|
|
Posts: 1764
Location: Ogden, Ut | Don Pfeiffer - 12/27/2006 10:28 PM
The d.n.r in wisconsin and minnesota need to wake up and realize the muskie clubs and anglers are doing their job for them
Pfeiff
I'm sure they will be glad to hear that. That should free up some time to kick back with their feet up or tool around in their fancy 4WD trucks.
Boy, that's a great way to create friends and influence people... 
S. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4080
Location: Elko - Lake Vermilion |
Could it be that the PMTT officals are still talking with the Mndnr concerning the Cass Lake event for lower than the 48"size limits??
Its still a 100% C&R tourney. Perhaps the PMTT is asking for a varience??? Nothing is up on their web site concerning the size limit yet.
Come on PMTT tell us whats happening with the size limits for Cass.......
Jerome |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32954
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Eguddal,
You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but you are dead wrong.
Muskies Inc was BUILT on competition ( Lunge Log? Club Junior, Senior, Ladies, and Guide divisions?) and club tournaments, one of the largest of which is held in Minnesota. Remove the competition, and you lose much of why many Muskie conservation groups exist, and eliminate their incredibly effective support for the Muskie fisheries across the country.
You speak as if Muskies are horribly fragile, easily killed critters, and that just plain isn't true, either. Handled as Mr. Hartman does, with a by- the- team measure and picture, which, by the way, has been carefully designed to stop any potential 'cheating' (not going to tell how, let's just say it works well) and actually doesn't create any additional handling than most would for a simple non tournament CPR.
'This thread has proven that tournaments do nothing but hurt the resource, the money contributed in so small that nobody needs it, and it brings additional pressure to already over crowded waters.'
This thread did nothing of the sort, that's ridiculous. In testimony before the WIDNR recently, the Eagle River Chamber of Commerce stated that Muskie Tournaments in Eagle River bring 1.6 MILLION PROVEN dollars to the local economy EVERY YEAR. Like amounts were testified to by other area chambers. That equates out to a multiplier effect of many times that amount.
I believe that it has BEEN competitive angling that has forwarded the cause of CPR, brought the sport to the forefront and added thousands of new Muskie anglers and the support they bring to the expansion of management of muskies everywhere. Your comment logically leads to an eventual banning of muskie angling all together, since pressure by non tournament anglers has a MUCH larger impact than that of tournaments. Read any yearly creeling survey on any water those are kept for the data.
These are FISH, not children.
'
It just amazes me how one format is a fish killer, and a photo tournament is just fine. especially when the photo tournament does not verify that the fish survived.'
The anglers out there bought a license, just like you. They have every right to go fishing on any given day and fish within the legal boundaries of each State DNR's regulations. If they decide to bet other anglers they can catch more and larger fish on that day, who are you to say they cannot do that? That, in essence, is what a tournament is.
There is absolutely NO biological evidence that tournaments have an adverse effect on the Muskie, Walleye, or Bass fisheries, and that is a fact. NONE! The impact is so small it is insignificant, and that is directly from the Wisconsin DNR. Fact is, transport Muskie events have NOT been proven to be 'fish killers', to the contrary, it seems most fish in the transport tournaments held over the years DO survive, and that the percentage of fish that die later has not been proven significantly higher in those events than it is in Judge Boat events. Changes in the venue going to judge boats and other formats are driven by SOCIAL pressures, not biological issues. As we, as Muskie anglers, become more conservative and less reality based, this will probably continue until Reality and Extremism collide. That happened right here, IMHO.
'I say get rid of all the tournaments. This thread has proven that tournaments do nothing but hurt the resource, the money contributed in so small that nobody needs it, and it brings additional preasure to already over crowded waters. Camera, judgeboat, honesty rules, it's all doing nothing but hurting the resource so get rid of all of them.'
I say, we should ban you, your friends, and all the other anglers out there creating 'already overcrowded waters', and save the fish for ME.
Sounds pretty selfish and awful elitist, doesn't it?
So WHAT if a photo or judge boat tournament on Mille Lacs is Ok'd? Mr. Hartman already holds events there. So does Muskies Inc.
The State DNR and those who run tournaments will come to terms as they will in Wisconsin and everywhere there might be controversy.
