It's probably best to keep some things about spearing within the members area. The next time I talk with Mike Holmes I don't want him quoting things MMA members said about darkhouse guys – trust me, they're watching.
Some food for thought from a Minnesota study (yes, I realize it's pike but the spearing vs. angler harvest is important):
Recreational Darkhouse Spearing for Northern Pike in Minnesota: Historical Changes in Effort and Harvest and Comparisons with Angling
Rodney B. Piercea and Mark F. Cookb
Abstract.—A traditional form of harvest for northern pike Esox lucius during winter is darkhouse spearing through the ice. Using a comprehensive evaluation of creel surveys and license sales in Minnesota, we document a long-term decline in this unique sport fishery. The decline in recreational spear fishing effort cannot be blamed on catch rates because spearing catch rates have not changed perceptibly with time. Catch rates for spearing (mean = 0.175 fish/h) are similar to harvest rates by anglers that are targeting northern pike. Conflicts between spearers and anglers have led to questions about relative harvests by each group and their effects on northern pike populations. Creel survey data since 1980 show that summer and winter angling account for most of the northern pike harvest. Spearing accounted for 15% of the average yield of northern pike by number, but spearing is selective for the larger fish. In comparison with population estimates, spearing removes a small proportion of the total population and biomass of northern pike but an increasing proportion of fish with increasing size. Recreational angling, by comparison, removes an even greater proportion of all fish sizes in a population. Management designed to improve the size structure of northern pike populations will need to be directed at reducing harvest by all methods.
"John E. Sox" said:
Kingfisher-
We may kill more fish but we don't kill anywhere near as many fish per person as spearers do. I think it's totally unfair to say we are the problem when we give so much to the fisheries and they just want to up the harvest and forget about what most anglers want.
I don't think Mike meant we (muskie anglers) but that open water anglers in general intentionally harvest more muskies.
I think the study above confirms this, at least in MN with the pike harvest.
"Will Schultz" said:
I've come to terms with the idea that I'm killing about 20 fish each year, though I'm 100% release. How many spearers kill 20 fish each year? I'm guessing not very many.
Many of us don't even catch 20 fish a year. If 20% of my released fish for a year die… it would only be about 3-5 fish per season. And I don't believe I kill that many. However, I would agree that open water anglers are responsible for more dead fish than the spear chuckers just due to the higher numbers of fish handled by line anglers.
Both sides have there arguements, and both are solid.
Scott
More thoughts…
I know this is all the same stuff we've talked about in the past but…
When talking muskie anglers, we have an obvious impact because of delayed mortality. The problem, from a management perspective, is we don't have any hard data to know if we're killing 10%, 15%, 20% or more. Yet we know that 100% of speared fish are dead. Who actually kills more, when we're talking 100% kill muskie spearers vs. 100% release muskie anglers, can't be stated for fact.
I've come to terms with the idea that I'm killing about 20 fish each year, though I'm 100% release. How many spearers kill 20 fish each year? I'm guessing not very many. Would we also ban anglers that catch more than 25 fish each year because they're probably killing more than one fish each year?
What I really struggle with is asking for a seasonal harvest limit. I truly believe it is the best way to allow spearing and open water harvest on all waters and still limit the harvest. However, if I'm allowed to catch and release as many fish as I want knowing that I'm killing some along the way it feels awfully hypocritical to point the finger at anyone…
You estimate you kill 20 fish a year? That seems high to me, even considering the number of fish you catch. I have yet to see a muskie carcass floating, not that it means there aren't any, but still… I DO see dead bass floating periodically. I would expect a muskie carcass to float around for at least several days…
We need some hard data on this issue. Has the idea of someone scientifically studying muskie mortality owing to mishandling been dropped?
I agree with Tom on this one. It seems as though when you see a dead fish, most of the time it's floating. Although…. now that I'm thinking about it, yesterday at the hatchery, I think all the dead muskies that I saw were on the bottom. But the dead rainbows were floating in the show pond. Do muskies sink and other fish float??? ( Yes, I got to see all of our little babies yesterday in the ponds. 
Whatta sight!) Anyways, years ago when it seems that fish were handled more rough than 99% of the guys I know, it seemed that C&R worked fine. I'm not saying that every fish that swims away is OK, but to see a % of 20? That really shocks me. So if you catch 20 fish a year over 45", 4 of them will be dead? With the amount of fish over 45" being pulled out of Murray, and keep in mind not all go back, it seems like the #'s would be less. If every year, Will kills 5, TF kills 4, and each member of the MMA kills one, it seems as though the likeliness of any fish hitting say… 48-49" is slim to none. yet we know they are still in there. And a better than average number as well.
