|
|
Posts: 32826
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | After many weeks of discussion, Muskies Inc.'s executive committee voted to craft and release a position statement regarding the conservation threat to fragile muskie populations Forward Facing Sonar poses. Read it HERE!
(440606853_10232649878448799_5220233099221024278_n.jpg)
Attachments
----------------
 440606853_10232649878448799_5220233099221024278_n.jpg (31KB - 107 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 12
| The charter guides, tournament fisherman, and sponsored content creators make up the majority of the use cases of this technology. Their very income depends on continually producing reliable fishing. And i'm fairly certain none of them are going to be terribly concerned about the "ethical use" of said technology if it means they are outperformed by their competitors by not using it to the utmost.
I guess i'm not really certain about what the "ethical use" is of what amounts to radar in a game that heavily revolves around instinct and guesswork. This technology removes the need of any of that. The fish lose no matter what. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32826
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | If the public widely rejects the content resulting from the practice because it's achieved in an unethical manner, social pressure can be a very powerful thing. I have very little respect or admiration for any big muskie caught sharpshooting. I look at that the same as high-fence deer hunting. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 319
| sworrall - 5/17/2024 5:26 PM
If the public widely rejects the content resulting from the practice because it's achieved in an unethical manner, social pressure can be a very powerful thing. I have very little respect or admiration for any big muskie caught sharpshooting. I look at that the same as high-fence deer hunting.
I agree except it is more like high fence deer hunting using thermal imaging from a helicopter. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 265
| Howdy,
I agree with Steve and think that this is a great first step in defining the responsible use of a technology that is not going away. Obviously this point has been beaten to death on this site but I applaud MI for taking a balanced position.
Take care,
Ruddiger |
|
| |
|
Location: Athens, Ohio | I hope that when MI "formulates it's stance" that they will consider exceptions for use of the technology for valid research projects. Some fish may need to be 'targeted' for various studies, and this is certainly more of a valuable tool than what I've seen by using PIT trackers. m |
|
| |
|
Posts: 116
| I think someone, somewhere, once may have lied about the lure/color/location that caught their giant Musky. So they will lie, and stick the big fish in our faces, and there will be nothing we can do about it but bicker and disapprove.
As for me, I'll float on a log with a leafy branch for a paddle, use fish intestine line and rock hooks so that other anglers don't think I'm ethically challenged.
Let's go back to dacron, paper graph, Pikie lures and wood rowboat so we can ethically jab an 8/0 hook in a Musky face. Anything else is gauche.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1285
Location: Hayward, Wisconsin | Very well written/said! Muskie's, Inc. in the forefront as they have been since the advent of Catch and Release in the 70's. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2020
| Kill and eat crappie with FFS OK, but Catch more muskies and release them ("possibly" kill them in the process) not OK.
I can't get over how we're asking people to not catch as many fish... I think the people using it will drop their membership, if they already were members. Ban guiding on lakes instead. They're free loading off of our fisheries moneys.
BTW, who makes up this so called Muskies inc Executive Committee? Are they biologists, other scientists, or other muskie nuts put on a board by their fishing buddies? Most importantly, are a majority of them from WI? How did they get into their positions of deciding what is OK for the species? Until the DNRs in MN, KY, and IL release their rules an regs on it, I'll just grab my popcorn. Does MI have a youth representation on the committee? Or, is it bunch of Boomers than can hardly operate a computer?
|
|
| |
|
| Interesting comment about the crappies. On today's episode of Water & Woods, Rob Manthei is guiding Gillespie on St. Germain area lakes. They start fishing for walleye and switch to crappies on another lake. There they show images from live scope and watch the crappie move in and out of the weeds. Manthei talks about how they used to have to keep moving to find where the crappies had gone, now they can see on the screen.
The caught a lot but were not keeping any that day, for whatever reason. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 14
| As a young MI member (under 30) I appreciate the statement. I think there are a number of young anglers that feel similarly from what I heard on the most recent Spot Burn Podcast episode put out by Musky Fool.
Personally, I don't see how new technologies such as FFS provides any benefit outside of initial increased catch rates for early adopters that ultimately becomes neutralized when the technology becomes ubiquitous. The early adopters will move onto the next new thing, but the net result is increased angler efficacy that puts pressure on an increasingly threatened resource.