Sorno,
Excellent point, sir. Remarks like the one you reacted to, and those reflected above have a negative effect on the debate, add no actual facts or substance, and are argumentative without actual substance. Emotion sometimes gets the best of us all, but it would be wise to THINK about what is on the screen before hitting the submit button. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8859
|
Worth repeating... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 10
| Steve,
Your obviously missing my sarcism on this issue. I'm trying to point out how silly it is to protest one version of a live release tournament and crucify the others. I agree with your comments,
Devils Advocate |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32954
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | It was pretty easy to miss...  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 734
Location: Watertown, MN | STeve and Sorno great post.
Yes the law is not officially signed yet, but it is to become law in 07. Just a bill on capital hill!!!!!!!!
No one is stating that judgeboat format is bad for the fish, or that Hartmans format is any better. They are both different and have some positive and negatives. The big issue is the MDNR official position on possession, and what they have stated in the past, and what they will do in 2007. They have not in the past issued variance for tournaments in the state, my guess is they do not want to set a precedance, because you allow one, you must allow others, and that is only more paperwork for officials, instead of being out enforcing laws, and working on improving the resources.
So time will tell, again this law was to protect the future of musky fishing, not be anti-tourn, PMTT vs Hartman format as some have made it to be. It is going to be how tournament promoter and local clubs will have to abide by the new law, and what impact it will have on us.
Troyz |
|
| |
|
Posts: 3163
| tournament permits for the comming year have to be in and approved by Dec,,maybe the fair thing to do is allow judge boat tourneys in 07 to get an exception to the 48' has the law wasnt known yet at time of application,then in 08 if they apply the 48 has to be used |
|
| |
|
Posts: 929
Location: Rhinelander. | I don't mean to offend either the minn. d.n.r or wisconsins but facts are facts. They have to look at all the help and benifits they have gotten due to the fishing clubs. They I am sure will even say how the clubs have been a great benifit to them. I am just saying don't bite the hand that feeds you.
Pfeiff |
|
| |
|
| The proposed 48" minimum was posted on all the lakes effected this summer at all boat landings, by law the DNR must post this information and hold public meetings, I believe they must give 1 year notice before the changes can take effect. So to say the changes were not known untill recently isn't going to fly with the DNR.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1764
Location: Ogden, Ut | Don Pfeiffer - 12/28/2006 3:58 PM
I don't mean to offend either the minn. d.n.r or wisconsins but facts are facts. They have to look at all the help and benifits they have gotten due to the fishing clubs. They I am sure will even say how the clubs have been a great benifit to them. I am just saying don't bite the hand that feeds you.
Pfeiff
Don,
I don't think they're really offended, but it might be better to put some things in the 'big picture' perspective. You say that the DNRs are getting all this help from clubs, yet who ULTIMATELY benefits? The DNRs or the anglers? I don't believe that it's as altruistic as you like to infer. I'm reasonably sure that there's a whole lot of biologists out there that wouldn't give a tinker's darn (family site) about muskies and whether or not you and I could ever go get one. Face it, muskies (and more importantly) muskie anglers, are difficult at best to manage. It's a low return for high investment program. So yes, I'm sure they appreciate the help (and truly, some portions of the programs would have to be sacrificed without it), but to say that you are basically 'doing their job' probably doesn't sit all that well with some of them. The muskie anglers certainly aren't busying themselves sampling panfish, walleyes, catfish, trout, salmon and assorted non-sport fish. They probably aren't commenting on all sorts of environmental impacts affecting fisheries that cross the biologists desks daily, nor are they likely to be analyzing data, writing reports and making management recommendations on the throngs of waters that have no muskies even in them.
I would hazard a guess that if every person that fishes EXCLUSIVELY for muskies would just quietly disappear, the revenues from license sales would hardly even be felt in either state (Wisconsin might be different, the cultural aspect of the muskie fisheries are hard to gauge). Trophy predator fisheries are basically luxuries that many states only are able to marginally afford. And the people that utilize them are exceedingly difficult to please. For instance:
CPR or keep it if legal?
Tournament or no tournament?
Judge boat or transport?
