What would you say if a Tournament Organization was opposed to a proposed DNR requirement that all boats entering a transport event have a 45" minimum length livewell?
------------

I would say leave that rule up to the Tournament organization. Not because I don't think it is a good rule, but it just seems that so many people clamor for less government EXCEPT when it is an issue that THEY feel strongly about.

This is something I feel strongly about. If a muskie angler doesn't have a livewell large enough to transport a fish that is perfectly within expectations to catch, they should not be fishing a transport/release event. The rules already reduce the transported fish into possession, so why not do everything possible to ensure the process allows for the survival of the fish?

 You can harvest muskies under 45" on many waters in WI, but you must have a 45" livewell if you're in a transport tournament where you intend to release the fish. Huh, what uh OK, I guess...

 If harvest is the expected end result, then the event should be a kill tournament, as many walleye events are because of special regulations. I feel very strongly it's perfectly within reason to expect a muskie tournament angler competing in a release event should have the equipment to ensure the fish will survive.

 Where does stuff like that end?

I'd expect this 'stuff' to end in better tournaments with fewer issues between tournament anglers and the general fishing public offering better conservation standards allowing the respective DNR to issue permits without many of the current major concerns for the population of targeted fish.

 And yes, bag limits and slot limits and length limits are all good things...but I would look at 45" minimum livewell rule as a means to end transport tournaments, so why not just call it that or end transport tournaments. Heck, make it a rule that everyone who enters a transport tournament must have a new Tuffy 2100(provided that it comes with a 45" livewell) LOL!

I don't get this at all. The proposed rule is coming from the Department of Natural resources fisheries biologists, not a boat builder, and is intended to bring transport events into the 21st Century. Far from being the end, I see this as a rule that promises transport events a future.

'OK, but can't that be left up to the Tournament organization and the anglers that participate in the events?'

 In the case of the Rhinelander Chamber of Commerce, appartently not.

Otherwise, to me it looks like a government agency attempting to regulate a successful business model.

We collectively want increased size limits and push for more muskie related conservation as Muskie anglers all the time. We can't have it both ways. The agency you refer to manages that resource and is not some legislator who knows zero about the sport or the fishery. The very problem at hand is that tournaments ARE a 'business', and encouraging and promoting them must be in step with the public's expectations for conservation efforts and in step with those we entrust to preserve the fishery.

 Does a Bass or Walleye angler need a 45" livewell?

Not for a CRR event like AIM, no. And the subject at hand is transport release events for Muskies, not walleyes or bass; those events are now banned on many waters during the time of year even the finest livewell systems will not keep the fish alve, or required to be kill events to avoid blatant waste of the resource. If a walleye boat livewell is so small the fish will not fit in it, the fish will die during transport no matter. I've never seen one instance of that and have attended literally hundreds of Walleye Tournaments, yet I have seen boats using just plain obvious fish killers like plastic garbage bags in muskie transport events. I'll agree to strongly disagree on this one.

If no muskie sized livewell is required onboard during a transport event that is supposed to be release oriented, the event needs to go to judge boats or CPR. Or, it should be a kill event.

This is a good rule for the event in question to accept. And, it's opposed by the tournament organization. Some in that organization also opposed the 50" limit on Pelican resulting in them removing that lake from the venue because they cannot transport a fish that is allowed to be measured and counted, but not allowed to be taken into possession. That's backward thinking, and does the sport more harm than good.

i'm leaning toward fishing some Ironman events this year. it's local to me, has good payouts for modest entry fees, and i like the guys running it. http://www.ironmanmusky.com/ i think they use judge boats.

i like tournaments, they're fun. i've fished WMT, MMTT, MAC and MI events and i've observed a couple PMTT events. i think it's OK for people to make money "off" the resource, whether that's by winning the event or more likely the organizers running the event.

that said, all of those things should occur with the good of the resource in mind. imho, it's the wrong question to ask whether or not a certain verification system hurts the fish; rather, tournament organizers should be asking: "what is the most fish-friendly possible way to confirm measurements?" and then use that one.

the PMTT (judge boat) and WMT (transport) are very successful and very well run. if they were both to switch to a digital photo format, they'd still be successful trails...