|
|
Location: Colorado/Birch Point, Lake Vermilion | No it's not wrong, it's a choice you make. That's the beauty of America you are free to make these choices and support whomever you choose. Even if someone else thinks it's wrong. |
|
| |
|
Location: Twin Cities | Guest - 9/8/2009 12:59 PM
He becomes friends with some out of state guides who used his new hot lure on lakes like Mille Lacs and V.
Those lakes turn off, too much pressure on V and fish move out of weeds/rocks on Mille Lacs.
Do you really believe the pressure moved the fish out into the main basin of Mille Lacs? Couldn't have any thing to do with the booming bait populations and cool summers that have allowed large number of tulibee's to survive and thrive? Not to mention the extremely large perch hatches....
On the north end, maybe...or maybe the pressure moved the fish just beyond a cast length of your rod because they learned the noise of a trolling motor and the result and move away... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 379
Location: Thief River Falls MN | Millesie,
My point is the first 40% of your 1K leaves without a trace. The first 40% of my income doesn't get a chance to leave MN, and I bet that more of my tax dollars get to the resource than from some out of state guide. Garanteed the guides are using their expenses as a write off also. Give your guide a 1099 and see what happens. I bet if half the guys guiding in MN would go legit as for tax purposes and such, half would disappear. Not saying the local economies don't appreciate your tourist dollars, just saying that some are getting away with something. |
|
| |
|
Location: Oswego, IL | As I see it, not everytime a out of state muskie angler comes with a guide. If anything guides seem to be a stepping stone to bring new clients to your state. With that said I almost gurantee that those clients whom used this (out of state) guide, use them because either they are new to the water, won on a auction(donations/OM1,2), or have a great reputation, then they will eventually go on thier own and fish your lakes with out a guide. So I dont see why to complain so much when those out of state guys are truley bring you business for life. Once that guide is not needed by the clients do you think the clients no longer fish your lakes? Be careful what you wish for........ |
|
| |
|
| You make a point Whored, but I don't see any resort owners falling over themselves to cater to the OOS musky folks and grab all that cash they supposedly bring with them. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1169
Location: New Hope MN | ColoAndy - 9/9/2009 11:14 AM
No it's not wrong, it's a choice you make. That's the beauty of America you are free to make these choices and support whomever you choose. Even if someone else thinks it's wrong.
Thank god someone actually still believes in freedom!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 186
Location: West Chicago, IL | Guest, you have to be kidding. Look at Spring Bay Resort who is a MuskieFirst sponsor. They seem to be falling all over for the Out of State musky folks. Everywhere I have stayed in Minn, the resorts have been grateful for the musky business. Heck, even the Miltona Chamber of Commerce has ads in Musky Hunter Magazine promoting the musky fishing and the local resorts. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 186
Location: West Chicago, IL | Just another point, no states would even stock muskies if they didn't bring revenue to the state. Look at Ohio, they've determined that the cost of stocking is financially worth the return and have stopped their musky program. Minnesota isn't stocking all of these musky lakes just for the locals to enjoy. They are also doing in to bring out of state reveune into Minnesota. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32955
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Do we have a specific example of the above tax and income issues? Does anyone know anyone who is self employed who DOESN'T deduct legal expenses? Do we know for sure ALL In State guides are reporting every dime in guide fees?
Guys, PLEASE keep to the points without pointing fingers. |
|
| |
|
Location: Oswego, IL | Guest, most of the out of state clients book an entire week or more, compaired to the in state people who may not stay there at all, maybe they buy a beer or two, three, four, or five, $20 with an sandwich. So I guess I am missing your point about resort owners not making money from out of state people, thats where they make most thier money. Now I cannot say for sure because I am not one, nor know one personally, but I can almost bet their biggest income comes from out of state fellows.
Edited by muskiewhored 9/9/2009 11:57 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 639
Location: Hudson, WI | Brad Hoppe is a tax paying MN resident who has done very well for himself in the State of MN. Started a tackle company, marketed it well (advertising, a tax write-off), pumped money back into his business, branched out into DVD's, sets up huge booths at all of the shows to promote his product and his guide service, updates his website to keep it fresh and works with others in the industry to grow the sport in general. Not to mention promoting the Alexandria area in general, bringing money to the community.
Gregg Thomas, Mike Hulbert, Lee Tauchen, Chad Cain, Steve Genson, etc are doing the same. They aren't big names by accident. They are doing a better job promoting their business. I know I would rather hire a local, but if I can shake a dude's hand and talk 'skies with him at a show for 15 minutes, watch their TV appearances and read their articles, I will probably book them instead and not feel bad.
My first sales job I was complaining that I never finished 1st in the company. My boss says, "You know why Richard beats you every month? Because he's better than you." Sad fact, but it's true. Out of state guides have a tougher time in a localized area and they STILL are out-booking many local guides. Because they are promoting their business better. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 454
| I guess I am not fishing the area that we are speaking of (western/central mn) all that often, but I am making an assumption that this (pressure) is not any worse than what the metro lakes feel every day from guides and non guides alike. Yes, lake Minnetonka is a big lake, but it gets hammered daily and still pumps out fish............many smaller lakes get abused as well. The number of fisherman targeting this species is growing and I do admit it can be frustrating when many of the spots you worked hard for and found are now being used by other fisherman (guides, and non guides alike).
Many rookie or (newbie) anglers are out there right now. Many lack proper equipment because the either can't afford it, or they are just unaware as to what is needed to properly fish for, handle, and release a muskie. I know of several gentlemen on particular lake that I have seen on the water 3-4 times a week for the entire summer. They did not have a proper net, release tools, or gear to be fishing muskie, but they had a love for the sport and were out there enjoying it. I have done my best to educate these gentlemen, and they have been receptive. I am sure however, that there are many more fishermen/women like these on lakes who are doing "damage" to the resource. Most guides that I know are very protective of this species and will do their best to ensure their survival.
If someone wants to troll open water and "kill" fish that is a separate issue. That is an irresponsible angler, guide or no guide. Irresponsible anglers hurt our lakes and muskie populations.
Just my two cents and probably worth about the same  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 221
Location: Detroint Lakes, MN |
Once again, a core point here is using a public resource to make money. This isn't about private business or products.
Shouldn't only the "owners" of that resource, the MN public be allowed to make money from it? I think that is a very valid point. Apparently many of you do not.
The other side of this is very obviously seeing pressure on MN waters drastically increasing, and it's causing rumblings among MN anglers. The quality of the fishing experience declines when the amount of users of a finite resource ever increases. Some of you thing that it's selfish for MN anglers to feel that way. I suppose it is in a way.
But isn't also selfish for somebody using a public resource to make a living to think that they have unlimited access to it?
There has to be a line between use and expliotaion when you start talking about public resources. Especially when you have a limited amount of that resource and an ever growing demand for it's enjoyment/use.
In MN we have the Boundary Wasters Canoe Area, BWCA. To ensure a quality experience the usage is limited. You have to apply for permits to visit and work there. It provides a non-congested place for anglers/campers to enjoy.
Are we headed that way?? When will the pressure on these lakes become to much? When will the public (MN anglers) demand something be done?
What are the alternatives? Out of state fishing from Memorial day to Labor day only? Applying for permits to fish in one "Zone" of the state per year whether your a resident or not?
At some point the gents in MN that do the leg-work for improving and expanding this fishery are going to ask why they are doing it. How much time and effort can you put into something that isn't giving you the return you are expecting?
In all seriousness, you do the work to improve your quality of fishing in your State. When the quality starts to decline no matter how much work you do, what next?? Keep beating your head against the wall?
Something to think about. The FM chapter of MI has been funding stocking of a new lake for several years now. We (and also the Hugh Becker foundation) are fully funding the stocking, 100%. Is it selfish of use to never want guides to show up and that lake? Or is it entirely within reason to be disgruntled if that happens?
We all gotta live together here, and something has to change.
JS
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 639
Location: Hudson, WI | Darn right. Lots of pressure everywhere, and it isn't going away. Something we all have to deal with.
Tony, are your students at gym class or something?  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 639
Location: Hudson, WI | John, I hear ya that it sucks. But this happened in western Wisconsin and the Hayward Lakes years ago. Stocking still takes place and the lakes are coming back around again. Not for nothing, but I buy an out of state license for MN for $40 every year and I fish it 5 times a year, maybe. The thought of additional permits sounds like communist Russia to me. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 231
| I've been reading this thread, and have noticed alot of good points on both sides. With that being said, I get up to MN once a year to fish (Cass Lake), and really enjoy it. I'm from Ill & don't use a guide. There is guide at the resort we stay at (Wishbone), who is really good, and knows the Cass Chain well. If I was looking for a guide, I would have no problem using him, but.... I have to be honest, I would also have no problem using someone along the lines of a... Mike Hulbert, Tony Grant, or Steve Jonesi. It doesn't matter to me where their from, it's about that fact that I think they're GOOD! This also includes different states/country. From Ontario to Indiana, If these guys were available, I would hire them. This is nothing against "local guides", as I know there are alot of good ones, it's just who are you comfortable with in what state? JMHO.
