Cass Lake

[northspear]

just read in Outdoor News that Minnesota might lift the ban on spearing northern pike on Cass Lake. Lets cross our fingers and hope for the best.

[bassNspear]

did they say when they were making up there mind?

[WaveWacker]

It's being discussed by the legislation, so anytime between now and May.

[bassNspear]

It's being discussed by the legislation, so anytime between now and May.

be interested to see what happens!

[Laska]

Im pullin for it!

[Sackett]

The DNR does not support this in case you didnt know. It's a shady way to try to get your way and sets a bad example of how to manage lakes. Put it to a vote amongst the ethical sportsmen community and it wont win. Put it to a vote in the senate or the legislature and it might win. 98% of those people dont know or dont care anything about this issue, and wont even know why they are voting one way or the other, which is the only reason it might win. Which is the only reason the group that proposed this is choosing this route.

[merkman]

The DNR does not support this in case you didnt know.

And the MnDNR, Minnesota Muskie Alliance, Muskies Inc., and the Minnesota Darkhouse and Angling Association all support no spearing bans on the 100+ other "new" muskie lakes, which are comprised of the same types of waters as Cass.

Does this make sense to you?

How can muskie anglers and darkhouse spearing sportsmen coexist on these 100+ "new waters" but it is supposedly impossible for them to coexist on the other 26 "old waters"

All I am asking is show me the data that supports the myth that 14 thousand darkhouse spearers spearing the daylight hours of the 3 shortest daylight hour months a year, kill more muskies than the 1.4 Million anglers allowed to angle Cass Lake day and night most of the year.

If your sport was banned I would expect you to ask for the same data that justifies the ban.

And if the ban was not justified in the first place, I would expect you to fight it untill it was removed.

No mater if the threat was from the anti's on the outside, or fellow sportsmen from the inside.

[Sackett]

Merk

See this is the problem. WHO SAID ONE THING ABOUT MUSKIES???????? Nobody until you. Here read it again:

The DNR does not support this in case you didnt know. It's a shady way to try to get your way and sets a bad example of how to manage lakes. Put it to a vote amongst the ethical sportsmen community and it wont win. Put it to a vote in the senate or the legislature and it might win. 98% of those people dont know or dont care anything about this issue, and wont even know why they are voting one way or the other, which is the only reason it might win. Which is the only reason the group that proposed this is choosing this route.

How does your thought process turn this into being about muskies. I'm dumbfounded on that.

[merkman]

Merk

See this is the problem. WHO SAID ONE THING ABOUT MUSKIES???????? Nobody until you.

Who said it... that would be Dirk L Peterson, MnDNR's new fisheries chief for one.

Q: Muskie anglers and darkhouse spearers don't agree on lake management. Muskie anglers want muskie protection, but spearers feel they're getting pushed off lakes. How do you make both groups happy?

A: It's a real challenge. You have to look for middle ground. Spearing bans, per se, go back to the beginning of active muskie management. On the other side, spearing has always been recognized as a legitimate way to take northern pike. I think there is room for understanding.

The long range plan would be another good source:

Recommendations for Muskellunge

- Manage muskellunge populations for "trophy" angling opportunities through stocking, size regulations, season closures, existing spearing bans, and promoting voluntary catch and release.

Muskies Inc and the Minnesota Muskie Alliance in their "Now you know" brochure

Muskies and Spearing

Spearing Muskies is illegal in Minnesota. There

are spearing bans on 26 lakes due to the fact

they are trophy lakes, brood stock lakes, or

lakes that need the additional protection of

small Muskies due to low natural numbers.

- Created and approved by: Muskies Inc. – Chapter 54 and

Minnesota Muskie Alliance.

Do you need any more sources?

[Sackett]

To get at what my point in this whole issue is I'll have to lay out a hypothetical for you.

I cant stand spearing. I think spearing 100% is detrimental to lakes. I form a group No More Spearing. I call an inept senator and ask(maybe bribe) for a bill to be voted thru that disallows spearing in the state of MN. It gets put on the ballot without hardly a word written or spoken to the general community on the subject matter. Now we wait and see what a bunch of people that have no knowledge of anything pertaining to the subject or dont care about it will decide for an outcome.

