New Winter Muskie Closure

[Scott M]

Since it sounds like MN is going to close Musky fishing December 1 (law hasn't passed but most likely will is what those in the know are saying), I was just looking for some opinions on the matter. Please follow forum policy and don't make it personal or pile on (I'd like this thread to stay here and not get moved to Outdoor Discussions!). I'm just curious what the views out there are.

Personally, I was hoping to get to try it some time in the future (ice fishing muskies). From the outside looking in, it seems to be a resource that isn't really pursued in the winter so I'm not sure if it's preventing too many people from killing a bunch of fish if they weren't being targeted anyways.

In most lakes where there are muskies, there are also pike, so it is going to be tough to prove intent to catch muskies. So that loophole exists for those that really want to catch them, ethics be darned.

I understand the spirit of the law, that the state wants to protect a trophy fishery since winter weather and time out of the water is just brutal to a fish of that size.

Honestly I haven't tried it and probably won't get to now but if one accidentally takes one of my tip ups on 'Tonka or Leech I won't be broken-hearted either. So IMO, nothing really changes for me but any ice musky trips are out of the question now.

Penny for your thoughts...

[TBone1]

I have caught a few incidental muskies first ice and they all were released no worse for wear. I believe that most that are caught thru the ice are caught during the first ice period, and conditions typically are not that brutal, it would be more the mishandling of the fish, which is going to happen whether it's a cold December day or a steaming hot July day with water temps in the high 70's. I also believe that the number of muskies caught and kept during the winter is relatively low compared to the summer months. A better idea would have been to restrict possession, catch and release only. oh yeah, who is going to tell the muskies not to feed on that shiner minnow that is intended for a Walleye? In any case the enforcement of this law will be extremely difficult and would be a waste of a CO's time to try to enforce. With "global warming" as it si I was hoping to target muskies in the future into December, nothing would tickle me more than to tell the wife on Christmas day that I'm going Muskie fishing.Another stupid Minnesota Law that has not been thought thru.JMO

[sheephead2]

It was the Mn Muskie alliance and Muskie Inc that push for the closing of Muskie...It prevents people from Harvesting the fish through the Ice... So now it is the law so people have to release them if the are out pan fishing.....

[setterguy]

Here is my take,

Minnesota has the best Muskie fishery in the country, a lot of that is due to the efforts of the MN DNR, Muskies Inc. and Biologists. If they think this will help protect the current fishery or make it even better I will go along with their ideas, until they prove to me that they don't know what they are doing.

[Meat-Run]

Quote:

---

It was the Mn Muskie alliance and Muskie Inc that push for the closing of Muskie...It prevents people from Harvesting the fish through the Ice... So now it is the law so people have to release them if the are out pan fishing.....

---

sheephead2,

not all muskie inc. chapters or people pushed for the Dec. 1 closure. I for one think is a joke and some folks in the TC are the ones behind this major push. If you really look at the big picture more fish are caught, hurt, or killed not intentionally in the summer months than in the ice or winter months. Not to many people do targeting muskies in the winter but the ones who do are serious folks that DO take the extra effort to catch and release with the most careful intentions. I know for a fact that muskies can be targeted all through the month of December in open water and hard water and have little threat to the overall population.

I hope AWH chimes in on this but I think its a joke and just not right to think by closing the season Dec. 1st your really going to make a difference anyways. This is another example of the MN DNR not think things threw and wasting more tax payers money on another law that isn't neccessary (see portable shelter license).

I fish a water system that stays open allot longer than most lakes and feel it doesn't warrant enough "evidence" to justify an early closure.

thats my .02

"PO" in Brainerd

mr

[RK]

Hiya -

I think one of the main reasons behind this was to help protect some of the Metro lakes, which do get a lot of harvest early ice, of pure strain fish, and especially hybrids.

What I wish they would have done is the same thing they did with smallmouth - make the season C&R only after a certain date, say, Dec 1. There's precedent for it in the regs already with the Sept 15 smallmouth closure, so it'd not be something completely unheard of.

