|
|
Posts: 566
Location: Elgin, IL | Flambeauski - 2/27/2013 3:07 PM
If all the muskie fisherman start going to Dane county so they can troll and the tourism in Vilas dries up the public will see the error of their ways and legalize it.
Yep. That would be a shame. Then you might see alot of FOR SALE signs on businesses and such.
Can I get a definition of what a yahoo is?
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 41
Location: PA | Isn't motor trolling is allowed in 49.5 states... |
|
| |
|
| Bytor - 2/27/2013 4:37 PM
BenR - 2/26/2013 12:56 PM
I'm really disappointed in some conservative folks on here who think it is okay for the government to limit my choices when angling. Northern Wisconsin is the only place in that I know of that doesn't allow trolling. It isn't the only state with small lakes.
It is long over due to allow trolling on all Wisconsin waters.
Once again, a basic error in thinking. WI is actually the place where government DOESN'T LIMIT YOUR CHOICES WHEN IT COMES TO ANGLING!! You can choose to fish motor trolling waters, or non motor trolling waters, or you can choose to row troll anywhere in the state, north, south, and in between. Can you say that about the surrounding states? Why do they not allow you the choice of fishing non motor trolling waters? Seems kind of like those governments are the ones limiting your choices. WI is all about freedom of choice, but you want to take it away from anglers and mandate their choices for your own selfish purpose. Cruel you! |
|
| |
|
| FSF - 2/27/2013 5:40 PM
Once again, a basic error in thinking. WI is actually the place where government DOESN'T LIMIT YOUR CHOICES WHEN IT COMES TO ANGLING!! You can choose to fish motor trolling waters, or non motor trolling waters, or you can choose to row troll anywhere in the state, north, south, and in between. Can you say that about the surrounding states? Why do they not allow you the choice of fishing non motor trolling waters? Seems kind of like those governments are the ones limiting your choices. WI is all about freedom of choice, but you want to take it away from anglers and mandate their choices for your own selfish purpose. Cruel you!
There is some "interesting" logic on this thread, but this one takes the cake. So, prohibiting trolling in the three counties with the highest concentration of freshwater lakes in the world actually "enhances", rather than "restricts", our fishing rights and opportunities? You really believe that? |
|
| |
|
| I don't think he is from WI, my guess is the south. BR |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | Guest - 2/27/2013 6:40 PM
So, prohibiting trolling in the three counties with the highest concentration of freshwater lakes in the world actually "enhances", rather than "restricts", our fishing rights and opportunities? You really believe that?
yes, absolutely
|
|
| |
|
| Guest - 2/27/2013 6:40 PM
FSF - 2/27/2013 5:40 PM
Once again, a basic error in thinking. WI is actually the place where government DOESN'T LIMIT YOUR CHOICES WHEN IT COMES TO ANGLING!! You can choose to fish motor trolling waters, or non motor trolling waters, or you can choose to row troll anywhere in the state, north, south, and in between. Can you say that about the surrounding states? Why do they not allow you the choice of fishing non motor trolling waters? Seems kind of like those governments are the ones limiting your choices. WI is all about freedom of choice, but you want to take it away from anglers and mandate their choices for your own selfish purpose. Cruel you!
There is some "interesting" logic on this thread, but this one takes the cake. So, prohibiting trolling in the three counties with the highest concentration of freshwater lakes in the world actually "enhances", rather than "restricts", our fishing rights and opportunities? You really believe that?
Hey, some of these people also believe a 69lb came came from up there also. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | UP Musky - 2/27/2013 8:28 PM
Hey, some of these people also believe a 69lb came came from up there also.
