Snidley Posted March 27, 2012 Report Share Posted March 27, 2012 That's a lot of fish in one pass. I suppose the fishermen need to make a living but overall I bet the economics of the whole thing would be much better if that resource was based on recreational angling VS commercial fishing. Overall I believe that both Zebra and Quagga mussels have enhanced Smallmouth Bass and Steelhead stocks in Lake Erie and dramatically reduced Walleye stocks in Erie at the same time. There are still lots of Walleye in Erie but not like when the lake was the murky, algae filled swamp it used to be. Not many Walleye anglers would dispute that the mussels as well as the reduction of phosphates in the environment have reduced the Walleye fishery there. An interesting sidebar to this issue is offered by Lake Winnipeg where there are no mussels but there are massively higher nutrient loads that are creating huge algae blooms that can be observed from space. Not only are there more walleyes than ever before in that lake but they are bigger than ever too. Trouble is some of those new algae blooms, mostly the ones found in shallow water, are toxic to mammals so pets and kids are at risk. It seems that nature always offers tradeoffs never a one way loss or victory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ThisPlaceSucks Posted March 27, 2012 Report Share Posted March 27, 2012 (edited) On the Great Lakes, especially Lake Erie, it's not the weekend angler who is the threat to our fisheries....but rather these guys... I appreciate that it is shocking to see a commercial fishery take that many fish in one net pull but 10 boats out fishing could do the same thing. there are limits on the number of boats that can commercial fish on the great lakes and these boats have a quota based on scientific population estimates... the same can't be said for recreational anglers. Your anecdotal opinion is appreciated but i work in hard numbers... not opinion. Look up the stats for the estimated biomass taken by commercial fishing vs. recreational fishing and present those to us and I'll agree with you!! But we need facts, not opinions and finger pointing. Like i said, the ecology of the great lakes is based on the sum of its parts, not one issue facing it. Edited March 27, 2012 by Dr. Salvelinus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outllaw Posted March 27, 2012 Report Share Posted March 27, 2012 it started here on st clair. species were affected then mother nature corrected the issues. as for fishing walleyes /muskies,,planer boards are a definate plus. sight feeders exploded. as for the statement on commercial netters theres plenty of blame to share. while commercial netters get 99.04 per-cent of quotas, anglers get .06. sports fishing has never achieved theres according to mnr stats. netters will tank nu.2 fish to achieve max dollars on nu.1 fish,,,more money per pound. the true issues lie on walleye spawning grounds. pollution and loss of habitat. just look at the thames walleye spawn. it is near non existent in the last 3 decades. london ont and bad farming efforts have created a toxic non spawning soup. these are facts folks not just thoughts. maybe we should be asking what goverments can do,,, oops i am sorry their broke, they gotta keep up their great pension plans and perks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snidley Posted March 27, 2012 Report Share Posted March 27, 2012 You must also factor in economic return when evaluating resource exploitation and I'm betting it would be hard to find sound economic reasons for allowing commercial netting operations on Lake Erie other than for a crazy quilt of heritage, ethnic or historical reasons. More economic activity comes from recreational exploitation of just about every natural resource than comes from sending harvesters out to catch something only to sell it into a cutthroat wholesale distribution system. Maybe at the end of the day a few restaurants make out ok selling fish and chips based on perch but the towns on the Erie coast would do better with hordes of recreational anglers coming out to try their luck, while keeping within reasonable limits, in an abundant perch resource. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy Bob Posted March 27, 2012 Report Share Posted March 27, 2012 I appreciate that it is shocking to see a commercial fishery take that many fish in one net pull but 10 boats out fishing could do the same thing. there are limits on the number of boats that can commercial fish on the great lakes and these boats have a quota based on scientific population estimates... the same can't be said for recreational anglers. Your anecdotal opinion is appreciated but i work in hard numbers... not opinion. Look up the stats for the estimated biomass taken by commercial fishing vs. recreational fishing and present those to us and I'll agree with you!! But we need facts, not opinions and finger pointing. Like i said, the ecology of the great lakes is based on the sum of its parts, not one issue facing it. The fact are sports fishermen are limited by size and bag limit on many species.....gill netters are limited in TONS and every fish caught in a gill net dies if released or not.....I have caught many small perch and walleyes and either let them go because of their size or because there is a size limit....if I catch any bass I ALWAYS let them go....this cannot be done with the killing gill nets....that is why MANY areas gill nets are OUTLAWED....so now you can do the numbers and let me know who is more of a threat to our Great Lakes fisheries...as I already know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OhioFisherman Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 (edited) I appreciate that it is shocking to see a commercial fishery take that many fish in one net pull but 10 boats out fishing could do the same thing. there are limits on the number of boats that can commercial fish on the great lakes and these boats have a quota based on scientific population estimates... the same can't be said for recreational anglers. Your anecdotal opinion is appreciated but i work in hard numbers... not opinion. Look up the stats for the estimated biomass taken by commercial fishing vs. recreational