It is a catch-22. You protect the resource one place (a worthy goal) but you end up taking away angling opportunity somewhere else. A classic example of the old political axiom: every law has unintended consequences.

Cheers,

Rob Kimm

[sheephead2]

From what I understand Muskie Inc tried The DNR wouldn't go C&R on the reg at the time of discussion

[Nick Kuhn]

Ski's are frustrating enough to catch on a perfect day, who wants to go after them when it's well below freezing?

J/K though, I know some of you are dedicated. It'd be nice to see at least one body of water open to catch and release in the winter months. I like what they've done to Pool 2, catch and release all year for bass walleye and sauger. Maybe they should extend that to ski's for you guys (granted they'd be nearly impossible to find in there). Then again you could "accidentally" catch them there too I suppose.

[AWH]

Quote:

---

What I wish they would have done is the same thing they did with smallmouth - make the season C&R only after a certain date, say, Dec 1. There's precedent for it in the regs already with the Sept 15 smallmouth closure, so it'd not be something completely unheard of.

---

Agreed 100%. If this option was considered, I'd be very interested to hear an explanation why they were against it. I can't think of a logical reason why this wouldn't be the best route to go. But if there's more information out there to explain that, I'd love to hear it.

That being said, if it's going to protect and enhance the future of our musky fisheries, I'm all for it. I just have to wonder if there would be BETTER alternatives.

Aaron

[Jason Durham]

Well said Rob.

[Muskiefool]

We needed something in So. MN, French had several big fish harvested over the last few years and it made up a large portion of the total population of fish that size according to population estimates, also fish are being tossed into the ditches, I suppose after people find out a 36 isn't legal, C&R would have possibly worked like Rob said it's a real Catch-22, I know some guys enjoy the river and maybe C&R on open water and closed through the ice would have been better but then you have more complications, I hope all the MI chapters can work together in the future so we can come to a better understanding of all of our needs and wants.

[lucy1205]

I also would have to argue that in the winter the metro gets fished hard by panfish anglers who have never caught big fish before, and certainly not through the ice before. These people are more apt to put em on the wall. I guess if it is not a law, more power to them. That's why those who oppose winter muskie fishing through the ice should prouldly stand up and fight so that they can argue there point. I mean look at Bryant, French, Cedar, all the little lakes in the cities like Cedar, Calhoun, and Many more and you will see winter harvest for muskies. All I am saying is whats next, No walts through the ice because of pressure, No more sunnies and bass because of pressure. After all, Crappies and sunnies spawn and there seasons never close. Walleyes and panfish to me are just as valued as Muskies even though I love to fish muskie. Why not let them all go. Order a pizza or buy some fish from rainbow. Or keep a few that are reasonable for harvest and get on with life.

[Andrew Erickson]

so is the season officially over now?

[lucy1205]

Who knows. One guy says he asks the DNR and it is, the next says he talks to the DNR and says it aint. Truth is some of the DNR don't even know. They can never answer the questions I ask them. I think the DNR are from mars or something, it's just that look in there eyes and that nothingness in there head. I think it would have been if it wern't for all these pesky river rats that muskie fish open water year round. I won't know tell there a definitive, reliable source saying it is. Who ices skees anyway. To much work and to many norts involved.

[AWH]

Jerry Younk of the DNR said this past Saturday that the season closure would be announced with their news releases on December 10th and that the season would officially close this year on December 15th. Going forward in all future years, the season will close on December 1st.

Lucy1205, no need to worry about “what’s next” in regard to the musky season closure when it comes to walleyes, panfish, etc. Those are species that are heavily utilized during the winter months and are seen as a food fish, whereas muskies are seen and managed as a trophy/sports fishery.

I’m going to throw out some completely hypothetical numbers to argue “why” closing the musky season is a positive thing. During the open water season, there are a lot of people targeting muskies, let’s say that 3% of all muskies caught are kept during the open water season.

