|
|
| not sure why this even makes the news... a big fish caught in mn thats a new one
and honestly if the kid has 5 musky on the wall ...o well maybe he just dont care about you? lol i dont see buck hunters shooting deer with paintball guns, some pple just dont care |
|
| |
|
Posts: 582
Location: WI | Guest - 7/16/2011 4:09 AM
lol i dont see buck hunters shooting deer with paintball guns, some pple just dont care
Comparing apple to oranges there guest. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 123
| What laws did the "Sallie Fish Guy" break by having 5 dead fish on his wall? I still can't believe we've come to the point where we're crucifying someone who operated completely inside the laws in place at the time, and I for one refuse to do it further. If you don't like that he has 5 dead fish on his wall then get off your but and try to get the regulations changed. That's much more productive then bad-mouthing someone on an internet website because their personal beliefs are different than yours. Never kept a muskie, never will, but I won't fault another angler for keeping a legally caught fish. I may try to educate him on the benefits of c&r for future reference, but as long as he has a legal right to keep that fish who am I to say differently. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Rick Wolff - 7/16/2011 9:34 PM
Just delete the post....big hitter!!!
OK. |
|
| |
|
| I don't have a problem with someone keeping the fish I have a problem with how this stories is being blown out of proportion. The fish is not a state record it's not big enough and it doesn't have the dimensions to make it one. I also have a problem with some claiming to be all for catch and release with four dead fish on your wall. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | So?
Complaining here logged in as an anonymous guest is going to accomplish something? How about proactive instead of reactive, and positive instead of negative tasking? Just a point.
If you want to stop harvest of 57" muskies, you need to get the DNR to set a 60" limit.
If you want to stop inaccurate reporting, you need to contact the media source via email and straighten them out...nicely.
If you want harvest to lessen, and CPR to increase, you need to proactively encourage conservation through education.
What have you done lately? If the answer is 'plenty', outstanding! If the answer is just complaining here, not so much.
Sort of preaching to the Choir. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 123
| Exactly Steve. |
|
| |
|
| The answer is plenty. All I was attempting to do by posting my last post was to try and echo the sentiment of most of the people that I know that have and issue with this whole thing. Lens creep made it sound like the only reason why anyone cares is because he kept the fish. "not the case" |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | No, he didn't. Read his post. He was addressing a specific portion of this debate. Context, please.
'Having a problem' begs the question as to how to solve same. It takes quite a bit of action to get a message across to those we need to, and my point is...those folks are rarely looking in on any discussion here. |
|
| |
|
| Well..this kid is about to become old news pretty quick I do believe. There's a fish being passed around on facebook caught this weekend in MN that smashes a state record..I'll let the guy himself decide if he chooses to post details but rest assured there's no doubter on this one...Oh yeah, and it was released successfully! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 123
| I believe MN requires that you kill the fish to be certified as a record, which is unfortunate, so no matter what the size Randy, it won't be THE record.  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 692
Location: Pelican Rapids, MN | Just returned from a trip to LOTW to hear about all this hooplah. Being the only local musky guide in the area this fish was gassed, my phone was ringing off the hook when this fish was harvested weeks ago.
Five minutes after the fish was first brought to light, I got a call from a local news reporter. We chatted for a while about it, got a texted photo of it and the name of the taxidermist who had the fish. Before I went to Ontario, I contacted him and asked exactly how big it was. He said it was rounded up to 55 taxidermist inches nose to tip. and was about 22-23 inches around. Probably around 40 legit pounds. Not even close to a record.... unless he got it on 2 pound test....
He is obviously under a lot of scrutiny due to the fact this is his 5th skin mount. It sucks that this has to happen especially from a lake that has a smaller transient population of fish. From what I understand he has decorated the walls of his parents cabin over the last several years. Hopefully all of the personal "collateral damage" from the exposure will be a lesson to a self described hardcore musky fisherman - So I guess the topic at hand.... Harvesting one or five "big" fish for the wall legal? Yes. Counterproductive? Most definitely. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 313
Location: Bemidji, Lake Vermilion | Thx for the extra insight Jerry. +1 on the counterproductive. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Not all who fish on Muskie waters and not all who fish muskies a couple times a year are immersed in our subculture. Some flat don't know any better, assuming we do, of course.
Educate. Inform. Influence.
Seems like MN is and has been for some time experiencing what WI has been roundly criticized by 'notables' for years, only the fish, when 'discovered' in MN by the 'general public' were newly established, and...big.
Join the club. Maybe folks from all over will be rude and abusive to MN activists while they fight to correct the backwards mentality instead of everyone pulling the same direction. Then again, maybe not. We can all hope... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 437
| Jsondag - 7/17/2011 9:03 PM
He is obviously under a lot of scrutiny due to the fact this is his 5th skin mount. Thanks Jerry for clearing up this aspect. There never was reference to the "other" mounts as to whether they were replicas or skin mounts. Everyone was assuming they were skin mounts and blasting the guy for it.
