"MattG_braith" said:
This is so saddening and maddening to hear about…the problem is I just don't see any way the DNR will ever deal with this properly. A change of the season to protect the spawners is probably the best way to start but there really should be a complete no kill all year long on those waters, which would never happen. The DNR doesn't have the balls to do something that drastic even if it is the right biological decision.Even if they change the MSL to 48 or 50 inches like they have considered that doesn't protect the fish that need to be protected. You will still have the 3, 4, 5, 10 people a year taking their 1 50"+ fish plus the guys that take more than 1 a year who don't report their catch.
Honestly, they should manage that chain like they manage the sturgeon on the Indian River chain with a lottery.
How would "no kill" be the right biological decision? What would the next step be… no fishing? Sound management based on scientific and social factors is how all decisions should be made.
Be careful what you wish for…
There are limited practical ways to protect this fishery. In my opinion closing off the river to fishing during the spawn would be a top priority that would have a significant impact on the number of fish harvested. I guess if we keep having a healthy dialogue with the people in charge hopefully we can make that happen.
"Chris Musselman" said:
There are limited practical ways to protect this fishery. In my opinion closing off the river to fishing during the spawn would be a top priority that would have a significant impact on the number of fish harvested. I guess if we keep having a healthy dialogue with the people in charge hopefully we can make that happen.
[smilie=sign-yeahthat.gif]
We have 100's of miles of catch and release/flies only regulations in the state for trout, which I love (the trout, not the regs… I never even fish those spots anyhow 👿 ), and that is purely social regulation, without biological input whatsoever. They actually admit that the regulations have done nothing for fish population/size on any of the rivers they regulate… I think catch and release on these waters would be awesome, allowing more big girls to be caught again, but the direction they should biologically focus on should be spawning habitat, and protection of it. a 50" size limit would obviously be awesome too, but its been shown that there are pretty specific areas in which muskies spawn, a closure in these areas from say march 15-june 15 would be stellar, and would benefit the fishery more than no kill, or C&R regs would… IMO. I also think it would be more feasible, as there is some precedence (might be stretching a bit here?) in the Otsego Lake spawning marsh. We all know that the tag is not going to get regulated particularly heavy, and is very difficult to do so, but they can't make regulations based on the select few who are going to break them anyway. My guess is that this regulation has saved many fish already this year, and that is all we can hope for.
Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but I have always heard these very large and old fish are not very good spawners (if they spawn at all). It looks like this conversation is turning into a couple different things and getting away from the original post of why this specific fish was taken by this angler. Also, we have to remember Michigan now has the strictest regulations for muskies so we shouldn't be bashing the DNR as they can't dictate if people follow the rules or not. Yes, it would be great to have more COs up there, and all around the state, regulating all the fishing rules, but that doesn't look like it will happen any time soon. I do believe those waters deserve special regulations, but I doubt that will happen in a little while as we just had a MAJOR change in the muskie regulations this past year.
"MattG_braith" said:
A change of the season to protect the spawners is probably the best way to start but there really should be a complete no kill all year long on those waters, which would never happen.
A no kill will never happen. But, what if the northern waters had the same season as LSC? 1st Sat in June – Dec 15?
"Mayhem" said:
A spearing ban would be great too but can't see that happening.
"jasonvkop" said:
I do believe those waters deserve special regulations, but I doubt that will happen in a little while as we just had a MAJOR change in the muskie regulations this past year.
You guys have no faith!
"Jim tenHaaf" said:
[quote="MattG_braith"]A change of the season to protect the spawners is probably the best way to start but there really should be a complete no kill all year long on those waters, which would never happen.
A no kill will never happen. But, what if the northern waters had the same season as LSC? 1st Sat in June – Dec 15?
That would be awesome as long as they are done spawning by the first saturday. They didnt start clearing the spawning grounds untill the third week in june this year but every season is different. Either way that would be a vast improvement.
Ya we were all pumped with the new regs and the one fish/year tag. The problem is this guy not respecting the fishery after he already got his "trophy" and taking another fish that gets him nowhere. This is still a social issue as much as anything. The trick is getting people to realize what a limited resource it is and somehow make them look like a dirtball amongst their peers for taking a fish. Ideally, a photo of a fish like that, on a brag board, would get more WTF?'s than awesome's. Not sure how that happens quickly, but that is what needs to happen…then regs and all the legal stuff really aren't as necessary. For non-spearing situations, for this fishery,….maybe we pay for the angler's replica if they release a 48"+ fish, or something like that. Paradigm shift.