34", 36", 40" 44", 48" 50" 54" minimum or completely C & R?
one line or 2? or 3?
season or no?
ice fish or no?
bait or atrificials?
quick strike or swallow?
trolling or 'position fishing'?
and really how big is the world record?
This thread is even evidence of people's inability to agree on even the most inconsequential elements of muskie angling (where a tournament circuit should occur)
And I sincerely apologize for hijacking it.
So who's actually biting and who's actually feeding?
S. |
|
| |
|
| I don't mean to offend either the minn. d.n.r or wisconsins but facts are facts. They have to look at all the help and benifits they have gotten due to the fishing clubs. They I am sure will even say how the clubs have been a great benifit to them. I am just saying don't bite the hand that feeds you.
actually, it's not the DNR who has to realize anything, as they're not the ones "benefitting" from the hard work the muskie clubs do.
it's you, it's me, it's us that has to realize these things because it's us that's benefitting.
we're the consumer.
WE are the ones who benefit from the hard work the fishing clubs do.
WE are the ones who benefit from the hard work the DNR does...and without the DNR carrying the majority of the load, the club efforts would be drops in the bucket.
don't bite the hand that feeds you indeed!
|
|
| |
|
| lol...sorno, you're too fast for me!
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1636
| sworrall, you nailed it.
Is it the same people that are against tournaments that hardly do anything to help the fishery? Just wondering...  I talk to a lot of people that are against tournaments or any kind of contest when it comes to fishing. They don't belong to any clubs or anything and don't share any info. with anyone. Kinda selfish...eh? |
|
| |
|
| Like I said earlier. The "possession" laws were put into effect to, for the most part, eliminate culling and transporting of fish. I do not understand because judge boat tourney's do neither. Again, I am not fighting for or against these things, just trying to understand their reasoning. What happens if you don't measure a fish and you are holding it in your net. Are you breaking the law if it's undersized and don't know it yet? Is there a law in MN that states that all fish must be immediately measured once it is netted? Is there a law in the MN state fishing reg's that states something along the lines that all anglers must carry a measuring devise to immediately measure all fish once they are netted?
Nice debate over all, if nothing else.
Tom Lejack |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2384
Location: On the X that marks the mucky spot | Pfeiff, it's the clubs that want the 48" limit and brought it to the DNR. It was a unanimous decision to have them pass it when brought to the MMA. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8859
| What exactly does this mean for the PMTT anglers?
Will there be concessions made for sub 48" fish to be registered and scored? As it relates to tournament fishing in general, what happens if we move to a 52" or 54" size limit down the road?
@ $600 per team plus all the other costs of travelling, what would the incentive be to actually fish a tournament knowing the outcome would likely be that none of the teams scored, and the standings didn't change?
Who gets the $20,000?
|
|
| |
|
|
Steve;
You state that tournaments have no effect on muskies, walleyes, bass etc.
In MN, it has been documented that very high mortality rates occur in bass and walleye tournaments when temps are high, and off-site weigh ins are used.
These results have been used to improve the tournament process and bring down those rates significantly. I'm not sure what biology you are using to claim that there is no negative effect, but that is not true.
As far as tournaments briging in Millions of dollars, that would only be true if no other revenue were to be seen without tournaments. Tournament anglers displace other tourism, they don't replace it. I also find it very had to believe that a few hundred, or even a 1000 people could generate even close to that. In Detroit Lakes, we have a music festival which attracts 40,000 people for 4 days. Local economy estimates are about the same as you state for muskie tournaments in Eagle River.
Your conclusions are seen only from the perspective of the tournament supporter, and really don't reflect the whole picture.
I would love to see the biological data from WI that reflects no impact on a fishery due to tournaments. Perhaps this is coming from the same WI biologists ,that are fueling No More Muskies in MN with data that says muskie stocking will hurt all fisheries populations in a lake. This is completely contradictory to MN fisheries experts, and most other WI experts as well.
Point being you can find science to refute global warming, that smoking causes cancer or anything you want to if you look hard enough.
Bottom line, MN fisheries come first, and MN tournaments second. Tournaments can adapt, just like anglers have to adapt to reg changes.
JS
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8859
| Example of single tournament economic impact: (see page 11 for summary)
http://dnr.wi.gov/org/water/fhp/fish/fishingtournaments/Bassmasters...
