Muskie Discussion Forums
| ||
| Moderators: Slamr | View previous thread :: View next thread |
| Jump to page : < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... > Now viewing page 2 [30 messages per page] Muskie Fishing -> General Discussion -> Muskies Inc FFS Position Statement |
| Message Subject: Muskies Inc FFS Position Statement | |||
North of 8 |
| ||
gimruis - 5/20/2024 8:49 AM ARmuskyaddict - 5/18/2024 11:10 AM Kill and eat crappie with FFS OK, but Catch more muskies and release them ("possibly" kill them in the process) not OK. That doesn't make any sense. Crappies and sunfish are generally not being released with this technology, especially in the winter during ice fishing. Muskies are being released. Most of us that specifically target muskies are very good about handling and doing it properly so the fish survives. Panfish are the species on the losing end of this and its not even close. Constant, year round pressure and targeted by meat hunters. Bag limits are going to have to come down on them soon. While not statewide, in WI a number of lakes have seen a bag limit reduction on panfish. The chain I live on has had that for 7 years now. The "meat" fishermen that used to hit the crappies hard in late winter no longer show up. They would fill a five gallon bucket with 6 inch crappies and did it with just regular flashers. | |||
| Angling Oracle |
| ||
Posts: 353 Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | Shooting ducks on the water, turkeys out of trees, pushing deer out of tiny bluffs or shooting over a bait pile (in Sask) lobbing an arrow into an elk at 70 yds... Sharpshooting muskies. All legal (here). Ethical? For many folks and for sure for myself, not at all. Legal does not equal ethical. Do the deer, turkeys, ducks, elk care how they are harvested or wounded? Nope. Dead or wounded ethically or unethically is irrelevant to them. It ultimately is a "fair chase" issue. One has to dig deep and consider why you are out in the woods or water to begin with. If you are pro-sharpshooting you are allowed to go do it. If you are feeling queasy about going and doing it because it just doesn't feel right and/or that you know that others disapprove of it - then this step by MI is achieving what it is meant to do. Edited by Angling Oracle 5/20/2024 12:31 PM | ||
| BNelson |
| ||
Location: Contrarian Island | while ffs will never be outlawed I do hope the tactic of sharp shooting is illegal at some point in the near future... with stocking #s basically everywhere going down, and pressure only increasing I don't see ffs as a good thing .... I have also debated with friends for a long time it is over the line in my opinion of what is considered fair chase... | ||
| esoxaddict |
| ||
Posts: 8772 | Some guys won't ever get the fair chase thing. From where I sit, sharp shooting just doesn't seem like it would be much fun. Muskies are easy to catch. There just aren't many of them. Not knowing if you'll catch one, or even see one is a big part of why a lot of us fish for them. You actually feel like you accomplished something when you get one to eat. FFS? Not so much... | ||
| Brett Waldera |
| ||
Posts: 108 | I look at the debate on FFS extremely similar to the debate when Vexilar unveiled its new ice fishing sonar and color changing flashers. Everyone thought that the fishery was doomed. How many would go ice fishing for panfish today without some sort of electronics technology? I am not sure I would. I get it, panfish and muskies are not comparable due to population, but the point is, the sky didn't fall when everyone thought it would. The thing I don't understand is why it's so important for people to have to pick a side on FFS? What difference in your life does it really make how/if someone else is using it? If it is a legal piece of equipment to use, then I feel people are entitled to use it as they see fit and how it works for them. I own FFS and I use it for ice fishing, Panfish, walleyes, and I use it in the fall when sucker fishing muskies to know if there is a fish behind my suckers. I do not "Sharpshoot" as that is not fishing, from my perspective. If someone else chooses to use the technology to "sharpshoot", I guess that is their option, but I personally am not going to get upset by it. Why should "I" feel I have to choose how someone else enjoys their time on the water if they are within the law?? If Livesope is proven to have a negative effect on Muskie populations, make the effort to ban or boycott it out of existence like was more or less done with single hook sucker rigs. Let's have the DNR start to monitor the technology and its effects on different fish species and make logical conclusions based on actual evidence and data. Until then, I think many of us should watch our own bobber. Brett Waldera | ||
| 7.62xJay |
| ||
