Trout angler decline

[Scudly]

This first attachment shows 26 years of Wisconsin trout stamp saled data. Central office fish folks had the nerve to count every Patron Card buyer as one trout angler which is FRAUD. Only a small percentage of PC buyers are trout anglers. Plus TU folks buy multiple stamps to support the program. The important thing here is to only look at the total trout stamps.

In the 1980s Wisconsin had almost 200,000 trout anglers. The low point was 1991 when special regulations were implemented back in 1990. An the numbers have never come back since. I do not have data for Minnesota but do believe if I did it would show the same thing.

The second attachment is an example of the Big Green River showing trout numbers at ~100/mile back in the 1960s - 1980s and then jumping up to ~3000/mile+ in the 1990s - present. I could give you a ton of examples. If you have fished trout streams recently you might even think we have a problem.

Aside from record trout numbers and a big angler decline there have been other changes. Early on locals fished and they were primarily bait and spin anglers. Now fly anglers predominate. There have been several studies that show total trout harvest is now less than 10%.

In summary, the trout fishing in the Midwest is the best it has ever been. Tons of trout, nobody fishing, and those that are fishing are mainly fly anglers who practice catch and release.

Don't be afraid to keep a few trout. There are some rivers that actually could use harvest -- Upper Kinni, Coon Valley. High trout populations make them stunted.

[Bug Ugly]

Why exactly is that Fraud? The Conservation Patron License includes a Trout Stamp. In order to make the data relevant you need to find out how many of the Patron's fish for trout. I'd be willing to bet a fair amount, otherwise why would you buy the card.

[Scudly]

The Patron license is quite extensive. It covers hunting, trapping, park access. Trout stamp is a small part of it. Patron Card

Anyway I have a ton of other examples showing angler decline. There are hot spots like Kinni, Rush, Coon Valley, West Fork Kick, Boise Brule. Go almost anywere else and you have streams all to yourself. Back in the day, folks used to be shoulder to shoulder harvesting trout. I'm sure you have seen old photos showing this.

Now I'm not saying angler decline can be entirely attributed to micromanagement of regulations starting in 1990. We are now more urban and tied to electronics and less into fishing and hunting. Talk to those that live in the country and they will tell you the majority of trout fisherman come from big cities. I also believe less locals trout fish, especially in areas were no live bait is allowed.

[blackdog1101]

I also believe less locals trout fish, especially in areas were no live bait is allowed.

What data do you have that shows locals fish less because they can't use bait?

[Big Hit]

None, he's just using the "no live bait" as a red herring. I do like the recent attempts to stir up some discussion recently.

[Ufatz]

I'm confused. Is somebody complaining because there are FEWER anglers on the trout creeks? Most fishers love the seclusion of a stream all to themselves...regardless what legal method they use to catch fish.

Oh. Maybe this is it: C&R has been so successful that there are now untold hordes of unharvested trout. Because of all the uppity big city fly anglers letting fish go, there are now too many trout and because there are too many trout fewer fly anglers want to fish for them because its too easy. Ergo more anglers should keep fish to keep population down, which would bring MORE anglers back to the waters.

I think I need to have another shot of medicine.....before some of this starts to make sense to me.

[Driftless]

i believe Mark is complaining about micromanaging of regulations

that has caused a OVER population of trout in some areas.

Believe he is trying to show there are less worm and spin anglers due to regs being too complicated.

Mark you will have to explain this a little more.

This what i gleaned from his data.

[Nate McVey]

None, he's just using the "no live bait" as a red herring. I do like the recent attempts to stir up some discussion recently.

"stir up" is exactly what it is. Shoot up to the north shore in the spring/fall and try to fish without another guy in your lap. Watch the "flossers", "bait guys" and "elitists" fish side by side in perfect harmony......it's a beautiful thing. Then go home, sign into FM and b1tch and moan about your fellow anglers.

Could the lack of trout fishing be attributed to the "keeping up with the Jones" mentality that has risen in the last 10-15 years? Could it be that kids are spending more time in school and have fewer breaks? Could it be the vast improvement in fishing technology that is drawing people from the rivers to the lakes to play with electronics and fast boats? Nah, can't be any of those things it has to be because people can't use a chub tail or a worm on a small portion of streams and rivers in the state. Ya that's exactly why............geeeeezzzz, I'm getting tired of this carp..........