What the WI DNR is doing to study the biological impact of tournament fishing:
http://dnr.wi.gov/org/water/fhp/fish/fishingtournaments/Study%20Pla... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 197
Location: N Illinois | What's a winter season without the annual tourney, anti tourney argument. How long till opening day? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 734
Location: Watertown, MN | Musky99
MN is still open, weather warming, rain is coming, metro lakes may open up who nows. Rivers are still open.
Troyz
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32954
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | addict,
That is about 1/10th of the story of what's happening here in Wisconsin. We discussed this extensively a few weeks back, as you are aware.
The WIDNR sat at the Podium in Rhinelander just a few weeks ago and stated CLEARLY there was NO appreciable negative biological impact on the Wisconsin fisheries from tournaments. I asked them that question during my testimony directly, and received that same response.
The reason the DNR has to follow the protocol you see in the document posted is really pretty simple; the Legislature dropped an unfunded mandate on the DNR to mediate a water use dispute between lake property owners, activists, and others and those who fish in, run, and observe competitive angling events. The dispute is NOT about biological impact, see my comment above.
Mr. Skarie,
First, I'd suggest you look further into the impact of competitive angling on the overall fishery, including the lakes hosting events. You and I are talking about different things, as should be obvious. You are talking about the mortality rate of released tournament caught fish SPECIFICALLY, not the actual impact of same on the overall fishery. OF COURSE studies on mortality in the past have improved delayed mortality rates after tournaments; DNRs from states all across the country work closely with Tournament organizations to see to just that. Tournament regulations for the competitors have changed to increase successful release, obviously. Most events that use off site weigh ins during high temps are now 'kill' events as suggested by the DNR's. Sheesh, talk about spin.
Name me ONE muskie tournament in Minnesota where there is an off site weigh in.
Tournament anglers do not displace other tourists during an event or during the prefish, that's ridiculous. The room they rent has to be available, that table they sit at for dinner needs to be open, the gas they buy has to be available, etc.
I won't even BEGIN to discuss non tournament pressure VS that of tournaments, but that is a reality I suggest you look into. Fact is, Guides probably are FAR more responsible for delayed mortality after CPR than all the tournaments put together, and they are certainly no less and no more concerned for the welfare of the fish. Minnesota allows ANYONE to Guide, without even asking for a license fee. Wisconsin charges a fee and accepts out of state guides, maybe that would be a good source of revenue to help manage the muskie and walleye fisheries over there.
I know of one guide who's clients released over 200 fish this year. One guide CPR'd more fish than an entire tournament circuit registered.
MI has ACTIVELY forwarded fishing competition for decades, and continues to do so as both a fund raiser and promotional venue.
Third, the figures the DNR gave us on delayed mortality match those of other states, including MN. I have no idea what you are talking about with the 'No more muskies' comments, none of the biologists I know in Wisconsin subscribe to what you are suggesting.
Fourth, the economic impact of competitive angling has been very carefully proven. It was Chambers of Commerce and like organizations that testified in the recent WI hearings to the exact dollar impact, and they are not, despite your accusations/implications, lying or exaggerating. I bet those folks don't really give a rats hinder whether you agree, those are the indisputable facts. I was able also to confirm like accounts from folks like the In Fisherman Professional Walleye Trail and FLW Tour, and the cities hosting the events. The Chambers were not discussing single events, they were talking about a season, sir.
Fifth, I believe I said almost the same thing in my post as your last statement.
Sixth, what makes anyone think the fish UNDER 48" won't be caught, netted, and released? Whether they are allowed to be used as a scoring fish or not, those fish will be caught and released and delayed mortality will occur, just exactly as it does from CPR from all other Muskie anglers.
As to this:
'Your conclusions are seen only from the perspective of the tournament supporter, and really don't reflect the whole picture.'
That's hooey. My comments are based from reality and source information from the agencies, organizations, and anglers involved, not emotional rhetoric. If tournaments damaged the fisheries as you imply, the DNR's would not permit them.
