Muskie Anglers Unite

[cjac]

Pardon me as I sidebar for a moment, but this whole sturgeon angle has piqued my interest in this discussion.

I have taken up sturgeon fishing in the past few years as well, so we have a common point Merk, imagine that.....hope that doesn't set off some global disbalance of some sort. LOL

Man, what a blast. The idea of catching a big and powerful and elusive fish is what fuels the interest for me. Fun as hell to catch despite the limited opportunity in our state. I even got one over 70lbs this Fall, too bad I had to drive 300 miles to be in a position to do so. Even better, I got to let it go, let it grow, so maybe 10 years from now and we meet up again it's an 80 or 90lb class fish. Wouldn't that be cool? I'm guessing you'd like a crack at her as well, seeing as it's a new found interest of yours?

In a nutshell, those are the same reasons I chose to fish for muskies: the intrigue of catching a big and powerful and challenging fish.....and to let it go. That's what muskie anglers are looking for, more opportunities to do exactly that.

Your comments about hoping that the popularity of sturgeon fishing doesn't increase can be, and are in my opinion, be seen as being elitist and protective of your said species of interest. Subsitiute "muskie" for "sturgeon" and you are essentially making the same point muskie anglers are.

Do we refer to you as a sturgeon "zealot" (hate that word by the way) now because you like to catch a particluar species of fish but don't want everyone else to partake in it yet you would welcome more waters stocked to do so?

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black......

Regards, Chris

[hanson]

As a predominantly catfisherman and sturgeon angler, I'm smiling that the lowly sturgeon has been brought into this conversation. Who would have guessed it?

Since the Horseshoe Chain is relative to this conversation, one of the issues being looked into is stiffer penalties and enforcement for wanton waste of channel catfish on the Horseshoe Chain. This would be locals and lakeshore owners killing these fish for the sake of them not liking them there. The CO's are well aware of it but handcuffed with the enforcement of it.

[Jameson]

...And for the gentleman with the proposal to stock every MN water once with muskie and see where they hold? Do no more stocking other than that one time? I would agree in a heartbeat, if walleye stocking and every other species was held to the same rule. 1/2 and probably even more of MN walleye opportunities would disappear in a wink along with many other great angling opportunities. Now that would be a very popular way of managing MN's public waters!!...

sarcasm? MN's public waters are for more than just fishing. Perhaps many of those SW MN walleye lakes would start attracting ducks again. Or maybe if we took the money spent on stocking year after year and invested it in creating areas for the fish to reproduce on their own, in the future the fishing would be better than it is now. Now that would be a very popular way of managing MN's public waters!!

[merkman]

cjac

... are in my opinion ...

[cjac]

"I sturgeon fish now, but I am not sure how long I will do that if it continues to gain popularity.

I hate to think how people will ruin that too.

Heck, Canada has the sturgeon on the endangered species list now.

It is only a mater of time...."

Not much embellishment or assumption there......wow.

[setterguy]

Do as I say not as I do Chris, don't you understand?

Jameson - I actually love the habitat idea.

[merkman]

"I sturgeon fish now, but I am not sure how long I will do that if it continues to gain popularity.

I hate to think how people will ruin that too.

Heck, Canada has the sturgeon on the endangered species list now.

It is only a mater of time...."

[polarsusd81]

Merk, this whole topic got out of hand when you jumped in with your anti-muskie propaganda. Site your sources for the scientific data you present.

I merely posted a topic so people would know what was about to air on the news tonight. From the original promo, it looked like another ODN ad gone wrong (in my opinion) but this time with a much larger viewing audience. The idea was to get people to contact the station to ask for fair representation from all sides of the issue. From the looks of the KSTP Musky Story Teaser it may have worked. This teaser was posted just before 11 AM today, and I have a feeling it was the result of the many emails sent to the news room.

All I wanted was a fair story rather than a sensational one sided piece sure to scare the bejeezus out of those that don't know any better.

[setterguy]

+1

[Esox_Magnum]

I wanna live on a lake so I can own it to LMFAO I think to have a say in what happens to a lakes fish status a lake assosiation member must hold a current fishing license and pass a general fishing knoledge test to even be heard.

[thrax]

Jameson - the landowners (not lake owners) who oppose muskie stocking are the same people in many instances (not all) who have wrecked and destroyed shoreline/spawning habitat in ALL the lakes for many species of fish. Being so concerned about having a weed free swimming area, a gorgeous green mowed lawn treated with pesticides and herbicides and fertilizer, these are things that have destroyed habitat, not stocking muskies.

I am also all for re-creating habitat in lakes for spawning and such. Who's going to do the work in all the lakes to restore the habitat though? Do you really think the money spent on stocking would do much? Are the landowners going to get on board, maybe change their ways of thinking and do it on their own properties? Would land have to be purchased? Most state owned shoreline is not wildly developed or had its shoreline habitat destroyed. I believe there has actually been some research on Leech Lake about muskie spawning specifically and land has actually been purchased to protect these areas and keep them free of development and changes to that delicate habitat.

