Posts: 32934
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | OK, enough about the spearing, the totals are published and easy to access and as Norm said are minimal when compared to angler harvest. Winter spearing is also VERY minimal there, again anecdotally.
Not stocking because of spearing is a ludicrous statement, the lake has to be managed for the use it's expected to incur, ALL sources. Don't even try to argue, just think about that. Be #*^@ed careful your comments won't be interpeted as antisocial; this sort of 'help' Mike and Norm do not need in the educational process for the public necessary to accomplish change and acceptance.
The number of angler harvested fish has NOT fallen that much anecdotally; the reason the figures were from the 90's is because those were from the last official WDNR Creel, and can be proven.
Yes, Pelican has some NR. The big question is-how much? Is it enough to hold the population to a fishable level under the current harvest pressure ( average length of harvested fish is mid 40's to upper 40's) we see there right now? NO! The lake won't be stocked for at least a decade, and that's why we tried for a 50" limit; Pelican can and does produce 50" plus fish, is at her best as a low density/high quality fishery, and clearly NEEDS to be protected from overharvest if there is to be no stocking. Mike and Norm stepped up, and DID something positive in an attempt to stave off the inevitable slow destruction of the Pelican Lake Muskie population.
guest,
Of COURSE a harvested fish is a dead fish. We can DO something about the ones that are harvested by anglers, and MAYBE, if we try very hard to understand the culture, motivations, and history of Native American harvest (a treaty RIGHT upheld by our Supreme Court--and isn't going to 'play out') from Ceded treaty lands we may eventually be able to work positively with the tribes. If you have a positive statement to support the fishery or efforts underway to protect the Muskie population there, great. If all you want to do is say something rude and mean spirited, back away form the keyboard and look in the mirror next time someone asks what the problem with Pelican might be.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'I still feel there is more to the problem than the harvest of the early 90's. It seems the drop off has been most dramatic the past couple of years. I am sure other lakes had a significant number of fish kept in the late 80's and early 90's until catch and release really took hold. The fish are going somewhere.'
Editor's Note:
This is from the author of this thread, this person started this conversation.-----
In partial answer:
There has been NO STOCKING since 1998, so the thousands of fish that used to be stocked in Pelican are no longer stocked so they can grow up and get caught. A fish stocked in Pelican in 1998 would be about 38" or a bit more today. Lets use 1000 fingerlings as a figure; about 30 percent of a year class disappears for many reasons each year. 1000 stocked in 1998 would leave roughly 80 fish from that year class in Pelican today to join those from NR. Take out a ratio of each stocked year class of 1000 every year, and the number is in the hundreds, significant to a 3600 acre lake. |
