|
|
Posts: 1270
| Playing Devil's advocate here but what really is a replica mount? It's nothing more than a nice painting of a fish. Don't get me wrong Lax is a true master artist when it comes to this but what would it take for me to call him up and order up a 55" fish? My guess is all it would take is a credit card and a shipping address. Now to get a 55" skin mount I would have to come up with a 55" skin to mount where would I get that? I would have to catch it. BIG DIFFERENCE!!!
PErsonally I don't have a need to mount a fish or get a replica made as they just don't really interest me to have one on a wall but to say that a replica and a skin mount are the same or that the replica is better is not true. The replica may last longer but when it really comes down to it it's nothing more than a fake. Would all of you who advocate for replicas think the same way if you walked into a house and there was a deer mounted with reproduction antlers on it?
Here's what I do: Take a nice picture and don't measure the fish, then get a 8"X10" of the picture and put it on the wall. When someone asks how big it was tell them "I don't know I don't measure my fish. All I know is that it was a nice fish that I was proud to catch" Why does everybody need to measure every fish and then get a girth on it also? |
|
| |
|
Location: Green Bay, WI | been-trollin' - 11/20/2007 2:17 PM
so WHO is going to do what is needed to find out what can be done about getting it on the ballot? Maybe some of the guys fishing that water all the time should be the spearhead and do something rather than rant and rave on the internet.
With all due respect; what do you think we are trying to do? As my last post points out... *I* am trying to find out what can be done (if anything even NEEDS to be done) to get it on the ballot. It may already *be* on the ballot. But we are indeed trying to spearhead and do something!
Please realize that what is posted on this forum (and other forums) is only the tip of the iceberg. Believe me--wheels are turning. Just because it is not all laid out here in black & white doesn't mean nothing else is being done.
I am only trying to facilitate discussion here to help maintain a flow of ideas. And while I (we) appreciate all posts, it would be helpful if folks would at least sign their names to their comments. All of the responses are taken seriously, and MANY people local to the Green Bay fishery are following this thread--you wouldn't believe the feedback I have gotten over the past five days. But if I (we) are committed enough to take the time to research information and respond to these posts, we ask that the poster at least take ownership of their comments. Anonymous posts are very frustrating in that respect. But thank you for your post nonetheless.
And once again, we (I) would like to thank MuskieFIRST for providing an outlet for this communication, and for allowing the discussion to continue.
Tom Betka
Research Director
Titletown Muskies Inc.
|
|
| |
|
|
A put and take fishery refers to one that is stocked for the sole purpose of allowing anglers to kill fish.
There is no such thing as a put and take muskie fishery.
The investment of money and time it takes for these fish to grow is so great, that state policy would never allow a put and take muskie program.
These fish are meant to be caught over and over by large numbers of anglers, with the hopes of someday having a self-sustaining population.
The point of putting these fish in GB was to create a trophy fishery, not just another muskie puddle.
JS
|
|
| |
|
| Since many fishermen would consider a 50" fish a trophy specimen. I would guess the goal has been accomplished.
Why suggest tampering with it then? If it's not broke why fix it? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8772
| For the same reason you change the oil in your truck and winterize the motor on your boat. It ain't broke now, but the future will only bring more angling pressure, more harvest, possibly VHS, and ultimately the potential for decline is a very real one. |
|
| |
|
Location: Green Bay, WI | Jayman_unlogged - 11/20/2007 2:57 PM
Since many fishermen would consider a 50" fish a trophy specimen. I would guess the goal has been accomplished.
Why suggest tampering with it then? If it's not broke why fix it?
Because we don't know that it isn't broken...and we don't know how to tell if (or when) it becomes broken. And by the time we *do* know these things, it may be too late. Oh, and please define "broken" with respect to this fishery? Is it based upon the number of 50" fish caught per year? How many is not enough?
The system is complex, and not fully understood--in fact we have a LONG, long way to go to understand it.
