|
|
Posts: 32934
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Let's say the density is one adult fish per acre after introduction in a 'new' lake. Let's say recruitment is enough to only sustain half that number.
Fishing will be tougher, that's for sure, but that won't hurt the upper confidence limit for the lake, which isn't realistically established with the introduction population for a number of reasons.
Delayed mortality is a low percentage of year class loss. Up to 30% of a year class of fish can be lost every year with NO angling at all.
Harvest can be a big issue, but needs to be quantified to be identified as a major reason for any actual decline that's real. Year classes of large fish will disappear eventually with no harvest.
If the population begins to drop below acceptable levels due to poor recruitment, and the desire is to maintain a number of adult fish based on what the water is managed for, stocking is the only reasonable answer. If harvest is the problem and stocking is not an option, then harvest needs to be limited. Only way to do that successfully is a size limit that makes harvest unlikely for the majority of the mature fish, protecting them for most of their lives.
Big muskies can and do eat little muskies, but I bet a stomach content study won't show enough to equal what 1/3 the largemouth bass predation on yoy muskie issues are.
The yoy will grow up. Huge chunks of the population from each year class will die from a multitude of causes. Each year class will begin the 'evolutionary process' of adaptation to the environment competing with all the other fish in that water for space and food.
Extremely simplified, but why 'new reservoir' syndrome is evident on some of the waters where the introduced population matured with little pressure and no recruitment issues. Unless fishing is banned entirely, it's likely the water will never see what the peak was again. There's no realistic and reasonably applicable cure for that far as I know.
Pewaukee Lake is near 100% put and take. Upper confidence is about 49" because of water quality and forage base. Pretty good numbers of fish are reaching that and a bit more now because of CPR. The muskie fishing is pretty good for big fish there despite HUGE pressure. It's a Metro Milwaukee area lake in an area with limited local opportunities for muskie anglers. I'd say management of this water is pretty darned good due to our DNR, the Milwaukee Chapter MI, and some other influences. Harvest is down, opportunity for big fish is up. And that lake is 'put and take'. Look to the Yahara Chain for another example that the sky is NOT necessarily going to fall.
Limiting the number of anglers is not a viable answer and everyone knows why. Expanding opportunity is for the long term, so that's a front line issue. Limiting harvest can be done by setting size limits at the upper confidence limit area. NW Ontario did that with HUGE success. Even us morons in Wisconsin are fighting for and winning 50" limits on our trophy waters. It's not easy, but by golly, we are getting it done even with our ridiculous method of deciding what our biologists are allowed to do. Cuts both ways, the CC does.
SO tell me I am wrong...MN's muskie waters have come of age, are now getting the fishing pressure we lived with here in WI for decades, and are moving through the original introduction year classes to reliance on NR and whatever stocking can be afforded and accomplished. Now MN will see what the stocked waters can do. They already know what the monster home waters like Leech and Cass will do, and that isn't bad, having that and other waters that are 10,000 years old as back-up.
Welcome to the reality of managed muskie waters and all the challenges attached. A group of you MN boys beat us WI guys up pretty good over the last decade poking all sorts of fun and abuse at our management, educational, budget, and all the other issues we have dealt with that are now becoming yours. Even called it our 'mentality' to harvest or overfish muskies. Seems that's sort of contagious, I guess.
Welcome to reality. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8834
| sworrall - 10/15/2011 10:19 AM
[...]
Welcome to reality.
There it is, in three words, what I've been trying to say for days...
|
|
| |
|
| PIKEMASTER - 10/15/2011 8:52 AM
I don't think a Muskie stamp will keep a True Muskie guy, it would kept a person that has never fished for them before that has no Idea what's he doing from fishing for them untill he commits to the rules of proper Muskies fishing.
No offense, but I don't believe this sort of elitist attitude is good for the future of the sport. We face enough obstacles, we don't need to go out of our way to pee off people that may well become strong allies in the future.
Not to mention I doubt the DNR would want to deal with this level of drama every time they are deciding what to stock. |
|
| |
|
Location: Latitude 41.3016 Longitude 88.6160 | Guest - 10/15/2011 1:15 PM
PIKEMASTER - 10/15/2011 8:52 AM
I don't think a Muskie stamp will keep a True Muskie guy, it would kept a person that has never fished for them before that has no Idea what's he doing from fishing for them untill he commits to the rules of proper Muskies fishing.