"hemichemi" said:
You estimate you kill 20 fish a year? That seems high to me, even considering the number of fish you catch. I have yet to see a muskie carcass floating, not that it means there aren't any, but still… I DO see dead bass floating periodically. I would expect a muskie carcass to float around for at least several days…
I really hope it isn't that many but even if it is only ten that is still a significant impact for one person to make.
Floaters are the fish that can't be released most of the time. Usually a fish that dies in water more than 2' deep never floats.
1 – Fish caught and released swims away from the angler
2 – Fish goes into weeds and/or seeks water closest to prefered temp
3 – Fish doesn't recover from catch/release stress and dies
4 – Fish doesn't float because swim bladder doesn't have enough gas to make them float
5 – Decomposition doesn't make enough gas to float the fish (usually because of #6)
6 – Dead fish on the bottom equals turtle and crayfish food. Feasting critters make holes which allows gasses to escape
Maybe we can all get along?? Has anyone ever tried to work with the spearchuckers? Maybe they would be interested in helping the hatchery
and developing a better muskie fishery.Maybe they would like to work with
the MMA if givin a chance. I really have no idea,but if they are even 1/2 as
passionate as we are it could benefit us all. ?????
I tried to engage Holmes in an email debate. He is very harsh and old school. When I talked about trophy waters he talked about removing all size limits on all species of fish. If he had his way you could spear anything that swims.
Will, Spearing may not kill more pike but tip ups do. I would venture to guess and I am probably pretty close that Ice fisherman take more Pike then open water fishermen to the tune of 2 to 1. Tip ups in the wrong hands also kill juvenile Muskies.
John, I got my numbers from the master angler awards. There are many many more by hook and line than speared. That was the only hard data I could find. I would guess that there are as many that dont report thier kill on both sides so the point is we dont have a leg to stand on when we say they kill more fish than hook and line anglers. You and I both want to see Speareing stopped but harvest numbers wont get it done. It will take hard science and hard facts. At least now the district biologists will be waking the decisions not some clown in Lansing that has never even seen a Musky.
All in all because of the facts that #1 Muskies are terrible at reproducing on thier own and #2 Michigan has no money to bring this fish back its time to limit harvest to one fish per year. I would want to see a lottery per county(limit the numbers of tags to balance with stocking efforts). Apply the fees collected from the tags to the stocking program.
That is my recommendation to our D.N.R. Mike
"kid coulson" said:
Maybe we can all get along?? Has anyone ever tried to work with the spearchuckers? Maybe they would be interested in helping the hatchery
and developing a better muskie fishery.Maybe they would like to work with
the MMA if givin a chance. I really have no idea,but if they are even 1/2 as
passionate as we are it could benefit us all. ?????
In Mike Holmes view, we are the "elitist" that is trying to take something away from other sportsmen.
Here are a couple examples from when we explored a spearing ban on all stocked water to allow these fisheries to become established:
<url url="[Permission to view this media is denied]
"><link_text text="[Permission to view this media is denied] … attack.pdf">[Permission to view this media is denied]
<url url="[Permission to view this media is denied]
">[Permission to view this media is denied]
"Kingfisher" said:
its time to limit harvest to one fish per year. I would want to see a lottery per county(limit the numbers of tags to balance with stocking efforts). Apply the fees collected from the tags to the stocking program.
That is my recommendation to our D.N.R. Mike
If the harvest was limited to one per year w/ a required tag it could create problems.
– What if I have a fish die in the net, that is legal, and instead of wasting that fish I put my tag on it? I would have to stop fishing for the year because I used my tag. Two or three tags per angler might be more realistic.
– Would a tag encourage anglers to harvest a fish that they might not have harvested?
"Kingfisher" said:
Will, Spearing may not kill more pike but tip ups do. I would venture to guess and I am probably pretty close that Ice fisherman take more Pike then open water fishermen to the tune of 2 to 1. Tip ups in the wrong hands also kill juvenile Muskies.
Sure that's probably true but there are also many more anglers on the ice targeting pike than you have during the open water season.
Why would you have to stop fishing? Tags would be for harvest only. After using the tag you be breaking the law to keep a second one. .
