proposed reg change to bass and musky

[BillM]

The bass are off the beds way before the opener as it sits.. Losing a week isn't going to change anything, unless we have a super duper cold spring.

Edited April 6, 2012 by BillM

[Terry]

thats' good info

and make sense too

maybe for those zones an earlier bass season isn't too bad

[ecmilley]

last summer a lake in the north kawartha/south bancroft district there was a bass still on nest's way into july, watched them guarding fry and passed them by

[Rich Nelson]

I will bet my pay check, that someone who just want to have a meal of muskie and not for the sport of catching as many as possible, they will kill far less then you..you can argue c/r all you want but every study states the there is a mortality rate when fish are caught and released.....lots of people fish for a meal they catch there fish and go home, they don't say let just get one for for a photo one more for a paying customer ..

it's easy to say c/r for muskie because it doesn't affect your fishing or your pocket book...sure be a good conservationist and don't eat muskie, easy for you but you are asking people to suffer or change their lives, if there are not many big ones then you should do your part and refrain from fishing for them.. yes lets take the high road and ban fishing for them completely..be a good citizen a good conservationist .

 

 

it's easy to say let do something when it doesn't affect you...isn't it

 

Ill take that bet. How exactly is it making people suffer,or change their lives? And every study shows there is a mortality rate? Maybe 1 in 100 fish for a true Musky angler. As top of the food chain, they exist in low numbers. Same as lions, tigers etc. absolutely no Good reason to ever keep one, and there should be no possession limit all across Ontario.

Guess you shouldnt comment on things you know nothing about....

[irishfield]

..hmmm he's probably caught more "incidental" 'skis than most here on this forum have ever caught targeting them in their lifetime. I know where Terry is coming from, maybe I can read between the lines better than most.

[camillj]

What ... no more Musky Burger's ... guess I'll need a new get-rich-quick fast food restuarant chain idea ...

 

All kidding aside ... last time I killed a Musky was before I knew how long they took to reach the trophy size (and back in the day they were still considered a pest likely to harm the pickeral populations ... seriously, how could anyone want to kill anything that takes upwards of 50 years to reach legal 'table' size ... thats just not sustainable.

[Terry]

Ill take that bet. How exactly is it making people suffer,or change their lives? And every study shows there is a mortality rate? Maybe 1 in 100 fish for a true Musky angler. As top of the food chain, they exist in low numbers. Same as lions, tigers etc. absolutely no Good reason to ever keep one, and there should be no possession limit all across Ontario.

Guess you shouldnt comment on things you know nothing about....

 

 

 

show me a study that shows 1%

you just made this stuff up and you say to me "Guess you shouldn't comment on things you know nothing about..."

LOOK WHO IS CALLING THE KETTLE BLACK

show me your study that state 1 %..... come on don't be shy

 

but lets just say you are right

 

1 % .... would he get 100 fish;; so he killed 1 fish

the average guy..does he get one muskie a year so 1 fish 100% mortality ..both killed 1 fish

 

well that's a tie no one wins but if a gill is ripped , that he has not control ..if a fish gets away..he didn't carefully cut the hooks out and baby that fish ..it will die ...

 

sorry you statement that you just made up doesn't hold water.....

 

and I stand by my statement that the right to keep fish for the table should never be removed...

 

 

 

 

 

trophy muskellunge. Average annual mortality rate

in trophy muskellunge populations ranged from

16% to 26%, which corresponds to maximum ages

of 26 to 16 years, respectively.

• Data from the Cleithrum Project indicate that, over

the past 16 years, maximum age of trophy

muskellunge may have decreased two years (23 to

21), reflecting an increase in annual mortality rate

from 18% to 20%.

• If annual mortality rate of record-sized

muskellunge 25 to 30 years old were increased

by 2%, it would be necessary to double

recruitment to compensate for this change.

• Harvest reduction and catch-and-release procedures,

which reduce mortality, are an easier and more

cost-effective way of maintaining and restoring

trophy muskellunge populations than trying to

supplement recruitment by stocking. If the

mortality rate of large muskellunge 21 to 23 years

old can be decreased by only 2% (20% to 18%),

this is comparable to increasing their initial

recruitment by approximately 70%.