That's a carbon copy of whats happening here. That's what I, and most, have an issue with. We have a DNR to decide this type of stuff for us. People that have at least have some knowledge of the situation need to be the ones deciding stuff like this. If you dont agree with the DNR, fine, but bypassing them on restrictions that pertain to fish removal is completely greedy and unethical.

[AWH]

What I find funny/sad is those that pretend that people that fish muskies are anti-spearing. And they go to all lengths to portray this picture. A 2006 survey sure suggests otherwise. It shows that musky fishermen spend more time spearing (percentage wise) than the rest of the general public.

By fighting against musky fishermen, you're fighting against many of the very people that enjoy spearing just as much as yourself. How does this help the cause?

Aaron

[Sackett]

Merk,

So your fine with the legislature and senate acting for the DNR now. That's who you think should decide lake and fish management from now on huh. I firmly disagree.

[merkman]

If you feel sportsmen suporting unjustified bans on fellow sportsmen is OK then we will just have to agree to disagree.

Once I see the scientific peer reviewed study that supports the myth that 14 thousand darkhouse spearers spearing the daylight hours of the 3 shortest daylight hour months a year, kill more muskies than the 1.4 Million anglers allowed to angle Cass Lake day and night most of the year, then I will believe it.

Until then, a fellow sportsman has as much right to ban my sport for killing muskies as an anti-sportsman has to ban guns because they kill people.

[merkman]

Merk,

So your fine with the legislature and senate acting for the DNR now. That's who you think should decide lake and fish management from now on huh. I firmly disagree.

Once again the legislature makes the laws.

Kinda hard to get laws changed though government agencies that don't make laws.

I assume that is why the legislature and not the MnDNR passed the law in the first place.

If you refuse to understand that; then again we will have to agree to disagree.

[Sackett]

Originally Posted By: Sackett

Merk,

So your fine with the legislature and senate acting for the DNR now. That's who you think should decide lake and fish management from now on huh. I firmly disagree.

Once again the legislature makes the laws.

Kinda hard to get laws changed though government agencies that don't make laws.

I assume that is why the legislature and not the MnDNR passed the law in the first place.

If you refuse to understand that; then again we will have to agree to disagree.

It's no business of the legislature to make this type of law. It is DNR business. The DNR does not support it. THIS IS THE WRONG WAY TO GO ABOUT THIS.

You dont ever answer any question posed to you. You didnt in the other thread either. You completely walk around it. Didn't even comment on the scenario I gave you in an above post that lays out the picture well. You just want your way, no matter what expense.

[MJ1657]

As stated earlier.

The DNR does not make laws.

They never have and I would assume never will. The legislature makes laws the DNR enforces them.

[Muskiefool]

The same people that were crying for an open and transparent process have done nothing open or transparent.

[Gordie]

To get at what my point in this whole issue is I'll have to lay out a hypothetical for you.

I cant stand spearing. I think spearing 100% is detrimental to lakes. I form a group No More Spearing. I call an inept senator and ask(maybe bribe) for a bill to be voted thru that disallows spearing in the state of MN. It gets put on the ballot without hardly a word written or spoken to the general community on the subject matter. Now we wait and see what a bunch of people that have no knowledge of anything pertaining to the subject or dont care about it will decide for an outcome.

That's a carbon copy of whats happening here. That's what I, and most, have an issue with. We have a DNR to decide this type of stuff for us. People that have at least have some knowledge of the situation need to be the ones deciding stuff like this. If you dont agree with the DNR, fine, but bypassing them on restrictions that pertain to fish removal is completely greedy and unethical.

I know this was a Hypothetical stiuation and This is what my problem with it is and its not the DNR its the fact that they will call this puplic water when in fact it is not I spear and am part of the puplic but am banned from this water.

The law makers get get info from others not just the DNR and base there dissions on that along with dollars. I'm not saying that its right but I'm not saying its wrong either.

[brmuskie]

Elwood - I agree with a lot of your logic except this one.

You are not banned from public waters just because you spear - it is similar to rifle hunters not being allowed to use rifles in game refuges. Both archery hunters and rifle hunters are hunting deer in Minnesota and the rifle guys can't do it in a game refuge but the archery guys can. It is still public land and your rights have not been violated.

