Muskie Discussion Forums
| ||
| Moderators: Slamr | View previous thread :: View next thread |
| Jump to page : 1 2 3 4 Now viewing page 3 [30 messages per page] Muskie Fishing -> General Discussion -> Early wisconsin C&R season? |
| Message Subject: Early wisconsin C&R season? | |||
Mr Musky |
| ||
Posts: 999 | Johnnie, I agree with you one hundred percent!!! I do not like the regs in WI at all!!! Wisconsin is set up to accomadate Tourism and dollars off of natural resources such as musky fishing and I dont think that will ever change. It's sure not rocket science why I go to Canada every year! Let's see 27 fish in the boat 2 guys one week not to mention a half dozen fish lost and 80 follows to boot, fish that actually follow 20 times around!!!!! Mr Musky | ||
| Guest |
| ||
| bn The Iowa Great Lakes has a May 20 thru Dic 1st season for Muskies Muskies Inc. mag "From the Muskie Biologists" section While WI hasn't had any large fish kills to date due to VHS, the disease is very new here, having been detected for the first time in May 2007. Fish appear to be most vulnerable to VHS in the spring, when water temperatures are cold and (emphasis for consideration) fish immune systems are stressed from the rigors of spawning. | |||
| sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32951 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Johnnie, what have you done lately to change any of that? And are you considering the HUGE difference between the varying waters in MN and WI? (no) Blanket statement that isn't dealing with reality. Since when does Tourism set our fisheries regs? This was a LAWMAKER from Eagle River, not a Tourism director. You need to differentiate between the State Bureau and influence groups in the North and make more accurate comparisons. Most State's 'Natural Resources' (talking fish and game here) are heavily promoted and 'exploited' for Tourism, both for in and out of state tourists. What else would anyone expect? Most of MN is at 40" right now, correct? There was a lot of work involved in getting a 48" limit in MN on some waters, right? How many lakes in MN have a limit at 50"? How many in WI? How many at 45"? How many in WI? How many Muskie lakes in WI, and how many are relatively infertile and under 600 acres? How many of the same in in MN? I sure hope we are not going to argue the entire WI waters thing again, go to the research board and read up...please. Mr. Musky, put that Canadian Lake in the center of Minneapolis and Milwaukee and Chicago with our Wisconsin water chemistry, weather, etc. Then, after a couple years, do another comparison. Guest, What does VHS have to do with a C&R season in Wisconsin? The temps at which VHS is the most dangerous is earlier anyway, most years. If you are trying to say the fish are stressed from the rigors of spawning, you are correct, but the reference is to the immune system. Are you trying to say the fish will catch VHS 'easier' if they are caught and released? | ||
| bn |
| ||
| guest, there are more musky lakes in Iowa than the 3 with that particular closed season.... | |||
| john skarie |
| ||
| I really don't care about the what if's when it comes to pre- or during spawn fishing. If you fishery means so little to you that you can't wait until the spawn is over to fish then you deserve what you get. Do you guys honestly think that the regs are the way they are based on nothing but whims or gut feelings ? I have a little more faith in the wisdom of biologists that I know who have touted the importance of protecting fish during the spawn, then any internet typer that needs to have a specific study to look at saying you must protect fish during the spawn or the fishery will die to concede that it's good idea to let them spawn in peace. JS P.S. Where is the study that says it won't hurt???? Can't find it ,can yah? | |||
| Guest |
| ||
| bn Your the one who made the generalization that Iowa had an all year open season, I simply pointed out the Iowa Great Lakes indeed do have a closed season. If you don't think the major Muskie water in Iowa counts, I guess I have to disagree. From the wordage of the quote it sounds like the vulnerability to the future posssible disease threat from VHS is increased from a stressed immune system do to the rigors of spawning. You stated you had no biological knowledge that it was stressful to catch and release Muskie during the spawn. If Muskies are more vulnerable to disease because their immune systems are stressed because of spawning I don't think it's a stretch to assume that adding to that stress by C&R during this time is not a wish choice for questionable extra income by opening the season early. | |||
| sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32951 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | JS, Hope you don't think I'm saying I like this idea. Since we have to deal with it for now, I'm just interested (like always) in the facts of the matter, and would like to see what biologists have to say about what this might mean. AND...we as Muskie anglers didn't CHOOSE to have this season, John. We voted it down several times, in fact. Figure it out, most of us are trying to assess the IMPACT of what is now law for the 2009 season. Some are screaming the sky is falling, some are thinking the impact will be near zero, and I'm thinking the fact of the matter is somewhere in between. Guest: I think it's as much a stretch to say spawn stressed fish's immune systems will be more likely to cause angler related mortality due to the C&R season, only because I haven't seen a thing yet to indicate that's a fact. By your logic, I'd 'assume' (bad thing to do, most days) that the season should not open until the fish have totally recovered from spawning. Maybe Wisconsin had too early an opener in the North all along, right? Perhaps we should be waiting another week. if that's a fact, I'd back a LATER opener...good luck with that now. What about walleyes, we fish those through the spawn, and that statement about VHS applies to walleyes, too. Or, is it that we should leave them to the process so the NR process is successful? Is that what protecting the fish during the spawn was about, or was it an overall conservation move covering all the above when Wisconsin made the change? I'd like to see what the fisheries folks have to say, if I don't see anything here I'll get on the phone and make a few calls. | ||
| Mr Musky |
| ||
Posts: 999 | Steve, Touism does affect size limits on lakes, take North Twin for instance, a lake that has mega trophy potential but it still has a 34" size limit because that's what the resort owners wanted so little Johnny could come up on vacation "tourism" and keep his 34 incher. And the reason some Canadian lakes are so great is because they are protected and managed well. Just as Minnesota lakes are. I dont think WI will ever change until we can get the power back into the people and the DNR not these stupid politicians and legislator idiots that are ruining deer hunting in WI along with many other activities. Mr Musky | ||
| sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32951 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Mr. Musky, the PEOPLE were the ones who voted down the 50" limit on Twin. The DNR supported it and the 'people' didn't. That proposal failed for many reasons, but mostly for lack of education of the public, and it wasn't just the resort owners who squashed that deal. How many MN lakes and rivers have a 45" limit right now? How many have a 50" limit right now? How many with a 40" limit? How many of the WI lakes and rivers have 50,45, and 40" limits? Canadian/Ontario waters were the some of the first to really set the bar and protect trophy potential, cut limits, and implement slot limits on Walleyes and Pike. Even that was a fairly recent change, in the overall history of the sport. For a very long time the limit up there was 30" and one a day with a two fish total bag. I might also point out it was 'the people'...and our democracy...in action that made the recent change allowing a C&R season. | ||
| Guest |
| ||
| I was reading this post and cant figure out what the topic is? Can anyone explain? Is it they may be having a earlier opener in Wisc. Earlier that Memorial Day weekend? Anyone? | |||
| happy hooker |
| ||
Posts: 3163 | Does anybody know of any lakes in this area with no known natural repo??? dont have to name hotspots just lakes that have a history of being dependent on being stocked. I guess if I got the early bug I might head up that way from Minn and try it. I guess that does make a case for the tourism. If I came it would have to be on a llake with no known repo I know we wouldnt like it here in Minn if people were throwing baits at spawning fish maybe a list of lakes in this area not known for natural repo would be helpful | ||
| MRoberts |
| ||