TB
Edited by tcbetka 11/20/2007 3:22 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 6
| I believe that very few posting here knew about this area before the 50 boat tournament in October which led to the discovery of this area by the profit fishing industry. The only problem out there is that there are to many people fishing this area. There are at least two guide boats that I know of bringing people everyday. There was no problem before this tournament. This tournament has directly caused this over pressuring of this area but the only talk is of size limits. It certainly can not be good for these fish to be caught over and over again on a regular basis.
Bob |
|
| |
|
Posts: 133
Location: Lake Tomahawk, Musky Central, USA | If you know what fishing is all about...Size limits do not matter. There will always be the clients, and the first timers...but what gets them into it? Education is key. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | Fishing in Wisconsin is cyclical. When GB get's hammered beyond belief for another year or so, the locusts will find another hot bite. Anazing how good the fishing up in Vilas has gotten after Minnesota and Illinois fisheries began taking off. Some people will always chase the "easy bite" instead of putting in the work. The 50" limit will work fine if you allow it to.
Fishing pressure is always going to happen when a water gets advertised. You boys up in GB have to learn to live with it. Concentrate on your fishing more instead of what other peole are doing and you'll find happiness. I have a place on one of the most hard hit lakes in Vilas. I used to blame flatlanders (ask Bette) and anybody else I could think of for the fishing being crappy. Tournament fishing has taught me that it isn't who's fishing the lake, it's how the lake is fished that matters. The fish are there, you gotta work and try new things to get them.
This whole thread is beginning to smell of sour grapes because other people are fishing and beginning to do well.
Edited by Gander Mt Guide 11/20/2007 5:33 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 194
Location: Lincolnshire, IL | bobp - 11/20/2007 4:40 PM
I believe that very few posting here knew about this area before the 50 boat tournament in October which led to the discovery of this area by the profit fishing industry. The only problem out there is that there are to many people fishing this area. There are at least two guide boats that I know of bringing people everyday. There was no problem before this tournament. This tournament has directly caused this over pressuring of this area but the only talk is of size limits. It certainly can not be good for these fish to be caught over and over again on a regular basis.
Bob
Hey Bob, hope all is well...I will disagree with you that the MI tournaments have been the sole factor, I'll even to venture a guess that they haven't played a large role regarding the "discovery" of the Fox River/Lower Bay muskie fishery. The 2x MI tournaments did not take place until well after the proverbial cat was "let out of the bag". How does the saying go...2 guys can keep a secret if 1 of them is dead. We no longer live in an age where skinny wirey guys deliver mail on horseback. Many factors have been in play regarding the popularity of the Musky fishing in this area. IMHO some the main reasons that the fishery is popular is its proximity to the 3rd largest city in WI, and with the surrounding communties of Appleton, DePere, Allouez, Bellevue, Suamico, Little Suamico, Isaar, Seymour, Oneida etc...(Trying to reedeem myself LOL) I would say the population mirrors that of MADTOWN(@nd Largest City in WI). With gas prices, etc. the local water(Green Bay) is bound to get more pressure. Also, the fishing is outstanding. It is easily adapted to by the casual fishermen. A boat with a motor, a rod, a reel spooled with 30 lb. test and a crankbait with a lip on it and you're in business. Also with the internet information is readily available(so I guess you could blame Al Gore for that). If my memory serves me correctly the fishing "became" hotter in the late 90's, by the early 00's articles were being written in major publications. By all accounts the MI tournaments were really Johnny come latelys on the scene. I haven't been fishing the system as long as some for muskies. I think I was serious about it in '01. I can tell you that having fished both MI tournaments that most of the teams, I would venture to say that 1/2 of them for both were regulars on the river and lower Bay. Were a bunch of fish caught for both tournaments...the answer is yes. But again, the tournaments came after the publicity, articles and the reports. And that is not a bad thing, it is just the way it is....Wade VandenHeuvel 
Edited by Wisconsin Wade 11/21/2007 7:11 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 7037
Location: Northwest Chicago Burbs | I've been kind of reading and watching this thread....a few observations:
-the fishing is GREAT on Green Bay right now. hordes of people flocking to fish there. people catch large fish, then find ways to talk about their successes (tv, print, web).
-a number of LARGE fish are being killed by what sounds like a small population of fisherman.
