|
|
| Hard for dead fish to produce eggs........ |
|
| |
|
| Here is the point Slim is trying to make.
He had a lake possibly that wasn't being guided say 5 yrs ago.
Then say a local guy develops a new lure and it gets hot. He becomes friends with some out of state guides who used his new hot lure on lakes like Mille Lacs and V.
Those lakes turn off, too much pressure on V and fish move out of weeds/rocks on Mille Lacs.
Then said guide friends come to lure makers lake to set up basecamp. Now you have at times 4 to 5 guide boats on the lake every day, not just once in a while, every day. So at primetime they are camped on the 5 best spots. If I were Slim I would be annoyed too. You can't go out some days without those same guys being out there camped on all the fish and spots you want to fish.
Always try to look at both sides of the coin. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2361
| musky23 - 9/8/2009 12:40 PM
I'd like someone to explain "protecting the resource". Since we are all CPR, what is it that we are exactly protecting? Seems to me the Minnesota DNR hasn't seen any population density declines. I think the local definition of "protecting the resource" is having dumb, uneducated fish that are easy to catch.
I think they are looking forward to possibly protecting the resource from having to wait in line to fish every good potential musky spot. Protecting the population from having increasing losses from increased hooking/handling mortality, and possibly as suggested by literature, growth loss and maximum size loss for numbers of fish. And in brood lakes protecting the large breeding fish from overhandling/stressing as might be cause by excessive targetting by guides with clients(I wanna picture with my 50!).
Understand also that protecting the resource can mean sustaining some semblance of unpressured fish, eager biters, etc. Something many of us have rarely encountered, and a resource that is notably exciting when experienced. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 186
Location: West Chicago, IL | While I understand some of the negative aspects of fishing pressure, I REALLY have a hard time understanding how 5-6 out of state "gypsy" guides are going to cause all of this to happen. Pressure is a completely different topic than a handful of out of state guides. I guess my point is we have an open bashing of all current and future evils of the state of Minnesota musky fishing and it's all being (completely unfairly) blamed on a handful of guys.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1169
Location: New Hope MN | musky23 - 9/8/2009 1:08 PM
While I understand some of the negative aspects of fishing pressure, I REALLY have a hard time understanding how 5-6 out of state "gypsy" guides are going to cause all of this to happen. Pressure is a completely different topic than a handful of out of state guides. I guess my point is we have an open bashing of all current and future evils of the state of Minnesota musky fishing and it's all being (completely unfairly) blamed on a handful of guys.
Because someone must be blamed for your failures. Except yourself of course. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 186
Location: West Chicago, IL | And I would think that things like resorts, local guides, Musky Hunter Magazine, heck, even MuskieFirst bring a heck of a lot more fishing pressure to Minnesota that a handful of out of state guides do.
Edited by musky23 9/8/2009 1:17 PM
|
|
| |
|
| You are the one making this about the out of staters.....it is more about the roving band of guides that lake hop. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 186
Location: West Chicago, IL | Ummmmm......muskydeceiver, I think you need to go back and read the rest of the posts if you think I'm the only one making this out to be out of state guides. It's what the whole thread is basically about. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 299
Location: Nowheresville, MN | There is one benefit there though Slim...when you round that corner and don't see those rigs parked you know the fishing will stink before you even launch the boat...and you know which lake is going better... |
|
| |
|
| ....nevermind......I'm going fishing......
Edited by muskydeceiver 9/8/2009 1:28 PM
|
|
| |
|
| I agree with other posters, this should not be about a couple out of state guides. This is about a flock of gypsies that are deceding on small lakes. If we focus only on out of staters they will just claim residency in MN, afterall they are here so long it would be easy to do. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2361
| musky23 - 9/8/2009 1:08 PM
While I understand some of the negative aspects of fishing pressure, I REALLY have a hard time understanding how 5-6 out of state "gypsy" guides are going to cause all of this to happen. Pressure is a completely different topic than a handful of out of state guides. I guess my point is we have an open bashing of all current and future evils of the state of Minnesota musky fishing and it's all being (completely unfairly) blamed on a handful of guys.