Posts: 714 Location: Rhinelander, WI | First I have to disagree with Steve W. on the following comment: “The walleye 'season' up here doesn't do much for tourism anyway. Who's going to Vacation in Rhinelander to fish walleyes with a limit of 1 over and 1 UNDER 14" or similar? That's a large part of the problem; muskie angling is growing in popularity, while not near as many folks fish up here for 'eyes.” At least on the first Saturday in May there are many people that choose to drive north to fish Walleye, even with the low bag limit numbers. In our group alone we have guys come from Milwaukee, Chicago, and Iowa. My experience is limited to Pelican Lake for this weekend, but it is the busiest weekend of the year as far as boats on the water fishing. I have no doubt of that. I also know of many other groups that continue to do their traditional opening weekend. I do agree that the week long walleye trips have gone to the West and North, and for the most part Northern Wisconsin has become a Weekend fishing destination for many if they even make the trouble to make that trip. Bass isn’t an issue because the Season has always opened on the First Saturday in May, a number of years ago they made it C&R from that day until sometime in June. It was never closed entirely until June. The barbless hook thing is going to me much more difficlult to deal with when fishing bass, as in May walleye and smallmouth are in the same locations. I will say this again, in my opinion, adding a Musky C&R season from the First Saturday in May to Memorial day weekend will not have a great affect on musky fishermen deciding to make the trip north. Especially as the southern waters keep getting better and better. I bet 90% of the people fishing the C&R season up here will be people that live up here, and as Hooker say there may be some musky nuts from MN and even MI who will drive the shorter distance to cast for ski. I truly believe the net affect of this will be less musky fishermen coming north on Memorial Day weekend. My guess is guys who normally do that will make plans to go hit the MN opener a couple weeks later instead. The chance at unpressued fish is a major factor in most Musky fishermen trip planning. Hey this is great for the local guys that want a chance to fish musky in Northern WI before Memorial Weekend, as far as a great benefit to tourism I don’t think the few people that pushed for this where really thinking. Maybe that’s why it was voted down at the spring hearings for at least 2 year in a row. I have said this before, but one benefit will be it takes the advantage away from the guys that specifically target Musky in May and claim they are “Pike Fishing” anyone who wants to fish musky now can without violating. Not a good reason, but it’s there. Hooker check out the following web site for your list of lakes: http://dnr.wi.gov/fish/musky/muskywaters_countylist.html Category 3 - the population has no known natural reproduction of muskellunge. Stocking of muskellunge is required for maintenance of a population. Category 4 - the population has no known natural reproduction of muskellunge. Stocking of hybrid muskellunge occurs. A hybrid muskellunge is a cross between a muskellunge and a northern pike, often called a "tiger musky." I don’t like this new rule but like I said before I will probably fish musky in May on some waters. As Steve said most of the time it will be Post Spawn. We can tell that by the spearing. They are usually done spearing Walleye and Musky by the end of April. If fish were actively spawning I would make the choice and leave them alone. Nail A Pig! Mike Edited by MRoberts 1/4/2008 10:03 AM | ||
| esoxaddict |
| ||
Posts: 8856 | john skarie - 1/3/2008 11:11 PM I really don't care about the what if's when it comes to pre- or during spawn fishing. If you fishery means so little to you that you can't wait until the spawn is over to fish then you deserve what you get. Do you guys honestly think that the regs are the way they are based on nothing but whims or gut feelings ? I have a little more faith in the wisdom of biologists that I know who have touted the importance of protecting fish during the spawn, then any internet typer that needs to have a specific study to look at saying you must protect fish during the spawn or the fishery will die to concede that it's good idea to let them spawn in peace. JS P.S. Where is the study that says it won't hurt???? Can't find it ,can yah? Easy there, John. I never said or even impied any of what you are accusing me of in your post, and I don't