-the size limit is 50", which is (to my knowledge) the largest size limit in the state of WI.
-people now want a higher size limit.
-fish are being killed either through harvest of trophy fish and/or delayed mortality, but no one really KNOWs the true population of fish there.
-the fishing is fantastic on Green Bay right now.
-some local fisherman are getting upset with people coming to fish "their" body of water.
So, to me, it sounds like we're dealing with a world that isnt 100% c&r, on a body of water with a really good population of really great fish. Education about c&r, working to change legislation and size limits....these are probably the best ways to keep this body of water at it's present state, right? Fighting and ugliness on MuskieFIRST are probably not going to stop a few individuals from keeping fish, so let's keep this conversation clean and civil. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | but Andrew ... what is your position on skin vs. reproduction ... i always thought they went hand-in-hand ...  |
|
| |
|
| there have been a LOT more than 10 killed this year ...one guy who is tapped into all that is going on up there knows of at least 23 or more killed...to me it's really sad WI legislatures can slam thru something like the crazy early season barbless season for muskies but can't put thru a 54" size limit in the same fashion..?? .why is WI always decades behind Canada and MN when it comes to preserving a great fishery...and making changes? look at all the great lakes in MN and Canada and it's easy to see why they have the fisheries they do...they preserve the big fish...Green Bay has the potential to be something even more special and great than it is now and putting a higher size limit up there will make a difference...I don't even fish there much, nor will I..but still it just baffles me how WI fishermen and the people who have the power to make changes make excuses for why we don't have the fishing that other places do...forage this, size of the lakes that, blah blah blah...try HARVEST...maybe I'm off base but I would say GB is about the ONLY place in WI that even comes close to any of the wates MN or Canada has with respect to actually catching a 50+ ...and so many are being killed out there...daily!
makes me sick. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | isn't there some pontoon dude on mille lacs that has a similar reputation ???? honest question ... also, i would assume minnesota has a pretty big walleye group still anti-musky trying to do similar things ... i know when we went to vermillion the guy who tended bar in tower was talking big about he and his buddies wanting others to kill all the muskies cause they ate his walleyes ... this same subject is pretty typical it seems from missouri and indiana's bass guys who hate muskies to minnesota's walleye guys doing the same to the wisconsin tourists and skin-mount history ... unless you are a state representative from eagle river, it doesn't seem there's much you can do about it but complain ... eh? |
|
| |
|
| or line the right pockets with some dough! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Great post Brad!
GMG are you serious? The fishing doesnt need to be cyclical. It is cyclical because people harvest several fish. If limits are in place to prevent over harvest then the fishery can remain at a high level with large fish being caught often.
Fishing pressure on GB is a given. But with increased exploitation it makes sense to raise limits to prevent over exploitation due to fishing mortality. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2037
Location: lansing, il | this post alone has made me want to go there and fish!!!:-) |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | "Fishing pressure on GB is a given. But with increased exploitation it makes sense to raise limits to prevent over exploitation due to fishing mortality."
Seriously, you think Green Bay is fished harder than any class A in Vilas and Oneida counties between Memorial day and Nov 30?? Maybe they need to raise every limit on every class A up there? Great idea.
I didn't say it need to be cyclical, the way people fish seem to be cyclical..they find the hot bite and one that's advertised, then they move on to the latest and greatest.
I have a question for you...since when is fishing legally "exploitation"??
Edited by Gander Mt Guide 11/20/2007 8:30 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 512
Location: Appleton | bobp - 11/20/2007 4:40 PM
I believe that very few posting here knew about this area before the 50 boat tournament in October which led to the discovery of this area by the profit fishing industry. The only problem out there is that there are to many people fishing this area. There are at least two guide boats that I know of bringing people everyday. There was no problem before this tournament. This tournament has directly caused this over pressuring of this area but the only talk is of size limits. It certainly can not be good for these fish to be caught over and over again on a regular basis.