On a related note, not directed to you Jerry... IMO, he has a right to keep the fish. Would I do it? No, but we shouldnt sit here and chastise the guy for doing something that is perfectly legal to do. Like Steve and others have said, if we dont like it, do something about it to change it. Lobby for an increase to 60" or even 58". I mean really, a state record fish would have to be near those lengths anyway. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 198
| The news on the radio this morning was the guy weighed it at home at 54 lbs. Lots of publicity on this fish, might have something to do with the state shutdown and him not being able to get it checked by a DNR biologist, etc.
Sure sets a bad example for C&R.
I hope the huge tiger that was just caught and released gets as much media attention. |
|
| |
|
|
I guess I didn't realize that if something was legal than the public was not allowed to comment in a negative way. At least that's the idea that some of you are putting out there.
Yes you can kill and mount 5 muskies legally. Legally people can also give an opinnion on that whether it is negative or positive.
Abortion is illegal. Plenty of people give their opinions on that both positive and negative in the public arena. Before someone chimes in I don't compare abortion to killing muskies. Point being people who don't approve of things that are legal have a right and privalege to voice said opinion. People shouldn't be expected to keep thier opinions to themselves and try to change laws vs. being able to express views.
If you are going to put yourself out there telling people you have 5 muskies on the wall and expect nothing but pats on the back than you are delusional.
JS
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | after being part of the backwards-minded Northern Wisconsin bunch, i'm glad to see we have company over in Minnesota. this way, Illinois and Indiana each can have ont to fix instead of sharing the one. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32944
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | No one said negative opinions shouldn't be expressed, there's simply the points to be made we have little we can say to FORCE people to adhere to our personal conservation ethic, and a baseball bat methodology hasn't worked well in the past and probably won't into the future.
Your example actually makes my point for me. Would you advocate picking out someone in MN personally attacking her in a publication for exercising her rights because you disagree with the law that allows her that right? How, I ask, would that do anything but polarize those who have differing opinions and those on the fence against your ideals? Sure, you'd get ataboys from those who mirror your ideals, but that's not likely to accomplish change.
Do you disagree with the laws that set the limit on that water? Who sets those limits? Why are they set where they are; are those limits arbitrary or is there a reasonable explanation why they are where they are? Why ISN'T the limit at, say, 57" in MN? Why did Ontario set the limit lower than the actual length of this particular fish? IS it actually 'wrong' or damaging to the management strategies in place on that water to harvest a fish that size, and if it is, why is it?
Many of us here want to see a larger limit on BOGB. I think it will happen, mostly because of very hard work by a small group of anglers. We wanted a 50" limit on Pelican. We got it, but not by trying to make anyone who disagreed with us an enemy, or beating up anyone who harvested a fish in a large publication. I personally believe trophy management strategies might be open to some adjusting on some waters to mirror the fact the fish are getting bigger than anyone really thought they would, and the social acceptance of the 'trophy water' concept is now much more comprehensive than it has been in the past. That's what I hope is about to happen on the Bay of Green Bay.
|
|
| |
|
|
Never said I advocate "baseball bat" methods.
I also never said anyone in particular should be publically pointed to, but when you put your story out in the public by your own free will than you and your actions are fair game to be commented on.
If a woman put out a news release that she had multiple abortions than I think everyone could agree that positive and negative comments would abound on internet, radio and other media.
If a walleye angler came out and said he keeps his limit every other day of the season then I'm sure you'd get feedback from walleye anglers about that.
Point being, why is it so unacceptable to point out in public the negative afffects of killing muskies, especially multiple times, when the anglers are putting these stories out there for all of us to see?
As far as the law goes, you don't have to pass more laws for people to not take advantage of what the current law says you can or can't do. C&R is voluntary and will continue to be that way as long as people can express opinions about it. The idea that people shouldn't express opinions about legal activities that they don't agree with not what "free speech" is all about.
Obviously "thuggish" speech is counterproductive. More and more though people are taking an attitude that making any kind of comment regarding C&R about a killed fish story is not acceptable.
We really don't have to make out world quite that PC.
