MENU
Lake-Link Home
LOGIN
Lake-Link
LOG IN

Why do we still live by rules made in 1898??

4/23/14 @ 11:02 AM
ORIGNAL POST
bt
User since 5/7/02
Why does WI still have closed gamefish seasons? Good fisheries management practices didn't start to develop till the 1950's and became what is today in the 70's and '80's.

Now that anglers are more well educated why on earth are we still living by rules that are 115 years old?

There's only two states left with completely closed gamefish seasons with minor exceptions; MN and WI. Are 48 other states wrong? There used to be over 25 states with closed gamefish seasons, why are there less now?

It's not sound scientific practice, it's social tradition.

Read this and tell me the fisheries science practices were more sound then, than now; http://books.google.com/books?id=HL8wAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA1347&lpg=PA1347&dq=1897+Wisconsin+closed+gamefish+seasons&source=bl&ots=Lt09ZH19wz&sig=jErRqSpTRcuWgSNcbedCw7ZtyMY&hl=en&sa=X&ei=X-FXU5esApStyASSi4KQAg&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=1897%20Wisconsin%20closed%20gamefish%20seasons&f=false

DISPLAYING 1 TO 10 OF 33 POSTS
FILTER OPTIONS
5/7/14 @ 11:42 AM
scrub
User since 8/15/06
You are right about invasive cycles but when you get rid of fish that eat rustys what do you think will happen? The rustys just say we had our time so no more breeding explosions? When I'm talking about removing fish that eat rustys I'm talking about removing acres of fish. I figure conservatively our crew removed 12.5ac of lmb from our 1500ac chain last yr. Get lots of people on the same body of water doing the same thing and it will make a difference. Keeping fish that eat rustys is the only thing I can control so that's my part I have accepted. I can't make anyone stock more eg walleyes than already get put in there (if it even works anyways) so I do what I can

5/7/14 @ 9:17 AM
bt
User since 5/7/02
Also we are finding that good sound fisheries management practices involves patience from the community. Nothing can be fixed overnight, and in some cases fisheries may never be again what they were.

5/7/14 @ 9:15 AM
bt
User since 5/7/02
Scrub you can fight mother nature but you'll never win. Like we're seeing with zebra mussels, or even fish stocking that establish populations. There is almost always a boom, bust, then level population cycle. We would have to eradicate rusty crayfish and reintroduce to have that happen. Now that it's been 25years+ we have found that even though native shellfish habitat is smaller, all species are living together without killing off the others.

We are seeing zebra mussels and even gobies starting to go through a crash cycle on the shallower parts of the great lakes, most noticeably is western basin of Erie and LSC. With this bust cycle we are seeing smallmouth size structure shrink, and walleye size structure go up almost instantly. With more available planktons minnow and shad populations are exploding. That is leading to a more natural walleye habitat preference. We will see if the water gets any more color to it in the next few years, but this may be a boom for walleye fishing in Erie.

Even invasive species have carrying capacities, about the only invasive that I see hurting water quality by tearing up aquatic grasses, and limiting spawning habitats is all the different types of carp out there. We will see though how this all balances out in the next 10 years or so.

5/6/14 @ 10:54 PM
scrub
User since 8/15/06
Bring back rustys by keeping every bass you legally can. More rustys equal less centrachid habitat. Get rid of their habitat they will suffer just as the walleyes are now suffering from too many weeds. Centrachids need weeds to survive walleyes do not. Tip the scales back in favor of walleyes

5/6/14 @ 8:22 PM
denesox
denesox
User since 2/1/06
"Yes, although rare, now, there was a record amount of stocking done."

There is A record of stocking being done, stocking was never done at a record amount. Records, meaning, in this context, a historical reference of the past.

Even in the past, the number of lakes stocked were always small. Like I posted, in the HISTORY of stocking, only a very small percentage of lakes were ever stocked with bass in any recent historical context. They did indeed, quickly prove to be self sustaining with very limited needs for additional stocking across the board. Wink

Excellent points bt!

5/6/14 @ 8:15 PM
bt
User since 5/7/02
Another biologist friend and I were talking about the kill a bass and a walleye magically appears in its spot mentality that northern Wisconsinites share.

Fact is carrying capacities have changes from eutrophication(aging) of lakes in the north. Most blame for the advanced aging of the lakes is population increases in humans. We have increased sediment runoff, fertilizer use, and transplanting of invasive aquatic plants.

If you guys really want to see walleye come back, bring your lakes back to the way they were. Unfortunately reversing mother nature is damn near impossible.

As a lake ages like many of the late mesotrophic to early eutrophic lakes in the northern parts of the state, bass populations will explode as cover becomes more readily available and forage bases change from cool water species(cisco) to warm water species(centrarchids).

