|
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Will you be attending the Conservation Congress Hearings on April 12. Meetings are held in all counties of Wisconsin. If you are out of state, please do not vote unless you are actually coming.
Edited by Pointerpride102 4/5/2010 11:59 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1030
Location: APPLETON, WI | I definitely will. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 25
| I'll be there in Horicon. First year I'll be going. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1185
Location: Wishin I Was Fishin' | bring your friends and relatives too |
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| I will be at the Outagamie County one held in Kaukauna. |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | definitely in dane co for me and i'm gonna try to get as many guys as i know to go....imo unless you are working you have no excuse not to go...it takes all of 1 hour total out of your day |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | BNelson - 4/5/2010 4:01 PM
definitely in dane co for me and i'm gonna try to get as many guys as i know to go....imo unless you are working you have no excuse not to go...it takes all of 1 hour total out of your day
I agree with this 100% |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1030
Location: APPLETON, WI | Pointerpride102 - 4/5/2010 4:20 PM BNelson - 4/5/2010 4:01 PM definitely in dane co for me and i'm gonna try to get as many guys as i know to go....imo unless you are working you have no excuse not to go...it takes all of 1 hour total out of your day I agree with this 100% +1 Me too. Now is the time to practice what we all preach. Support the musky! |
|
| |
|
Location: Sun Prairie, WI | Definitely will be there to vote. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 256
Location: Janesville | I wished I was going .I have to work that night. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 576
Location: Elk Grove Village, IL & Phillips, WI | Please vote NO to all of these!! There are way too many smaller lakes that will be impacted by allowing trolling. I don't think allowing trolling on all lakes is the way to go.
QUESTIONS 24, 25, 26 & 27 – Motor trolling in Ashland, Iron, Price and Sawyer Counties Currently motor trolling is only allowed on the Kakagon River and sloughs in Ashland County, Pike Lake and Round Lake in Price County, and Chetac, Grindstone, Lac Courte Oreilles, Nelson, Round, Whitefish and Windigo Lakes in Sawyer County. Opening all waters in Ashland, Iron, Price and Sawyer Counties would allow motor trolling in approximately 700 additional waters. Prohibitions on motor trolling are socially-driven and have been handled by the Department of Natural Resources on a county-by-county basis in line with local preference. Currently motor trolling is allowed county-wide in 18 of the state’s 72 counties. Motor trolling poses no other biological threat to muskellunge, walleye, or any other species than conventional angling, and the Department of Natural Resources endorses removal of motor trolling prohibitions wherever that removal is locally supported.
Do you favor allowing motor trolling in all waters in Ashland County? 24. YES _______ NO ______
Do you favor allowing motor trolling in all waters in Iron County, excluding Etna, Grey, Lost, Minette, Oriole, Pardee and Sherman lakes, which straddle the Iron-Vilas County line? 25. YES _______ NO ______
Do you favor allowing motor trolling in all waters in Price County? 26. YES ______ NO ______
Do you favor allowing motor trolling in all waters in Sawyer County? 27. YES ______ NO ______
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | If I was voting I'd actually be inclined to vote yes to those Ken. Do you have any biological info to back up your desire for others to vote no? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 576
Location: Elk Grove Village, IL & Phillips, WI | Pointer, you are too young to remember the legal backtrolling days when many large muskies were caught and kept on many, many bodies of water just to hang on the wall. Also etiquette goes out the window, especially bodies of water under 1000 acres.
Legalizing yet another way for some to catch and kill muskies without increasing the size limit will only make matters worse. Stocking rates in the last 10 years have been dramatically decreased by 1/2 to 1/4 of what they once were and the harvest rates, especially in the counties mentioned hasn't declined at the same rate!
Edited by KenK 4/6/2010 12:49 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | ... i sure hope they don't pass motor trolling ...
Edited by jonnysled 4/6/2010 1:39 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1030
Location: APPLETON, WI | This is what I posted in the other thread: For me, personally... I'll probably vote - NO.
'm pretty much a die-hard caster. Always have been and I feel more "connected" in a way to my fishing experience. Driving around aimlessly on the lake with a couple of lures behind the boat... well, I don't know... I guess I don't really see the skill in that. Again, for me, personally... I'd rather feel more connected to the experience and cast.