believe anyone else did either. I'm asking questions because I don't have the answers, and before I form an opinion I'd like to have some basis for it in fact and science rather than emotion. Have you forgotten that us "internet typers" here are also musky anglers? Just like you, we have a vested interest in the success of Wisconsin's muskie fisheries. If you're just looking to attack someone who doesn't care about the WI muskie fisheries, I'd suggest you try a golf forum, and not one related to muskie fishing. And this: "Do you guys honestly think that the regs are the way they are based on nothing but whims or gut feelings ?" No, I do not. But they're not what they are due to sound biological concerns, are they? Personally, I probably won't fish pre-spawn no matter WHAT the season dates are, and I suspect most of us here won't either. There's plenty of water South of highway 10 to keep us all occupied until things warm up in the Northern region. But I'm also not willing to get my shorts all in a bunch over this and start tossing accusations around before I have one shred of evidence that this will ever cause a problem. I don't THINK it's a good idea, but I've got nothing to base that on other than emotion. I'd rather KNOW it's not a good idea and have some factual basis for why I feel that way. Knowledge is a powerful thing, John. Emtionally charged nonsense is still just that -- nonsense. | ||
| sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32951 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Mike, The level of tourism surrounding the walleye opener has dropped off the edge from where it was before the TAC regs. I remember clearly the line of cars (solid) on HWY 45 all day Friday and Sunday evening, all folks coming up for the opener. Now the traffic is not really even noticeably more than any other weekend during the open season. The number of guides making a living fishing walleyes has fallen off as a result. Resorts all over the North closed or sold off; this was a good portion of the why. It wasn't pretty to watch. And now with the snow in the winter a thing of total chance, tourism here is more dependent on Muskie angling and Deer season than ever before. Of course, the CWD scare drove off alot of out of state hunters, too. Still doesn't make how this went down feel very good. | ||
| MRoberts |
| ||
Posts: 714 Location: Rhinelander, WI | Steve, points taken and there is no doubt the majority of resorts are gone. But there’s still a very large number of people fishing opening weekend. Opening weekend traditions are probably the majority of fishing traditions left in Northern Wisconsin, as far a things that draw people to the area, (other than tourneys). This new rule effectively eliminates a opening weekend for one of the fastest growing segments of the fishing industry. I still think this will result in a NET LOSS of musky tourism in northern Wisconsin in the month of May. Guides may be able to book a few more dates that I will admit. (Tongue Firmly In Cheek) Another UP side is there can now be musky tourneys every weekend in May except the first, north of Hwy 10 as long as they are immediate release and you use barbless hooks. No more having to have a tourney Memorial Day weekend on Sunday and Monday to avoid a season opener. THAT’S GREAT!!!!!!!!! Nail A Pig! Mike Edited by MRoberts 1/4/2008 10:59 AM | ||
| sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32951 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | That one didn't occur to me. I hope no permits are issued, at least the DNR can still deny a permit. | ||
| john skarie |
| ||
| Esox Addict; My post was not directed at anyone specific, but the sentiment of many people saying that there is no scientific evidence to support not fishing during spawning periods, that those regs are based on guesses, etc. That line of thinking is ridiculous. First of all, people need to realize the purpose of a "study". They are done to find answers to things that aren't clear to scientists, not so you can support things that are "common sense" to people in the science fields. My comments are not based on emotion. I have a degree in Aquatic Biology, I've worked on fisheries crews in Walker and Bemidji both as an employee, intern and volunteer. I've been in the field with some of the leading muskie biologists in the world. I've handled hundreds of muskies collecting eggs and milt, and had the opportunity to discuss issues like this with people who know have opinions based on training and experience, not emotion. So your dismissal of my thoughts as emotion without knowledge is quite a stretch. John Skarie | |||