No offense, but I don't believe this sort of elitist attitude is good for the future of the sport. We face enough obstacles, we don't need to go out of our way to pee off people that may well become strong allies in the future.
Not to mention I doubt the DNR would want to deal with this level of drama every time they are deciding what to stock.
Elitist Attitude ????? Funny don't U have to take a hunting Safty Course to get a hunting licence ??? so Y not a Musky Proper Muskie Handling Course ??????
Edited by PIKEMASTER 10/15/2011 1:31 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32934
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | The hunters safety course is to protect the hunter and others in the field from getting shot. No danger there for muskie anglers, and no reason any government agency would require a course to protect a fish no matter how we personally value muskies.. |
|
| |
|
Location: Latitude 41.3016 Longitude 88.6160 | I guess I do have a Elitist Attitute about Muskies LOL LOL |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8834
| PIKEMASTER - 10/15/2011 1:29 PM
Guest - 10/15/2011 1:15 PM
PIKEMASTER - 10/15/2011 8:52 AM
[...]
Elitist Attitude ????? Funny don't U have to take a hunting Safty Course to get a hunting licence ??? so Y not a Musky Proper Muskie Handling Course ??????
I believe the main difference is that you don't muskie fish with a gun, that if mishandled can kill you and/or your fellow hunters. Hunter safety courses are about keeping the hunters safe, NOT their quarry. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1767
Location: Lake Country, Wisconsin | jonnysled - 10/14/2011 7:35 PM
how bout making everyone buy a stamp ... that'll fix it
hmm...I remember a recent write up on another site saying WI needs a musky stamp specifically citing Indiana and Minnesota as examples of what WI needs to imitate
....I see a thread complaining about MN fishing, and also another in the reports section complaining about Indiana...
I think all 3 states need the stamp 
|
|
| |
|
Location: Latitude 41.3016 Longitude 88.6160 | sworrall - 10/15/2011 1:36 PM
The hunters safety course is to protect the hunter and others in the field from getting shot. No danger there for muskie anglers, and no reason any government agency would require a course to protect a fish no matter how we personally value muskies..
Ok then a newbie buys his rod and reel for Muskies and his lures, the guy at the store said Bulldawgs are the bait U need so he goes out and nails a 40"plus Muskie on a dawg and the Muskie inhales the bait, as they do and this guy has a small 4" pliers, so he tries to get his $30.00 Dawg out of the Muskies mouth and sticks his hand in the fish mouth and the Muskie bites down ?????? I say 30 stitches, plus the muskies been on the floor of boat for 5 mins ????? Laugh or call me elitist but this happens alot.
Edited by PIKEMASTER 10/15/2011 2:48 PM
|
|
| |
|
|
Guest;
My answer to what can be done is a personal choice.
I fish with barbless hooks most of the time. I rarely measure or photo a fish. I prefer to unhook in the net and let them swim.
Those are things most anglers don't want to do.
In your view the majority of anglers are doing things the right way. You think they have the big nets, tools and don't fish when it's hot. I think that is a presumption that isn't correct. How many muskie nets have Frabill and Beckmen ever sold? It's estimateed that something like 100,000 anglers fish for muskie in MN. I doubt that the majority of them have the tools. I watch people on my home lakes take very long photo sessions, multiple poses. Put the fish back in the net, take it out again for more pics after they see the digitals that they don't like. Many of us may have a fish first ethic but IMHO more anglers don't than do.
We can't stock more fish for political and financial reasons. Getting new lakes is met with a lot of opposition and only a handful of muskie anglers care to take the time to go to a public meeting or send a letter or e-mail. Where is the money going to come from? We've been trying to raise money and get more people involved for the last decade. The response is always the same. People can't afford it or they jump on the MI is a bunch of elitists bandwagon.
The idea that we're already doing all we can do is something I don't even have a response for. That is a perception that I don't agree with.
This horse is dead, buried and needs no more beating.
JS
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32934
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Actually, no it isn't. If the fishery needs help, folks here need to know that. If there's anything they can do, I bet the majority will do what they can. Hard to know what to do if there's no facts laid out there to act on.
|
|
| |
|
| Guest - 10/15/2011 3:18 PM
In your view the majority of anglers are doing things the right way. You think they have the big nets, tools and don't fish when it's hot. I think that is a presumption that isn't correct.