JS
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 444
| Good posts JS... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 897
| What I want to know is how possession limits factor into this all. At what point does your possession limit get reset to 0? Is this guy keeping more than one per year? If I could get onto the DNR website (down due to shutdown) I could get an answer! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2076
| Whynot, You could keep a 48"+ every day of open season |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | i say put him in a public square and stone him to death ... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 123
| The point I was trying to make in an earlier post wasn't about anyone not being able to state what their opinion was, but rather that stating your opinion will do nothing to change the situation. You can call this guy whatever you want, but how is bad-mouthing someone on this website going to have an effect on what he's doing? It will not. If a guy having 5 dead muskies hanging on his wall is enough to aggravate you to slander him on an internet website, then it should be enough to get you to pick up the ball, get some signatures, and try to put regulations in place to end the harvest of fish this size. That's all I was trying to get across earlier. Feel free to say whatever you like about this individual, but don't complain next time he does it if you did nothing to educate him or made no attempt to put changes in the regulations to stop him from doing something perfectly legal. That's all I was trying to say. Good fishing all. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 897
| IAJustin - 7/18/2011 11:30 AM
Whynot, You could keep a 48"+ every day of open season
No, you can't. Possession limit for muskies is 1 in MN, same as your daily limit. Just like for walleyes it is 6. That number doesn't get reset until the fish are eaten or otherwised used up. I'm wondering if mounting a fish resets that to 0? Never seen it in the regs, but I'm guessing when you drop the fish off at the taxidermist it resets. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 797
Location: North Central IL USA | Lens Creep - 7/18/2011 11:34 AM
The point I was trying to make in an earlier post wasn't about anyone not being able to state what their opinion was, but rather that stating your opinion will do nothing to change the situation.
I would guess people are just venting.
Personally I wouldn't have any dead fish carcasses on my wall.
2 reasons being:
I don't think a fish should have to die just so that I can get my jollies catching it and then hang it on my wall to brag about.
I'd want to put it back in the water ASAP so someone else could have the pleasure of catching it.
That's just the way I operate. To each his own with this stuff. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 366
| C&R may be legally voluntary, but there are plenty of guys who won't keep fish because of the attacks and social pressure against doing so, and not just because of the affects on the fish. Obviously, that is the goal for those who are unable to actually change the laws. I fully support C&R, and always try to pass that mindset onto others. But, it kind of makes me sick to think of being associated by other fishermen as the same types who stand out in front of abortion clinics with giant posters of blood and mutilation and shout at anyone who comes near the place. I don't think that most anti-abortionist exhibit that sort of behavior and I'm sure plenty of them realize that it might ultimately be detrimental to their cause, but there isn't much to be done to besides try and convince their self-appointed spokespeople to use better methods. Also, it isn't that hard to see how easy the anti-muskie harvest argument can so very easily be morphed into the anti-muskie fishing banter, especially when you put the ball on the tee and hand those people the bat. There are more and more people in this country who are developing feelings against things like fishing, than those who are picking the sport up these days unfortunately.
Just because the easy way to pressure people into not keeping fish is to chastise anyone who does, doesn't mean that it is actually the best long-term tactic to create the best muskie fishing conditions any of us could hope for. Because you really have to think about what you truly want... no muskies to ever be harvested, or simply the best muskie fishing possible for those of us who love to do it? If it's the former, then the only eventually logical tactic to employ is to stop any sort of interaction with them.
Ryan
|
|
| |
|
| Drawing the parallel between what WI has battled for 70 years and what MN is now is battling is an interesting one.
On the C&R thing.....I think its easy for everybody to sit back and be all brave and gruff at your keyboard. I've been guilty from time to time. But I think there are new folks who come into this sport every day, and like cattle needing water on a day like today, they're going to seek the source of what they need. In their case....its info. Which means websites and discussion forums. It should also be said though that communications via internet generally are not sent/received always as they are intended.
On the one hand I think its unfortunate that convo's like this turn into skin mount bashing because I think it just makes everybody look bad. But on the other hand, I think it helps to be vigilant and ready to help "christen" the newbies on how our subculture prefers to treat the catch of a great fish. Read: please release it.
This story wouldn't be a story if 1) there hadn't been all this recent record banter, and 2) if it hadn't been known that he had 4 other mounts. Those two facets are the buzz words here.
Lastly, if folks hadn't been vocal about catch and release......we wouldn't have the very high % of catch and release we enjoy today. We'd still be stuck in the early 90s mentality of being angry that the size limit went from 30 to 32". |
|
| |
|
Posts: 692
Location: Pelican Rapids, MN | Just in from a ridiculously hot morning of guiding and following up on this post. The young man who caught this fish is from Arizona and even though he thinks of himself as a hardcore musky fisherman, he is not. I wouldn't even label him as a weekend warrior. He's just a wide eyed kid that's gotten lucky and thought he had something special...several times. He obviously has very little understanding of "back of the boat" ethics and the unwritten code of musky fishing. Nor does he understand rules and regs for any type of records. Unfortunately a lot of folks out there pitching baits don't.
It is an individuals right to keep a legal sized fish if they so chose - But like I said before, it's a truly counterproductive practice for a fishery to endure, especially one like the lake this fantasy fish was harvested from. There are many anglers on this site alone that have had a accurate catch that trumps this one, and my guess is most if not all of them got put back. If not, that's their choice - we may not agree with it, and find it downright infuriating, but alas aside from a sideways congratulatory thumbs up and a polite suggestion of "next time... maybe release the fish" there is not much we can do besides maybe embarrass the poor fool by berating them online into making better decisions.
The MN DNR and Catch and Release ethics have built this Minnesota fishery - I say keep the guns blazing and don't forget for a second what we might lose if we don't. |
|
| |