Posts: 523 Location: NW WI | Brett- How would you study it accurately? I spose some lakes could be glassed and recorded as to how many anglers are actively pursuing muskies with FFS, and than compare that data with fish populations and monitor it over years to see how extensive the impact may or may not be. But I'm pretty sure Kirby can already attest to that data on V. Or, the DNR could go out sharpshooting themselves and record their catches and tag the caught fish to record delayed mortality while also contrasting their catch rate to creel survey data to form a figure as to what the "increased catch is". Separately, almost sounds to me that in the future, as a happy medium...We all may be discussing something like "Catch limits". 3 fish per person netted a day, and your done. I can see the clickbait titles already. "WE CAUGHT OUR LIMIT IN THE FIRST HOUR!". Edited by 7.62xJay 5/21/2024 8:54 AM | ||
| raftman |
| ||
Posts: 539 Location: WI | I learned about CPR watching Simply Fishing on PBS when I got home from school. Bob always told me to do it at the end of the episode and I did. Education on the negative impacts of sharpshooting by groups like MI as well as visible leaders in the fishing community is the right approach. | ||
| gimruis |
| ||
Posts: 145 | North of 8 - 5/20/2024 11:30 AM gimruis - 5/20/2024 8:49 AM ARmuskyaddict - 5/18/2024 11:10 AM Kill and eat crappie with FFS OK, but Catch more muskies and release them ("possibly" kill them in the process) not OK. That doesn't make any sense. Crappies and sunfish are generally not being released with this technology, especially in the winter during ice fishing. Muskies are being released. Most of us that specifically target muskies are very good about handling and doing it properly so the fish survives. Panfish are the species on the losing end of this and its not even close. Constant, year round pressure and targeted by meat hunters. Bag limits are going to have to come down on them soon. While not statewide, in WI a number of lakes have seen a bag limit reduction on panfish. The chain I live on has had that for 7 years now. The "meat" fishermen that used to hit the crappies hard in late winter no longer show up. They would fill a five gallon bucket with 6 inch crappies and did it with just regular flashers. Yes, there will be more of this coming in the future. I could see many of them becoming C & R only too. My parents fish on a statewide amateur walleye circuit and a few teams are completely mopping up because they have multiple FFS/live sonar units. The rest of the circuit cannot compete unless they fork over 15 grand to upgrade. Its taking the fun out of it. This is not a pro circuit where sponsors pay for the gear either. | ||
| xcskier_hunter |
| ||
Posts: 20 | I agree it would be tough to conduct, even more difficult to convince anglers of the results one way or the other. I don't think anyone can argue that FFS does not increase angler efficacy based on how it's been employed in fishing tournaments, looking at PMTT and particularly the major bass tours (not to mention crappie tournaments). You'd undoubtedly be severely handicapped to not have FFS while competing against those with it. Sure, there may be specific scenarios where it's useless but those seem be less common as the technology improves. The next logical question is whether these increased increased angler efficacy negatively impact the musky population. I think once could argue that even with perfect handling and C&R there is some mortality, meaning anything that any increase in catch rate will hurt the population. But another argument would be that the fish will just adapt over time to the technology. To answer the question on whether the musky population has declined or just adapted with a scientific study is a bit more tricky because many musky populations are already on a downslide, so what'd you be trying to figure out is whether FFS increases the rate of decline. This is exacerbated by the fact that muskies in places like northern WI live 20+ years, so the time-scale of the study to definitively prove the negative effects of FFS might be so long that if FFS is proven to be negative it may be so entrenched that it's difficult to eliminate. This is why many states preemptively banned drones for hunting, rather than waiting for studies to determine their effect. I also doubt that Alaska used studies to determine that hunting on the same day that you fly in was negatively impacting populations. One interesting way to study the effect of electronics in general would be take a set of lakes and designate some as electronics free and others with no limit on electronics and to compare catch rates and other population health metrics over time. This on its own would yield interesting data but what I'd also be interested to see is what would happen if the designations were then reversed. How would anglers with no electronics fare on waters that previously did limit them versus anglers using electronics on waters where they have been limited for an extended time period? If the relative success rates between the two groups remained the same then that'd be good evidence that FFS is not having a negative effect. However, population health metrics may be a more telling result to eliminate the initial performance bump any new tool provides before the fish have become conditioned. | ||