| Geeezjohn |
| ||
| You sure posted that as emotion. Not nice emotion, either. Relax, we are all on the same side. I don't see anyone dismissing anything. I see alott of questions. I hope we get some answers from a WI fish guy. | |||
| esoxaddict |
| ||
Posts: 8856 | Apologies for that insinuation John. As I mentioned earlier, I presume you know more about this than I do. I never implied that catching muskies during the spawn is harmless -- common sense will tell you that any sort of stress you put a female muskie through during and immediately prior to that time can be a detriment. What I am asking is is this new legislation REALLY the problem many are making it out to be? I don't see that extra few weeks of open season being a huge impact for many reasons: 1. During most years, water temps have warmed to the point where spawning is presumably complete well before this time anyway 2. I suspect the people most likely to actually be out there catching fish will voluntarily refrain from fishing during the spawn 3. I do not believe that a significant amount of fish will be caught and their particular abilities to spawn sucessfully compromised Will some female muskies be caught and potentially harmed during a time when they are getting ready to spawn? Probably. But does this represent a detriment to entire fisheries, overall spawning success, or even a reason for serious concern? Or are there more important things we should focus our attention on? One thing mentioned above that I had not thought of was tournaments. I agree that holding a tournament during that time would be outright stupid. | ||
| lambeau |
| ||
common sense will tell you that any sort of stress you put a female muskie through during and immediately prior to [the spawn] can be a detriment. there are lots and lots of things that common sense tells us. at times, research shows common sense to be just plain wrong, sometimes even the opposite is true. on issues such as this one, common sense should not be our guide. research and science should tell us what's best. of course, it wasn't science that put this early season into law in the first place. but it's law and will go into effect as of spring '09, so it's worth asking what the science says about the impact of catch and release on fish who are mid- or post-spawn. i know there's been quite a bit of research on the impact of captures on bass reproduction, but most of what i've seen has indicated the impact is a result of eggs and fry being eaten during even the very brief time that the male guarding them is gone before it's released. muskies don't guard their eggs/fry, so there's no direct application there. there is good information available that says a combination of multiple stressors can result in post-release mortality. one good thing about the early season is that the water is quite cool, reducing one factor that may contribute to delayed mortality. in southern areas with year-round or early-open seasons, the fish are routinely captured during the time they are attempting (albeit unsuccessfully) to spawn. these fisheries don't seem to experience high fish mortality rates. but again, this doesn't apply directly because it's about whether or not the fish itself survives the experience; assuming it does, we don't know what (if any) impact it would have on the success of it's reproductive efforts. anecdotally, fishing for muskies used to be legal in May even in the north. some of the lakes didn't receive any stocking support, but managed to maintain viable populations in spite of fishing pressure (that usually was catch-and-keep!) during times of the year that could have included the spawn. it'd be helpful for those who know about applicable research to share it. i'm in no way suggesting that this change was a good thing, just that those who say it might be a bit extreme to suggest that this means doomsday for naturally sustaining populations could be right as well. there are way too many variables involved for us to know the impact perfectly. at least these are fish that are hard to catch! the reality is probably somewhere in between, it's likely not a good thing and it sure won't help spawning success, but hopefully it's not the end of the world either. | |||
| TanMan |
| ||