If we don't want to limit electronics whatsoever, then maybe the state DNRs can cut out the electronics companies entirely and just put GSP trackers in every musky they stock or net and sell live tracking data through an app to the public. You still have to "get the fish to eat" but you don't have to waste time casting aimlessly or learning fish habits and biology. I recognize this is a bit hyperbolic but I don't see how future iterations of fish locating technology will not be akin to this. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32826
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | ARmuskyaddict - 5/18/2024 11:10 AM Kill and eat crappie with FFS OK (where di I say that? This ain't a crappie board ), but Catch more muskies and release them "possibly" kill them in the process not OK. ( Catching 'more' is not the obvious issue, it's HOW more will be caught) I can't get over how we're asking people to not catch as many fish... I think the people using it will drop their membership, if they already were members. Ban guiding on lakes instead. They're free loading off of our fisheries moneys. ( strongly disagree) BTW, who makes up this so called Muskies inc Executive Committee? Are they biologists, other scientists, or other muskie nuts put on a board by their fishing buddies? Most importantly, are a majority of them from WI? How did they get into their positions of deciding what is OK for the species? Until the DNRs in MN, KY, and IL release their rules an regs on it, I'll just grab my popcorn. Does MI have a youth representation on the committee? Or, is it bunch of Boomers than can hardly operate a computer?--- OK, a lot to unwrap there.
Stepping out of OFM Co-Owner and into Muskies Inc VP of Communications and marketing:
Muskies Inc has been here for decades working with fisheries managers, biologists, etc. We are a conservation related organization recognized as one of the first to suggest Catch and Release as a conservation ethic. The Executive Committee represents all the Chapters through out the country, and no, the Chapters are certainly not all in Wisconsin. Region 1 represents the West, Region 2 represents North Central, Region 3 the East, and Region 4 South Central for over 50 active Chapters. Collectively, the Chapters are responsible for an amazing amount of stocking efforts and funding. The EC is all volunteer, includes Regional Representatives from various Chapters, and various members as the other officers on the Board. We meet once a month via computer/phone. It is our responsibility to represent the Chapters and unaffiliated members. We publish a magazine sent to all members, a monthly newsletter to all Chapter Presidents and interested parties, and our very popular calendar (fund raiser). I'm VP Communications and marketing and from what I know most of us are very capable around computer tech. Anyone is welcome to attend our meetings. OUR ORGANIZATION Muskies, Inc. is an Active, Service-Oriented, 501 (c ) (3 ) Non-Profit Organization for men, women and children. Founded in 1966 by Gil Hamm, the original group of thirteen avid Muskie Fisherman concentrated on continual improvement of the Muskie Resource through rearing and stocking efforts, and sound conservation practices. Today, Departments Of Natural Resources have realized the value of stocking Muskies. There are thirty-seven of the lower forty-eight states with active Muskie stocking programs. Muskies, Inc. has expanded to over 6,000 Members and 50 independent Local Chapters throughout the country. We have become a national voice of the protection of the Muskie species. Muskies, Inc. is widely recognized as the first organized group of anglers to espouse the “Catch And Release” practice now embraced by many conservation minded groups throughout North America. Today Muskies, Inc. focuses on three critical areas: Youth, Fisheries, And Research. FISHERIES – Muskies, Inc. works to conserve, protect and restore North America’s Muskie Fisheries. Areas of concern include habitat preservation, water quality, water management policies, and the development/maintaining of self-sustaining fish populations. RESEARCH – Muskies, Inc. continues to seek out Elevate And Fund Research for local projects and activities that involve improving Muskie fisheries. YOUTH – Muskies, Inc. provides guidelines and suggestions for quality programs and activities to educate our young members and, where possible, youth in general to ensure the future of the fishery. - To support selected conservation practices based on scientific merit and carried out by authorized federal and state agencies;(position statement regarding FFS Included)
- To promote muskellunge research;
- To establish hatcheries and rearing ponds and introduce the species into suitable waters;
- To support the abatement of water pollution;
- To maintain records of habits, growth, and range of species;
- To disseminate muskellunge information;
- To promote good fellowship and sportsmanship among men, women and children;
- To promote a high quality muskellunge sport fishery
We also operate the Lunge Log.The Lunge Log is a standardized
voluntary reporting system through which members of Muskies, Inc. register Muskies they catch
and by doing so may participate in an annual Members Only Fishing Contest (MOFC). Muskies
must be 30 inches or longer. The Lunge Log serves as a valuable resource to our members,
fisheries, scientists and managers who work with muskies. We also provide umbrella insurance for our Chapters for events, tournaments, etc. I'm sure I am forgetting other activities and accomplishments and hope this clarifies what MI does.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32826
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | mikie - 5/18/2024 9:00 AM
I hope that when MI "formulates it's stance" that they will consider exceptions for use of the technology for valid research projects. Some fish may need to be 'targeted' for various studies, and this is certainly more of a valuable tool than what I've seen by using PIT trackers. m
Obviously, agreed, and I am certain they will. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1240
| I am a ex Muskie INC International Board Member and yes it was a lot of years ago however I was not on the Executive Committee. Back then I knew a few of the guy's on the committee, One who was the International President was a ex Colorado Division Of Wildlife Commissioner (he was responsible for getting Tigers Stocked in Colorado) one was a food salesmen, one was Highway Patrolmen, School Board Executive, trucking company dispatcher to name a few. All these guy's knew how to get things done and who to talk to get things done. and yes they were fishermen. Guides teach people how to fish and keeps the ball rolling for the next generation of fishermen and helps some older folks say on the water. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 370
Location: SW Ohio | Surprised they listed side scan but not down scan. Both are nothing more than a snap shot of what was there, similar to 2D. Does not mean they are still there. Fish move. LS shows them moving and where they are going. Huge difference. SS, DS and 360 have been out for years and are accepted technologies. It took LS to get everyone up in arms. Majority of all fishing boats have some sort of sonar system, and some are better at using it than others.