| jasonvkop |
| ||
Posts: 611 Location: Michigan | “Fair Chase” is a concept that hunters have long promoted. This is a practice in that the hunter does not take game with an unfair advantage over the game animal. The same concept applies to muskie fishing. Fair/unfair is always difficult to deal with as it's subjective to the person. One could argue having a 50k boat, 10 rod/reel combos, multiple graphs, GPS, internet information, etc already make it wildly unfair to the fish. | ||
| jamesb |
| ||
Posts: 66 | When you have a rifle and the animal doesn't, I'm pretty sure that's unfair already. I guess you could say certain ways are more "sporting" than others. | ||
| xcskier_hunter |
| ||
Posts: 20 | Boone and Crocket's principles of fair chase are interesting to look at and consider how they relate to technology in fishing (not necessarily just FFS): https://www.boone-crockett.org/principles-fair-chase Some particular points of particular interest are: "Defines 'unfair advantage' as when the game (fish) does not have a reasonable chance to escape". This is definitely a gray area as Jason rightly points out and may also depend on the ability of the angler. "Measures success not in the quantity of game taken, but by the quality of the chase". Something I personally believe in and I'd suspect most musky fishermen believe in, since there are many fish that are far easier to catch than muskies. "Embraces the 'No guarantees' nature of hunting (fishing)". If musky fishing was simple, would muskies be as prized as they are today? "Uses technology in a way that does not diminish the importance of developing skills as a hunter (fisherman) or reduces hunting (fishing) to just shooting". Probably the most relevant point in regards to technology like FFS. I think it's also important to point out the idea of "fair chase" is more of an ethic than a strict definition, and it was born out of a need to protect and recover game species that had been decimated by unregulated market hunting. By applying a fair chase ethic, it's possible for a larger number of people to participate an activity such as regulated hunting or fishing without harming the resource, creating user group that can ultimately advocate on the behalf of that resource in a mutualistic relationship. Edited by xcskier_hunter 5/21/2024 2:17 PM | ||
| CincySkeez |
| ||
Posts: 630 Location: Duluth | Most the people I have talked to in person since the MI statement have responded something like this, "Well I don't think the way I use the tech is unfair." Which cool, but I think they are missing the point. If it's available, it will be abused until there are real consequences. Or the new crowd wins and all of us outdated folks can move to a "purer" pursuit until we die. The future is not bright if the overall attitude is "I know it's a problem, but I'm not the problem." | ||
| sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32880 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | 'I get it, panfish and muskies are not comparable due to population, but the point is, the sky didn't fall when everyone thought it would.' I have seen ice fishing since the advent of sophisticated sonar literally strip entire year classes of fish from some of the lakes I fish. In one case the lake was totally ruined with very few predator fish left and all the pannies severely stunted. I'm betting the 'lake by lake' moves to limit panfish and predator fish harvest will become a thing on most lakes. Most of our muskie lakes are put and take, and stocking is already looking tough for many. It's already happened with strong support on some muskie waters by placing the size limit so high the likelihood of a harvested fish is statistically insignificant. In the not-so-distant future I see a number of put-and-take lakes not getting much if any stocking, and the lakes that do taking on the pressure. I'm a glass-half-full guy and am still concerned. Muskies are crazy expensive to raise and stock, and the money and will just ain't there. One more time....the issue is not the tech. It's sharpshooting by the definition provided earlier, which prompted the MI statement. We were quite aware some would react with -you can't tell me what to do'- and decided that was a good thing, as opposing opinions spark debate. | ||
| Angling Oracle |
| ||