And on a smaller body of water, it is a bit frustrating when attempting to work an area by casting and you're constantly being strong-armed by a couple of guys trolling. Seems like once the kicker motors are in operation, all functional boating etiquette goes right out the window. But that's just my experience.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | KenK - 4/6/2010 12:45 PM
Pointer, you are too young to remember the legal backtrolling days when many large muskies were caught and kept on many, many bodies of water just to hang on the wall. Also etiquette goes out the window, especially bodies of water under 1000 acres.
Legalizing yet another way for some to catch and kill muskies without increasing the size limit will only make matters worse. Stocking rates in the last 10 years have been dramatically decreased by 1/2 to 1/4 of what they once were and the harvest rates, especially in the counties mentioned hasn't declined at the same rate!
So being 24 and being too young to remember the back trolling days you're trying to convince me to vote (not me obviously, theoretically) on something based of off anecdotal evidence from 20+ years ago? We talk and talk and talk about how beneficial Catch and Release has been for this sport. My guess is that the C&R sentiment was not felt as strongly 20+ years ago. Do you really think that people are just sitting around waiting to invade each body of water under 1000 acres just to troll it to a froth? What are the reasons behind the lower stocking rates?
I understand and can sympathize with your argument but your arguement against trolling doesn't come with any hard facts that show trolling is going to rape and pillage the resource all the while ruining your fishing experience. I'd be more than willing to change my view on the matter if you can provide something more than anecdotal evidence.
For the record I'd much, much, much rather cast than troll. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | Pointerpride102 - 4/6/2010 1:57 PM
I'd be more than willing to change my view on the matter if you can provide something more than anecdotal evidence.
because then even clowns like Pointer could catch a 50" fish ...
that good enough for you mike? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | jonnysled - 4/6/2010 2:12 PM
Pointerpride102 - 4/6/2010 1:57 PM
I'd be more than willing to change my view on the matter if you can provide something more than anecdotal evidence.
because then even clowns like Pointer could catch a 50" fish ...
that good enough for you mike?
Not sure what that has to do with what I'm asking for here. Simply because I've landed a 50 trolling is not the reason I feel the trolling ban should be lifted. Would like to hear an actual argument as to how trolling rapes the resource while ruining YOUR fishing experience. The fact that this was all you can come up with leads me to believe you have no evidence other than bar room biology. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 576
Location: Elk Grove Village, IL & Phillips, WI | "What are the reasons behind the lower stocking rates?"
Mostly budgetary, ask Jordan!
"My guess is that the C&R sentiment was not felt as strongly 20+ years ago."
Price County and the others on the list haven't changed much. The same crowd still keep "their" fish!
"I'd be more than willing to change my view on the matter if you can provide something more than anecdotal evidence."
Ask any of your Wisconsin DNR friends (or anyone who lived through that time, I bet Steve will echo), what happened in the lakes 20 years ago. Lot's of wall-hangers taken. It was the same thing that happened up in Lac Suel in Canada!! And Lac Suel had to go to C&R only because of it!
Back this up with higher limits and it may work on larger lakes, but this is just playing into the hands of those who can and will take "their" musky!!
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 189
Location: Barrington, Il | What Pointer said. You can't use science only when it validates your point. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | KenK - 4/6/2010 2:27 PM
"What are the reasons behind the lower stocking rates?"
Mostly budgetary, ask Jordan!
"My guess is that the C&R sentiment was not felt as strongly 20+ years ago."
Price County and the others on the list haven't changed much. The same crowd still keep "their" fish!
"I'd be more than willing to change my view on the matter if you can provide something more than anecdotal evidence."
Ask any of your Wisconsin DNR friends (or anyone who lived through that time, I bet Steve will echo), what happened in the lakes 20 years ago. Lot's of wall-hangers taken. It was the same thing that happened up in Lac Suel in Canada!! And Lac Suel had to go to C&R only because of it!
Back this up with higher limits and it may work on larger lakes, but this is just playing into the hands of those who can and will take "their" musky!!
Ken the burden of proof that the Price county people are still the "same" guys is on you. Do you have creel data to back up your claims that angler harvest is excessive?
According to the question it sounds like the WDNR supports it. Do you have correspondence with the biologists that proves otherwise? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 406
Location: Stones throw away...finally!! | I can't believe I am actually admitting this, and take it for what it is worth as I don't live in WI, but I have to agree with Pointer here...I know, don't remind me. The same people that are going to keep them, will. I don't see how trolling is going to effect it for the better or worse. Just another way of fishing, and for some that may not be physically able to cast or row, shouldn't they be able to enjoy it. I mean it's not like you are legalizing snagging. Like I said, I don't live there, so I don't really care. Just my views.
