organization to help Northern Pike fishery

[foulpole18]

Merk

Influential buddies and a legislator. Sounds like what you guys tried to do with pike management in MN last session.

[jeffreyd]

For clarification to your post, Past President of the AZ Deer Assoc. Now on to your question. You are not the first person to have tried this, nor will be the last. What I would recommend to you, is to research Proposition 100 from the mid 1990's when the "greenies" tried the very thing.

The first thing that would happen is that your would be met with great opposition by both our governor and legislature. Second the game and fish commission is made up of sportsman and scientist whom would give you the importance of hunting and wildlife management.

Third, I would recommend that if you are cruising in Southern Arizona, on a Harley, you should take advantage of the law that goes into effect tomorrow that you can carry a weapon concealed without needed a permit. This is for your own safety as we do not enforce immigration or smuggling laws in this state. You are riding in Southern AZ, you are taking your life into your own hands.

Fourth, I would recommend that you rally your people along with the Center for Biological Diversity located in Tucson, Protectors of Wildlife, and Sandy Barr the State President of the Sierra Club to assist you in your fight.

Did I mention that the sportsman and women, along with kids, have a huge say in what is done as far as wildlife management in the state.

So not to avoid your question, I am simply giving you the vaguest answer similar to most of yours that i could possibly do.

Oh and your simple links do not work.

[cbrooks]

Sorry to get off topic but it sounds like its turning into the wild west down there jefferyd.

[Cooter]

merk - are you serious?

Quote:

IF the impact of 14 Thousand darkhouse spearers darkhouse spearing the daylight hours of the 3 shortest daylight hour months has more impact on the fishery than 1.4 MILLION anglers fishing 24-7 most of the year then you would have a point.

The numbers point this out very well.

Darkhouse spearing season: Nov 15, 2010 to Feb 27, 2011 OR 104 Days

Hook and Line season: May 25, 2010,Feb 27, 2011 OR 278 Days

Posession Limits are equal for both methods

Just counting northern pike over 30" here is what each method is allowed to take per year.

104 Northern Pike over 30" per sportsman via darkhouse spear per year.

278 Northern Pike over 30" per sportsman via hook and line per year.

Multiply those numbers by the 14 THOUSAND vs the 1.4 MILLION and you get.

1.5 Million Northern Pike over 30" allowed via darkhouse spearing per year

389 Million Northern Pike over 30" allowed via hook and line per year

A 30" northern pike = 7.7 lbs

That translates to

11.5 Million pounds of Nothern Pike over 30" allowed via darkhouse spearing per year.

3 Billion pounds of Northern Pike over 30" allowed via hook and line per year.

Actual take of northern pike per year by ALL methods in Minnesota.

3.2 Million Pounds of Northern Pike per year

That is 2.28 lbs of nothern pike per angler per year.

To put that into perspective:

Minnesota Walleye harvest: 24 lbs per angler per year.

Minnesota Panfish harvest: 47.7 lbs per angler per year.

If you can make the case to ban darkhouse spearing, the case to ban hook and line fishing certainly can be made.

I prefer to keep both.

As to the rest of your questions I respectfully ask you to reread my post.

[jeffreyd]

CB it is going to be a crazy couple of months. With the AG of Virginia saying they are going to let LEO ask the question about residency, should only make others follow step. So we will see how it all plays out. The activists are pushing hard, but when i see the protestors, it makes me wonder, how we can allow people to fly their country flag when protesting US laws. Just does not make a lot of sense to me.

[foulpole18]

Cooter unfortunatly he is serious. He uses that whole post all the time. It's on his speed dial of regurgitated posts.

[cbrooks]

The activists are pushing hard, but when i see the protestors, it makes me wonder, how we can allow people to fly their country flag when protesting US laws. Just does not make a lot of sense to me.

That says it all right there. I hope that isn't our future.

[merkman]

merk - are you serious?

Harvest

Sport Fish Harvested:

Walleye - 35 million pounds

Northern Pike - 3.2 million pounds

Panfish - 64 million pounds

http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/faq/mnfacts/fishing.html

[Nick Kuhn]

Once again merk, the average fisherman does not harvest 30 lbs of walleye and 50 lbs of panfish each year. Those numbers on the DNR site are wrong. MN and Wisconsin are practically identical in terms of fisheries, there's no way those numbers would be so different than these, unless the average walleye kept weighs 15 lbs and the average panfish kept weighs 2 and a half lbs:

http://dnr.wi.gov/news/DNRNews_Article_Lookup.asp?id=632

[reinhard1]

i dont understand these numbers. for one thing there is no logic in them. merc is a little controvertial as seen by these posts. he has good intentions but there are better arguments to make your points. i will give only one and that is return all large predators back in the waters and only keep what you will consume. simple and apply's to all game fish. good luck.