It looks like an open group of topics to me, centering around pressure, the role of guides in general, possible need to regulate out of state guides for each state, and a number of other things. If we agree that there are only "5-6" out of state guides, then I don't see why everybody can't see to eliminate out of state guides entirely. If that is the primary objection MN residents have, I can support them in getting rid of the out of state guides. That makes sense and will leave any MN musky guiding income stream, available to be utilized by MN residents, paying MN property taxes, income taxes and supporting the area by spending the income they earn, in state winter and summer. It may also open opportunities for more MN in state guides to operate year around, through snowmobile, hunting ice fishing and summer fishing seasons.
Whats the big deal about getting rid of a few out of state guides? There will be plenty of guides available for those that want them. I can guarantee it.  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 734
Location: Watertown, MN | Musky23, it not the 6 guides that brings total pressure, it the hundreds of angler they are educating them networking with friend to show up back to this lake again for weekends or weeks stays once they have been given the key, both in and out state, but issue arising more since the vast majority have moved off mill lacs which people said okay because there local lakes were left for them, know everyone is moving in on them. Any the pressure will multiply as more get to these new lakes.
How does it effect brood stock, delayed mortality, excess pressure can get them change spawning locations, injured fish might be as strong spawners due to fighting injuries from previous years.
So I ask why release fish, because we have chosen CPR, these are guides they are supposed to be better than average anglers, anyone can beat up on dumb fish, impress me and fish regular lake like the rest of the folks. or is it a ego think? The DNR has designated one CPR.
Troy
Edited by Troyz. 9/8/2009 1:45 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1169
Location: New Hope MN | you cannot regulate out of state guides differently than in state. Interstate Commerce Clause US Constitution. What is done to one person applies to all. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 186
Location: West Chicago, IL | Troy, good points. But if you take away these 6 out of state guides and there is a demand for guiding, 6 new in state guides will take their place. Then you still have all of the exact issues you just stated...no?
Mike |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32935
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Wisconsin used to have a residency requirement for a Guide license. That was changed a few years back, I believe because so few 'new' guides had put out a shingle, and the feds stepped in regulating all the Captains who didn't know they WERE a Captain. All have to pay for a license, but it's a token charge at $40 a year for inland waters when compared to a captiain's License requirement.
I thought that was a step backwards.
I personally think residency for a Guide or Outfitter license should be a requirement in ALL states, as should insurance and an affidavit signed and notarized that the Guide will uphold all State game and fish laws with the understanding that as a State Licensed Guide, any infraction would be punished severely. This encourages accountability to all guiding/outfitting regulations the state deems necessary including state taxation, acceptable insurance guaranteed for the client, and a record of who is a 'guide' and who isn't. I think you'd still see the same number of MN guides you see now, except all would be 'legal residents' since that is not all that hard to accomplish given the amount of time many spend there, so the objections would then be more to 'conservation' than 'invasion'. Many of the top Guide names are MN folks anyway, with a few from other states sprinkled in.
The concept it's Out of Sate guides only who bring pressure to lakes anywhere by teaching the water to clients is not well founded, those anglers would learn the water one way or another if they intend to fish it and return. there are many arguing points here, and some should not spill over to others, IMO. The 'problem' is MN has created an incredible fishery, and folks will go there to fish. I do believe that was the goal from the State level.