I'm not sure the new regulations had that big of an impact on the chain during the open water season. The problem is that the people harvesting are only catching one a year just by pure coincidence. The people that are catching multiple fish are sportsman who respect the fishery and know how fragile the fishery is. I've been told that the fishery is "ROBUST" and "CONTINUES TO THRIVE UNDER CURRENT REGULATIONS." I'm pretty sure that isn't the case. I'm no professional fishermen nor am I a biologist but last season tells me that if that was true I wouldn't go days without even contacting a fish, let alone having one hit the net. Hopefully we can convince the powers to be that this is an ongoing issue and we can put an end to over harvest.
I know you're right Will, a no kill is not the right thing, I just get overdramatic sometimes with this issue. But why couldn't those waters be managed for muskie like the state manages the sturgeon season on Black with a tag lottery so these guys cant just go out every winter and spear their 1 big female.
A season in line with the LSC season is definitely the obvious solution but no way the spearing crowd would allow that as it would close the season during their stab fest. Would it even be possible to pass that season change up there?
I think we all should take a step back and recognize that keeping that fish (assuming he had and utilized a tag) was legal, period. We might not agree with him keeping it (Lord knows I don't) but we as muskie fisherman are not going to make any friends in sportsman's circles or with the DNR griping about someone legally taking a fish. Again, I don't agree with him takling that fish but we muskie fisherman are not without sin in regard to killing big fish. Sure most LSC fisherman (trollers in particular in my mind) throw their fish back but I've been out there and have seen quite a few flaoters over the years and, in talking to Spencer, it happens more than anyone wants to admit. Plus, some of the GoPro video's posted on YouTube and still pictures posted on the net suggest that many of the fish that are released are mishandled. So, is it ok for us to troll for the big girls on LSC during July and August when the water is quite warm and the risk of post release mortality is higher just because we released the fish? The only way to stop big fish from being harvested is to continue to educate people about the virtues of careful catch and release. We as muskie fisherman in general, and as MMA more specifically, need to recognize that gripping about legal harvest is a waste of time. Rather, we need to convince the DNR that as a matter of sound science something needs to be done to protect the population. Until the DNR believes that the harvest rates are too high and are having an adverse impact on the Chain fishery, nothing is going to get done. I used to hate when Will said this all the time because I thought it was a cop out. But, it is true, the DNR bases its regulation decisions on the advice of biologists and biologists are convinced by science not opinion, speculation nor emotions. So, in the intrerim, education of dolts is about as good as we can do.
Again, I hate to see this, especially from a fisherman that should know better. However, what he did was legal despite our opinion that it was unethical or un-sportsman like. As Will said earlier, be carful what you wish for. Probably the best way to protect the small population of muskies in the Chain is to ban any fishing for them. Or (as someone suggested but which IMO is almost equally as bad) going to a sturgeon like lotttery which would likely prohibit targeting muskies unless you won the lottery that year and possess a tag.
You're right. Although I don't condone his actions I do accept he was in his own right to harvest that fish. I'm still shocked that it happened knowing how much passion he has for the sport. I'm surprised it even came out. He's probably the most secretive guy I know in the sport. And no he's not doing it for his ego. I bet this fish isn't even in his top five.
The Chain is unique in that it is able to grow massive muskies despite the lack of management. I'm not looking for a No kill but I believe that some kind of unique management options should be implemented that still allows angler opportunity to all but helps control the over harvest.
I agree that its legal harvest, and I agree he has the right to do that, and I don't think anyone would deny him that right. I do think that any harvest on the chain is too much, considering what Will said earlier, about how huge an old aren't necessarily related. I also agree that we need to educate people better on the sensitivity of the situation up there. I feel the problem is with the stigma of muskies and their hard to catch/low population reputations, and that people that don't know any better assume that the stigma is true/natural on the chain. What they don't get is that the stigma of low population density comes from places where they measure fish/acre not hundreds of acres/fish. I don't think they realize how few there actually are up there, and assume its normal. To equate with what Will said, there needs to be an understanding with the public and the DNR that this is indeed a very special place, in that 7-8 yr old females are nearly 50" and haven't even spawned yet, so having a 42" limit which is based on sexual maturity in most waters doesn't apply. Increasing the size limit is the most obvious next step to me, which will help reduce harvest even farther, but I sitll think there needs to be a season closure for at least the spawning areas to protect them from the times they are much more easily harvested… or maybe like bass close the possession season from dec 31-memorial day, but leave it open for C&R during that time (another back door to eliminating speering).