If MI determines that I'm an unethical fisherman because I use SS, should I continue supporting them? Will they continue to take my "tainted" money? Condemn me for using using technology but badger me for membership fees and donations? Hmmm, a bit of a conundrum for both of us, and not an easy one to answer. I think they are thin ice and should tread lightly. I don't have LS, nor do I plan on installing it anytime soon if ever, but I will continue to use SS, DS and 2D. If that makes me "bad" then I guess I'll be a "bad" fisherman. Not just due to my low catch rate but due to what electronics I have in my boat. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2020
| Steve,
Thanks for the comprehensive summary. I am all for MI, I'm just playing devil's advocate with my ramble before. Although, the Boomer part was probably true... Personally, I think FFS/LS can be a great detriment to muskies; especially when used in ways we know will likely lead to harm of the fishery/fisheries. However, when the June open water trolling bite on Vermilion started gaining popularity in 2013, people said the fish will all be harmed. The sky never fell on that one though. The open water trolling bite is always there too. I got a fat 46 incher on July 26th, 2020 over 40 fow. FFS/LS shows us the guys preaching Buck Perry's spoon-plugging ideas were right. Trolling fish can't be targeted based on depth. At least with FFS/LS, education can help people select 20 ft as their depth limit. How does that get enforced though? Or, is it just another thing muskie fanatics have to gripe to others about? Along with proper release tools etc.. Yes, FFS/LS is similar high fence hunting, in respect to fair chase. The difference is we're no longer putting a 22 though the muskies head, and they have a decent chance to swim off.
xcskier had a great point about the youth. The sport is dead in areas requiring stocking if recruitment of new fishermen and women is not achieved. Muskies suck, a book was written about it. We love them though. I, for one, will hop in a friend's boat to see what it's all about this summer. I bet I end up drinking too much beer, or smoke up a bit, because I'll get bored really fast. I like the hunt and can still cast all day. That may be frustrating when it's slow, but not boring. However, I'm 53 with a fully developed frontal lobe. Young people need more stimulation, and if seeing them on the screen to cast at helps get their blood racing so that they continue to fish, the sport will benefit in the long run.
Regardless of MI's conclusion, DNRs are the only governing bodies. I doubt they adopt any regs that would results in a decrease of people getting out and fishing.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32826
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | OH Musky - 5/18/2024 3:41 PM
Surprised they listed side scan but not down scan. Both are nothing more than a snap shot of what was there, similar to 2D. Does not mean they are still there. Fish move. LS shows them moving and where they are going. Huge difference. SS, DS and 360 have been out for years and are accepted technologies. It took LS to get everyone up in arms. Majority of all fishing boats have some sort of sonar system, and some are better at using it than others.
If MI determines that I'm an unethical fisherman because I use SS, should I continue supporting them? Will they continue to take my "tainted" money? Condemn me for using using technology but badger me for membership fees and donations? Hmmm, a bit of a conundrum for both of us, and not an easy one to answer. I think they are thin ice and should tread lightly. I don't have LS, nor do I plan on installing it anytime soon if ever, but I will continue to use SS, DS and 2D. If that makes me "bad" then I guess I'll be a "bad" fisherman. Not just due to my low catch rate but due to what electronics I have in my boat.
"If MI determines that I'm an unethical fisherman because I use SS"---- What?