The resource belongs to us all, and will be carefully managed by the state DNR fisheries folks in reflection of that simple fact. When special interest group emotion gets in the way of good fisheries management (something that every fisheries manager I have talked with to date tells me is one of their major stumbling blocks in implementing sound management policy) as has happened here in Wisconsin, one can only hope the 'whole picture' can be accurately and reasonably discussed before any changes based on rhetoric and emotion are forced on us all. I trust the MNDNR has less of that sort of thing than our WIDNR does working with the Conservation Congress.
And I personally think the PMTT schedule is just fine. Challenging waters, numbers and the possibility of a big fish, and good community support. |
|
| |
|
| I don't know how much of an economical impact I have fishing tournaments. But I do know I have a #*^@ good time! And always come home broke!
See you guys at the ATM before the next tournament! |
|
| |
|
| sworrall,
"If they decide to bet other anglers they can catch more and larger fish on that day, who are you to say they cannot do that? That, in essence, is what a tournament is."
I usually agree with sworrall, but not with this statement that you made earlier. Betting in WI is illegal and I do not think you should be inferring that tournament fishing could possibly be an illegal activity in WI. Tournament fishing is under enough pressure already without it being called betting.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32954
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Give me a break. 'Betting', as in placing your tournament entry in and fishing an event and betting you can catch more fish than the rest of the field isn't even close to illegal, so take it elsewhere. I was using an analogy, and not at your pleasure.
That's EXACTLY what this is, a legal bet. Not only that, but ALL the contestants in most Muskie events are fishing for a smaller than paid in portion of THEIR ENTRY FEES, usually 80% and in some cases(do the math) less.
And I still think the PMTT Schedule for 2007 looks OK. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1636
| Rick Hess - 12/30/2006 5:43 AM
I don't know how much of an economical impact I have fishing tournaments. But I do know I have a #*^@ good time! And always come home broke!
See you guys at the ATM before the next tournament!
I'm with you man. They are fun
The same people complaining about tournaments are probably the same people that have never even fished one.
They don't hurt the fishery anymore than a months worth of angling pressure (people fishing for fun and people fishing for keeps) Thats just the way I see it. Most of the people fishing them are like you and me... take the right steps in order for a successful release. Its not like we have the fish sitting at the bottom of the boat waiting for the judge boat!
Get over it. |
|
| |
|
| I'm with you man. They are fun
So if tournaments are for the fun of it, what difference would a 48" min. make?
That's what this thread started out as, not the usual "Pro /Anti tournament" discussion.
Dave Mendel |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32954
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Actually, this thread started as a commentary on the PMTT 2007 Schedule. Nothing wrong with the discussion taking a few U turns, that's the way conversation goes. |
|
| |
|
| Steve,
I stand corrected. I had to go back myself to see how this started. Again the tournament debate always seems to take over these discussions. The Minn. DNR and the MMA have had the foresite to increase our size limits to help protect the resource. Minn. has been the front runner in Muskie managment, and it shows by the number of out of state license plates at the public accesses. So why is it that when a Minn. Muskie issue comes up on these boards, that most of the complaining and suggestion are made by the non-residents?
Dave |
|
| |
|
|
Tournament angler cerainly do displace tourism of non-tournament anglers. How can they not?
People who don't want to fish in the Twin Cities tourney in Sept. avoid the lakes involved, they go elsewhere.
I personaly know many anglers who now don't fish Cass in Sept. anymore because of all the tournaments there in the past few years.
If there were no tournaments to fish, anglers would still go fishing. Money would still be spent, there wouldn't be an economic catastrophe.
Ecomomic studies often show what people want them too. I didn't accuse anyone of lying, but numbers can be mis-leading if not looked at from all angles.
You can believe what you want too, but tournament anglers don't contribute anymore to a local economy than other tourists do. With the quality of fishing in MN, we have no problems getting good tourism without cash prizes to entice them.
Tournaments do far less damage to our resources now than they used to, and that is because they have been regulated, not because of the tournament promoters/participants.
Further regulations are not a bad thing, and to imply that tournaments are in the forefront of C&R is a big stretch. Some are, but very few have done anything to improve without being told to.
Of course sub-40" fish will be caught and measured. Nobody ever said they wouldn't.
Doesn't bother me a bit if they can't be held until a judge boat comes. Aside from the guys participating in the tourney, nobody else will care either.
Adapt to the regs, or quit having them, plain and simple.
|
|
| |