JS
No, I think most people are going to get the correct equipment after a trip to the hospital.
Not that it matters, but I live on a lower density musky lake. When I observe people fishing, those that I know are targeting musky do have the correct equipment - or at least a large net - 99% of the time. How it is on more popular waters that have a "hot bite" I can't say. I usually avoid the lakes I hear alot about. |
|
| |
|
| Guest - 10/15/2011 3:18 PM
In your view the majority of anglers are doing things the right way. You think they have the big nets, tools and don't fish when it's hot. I think that is a presumption that isn't correct.
JS
No, I think most people are going to get the correct equipment after a trip to the hospital.
Not that it matters, but I live on a lower density musky lake. When I observe people fishing, those that I know are targeting musky do have the correct equipment - or at least a large net - 99% of the time. How it is on more popular waters that have a "hot bite" I can't say. I usually avoid the lakes I hear alot about.
|
|
| |
|
| This is an excerpt from a DNR study:
Although we were unable to produce a valid catch curve regression, total mortality of adult muskellunge in (Lake X) is likely relatively low. We say this primarily because our estimate of the annual exploitation rate for muskellunge was zero. No tagged fish were reported as harvested and the estimated harvest from the angler survey was zero. Also, the majority of anglers who seriously target and regularly catch muskellunge are known to practice catch and release. Additionally, a large proportion (40%) of fish we collected were relatively old (= age 10), and one fish was aged as 15. Casselman (1999) reported modal ages of 8 and 11 for males and females, respectively from muskellunge taken in the Cleithrum Project. The Cleithrum Project analyzed age data taken largely from angler-caught “trophy” muskellunge. Casselman (1996) also estimated 20% and 16% total annual mortality of male and female muskellunge, respectively.
Sounds like we're doing a good job to me... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8834
| JS
I think you are largely preaching to the choir in this venue. I doubt that anyone reading here holds muskies in any less regard than you or the rest of us. The serious muskie anglers are not the problem in my opinion, aside from the sheer number of them on your waters. I'm not doubting what you see out there. I'm sure it happens more often than we'd like to think. So that leads me to some questions:
1. For the anglers that aren't handling their fish in a manner conducive to their survival: Is it that they just don't know any better? Proper release methods are no secret - that information is there for the taking, and it is EVERYWHERE. It's in every magazine, on every TV show, every club, and you hear it from every guide and every experienced angler. So if there are those who just don't know better? How do we reach them? How do we convince them? If they are oblivious enough where they have never heard about proper release techniques, what exactly can any of us do to get through to them? I see one solution, and that's to take a rookie fishing and share your knowledge with them, so they start out with a foundation of how to safely release the fish, BEFORE they make the mistakes you speak of. The other possibility is that they just don't care. Not sure WHAT we can do about that.
2. Barbless hooks: That may save a few fish. But how many and how often? Until you can quantify that somehow, I don't see that catching on unless you legislate it and enforce it. Until then, it's a voluntary choice that I suspect many won't even consider. Those who DO try will likely only do so until it costs them a substantial sized fish, and then all bets are off. We're all out there to catch fish, not lose them.
3. Water releases: another method that might save a few fish in the long run. But a big part of the whole experience for many is having that picture of them holding that fish, ESPECIALLY if it's a big one. How do you sell that, exactly?
In the end, I think we have to accept that the fisheries were created for the purpose of public enjoyment. And enjoyment, in the broadest terms, means being able to go out there and catch muskies. There's a fine line between preserving the fishery and taking the enjoyment out of it. And when you take the enjoyment out of it for enough people, there ceases to be a reason to maintain it. Some of what's been suggested has gone beyond ridiculous and travelled well into the realm of assinine. Fees, stamps, classes, mandating what gear one must own? It was less of a hassle to get a concealed weapons permit, something I have to protect the life and safety of myself and my loved ones. That's life and death.
This is just fishing...
When we start suggesting that the safety of the fish themselves is more important than the enjoyment of the folks who fish for them, which was the purpose of putting them in the lakes to begin with? We have graduated from fanatic, to extremist, to someone whose senseless babble simply cannot be taken seriously, because they are, quite simply, f-ing NUTS.
And that, my friends, is NOT how we want to present ourselves if we're ever going to get anything positive accomplished for our fisheries ever again.