Posts: 353 Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | The position and rationale is spot on. Saved this anecdote and thought a good time to tell as doves into Steve's. I've seen some trophy pike fisheries decline rapidly - and never recover. In fact my musky partner and I always reminisce about a particular lake where a member of our group caught two 48" 30+ pound pike in an hour (back in the 90s). These were ice fishing fish. Power ice augers just started being popular, big baits were hard to come by. We ruined it. We told a friend. Which was okay, but... He told a friend, and then a friend of a friend. From one truck, to 10 trucks, the next year 20. A couple years later, you would be lucky to get a flag. We for sure harmed some pike and kept a some small ones to boot - but not as bad as some of the other folks that didn't know what they were doing. Many just lost fish with whatever hooks and line they were using. Others were bonked by some folks who wanted to mount them or eat them - it was allowed then. We though hmm, probably okay. Pike are resilient. Those big girls will be fine. Pike grow fast. But they don't. 30 years on and we hope, but there is far too much educated pressure now. Probably some decent pike in there, but the run of good years we had are never to return. Whatever the equilibrium was with those big predators became unbalanced by their mortality. We learned a lot from that. (xcskier_hunter - we were your age then - fyi). It is one reason why we have a none over 75 cm rule in Manitoba today. My friend told this story to the biologists he managed and probably the minister when getting this reg signed off on. It's a good reg. It also allowed us to justify having an additional spring season opportunity. Equilibrium unbalanced... Recovery is not something that it is going to come quick, if at all. I'm not willing to gamble with our musky fishery, and I'm not willing to have others gamble with it either. For what? Thanks again to Muskies Inc. for taking this position. Edited by Angling Oracle 5/21/2024 6:40 PM | ||
| Brett Waldera |
| ||
Posts: 108 | I still don't really understand the argument here? Why is catching a muskie via sharpshooting any different that catching it by other means? To me this just seems to be splitting hairs. Muskie are sportfish and there are regulations in most states to protect the populations, and 95+% of the angler's fishing deliberately for muskies now practice C&R. So the argument is we shouldn't catch more fish? How do Guides, Tackle Manufacturers, Resorts, Retailers, and others who make a living in the fish catching industry feel about this argument? Who causes more delayed mortality, the guide who handles 200+ fish a season or the guy sharpshooting with livescope who handles 40? I am not saying I am in support of sharpshooting muskies, and I choose to not to fish for them that way, but I just don't understand why everyone thinks it's so important to pick a side on the topic at this point. I really seems like more of a jealousy type of thing to me. Joe Blow has an unfair advantage because he uses more technology than I do and he catches more fish. Where do you draw the line? Is it fair chase to fish for muskie trolling in OH with 6 lines? In MN I am allowed one line is all. FFS is here to stay and we all have a choice to use it or not, and to use it how we see fit. If the argument about FFS is someone else might catch too many fish...I am not sure I understand that argument? I will bet that MEGA Side imaging puts more muskies in the boat for the average muskie angler than FFS. When do we start to worry about that? Brett Waldera | ||
| chuckski |
| ||
Posts: 1345 | There have been windows of great fishing over the years, but you name it over fishing, habitat loss, tons of different things as the saying goes "North gets farther North every year" And the smaller the body the more impact. There are too many of us and the more people the more regulation and it can't keep up. Do you remember in the 90's "the good ole days are now" Things are taking down turn now. | ||
| mikie |
| ||
Location: Athens, Ohio | Steve Goodman (God rest him!) had a song that said, "Besides the looking -for you know the finding's always tame, and the treasure's not in the taking, it's the loving of the game!" Think about that. m | ||
| xcskier_hunter |
| ||
Posts: 20 | I think sharpshooting is a target because it's a new technology that has opened the door to completely new tactics when most fisheries are already struggling. Personally, I'm just as irritated by pushes to legalize 3 line motor trolling where it's not currently legal in WI. I'd be less concerned by an angler sharp shooting from a kayak than someone motor trolling with 3 lines on a 500 acre lake in Vilas County. However, precedence tends to be given to traditional techniques versus new ones unless an older technique is proven to be clearly harmful (see single hook sucker rigs). I also agree that the more muskies someone handles, the more fish will die, all else equal. However, do we prefer a world where musky fishermen are so effective that they feel obligated to not fish once they've landed x number of fish or one where the resource is thriving and the fishing challenging enough that people don't need to self limit and can fish as much as they want? I know many people do self limit or at least attempt to spread out their pressure but if FFS continues to improve without limits then muskie fishing may become a sport where you drive around lake to lake and only make casts