Now, through your own example, metro lakes get hit hard by panfish anglers who have never caught big fish before and certainly through the ice, and may be more apt to put one on the wall. (First of all, I would suggest a graphite reproduction. The fish can be put on the wall and still swim away. But that’s not the point here.) More hypothetical numbers….very few people target muskies during the winter months. Therefore, a much greater percentage that are caught through the ice are caught by non-musky anglers than during the open water months. As a result, a far greater percentage are going to be killed. Maybe it’s 30% of all fish caught are killed.

Again, these are completely hypothetical numbers, but the relevancy remains the same. In these above numbers, of the total number of fish caught, 10 times more end up dead during the hard water months than during the open water months. If a far greater percentage of fish caught from December 1st to the end of February end up dead than during the open water months, it warrants change. Especially when we are talking about a fish like a musky that can not sustain a large percentage of harvest. Personally, I would have preferred a catch and release only season during that time for several reasons. But the change to a closed season is still a positive one with what has been happening during the winter months in Minnesota.

Aaron

[lucy1205]

Dude. That was my point. What I was trying to say is, Who says Muskie are more of a trophy fish then sunnies or walleyes. Yes I fish muskies heavily in the summer and let them all go but a guy should do the same with other species. We need to face the fact that jumbo perch are almost wiped off the face of the planet because of the old 100 perch limit. Now the perch limit is cut way down but we have 10 fold more anglers pumping cash in to fish them. Flocking to Northern MN and to SD. Listen I love muskies but care just as much about Smallies, Perch, Northern Pike, Sturgeon, Catfish, Walleyes, Hell even Carp and Sheephead. Look at the huge bass growing now in central and southern Mn. I catch multiple seven pounders a year now when I use to regard that as a monster.

[AWH]

Quote:

---

What I was trying to say is, Who says Muskie are more of a trophy fish then sunnies or walleyes.

---

I think the way they are managed by the DNR says they are more of a trophy fish than sunnies and walleyes, not to mention how the majority of anglers (that target them) treat each of these species. Sunnies and walleyes are viewed as a table food. Muskies are seen as a trophy/sport fish.

I do agree with what you said about other species. I think across the board (especially with more anglers on the water all the time) that we need to be more selective with what we harvest. The days of keeping limits of fish day after day needs to be a thing of the past.

Smallmouth and sturgeon, I think, are the closest comparisons to muskies in MN with how they are managed. Smallies have an open season where harvest is seen as ok (per the regulations). But for the majority of the year, it's catch and release only. In other words, managed as more of a trophy/protected fishery?

Sturgeon? It's a completely closed season other than border waters where it's protected by a very short season. A fish that's protected by a tag system and a limit of just one fish per season says this fish is also managed as a trophy fishery.

Per the MN DNR, their long range management plan for muskies is worded as such: "Provide unique, high quality angling opportunities for trophy muskellunge." It does leave it up for interpretation what is meant by a "trophy", but they make it very clear that muskies in the state are managed in this manner, unlike species like walleyes and panfish.

Quote:

---

Now the perch limit is cut way down but we have 10 fold more anglers pumping cash in to fish them.

---

I think you underestimate how many musky anglers are in the state and how much money they spend to target them. Granted, certain waters in the state see very heavy pressure from people targeting perch in the winter months. But the "10 fold more anglers" is way off base. The state estimates that we have roughly 140,000 people that fish for muskies in MN between both resident and non-resident anglers. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong on that figure. But I know it's in the ballpark.) In 2002, we had 1,168,406 licensed anglers in the state (both resident and non resident). That figure is taken from the MN DNR HSOforum.

Maybe I misinterpreted your point about the perch fishery and that it was not in comparison to the number of people targeting muskies?

Getting off the subject a bit, but still related, here's another interesting tidbit from the DNR HSOforum regarding the most heavily harvested fish annually in the state. Definitely shows that walleyes and panfish are not viewed as trophy fish.

Walleye - 35 million pounds

Northern Pike - 3.2 million pounds

Panfish - 64 million pounds

Aaron