On the other hand, the concept of 'ownership' of the fish due to volunteer work for the good of the public resource seems to be much like the old saying about volunteering...the SECOND you expect compensation, you are no longer a volunteer. |
|
| |
|
| The orginating poster reposted about what the guides are contributing to the fishery that they are clearly having an impact on. While they may not be calling him back offering to write checks, some do give generously to MI chapters and some of those chapters are writing big checks to stock many lakes and will write more checks if/when the MN DNR gives approval to start the 8 new lakes they promised. Their giving to the resource does not eliminate the need to equitably distribute the fishing pressure they bring with their business. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 186
Location: West Chicago, IL | By the way, I am not against Minn having a guide regulation or having guides pay a higher out of state guide fee. I think there should be a standard to make sure the guides all (in state included) have their ducks in a row. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2384
Location: On the X that marks the mucky spot | dtaijo174 - 9/8/2009 10:11 AM
Muskie Treats - 9/8/2009 11:20 AM
dtaijo174, while this may be the land of the free, stocking muskies and getting new lakes and changing public opinion about muskies and muskie fishermen is not.
I agree, but it comes from voluntary means via Musky Inc. Catch and release ethics came from educating anglers, and again voluntary. Teach anglers, through education, to use local guides if you think it is wrong to use outside state guides.
If you read my posts you'll note I wasn't singling out out of state guides but that a guide license is general is desired. If it was structured right the revenue would go back to the resource whether it be walleye, muskie, bass, etc.
I also do promote the guides who give to our chapter and who have a history of being proactive with the resource and generous with their time and money. These guides have booked many more trips then they would have if they were keeping to themselves. I also have cost many guides (instate and out) trips that have a history of not helping and/or those that show poor ethics. It's funny how many of the guides out there don't get the marketing aspect of their business. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1169
Location: New Hope MN | Treats, I know you weren't singling out out of state guides.... I just didn't want to post twice. Sorry for my wrath
I agree guides should want to help out the lakes they are working on. It's in their best interest to keep well stocked lakes. |
|
| |
|
Location: Oswego, IL | Maybe they should have a "muskie" stamp additional to a fishing license. Just like a Salmon or Trout stamp. Pay more to fish that particular species. And that portion of the license is soley directed at stocking. People pay to catch fish, not a boat ride, so any smart angler will fish where the bite is, who the heck wouldnt. I personally will not argue any "guide" issues as I am not one of them. FYI - Just reading all of this thread though is almost enough to never hire a guide in the first place. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 344
Location: Musky Country | Guest - 9/8/2009 12:59 PM
Here is the point Slim is trying to make.
He had a lake possibly that wasn't being guided say 5 yrs ago.
Then say a local guy develops a new lure and it gets hot. He becomes friends with some out of state guides who used his new hot lure on lakes like Mille Lacs and V.
Those lakes turn off, too much pressure on V and fish move out of weeds/rocks on Mille Lacs.
Then said guide friends come to lure makers lake to set up basecamp. Now you have at times 4 to 5 guide boats on the lake every day, not just once in a while, every day. So at primetime they are camped on the 5 best spots. If I were Slim I would be annoyed too. You can't go out some days without those same guys being out there camped on all the fish and spots you want to fish.
Always try to look at both sides of the coin.
You said that Perfect |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2384
Location: On the X that marks the mucky spot | Muskiewhored, do a search on "muskie stamp" it's been hashed out several times. The feeling in the DNR is that when you figure in the cost to manage it there wouldn't be enough net income to make it worth their time. MN just had their first voluntary walleye stamp and it only netted about 10% of the total take. That's not a great investment of our $$$. |
|
| |
|
| as i see it, the issue in MN is sustainability.
MN has a few really huge lakes that can absorb a ton of boat pressure...but when those boats go elsewhere the options are very limited indeed.
- is the muskie resource sustainable under the current/increasing pressure?
i'm not a biologist, but with high levels of CPR, i think it is, yes.