to 45"+ fish to avoid going over some socially acceptable C&R limit. I also can't stand the argument that people with less time to fish than others should not need to limit themselves as everyone has their priorities in life. I probably hunt more than I musky fish and I'm often hunting when I could be musky fishing, but that does not mean I feel as if I should be entitled to use more effective fishing methods to make up for my lack of fishing time compared to others that fish more than me. I think many guides would prefer there to be no sharpshooting (or FFS in general) from what I've seen. Probably not those that utilize it as their main tactic but any dumbing down of the sport is a negative for guides. Tackle manufacturers ought to be concerned too, as in bass fishing FFS has led to a reduction in the number of lures anglers use, with the priority placed on lures that are visible to the FFS. Search type baits are also less valuable as the FFS does the searching. In general, it's also in the fishing industry's best long term interest to have a thriving musky population and as many anglers to sell to as possible, not tools that dumb down the sport to where a single tactic dominates. Regarding whether FFS is here to stay, I'd tend to agree but we have seen states like Arizona ban trail cameras after they saw how problematic they were on water holes. There were so many trail cameras and human activity associated with the trail cameras that many deer were limited to nighttime drinking. Thus, I could see state DNRs imposing limits on electronics if they could demonstrate it makes open water inhospitable to muskies (and other fish) or if musky fishing devolves into constant harassment of fish until they finally eat. Edited by xcskier_hunter 5/22/2024 9:33 AM | ||
| Angling Oracle |
| ||
Posts: 353 Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | Brett, you don't have to pick a side. But if you are not for sharpshooting then you have picked one, you are just a bit more ambivalent than some of us. I recommend you go through the threads including the one on PMTT that is in the deleted section. Plenty of info and links to videos covering topics on the why FFS it a line too far (yes, the other stuff, GPS everything, SI, brought us right up to it). The "tragedy of the commons" argument has been brought up several times. A link to an article a quickly found about it here: https://www.perc.org/1996/09/01/community-run-fisheries-avoiding-the... The "against" crowd and now Muskies Inc has come to the conclusion that it is in the best interest of all of us musky fishers that we refrain from "sharpshooting," in all its forms. FFS is clearly a frontrunner as far as efficiency goes, but certainly one could use megaside, or even down-imaging in deeper scenarios and effectively do the same thing, but not as effectively as FFS with the immediate feedback. In the previous threads we covered a lot of the ecology aspects, mortality, we have real personal observations and anecdotes of catches and of dead fish - ultimately these factors lead me and obviously others to the conclusion that we must invoke the precautionary principle with regards to "sharpshooting," whereby we instill a conservation ethic in our community to protect our musky fisheries, both in quality (size) and quantity, from irreparable harm despite the lack of scientific certainly. There is no need to conduct a direct study: we have catch mortality rates for musky fishing in general, and plenty of information as to how effective and efficient sharpshooting using FFS on muskies and other species is. It is only going to get more efficient and ubiquitous over time. The math is clear. Do consider have far we have come in such a short time - this tech and tech that we haven't even conceived of is only going to get more effective in making things easier. I think your point about guides is correct, they do catch a lot and have a good read on the waters they fish. If you listen to the musky podcasts (ie Backlash, Ugly Pike are two I listen to regularly) you will hear that most guides are against it. They are caught up in the "tragedy of commons" scenario where if the other guy is doing it, well I better do it too. This Muskies Inc statement will give them an "out" to get out of it. They need to get together and decide as a group to get off the FFS train. No one is jealous of these kids coming up using this stuff. On the contrary, we try not to make them feel bad when we regale how we grew up in 80s and 90s. Thanks for taking the time to bring up those points. Edited by Angling Oracle 5/22/2024 11:38 AM | ||
| BNelson |
| ||