MI didn't say, insinuate, or indicate using FFS makes anyone a 'bad person.' I own the tech and use it all the time on one screen for really good boat control. I can admit to keeping my boat in a better position than before the tech arrived; seeing exactly where the weedline, rock edge, or other structural elements are is a plus. No one is dissing the tech, it is what it is and it's here to stay. We are, as a conservation-based organization, encouraging it to be used with conservation in mind. Sharpshooters drive around with the spotter running the sonar until they spot a fish, stop and then harass it, while the spotter stares at the sonar and an angler casts or jigs until they give up or it hits. I won't apologize for calling that practice out as less than fair chase. We received similar comments when we fought hard for the catch-and-release ethic.
'DNRs are the only governing bodies. I doubt they adopt any regs that would results in a decrease of people getting out and fishing.' Agreed, never said they would. In fact, I'm certain they will not.
I fish with a number of young folks each season, and have yet to have one give two hoots about my 4 sonar display.
As I said before, it isn't using the tech, it's HOW the tech is used.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 370
Location: SW Ohio | My comments were based on MI’s article and this:
“Sharpshooting,” the practice of using live view, 360, or side scan to target individual muskie, should be considered unethical.”
Everyone using sonar targeting individual fish whether it be jigging using 2D or finding them with side scan over a sand bar is, therefore, unethical. We are all guilty of it if we use sonar to locate and target fish. Doesn’t matter the type. But that is the whole purpose of using sonar. Locate and target them. I have dozens of pics for side scan showing fish, several that I’ve caught, most never eat.
Like I said, it is a conundrum for both MI and its members.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2289
Location: Chisholm, MN | A great first step. Thanks Steve |
|
| |
|
Posts: 611
Location: Bloomington, MN | I've never been in a boat with one. I guess I could afford to get one, but I will never fish a tournament again because of FFS even if I get 2 and learn how to use them. The gosh darn dialed in locals was my previous excuse. I do not hold much pride in my fishing accomplishments for the large fish I have caught in the Northwest Territories. Anyone can catch them, they are stupid. This year our guide on Great Slave will have the FFS Garmin, so I'm interested in the results with stupid hungry fish. I still enjoy mindlessly drifting a weed line/rockpile for the elusive muskellunge with high hopes. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32826
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | ---“Sharpshooting,” the practice of using live view, 360, or side scan to target individual muskie, should be considered unethical.”
Everyone using sonar targeting individual fish whether it be jigging using 2D or finding them with side scan over a sand bar is, therefore, unethical. We are all guilty of it if we use sonar to locate and target fish. Doesn’t matter the type. But that is the whole purpose of using sonar. Locate and target them. I have dozens of pics for side scan showing fish, several that I’ve caught, most never eat. ----
I have Mega 360, Mega Side Imaging, and Mega Live on my rigs. Using that tech for boat control, structure ID, fish ID while fishing a breakline (which most who have the tech do) is a far cry from driving around scanning, picking out a fish on SI or 360, dropping in the FFS, zeroing in on and chasing the fish about until one gives up or the fish hits-- removing all elements fair chase. I use 2D all the time and compared to sharpshooting (read the description of the tactic above) it's not even in the same universe. You keep painting this with a broad brush disregarding the statement intent. Once again, it's not using the tech, it's HOW the tech is used. Not a conundrum at all. The keyword is SHARPSHOOTING, not the tech. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 606
Location: Duluth | Very good statement from Steve and MI.
Appreciate the time and effort you have put into the sport. |
|
| |
|
| Sorry Steve, I have a difficult time making a clear distinction there. First year I had my SI, took a break from casting weed line, etc., deciding to criss cross the lake, looking for bait balls. Found one in middle of the lake, with what appeared to be a musky lurking nearby. I rigged a rod with a crankbait and began making passes near the bait ball. On the third pass, hooked and boated a nice musky, which I believe was the one I saw earlier. Yes, the live scope would be clearer, easier to see, etc., but is it really that different than what I did with SI? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32826
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | North of 8 - 5/19/2024 9:44 AM
Sorry Steve, I have a difficult time making a clear distinction there. First year I had my SI, took a break from casting weed line, etc., deciding to criss cross the lake, looking for bait balls. Found one in middle of the lake, with what appeared to be a musky lurking nearby. I rigged a rod with a crankbait and began making passes near the bait ball. On the third pass, hooked and boated a nice musky, which I believe was the one I saw earlier. Yes, the live scope would be clearer, easier to see, etc., but is it really that different than what I did with SI?
