|
|
Posts: 183
Location: Grand Forks ND | If Minnesota had more than 90 lakes in the entire state where you could fish musky I would soften up to more than one line, but until that happens I say keep it at one.
I was talking with Steve Heiting one time and I think he said he was able to musky fish literally hundreds of lakes within an hour of his home! Well, we don't have anything even close to that in Minnesota.
Why does everyone want to change things when they are apparently working? Minnesota musky fishing is pretty darn good right now, why mess it up? Just like people wanting to mess with North Dakota duck and pheasant hunting.....enough already!!!!!!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 74
Location: Brainerd, MN 56401 | sworrall - 3/8/2011 7:57 AM
Nah. Watch the walleye guys. Two rods, one in each hand, see it all the time.
Do they reel with their feet or what? As a hockey player I resent that last remark. |
|
| |
|
| 1, if you need more than that go someplace else and catch more fish. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32934
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | jranderson - 3/8/2011 5:30 PM
sworrall - 3/8/2011 7:57 AM
Nah. Watch the walleye guys. Two rods, one in each hand, see it all the time.
Do they reel with their feet or what? As a hockey player I resent that last remark.
If you play hockey you know exactly what I mean.
Walleye anglers use two rods vertical jigging from the bow or stern all the time, one off of each side of the boat. Fish hits one, set the hook and set other rod into holder.
The number of lines allowed in MN should be determined by MN anglers and the MNDNR.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 74
Location: Brainerd, MN 56401 | We only behave badly on the ice. Off the ice I am a model citizen. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2384
Location: On the X that marks the mucky spot | MuskyManiac09 - 3/8/2011 3:10 PM
Why does everyone want to change things when they are apparently working? Minnesota musky fishing is pretty darn good right now, why mess it up? Just like people wanting to mess with North Dakota duck and pheasant hunting.....enough already!!!!!!!
One word: Greed |
|
| |
|
| Muskie Treats - 3/9/2011 8:37 AM
MuskyManiac09 - 3/8/2011 3:10 PM
Why does everyone want to change things when they are apparently working? Minnesota musky fishing is pretty darn good right now, why mess it up? Just like people wanting to mess with North Dakota duck and pheasant hunting.....enough already!!!!!!!
One word: Greed
I guess if everything is great and there is no need to change things, supporting new lakes to be stocked with muskie would be a poor decision. Change is bad, correct? |
|
| |
|
| Change is bad?? If you got that out of what Treats said than you're really not paying attention.
Change can't be inherently good or bad.
JS |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4080
Location: Elko - Lake Vermilion | MuskyManiac09 - 3/8/2011 5:10 PM
If Minnesota had more than 90 lakes in the entire state where you could fish musky I would soften up to more than one line, but until that happens I say keep it at one.
I was talking with Steve Heiting one time and I think he said he was able to musky fish literally hundreds of lakes within an hour of his home! Well, we don't have anything even close to that in Minnesota.
Why does everyone want to change things when they are apparently working? Minnesota musky fishing is pretty darn good right now, why mess it up? Just like people wanting to mess with North Dakota duck and pheasant hunting.....enough already!!!!!!!
Guys, this 2 line issue isn't driven by "muskie fishermen" It's driven by other fishermen and politicians......and my other comment is for Muskiefool,..... Isn't the point of going fishing to catch MORE FISH?? I mean really , who goes fishing to just catch 1 or 2 fish ? If you catch a fish at 7:00am do you quit for the day?
We fish to catch fish, and yes using 2 lines will enable you to catch more fish. and I agree that more fish (of all species) will probably die., but I really don't think that it will decimate a body of water like some of the "Chicken Little" theorists out there.
Ok,.... Now I feel better.
Jerome
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2384
Location: On the X that marks the mucky spot | stocking - 3/9/2011 9:39 AM
Muskie Treats - 3/9/2011 8:37 AM
MuskyManiac09 - 3/8/2011 3:10 PM
Why does everyone want to change things when they are apparently working? Minnesota musky fishing is pretty darn good right now, why mess it up? Just like people wanting to mess with North Dakota duck and pheasant hunting.....enough already!!!!!!!
One word: Greed
I guess if everything is great and there is no need to change things, supporting new lakes to be stocked with muskie would be a poor decision. Change is bad, correct?