Location: Contrarian Island | A guy who I know and trust told me about a guide in MN that has 3 units on his boat, he doesn't even put the trolling motor down, he drives around with the big motor in open water, spots muskies and has his clients cast at them . They caught one that was 20 or 30 feet down and it died. The guide "released it" ie, torpedo'd it down, the guy I know went over and tried to revive it..they are not sure if it lived..it was a big one. That is just one case where sharp shooting is having a very negative effect on the resource, a public resource, with limited #s of fish going in, if every guy drives around and jigs or casts at fish 20 to 40 feet down a higher % will die.. why should we care Brett.. ? I think this example is a good one.. do you care if guys are killing muskies by such tactics on the waters you fish? I would hope so.. most guys don't fish for muskies in mid to late summer when the water is 85 .. why? well we are trying to do our part to help the resource... I know guides on places like Vermilion that is all some do in June.. if we leave them alone in 85 degree water, why isn't the same being done not to drop a tube on their head when they are 40 feet down in the summer? | ||
| ToddM |
| ||
Posts: 20212 Location: oswego, il | I heard an interesting comparison between FFS and bedfishing. The difference being you can see the fish on the bed. Based on what I've seen so far, fish will adapt to it. I've seen boats by me sit on schools, whip around and stay with them like a cheetah on a gazelle until no more bite and they search for another school. I've seen sharpshooters on 200 acre lakes up north musky fishing. It's been said you still have to make them bite but the feedback to make that happen is so much better. Edited by ToddM 5/22/2024 11:21 AM | ||
| Tommy |
| ||
Posts: 98 | I have no problem with people doing it with fish high in the water column. Shouldn't be targeting ones sitting deep though. Just asking for trouble. My favorite FFS use case is just having it in while casting structure. I see a lot more follows than I used to by just glancing at the screen. Often times they won't come all the way to the boat. Gives me confidence in spots without seeing the fish with my eyes. | ||
| Angling Oracle |
| ||
Posts: 353 Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | To my point, it is only going to get worse. https://youtu.be/7lW4OL90KO8?si=PafMvytjMcMW7olj&t=351 | ||
| Slamr |
| ||
Posts: 7037 Location: Northwest Chicago Burbs | BNelson - 5/22/2024 11:09 AM A guy who I know and trust told me about a guide in MN that has 3 units on his boat, he doesn't even put the trolling motor down, he drives around with the big motor in open water, spots muskies and has his clients cast at them . They caught one that was 20 or 30 feet down and it died. The guide "released it" ie, torpedo'd it down, the guy I know went over and tried to revive it..they are not sure if it lived..it was a big one. That is just one case where sharp shooting is having a very negative effect on the resource, a public resource, with limited #s of fish going in, if every guy drives around and jigs or casts at fish 20 to 40 feet down a higher % will die.. why should we care Brett.. ? I think this example is a good one.. do you care if guys are killing muskies by such tactics on the waters you fish? I would hope so.. most guys don't fish for muskies in mid to late summer when the water is 85 .. why? well we are trying to do our part to help the resource... I know guides on places like Vermilion that is all some do in June.. if we leave them alone in 85 degree water, why isn't the same being done not to drop a tube on their head when they are 40 feet down in the summer? That guide is a d o uch ba g, I thik we can all agree. Honest question from someone who doesn't know: how pervasive is "sharp shooting". Is this something hundreds of anglers are doing, or a couple dozen? Not syaing bad isn't bad, but how widespread is this? | ||
| BNelson |
| ||
Location: Contrarian Island | I think it will only get worse, while I do think it is done by a small % now. all the youtuber younger guys will see the guide noted above videos and want to go do that. FFS is fairly new, it's expansive overall but more and more will get it and more and more will abuse it. With the technology only going to get better and better it is just not a good thing for musky fisheries as a whole imo. Open water use to be a place that muskies could to some degree, hide, from the constant barage of lures, now it is the place that they are most susceptible to Sharp shooting... | ||
| Angling Oracle |
| ||
Posts: 353 Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | BNelson - 5/22/2024 11:09 AM A guy who I know and trust told me about a guide in MN that has 3 units on his boat, he doesn't even put the trolling motor down, he drives around with the big motor in open water, spots muskies and has his clients cast at them . They caught one that was 20 or 30 feet down and it died. The guide "released it" ie, torpedo'd it down, the guy I know went over and tried to revive it..they are not sure if it lived..it was a big one. That is just one case where sharp shooting is having a very negative effect on the resource, a public resource, with limited #s of fish going in, if every guy drives around and jigs or casts at fish 20 to 40 feet down a higher % will die.. why