Bob
I would assume you didn't fish this area last year? It was just as much a zoo last season as this. In fact most guys congested the river making it alot worse. Now guys just zig zag over and over on a bay with a few scattered in the river. I don't disagree with guides adding to the pressure in GB but word has been out about this place for some time. http://muskie.outdoorsfirst.com/muskievideo.asp This is a link to the video on this site dated 11/30/05 that talks about the GB fishery. This video pretty much tells you it is a great fishery. Also gives a good history. Check it out.
Edited by Team Rhino 11/20/2007 8:32 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | "this post alone has made me want to go there and fish!!!:-)"
Stay in Vilas Flatlander! |
|
| |
|
| It was the tournament last year that substantially increased pressure after the results were posted online.
GMG
Not sure if you've seen the mouth of late but it's wall to wall. It is much worse than any inland lake i've ever seen. Maybe Vermillion on the weekends is the only comparision. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 6
| Hey Wade hope all is good with you too. By the way GB is the third largest city in Wi not the second. Where did you go to school ? Same place as me right . Just to clear a few things up then I am done with this. I do not visit these boards very much any more but I have been watching recently because of the GB situation. Yes the river and channel have been heavily fished for a long time now but few people have ventured beyond. The area in question I have fished for several years. I have been fishing the bay since I was a young boy in the early 60's. Last year I fished this area extensivley and there was never more than a few boats. Six was the most and a lot of times no one else. I knew that this would not last but this fall was still not too bad. Pretty much the same people as last year. That was untill the tournament. Then all hell broke loose. Now you can count up to 40 boats in this area. Yes people have a right to tournament and profit fish but 50 boats is way too many and an exploitation of the resource in my opinion. And yes this is the main reason for the explosion of people fishing this area and the fish being kept. I do not like to see all these fish kept either but just as people have a right to tournament and other profit fishing these people have a right to keep these fish if they want. We all know that almost all musky fisherman release there fish. We do not need higher size limits ! If someone wants to keep a fish, big deal, let them keep it.
Bob |
|
| |
|
Location: Green Bay, WI | I spoke last night, to the chairman of the Great Lakes Committee (GLC) of the Conservation Congress. After the resolution was voted upon favorably by the citizens in the various counties, it was assigned (by the Executive arm of the CC) to the GLC. They met near the end of September to discuss the various resolution proposals that had been assigned to them. They declined to pass it through to the DNR. So it is indeed a dead issue.
This comes directly from the chairman of the GLC, so I am quite certain of the status. He has yet to receive a copy of the formal decision (in writing) back from Madison, so that is not available to me.
So the process must begin again, and a new resolution must be written and voted upon throughout the state--and it once again will need to go *back* to the GLC for consideration. But until we can read the resolution and more importantly, the GLCs written decision declining to pass it forward, we cannot begin to formulate a new strategy to help it be successful. But the good news is that the chairman of the GLC was very willing to maintain a dialog, and discuss with me exactly why the resolution failed in September. This can only help us in the long run.
Therefore I will take all of this information back to the Titletown MI chapter, and ultimately we will sponsor another resolution. These plans are already underway.
So we wish to thank all who have participated in this thread. Your comments are appreciated, and will be considered when we formulate our next course of action. Please feel free to either PM or email me with questions/comments. I will post periodic updates about the process as they become available.
Tom Betka
Research Director
Titletown Chapter, MI |
|
| |
|
Posts: 194
Location: Lincolnshire, IL | bobp - 11/21/2007 6:07 AM
Hey Wade hope all is good with you too. By the way GB is the third largest city in Wi not the second. Where did you go to school ? Same place as me right . Just to clear a few things up then I am done with this. I do not visit these boards very much any more but I have been watching recently because of the GB situation. Yes the river and channel have been heavily fished for a long time now but few people have ventured beyond. The area in question I have fished for several years. I have been fishing the bay since I was a young boy in the early 60's. Last year I fished this area extensivley and there was never more than a few boats. Six was the most and a lot of times no one else. I knew that this would not last but this fall was still not too bad. Pretty much the same people as last year. That was untill the tournament. Then all hell broke loose. Now you can count up to 40 boats in this area. Yes people have a right to tournament and profit fish but 50 boats is way too many and an exploitation of the resource in my opinion. And yes this is the main reason for the explosion of people fishing this area and the fish being kept. I do not like to see all these fish kept either but just as people have a right to tournament and other profit fishing these people have a right to keep these fish if they want. We all know that almost all musky fisherman release there fish. We do not need higher size limits ! If someone wants to keep a fish, big deal, let them keep it.
