"><url url="[Permission to view this media is denied]<url url="[Permission to view this media is denied]
"><link_text text="[Permission to view this media is denied] … _guide.jpg">[Permission to view this media is denied]
” alt=”
"><link_text text="[Permission to view this media is denied] … _guide.jpg">[Permission to view this media is denied]
” />
I've commented on this topic at our Muskegon and White Lake AOC meetings. One of our impairments is restrictions on fish and wildlife consumption. We also have the GL spotted muskellunge listed for native specie reintroduction within our action plan and management plan (included with walleye, white bass, sturgeon). I received some debate from non-fisher AOC members why stock muskie we can't eat. I noted the eating advisory would actually help the survival of the GLS through CPR and help boost clean tourism economics of the AOC lakes. The GLS is more valuable alive providing some food web balance with rough forge control.
There are more facts in the Michigan consumption advisories about the age of fish relating higher level of toxins. Smaller or younger of each species is recomended.
Now this is where the darkhouse crowd starts yelling for smaller size limits on Muskies. They argue that if the size limit s were smaller they would be safer to eat. This is true. Our attack has to be based on the predator(rough fish ) relationship as mentioned by Hamilton. They must be allowed to grow big enough to control the rough fish like Sheeps head and carp that are exploding in numbers all across the western shore line of Michigan. Then we add the fact that these bigger fish are unfit for consumption.
Now with Pike I favor the Minnesota approach going to a maximum size limit instead of a minimum. Say 10 to 28 inches limit two for consumption per day. Zero from 28 to 40 inches with a kill tag for one over 40 inches per year. This would build the big Pike numbers back up to where they would be controlling trash fish much better then the dinks we have now. Mike
57
12
1 Guest(s)