Edited by Marshall 4/6/2010 3:04 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | Ever live on a lake? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 576
Location: Elk Grove Village, IL & Phillips, WI | Burden of proof? I got this from the biologist for Price County. There hasn't been an extensive survey done on this lake for over 20 years. There is no management plan in place and won't be for another 2 - 3 years. Stocking was reduced from 2 fish per acre to .5 per acre because the DNR "believes" that there is a strong catch and release ethic. And yes, if I had the time I could find that email!!
To me opening up the waters for possible increased pressure and harvest without fixing other issues first is a folly at best.
Edited by KenK 4/6/2010 3:22 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 7077
Location: Northwest Chicago Burbs | Here's a question for those of you who oppose trolling in this measure: are you opposing trollng so that people DONT catch fish? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4343
Location: Smith Creek | DNR supports it because it doesn't want to enforce it anymore. Period. And pretty much all evidence is anecdotal as far as muskies are concerned.
I personally know of about a half dozen 50"+ muskies caught by acquaintences in this area. Zero were released. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | Slamr - 4/6/2010 3:21 PM
Here's a question for those of you who oppose trolling in this measure: are you opposing trollng so that people DONT catch fish?
no ... i'm opposed for 1. the (3) line trolling with multiple guys on a lake with a single weed-edge or a handful of spots, 2. to protect the tradition of row-trolling, 3. to not be consistent with other means of justification (torch to generator powered spotlights) of "tradition", 3. recreational "trollers" out for a pontoon party cruise and 4. selfishly because i like things the way they are at least until they can effectively solve some of the other more urgent needs like increasing limits and effectively stocking and protecting what we already have.
not including muskies ... the already low and aweful walleye population will basically be done for. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 7077
Location: Northwest Chicago Burbs | jonnysled - 4/6/2010 3:27 PM
Slamr - 4/6/2010 3:21 PM
Here's a question for those of you who oppose trolling in this measure: are you opposing trollng so that people DONT catch fish?
no ... i'm opposed for 1. the (3 ) line trolling with multiple guys on a lake with a single weed-edge or a handful of spots, 2. to protect the tradition of row-trolling, 3. to not be consistent with other means of justification (torch to generator powered spotlights ) of "tradition", 3. recreational "trollers" out for a pontoon party cruise and 4. selfishly because i like things the way they are at least until they can effectively solve some of the other more urgent needs like increasing limits and effectively stocking and protecting what we already have.
not including muskies ... the already low and aweful walleye population will basically be done for.
I see YOUR point Mr. Sled. My thought and why I asked the question is that I think it's a slippery slope when we're creating laws that STOP people from catching fish. As much as WE all believe in the C&R Ethics, the resources are there for all to use under the laws determined by the WDNR and the input from he Conservation Congress. Some people will never understand the C&R ethic that we hold dear, but to think we're trying to inact laws to stop these law-abiding users of the resource from fishing and catching fish, that just doesn't sit well with me. I'm all for more and bigger fish, but at the expense of working to enact laws that make catching fish harder for people....that's attempting to legislate resource usage for the betterment of some, not all.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 4343
Location: Smith Creek | Hypothetical situation: You get up early one morning to fish the famous Flambeau River in Price county. Very little shoreline development, loons and 'rats swimming around, you almost feel like you've stepped back in time. Then some yahoo with the world's loudest two stroke approaches, billowing smoke, boards running shoreline to shoreline and everywhere in between. He might pull a board in when he passes but he'll let it back out again once he gets by.
You folks in IL or MN might say BFD! Get used to it!
Part of the reason I choose to live here is so I don't have to get used to that crap. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 576
Location: Elk Grove Village, IL & Phillips, WI | I don't oppose people catching fish, but I do oppose the keep. Making it easier without limiting the harvest isn't good for the resource. I too enjoy the serenity of casting a quiet bay without a guy with the shore to shore spread going on. It may work well on larger lakes in Minnesota, but not the little puddles in Wisconsin. To just pose the question of opening up all lakes to trolling is just irreponsible, especially when the DNR has no idea of how many fish are being kept! They have no hard numbers, they are going by hearsay too! |
|
| |