Bob
My Kids are always switching the keys on my keyboard, they think it's funny, The sad part is that I went to School in Madison as well, but I thought that it was only one street...my bad...I always forget that one....Take Care!
Edited by Wisconsin Wade 11/21/2007 7:13 AM
|
|
| |
|
| so the WI Fishermen voted in favor of the 54" but a committee shoots it down....and we bother to vote why....?
Like MRoberts said, the Cons Congress is a joke...
I don't understand how we can vote something thru and it just gets shot down...what is the point of even voting if a small committee ultimately decides what THEY want, not what WE want...crazy. |
|
| |
|
| the GLC is a committee that elected members of the Conservation Congress can get themselves on...which is to say that any one of us could get themselves on to it and thereby influence it's decisions.
Tom, if you talk to him again, along with the written decision, you might ask him to also provide you with a copy of the minutes of the meeting in which that decision was made. those minutes are a matter of public record. interestingly enough, the minutes from recent meetings from just about every other CC committee are posted on the DNR website, with the exception of the GLC.
here's the current make-up of the committe if anyone felt like writing some letters.
there are some recognizable names on this list...
DALE MAAS W9449 BREEZY PT RD FOX LAKE 53933 (Chair) DODGE
DAVID TUPA 6691 COUNTY A EGG HARBOR 54209 (Secretary) DOOR
RICHARD ALVIN N376 LAKKEN RD SARONA 54870 WASHBURN
DONALD ANDERSON d N2938 HOSPITAL RD KEWAUNEE 54216 KEWAUNEE
RICHARD BECKER 8633 HWY 42 TWO RIVERS 54241 MANITOWOC
NORMAN BLOHM N8661 LAWN RD SEYMOUR 54165 OUTAGAMIE
JOHN BLUMREICH 2034 WALTON LN BELOIT 53511 ROCK
ALVIN BOCHLER 3203 CITY HEIGHTS RD ASHLAND 54806 ASHLAND
SCOTT HECKER W5195 CTY A WILD ROSE 54984 WAUSHARA
VERNON KONRAD 319 N JOLIET UPPER STURGEON BAY 54235 DOOR
PETE PETROUSKE 1498 PONDAROSA GREEN BAY 54313 BROWN
RICHARD PLADIES PO BOX 266 CRIVITZ 54114 MARINETTE
BRUCE PRENTICE 604 3RD ST W ASHLAND 54806 ASHLAND
ED REWOLINSKI 4212 S PINE AVE MILWAUKEE 53207 MILWAUKEE
WAYNE SCHROEDER w 3530 N STORY ST GRAND CHUTE 54914 OUTAGAMIE
RONALD VANDER LOOP 2121 ORRIE LANE GREEN BAY 54304 BROWN
RUSS WARYE PO BOX 128 PRESQUE ISLE 54557 VILAS
MICHAEL WITKIEWICZ 2755 BARTELS DRIVE RACINE 53406 RACINE
CHRIS GROTH PO Box 10448 GREEN BAY 54307 (DNR Liaison)
BILL HORNS PO BOX 7921 MADISON 53707 (DNR Liaison)
Edited by lambeau 11/21/2007 8:21 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 3518
Location: north central wisconsin | Tom, sad, but we had the same thing happen here in Central WI when I drafted the 45" limit for the WI River. The C.C. warm water committe shot it down after it passed by a huge margim locally. Why? It ws getting late in the evening, and some other Musky related issues had already failed to go through. I went to the chairman of the board and spoke of how the public voted it through in large numbers. He was surpised and angered that it didn't make the advisory ballot. It was reinstated, and we didn't lose any time with it, as he upped it the following year to a rule change question and it is now law. It might pay to make a call to the chairman of the board. Also, if Kevin Kapucinski's contact is still available, one might want to contact him to get his views. He was the manager in charge during the 50" rule change, and his opinion might weigh heavily in this.
