Well, I read everything about Austin so, I decided I better vent a few of my concerns on spearing from up North.
I know of 9 legal fish that have been speared out of our area lakes and rivers. These were all bigger fish (upper 40's or bigger) and that is why I heard of them.
Haven't heard of many in the close-to-legal size but, I'm sure there have been plenty.
Now, I'm hearing about one of our stocked lakes being pounded badly. There is a crew of young guys that have been spearing on it and one of them is bragging that he has speared 14 sublegals. Our CO's our trying to get him but, the damage has been done. One of our officers saw blood on the ice outside of his shanty so, I'm guessing there is some truth to his bragging.
I've come to the point that I don't even pout about legal fish being speared. It sucks but, it's the 'angler's' right to do so, so whatever. It's the ones that are spearing sublegals (some keep them and some 'release' them) that bother me the most. We cannot enforce the reg's well enough in my area to keep spearers from hurting the fishery. We have so few CO's that we just can't have them sitting and waiting for every spearer to mess up. I would like to see the size limits go up and have more law enforcement to make these reg's work but, I don't see that happening anytime soon. The only way to protect our muskie populations is to have more spearing bans.
I am trying to bug our local DNR fisheries to get a spearing ban on North (Round) Lake. We have stocked this lake but, the fish are not legal size as of yet. I am hoping that we can get a spearing ban on the lake before the fish mature and spearing gets popular on the lake. I'd like it to be a vacation destination for some you guys in the Mitten.
I know where you're coming from. What really irks me is it always seems to come back to "it's their right". Well, I don't agree! It is a privilege, not a right for all of us and if not viewed that way it's going to be another one of those resources we have ruined. I'm not one of those people that belive we live in the land of the free and the home of the entitled.
It has come to the point that it is getting hard for me to believe in supporting the DNR and the fishery with MMA funds when for all intents and purposes the fishery is being flushed down the toilet. However, MMA wasn't formed to be a selfish group. I want to believe that what we do is for the benefit of the fishery for everyone and not simply the special interests of a few.
That really does suck, John. And 14 sublegals??? Maybe it just has to be broadcasted more what the penalties can be for taking sublegal fish. I think we need to make some friends with some other DNR officials in other states who believe the same as us. Maybe our DNR will listen to their own kind more intently.
"Will Schultz" said:
What really irks me is it always seems to come back to "it's their right". Well, I don't agree! It is a privilege, not a right for all of us and if not viewed that way it's going to be another one of those resources we have ruined.
I agree with Will on this and have stated so before. It is a priviledge to be able to fish these great waters of ours and to continue to do so we need to protect them as best we can.
It has come to the point that it is getting hard for me to believe in supporting the DNR and the fishery with MMA funds when for all intents and purposes the fishery is being flushed down the toilet. However, MMA wasn't formed to be a selfish group. I want to believe that what we do is for the benefit of the fishery for everyone and not simply the special interests of a few.
I agree Will. Over the years MMA has donated probably over $50,000 to our DNR. When the DNR needed help for numerous projects we would either write them a check or hold a special fund raiser to find the money. I don't feel we should expect special regulations for doing this, we choose to support the DNR in what ever way necessary to help them produce / stock more muskies. I don't think the DNR has held up their end of the bargain and stocked more muskies. If the DNR was stocking 40,000 fish annually and creating new musky fishing opportunities along the way, then I would feel like we where doing the right thing. Since that is not happening, maybe it is time for MMA to reconsider how we spend our money.
"Chris Barton" said:
It has come to the point that it is getting hard for me to believe in supporting the DNR and the fishery with MMA funds when for all intents and purposes the fishery is being flushed down the toilet. However, MMA wasn't formed to be a selfish group. I want to believe that what we do is for the benefit of the fishery for everyone and not simply the special interests of a few.
I agree Will. Over the years MMA has donated probably over $50,000 to our DNR. When the DNR needed help for numerous projects we would either write them a check or hold a special fund raiser to find the money. I don't feel we should expect special regulations for doing this, we choose to support the DNR in what ever way necessary to help them produce / stock more muskies. I don't think the DNR has held up their end of the bargain and stocked more muskies. If the DNR was stocking 40,000 fish annually and creating new musky fishing opportunities along the way, then I would feel like we where doing the right thing. Since that is not happening, maybe it is time for MMA to reconsider how we spend our money.