"Scrappy" said:
Again, I hate to see this, especially from a fisherman that should know better. However, what he did was legal despite our opinion that it was unethical or un-sportsman like. As Will said earlier, be carful what you wish for.
Well said.
Hate to see these fish harvested, but I am coming to grips that the DNR traditionally stocks for harvesting so I try to enjoy the resources while they are available. Spearing-hook/line, whatever the means used, is the mindset of some people that has been passed from generation to generation. Its unfortunate that its a given that Muskie are spearable in MI.
My relatives in MN love to spear, ask them about spearing Muskie and they krinkle their foreheads and call you crazy. They will respond by saying they are hard enough to fish as it is and explain that most lakes that have muskie you cant even spear pike. Until you can take the god given right to spear Muskie mindset out of the MI fishermen you will have inland lakes like Austin which had large fish in them, now they have a decent population of under 40 which i have found acceptable to catch on a night where I only have an hour or 2 to fish and its convenient. Would love bigger, but it is what it is……..
"mskyprey" said:
I am coming to grips that the DNR traditionally stocks for harvesting so I try to enjoy the resources while they are available
The difference here is that this resource is not supplemented by DNR stocking. The Antrim chain isn't a put and take fishery like our stocked waters are. I am almost indifferent to people spearing muskies in our stocked lakes compared to hearing about the antrim/indian fish being taken. Sure, it sucks to hear about the big girls taken out of some of those lakes and it sucks to see the size range effected by it but honestly muskie don't belong in those lakes as it is so I cant argue with someone legally harvesting them there. When it comes to our native lakes, I can argue with someone legally harvesting them. Legal or not, it just isn't right. If we could make a trade with the spearing community that would open all inland stocked lakes to spearing if it meant we were able to close our native waters to it, I would make that trade in a heartbeat.
"MattG_braith" said:
[quote="mskyprey"]I am coming to grips that the DNR traditionally stocks for harvesting so I try to enjoy the resources while they are available
The difference here is that this resource is not supplemented by DNR stocking. The Antrim chain isn't a put and take fishery like our stocked waters are. I am almost indifferent to people spearing muskies in our stocked lakes compared to hearing about the antrim/indian fish being taken. Sure, it sucks to hear about the big girls taken out of some of those lakes and it sucks to see the size range effected by it but honestly muskie don't belong in those lakes as it is so I cant argue with someone legally harvesting them there. When it comes to our native lakes, I can argue with someone legally harvesting them. Legal or not, it just isn't right. If we could make a trade with the spearing community that would open all inland stocked lakes to spearing if it meant we were able to close our native waters to it, I would make that trade in a heartbeat.
Careful on lumping all stocked water together and blanket statements about where these fish belong. We're turning the page and stocking most of them where they were native. We have four distinct groups of water:
– native populations that solely rely on natural reproduction
– native but extirpated (stocking is now concentrating on these)
– naturalized populations that were stocked and are now self sustaining (or mostly self sustaining)
– stocked (put-n-take) water with no natural reproduction these fish are put in place to balance the fishery
I have to bring this up again because our image as muskie anglers is tremendously important to our success when it comes to getting things done. When we target a single group concerning their method of harvest we need to be careful. Even though we release the fish we catch they're not all going to live and we have to accept that we kill fish. If the well being of these fish was the #1 priority then we would stop fishing for them completely. We aren't helping the fishery by sticking hooks in them (sometimes in bad places), netting them, taking them out of the water to measure and get our "hero photo". Our goal is a completely selfish one if we simply want to eliminate spearing so we can catch more and/or bigger fish.
Lets' look at it another way…
– we ban spearing
– harvest is reduced and the population increases
– catch rates increase attracting more anglers and new anglers (new anglers often handle fish poorly until they learn correct release methods)
– anglers catch more fish
– more fish caught equals more dead fish from delayed mortality
Outcome… the population doesn't change. Who do we point our fingers at?
What I'm getting at is this, to reduce harvest it needs to be done fairly and across the board so it impacts all user groups. The tag accomplished this. Do some populations require additional protection? Sure, and those need to be addressed based on the water. The size limit on some waters isn't correct and it needs to be changed to allow mature females to spawn.
To make the things happen, for our "social" desire to catch more and bigger fish, we need to use science to get correct regulations in place. Dead fish are dead fish whether harvested by spear, harvested by open water anglers or those that die from C&R.
368
43
1 Guest(s)