Chas |
|
| |
|
Location: Oswego, IL | Pressure will only get worse the bigger the sport becomes. Point is: its not any guide making your pressure worse, its TV, magazine, News, ADVERTISING. People wanted to make this sport huge, and this "problem" is what you will get with the resources available to them- is just not enough for everybody. Blame a suit not a fellow angler: the suit only wants your money the angler wants your friendship. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32955
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | 'At some point the gents in MN that do the leg-work for improving and expanding this fishery are going to ask why they are doing it. How much time and effort can you put into something that isn't giving you the return you are expecting?'
That goes directly to the point I made earlier about volunteers. If you are expending that effort and money as volunteer conservationists (very commendable, by the way), and your DNR and the general public sees it as such.... and then that changes because the end result is unexpected and people show up to fish you personally do not approve of; at what point do you then become 'competition' to the stated goals of fishery management in Minnesota by doing all you can to drive off out of state pressure? If you volunteer to stock a public resource, and the State of MN decides not to restrain, license, or otherwise control the Guiding population, I'd say yes, it's unreasonable to be disgruntled.
As lambeau said, you can exert 'social pressure', but the State Fisheries folks may not take that as well as you would hope, and defer any other new waters...for good. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 454
| Lunch actually and this teaching is really cutting into my muskie fishing.....Sounds like I should be in the Bemidji Area
Only joking gentlemen, don't take it seriously......the last thing I need are jet skiers surrounding me in November......again, only joking.
I know that it must be frustrating to work hard to get a lake stocked only to have it bombarded when the fish population peaks and big fish are starting to be caught regularly. I just don't know how you are ever going to prevent it.
Anyway, I will be out in the metro with the 100 other muskie boats chasing them on Tonka at some point this week. Good luck to all. |
|
| |
|
Location: Oswego, IL | I now totally understand why god created women.... to keep us guys from arguing with eachother over personal feelings. Just think if it was all us men in this world, beeting eachother with tree branches, arguing over who cuts thier grass better, just complete chaos! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 135
| I don't think that anyone on here thinks that there should not be interstate commerce, just that if one is making money from a states resources that it's not unreasonable to think that they should in some way pay into that state's resource pool. Saying that guides contribute their share to this by buying gas, food, lodging and paying the taxes on those just doesn't cover it, IMO. The locals who are fishing are doing the same thing, but in addition, they are paying income and property taxes.
If you travel alot to earn money in other states and that state or municipality's dept of revenue comes after you like they did me for working in other states, then you just have to deal with that. Anyone who has ever dealt with tax issues knows, they may be right, they may be wrong, but if they decide you owe them, it's on you to prove that you don't Every state has different tax laws regarding this, and different levels of interest in going after folks who do travel to make a living. I was pretty peeed after getting tax bills from other states, but hey, it's right there in the law books in Black and White. FYI, I wasn't double taxed, the taxes I paid on CA, NY, etc income didn't get taxed in IN.
Specific to the topic of making money guiding in another state, that state's taxpayers have paid the vast majority of cost in establishing and maintaining that resource, which I believe is reflected somewhat in the fact that out-of-state licenses for hunting and fishing are more $$ than those for residents. I don't think, however that a guide making money off of that resource is covered, per-se, by that difference in cost, nor is is in the spirit of that principle, IMO. It just makes sense that if it cost $$ to establish and maintain a resource that if you want to use that resource to make a living, then you need to pay into the cost of maintaining it. If you're a guide and you think you're paying your fair share by just buying local gas and burgers, you're not, IMO. Tourists are doing that, and so are folks who aren't even fishing, but without the impact to the state resource that a guide is having. Do I blame a guide for wanting to hit the best place to have success guiding musky, hell no! I'd sure do it if I were a guide. I would take my medicine, however, if the state decided to recoup some of their cost since I was making part of my living off of the resource that they established and maintain. Worral's idea about a license such as a captain's license would cover it nicely, IMO. It would make the guides cover insurance and liability, and weed out the people who aren't serious or professional. If a resort wants to have their kid guide, hey no problem as long as they meet the requirements and pay their fee. Just like fishing license, it could cost more for out-of-state guides than for in-state. If the powers that be start to believe that there is a large enough amount of $$ being made commercially off of their public resource in any state by locals or by non-locals, there will be an adjustment, you can be sure of that.
