watch what happens going forward, and that the biologists have the ability to implement emergency rules if need be. However they do not have the ability (manpower) to watch it close enough.
I trust Jordan and other experts are doing the right thing. That doesn't mean I can't have my doubts, and have an opinion of not wanting trolling. After all this thread is all about our opinions, and not who is right or who is wrong.
A little more Jordan says since you want to reference what he says:
"I think you are right regarding blame should the fisheries collapse...but there is precedence that says they will not-based on the lakes in other counties that currently allow trolling. I hope I'm right too (but it's not just me who made this decision-there are people a lot smarter than I working here too!)"
So he hopes he is right as well. If this was a no brainer there would be no "hope" on his part. Maybe I am taking that out of context and Jordan really is 100% positive this is a biologically sound change.
Another from Jordan Weeks:
"There will continue to be creel surveys performed in the Northwoods, however, I don't anticipate that they will increase in number-so coverage will be sparse. Your concerns are well founded in that regard. I do not have an answer as to why...except for reductions in funding play a role."
So as mentioned on here before to know how anything is impacted you need to know the before and after statistics. Creel surveys will not increase. Creel surveys are not done on every lake every year. Only a handful of lakes have a creel survey each year. I don't know the cycle but I am sure it is awhile before the creel survey will be done on the same lake twice. So if the last time a survey was done on a lake was say 2008, and the next scheduled on that lake is 2018, is that enough frequency to monitor how a lake is doing?
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8823
| I'm no biologist. I don't even play one on TV. I don't work for the DNR. I do not discredit their intelligence or their ability or their knowledge. But they have all but admitted that there does not exist the money or time or personnel to studiy this effectively, enforce the rules effectively, or truly understand the dynamics of individual lakes, or even in a county by county basis.
The experts themselves are basically saying "we don't know, because we don't have the means to study the issue effectively. Even if we DID, we do not have the money or the means to enforce or implement any laws."
Seems to me that the opinions of the people who are actually out there day after day, season after season, ON the lakes, SEEING what goes on might just know a bit more here...
|
|
| |
|
| esoxaddict - 3/15/2013 8:24 PM
I'm no biologist. I don't even play one on TV. I don't work for the DNR. I do not discredit their intelligence or their ability or their knowledge. But they have all but admitted that there does not exist the money or time or personnel to studiy this effectively, enforce the rules effectively, or truly understand the dynamics of individual lakes, or even in a county by county basis.
The experts themselves are basically saying "we don't know, because we don't have the means to study the issue effectively. Even if we DID, we do not have the money or the means to enforce or implement any laws."
Seems to me that the opinions of the people who are actually out there day after day, season after season, ON the lakes, SEEING what goes on might just know a bit more here...
If the people out there are making money off the resources like guides, why would you accept their opinion or if people are just concerned with having more traffic on the lake? Perhaps those that can have an objective eye would carry the most truth. BR |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32922
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Creel surveys in the area in question are paid for by GLIFWC..Treaty.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | BenR - 3/15/2013 8:29 PM
esoxaddict - 3/15/2013 8:24 PM
I'm no biologist. I don't even play one on TV. I don't work for the DNR. I do not discredit their intelligence or their ability or their knowledge. But they have all but admitted that there does not exist the money or time or personnel to studiy this effectively, enforce the rules effectively, or truly understand the dynamics of individual lakes, or even in a county by county basis.
The experts themselves are basically saying "we don't know, because we don't have the means to study the issue effectively. Even if we DID, we do not have the money or the means to enforce or implement any laws."
Seems to me that the opinions of the people who are actually out there day after day, season after season, ON the lakes, SEEING what goes on might just know a bit more here...
If the people out there are making money off the resources like guides, why would you accept their opinion or if people are just concerned with having more traffic on the lake? Perhaps those that can have an objective eye would carry the most truth. BR
like Sled? same logic, same truth as you are hearing from Travis and others. refute it if you want to but yah, Jerry and BenR i would say collectively that there are some experts in vilas and oneida county life and fishing responding here.
i just spent the last two days fishing among the natives ... talked a bit about the overall situation. it's a wide gap and our resources are in need of some relief not "another" way to exploit them. jiggin' whitefish is a hoot tho that's for sure!!
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 566
Location: Elgin, IL | esoxaddict - 3/15/2013 8:24 PM
Seems to me that the opinions of the people who are actually out there day after day, season after season, ON the lakes, SEEING what goes on might just know a bit more here...
This is a key point in the discussion. What really happens in the NorthWoods is sometimes way different than what is proclaimed.....on ALL sides of this dilemma.
It would be easy for a non-resident like me to just say "why not troll?", without knowing other factors involved. It's just not that simple. There are a few guys here who I would trust with info way before I would trust the word of others. Just because of their experience UpThere. Ironically, some of them I've never met face to face....I just trust them as outdoorsmen. I do have great friends who happen to live and own businesses up there too.