 

 

How exactly is it making people suffer,or change their lives

 

my point was if you like to eat muskie or any other fish and they put a ban on keeping them it can, it will affect their lives..surely you can see that..for some people fish in the bucket is money in the bank and they fish to help put food on the table,,there for it affects their life...this person has to change his life in some small ways to be a good conservationist..... you understand...

and then you have a muskie guide...if they make it c/r only... he has more fish to catch

he has happier customers , he has more money in his bank..

this guy has to do nothing to be a good conservationist....it puts money in his bank

it's a self-serving act...and it is pretty easy to say lets make these great changers when it does not adversely affect you

if he said lets quit fishing muskie to help protect this great fish..then he is hurting his bottom line and you can respect that...if he said lets have a 5 year clsed season on muskie fishing then he's a conservationist but his statements are self-serving wallet building propaganda

Edited April 6, 2012 by Terry

[farsider]

and I stand by my statement that the right to keep fish for the table should never be removed...

 

show me a study that shows 1%

 

my point was if you like to eat muskie or any other fish and they put a ban on keeping them it can, it will affect their lives..surely you can see that..for some people fish in the bucket is money in the bank and they fish to help put food on the table,,there for it affects their life...this person has to change his life in some small ways to be a good conservationist..... you understand...

and then you have a muskie guide...if they make it c/r only... he has more fish to catch

he has happier customers , he has more money in his bank..

this guy has to do nothing to be a good conservationist....it puts money in his bank

it's a self-serving act...and it is pretty easy to say lets make these great changers when it does not adversely affect you

if he said lets quit fishing muskie to help protect this great fish..then he is hurting his bottom line and you can respect that...if he said lets have a 5 year clsed season on muskie fishing then he's a conservationist but his statements are self-serving wallet building propaganda

 

Even with the associated low mortality linked to C/R efforts, Muskie mortality will continue to occur. Unless the body of water becomes a sanctuary which I think we can agree is not what anybody would prefer. Incidental catches, lost lures from walleye/bass anglers, commercial by-catch, natural causes, and nefarious means will still contribute to annual mortality.

 

One argument I think you could make is the annual mortality rate (even for meal fisherman)would eventually go down if consumption goes up because catch-rates including incidental would plummet.

 

I never argued for banning consumption. I personally think you would have to be brain-damaged to eat a legal-sized Muskie(which incidentally is a sympton of Mercury poisoning) but, I wouldn't argue for an outright ban. I think both goals are achieved with higher minimum limits and thus agree with the proposed reg. changes. I just think they didn't go far enough. My goal would be an 80" minimum.

 

Here is a study with a 0% mortality rate.

 

C/R Mortality study

 

Granted it was "average" Muskies Canada anglers with the education, tools, and experience to properly handle Muskies but it does show that it is possible if unlikely.

 

Cheers,

Mark

[Terry]

that is an interesting read

 

I didn't see how long the the radio fish were followed or what the size of the average fish was

it does show that with extreme care fish do have a great chance at surviving...and when you consider the natural mortality rate is 16 to 18 %......and that's muskie that have not been caught 0% is just unbelievable..but nice to see

 

it was not I that said 15%, I just used the number stated and did the math

 

I don't really think that way, I just used extreme statements to make a point and get some people to realize that . doing something self-serving, that has no ill affects to your livelihood really has nothing to do with being a conservationist

it just makes you part of the ME generation .

 

and that was my point that as we raise the length longer and longer people who would like to eat a muskie have less options a 30 inch makes more sense to eat but the basic right to eat a fish has been taken way, in favor a sport ...which countries and fringe groups like P3TA have jumped all over as a reason to ban fishing altogether...that is why some countries have gone to catch and kill only....they don't mind you playing with your food...but making fish suffer for fun only is cruel..their words not mine

 

Edited April 6, 2012 by Terry