In many many waters, and not just SW MN lakes, fisheries are maintained by stocking. Walleyes are not just in jeopardy in that part of the state, they are in jeopardy in all areas of the state and require massive overall supplemental stocking to maintain population levels and provide harvest opportunities. Further north here, the lakes with the best walleye fishing are the MUSKIE lakes because those muskies also bring systems into balance, helping control perch and other baitfish populations that otherwise prey on things like walleye and panfish fry, thereby limiting natural population/reproduction.

[DTro]

wow, all the pomp and circumstance for that???

yawn....

[WallyGator12000]

Nice job Shawn, you represented us well. I was very nervous when I saw the previews, they definitely had a slant to it against musky stocking. I was pleasantly surprised to see they let both sides say their piece. I still cannot get over the landowners who think they own the lake or should be able to decide what happens with it...ridiculous

[Muskiefool]

Thanks Shawn, I thought it you did a very good job. I wish they would have talked to the local area contacts as well.

I like Muskies more every single day.

[DTro]

It's almost as if they rewrote their story after getting emails and interviewing Shawn.

[cbrooks]

The story seem pretty unbias to me. Got to hear both sides.

[DTro]

For those that missed it:

http://kstp.com/news/stories/S1824406.shtml?cat=1

[10,000 Casts]

time will tell but I would say that only helped the stocking.

Nice Job Shawn. Without you, that would have been a tilt in a negative light.

I wonder if someone could talk to a sample of those 800 people that were uneducated and more than likely strongarmed and mislead to sign the petition, and explain to them how good the fishing is in other Muskie lakes and how their property values will go way up in within 10 years.

[Scott M]

Yep, hardly worth DVR'ing. Go into commercial break telling people that stocking decisions are being made by nonresidents, spend all week running promos telling people that the DNR isn't listening to its citizens, and then come back and actually talk to both sides and the DNR and it appears that comments are 8-1 in favor of stocking. Lots of bark and no bite.

[merkman]

it appears that comments are 8-1 in favor of stocking.

Looks good on the surface.

Should be OK as long as no one takes a closer look.

The article was pretty clear, the decision has been made there is nothing that is going to change it.

They have the data that supports the decision (20,000 + people responded from 20 different states and Canada... no asian isp's so we can be pretty confident the web poll was not gamed so it must be valid.)

Bottom line, those who don't like it deal with it or go somewhere else.

Cram it down their throat then complain that no one likes the lowly muskie.

Business as usual.... carry on.

[Willy]

Further north here, the lakes with the best walleye fishing are the MUSKIE lakes because those muskies also bring systems into balance, helping control perch and other baitfish populations that otherwise prey on things like walleye and panfish fry, thereby limiting natural population/reproduction.

Really? I wouldn't say that. The best eyes lakes are not always the big waters that have skies in them. Muskies don't make anything better there is absolutely ZERO conclusive proof out there that overall this is the case. For that matter I don't think they make fishing for other species any worse either. On a lake by lake basis, I believe it can be true either way.

People don't like the idea of Muskies being stocked, not because of the fact there will be muskies in the lake. It is because of the attitude of ALOT of musky guys and the fact that the DNR let themselves be pushed around by Muskies Inc. How about if the DNR came in and said they are gonna net and kill all the Muskies out of Minnetonka because "There are so many walleye fisherman that want it done from out of the area?"

You city boys would be mad too. Like I said, not the fish, the arrogance and behind the scenes politics are what puss people off. Bottom line, $$ talks, [PoorWordUsage] walks.

[Musky Buck]

We're the whipping boys boys. What's the reason some of the belly achers don't put there lake place for sale if they are unhappy with muskies being in "their lake" ? There are thousands of places for sale, but I'm going to save my lake by goodness, who cares about all the children that are taking up muskie fishing, I'm paying taxes on it so it's mine, all mine and heck after opening day I don't even fish but that doesn't matter, my lake, my lake, my lake that is stocked with a piece of everyones dollars who cares, it's my lake.

[Kodiak]

what we really should do is make our own online petition to stock MORE muskies and submit that to kstp, i bet we can get more signatures than Jim Eagan has in about 1 day.

[Kodiak]

here is the petition, i am going to make sure kstp and the dnr get this.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/moremuskies/

thanks for your support!

[Nick Kuhn]

Really? I wouldn't say that. The best eyes lakes are not always the big waters that have skies in them. Muskies don't make anything better there is absolutely ZERO conclusive proof out there that overall this is the case. For that matter I don't think they make fishing for other species any worse either. On a lake by lake basis, I believe it can be true either way.

I actually took a full county in Wisconsin and did walleye/per acre in both Muskie lakes and non-muskie lakes. This is what I came up with: