|
|
Posts: 5874
| I'd support the stamp under one condition. The funds go towards Muskie management.
The spearing thing is a non issue, because it is not a Sate of Wisconsin thing, it is a Federal Court ruling. I don't like the spearing anymore than anyone else. But, until we get the liberals off the bench, and stop feeling we have to make up for what happened hundreds of years ago, spearing will be here for a long time. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1769
Location: Algonquin, ILL | BYTOR: I understand what you are saying but without preassure from the State the Feds will most likley just ignore this issue 
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | If the stamp is a possession thing...let it roll. I don't need it, but I'd buy it to contribute. If its for Musky fishing, no way they're going to be able to enforce it unless guys are fishing Musky tournys. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 87
Location: Wauwatosa, WI | I have no problems with a muskie stamp. I already buy a great lakes stamp for the three weeks in the fall for the salmon run and it's worth every penny. If you want to maintain a good fishery, you need money. If they spend the extra stamp money on muskies, all the better.
Bob |
|
| |
|
Posts: 714
Location: Rhinelander, WI | I have a question, if the stamp is for harvest only and you can still target musky without it, but just not keep one. Exactly what good will it be for determining the number of musky fishermen and how much money will it really raise. If the goal is to have musky fishermen pay to supplement stocking and research shouldn’t all fishermen targeting musky be required to purchase the stamp?
You can currently fish the great lakes for walleye, bass and pike with out the great lakes trout stamp, why would enforcing a musky stamp be any different. And again I say let the violators worry about it, the majority of upstanding sportsmen would buy the stamp if it was required. A lot more than would buy it if it was for harvest only as only those planning to keep a trophy or dinner fish or guys fishing transport tourneys or people willing to donate would buy the stamp then.
Nail A Pig!
Mike
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32885
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | What Mike said.  |
|
| |
|
Location: The Yahara Chain | I agree with Mike, the stamp should be required to fish muskies. This is the only way I see this thing working. |
|
| |
|
| If the stamp is for possesion,,would there be a risk that peoples mindset might be 'well I paid for it Im entitled to harvest one" and you might end up with more harvest???? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 66
Location: Wales Wi. | Mike, how would a Warden tell if someone was targeting Pike and not Muskies?. It would raise more money, but to hard to enforce and a put and take fishery stands more of a chance to pass. Tracking harvest would be a very important tool for stocking,and measuring the "pressure". I have no idea what the new limits would be,but it most certainly would be less than the one a day allowed now. If some folks want to harvest Muskies they do so already, but now would be required to give back to the resource management. Also incidental harvest would be reduced. Lets give our DNR the money it needs to follow thru on proposed programs. What we have is a management concept difference between the DNR and the CC. The DNR on one hand talks about "trophy management" and the CC has members that are worried that same concept will and has reduced license sales.In my opinion "little Johnny" is not interested in hunting and fishing for social reasons. Like both parents working and not being introduced to hunting and fishing the way we were.Also its not instant gratification like his video game. There are economic reasons also. The Stamp is about helping the stocking progams and giving the DNR the funds they need to reach their goals. When it comes to violaters and those who try to find loopholes in our fish and game laws..some do now,most do not. This is all just my opinion and what does count is the opinion of those who show up at the hearings. Howie
Edited by H.K. 3/18/2005 11:51 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 714
Location: Rhinelander, WI | Howie, right now north of Hwy 10 we have the exact same enforcement issue from the first weekend in May to Memorial Day Weekend. I say treat the stamp the same way.
I believe that most musky fishermen would buy the stamp and follow the rules. Some guys may try to get around the rule and say they are fishing pike, but my guess is they would be guys who only fish muskies once or twice a year or wouldn’t buy the stamp regardless and would probably risk keeping one without out.
The only black and white way to enforce this is if you have a musky in possession you need to have the stamp, but the intent of the law should be if you want to fish for them you need the stamp so we can get the most funding for stocking, habitat and research.
I think we musky anglers need to realize that we are a small group and if we are going to vote for a stamp to help fund the musky fisheries we need act as an entire group and not split up between those who practice C&R exclusively and those who may want to keep a fish.
I was discussing this with a non musky fishing sportsman I work with, he said he thinks if you only make the guys who may plan to harvest a fish pay for a stamp that doesn’t seem very fair. And he can see some arrogant musky fishermen using it against other fishermen calling them meat hunters for buying the stamp. This is the stereotype we have to deal with, whether we like it or not.
We also discussed the thought that buying a stamp may increase peoples desirer to keep a fish because they paid for it. We came to the opinion that the reduction in incidental catches would probably far out weigh the fish kept because of the “I paid for it mentality”. In fact he said he probably wouldn’t buy a stamp and would release any incidentally caught fish, where if he caught one with the rules the way they are now he would most likely keep a fish if it was over 40”. Without the stamp he would be forced to get a replica of that trophy fish and that’s not such a bad thing. Those are his words.
Nail A Pig!
Mike
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 66
Location: Wales Wi. | Mike I see this as the best compromise between those who want to harvest a fish and us cpr guys. The harvest would be on a more limited basis and the cpr guys would still buy a stamp to help the resource. Also the fact that they might want the option to keep one if they ever get that 70lber or want to utilize a accidental death. I think most folks would look at a stamp buyer in a positive light for helping the resource whether they plan to harvest or not. I know to a lot of folks on this sight, killing a Musky is unthinkable, but limited harvest has to be allowed for the average fisherman to even consider it. Howie |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | why not use the stamp to fund a "no kill" program and provide for a discount (state funded via stamps) for a replica mount of a verifiable picture over say /// 40"? |
|
| |