So anyone out there who wants anything better for the waters you love to fish? The absolute BEST thing you can do, is to be aware of how you present yourselves. Keep your emotions in check, for **** sakes. Speak in facts. Speak with reason. Speak kindly, be informed, and speak with intelligence. Or shut up and let those who can do that do what has to be done; because some of us, honestly, are doing more harm than good. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 512
| Wow, i dont know where/how this question took a turn, but i have heard from people and guides at their home lakes that always see a large number of dead muskies..
They also see new muskie fisherman not handling the fish correctly, probably the result of all the floaters.. I have seen many people keep fish out of the water for wayyyy to long..
Disturbing, but not much you can do about it..
Dave
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32934
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Considering all the folks visiting here who fish those waters, if there were 'large numbers' of floaters, I'd think we'd be seeing pictures of them and hearing about it regularly. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 581
Location: deephaven mn | PIKEMASTER is on the right path.....water release with the correct tools, no pictures ( it should be close to the 4 foot mark)
there is no need for law inforcement here just education, spread the word on proper practices |
|
| |
|
|
Addict; I agree with your sentiments. I'm not for imposing regs regarding barbless, limiting access or any other such things.
I don't know the answers to how to sell going barbless or water release of most fish.
I don't believe the majority of anglers are uncaring, I think that many of them hear so much in regards to how tough muskies are and how barbless hooks will lose them fish. We're told most muskies are released but I know of several hundred that have been mounted out of Big Detroit, Pelican and Lake Sallie over the last decade. Toad Lake Taxidermy has done 20-30 a year for the last 10 years. That's just one guy.
I don't know why in other circles, take trout fishermen for example, or the trophy pike and lake trout fisheries in Canada going barbless is the norm. Muskie fishermen just don't want to go there. Some ask for proof of how many fish it will save. The common sense answer is that the quicker they get unhooked the better the chance.
Do we need to quantify things exactly to realize the benefit?
I don't begrudge anyone a picture or measuring. I've been blessed with a long muskie career with lots of fish. I just don't care to know exactly how big they are anymore, or need another photo of most fish I catch. I think there are a lot of anglers out there that have caught 100,200 or 500+ fish who still feel the need to bump board and photo every fish. I just don't see why that is more important to some then helping to preserve the fishery. Personal bests or other such special fish I photo them and maybe measure too. I just think some of us are taking it to the extreme.
All I know is what I see on the water, what I hear from DNR in working with them and talking to taxidermists locally. I think many of us want to see a better picture of our fisheries than really exists.
I've always held the philosophy or being proactive rather than reactive in managing fisheries. That's just me I guess.
JS
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32934
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | JS,
That's alot of mounts. Ouch. Do the taxidermists offer replicas over there? Is it a cost issue or just not much promoting of replicas? |
|
| |
|
| I think this article would be a good read for some of the people posting here. Although it isn't directly related to musky, I think it should offer some insight.
http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,4570,7-153-10366_46403_59159-217012--... |
|
| |
|
|
Toad Lake Taxidermy did a replica for me 8 years ago. He does a great job and tries to promote them but they just don't catch on to a certain segment of the fishing population.
Other taxidermists don't do replicas around my area. I don't know how many the lesser known are guys mounting. Mark Arnold at Toad Lake is an outstanding taxidermist and a real artist when it comes to painting. He probably gets the majority of local business.
Unfortunately there is a failrly large number of people who have the idea that graphites are "not real", don't look real and want a dead fish on the wall. That is a personal choice obviously but with muskies we have to realize that there isn't a 50"er for everyone to kill. I would bet most fish that are mounted have been released before.
JS
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8834
| Well, John...
There are a lot of things we all can do in our own fishing to make sure our fish go back quickly and safely. Those of us who understand what those things are are going to make their own choices, and one can hope that they are the right choices. As it relates to the dedicated muskie anglers, the folks here, the guys in our local clubs, the names we all know, the guides, the die hards... I am not sure there is much we can do, or much more that needs to be done that can make a significant difference in the fishery with those folks. If your local taxidermists are putting up those kinds of numbers? THAT is something we can quantify, and there's no better way to impact the fishery than take a fish out of the system forever. Essentially, we're yelling at guys who keep a fish out of water for a few too many pictures, telling people to use barbless hooks, and do water releases, to offset the folks who are bonking their fish and keeping them for the wall.
