Lake-Link Home

Angler Preferences

10/18/19 @ 8:53 AM
User since 1/27/10

Greetings fellow anglers.  I thought I would start a discussion on angler preferences.  

A fairly frequent theme I often observe is oppositional viewpoints regarding high minimum length limits for gamefish.  They are often times mistakenly viewed as as being prescribed to a lake to solely provide a trophy angling opportunity; when in actuality the high minimum length limit may be applied to provide an action/C&R opportunity.

Balancing angling opportunities with science, social and economic objectives can be a challenge.  What's your preference?  Catch & Release, Harvest or Both?  Why & where?

10/19/19 @ 8:51 AM
MEMBER since 6/15/01

I'm not a fan of stocking Lake Geneva with musky... was a lake where a true trophy northern could be had... we won't know if they will be impacted, but soon... no reason to stock it with musky except to provide a destination near the border, imo

10/19/19 @ 6:39 AM
Paranoid Percher
User since 8/19/18

I LOVE KEEPING THOSE 25inch and over walleyes in the bay you smoke them tasted just like ham

10/18/19 @ 1:58 PM
User since 10/24/17

I think it would be tough to come up with a default slot limit that worked well statewide. Too many factors such as size of the water body, water fertility, genetics, harvest rates,  natural reproduction, etc that would make it tough to pull off.   The idea behind the slot is you're protecting the size and age class that has the most successful spawning rate.  If natural reproduction is low and the fishery only exist due to stocking the slot serves no purpose. Or Lets just say they're is statewide walleye slot of  18"-21" for whatever reason the walleyes in the lake seldom exceed 20" so there isn't any science behind not harvesting that fish.   States tried the one size fits all approach with statewide minimum lengths for decades and they didn't provide the protection that lakes with trophy potential needed and in some instances were too restrictive and allowed lakes to become over-populated with a bunch of stunted fish.  I see the same thing happening with a default slot limit.  While not completely immune from politics and economic factors there is some science behind how the DNR establishes size or slot limits as well as bag limits.   If person wants to find out the regs for body of water it doesnt take much effort.  

10/18/19 @ 1:01 PM
User since 2/16/17

I realize the 40 in size limit was not put into place for trophy fishery in Big Muskego Lake. But in my mind and the eyes of many others it is not doing what it is intended to do which was to decrease carp population,  increase native plants and improve water quality. The only thing it has done has helped get the lake out of balance. Northern pike fishery is getting worse with fewer, smaller and skinnier fish. You cannot go 10 years or more with no harvest of northerns and have a healthy fishery.  The 40 in limit gives the angler no choice in harvesting a fish or not. It forces catch and release only.2 fish and 26 inches gave the angler a choice to keep a fish or two or catch and release. Wish this failed and flawed experiment would end now. Go back to 2 and 26 give anglers a choice and have a healthier better fishery like it was. Sometimes the dnr has to admit when there flawed experiments and flawed science failed and move on. Not all science is good science. Just cause it says it works in a book or on another lake doesn't mean it will work on a shallow marsh like Big Muskego.  It wasn't broke to begin with so stop always trying to fix it.

10/18/19 @ 11:26 AM
User since 6/20/01

Keep in mind the OP is the person who is responsible for the Big Muskego 40" debacle...

10/18/19 @ 9:36 AM
User since 12/22/04

All of the best lakes I have ever fished for C&R, Trophy or Harvest have always had a slot limit.     Minimum Size limits is a completely ineffective way to manage a fish population unless they want to set them so high, no one keeps any fish.     The fact the entire state has not gone to a default slot limit, which would make education and enforcement much easier, just shows how ineffective the WIDNR truly is.   This is really not debatable unless politicians are putting other priorities ahead of general good.    

Advertise here
Advertise here
Please take a moment to visit our sponsors. Without them we would not be here.