[Driftless]

I gave up big lake fishing 14 years ago to due to elbow to elbow idiots and was a little shy about eating anything that comes out the great lakes with so many pollutants in it.

I always want an option to keep a fish if i want to. That option was removed by myself due to the big lakes being polluted . I don't fish for SPORT only. I consider that a crime against nature.

I won't fish catch and release only water during regular season. I am seriously considering stopping fishing in early c/r season in wisconsin.

By the way.....please show me any other species of fish in the untied states that has a c/r only season?

I kept 12 trout this year....12 last year...12 the year before....

Each year caught over 1,600 trout each year. my keeps are a little over 1 percent of my catch. Just like the option.

[Scudly]

Quote:

None, he's just using the "no live bait" as a red herring. I do like the recent attempts to stir up some discussion recently.

I've been known to stir the pot, primarily for the interest of a sparking a lively discussion.

Quote:

Nah, can't be any of those things it has to be because people can't use a chub tail or a worm on a small portion of streams and rivers in the state. Ya that's exactly why............geeeeezzzz, I'm getting tired of this carp..........

Is this a warning to quit voicing my opinion? It sounds like I'm on thin ice with the you shiner.

What I am saying here is we have more trout than ever, less fisherman than ever, and the fisherman that now predominates is a fly angler than rarely harvests. Fine by me. As a bait and spin angler, life is good. Conservation organizations are brainwashing folks into catch and release. When I was on a conservation board I got grilled every time I kept a trout 12" or larger. I got grilled for fishing with worms and chub tails. With 5000/mile, who cares if I harvest a few 12-15" trout? Trout do not need to be worshiped. Catch and release is a management practice, not a religion!

Another goal I have is to PROMOTE trout fishing. Show folks how awesome trout fishing really is. I think a few have jumped on board. I get compliments. I share stories and photos. I am more open to sharing locations and offering advice to get people into the sport. So many trout anglers are a secretive bunch - terrible at sharing. Well with a bounty of trout there is no longer a need to be so private. I just want others to hear the other side of the story -- catch and release is NOT necessary on most streams. Harvest should be actually encouraged. Example: Upper Kinni is in a sad state of affairs. We actually need to change the regs to 10 fish harvest or electroshock out a good number and give to a food pantry.

[tom_w]

It sounds like I'm on thin ice with the you shiner.

Is that your goal Mark? That sound like prodding.

[Driftless]

sounds like exerting his god given right to opinion to me.

[Nate McVey]

Quote:

s this a warning to quit voicing my opinion? It sounds like I'm on thin ice with the you shiner.

Nope, no warning, no thin ice...............

We just see the trout world through different eyes, you have your opinion and i have mine.....

[mainbutter]

By the way.....please show me any other species of fish in the untied states that has a c/r only season?

Sturgeon, for one.

[SkitterPopper]

Quote:

09/14/09 - 02/28/10

Smallmouth Bass - 2009 catch and release season

Smallmouth Bass for two.

[tom_w]

Largemouth, striped bass, muskie...

[macgruber]

friend of mine pulled a 22 inch fish out of the upper kinni late last summer...... i'd hardly say that's sorry..... and i had three of my best days out there last year..... i'm not sayin, i'm just saying.....

for many people this is a deep ethical question.... i know i struggle with it-- is fishing for fun ethical? is killing fish ethical? the c & r angler probably answers yes to the first, but no to the second..... but in some ways it's almost worse to simply amuse yourself at the expense of a fish..... when i head down to minnehaha creek and fish by the mississippi and hook a smallmouth whose lips have been torn apart in the c&r section, is that ethical? but hey, i really like fishing, and i rarely want to kill the fish i catch......

catch and release may be only a management tactic, but for many, fishing is a religion..... and from how worked up you get, scudly, you are obviously a convert as well..... most likely we all are..... so to say that trout aren't to be worshipped is like telling us all we've created false idols.... and from the extensive time you've put into catching big fish, you can't tell me there isn't a little worship on your end as well....... and i would hope there would be....

bottome line is we all like fishing..... and we all want to do it in a way that's "best" for the resource...... just because certain streams are C&R now doesn't mean they'll stay that way..... the dnr has made a concerted effort to alter the regulations when appropriate..... all we can do is voice our concerns and hope they'll listen-- and in the meantime, fish our streams which, as you have conceded, are in the best shape they've ever been......

[blackdog1101]

Originally Posted By: Scudly

I also believe less locals trout fish, especially in areas were no live bait is allowed.