One thing, keep to the issue here guys, especially those interested in a higher size limit. Arguing, here, about people legally keeping fish, and why a rep. is better than skin, will not help you when you are up in front of your counties' constituants at the hearings. Could hurt. Let the proposal speak for itself, and the fact that the public majority voted in favor of it when the resolution was tabled. One note, it was we(locals, DNR, interested parties who fish there), who fought hard for the 50" limit years ago already. We were already getting into 50" fish over there when that went through, and some of us questioned why it wasn't set higher to start with, but that is water under the bridge. I guess I am saying be glad that it is at least 50".
That said, why not shoot for 52"? Of course 54" could be an end all to this argument, but 52" might be more easily attained. Don't blast me here please, as this is just a thought. 52" would offer a ton of protection(the majority of the fish I've seen kept from there over the years have been 50-51.5" fish, and yes that is obviously because of where the size limit is now). Yes, I know some fish can get bigger than that there and we've seen them and heard of them. But, one might have to adjust, to enjoy more protection, while appeasing the fish managers and committees. I think it is safe to say that 52" would afford a ton of increased protection, and potentially allow for more support.
Edited by Reef Hawg 11/21/2007 8:17 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 743
| Seriously, what did you guys expect? the VAST majority of people who visit this website are all for Catch and Release...but there are peoplee both OK with the #1 musky fishery in their state being taken advantage of. there are MANY MANY conservation minded anglers in Wisconsin. However, a big part of the Wisconsin Fishing Culture is "if i catch it, it's mine", no matter if we are talking muskies, pike, bass, walleye, catfish...whatever. So seriously guys, what did you expect? in this situation, a few bad apples might spoil it for everyone else. but this should not be alarming, this is how most fisheries in WI are treated by the locals. they are "entitled" and it's their "right" to kill what's legal...anyone who lets legislation sets their moral standards doesn’t properly use their own reason and conscience. just because it's legal, doesn’t mean it's right. and just because it's illegal, doesn’t make it wrong. One this is certain, and probably will be for a while. If you create and build an outstanding fishery in WI, some the locals will try their best to keep what is "theirs"....
it's just part of it guys....i think it takes a good mix of "cramming the message down their throats, ridicule, making meat hunters feel like 2nd class folks" and "nice education". you can reach both crowds that way.
Seriously...this is not an "alarming" trend..the post should be called, "we knew it would happen".
peace in the east
tomcat
Edited by tomcat 11/21/2007 8:47 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 3518
Location: north central wisconsin | Tom, get real, try to do something to help, or keep the narrowmindedness in Indiana where your states' Musky fishing just happened to begin 200 years after it did here in WI. You can berate another regions culture all you want, but unless we see you actually DOING something to help improve/change it, your rhetoric doesn't do much other than anger and alienate, making it more difficult for those that are trying to make change to complete their efforts.
Edited by Reef Hawg 11/21/2007 10:23 AM
|
|
| |
|
Location: Green Bay, WI | OK guys, let's take a deep breath...
Thanks for the posts. For Jason--I have in fact spoken to the Chairman of the GLC, for quite some time last night. He & I had a VERY productive conversation, and he has agreed to make himself available to me during the re-write of the proposal. All I can say here publicly is that the wheels are turning on the resolution re-attempt, and on a couple of other available options as well. But I must have as much factual information as possible--on everything from the most current population estimate of muskellunge in the bay system, to VHS, to the history of the current size regulations. There is a LOT of information to pour through, and I have started that process. I expect to have rough draft(s) of everything we are working on by the first of the year. So obviously we aren't going to get anything accomplished by the end of this season, given that it's only 9 days away.
Jason, if you will PM me a contact number, I would like to give you a call within the next 3-4 days. I am going to Tomahawk for a couple days for Thanksgiving, but will be back to Green Bay on Friday, and can call you then if it's OK.
Thanks again for keeping this a civil discussion.
TB
Edited by tcbetka 11/21/2007 11:57 AM
|
|
| |