[merkman]

return all large predators back in the waters and only keep what you will consume. simple and apply's to all game fish.

+1

I agree; it applies to all fish and all methods of harvest.

We are all in this together.

[john skarie]

No Merk, "we" are not all in this together, not by a long shot.

Opposing regs because they don't allow you to fish the way you want to is anything but "being in this together" for what is good for the fishery.

You are against any management policy that doesn't let you do what you want, when you want to.

Every aspect of hunting and fishing have regulations that prevent all people from doing exactly what they want to, where and whenever they want to.

Other people deal with it, accept it and realize following restrictions and regulations are part of being an ethical and responsible sportsmen.

JS

[jeffreyd]

and to add to Mr Skarie's post, participate in DNR roundtables and events that allow public comment. However as i have noted in some of my posts, going in with an agenda that is updated, reflects accurate numbers or statistics, and not bullying your way with the group will make end rows with many people. I have seen the stance of many that are only approaching the DNR to complain or argue. Those people do not get the respect they are seeking with this type of approach. Merk you said we are all in this together and while i am on both sides of the fence with that statement, selective harvest in a dark house or hook and line is going to be up to the end user. Education on selective harvest is the key. No different than allowing 4 deer tags per person. that is not selective harvest that is a free for all in my eyes. the dnr are setting the policy and we need to agree or disagree but using statistics that are relevant are the key.

[merkman]

selective harvest in a dark house or hook and line is going to be up to the end user. Education on selective harvest is the key.

+1

[reinhard1]

we are making progress today!good luck.

[Cooter]

Usually its best to try the 'nice guy' approach first, especially if you really are a nice guy. When you try it as a last resort its pathetic.

[merkman]

we are making progress today!good luck.

Now if we could just agree on a fair implementation of northern pike slot limits that do not push 45 of 48 darkhouse spearing sportsmen who wish to responsibly harvest small northern pike from these lakes; we would have it made.

[smnduck]

Since spear fisherman claim the look and release method, why not just sit in the house without a spear?

[merkman]

Since spear fisherman claim the look and release method, why not just sit in the house without a spear?

Many do, I know people who frequent this site that look and release on Mille Lacs and other lakes both during and after the season.

The root of this question however is embedded in the larger question of harvest vs. no harvest.

I have a much easier time understanding your position if you are against all harvest and the lake is made no kill by any method.

I can better understand C&R only lakes where harvest is totally banned; but I still have a hard time getting over the fact that a C&R person is allowed to kill 5% or 1 in 20 fish (over and over and over) on these lakes without putting the dead fish to good use. If they are no kill lakes then they should be no kill.

So to summarize; if you are against all harvest I can see your point. If you are for responsible harvest via hook and line but not responsible harvest via darkhouse spear, then I kinda get lost in your logic.

I firmly believe that the northern pike fishery is beter served by more sportsmen harvesting smaller northern pike, than it would be by making it a no kill fishery. Some do not agree with that and I can agree to disagree with them.

I also fully believe that it is up to each and every individual sportsman to promote both catch and release and look and release no mater your position on responsible harvest.

Catch and Release and Look and Release as the end all be all for the non harvest folks and Catch and Release and Look and Release as a method of keeping the smaller fish and letting the big ones go for those who promote responsible harvest.

[AWH]

I firmly believe that the northern pike fishery is beter served by more sportsmen harvesting smaller northern pike, than it would be by making it a no kill fishery.

Merk, I personally know of ZERO people that do not agree with you on this. And we both know that there are very few people anywhere that don't agree with you on this. So why do you continue to act like this is an issue of debate? If you disagree with that, please start naming people that have spoken up on our pike fisheries on these forums that believe our pike fisheries should be catch and release only. For it being such a hot topic for you on these forums I'm sure you'll have no trouble naming many such individuals. We'll all wait patiently for that.

Aaron

[AWH]

Actually, there are a number of people that believe that removing LARGE pike and releasing the small ones are better for our fisheries. So I guess you're right to assume that people don't agree with you on that quote. But it's not the people that you continue to fight with on the matter.