- is the fishing experience sustainable under the current/increasing pressure?
without more lakes, no, i don't think it is.
i'm a southern WI resident with a land-owning stake in west-central MN who has given thousands of dollars in donations to Muskies Inc in both states, so i'm not sure where i get slotted...but i know i'd much prefer it if all those big-name guides were bringing clients to Mille Lacs rather than "my" area. and i suppose the folks who live near the big pond are happy to see everyone leave...classic NIMBY.
regardless, i don't think state residency is the proper measure for whether or not someone has enough of a stake in the fishery or has done enough for the fishery to make a living or some money from it.
that being said, i do think it's entirely reasonable to require by law that any profit-making effort (guides, tournies, etc.) to give back to the resource either through fees or licenses or whatever. if you're willing to pay that fee it shouldn't matter what your address is. and i think those fees should be quite high.
if we can't get that in place by law, we can exert social pressure on the tourney organizers, guides, etc.
one thing that we can all do is to support local fishery efforts: there's waaaaay more out-of-state fishermen who aren't supporting them than guides - and that means you and you and you who have gone to MN in search of a trophy fish. send a donation to an MI club, write a letter to a legislator when asked to do so, or just choose to hire a local guide who's a member of the local club in that area.
|
|
| |
|
Location: Oswego, IL | I see treats... point taken.
I have read both sides as a simple angler, what I see is two senarios, out of state guides bring in money, if not just themselves the people they guide buy gear, gas, lodging, licenses. They on a small portion do support the community, maybe not the lake itself, but they do contribute to the state. Those same guides may be helping thier own state stocking with the money they make from another, which on the other coin, also have other out of state guides fishing that lake they just put money into, so I see both have the same issues, and more of a wash. Sure some dont think its a wash because one is more favorable than the other, but one day it could be the opposite so be careful on what your trying to do. With as silly as some sound whats next? Telling the lure manufactures for making such a great lure that its dropping hundreds of muskies in boat for stocking money? is it the guides or the lures catching fish? Again I am sure guides give back or at least IMO should, as giving back is only JOB SECURITY! No fish = no work. If everyone worked as hard together as they do against eachother on here things would be that much better.
Edited by muskiewhored 9/8/2009 3:02 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1169
Location: New Hope MN | If you are a guide, MARKET THAT YOU DONATE/VOLUNTEER to MI chapters! Another good idea, ask your clients if they would like to donate to the local chapter. Maybe that would cool down some of this... |
|
| |
|
Location: Colorado/Birch Point, Lake Vermilion | I personally would only use a local guide. I find they have a better knowledge of the area and while all guides may know the 'hot spots' the locals will have their own spots that out of towners may not know. I like to support the local economy when I go to areas I haven't fished before. I also like to buy bait, groceries and some tackle locally as I believe it makes the fishery and local economy stronger. I personally do not have a problem with out of towners guiding as long as they are respectful of the locals , the resource, and non-guided fishermen. They are trying to make a living and may have to travel to do so as fishing is not always great in one area. I think if you have a problem with out of state guides do what you can to support the locals, buy their lures, hire them as your guide, recommend them to friends or even the vacationers at the bar. I think that will have a better outcome then bashing specific guides on the internet. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1243
Location: Musky Tackle Online, MN | Muskie Treats - 9/8/2009 2:36 PM
MN just had their first voluntary walleye stamp and it only netted about 10% of the total take. That's not a great investment of our $$$.
If the numbers I read in the paper recently were correct, anglers were surveyed before this voluntary walleye stamp became a reality and just over 50% said that they would buy it. Fast forward to today and only 1% of anglers buying a license also purchased the walleye stamp.
Aaron |
|
| |
|
Location: Oswego, IL | Crazzzzzy....... |
|
| |
|
| Musky23 -
Lets for arguments sake say you are a deer hunter. How would you feel if some out of state people, came in and started guiding deer on public lands in IL?
How would you feel if they started hunting the land you have been hunting for years?
What if they all talked to each other everyday about where the bucks have been moving, and when you walk out to your stand one afternoon there are three of them in the same woods chasing the same buck that you have been scouting for weeks?
Now how would you feel if pretty soon there were less and less bucks to shoot? That is where this is going.
We all want to catch more and bigger fish. Peoples feathers get ruffled when someone else is benefiting from our hard work and $$ then having the resource left worse than they found it, which is exactly what is happening.
I'd love to hear from some out of state guides, or in state guides for that matter on how they would feel about paying a fee to guide in MN, with the understanding that the $ would go back into the resource.
|
|
| |
