[size=150]First off… I must stress that the following is not public knowledge. Please do not share this outside this forum until the time that these reg. options go public through press release (likely in March).[/size]
I’ll skip over the pike regulation review that began the meeting and get straight to the muskie reg. review. The following options were presented today at the Warmwater Resources Steering Committee meeting.
I’ll note any changes to the presented options and my opinion on the options below. I was able to have the Catch and Immediate Release (CIR) season added to the options where applicable. This CIR season would align with the Bass CIR season for now. This next part was not discussed this is my opinion and something I think is doable at a later date… Due to the success of the CIR bass season (no observed concerns) it may be possible in the future to work with the bass anglers to change the CIR season to begin March 15 and to include Bass, Northern Pike and Muskellunge (one battle at a time).
Option 1. (Status quo) Seasons = May 15 – March 15 for U.P. Great Lakes and inland waters, last Saturday in April – March 15 for L.P. inland waters, first Saturday in June – December 15 for L. St. Clair, St. Clair R., and Detroit R., no closed season for L.P. Great Lakes. Possession limit = 1/day. Size limit = 42 in statewide, with some exceptions by county.
Option 2. Season = first Saturday in June – March 15 statewide. Possession limit = 1/day. Size limit = 42 in statewide, with the addition of a lower (38 in) MSL for a few high-density, slow-growth waters and/or stocked waters, and the addition of a higher (46 in) MSL for a few fast-growth waters. Broodstock Lakes would remain at a 50 in MSL in order to maintain a viable rearing program, now and for the future. Catch and Immediate Release (CIR) season that aligns with the bass CIR season.
This option is an improvement in protection for many natural populations due to the season change. However it does nothing on a statewide basis to address the potential for overharvest. Higher MSL’s would need to be done by county exception. This would make regulations complex and make more work for us to convince the managers which waters need to have the 46” MSL put in place.
Option 3. Season = first Saturday in June – March 15 statewide. Possession limit = 1-2/season (with tag, w/o tag, or mandatory reporting). Size limit = 42 in statewide, with the addition of a lower (38-in) MSL for a few high-density, slow-growth waters and/or stocked waters, and the addition of a higher (46) MSL for a few fast-growth waters where female size at maturity exceeds 42 in. Broodstock Lakes would remain at a 50 in MSL in order to maintain a viable rearing program, now
and for the future. Catch and Immediate Release (CIR) season that aligns with the bass CIR season.
This option will change to read as follows:
Option 3. Season = first Saturday in June – March 15 statewide. Possession limit = 1/season (with tag and reporting). Size limit = 42 in statewide, with the addition of a lower (38-in) MSL for a few high-density, slow-growth waters and/or stocked waters, and the addition of a higher (46) MSL for a few fast-growth waters where female size at maturity exceeds 42 in. Broodstock Lakes would remain at a 50 in MSL in order to maintain a viable rearing program, now and for the future. Catch and Immediate Release (CIR) season that aligns with the bass CIR season.
This would give Michigan arguably the most restrictive regulations of any state/province by limiting harvest. The 46” MSL would still need to be put in place by exception for some waters but the reduced possession, in theory, would make the waters requiring the higher MSL significantly smaller. I can also see this option setting a precedent for other states that have explored a tag/stamp.
In my opinion this is the best possible option for the state for a number of reasons. First, the tag would have to be requested at the time of license giving data on the number of anglers targeting muskie. Second, the reporting (not mandatory but may be similar to waterfowl and/or like the hunting report requested each season from deer and turkey hunters) would provide harvest data. Third, the reduction in harvest from 1/day to 1/season should eliminate the overharvest on many waters. Obviously compliance is the primary concern with this but it is generally accepted that regulation compliance is 75%, if that is the case this would have a very positive impact on the fishery. Lastly, the option is still there for the 46” MSL which can be applied to “trophy” waters and to those waters where size at maturity doesn’t allow more than one year spawning for mature females.
Most importantly, there didn't seem to be strong opposition from the spearing community on this option.
Option 4. Seasons = May 15 – March 15 statewide, first Saturday in June – March 15 for Great Lakes populations. Possession limit = 1/day. Size limit = 46 in statewide, with the addition of a lower (38-in) MSL for a few high-density, slow-growth waters and/or stocked waters. Broodstock Lakes would remain at a 50 in MSL in order to maintain a viable rearing program, now and for the future. Catch and Immediate Release (CIR) season that aligns with the bass CIR season (applicable to LP only)
This option would be the second best in my opinion as the 46” MSL provides protection where needed. However, this option will have the most resistance from the Darkhouse group. This option also doesn’t address the overharvest on some waters, particularly among the spearing community, where harvesting numbers of fish over 46” each winter is a reality.