Things are good, but it takes constant improvement to keep them that way. I have yet to hear how 2 line will maintain or improve our fishery. I'm all ears if you know how it will. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8834
| Better fishing does not necessarily equal a better fishery. Simply put, the more difficult you make it to catch fish, the better life is for the fish. |
|
| |
|
|
I haven't heard anyone say it will decimate the fishery.
I have heard a lot of people say it won't benefit it.
Painting them as "the sky is falling" crowd is a stretch.
JS |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8834
| Well, John... allowing people to catch more fish by using more lines can't possibly benefit the fishery, now can it? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4080
Location: Elko - Lake Vermilion | Muskie Treats - 3/9/2011 1:30 PM
stocking - 3/9/2011 9:39 AM
Muskie Treats - 3/9/2011 8:37 AM
MuskyManiac09 - 3/8/2011 3:10 PM
Why does everyone want to change things when they are apparently working? Minnesota musky fishing is pretty darn good right now, why mess it up? Just like people wanting to mess with North Dakota duck and pheasant hunting.....enough already!!!!!!!
One word: Greed
I guess if everything is great and there is no need to change things, supporting new lakes to be stocked with muskie would be a poor decision. Change is bad, correct?
Things are good, but it takes constant improvement to keep them that way. I have yet to hear how 2 line will maintain or improve our fishery. I'm all ears if you know how it will.
Shawn, again I agree..... But Us muskie fishermen are only a small part of the fishing masses in this state . Non musky fishermen are the ones that want the 2 lines. I agree that 2 lines will not improve our fishing, But I don't think using 2 lines will hurt it as much as some people think.
Ok, look at Mi lacs This lake's bait fish population exploded ,....perch,cisco, walleye, gills..... and it put a hurting on the muskie fishing... why? because the muskies had way to much food to eat.... would 2 lines have made a big difference in the fish population (all species) ?
Sooner or later this might pass, Then what are we going to do?
I guess we will still have good fishing , like the other states that have such laws. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 581
| Muskie Treats - 3/9/2011 1:30 PM
I have yet to hear how 2 line will maintain or improve our fishery. I'm all ears if you know how it will.
I could be all hot air on this, but I'll throw it out there for consideration. Sorry if I am a bit long-winded.
"Big Picture" Concept:
Increased opportunity, access and use of fisheries will make it more likely that appropriate public resources are committed to management of and improvement of the same.
Extreme example of the opposite:
The State of Maine. Muskie are not revered as a sportfish and do not receive appropriate protection from their DNR. To my knowledge, nothing is being done in Maine to expand or enhance the muskie fishery and in fact, to the contrary, a greater effort is underway to limit or even eradicate the muskie population. There are many factors causing this, but most important is the extremely limited interest and use of the muskie fishery.
In other words, there is a direct relationship between increased interest and usage of a resource and the level of management that said resource will then receive.
So, if allowing 2 lines per angler in MN creates more opportunity, interest and use of the overall muskie fishery, while not harming the fishery, then it would seem that the expansion of muskie lakes, new stockings, better management, etc., would be more likely.
If you can't tell, my general philosophy as an angler, hunter, etc. is that I am in favor of the least amount of governmental restriction as necessary, e.g., regs that limit angling or hunting rights should be enacted only as necessary to adequately protect, preserve and maintain the resource.
Bottom line. If demonstrated that 2 lines per angler will ultimately cause harm to the fishery, then I'd be in favor of keeping it as is. If there is no harm, then I'd prefer 2 lines per angler in an effort to increase angling opportunity and interest.
Disclaimer: I don't fish in MN and I don't really care one way or another. Just throwing food for thought. |
|
| |
|
| Things are good, but it takes constant improvement to keep them that way. I have yet to hear how 2 line will maintain or improve our fishery. I'm all ears if you know how it will.
we manage (and sometimes even create) fisheries for our own benefit. the rules and regulations are intended to protect the fishery while also providing for the maximum possible enjoyment of that resource by people. a reasonable case can be made that allowing 2 lines will have no negative impact on the fish while actually increasing people's ability to enjoy the fishery. this is especially true for non-muskie species, and it's important for us to remember that there are a lot of people out there fishing for walleyes, panfish, etc. |
|
| |
|
|
Live bait fishing for panfish, walleye etc. is what concerns me most about 2 lines.
Anybody who fishes a little can't deny that more fish will swallow bait if people use 2 lines. You can't reel 'em both in at the same time.