5/6/14 @ 7:06 PM
lawdog616
lawdog616
User since 1/20/04
Casting, I agree seasons and regulations are needed. That is why I suggest we create a catch and release season on walleye from the May opener to the June 1st. Everyone brags the catch and release for bass and musky, why should we not do the same for walleye? The answer is simple, it is all about economics. Tourist come to catch and keep walleye, and they would not come to catch and release walleye. Until we show people the great bass fishery and attract those tourist, nothing will change unfortunately.

5/6/14 @ 6:09 PM
denesox
denesox
User since 2/1/06
"Bass are/were commonly stocked in many waters. I randomly picked Waukesha county and then Vilas county to get a gauge for waters both south and north and within the first 4 or 5 lakes I looked at in each county there was record of LMB stocking having been done. Its more common than you think"

Exceptionally misleading comment there that points people beyond what the truth actually is. The argument here is that they are the least stocked game fish in the state, and stockings are rare, which is the truth. I went through every single lake in both Vilas and Waukesha counties and basically what I found is that that post would only be legit if it were still the late 70's, or at least the 90's which was the end of the bass stocking experiment.

In Waukesha county roughly 80% of all water bodies have never seen a bass stocked (80 listed with only 17 ever seeing bass stockings). Even more telling is the fact that since 2000 there has been exactly one stocking of bass. That was in Big M in 2001 (there have historically been more pike and even walleye stocked than bass in Big M). Since 2001 there has been ZERO bass stocked anywhere in Waukesha county's waters.

In Vilas county the numbers were even more dramatic. Here 88% of lakes have NEVER in history seen a single bass stocking, with exactly one stocking after 2000. 262 lakes listed, only 32 ever saw a bass stocking in history. That last stocking was Robinson lake, 2002.

So since 2002, or the last 12 years, there has not been one single bass stocked in either Vilas or Waukesha county, despite your claim that "its more common than you think"...its CLEARLY not...its actually LESS common than one might think. Stocking reports you posted show this.

If you really look at the dates, the 70's were the time when bass were stocked the most. There was a slight resurgence in the 90's, but if you look at the numbers, most of those later stockings were actually quite small, very often consisting of less than 1000 fish and not repeated, with many of those lakes only stocking 3-500 total bass. The last of those stocked bass in these counties are near the end of their lives, IF they managed to live this long, and the vast majority of bass ever stocked are long dead.

When going through the stocking reports for every lake in those counties its clear as a bell that bass are in fact the least stocked game fish (actually the least stocked fish listed). Down south pike comprised the biggest stockings, up north its walleye and musky, with trout being stocked inland in heavy numbers and a wide variety of places (where do inland trout lie on the state's list of popular fish...at the bottom I would bet).

Yeah, there IS a "record" of bass stockings, but its not in the present, its in the historical records of the past.

Again, our bass fisheries are booming, self sustaining and do not benefit from a closed season. Bass limits are being lifted in many places to attempt to reduce their (so often) exploding numbers. Bass popularity may be behind walleye, but its ahead of all the other game fish, and unlike walleye, there are far more lakes conducive to bass than there are conducive for walleye in this state.

5/4/14 @ 9:14 AM
esoxcpr
User since
Right in the Wisconsin Black Bass Management Plan it states that 18% of Wisconsin licensed anglers list Bass as their favorite fish, which is a far second behind Walleye which is 31%. Muskies come in at about 12% of Wisconsin anglers listing them as their favorite fish.

LM Bass are known to occur in about 65% of the states waters, so they are more than appropriately represented for the percentage of anglers who pursue them. In other words there are far more opportunities available for Bass than there are anglers who target that fish.

Muskies occur in about 5% of the states waters so there aren't as many opportunities present as the percentage of anglers who pursue them. The number of Musky waters is about 7% short of 'equal representation' when compared to the percentage of anglers who target that fish.

Walleyes occur in about 7% of the states waters and the state is woefully short of Walleye opportunities when compared to the percentage of anglers who pursue them. The number of Walleye waters is 24% short of 'equal representation' when compared to the number of anglers who target that fish

All of the above is a big consideration as to why you see a large effort to keep and expand walleye and musky opportunities by use of artificial stocking and habitat improvement and you see very little for Bass. It's because that's what the majority of the DNR's customers want to see.

11/17/10 @ 11:40 PM
esoxcpr
User since
Bass are / were commonly stocked in many waters. I randomly picked Waukesha County and then Vilas County to get a gauge for waters in both the south and north and within the first 4 or 5 lakes I looked at in each County there was record of LMB stocking having been done. It's more common than you think.

Wisconsin Fish Stocking Database

DISPLAYING 1 TO 10 OF 33 POSTS
Advertise here
Advertise here
Please take a moment to visit our sponsors. Without them we would not be here.