What data do you have that shows locals fish less because they can't use bait?

Mark, you made the claim, now how about showing the data?

[Scudly]

So special regulations implemented in 1990, the low point was 1991, and numbers have yet to come back. Coincidence? Maybe. I also though "A River Runs Through It" which came out in 1992 really boosted fly fishing. If that is rhe case, the number of new fly anglers could not even offset the number of bait and spin anglers lost? I was under the impression that fly shops were booming in the mid to late 90's?

I'll dig further for you Warren. However I mention it is my belief that bait anglers declined after the special regs were imposed. You can look through this board and find locals compain about the no live bait rule. I think it should ONLY be justified in poor low number trout streams. When a special interest group pushed for Winnebago to be artificial, what happed? How about the Prairie River vote in WI? Don't get me wrong, TU and other organizations do tremendous work. I just don't like to see TU pushing the DNR to exclude live bait.

[tom_w]

Is there a perception that TU dictates the DNR's decisions? I think the DNR came to its own informed decisions on live bait regs.

[blackdog1101]

So you've really got no data. No studies, no creel surveys, no angler surveys.

As I've said here before, it is my opinion, and that of some others in TU, that people young enough to not require a license should be allowed to bait fish on any stream regardless of special regulations. If you're old enough to require a license, using jigs, mepps, spoons, etc. on special regulations streams shouldn't be a problem.

[blackdog1101]

One more thought: Angler numbers are down all over the country, even in areas where trout are not found. It is my opinion that other, larger, social factors are playing a greater role in reduced angler numbers. I don't doubt that there may be some people who quit trout fishing due to the special regulations. But I don't believe it amounts to tens of thousands of people/license sales in MN.

Again, my opinion only. But like you, I have no data to support it.

[Scudly]

Quote:

Is there a perception that TU dictates the DNR's decisions? I think the DNR came to its own informed decisions on live bait regs.

Which organization applied the most pressure on the DNR to have the regulations changed? I was on MNTU when the proposal was going down. Maybe I should start up Worm Angler Unlimited and petition the DNR to ban catch and release on the Kinni, or no flies or artificials allowed on certain areas. How would you feel? TU was the most pro-active in having the regs changed. Sure the DNR listens to input from all. However bait anglers just not as organized politically.

BTW, what organization is currently working on persuading the MN DNR to open more streams for the barbless C&R pre-season? Actually in favor of this, especially considering live bait is allowed? Saw Dornack was getting in touch to make it happen. Wish I had that kind of influence on the MN DNR.

Anyway my main points are: Trout streams are the best they have ever been. Angler harvest is at an all time low. Don't be brainwashed by the catch and release movement. Trout regulations could be simplified to entice outdoor enthusiasts back into trout fishing. There is no legitimate reason for banning live bait unless a stream cannot support pressure, and in this day and age, that is rare.

[blackdog1101]

I've been doing some Googling over lunch hour, and attributing the decline in trout stamp sales to locals not being allowed to bait fish just doesn't make sense. I tried to look at some real data, and then apply some logic.

In 1980 the population of Houston Cty was 18,382. In 2008 it was 19,245.

In 1980 the population of Fillmore Cty was 21,930. In 2008 it was 20,850.

In 1980 the population of Winona Cty was 46,256. In 2008 it was 49,879.

In 1980 the population of Goodhue Cty was 38,749. In 2008 it was 45,897.

In 1980 the population of Wabasha Cty was 19,335. In 2008 it was 21,813.

So for those 5 SEMN counties with the most trout streams, the total population in 1980 was 144,652. In 2008 it was 157,684.

So now come the guesses. How many of those bought trout stamps in 1980? 5%? 10%? Let's use 10%, although I doubt it was that high. So that makes 14,465 trout stamps sold in these 5 counties in 1980. And let's say that only 5% bought trout stamps in 2008, so that's 7,884. This is a decline of 6,581 stamp sales in those 5 counties. Again, I doubt it's that high, but we'll use it as a hypothesis.

2 questions come to mind:

* - Do we really believe that 6,581 people got so ticked off because they can't use bait in 12 streams that they quit trout fishing?

* - How does the "no bait" regulation on these 12 streams explain the decline by tens of thousands of stamp sales across the state?

I submit that the "no bait" regulation on 12 streams has very little to do with the decline in stamp sales, and that other social reasons are the main cause.

[tom_w]

Trout streams are the best they have ever been.

Then let's leave everything the way it is.