Aaron

[walleye101]

I can better understand C&R only lakes where harvest is totally banned; but I still have a hard time getting over the fact that a C&R person is allowed to kill 5% or 1 in 20 fish (over and over and over) on these lakes without putting the dead fish to good use.

Merk, Maybe I can explain it in a way you can understand.

C&R has been shown in numerous studies to result in a very small percentage of mortality for the fish released. For discussion I will use the 5% mortality example from the study you mention. Very few fish are outright killed during the act of catching and releasing them. The majority of the relatively low level of release mortality occurs post release, many hours or days after handling from stress induced complications or infections. While anglers sometimes claim "that fish is gonna die anyway" in reality we have no idea which fish will fully recover or succumb to delayed mortality.

So, to say the "one in twenty" that died was not put to "good use" is false. To avoid "wasting" the random fish that might die later all fish would need to be harvested. By releasing that fish and 19 others all had a chance to survive, grow and live to be caught another day. The result of releasing 20 isn't so much about the one that didn't make it as it is about the 19 that did. That is why C&R works.

That said C&R isn't for everyone, and there is nothing wrong with harvesting fish. Fisheries can be managed to maximize quality (individual size) or harvest (sustained biomass) but both objectives cannot reasonably be met on the same water. The issue (which objective) isn't biological it is social. The advantage we have in MN, with 1000's of northern pike lakes, is that we shouldn't have to quibble about which objective we manage for. The logical solution is to manage some waters for quality, and others for sustainable harvest and everyone can choose which experience they prefer. The difficulty is when we try provide everything for everyone on every lake in some irrational attempt to be "fair".

[Jameson]

...So, to say the "one in twenty" that died was not put to "good use" is false...

[walleye101]

Good post Jameson, you made my point better than I could. As I said, and you confirmed, C&R is not for everyone. I tend to be much more of a harvest angler myself, but that does not prevent me from understanding the utility of C&R regulations where quality management is the objective.

While I personally prefer to go out and harvest a few fish for a meal, and don't have much interest in pursuing an occasional large fish, I do respect the interest of those who do. Most of them already practice voluntary C&R but the truth is that it is folks like you and I, more interested in harvest, that makes voluntary C&R a noble practice but an ineffective management tool. That is why significant harvest regulations are necessary if we are going to be serious about quality management on some waters.

So, getting back to the topic of this thread..... If there is going to be serious discussion about northern pike management both sides need to come to the table. If either side takes an "All or Nothing" approach, they need to understand and accept that position has a 50/50 chance of ending up with nothing.

Those who have been involved in these discussions at the northern pike workshops would be more productive if they stopped debating whether slot limits work, or if a few big fish are going to eat all the walleye or panfish in a lake. The biology is clear on what it takes to grow large pike, and also clear that a more balanced size distribution and density actually improves the rest of the fish community. These are simply diversionary tactics to avoid the more difficult social issues like how many quality angling opportunities do we need, and how are they best distributed to provide a decent mix of both harvest and quality fishing opportunities.

[merkman]

Those who have been involved in these discussions at the northern pike workshops would be more productive if they stopped debating whether slot limits work

I don't think anyone doubts that allowing fishing by any method is a social issue not a biological one. Most if not all natural resources would be far better off without any impact of the human race.

The problem comes when those who have been involved in these discussions at the northern pike workshops ignore the well documented fact that the current implementation of slot limits do not work for most darkhouse spearing sportsmen(45 of 48 darkhouse spearers are pushed off public waters according to peer reviewed published studies)

These people need to stop ignoring that the current implementation of slot limits are indeed biased against darkhouse spearing sportsmen who wish to help the fishery by harvesting smaller northern pike from these lakes without being made a criminal the same honest mistake of a dead slot limit fish that hook and liners walk away from. To put it in simpler terms, treat darkhouse spearers as you treat hook and liners on these lakes.

I can only imagine the same 45 of 48 ratio of fishermen would be pushed off slot limit lakes, if anglers were held to the same standard as the darkhouse spearer. Unintentionally kill a slot limit northern pike no mater the method; face a criminal record.

There are many fair equitable ways to get this done; but the same old, same old, go somewhere else is not an acceptable alternative.

9 years ago promises were made to only put this current implementation on 60 lakes in Minnesota with a 10 year evaluation period. Fast forward to today (not even out of the 10 year period yet) and according to the long range plan

Currently 106 waters, totaling about 675,111 acres (about 29.5% of the total) are managed with experimental or special regulations.

And guess what, the same old biased implementation still has not been fixed and now we are looking at twice the lakes that have it.