fishing and present those to us and I'll agree with you!! But we need facts, not opinions and finger pointing. Like i said, the ecology of the great lakes is based on the sum of its parts, not one issue facing it. We fought that battle here in Ohio, for years we heard from the commercial fishermen that they weren`t taking enough Walleye to hurt the population, but it became exceptionally rare for a sport fisherman to catch one outside the spawning areas during the early spring runs. Once the state bought up all the commercial fishing licenses for the Walleye netters Lake Erie was full of them again. Sport fishermen don`t have the ability to trap an entire school, whether they are hungry or not and deplete them? I grew up in the 1950`s and early 60`s fishing Lake Erie, it was a mess on this side that continued to get worse. Fishing areas like Sandusky Bay and East Harbor, 3-4 feet of water and no weeds? We fished the dock areas because it was the only available cover for the fish. With the Zebra mussels came an increase in water clarity, it is now common to see weed grow in those bays in 10 feet of water. Has it affected fishing? Yes, unless you adapted to the new conditions you might not catch fish where you used to. They don`t have to concentrate in the same areas because of lack of cover or lack of cover for their food supply. Massive weed areas can be a challenge for some to fish, but they provide protection for young fish and the food that lives in them gives them more of an opportunity to grow. Edited March 28, 2012 by OhioFisherman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike rousseau Posted March 28, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 I think we already had this debate on on other thread... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopheraaron Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 Maybe we NEED the asian carp to clean up all of the weeds! Fight fire with wire right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris.brock Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 There are 2 lakes in the Chapleau area I'm familiar with that had walleye introduced after being only pike lakes. The walleye fishing was great after 3 or 4 years. I don't think these lakes are going to be "fish factories" forever. It takes a quite few years for the aquatic community to reach a ballance. With the invasion of zeebs, things still haven't ballanced. MuskyMike said he thinks the zebra mussles have thinned out abit since first getting established in his area. I think it's too early to judge the affects of zebra mussles, throw in other factors like fishing pressure, climate change, polution etc., and who knows what's really going on. Still, invasive species are bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris.brock Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 oh yeah, MM, I hope the Sens overtake the Bruins (just because I hate the Bruins) and bump them down to 6th or 7th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike rousseau Posted March 28, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 oh yeah, MM, I hope the Sens overtake the Bruins (just because I hate the Bruins) and bump them down to 6th or 7th. Me to... My friend plays for the sens and he's been out since dec with a concussion... He should be back playing any day now.... And he's bananas for fishing... I send him pics of the fish I catch and he gets jealous that I'm fishing and he's playing NHL hockey...lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Headhunter Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 it started here on st clair. species were affected then mother nature corrected the issues. as for fishing walleyes /muskies,,planer boards are a definate plus. sight feeders exploded. as for the statement on commercial netters theres plenty of blame to share. while commercial netters get 99.04 per-cent of quotas, anglers get .06. sports fishing has never achieved theres according to mnr stats. netters will tank nu.2 fish to achieve max dollars on nu.1 fish,,,more money per pound. the true issues lie on walleye spawning grounds. pollution and loss of habitat. just look at the thames walleye spawn. it is near non existent in the last 3 decades. london ont and bad farming efforts have created a toxic non spawning soup. these are facts folks not just thoughts. maybe we should be asking what goverments can do,,, oops i am sorry their broke, they gotta keep up their great pension plans and perks. I have a feeling that there are other circumstances that are effecting the Thames river Pickereye run and those issues happen with regularity just down river from London... HH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jigger Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 Sinker hit the nail on the head. Adapt or go home with a skunk. Smallies are invasive, pike are invasive, all sorts of aquatic plants are invasive... Deal with it when the time comes. I dont reall fish waters that were overly stained to begin with. So its really a moot point for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oggie Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 (edited) I appreciate that it is shocking to see a commercial fishery take that many fish in one net pull but 10 boats out fishing could do the same thing. there are limits on the number of boats that can commercial fish on the great lakes and these boats have a quota based on scientific population estimates... the same can't be said for recreational anglers. Your anecdotal opinion is appreciated but i work in hard numbers... not opinion Look up the stats for the estimated biomass taken by commercial fishing vs. recreational fishing and present those to us and I'll agree with you!! But we need facts, not opinions and finger pointing. Like i said, the ecology of the great lakes is based on the sum of its parts, not one issue facing it. I'd be more ok with commercial fishing if they were monitored frequently. There are very few CO's left so who is watching the commercials. One commercial boat may do no more damage than 10 recreational boats but the rec boats don't fish daily. Edited March 29, 2012 by Oggie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now