It's a mess, I hope cooler heads can prevail in all of these issues. It seems to me that after reading all of this info carefully, changing trolling regs is not something that should be a priority right now. There are other fish to fry, in my opinion.
I'm getting pretty good at this "position fishing" thing anyway. I've learned how to be very efficient with a drift sock too. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | i spent the past few days jigging whitefish with 3 non-natives and 2 native americans trying to get my own read on the overall situation. my conclusion is that the two most important things to resolve are "why" are you doing what you are doing and "how" can all happen in the best way possible.
my conclusion is that the gap is WIDE and will never be completely bridged. that's not to say there can't be some kind of compromise, unfortunately the status of things as they stand today suggest both sides are moving away from the middle. i'd rather see more effort there than where its being applied.
yesterday i took my shack off the ice and i'll tell you the last thing i would want to do today is to go out on the ice (more like swamp) and participate in a spearing tournament.
my biggest concern from all of this? = SAFETY. i've learned there are unmarked holes and less than great effort to protect the after-time. be careful out there if you venture out to a place that is being speared. i just saw a note that that is a paramount piece of the tribe's efforts this weekend, but as a local i also "hear" first-hand that it is something that is happening. it concerns me more than a dead musky does.
steve ... feel free to delete this post if it causes a litany of rebuttals that get negative. it's meant to be an accurate report with information that is usable and helpful to those still out on the ice and interested in the overall situation currently and as we enter into the season.
you can't see some of this stuff from LaCrosse, WI. jerry ... |
|
| |
|
Location: 31 | Northwind Mark - 3/16/2013 10:02 AM esoxaddict - 3/15/2013 8:24 PM Seems to me that the opinions of the people who are actually out there day after day, season after season, ON the lakes, SEEING what goes on might just know a bit more here... This is a key point in the discussion. What really happens in the NorthWoods is sometimes way different than what is proclaimed.....on ALL sides of this dilemma. It would be easy for a non-resident like me to just say "why not troll?", without knowing other factors involved. It's just not that simple. There are a few guys here who I would trust with info way before I would trust the word of others. Just because of their experience UpThere. Ironically, some of them I've never met face to face....I just trust them as outdoorsmen. I do have great friends who happen to live and own businesses up there too. It's a mess, I hope cooler heads can prevail in all of these issues. It seems to me that after reading all of this info carefully, changing trolling regs is not something that should be a priority right now. There are other fish to fry, in my opinion. I'm getting pretty good at this "position fishing" thing anyway. I've learned how to be very efficient with a drift sock too. Hi Mark, I disagree that it’s a dilemma and that it only affects only the Northwoods. It's a “perceived” dilemma at best and is also a statewide issue. For instance, there's a small lake just over the border that I would fish some but can't because trolling is banned there as well. It's not a big deal to me, but it is something. Frankly, after researching this, it is easy for me to say “why not troll”, and I will accordingly on April 8. Lifting this silly trolling ban is long overdue IMHO. I see you're from Elgin, if you want to ride along, just let me know and I'll drive you there… even if you're vote cancels mine out. You can't see that lake from the Northwoods either Sled.
Edited by Jerry Newman 3/16/2013 10:36 AM
|
|
| |
|
Location: Sawyer County, WI | Thanks for your perspective sled.
I found the following statement especially revealing:
jonnysled - 3/16/2013 10:21 AM
..unfortunately the status of things as they stand today suggest both sides are moving away from the middle.
That pretty much seems to be the American condition these days. Interesting how the locals/natives behavior closely mimic what happens on a national scale... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 566
Location: Elgin, IL | Thanks Jerry. I truly see both sides of this issue and I appreciate the offer. I will probably be going with several guys I know, and we all have different views on this.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | jerry ... that lake is in the heart of the northwoods and 15 miles from my house. there are a few options for whitefish within 20 miles. i'm assuming you are referencing the whitefish lake ...
Edited by jonnysled 3/16/2013 6:06 PM
|
|
| |
|
Location: 31 | jonnysled - 3/16/2013 5:38 PM jerry ... that lake is in the heart of the northwoods and 15 miles from my house. there are a few options for whitefish within 20 miles. i'm assuming you are referencing the whitefish lake ... Nope, I was referring to the bigger statewide issue of the way the trolling ban is scattered around the state kind of willy-nilly. From my post; “For instance, there's a small lake just over the border that I would fish some but can't because trolling is banned there as well. It's not a big deal to me, but it is something.”
Edited by Jerry Newman 3/16/2013 11:32 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 929
Location: Rhinelander. | back some years trolling was legal here. Backtrolling only. Did not not but create problems. I would say we have only a few lakes that are even big enough to bother with. If you can't cast due to a handicapp you can get a special per. to troll. I thinks thats great. .
Pfeiff
|
|
| |
Wisconsin Motor Trolliing - What do you think?