worth another read
Edited by jonnysled 2/27/2013 9:02 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 285
Location: NE Wisconsin | To those who think 3 line trolling is too much pressure on smaller WI lakes. What do you think about 3+ line tip up fishing on these same small lakes for days at a time. Sometimes the lines aren't taken out all weekend. If 3 line trolling is too much pressure, how about all of those tip ups set exactly on the spot on the spot, for many hours a day and then day after day, right on the right spot. If you have ever fished a small NE WI lake with 3 tip ups and are opposed to 3 line trolling those same lakes, you're blowing smoke. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1760
Location: new richmond, wi. & isle, mn | Our side of the state motor trolling been allowed as long as I can remember. Never really seen a problem with it. I too troll at times for a change of pace,take a break, or just check out open water. I believe trolling is an art . A lot more then just drinking beer and dragging a bait around . Respecting Vilas and the other traditional musky counties I understand the tradition. Some things that have bothered me more is the three lines . Boats will sit on their favorite crib or pile with nine lighted bobbers for weeks every night till the bite is done "aka fished out". I've always liked the fact that Wisconsin had the different regulations and fishing opportunities. When I have a n opportunity to fish with my dad for muskies lately It's been trolling. He'll be eighty this summer and working bulldawgs is not in his arsenal. I guess I understand both sides of the fence. I hate to see the states go back to macromanagement because they think it will be cheaper to manage. I don't believe its smart to throw the whole state under one legal blanket. |
|
| |
|
| jonnysled - 2/27/2013 8:15 PM
Guest - 2/27/2013 6:40 PM
So, prohibiting trolling in the three counties with the highest concentration of freshwater lakes in the world actually "enhances", rather than "restricts", our fishing rights and opportunities? You really believe that?
yes, absolutely
That's just ridiculous.
How's about we ban bucktails in Sawyer County, and then ban suckers in Iron County, to further enhance fishing opportunities in Wisconsin?
Sound silly, perhaps? Well, it's the exact same logic.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1767
Location: Lake Country, Wisconsin | WHY exactly should anglers be allowed to use 3 lines again? and how in any way is that good for the resource?
If it is simply an ice fishing thing...then make different rules for ice fishing?
if not, then what exactly is the reasoning? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Guest,
Trolling is already prohibited. This is about leaving it that way or changing things. Bad analogy. |
|
| |
|
| Guest - 2/27/2013 9:30 PM
That's just ridiculous.
How's about we ban bucktails in Sawyer County, and then ban suckers in Iron County, to further enhance fishing opportunities in Wisconsin?
Sound silly, perhaps? Well, it's the exact same logic.
Those who know me, probably wonder why I haven't jumped on this already, but I'm here now, and, I fully endorse your proposal. When can we ban those suckers?
I really like the way you think. And no, I won't be upset if you try and ban suckers state wide, but Iron County??? Great place to start!!!!!!!!!! |
|
| |
|
| sworrall - 2/27/2013 9:58 PM
Guest,
Trolling is already prohibited. This is about leaving it that way or changing things. Bad analogy.[
The example was not offered as an analogy, and FSF's point wasn't dependent on what's currently law, so I don't what's "bad" about it. If you are following along, the example was offered as a response, taking FSF's reasoning to its logical conclusion: FSF says that having "choice" between trolling and non-trolling counties "enhances" fishing opportunities statewide.
I am saying that if we had a county or two where bucktails or suckers (thanks FSF for being candid on that) were prohibited, we would also have additonal "choices" and thus further "enhance" opportunities statewide.
Why not try to explain the differences in logic between those two propositions? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | 'I am saying that if we had a county or two where bucktails or suckers (thanks FSF for being candid on that) were prohibited, we would also have additonal "choices" and thus further "enhance" opportunities statewide. '
There IS no 'logic' involved with this statement.
There is no 'logic' involved with not allowing trolling.
Logic has nothing to do with any of this.
Tradition certainly does. Many folks up here value tradition quite a bit. I'm not going to try to call this because the vote may be close. I personally don't have a preference.
By the way, when debating with FSF, it's a seriously inadvisable tactic to 'lead with your chin'. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8782
| Guest - 2/27/2013 6:40 PM
FSF - 2/27/2013 5:40 PM
Once again, a basic error in thinking. WI is actually the place where government DOESN'T LIMIT YOUR CHOICES WHEN IT COMES TO ANGLING!! You can choose to fish motor trolling waters, or non motor trolling waters, or you can choose to row troll anywhere in the state, north, south, and in between. Can you say that about the surrounding states? Why do they not allow you the choice of fishing non motor trolling waters? Seems kind of like those governments are the ones limiting your choices. WI is all about freedom of choice, but you want to take it away from anglers and mandate their choices for your own selfish purpose. Cruel you!
There is some "interesting" logic on this thread, but this one takes the cake. So, prohibiting trolling in the three counties with the highest concentration of freshwater lakes in the world actually "enhances", rather than "restricts", our fishing rights and opportunities? You really believe that?