For those who think this is no big deal, take another look at the post by "Guest"
I think that this is where it could be headed, big bucks are like big musky, not that many of them, and while there are more now than before, not nearly enough to support a big influx from out of town hunters and still have a decent a safe experience for the local hunters whose tax dollars and efforts have gone towards improving that resource. Now if you added to the quote below the concept that not only were tons of people now utilizing the resource, but lots of folks who are making money off of that resource without really paying into it like the local folks are doing, I believe you'd have a pretty similar scenario there.
guest - 9/8/2009 4:46 PM
Musky23 -
Lets for arguments sake say you are a deer hunter. How would you feel if some out of state people, came in and started guiding deer on public lands in IL?
How would you feel if they started hunting the land you have been hunting for years?
What if they all talked to each other everyday about where the bucks have been moving, and when you walk out to your stand one afternoon there are three of them in the same woods chasing the same buck that you have been scouting for weeks?
Now how would you feel if pretty soon there were less and less bucks to shoot? That is where this is going.
Summing up, I'm all for guides and whoever else being able to travel anywhere they want in this great land of ours, but I think that a guides license with a professional sized fee is appropriate, and it should be more $$ for the out of state guides, but not prohibitively more, kind of like the difference , percentage-wise in out-of-state vs. in-state licenses. I bet most guides might welcome this as a way to better sift out the amateurs and wanna-be's. Then again, I could be wrong....
Edited by whit65 9/9/2009 12:40 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2084
| Anyone want to go fish MN this weekend? I have a boat... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 221
Location: Detroint Lakes, MN |
The Ducks Unlimited Volunteers in North Dakota lobbied to have out of season hunters have a later starting date so they would have more of an opportunity to hunt in un-crowded conditions.
Being a volunteer doesn't mean you don't have expectations of how your donation of time and money will turn out.
Who would volunteer money to something that had an end result which they didn't approve of, or for which they thought was a waste of effort? (not meaning what we've done has been a waste, but you can't expect people to give and not be happy with what the end results, they will stop giving sooner or later.)
JS |
|
| |
|
| Something to think about. The FM chapter of MI has been funding stocking of a new lake for several years now. We (and also the Hugh Becker foundation) are fully funding the stocking, 100%. Is it selfish of use to never want guides to show up and that lake? Or is it entirely within reason to be disgruntled if that happens?
i'm glad you brought this up, John, as i think it speaks to one of the core issues.
who "owns" the resource in any particular area?
let's use this one lake as a microcosm of the issue in general:
the lake you describe has been stocked entirely by private donations, no public money at all. at the same time, the lake itself is public waters. are the fish a public resource even though they were bought with private monies since they were placed into a public lake?
in fact, this lake has been on my radar for a few years because it's close to my family place and because of what FM-MI has been doing...
so, can i catch a muskie on that lake or will it upset the people who paid for those fish?
what if someone who's a member of the club decided to do some guiding and chose to take clients there? is that okay?
what if someone who's a MN resident but not a club member decided to guide it?
what if someone from out-of-state guided clients there?
my point is: where do you draw the line? don't try, because you can't.
at the same time i can understand how frustrating it can be to develop something good and get the sense that others are using it without "earning" it or giving back enough to the resource.
the bottom line is that unless you're raising fish in a private lake, muskies and muskie waters will always be a public resource available for people to use in lots and lots of ways. heck, we're discussing whether or not it's "right" for guides to make money on the resource and in all actuality it's technically legal to harvest one muskie every single day of the open season...
so i think instead of banging your head on the wall, the next steps are twofold:
1) do everything possible to protect the resource with size limits, education, etc.
2) be mentally and emotionally prepared for the fact that others are going to use the resource and may not be as invested in creating/preserving it.
and for you and you and you out there reading this who have a picture of a giant MN muskie hanging on your wall, ask yourself: how have i helped preserve and advance this wonderful _public_ resource?
we can't all be lobbying the legislature, putting minnows in a rearing pond, or driving a stocking truck to the lake...but for the price of ONE LURE, a donation to an MI stocking fund can help support the guys who are doing that and put a couple of fish into one of these lakes.
*** and i happen to know from personal contact with a fair number of both resident and out-of-state guides in MN that they are in fact doing their part - in fact many of them give way more than most people.
direct monetary donations, appearing as speakers at MI clubs for a low fee (which draws in people who donate to the raffles), donating free guide trips to fund-raisers, donating products from their lure companies to fund-raisers, educating clients about safe fish-handling, etc., etc., etc.
how many of you have won a trip or a lure or a dvd at an MI raffle? many of them are sold to the clubs at cost or completely donated.
it's a horrible misrepresentation to generalize them as uncaring consumers.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32955
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | If one lobbies for control of a specific public resource and is successful through legislation in gaining a benefit others cannot equally enjoy, you are no longer 'volunteering' in the sense of the word intended when those who 'volunteer' look for public approval...one is attempting to create a resource to be available to 'outsiders' only when it's approved by the folks who 'funded' the direct effort-- which may run afoul of your states expressed management goals, not to mention the fact we all pay for the MN DNR Fisheries folks (and mine) to function, and without the cooperation of the DNR the fish would not be stocked at all no matter who pays for them.