Posts: 108 Location: Toronto, ON | Frankly, WI's reg's look completely outdated. That, along with an obvious culture of catch-and-keep, can't do anything to help the musky fishery in WI. Perhaps if WI made the long, slow change to a high size limit, "fish-friendly" (i.e. C&R only on some lakes) fisheries management plan, people from MN and Canada would actually travel to WI for more than cheese and Packer's games. Musky fisheries management here in Canada are hardly perfect--far from it--but the size limit increases (they still have a ways to go) and seasonal restrictions at least make sense. We still have far too many muskies killed for no apparent reason....nobody is eating them and repro's from Advanced Taxidermy here in Canada are far superior to skin mounts. Education is the key, it just takes time; for those who go off the deep end, I like to remind them that we all started off with the "wrong" or insufficient release tools and more importantly, release knowledge. Personally, the "it's my right" argument for keeping a musky is ludicrous....if we change the law to C&R only, what happens to that argument? | ||
| sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32951 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | If you change the law to 100% C&R in the States almost anywhere across the board, the most important question is what happens to management. We have to be careful and aware of what we are wishing for and apply that standard only where it is needed, like Bay of Green Bay. More than 90% of the muskies caught in Wisconsin now are released, according to recent study, so statistically we don't have much or even perhaps any more of a 'catch and keep' culture than you, if one is to take your comments at face value. If we can get the limits to 50" on trophy waters, and 45" on waters where that limit makes sense that figure would jump up, IMHO. And, Devil's Advocate here; why is it ludicrous for the average guy to say 'It's my right' if it IS his right? Is it any less ludicrous to say he shouldn't, if there's no patient and reasonable explanation as to why? Alot of folks just don't know. Education, and protection of waters that need/warrant protection, I think you are correct. | ||
| TanMan |
| ||
Posts: 108 Location: Toronto, ON | Steve, to ME it's ludicrous because of my value system, for better or worse. That "right" only exists in relation to the law or regulation that allows it....I'm suggesting that musky fishermen, WI, ON, KY, MN, wherever, shift that thinking away from reg's and laws and towards a best practice paradigm as it pertains to the interests of the fish and the fishery. Of course, that requires that education factor which often is confused for a personal attack...either way, it needs to happen if the gains of the past 15-20 years are to be realized across all musky fisheries and in fact, steadily improved upon. Just my 2 cents. | ||
| sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32951 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Point taken, thanks. We have a little different situation than most Muskie destinations, with hundreds of Muskie lakes to fish, and each having a unique history and potential and most very small in comparison to Canada or even Minnesota. We have more Muskie lakes, but MN has more Muskie acreage. Plus, management here even on PRIME muskie water is not 'just' for us conservationists and elitists ( I'm a muskie elitist by many standards), it's broadly based to meet the generally accepted goals put forth by the public and tempered somewhat by our fisheries managers. Since we are but a small portion of that mix as Muskie anglers, our say in the matter needs be supplemented by local support and/or support from our fisheries folks, and even then it can mean little or nothing as far as accomplishing our goals at the end of the day. This case shines as an example of doing exactly the opposite of what the majority of us Muskie anglers would like, but there it is. | ||
| TanMan |
| ||
Posts: 108 Location: Toronto, ON | The fight needs to be fought. It's disappointing because of the $$$ that won't be realized because of poor management. Solid musky fisheries management a la Minnesota can and should be completely independent of any other other species management and should be targeting long term fisheries health and the expected revenue increases. I imagine, without any hard facts, that the investment by the MN DNR is paying off now. Hopefully, their current bounty is not "strip-mined" and is managed carefully. | ||