Delayed mortality will go up. Whether that is detrimental is a personal opinion.
I just don't see the logic in creating new regs that will result in more fish swallowing hooks.
JS
|
|
| |
|
| Muskie Treats - 3/9/2011 1:30 PM
stocking - 3/9/2011 9:39 AM
Muskie Treats - 3/9/2011 8:37 AM
MuskyManiac09 - 3/8/2011 3:10 PM
Why does everyone want to change things when they are apparently working? Minnesota musky fishing is pretty darn good right now, why mess it up? Just like people wanting to mess with North Dakota duck and pheasant hunting.....enough already!!!!!!!
One word: Greed
I guess if everything is great and there is no need to change things, supporting new lakes to be stocked with muskie would be a poor decision. Change is bad, correct?
Things are good, but it takes constant improvement to keep them that way. I have yet to hear how 2 line will maintain or improve our fishery. I'm all ears if you know how it will.
Does saltwater reel/rods help and improve the fishery? High tech electronics? Two rods is no different, the same 10% will still catch 90% it is a non-issue. Just choosing when to accept change based on your agenda is sloppy. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 667
Location: Roscoe IL | esoxaddict - 3/9/2011 2:58 PM
Well, John... allowing people to catch more fish by using more lines can't possibly benefit the fishery, now can it?
Why fish with hooks at all? It hurts the fish and that's not good for the fishery right? We can just sit at home and watch TV holding our di&#s, which will protect the poor fish….
Everyone who fishes wants to catch more fish, that why they spend money on better equipment every single year. An added line would generate more sales; I see that as a very good thing for local businesses. Education is the key to better fisheries, spend more money on education and continuous improvements will be made.
Buy American!
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 233
Location: Iowa | Keep it at one. I don 't see any benefit or any more enjoyment fishing two lines instead of one.
Two hands, one to hold the rod and the other to turn the reel.
Jeremy |
|
| |
|
Posts: 233
Location: Iowa | "Does saltwater reel/rods help and improve the fishery? High tech electronics? Two rods is no different, the same 10% will still catch 90% it is a non-issue. Just choosing when to accept change based on your agenda is sloppy."
How can you argue that having two lines in the water is the same as using saltwater rods/reels and electronics? They are completely different things. I don't think electronics and saltwater reels are going to catch fish themselves. Don't confuse tools vs techniques.
Jeremy
Edited by jwelch 3/9/2011 5:42 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1184
Location: Iowa Great Lakes | Is it safe to guess all you MN guys that ice fish use 2 lines??? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 313
Location: Bemidji, Lake Vermilion | I don't support the two line change especially for gamefish other than muskies. While this is a muskie site, the harvest of panfish and walleyes, even fish like catfish will go up unless limits are reduced. There are FAR too many people in this state who care nothing what the limits are and are never being caught breaking the rules as it is. Too many people who are toting kids along for nothing more than additional lines. Abuses like this only get twice as bad. Poor fisherman/women who might catch nothing with 1 line out WILL catch more with two. Maybe not every day, every time out, but they will catch more.
As for muskie fishing I still don't support 2 lines. If it passes will I use 2 lines when out trolling by myself - yes. If a person is with me maybe we troll 3 total, unlikely to do 4. I don't and probably won't ever fish muskies with live bait so that aspect of 2 lines doesn't interest me at all on a personal level. Responsible people can do it without much harm to fish. Irresponsible/improperly educated anglers will kill more muskies with 2 lines. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2361
| I would expect the panfish mortality would be much greater than the musky mortality with two lines. They can't grow if somebody guthooked them when they weren't of legal size. Harvest will go up, the math is simple. It will not be double, but it will be increased. Guides will like it, because now it will be much easier to get an idiot a musky. More money. More guides. More pressure on the resource more mortality. I don't think you can assume it will cause more lakes to be stocked or more stocking density to be done. That is not something I would expect.
WI has decreased the stocking densities, rather than increasing them and there has always been a high high musky interest historically in the state. MN can't even get the population to agree on possible musky expansion. When you guys start to see trolling spreads and 2-3 trailing sausages you are going to understand the two line animal a little better. And those sausages also work extremely well on the trophy pike population. As well as the non trophy, nice pike populations. |
|
| |
|
| Guides will like it, because now it will be much easier to get an idiot a musky. More money. More guides. More pressure on the resource more mortality.