I depends on how you define "opportunity"... Personally, I cherish the opportunity to spend a Saturday in July fishing on a small Vilas County lake and not hear a sound except for the loons, and not see another boat all day long. There are few places like that. We can troll just about anywhere. We can dodge pleasure boaters and jet ski's anywhere. I can take my life into my hands fishing the Fox Chain on a weekend, where there are actually so many boats that there are crashes every season. There's no shortage of places where you can troll to your hearts content. Why not leave the few pristine places where you can only troll with oars alone? So a few people can catch more fish? You can troll in Adams County, and Iron County, and in Michigan. None of them are far away. Maybe the tradition isn't about keeping the fisheries healthy, or holding fast to the "old ways" as much as it is keeping the lakes quiet and unspoiled. I'd bet the people who are against that are the ones who have never been able to enjoy it. |
|
| |
|
| sworrall - 2/27/2013 10:42 P
By the way, when debating with FSF, it's a seriously inadvisable tactic to 'lead with your chin'.
LOL, not sure whether "debate" is the right term, but point taken.
 |
|
| |
|
Posts: 3868
| Troll but limit lines and kick the keeper size limit WAY up then limit the number of tanker fish any one guy can take per year.
Tradition is usually not in the best interest of the fishery. If it were, to hell with spears, I would be fishing for food with home-made explosives. And I would do great. But many legal issues, dontcha know. If you want tradition in WI then use gill nets and spears. That was the original tradition, like it or not.
So the answer is to troll with home-made explosives. End of the thread.
|
|
| |
|
Location: Madison, WI | i've spent a lot of time at the family cabins on lakes in MN where trolling is allowed. when someone trolls past the end of the dock, everyone smiles and waves at them (same for slow-moving pontoon cruises). but when a jet-ski buzzes by, everyone curses under their breath.
the idea that banning trolling keeps lakes "pristine" where jet-skis drive around is laughable.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | do they keep rowing when they wave? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1141
Location: NorthCentral WI | On many of the small lakes I fish in N WI there are these "slow-moving pontoons" you speak of. Although they will often repeatedly cruise within 20 yards of guys casting when the entire rest of the lake is wide open. In effect making laps around the fishermen. I typically do not smile and wave at these folks. Other party boats that keep there distance are great. Often times I think they just want to see what you are fishing for, what you are using, etc... I'd be willing to bet there would be quite a few pontoons pulling 3, 6, 9, maybe even 12 lines behind to give them a shot at a fish too. Then when they get one they will use thier walleye net to lift it into the boat and proceed in having no idea what they are doing. Sounds like good times.
It will happen too. But at least now they will have the "opportunity" to catch a musky, considering they do not have any of the right gear for casting.
Edited by MartinTD 2/28/2013 6:40 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | By the way here is where you can troll in WI. Doesn't seem too limiting to me.
Trolling is currently allowed on the following inland waters:
•All waters of Barron, Bayfield, Burnett, Dane, Douglas, Grant, Iowa, LaFayette, Polk, Racine, Richland, Rusk, Taylor, Washburn and Waukesha Counties;
•the Wisconsin River including sloughs, bayous and flowages from County Highway A downstream (east of Tomahawk, WI in Lincoln County), excluding Lake Mohawksin, and excluding that portion of the Castle Rock Flowage north of the County Highway G bridge;
•the Chippewa river including sloughs, bayous and flowages up to the flowing portion of all tributary streams from the Holcombe flowage, Chippewa county, downstream;
•the Fox River from Buffalo Lake downstream to the DePere Dam, and
Additional waters
The following named lakes and rivers, their flowages and sloughs, also allow trolling.
•Adams County - Mason; Wisconsin River (including Castle Rock and Pentwell Flowages)
•Ashland County - Kakagon River and Slough
•Brown County - Fox River
•Buffalo County - Chippewa River
•Calumet County - Lake Winnebago
•Chippewa County - Chain; Long (T32N, R8W) including Herde Lake. On the Chippewa River (including Lake Wissota, Old Abe, Chippewa Falls, and Cornell flowages and tributaries of the river from their mouths upstream to the first dam or lake), motor trolling is permitted, but only up to the first road, bridge orrailroad bridge. On the Holcombe Flowage and tributaries, motor trolling is permitted up to the flowing portion of the tributary streams.