Where does it go from here? The changes above will be made to the whitepaper and the options. Those changes will come back to the WRSC by email for approval in January. The paper and reg. options will then go to the tribes for review (required). The WRSC will then meet by conference call in March for final approval and the options will then go out for public comment in mid-March. Following the public comment there will be public meetings and in May/June the WRSC will meet to review the public comment and finalize the regulation that will be placed on the fisheries order for approval. The order then would be brought to the NRC, approved by the director and put in place by the legislature to take effect April 1st, 2013.
That’s my review of the day. What I need to know now is what the overall opinion is on the options presented and if I’m correct in assuming that Option 3 will be the preferred option by all of you and the most likely option to have strong support during the public comment period. Please let me know your opinion and if you support a strong push for Option 3 or if there is another option that you prefer.
Well… thanks for going all King Solomon on me there WRSC. I do think number 3 is a better option for the reasons of limited harvest. But I would love to see their ideas on what lakes will have/need the 46" limit and which will have the 38" limit.
With the amount of CIR going on now I am tempted to say number 4, but knowing the amount of spearing on the chain, I have to go with less harvest… Hoping to have the chain on the 46" list!
Option 3 for sure. I would really like to insist on there being an actual tag that you must have to target and harvest muskie. Honor system (no tag) or mandatory reporting will, in my opinion, lead to compliance problems.
Maybe we can start another thread to speculate on lakes that should have 38 and 46 inch size limits for fun?
"vano397" said:
But I would love to see their ideas on what lakes will have/need the 46" limit and which will have the 38" limit.
The 46” limit will be used on fast growth natural waters primarily. This would be considered on waters like the Upper and Lower Antrim chain, the Burt, Indian R., Black, Mullett, sections of certain rivers, etc. 46 could also be used on specific “trophy” waters though this is less likely with the 1/tag system. The 38” could be used on waters that need some harvest, I’ve been told of a couple waters in the UP that seem to have too many fish. The spearing community will push the managers to apply this to other waters however the managers and esocids committee have made it clear that anything below 42” puts populations at risk.
"Mayhem" said:
Option 3 for sure. I would really like to insist on there being an actual tag that you must have to target and harvest muskie. Honor system (no tag) or mandatory reporting will, in my opinion, lead to compliance problems.Maybe we can start another thread to speculate on lakes that should have 38 and 46 inch size limits for fun?
Concerning Option 3: The tag will be a harvest tag and will not be required to target muskies but only to harvest a muskie. No tag is not an option for Option 3. Mandatory reporting was determined to be nearly impossible and therefore other methods would be used.
See above on the lakes that could see the optional size limits by exception.
"LonLB" said:
Now we need to try an campaign to people ahead of time to drum up support of reg #3, and stress the importance of submitting comments.This one will receive lots of negative comments most likely.
Yes but this needs to stay away from the public for a while. We will have everything prepped for when this is ready for comment and get it handled.
"Kingfisher" said:
I like #3 as long as we have the CIR for earlier then the first week in June…. Starting in June really cuts the cool water time available. It will reduce harvest. That is the main thing. Thank you for the hard work. Mike and Michelle
The CIR is a no brainer with the pike and walleye season opening on the last Sat. in April and May 15.
"Steve S" said:
So when does C & R bass season start? When would this apply to muskies, like a year later or when these rules go into effect. When would #3 go into effect 2012 or 2013? Like Mike said if this dosen't open till June it will shorten the season. Hudson would be "50?
Last Saturday in April, so it would allow you to resume yearly opening weekend traditions.
"vano397" said:
[quote="Steve S"]So when does C & R bass season start? When would this apply to muskies, like a year later or when these rules go into effect. When would #3 go into effect 2012 or 2013? Like Mike said if this dosen't open till June it will shorten the season. Hudson would be "50?
Last Saturday in April, so it would allow you to resume yearly opening weekend traditions.
and May 15th in the UP
Hudson could go to 50 as an exception placed by the manager for that basin. However, just because a water has a 50" limit doesn't mean it will have big fish. Hudson is one of the slowest growth waters in the entire state so it doesn't make sense to put a 50" limit on it unless the population changes. A 50" on Hudson currently would essentially make it a no-kill water, I'm OK with that but I wouldn't expect to see numbers of big fish unless density changes.
368
44