Taxidermists have to make a living too, and I can understand why they might not want to tell everyone who walks in the door that they should get a replica instead. But if those numbers of fish are being harvested? If we're to preserve the fisheries, one sure fire way to do that is to decrease harvest.
Two ways to do that as I see it:
1. Higher size limits. That is something that absolutely will NOT happen, unless and until we can circle the wagons, and show up in great numbers to voice our opinion. That requires people getting off their backsides, and that's a challenge that nobody has solved as of yet. How DO we get people to show up and speak up? That's what it takes. Maybe that's something we tackle at the club level?? We do youth outings and Canada outings, fundraisers, and raffles, tournaments, family night, kids fishing derbys.... Why not organize trips to the hearings? Why not have recriutment at the club meetings for folks to go to the hearings, contact the legislators, make a few phone calls? There is not a muskie fisherman ALIVE that doesn't want better fishing. Where is the disconnect between wanting it and making it happen? I suspect that most just don't know what to do. It's not us changing our fishing that's going to change our fisheries. It's us changing THE fishing. And that's where we fall short.
2. Change the harvest mentality. There's no longer any REASON to get a skin mount. Oh, but it's the actual fish! Horse Hockey! It's the skin, stretched over a piece of styrofoam, and painted. It is no more, and perhaps even LESS accurate than a replica. So why ARE people still keeping muskies for the wall? Perhaps because they just don't know any better? Seems to me we need to focus our efforts where they will accomplish the most. And it appears that harvest is still a very huge issue. I find it difficult to understand why you'd harvest a 20 year old fish you don't want to eat, to get a skin mount that eventually degrades, over releasing the fish and getting a replica that's made to the dimensions of your fish and painted to look like it.
So... Why DO people kill fish and get skin mounts? And what do we need to do to get them to realize there are better ways, BEFORE they actually do it? |
|
| |
|
| Besides education and focusing on C&R and having the right tools etc, we should push for 50 inch size limits mabe even prohibit anything but replicas when it comes to muskies. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 74
Location: Brainerd, MN 56401 | YES....you are being selfish. Didn't you learn to share in kindergarden. Quit whining and you'll be happier.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 90
Location: Ohio | guest - 10/17/2011 7:51 AM Besides education and focusing on C&R and having the right tools etc, we should push for 50 inch size limits mabe even prohibit anything but replicas when it comes to muskies. Won't work and will never happen on the replica only part
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32934
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | 'Higher size limits. That is something that absolutely will NOT happen, unless and until we can circle the wagons, and show up in great numbers to voice our opinion. That requires people getting off their backsides, and that's a challenge that nobody has solved as of yet. How DO we get people to show up and speak up? That's what it takes.'
Wisconsin is getting it done state wide for our numbers lakes and one at a time for our trophy waters. Public participation at the CC meetings voting on proposals brought by special interests for and against. We showed up the last few years in numbers that were sufficient, and we won the day...so far.
A legislator decided to try to meddle with the regs once, and public outcry and lack of cooperation in Madison shut that down. |
|
| |
|
| I think everyone can improve fish handling, myself included, and make better choices on when to fish to limit stress on them. (i.e. fishing in hot water, or in very high winds, if anyone is interested I wrote a couple of articles in EA years back, one with MN DNR biologist Dan Iserman that talks about fish stress and handling.)
Other than that the answer to reducing pressure on individual waters involves getting more waters. That is something that takes a big voice and organization to do, and that is where we are very lacking as a group. I know many of the people that come here do help, but the vast majority have never been to a public meeting about stocking new lakes. We have to get people to do more on that end. We can't let the lake assc. and small numbers of locals dictate what happens because they are the ones that show up.
We need to get involved and quit making excuses to why some of us don't/won't do that.
A side note, with the new 48" limit numbers of killed fish should go down, that just makes sense. It was surprising to me how many of the fish mounted around here locally were in the 42-46" area.
JS |
|
| |
|
Posts: 20254
Location: oswego, il | One thing that boggles my mind is why these issues are not brought to light in Muskie magazine. Very rare to see any issues to be voted on or petitioned for in the magazine. I hate to call it fear mongering but other organizations use it to great success. Beat the drum in the magazine then the chest when progress is made in the magazine. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 90
Location: Ohio | As I stated before I just started muskie fishing but how does "high winds" harm muskie? drying them up while they are out of the water?
|
|
| |