•Clark County - Arbutus
•Columbia County - Columbia; Wisconsin River (including Lake Wisconsin all impoundments and sloughs)
•Crawford County - Wisconsin River
•Dodge County - Beaver Dam; Fox; Sinnissippi
•Door County - Clarks; Kangaroo
•Dunn County - Menomin; Tainter. Chippewa River including streams flowing into the Chippewa River from their mouths up to the first road or railroad bridge, motor trolling is permitted.
•Eau Claire County - Altoona; Eau Claire. Chippewa River (includes Dells Pond and tributaries upstream to the first dam or lake), motor trolling is permitted (including tributaries, but only up to the first road or railroad bridge).
•Florence County - Halsey
•Fond du Lac County - Lake Winnebago
•Forest County - Butternut; Franklin; Lucerne; Metonga; Pickerel; Pine; Wabikon
•Green Lake County - Big Green; Maria; Puckaway; Fox River
•Jackson County - Arbutus
•Jefferson County - Koshkonong; Rock Lake
•Juneau County - Wisconsin River (including all impoundments and sloughs, except that portion of the Castle Rock Flowage north of the County Highway G bridge); Kilburn Flowage
•Kenosha County - Elizabeth
•La Crosse County - Neshonoc
•Langlade County - Post (Lower); Post (Upper); Rolling Stone; Pickeral
•Lincoln County - Spirit River Flowage; Wisconsin River from County Highway A downstream, excluding Lake Mohawksin
•Marathon County - Big Eau Pleine Reservoir upstream to highway 153 bridge; Wisconsin River (including all impoundments and sloughs
•Marinette County - High Falls Reservoir; Noquebay
•Marquette County - Buffalo; Mason; Fox River (downstream from Buffalo Lake)
•Oconto County - Christie; Machickanee (Stiles Pond); White Potato
•Oneida County - Columbus; Rainbow Flowage; Sugar Camp; Thunder; Willow Flowage
•Outagamie - Fox River
•Pepin County - Chippewa River including tributaries up to the first road or railroad bridge
•Portage County - Little Eau Pleine Flowage east of county highway "O"; Wisconsin River (including all impoundments and sloughs)
•Price County - Pike; Round
•Rock County - Koshkonong
•St. Croix County - Cedar
•Sauk County - Redstone; Wisconsin River (including Lake Wisconsin and all impoundments and sloughs)
•Sawyer County - Big Lake Chetac; Grindstone; Lac Court Oreilles; Nelson; Round; Whitefish; Windigo
•Shawano County - Shawano
•Sheboygan County - Sheboygan Marsh (including Sheboygan Lake and its tributaries upstream to the first road crossing)
•Walworth County - Beulah; Como; Delavan; Geneva; Whitewater
•Washington County - Big Cedar; Pike
•Waupaca County - Partridge; White
•Waushara County - Poygan; Fox River
•Winnebago County - Winnebago Pool Lakes (includes Butte des Morts, Poygan, Winnebago, Winneconne); Rush; Little Lake Butte des Morts; Fox River
•Wood County - Wisconsin River (including all impoundments and sloughs)
|
|
| |
|
| You sconnie guys are funny. |
|
| |
|
| To FSF: I'm pretty sure you can row troll in any state you want. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | It apperas a lot arguing here have forgotten the fact we are not proposing to take anything away from you as you currently cannot do it in some areas. Your arguements for trolling may make more sense if it was currently allowed, and we were looking to take it away.
Neuman you mentioned the good far out weigh the bad. How so? What is the good? The ONLY reason to allow trolling is to simplify the rules. The bad...think back to when backtrolling was allowed. The argument is it is different times now and that wouldn't happen again. I ask how sure are all of you that it wouldn't happen again? How many 40-60# muskies will be caught trolling that will fall victim to the "it ws badly hooked and thus didn't survive" excuse? Most are claiming guys aren't going to start flocking to northern WI to troll. Are you so sure on that? Lots of prime waters up there to troll that I know guys have mentioned "just imagine if we could troll this lake what we may catch". I know if it is allowed I would be doing it because man there is some great opportunity to capitalize on some fisheries. Again I said CAPITALIZE on some fisheries. If I am allowed to do it I will, but I would rather it not be allowed as you only need a ew bad seeds that don't respect the resource to ruin it for all.