| ChinWhiskers |
| ||
Posts: 518 Location: Cave Run Lake KY. | 65 here monday should be a good bite on the Cave ! | ||
| lambeau |
| ||
Frankly, WI's reg's look completely outdated. That, along with an obvious culture of catch-and-keep, can't do anything to help the musky fishery in WI. Perhaps if WI made the long, slow change to a high size limit, "fish-friendly" (i.e. C&R only on some lakes) fisheries management plan, people from MN and Canada would actually travel to WI for more than cheese and Packer's games. whoa there! "completely outdated"? you follow-up that statement by suggesting WI make the "long, slow change to a high size-limit, 'fish-friendly'...management plan." the general perception out there is that WI has regressive size limits based on the state-wide 34" minimum. however, when you really look into it, WI is one of the most progressive states with more high(er) size limits than most anywhere else in the muskies range. if you're fishing a lake or river with quality potential in Wisconsin, it's very likely that the size limit is 40", 45" or even 50". the "long, slow change" you suggest was started quite some time ago and there's been incredible progress made. the only thing lagging behind is people's perception of the state of size limits in Wisconsin. at the same time i do completely agree with you that changing values towards release is just as, if not more effective than changing regs. the regulations help to limit harvest by casual or occasional muskie anglers who aren't reached by various education efforts. here they all are as of the 2007 regulations: http://dnr.wi.gov/fish/regulations/2007/documents/FishingRegs%2007-... (list is organized by county, so there may be some slight duplication) Adams Co.: Wisconsin River 45" Ashland Co.: Lake Gallilee 40" Bayfield Co.: Bony Lake 40" Eau Claire Lake 40" Namekagon Lake 50" Pike Lake 40" Brown Co.: Fox River 50" Burnett Co.: County-wide minimum 40" Barron Co.: County-wide minimum 40" Calumet Co.: Lake Winnebago 50" Chippewa Co.: Chippewa Falls Flowage 40" Chippewa River 40" Cornell Flowage 40" Old Abe Flowage 40" Lake Wissota 40" Holcombe Flowage 40" Jump River 40" Clark Co.: Lake Arbutus 40" Black River 40" Mead Lake 40" Rock Dam Lake 40" Columbia Co.: Park Lake 40" Silver Lake 40" Spring Lake 40" Swan Lake 40" Dane Co.: Lake Monona 45" Lake Waubesa 45" Lake Wingra 45" Douglas Co.: Eau Claire Lake 40" Fond du lac Co.: Fond du lac River 50" Lake Winnebago 50" Forest Co.: Julia Lake 40" Kentuck Lake 40" Riley Lake 40" Roberts Lake 40" Wabikon Lake 40" Green Lake Co.: Big Green Lake 40" Fox River 50" Iowa Co.: Twin Valley Lake 40" Iron Co.: Catherine Lake 40" Cedar Lake 40" Fisher Lake 40" Gile Flowage 40" Long Lake 40" Mercer Lake 40" Moose Lake 40" Pine Lake 40" Springstead Lake 40" Trude Lake 40" Turtle Flambeau Flowage 40" Wilson Lake 40" Jackson Co.: Lake Arbutus 40" Arbutus Canal 40" Black River 40" Black River Flowage 40" Morrison Creek 40" Potter Flowage 40" Juneau Co.: Wisconsin River 45" LaFayette Co.: Yellowstone Lake Catch-and-Relase Only Lincoln Co.: Bridge Lake 40" Deer Lake 40" Nokomis Lake 40" Rice River Flowage 40" Wisconsin River 40" Marathon Co.: Wisconsin River 40" Oconto Co.: Archibald Lake 40" Anderson Lake 40" Oneida Co.: Bridge Lake 40" Buckskin Lake 40" Clear Lake 50" Katherine Lake 40" Julia Lake 40" Nokomis Lake 40" Pelican Lake 50" Rainbow Flowage 40" Rice River Flowage 40" Shishebogama Lake 40" Stella Lake 40" Two Sisters Lake 40" Outagamie Co.: Embarrass River 50" Fox River 50" Shioc River 50" Wolf River 50" Polk Co.: County-wide minimum 40" Portage Co.: Wisconsin River 45" Price Co.: Jump River 40" Rusk Co.: Chippewa River 40" Dairyland Flowage 40" Flambeau River 40" Holcombe Flowage 40" Jump River 40" Main Creek 40" Potato Lake 40" Sauk Co.: Lake Redstone 40" Sawyer Co.: Brunet River 40" Chippewa Flowage 45" Chippewa River 45" Grindstone Lake 50" Lac Courtes Oreilles 50" Moose Lake 40" Radisson Flowage 45" Sissabagama Lake 40" Winter Lake 40" Shawano Co.: Cloverleaf Lakes 40" Embarrass River 50" Red Lake 40" Shawano Lake 40" Washington Lake 40" Wolf River 50" Wolf River Pond 40" St. Croix Co.: County-wide minimum 40" Taylor Co.: Harper Lakes 40" Vilas Co.: All Lac du Flambeau reservation waters 40" Allequash Lake 40" Big Lake 40" Big Muskellunge Lake 40" Buckskin Lake 40" Crab Lake 40" Kentuck Lake 40" Little St. Germain 45" Little Trout Lake 40" Papoose Lake 40" Shishebogama Lake 40" Sparkling Lake 40" Trout Lake 45" Walworth Co.: Delavan Lake 40" Washburn Co.: County-wide minimum 40" Waupaca Co.: Cincoe Lake 50" Embarrass River 50" Little Wolf River 50" Partridge Crop Lake 50" Partridge Lake 50" Waupaca River 50" Wolf River 50" Waushara Co.: Fox River 50" Lake Poygan 50" Pine River 50" Willow Creek 50" Winnebago Co.: Fox River 50" Little Lake Butte des Morts 50" Winnebago Lake 50" Poygan Lake 50" Lake Butte des Morts 50" Lake Winneconne 50" Wolf River 50" Wood Co.: Wisconsin River 45" | |||