From the MN website:
http://news.exploreminnesota.com/category/fishing-report/ (brought to you by Minnesota Tourism)
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fisheries/index.html (a goodly portion of the DNR budgets in all stares comes from federal Excise taxes we ALL pay if we buy fishing gear or boats, etc) The Section of Fisheries is responsible for managing the diverse fisheries in Minnesota's 5,400 game fish lakes and 15,000 miles of streams and rivers. Staff size: 320 workers (302 in field and regional offices; 18 in St. Paul headquarters).'Annual budget: $22-$30 million, most of which comes from fishing license fees and a federal excise tax on fishing and boating equipment.'
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fisheries/muskiepike_2020.html
Fisheries management of Minnesota's lakes, rivers, and streams is based on public input as well as an understanding of fish communities and the best available science. While this plan emphasizes muskellunge and northern pike management, the Section of Fisheries Management's mission statement is "to conserve and manage Minnesota's aquatic resources and associated fish communities for their intrinsic values and long term ecological, commercial, and recreational benefits to the people of Minnesota."
Note the term 'commercial'. I bet that means tourism which means full resorts and busy guides. If it doesn't, perhaps someone can tell me what it does mean.
Not that I disagree the pressure sucks for you guys in WC and NW MN, I'm sure it does because you are not conditioned to it yet. You have 790,000 acres on 116 water bodies managed for muskie, and our State has 790 water bodies. We can spread 'em out better when looking at the entire picture although we don't have the sheer acreage. You have some MASSIVE lakes and river systems that take pressure well, but those don't seem to be the deepest portion of the subject here....it's the smaller lakes most of the conversation seems to be about. Sort of like my favorite over here, Pelican. For years Pelican had the highest creeled hours chasing muskie in the State, believe it or not. I guided there during the early tough years, and suddenly when the lake grew 'hot' from tons of volunteer and state funded stocking, LOTS of guides showed up. Now that the stocking has ceased and the muskies don't literally jump in the boat, only a couple guides work the lake. But that didn't stop the ridiculous harvest numbers there, the last creel I have access to showed a HUGE number of Muskies over 40" harvested. That's why Norm and Mike got busy and spearheaded a 50" limit effort there...and got it done. The 50" limit is now under attack, and guess from whom? Local Muskie anglers and resorts, thinking that a trophy fishery will not bring in tourism ( and you guys find it brings too many, which is right?). Hard to win, this battle.
Excellent post, lambeau.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 639
Location: Hudson, WI | John, what percentage of these lakes you are talking about are 100% privately stocked? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 221
Location: Detroint Lakes, MN |
It's definately not a black and white issue. While I agree that in the purist sense a volunteer gives without thought to self-reward or accolades. I also feel that we aren't going to volunteer our time and money with the same enthusiasm if we feel our efforts are taken for granted or being capitalized on by others who really don't have a right to. MHO of course.
There were strings attatched to our stocking project which had to be met by the DRN and Tribal fisheries dept. The tribe cannot spear these muskies and they have to adhere to any MN length and possesion laws. The DNR has to stock it as long as we have money, they can't stop without a drastic cause. So I guess we didn't really volunteer, we did what we did with condiotions.
Will that be the future of MI stocking monies? New stockings can't be used for commercial gain? (not saying I'm pushing for that) You have to be a MN resident to fish them? I don't know, that sounds very extreme, but if we're footing the bill, are we within reason to attach clauses like that?
We'll see what happens, all I know is that right or wrong, a lot of MN anglers and guides are starting to feel like they are being pushed off the waters we "own" as residents.
Maybe this will just pass on it's own.
JS
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32955
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | IMHO the issue probably will pass, as it has everywhere else this has happened, but it will probably pass sorta like a kidney stone. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 221
Location: Detroint Lakes, MN |
Moltisanti;
I'm refering to one lake. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 186
Location: West Chicago, IL | If you start thinking that you "own" the lake as a resident and you should be able to decide who gets to use a resource and for what purpose you start falling right into the same type of mentality as a group like No More Muskies. These are folks who don't want muskies stocked on "their" lakes. The "entitlement" attitude of some posters is walking a VERY slippery slope. |
|
| |