You knew the muskie was in the area but didn't have a sonar lock on it tracking it as you cast to it chasing it around, and you also were not using another person as your spotter. There are multiple comments that many muskies spotted on SI do not hit. Cool. Maybe we should leave them there instead of dropping in the FFS and harassing them endlessly. Believe me, cast placement with FFS is laser accurate, not so much with SI. However, if you are good enough with SI to find, lock on, and harrass a fish, ask yourself if that's sporting and fair chase.
When I installed my first FFS I tried using it on crappies and was able to track, pursue, and catch every single crappie in a school I found on a crib. I have never used it that way again, and won't. Fair chase that was not. |
|
| |
|
| Ok, that is a good explanation of the difference. Not having used the FFS, not aware of all the capabilities. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 331
Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | I think the statement is perfect.
A statement such as this provides guides and lodges guidance an ethical justification to take a strong position on the use of this tech with their clients and guests. The same can be said of the social media end of things, tournaments.
Not sure how anyone can take umbrage with an ethical stance of Muskies Inc. - ethics are not regulated in any way other than peer pressure and personal shame. Many folks consider fishing for fun to be unethical, so we are all on the wrong side of someone's ethical line. This line just provides guidance as to what the educated musky community thinks is in the best interest of musky fisheries everywhere.
The justification for such an ethical stance with muskies is actually both a conservation and fishing quality issue ultimately. Muskies are not as bright or enigmatic as we like to think they are, it has always been about trying to find them. "Sharpshooting" in all its forms using the electronic capabilities we have now and what is about to be developed reduces musky fishing to simply teasing them to bite. If that sort of fishing turns your crank, so be it - but the problem is sharpshooting ultimately ruins it for everyone else - in the same way keeping muskies in the past did. Sharpshooting is unstainable.
Thanks to everyone that spent time developing this stance. I look forward to providing this information to the lodge that my musky partners and I frequent - the lodge owner asks us about it every time we visit.
Edited by Angling Oracle 5/19/2024 4:05 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 122
| ARmuskyaddict - 5/18/2024 11:10 AM
Kill and eat crappie with FFS OK, but Catch more muskies and release them ("possibly" kill them in the process) not OK.
That doesn't make any sense. Crappies and sunfish are generally not being released with this technology, especially in the winter during ice fishing. Muskies are being released. Most of us that specifically target muskies are very good about handling and doing it properly so the fish survives.
Panfish are the species on the losing end of this and its not even close. Constant, year round pressure and targeted by meat hunters. Bag limits are going to have to come down on them soon. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32826
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | There are new laser sights and after-dark scopes for hunting rifles, too. Those actually ended up being against the law to hunt with in most states. I OWN the FFS tech and will choose not to be a sharpshooter. What you choose is up to you, but MI saw the need to raise the subject for discussion.
There's a member who has registered over 90 fish already this year. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 66
| While I do think limits will need to be adjusted -- I don't see how being able to catch more fish efficiently is inherently bad. A lot of people only have limited time to be on the water and if this helps them to enjoy it more, great. If you want more youth involved, this seems to be a good way to do it. Telling a kid, "hey we coulda caught more but wasn't it it more fun to catch nothing but do it the old school way?" I also think if you have the technology on your boat then you're supporting the use of it. You can't say you only support it "in these specific circumstances." There will always be people who abuse the system no matter what the technology is. If you want to use it and it's legal, you shouldn't be "shamed." |
|
| |
|
Posts: 14
| For people who disagree with a "fair chase" ethic in musky fishing, do you believe that C&R and good handling practices can maintain the resource no matter how effective musky anglers are? If you do believe this then I can understand not liking to be told the "right way" to fish. However, I personally believe that even with C&R and improved handling practices there is still a limit on what the fish can take before there are negative consequences on the health of the musky population as a whole. I'd rather fish for healthy muskies with limited technology than an unhealthy population with limitless technology, especially since I don't see the latter scenario as sustainable anyways.
I'd also disagree with people asserting this statement from MI is an attack on younger anglers. As an angler in my late 20s, I find a higher percentage of younger anglers receptive to limitations on technology to protect or maintain a resource than the older generation, who tends to view any limitation/regulation as an attack on their rights. I think this sentiment in general has driven the popularity of fly fishing for muskies, and, analogously, bowhunting for deer with the younger crowd, who recognize there is some value and sense of accomplishment in how you do something, not just the end result. Of course, there are older anglers that don't like any new technology and younger anglers that readily accept and are naturally inclined to take advantage of modern technology too. In any case, people should not be demeaned for using legal methods of fishing, which I don't believe the MI statement does anyways.
Edited by xcskier_hunter 5/20/2024 11:38 AM
|
|
| |