Currently there are only 26 lakes that you can not spear on (refuges) but it is still very public.

The White House is a public building but you can't just walk in there whenever you want to.

[merkman]

Elwood - I agree with a lot of your logic except this one.

You are not banned from public waters just because you spear - it is similar to rifle hunters not being allowed to use rifles in game refuges. Both archery hunters and rifle hunters are hunting deer in Minnesota and the rifle guys can't do it in a game refuge but the archery guys can. It is still public land and your rights have not been violated.

Currently there are only 26 lakes that you can not spear on (refuges) but it is still very public.

The White House is a public building but you can't just walk in there whenever you want to.

If there is a valid scientific reason for the ban then let's see it.

If the reason is that some don't want us there, there is a "compromise", or it is just the way things have been done since the beginning of muskie management, then there seems to be a problem.

I see no problem with expecting a valid reason of why a group of sportsmen are banned from 26 lakes in Minnesota. If you or others were banned I would only hope you would expect the same.

The scientific data does not support the ban, the real life examples of 100+ other muskie lakes do not support the ban, but it is still in place. Muskie anglers and darkhouse spearing sportsmen can coexist on muskie lakes. The science proves it, the real life examples prove it.

We have been doing it for years and the muskie fishery in Minnesota is one of the top in the world. If we coexist on 100+ waters there is absolutely no reason we can’t coexist on the other 26.

[Gordie]

Elwood - I agree with a lot of your logic except this one.

You are not banned from public waters just because you spear - it is similar to rifle hunters not being allowed to use rifles in game refuges. Both archery hunters and rifle hunters are hunting deer in Minnesota and the rifle guys can't do it in a game refuge but the archery guys can. It is still public land and your rights have not been violated.

Currently there are only 26 lakes that you can not spear on (refuges) but it is still very public.

The White House is a public building but you can't just walk in there whenever you want to.

I understand what your saying also but I dont always agree with the hunting refuge idea either.

This is the deffintion of public that I found

pub·lic

pub·lic [púbblik]

adj

1. concerning all the people: relating to or concerning the people at large or all members of a community

public support for the policy

2. for community use: provided for the use of a community

public library

3. open to all: open to everyone, and typically frequented by large numbers of people

public spaces

4. well known: known to large numbers of the community through being involved in activities such as politics or entertainment

maintained a very public persona

#3 is the one that stands out for me...

Seems to me that public is not the right word to use then.

[MJ1657]

Let me pose this question.

We have deer hunting areas/license's that you can only shoot bucks. How is that different from lakes that have northern's and muskie's?

I do not spear any different then I hunt for deer. I see my target, I identify it, then I decide if it is legal. If it is I then decide if I want to harvest it or let it pass by.

[AWH]

Elwood, Cass Lake is open to you and everyone else. It's very much a public resource, even by your #3 definition that you cite. You are not banned from the lake. Certain methods of harvest are legal there, others are not. It used to be tradition to shoot fish when you got them close to the boat to aid in their harvest. Why have gun yielding sportsmen been banned from our lakes? Oh wait, they haven't been. They are just required to harvest their fish by other means.

Aaron

[MJ1657]

Elwood, Cass Lake is open to you and everyone else. It's very much a public resource, even by your #3 definition that you cite. You are not banned from the lake. Certain methods of harvest are legal there, others are not. It used to be tradition to shoot fish when you got them close to the boat to aid in their harvest. Why have gun yielding sportsmen been banned from our lakes? Oh wait, they haven't been. They are just required to harvest their fish by other means.

Aaron

Was it ever legal to shoot fish when you got them near a boat?

[mainbutter]

Originally Posted By: AWH

Elwood, Cass Lake is open to you and everyone else. It's very much a public resource, even by your #3 definition that you cite. You are not banned from the lake. Certain methods of harvest are legal there, others are not. It used to be tradition to shoot fish when you got them close to the boat to aid in their harvest. Why have gun yielding sportsmen been banned from our lakes? Oh wait, they haven't been. They are just required to harvest their fish by other means.

Aaron

Was it ever legal to shoot fish when you got them near a boat?

If you go far back enough in time, yes. Guns were used to shoot fish well before there were any regulations regarding fishing in MN.