Did you miss the "however" part? I'm not willing to be that selfish person/organization and hold this over the head of the DNR or say that MMA is going to walk away from the very fishery this organization was built to protect. Do some things make me wish we had more input on decision making? Sure, but I don't for a minute think that MMA should walk away from its committment to the muskie fishery in Michigan. Go back ten years and try to remember how grim the outlook was for the muskie fishery here in Michigan. We're far from perfect but we've also come a long way.
What I'm saying is… MMA does what it does to benefit the fishery and not as something to hold over the DNR if they don't make the changes we want. MMA has never said we'll do this if you:
– ban spearing
– raise the size limit
– reduce harvest
– raise 40,000 fish each year
– etc.
No, I did not miss the "however" part. I specifically mentioned that we should not expect special regulations or special treatment for helping the DNR over the past 10 years. Also, by no means am I suggesting that MMA should walk away from its commitment to the muskie fishery in Michigan. Those are your words not mine.
What I am saying is maybe it is time for MMA to reconsider how we spend our money. We have been giving the DNR money for whatever they felt was necessary. Maybe we can support them in other ways. Instead of giving them money for fisheries stuff, we can support them by educating the angling public about muskies. Maybe we should be attending all these sports shows and simply try to teach the public about the muskie programs and how fragile they are. Maybe we can reach out to the lake associations around these new fisheries and teach them about the muskie program.
"Chris Barton" said:
No, I did not miss the "however" part. I specifically mentioned that we should not expect special regulations or special treatment for helping the DNR over the past 10 years. Also, by no means am I suggesting that MMA should walk away from its commitment to the muskie fishery in Michigan. Those are your words not mine..
But you did say:
"Chris Barton" said:
I don't think the DNR has held up their end of the bargain
To me that says you think we had a deal (bargain) with them to get something in return. All of the hatchery improvements and all of the money spent on minnows has improved the facilities and helped raise more fish.
"Chris Barton" said:
Instead of giving them money for fisheries stuff, we can support them by educating the angling public about muskies. Maybe we should be attending all these sports shows and simply try to teach the public about the muskie programs and how fragile they are. Maybe we can reach out to the lake associations around these new fisheries and teach them about the muskie program.
Sure, those are all things that we should be doing regardless and in addition to supporting the DNR. They are also things that have been talked about for years and things that need someone to own them. We have lists of ideas that we should be doing but no one that is willing to take on these projects. I would be very interested to hear a proposal of how we accomplish these education efforts from someone willing to take responsibility. Ken has done a great job keeping MMA involved in Fish Fest but I know getting people to help is very difficult (even for a few hours).
I would support the DNR muskie program in spite of the darkhouse spearing challenge. Specifically, I would prefer the limited MMA funding set priority to promote the fish culture first then the research. Better yet, have a 2-year funding account for pond forage, funding for hatchery maintenance and upgrades, then the research. I love fishery research projects, but we need as many fingerlings possible to maintain the stocking schedules and lake expansions as bonus. I know the MMA has done a great job with limited funding.
However, isn't it ironic that some of the complainers of a few muskie speared are the same ones that are happy to kill thousands of fish statewide with their favorite politicians that gut the DNRE budgets, promote dirty polluted waters, and support anti-muskie agendas. You can't have it both ways. MMA needs to be totally committed to the muskie program.
I read over the big spearing thread and this and felt almost too ill to reply, but in case a post helps me keep down lunch today, here's just another point or two…
Michigan's commitment to darkhouse spearing is somewhat like a commitment to the dark ages. As for the traditional aspects, well we might as well go back to living in teepees or wigwams then too, and riding horses to go to work and fish. As for losing other types of fishing if we ban spearing, why hasn't that happened everywhere else since spearing is banned everywhere else but Minnesota (with minor exceptions like tribal spearing in WI)? At least Minnesota is much more restrictive – residents only, an additional darkhouse license required, no other lines in the water, and muskies not included.
Maybe Michiganders are genetically different than sportsmen elsewhere else thus that spearing must not only be allowed, but encouraged. Everywhere else survived the banning of spearing and their fisheries most likely improved as a result. As for regular angling taking more fish, that's only because our dark ages fisheries management approach allows that, including now even more lines to allegedly increase opportunity while it reduces our fisheries. Clearly absurd. Of course a much longer season and many more people using regular fishing tactics will take more fish if the regs allow or encourage it (and as long as some fish are left to take). That doesn't justify a lethal method that focuses its wrath on the most valuable of the fish that are left. Heck given that logic, let's allow January firearm fishing through the ice since not many will do it and it will take less fish than other methods.
