"Will Schultz" said:
[quote="muskaholic"]just a dumb comment.. but who keeps bass??? I cant remember the last time I heard of anyone saying they were going bass fishing for dinner. granted there is accidental death with all fishing but seams like a big deal about nothing as far as bass are concerned to me.
I'm always surprised at how many people keep bass to eat and even target bass to eat.
Worse yet is that there is a large number who catch/kill ANYTHING they catch. And many times regulations are ignored here too.
Over limits, undersized fish, etc.
THESE are the people I worry about.
As for bass there are lakes where I have purposely targeted bass to keep. 10" limit lakes.
With how not abundant Walleye/perch are, and how much damage dozens of boats w/two guys each pulling bluegills off their beds, I feel more comfortable keeping a few small bass vs any other fish including bluegill.
how about 11 bass kept by two guys in March? I called the dnr because they were throwing crankbaits and spinners. If cpr was open I may not have made that call. The point is regarding poachers is that by opening the season to catch and release you give them a legal right to be on the water with bass tackle. The same would apply to deer poachers. This is like giving deer poachers the right to be in a car with a loaded gun and spot light. My DNR officers here respond to our calls and have even been stepping up patrols on our little puddle so dont anyone hand me any bs about no efforts to enforce existing regs. I say leave the law alone. Mike
"Kingfisher" said:
how about 11 bass kept by two guys in March? I called the dnr because they were throwing crankbaits and spinners. If cpr was open I may not have made that call. The point is regarding poachers is that by opening the season to catch and release you give them a legal right to be on the water with bass tackle. The same would apply to deer poachers. This is like giving deer poachers the right to be in a car with a loaded gun and spot light. My DNR officers here respond to our calls and have even been stepping up patrols on our little puddle so dont anyone hand me any bs about no efforts to enforce existing regs. I say leave the law alone. Mike
And if they are legally allowed to be out there there is much less of a spotlight on them. Making it much easier to KEEP fish even though it is during the catch/release season.
When they are not even supposed to be out there they are subject to possible scrutiny just for being out there. Chances of being "checked" on water are much higher. Catch/release seasons removed those chances of being checked.
Wow I disappear for a day and miss 4 pages of discussion! I love it!
I am surprised also how many people catch/keep bass. There is a large family that stays on the upper chain the week before us who fills their freezer once a year with bass out of the upper chain, they are from Ohio so that may explain some of it.
As far as this regulation it makes me think of two recent laws that have been changed for the peoples own edification, not because they were good laws or bad laws, but it was easier to change it and shut people up, and I think each one has a consequences to this topic that can be applied, that makes me say I don't want it.
The first is the motorcycle helmet law, there will be more deaths, and if not more serious head injuries further draining our healthcare system… This is an obvious consequence, that is not really in the intention of the law. It also leaves judgment of safety and protection up to people, and I think its pretty obvious we can see that people are not capable making that judgement… pretty simple with the fishing, people can not be allowed to make judgement calls within the laws, they will take the one that immediately benefits them at the moment regardless of the harm it may cause down the line.
The second is medical marijuana, this isn't an agree/disagree comment, I don't care about that discussion. My brothers girlfried has an idiot son who has been busted twice fro pot. he is 17. The last time they found it in his room along with about 20 handmade pipes. They didn't prosecute him because they were afraid it would get thrown out, as a result of the medical law (typical Newaygo county btw). But If they aren't prosecuting minor possessions of pot because of stupid technicalities, they certainly aren't going to when it comes to natural resources.
So basically I think anything that gives the average joe more decisions on how to regulate our resources, and the DNR less firm ground to stand on, is probably treading on thin ice, regardless of how much it wouldn't hurt muskies south of 55, there is no guarantee with this thing it would protect the upper chain and other populations north of 55(especially since they don't seem to care to protect them now). and like Will said, (especially in spring with smaller baits) its impossible to say what people are targeting if you open it for just bass or pike.
I am kind of surprised how many think rules should be made based on the lowest common denominator…poachers.
Most people enjoying the outdoors are good people. I promise. Poachers are the minority. Fishing regulations should be based on biology and then fisherman enjoyment. If there are no biological reasons to allow CIR fishing, then I'm all for giving people more opportunities on the water.
"pikerule2" said:
Very good points on both sides but all in all my position is to not support the year-round CIR, in no small part due to even more unabated pike abuse more than an impact on muskie. They rely solely on natural reproduction in Michigan, a 45-day break or so still leaves us a mere 320 days to catch them, and kill them as is the case with many who pursue them on purpose or catch them by accident.
I agree with these points as well. Right now I think the current season for pike does a pretty good job of protecting them while they are spawning as I think most fish spawn in April depending on the year. I dont quite understand why we would want to remove this protection and allow everyone to fish for them, albeit C&R, during these times. If you know what you are doing, you will know where to find these 40+ inch breeder females and I just dont think you should be allowed to catch these fish at this time regardless of if you intend on releasing them or not. I see it as very selfish of anglers to not be satisfied with the current 320 day season on pike/muskie fishing.