That right there is the kind of reasonable rhetoric that really helps the conversation progress. Good job. I'm not sure if you're being more rude to guides or to their clients.
And it's a pretty giant leap to equate 2 lines to more pressure. It'll mean more guides because it's suddenly so easy to get their "idiot" clients a fish? What?
When you guys start to see trolling spreads and 2-3 trailing sausages you are going to understand the two line animal a little better.
I wonder how the fishing is in places like KY and IL and NY and OH and MI and even Southern WI where trolling spreads and trailing live bait is common practice? Oh yeah, it's better than it has EVER been before. Weird, that.
There's actually less conflict between anglers who are trolling 6-line spreads than there is between casters competing for turns at the same weed points or humps.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 742
Location: Grand Rapids MN | Who knows, maybe with more lines people will be more attentive and there could be less deep hooks in panfish and 'eyes. I know when I'm 'toting' around my 3 kids I have to pay close attention to their lines and not just mine. Its actually that much more work I rarely get to fish myself. Plus I feel better since I'm not abusing our resources when I set down my rod. In all seriousness, I do agree with you Brian that it won't make much of a difference most of the time. |
|
| |
|
| All due respect fsf, I felt the same as "Just an Idiot" when I read that. I'm a guide and I've opposed this from the start. If you polled the guides I know I'd bet you'd be surprised. Obviously some guides would support it , but many of us are protective of the resource and support the MMA and Muskies Inc and would be opposed. I'm also not seeing the connection to more lines equating to more clients. Lastly, people hire guides for many different reasons. At least half of my clients just wanna learn something; catching fish is a bonus. I had a client last year tell me he hoped he wouldn't catch a 50 incher on our outing because he wanted to get his first 50 on his own. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2361
| Just An Idiot - 3/9/2011 8:57 PM
Guides will like it, because now it will be much easier to get an idiot a musky. More money. More guides. More pressure on the resource more mortality.
That right there is the kind of reasonable rhetoric that really helps the conversation progress. Good job. I'm not sure if you're being more rude to guides or to their clients.
And it's a pretty giant leap to equate 2 lines to more pressure. It'll mean more guides because it's suddenly so easy to get their "idiot" clients a fish? What?
When you guys start to see trolling spreads and 2-3 trailing sausages you are going to understand the two line animal a little better.
I wonder how the fishing is in places like KY and IL and NY and OH and MI and even Southern WI where trolling spreads and trailing live bait is common practice? Oh yeah, it's better than it has EVER been before. Weird, that.
There's actually less conflict between anglers who are trolling 6-line spreads than there is between casters competing for turns at the same weed points or humps.
I'm going to accept your anon name as accurate. And no, the fishing in KY is not as good as it was before, and in fact it appears that the trolling has affected it. I don't know where you fish, but I've seen the 6 line spreads and they compete for the turns and humps too. And if you have never had a six line spread come between you and the area you are trying to work, you've had a pleasant uncrowded experience fishing.....thus far. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2361
| Ben Olsen - 3/9/2011 9:16 PM
All due respect fsf, I felt the same as "Just an Idiot" when I read that. I'm a guide and I've opposed this from the start. If you polled the guides I know I'd bet you'd be surprised. Obviously some guides would support it , but many of us are protective of the resource and support the MMA and Muskies Inc and would be opposed. I'm also not seeing the connection to more lines equating to more clients. Lastly, people hire guides for many different reasons. At least half of my clients just wanna learn something; catching fish is a bonus. I had a client last year tell me he hoped he wouldn't catch a 50 incher on our outing because he wanted to get his first 50 on his own.
With all due respect, I'm standing on my post. However, I hope you are right rather than I, on guides supporting multiple lines. In my experience, they are in favor of multiple lines and multiple line trolling, particularly if they have learned the method.
Maybe you should poll the guides and find out what their feelings are about it, one of us will probably be surprised. |
|
| |
|
| To think a bad fisherperson with two rods will out fish a good one with one rod is silly...Good fisherpeople put far more stress on the fishery than a two rod rule would. Things are good, we stock them to catch them, just keeping education on C&R and things will be fine. You might also gain new anglers to support further stocking of new lakes, gain support in fights against groups such as no more muskies and the spearing agendas. Seems pretty simple in regards to muskies. BR |
|
| |