What's good for one fish or at least is not harmful, should therefore be good or at least not harmful for all. So let's open spearing for bass, trout, walleye…but wait, what about the public outcry? Yes of course that would happen, so is our state not discriminating against pike and muskies and their advocates if these fish can be speared and other gamefish can't? Fair is fair, let's spear 'em all and let God sort 'em out.
Basically, our state hasn't had the guts to do the right thing for our pike and muskie resources like has been done most everywhere else. It's as simple as that.
The MMA and DNR works hard to establish new muskie lakes and in year 2009 Lake Margrethe got the largest of the limited stocking. Eric Sharp lives on the lake, was grateful for the muskie future, and he will help the MMA as needed in the future. So when a novice asked a simple walleye question about the lake over on the violators forum, I noted the darkhouse reply, "Can you keep musky out of there?." This should answer your question about the future intentions of the darkhouse organization.
"pikerule2" said:
What's good for one fish or at least is not harmful, should therefore be good or at least not harmful for all. So let's open spearing for bass, trout, walleye…but wait, what about the public outcry? Yes of course that would happen, so is our state not discriminating against pike and muskies and their advocates if these fish can be speared and other gamefish can't? Fair is fair, let's spear 'em all and let God sort 'em out.Basically, our state hasn't had the guts to do the right thing for our pike and muskie resources like has been done most everywhere else. It's as simple as that.
I really like this idea…
I would be very interested to see how the reaction to a request to open spearing for all species would be handled… Would someone like to post that question/topic on the Michigan Sportsmen forums? I would to it but can't do it because of obvious reasons.
Maybe that is the ultimate partnership… MMA and the Darkhouse group band together to open spearing on all species. Maybe then someone will realize that muskies can't be managed like pike, bass, walleye, etc.
However… I know you are aware that the DNRE isn't responsible for all management decisions because the legislature has control over the regulations. Until that changes their hands are often tied… it isn't fair to point your finger at the DNRE.
"Will Schultz" said:
[quote="pikerule2"]What's good for one fish or at least is not harmful, should therefore be good or at least not harmful for all. So let's open spearing for bass, trout, walleye…but wait, what about the public outcry? Yes of course that would happen, so is our state not discriminating against pike and muskies and their advocates if these fish can be speared and other gamefish can't? Fair is fair, let's spear 'em all and let God sort 'em out.Basically, our state hasn't had the guts to do the right thing for our pike and muskie resources like has been done most everywhere else. It's as simple as that.
I really like this idea…
I would be very interested to see how the reaction to a request to open spearing for all species would be handled… Would someone like to post that question/topic on the Michigan Sportsmen forums? I would to it but can't do it because of obvious reasons.
Maybe that is the ultimate partnership… MMA and the Darkhouse group band together to open spearing on all species. Maybe then someone will realize that muskies can't be managed like pike, bass, walleye, etc.
However… I know you are aware that the DNRE isn't responsible for all management decisions because the legislature has control over the regulations. Until that changes their hands are often tied… it isn't fair to point your finger at the DNRE.
It's posted now let the fun begin 
<url url="[Permission to view this media is denied]
"><link_text text="[Permission to view this media is denied] … p?t=325251">[Permission to view this media is denied]
[smilie=biggrin.gif]Way to go, MMA! Thanks for starting it there. If nothing else, we can take some satisfaction in that they can't support their spearing position with anything resembling facts or logic. I think I'll start a MUCC resolution to open bass, trout and walleye to spearing…I'm picturing my favorite Power Grubs dangling down under my bass spear in my new multi-species spearing shack…ol' bucketmouth comes in for a sniff and whammo, she's mine!!
"Will Schultz" said:
…..However… I know you are aware that the DNRE isn't responsible for all management decisions because the legislature has control over the regulations. Until that changes their hands are often tied… it isn't fair to point your finger at the DNRE.
Will is correct. The DNRE is at the mercy of a nonfunctional legislature. However, The DNR fishery staff is doing absolutely everything they can to help MMA along with all the other state fishery programs. In fact, the DNR has gone the extra mile to help the muskie program because they know Michigan has the resources to be the top muskie state in nation. That goal is noble and when achieved (assuming money & disease problems are ever fixed) would make the fishery staff and MMA look very good. Right now state finances and dirty politics is really hurting the DNR. The fishery staff supports the two DNR-DEQ department directors, but is concerned Governor Granholm's screw up of allowing the appointment of the top director will lead to another corrupt John Engler type appointment to destroy the DNRE. The DNR fishery staff needs the MMA for morale support through this tough time. Everyone needs to say 'thank you' to the fishery staff at the banquet for their hard work.
144
21