Plus, for me this 45 day break only makes me more excited to fish when the season does open back up and it forces me to take a break at just the time where I am bordering insanity from getting skunked all the time for muskie…
"Vito" said:
I am kind of surprised how many think rules should be made based on the lowest common denominator…poachers.Most people enjoying the outdoors are good people. I promise. Poachers are the minority. Fishing regulations should be based on biology and then fisherman enjoyment. If there are no biological reasons to allow CIR fishing, then I'm all for giving people more opportunities on the water.
I don't think I would say to not make a regulation because of poachers, I just don't think you can rely on people fishing within regulations to make judgement decisions… just because its ok to catch and keep 25 gills a day or 5 browns or 1 musky, doesn't mean you should. Just because you can fish bass musky or pike while on their beds, doesn't mean you should, even if its legal its not really right, but people won't follow that (Also I am not convinced the current CIR on bass has been instated long enough to actually determine its impact). its not poaching, but its not good management. Also anything that creates an edge for the sportsman over the law enforcement is a bad deal. making it harder for our DNR officers to enforce regulations, regardless of the science behind them, is asking for even less enforcement.
I don't think this proposal is a bad idea in general, but I think to do it right would be far too complicated, and too hard to manage. So it is just safer to leave it the way we have it, maybe adjust closures to correlate better with the real reason for the closures…IMO
I can argue both sides of this issue but I'm going to stay on one side for this discussion.
If we were to set season dates on the side of caution and spawning protection they would have to look something like:
Bass: No CIR season. Opening date should be after spawn which to be safe would be July 1 for the LP and UP.
Pike: No CIR season. Opening date last Sat in April and May 15.
Muskie: No CIR season. Opening June 15th statewide.
Walleye: No CIR season. Opening June 1.
Also, when does "spawning" or protecting females with eggs end? If we have muskies starting to build egg mass in September should we shut the season down in September to protect these fish and not open it until they're done spawning in June?
Keep in mind, management isn't just about the biological aspect, the social and economic aspect is huge. Biologically, very few species would be negatively impacted by a CIR season.
"vano397" said:
I don't think I would say to not make a regulation because of poachers, I just don't think you can rely on people fishing within regulations to make judgement decisions…
If you can't rely on people to follow the regulations, then why have regulations? What should we do? Close all fishing?
"Vito" said:
[quote="vano397"]I don't think I would say to not make a regulation because of poachers, I just don't think you can rely on people fishing within regulations to make judgement decisions…
If you can't rely on people to follow the regulations, then why have regulations? What should we do? Close all fishing?
I was saying people ARE following the regulations, and that just because its OK by regulations, doesn't mean its OK for the fishery. I also think its silly to leave that line up to people. So its not making the regulation because of poachers, its that if you make the regulation, people WILL use it to its fullest extent. If it is true that these fish are unaffected while on the nest, this is moot point, Im just not convinced.
"vano397" said:
[quote="Vito"][quote="vano397"]I don't think I would say to not make a regulation because of poachers, I just don't think you can rely on people fishing within regulations to make judgement decisions…
If you can't rely on people to follow the regulations, then why have regulations? What should we do? Close all fishing?
I was saying people ARE following the regulations, and that just because its OK by regulations, doesn't mean its OK for the fishery. I also think its silly to leave that line up to people. So its not making the regulation because of poachers, its that if you make the regulation, people WILL use it to its fullest extent. If it is true that these fish are unaffected while on the nest, this is moot point, Im just not convinced.
I couldn't agree more.
Walleye season closes on March 15th and reopens on the last Sat. in April. On years where the Flint, Cass, Tittabawasse and Shiawassee rivers are flowing freely prior to the closure there is a significant number of 10-13 pound walleyes being harvested, however those fish disappear before the season reopens. I don't think we should be targeting those fish while they are spawning even if it is CIR.
"MuskyDan" said:
Walleye season closes on March 15th and reopens on the last Sat. in April. On years where the Flint, Cass, Tittabawasse and Shiawassee rivers are flowing freely prior to the closure there is a significant number of 10-13 pound walleyes being harvested, however those fish disappear before the season reopens. I don't think we should be targeting those fish while they are spawning even if it is CIR.
You don't think we should because there will be a negative impact to spawning? I realize it's a different system but even with harvest there isn't a negative impact the Detroit River.
With that said, that water could be closed to fishing if there was a concern. Keep in mind, just because this would be a statewide regulation change there could and would be exceptions.
I like the idea of CIR for muskies, south of a point where we see evidence of natural reproduction. However, as we transition to GLS, will there be points below this " line" where GLS will successfully reproduce in the future? As for the other fish with teeth……..im indifferent based on some good points brought up here on both sides. There is a lot to consider……
368
34
1 Guest(s)