| TanMan |
| ||
Posts: 108 Location: Toronto, ON | #*^@, ya got me. We still have many lakes or regions with 36" limits here in Ontario which to me, is embarrassing. Why would anyone need or want to keep a 36" fish??? The education is key and reg's that make sense including C&R ONLY bodies of water, or at least, 50"+ limits. No matter, for various reasons, I think more WI folks are traveling to MN or ON for their musky trips than vice versa. I hope that WI fisheries strengthen. | ||
| ChunkN-Wind |
| ||
Posts: 7 | VMS, it will affect the memorial day pressure. What happens when you go to a lake two or three times and get skunked, you dont go back. Well, when the general public starts fishing early, they will get skunked more often(most likely). So come memorial day, the preasure will be spread out like you see it the second and third weekends after the opener. I actully like the season. I catch many muskies fishing for walleyes in May and they are all spawned out in central Wisconsin. The DNR strips eggs in early April here and the muskies look fine around the 10th of May. Maybe the rule could have been changed to use Hwy 8, but it is what it is. As far as the goverment making the changes, I like that. It works really good in Minnesota and we all know how good there fishing is. Minnesota does not have an early season, but thats makes sence over there, leech lake muskies spawn later then Wisconsin strain. I talked with my local DNR on this issue and he said there is no reason why they cant be fished for, the fish are all spawned out. I think those that dont like the early season will change there minds when they get the chance to get out and work the bugs out of there new tackle and maybe catch a fish or two. Everyone fights to fish opening day for muskies, now we can work our way up to the better part of muskie season and peasure will be lighter on memorial day. The reason why anglers dont think they will catch muskies early is because they have never had the chance to figure out the very early season behavor patterns of muskies. They can be caught, it might be a "shad rap", but they can be caught. The best thing is, we can start ChuckN baits and get the bugs out of our boats and muskie gear. They catch fish in the fox Chain in IL. in early March, and those anglers down there dont complain about it, they enjoy it. Last spring there was a guy on this site with a really big prespawn fox chain fish. Boy did that guy have a smile. I believe that guy was from Wisconsin and drove south to spend money and catch muskies. If I could afford it, I would drive to the fox chain in early April and give IL some my money, just to have a chance to fish muskies. Some might disagree with me, but thats my 2 cents on that issue. | ||
| sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32951 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Wisconsin has one of the best Muskie management teams in the world, employing a pretty good segment of the world's Muskie 'brain trust' when it comes to science and biology. I think most of us need to occasionally step back a bit and thank our fisheries folks for not abandoning us laymen out of hand for our holier-than-thou-we-know it all attitudes about Muskie management in this State. Wisconsin boasts a couple of the most progressive Muskie conservation groups, frequently teaming with out of state groups to do good things in the Muskie world. Now if we could just leave the management of Muskie waters in the state o WI to those experts... And, I'm pretty sure Wisconsin does WAY more work in the 'field' regarding Muskie management than any of our neighbors. ChuckN-wind, I've had plenty of opportunity to fish early season Muskies. The season didn't always open later than the regular opener. | ||
| Jump to page : 1 2 3 4 Now viewing page 3 [30 messages per page] |
| Search this forum Printer friendly version E-mail a link to this thread |
Copyright © 2026 OutdoorsFIRST Media |