I see what you are saying . But think like this, I can hunt deer all year long but I can only shoot one for every tag I have. In a sense catch and release is the same . We have no intention of ever keeping one. I would buy a tag just to make sure that one didnt get whacked. Fact or fiction? There are more deer in Michigan than Muskies. I would guess there are more deer. Another way to look at it is like the Canadian conservtion license and the harvest license. One says you can fish but not keep the other is needed to harvest. Simple in my book. Buy a tag if you want to kill one but you better be selective because you only get one if your lucky. 😀 Mike
"Kingfisher" said:
Why would you have to stop fishing? Tags would be for harvest only. After using the tag you be breaking the law to keep a second one. .I see what you are saying . But think like this, I can hunt deer all year long but I can only shoot one for every tag I have. In a sense catch and release is the same . We have no intention of ever keeping one. I would buy a tag just to make sure that one didnt get whacked. Fact or fiction? There are more deer in Michigan than Muskies. I would guess there are more deer. Another way to look at it is like the Canadian conservtion license and the harvest license. One says you can fish but not keep the other is needed to harvest. Simple in my book. Buy a tag if you want to kill one but you better be selective because you only get one if your lucky. 😀 Mike
But… you can't keep deer hunting after you've filled your tag. The same is true for a sturgeon tag, you can catch and release w/ the tag in your posession but as soon as you harvest/tag one you are done. In these days of attempting to draw more anglers into fishing, keeping regulations simple is paramount.
I've heard it said by Canadiens that a muskie angler shouldn't be allowed to fish with a conservation license. Holding a fish up for a photo w/ a conservation license could get an angler ticketed and their gear confiscated. I'll never buy one again because I can't afford a game violation, I'll always buy the full non-resident license.
In my area it seems that released muskies and speared muskies don't make the Master Angler list. I would say that kept fish by open water anglers are the most likely to show up here. The numbers here don't prove much.
Some of the things that bother me up here:
-I know many people spear sub-legal fish and are never caught doing it. Some even think that they can 'release' them. I found a 35-36 incher this year with spear marks. Do you think the person who speared the fish took their time to make sure the fish was 42 inches or bigger?
-Big females are speared at the end of Feb. every year. The fish we kill incidentally can be any size… speared fish at this time are usually big ripe females that won't get to spawn. This extended season will probably mean more will be speared.
-Spearing hurts our economy. In the winter, some sucker decoys are sold and maybe some gas and goodies, but for the most part, I see local guys sitting out there, day after day, hoping to stab a big one, giving nothing to the local economy. When you guys come up in the open water season, you buy baits, gas, hotels, etc… and release fish to provide 'recreational opportunities' for other anglers.
-The guys that are spearing think MMA is a group of elitist snobs. The do nothing to help our muskie fisheries while MMA puts the fish in the water for them to spear. This makes it hard to put your emotions to the side when they don't do a dang thing but ask for more rights.
"John E. Sox" said:
-Big females are speared at the end of Feb. every year. The fish we kill incidentally can be any size… speared fish at this time are usually big ripe females that won't get to spawn. This extended season will probably mean more will be speared.
I'm not so sure about this point when talking a natural fishery and it's obviously moot when talking stocked fisheries. Don't get me wrong, I hate seeing BIG dead fish as much as anyone! I see this as an argument based on feelings and not a measured impact. What am I getting at? Let's say I have a 42" female that dies from delayed mortality, I've impacted reproduction for many years to come (maybe 10-15). A spearer kills the big old female really has a minimal impact on the fishery because that big female might only have 2-5 more years of viable spawning and often those old girls only spawn every other year.
Back to the tag thing, As it stands now you dont need any special license to fish for Muskies . Resident or nonresident fishing license. What I propose is that the harvest is lowered from one per day to one per year. That is simple right? So dont charge them for the tag. Just issue it if requested. The tag is used to harvest one Fish. Guys this makes the most sense to me. This would stop that dude up on the Chain that whacked over 12 legal Muskies in 2007 on 6 mile lake. Reducing the harvest limit would go a long way towards growing this fishery. Mike
I can see it now…
"Michigan Muskie Alliance wants to take away the opportunity of sportsmen harvest and eat fish. Those people over at MMA are elitist and on the same level as PETA. They should worry more about the all the fish they kill through catch and release that just go to waste." Fred Trost would be all over MMA again if he was still alive…
I do like the idea of a tag and creating a seasonal harvest limit but it would be nice to have some precedent. When muskie mecca's like Wisconsin and Minnesota have a 1/day bag/possession limit it makes it tough to convince me that this is the answer.
I hate playing devils advocate but as I've said before I'm never going to the table again on any issue unless I'm 100% prepared to refute any possible argument.
However, MMA is helping to replace any fish we harm, and with style, as we just saw with the current hatchery emergency, and MMA also helps and encourages the expansion of the fishery in MI.
Do the organized darkhouse folks do anything to help preserve or restore or expand the fishery they use, aside from paying the DNR license fee we all pay? If they did, perhaps fewer of us would resent their harvesting.
I would also be more at ease if there was perfect policing of fishing of ALL descriptions in MI, but we all know it's about as far from perfect as possible, and abuses are undoubtedly occurring under current conditions.
57
27
1 Guest(s)