should we care Brett.. ? I think this example is a good one.. do you care if guys are killing muskies by such tactics on the waters you fish? I would hope so.. most guys don't fish for muskies in mid to late summer when the water is 85 .. why? well we are trying to do our part to help the resource... I know guides on places like Vermilion that is all some do in June.. if we leave them alone in 85 degree water, why isn't the same being done not to drop a tube on their head when they are 40 feet down in the summer? Perfectly legal at the time and "unfortunate." Inappropriate and unacceptable now. I think we will look back at this Muskies Inc. statement down the road as a very wise position and ahead of other groups who will follow this lead. Now need the Muskie Inc. no sharpshooting t-shirts, hats and boat wrap... Edited by Angling Oracle 5/22/2024 1:03 PM | ||
| Brett Waldera |
| ||
Posts: 108 | Some very good points brought up here and I agree with many of them. I do think the "guide" sharpshooting fish is an exception and not the majority. Thank goodness!! I think that is an extreme example to most respectable muskie anglers would not cross provided the technology or not. I don't think you need to regulate to the least common denominator, but more accordingly to the masses. My position on this topic has been "Devil's Advocate". I am all about preserving our resources and I have been a Muskies Inc President for longer than 17-years. I have been on the forefront of creating new fisheries in MN, and generating increased stocking efforts in existing fisheries. I have fought anti-muskie groups such as "No More Muskies" and a guy who single handedly derailed the 20-year MN Muskie Program. I am about conservation and propagation of the muskie species. I am making the comments and points that I am because just because the FFS technology exists, doesn't mean its the most detrimental thing out there today. GPS, Lake Maps, and MEGA Side Imaging all take up their place too. I would be pretty confident in the stance that GPS and Lake Chips kill more muskies by delayed mortality than FFS does. Think about that for a minute and what that technology has done to increase the amount of catches and handling on lakes like LOTW. I believe if this is a worth taking a stance on...so are plenty other topics that add to delayed mortality. Some of them have been brought up above this post. Brett Waldera | ||
| Kirby Budrow |
| ||
Posts: 2317 Location: Chisholm, MN | Brett, the problem to me is that the DNR regulations, stocking and fishing pressure could "almost" keep up with technology before FFS. It was going downhill before FFS though. Now with FFS the species cannot keep up with how they are being managed. We have been seeing a decline in catches without the use of FFS and we will continue to do so until it's not fun anymore unless something changes. You maybe don't see that in your area as much because for some reason your lakes receive special attention from the DNR for stocking. Other places, not so much and it's noticeable. | ||
| Angling Oracle |
| ||
Posts: 353 Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | Thanks again, Brett. The GPS (spot-lock) trolling motor by far the most useful innovation, and really the rest sort of piggyback onto it. Anchor in heavy current or waves? Jog this way, jog that way, record a route, follow a contour. No problem. Yes, catch rates increased due to all these things and fishing made a lot easier. Increased catch rates equals additive mortality. But you are underestimating the efficiency potential of FFS and the potential damage I think. The scenario BNelson described is not unique at all. I've seen this where I'm fishing and Kirby is definitely seeing it where he is: https://www.worldfishingnetwork.com/show/jimmy-houston-outdoors/vide... This looks to be in comfortable conditions all around and good time to be filming (if you get my drift). Serious guys who are looking to get the one they want (by catching lots) are doing what serious guys do. So there is the pool of muskies out in these open water scenarios - some of them are the classic structure fish out for a feed temporarily, some are pelagic all the time. Either way the mortality is additive to all the other fishing mortality that you describe, and unlike the structure based fish, they can't hide. You don't need to take a break, just keep driving. "There's one." No one is tired, no one needs a nap. Relentless. "Too small, let's keep looking." "Hey, there is a mongo." "Try the bulldawg." "Try the tube." "Try a Bondy." "Maybe downsize." "It's going that way, let's get in front of it." I've watched it. It is appalling. There is a huge gap between sharpshooting with FFS and everything else. Edited by Angling Oracle 5/22/2024 2:41 PM | ||
| Jump to page : < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... > Now viewing page 2 [30 messages per page] |
| Search this forum Printer friendly version E-mail a link to this thread |
Copyright © 2024 OutdoorsFIRST Media |