There are lots and lots of anglers out there that don't have the same C&R mentality that us onhere have. Walleyes...Most people target to eat. There is no doubt in my mind that trolling would change the fisheries up there.
DNR claims there is no advantage of one method over another...I take that for what it's worth. Where is the facts behind that statement come from? Is it based on catch rates in S. WI waters? Can those waters really be compared to N. WI waters? Is there the amount of walleye anglers on those waters equivalent to the waters in question? How can you say trolling in Vilas will be no advantage over casting in Vilas if you currently cannot practice both to compare. Also bag limits are set based on estimated catch rates, spearing quota, and population estimate. If a DNR currently accounts for say 4000 walleyes will be harvested by anglers in a given year on a given lake they set the bag limit to ensure it maintains a healthy population. However what is missing is most of those walleyes are probably caught in spring and fall when they are shallower and easy to target. Now throw in you can troll, and the number you catch in the summer will drsatically increase. Sure you can still only keep your limit, but where as in the past you may not have hit your limit you now do while trolling. So by the end of the year rather than the typical 4000 harvested you now have 6000 harvested. The DNR may then decide the lake can not sustain that kind of harvest, and reduce the bag limit from 2 to 1 the following years. Guaranteed the fisherman will not like that route. However rather than look at why it was reduced they will blame the Native Americans and their spearing when in reality it was reduced because of their improved success. All the while they were still following the bag limit as the DNR suggests shouldn't be a problem if people adhere to it.
Some waters flat out cater to trolling, and some flat out cater to casting.
I would rather be proactive in trying to keep resources healthy than to be reactive when a resource starts suffering. Trolling will either have no affect on a resource, or will negatively affect it. Not trolling will always have a positive affect on a resource compared to trolling.
One more thought on the no advanatge. I will take North Twin Lake although I would consider it large enough to troll and would accept it there. Can you tell me trolling would have no advantage over the non-trollers in mid summer when the walleyes are holding in deep water and relating to ciscos? |
|
| |
|
| I would rather be proactive in trying to keep resources healthy than to be reactive when a resource starts suffering. Trolling will either have no affect on a resource, or will negatively affect it. Not trolling will always have a positive affect on a resource compared to trolling.
It's perfectly okay to dislike trolling, and the "tradition" argument is reasonable enough in it's own way I suppose.
But please don't spread misinformation: the DNR (You know, those fish biologist and fisheries management types?) says very clearly that it would not harm the fishery. This is evidence-based, not a "best guess" situation. Trolling has not harmed fisheries in other areas of WI or other states.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | 12LinePete - 2/28/2013 7:48 AM
I would rather be proactive in trying to keep resources healthy than to be reactive when a resource starts suffering. Trolling will either have no affect on a resource, or will negatively affect it. Not trolling will always have a positive affect on a resource compared to trolling.
It's perfectly okay to dislike trolling, and the "tradition" argument is reasonable enough in it's own way I suppose.
But please don't spread misinformation: the DNR (You know, those fish biologist and fisheries management types? ) says very clearly that it would not harm the fishery. This is evidence-based, not a "best guess" situation. Trolling has not harmed fisheries in other areas of WI or other states.
Not spreading misinformation at all. How can trolling improve a fishery? I said it will either not change it or hurt it. That’s a pretty accurate statement I would think. Also trolling most definitely hurt fisheries the last time it was in effect in N. WI. THAT is a fact that cannot be disputed! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| Yeah I will say the Pontooners sure took trolling to a "new level" on the north shore of Mille Lacs! I seen quite a few of them loaded with people, big mast systems covering tons of water. Ohh and how can I forget the dead rolling giant ski's being towed on a rope off the back of them. That really worked out well for that system didnt it??? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 566
Location: Elgin, IL | Travis, you make some really good points. Probably the best ones as far as the No-Troll idea.
FSF wants to save Traditions on one hand, and ban other Traditions just as fast....
It's a good discussion, I can see both sides. I am still wondering if I'm a yahoo....or if I'm an overweight slob that would love trolling up there because I'm lazy.
But what I'd like first, is to see the WI DNR clarify the law regarding Position Fishing (with suckers) That should be job 1.
Edited by Northwind Mark 2/28/2013 8:32 AM
|
|
| |
