Driftless Trout Anglers

Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

3 Pages<123>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
s.t.fanatic  
#11 Posted : Wednesday, February 21, 2018 7:44:02 PM(UTC)
s.t.fanatic
Rank: Dragon Fly

Joined: 3/24/2010(UTC)
Posts: 676
Location: Altura

Thanks: 40 times
Was thanked: 11 time(s) in 11 post(s)
Originally Posted by: NBrevitz Go to Quoted Post
I doubt it would hurt the southern stuff a bit, and I do think its ridiculous that MN opens for harvest 3 weeks before WI.



Just for clarification, are you suggesting that Minnesota opens for harvest to soon?
NBrevitz  
#12 Posted : Wednesday, February 21, 2018 8:06:30 PM(UTC)
NBrevitz
Rank: Super Fly

Joined: 3/16/2013(UTC)
Posts: 1,342
Man
Location: Lake Elmo, Mn

Thanks: 48 times
Was thanked: 34 time(s) in 29 post(s)
Originally Posted by: s.t.fanatic Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: NBrevitz Go to Quoted Post
I doubt it would hurt the southern stuff a bit, and I do think its ridiculous that MN opens for harvest 3 weeks before WI.



Just for clarification, are you suggesting that Minnesota opens for harvest to soon?


No, I think it’s funny that WI opens later than a state with harsher winters and less water to spread pressure out. Michigan also opens earlier than Wisconsin and has an abundance of water, especially in the lower peninsula, that’s always open. I think an April 15th-ish Opener for Driftless and Central Sands wouldn’t be detrimental.
"I fish because I love to: Because only in the woods can I find solitude without loneliness."
thanks 1 user thanked NBrevitz for this useful post.
s.t.fanatic on 2/21/2018(UTC)
WI-fly  
#13 Posted : Wednesday, February 21, 2018 11:47:45 PM(UTC)
WI-fly
Rank: May Fly

Joined: 9/19/2015(UTC)
Posts: 476
Man
Location: La Crosse, WI

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 21 time(s) in 15 post(s)
If they started the keep season earlier here in the SW part of WI, I don't think it would change the overall trout population at all. We have plenty of fish, and not many fishers even like to keep them.

And if any of you screenshot this and send to Roger Kerr, you will have consequences. I already have plenty of mail from him about regulations and the trout population back in 1976. Those consequences will be that I list you as a board member of Coulee Region TU and list your address. His mail is polite and non-threatening, but dear lord, the man likes to write and lick envelopes.
=============
Curt Rees
Coulee Region Trout Unlimited
Catch fish, have a good time, protect the resource.
CRTU Facebook
CRTU Instagram
trapper  
#14 Posted : Thursday, February 22, 2018 12:47:43 AM(UTC)
trapper
Rank: Super Fly

Joined: 3/24/2010(UTC)
Posts: 2,165
Location: West Fork

Thanks: 4 times
Was thanked: 24 time(s) in 20 post(s)
Sadly, I have not seen the latest issue of WON
My newest Trout dog made the last issue.

Many folks want to fish my area before the bugs, wild parsnip and stream side plants get over their head.

Leave written comments on either website or at meeting.

And yes,WIDNER does monitor this forum.
Why? Because we are DTA
Get Reel
JGF  
#15 Posted : Thursday, February 22, 2018 1:09:47 AM(UTC)
JGF
Rank: Midge

Joined: 5/4/2016(UTC)
Posts: 76
Man
United States
Location: Wisconsin

Thanks: 4 times
Was thanked: 14 time(s) in 11 post(s)
Originally Posted by: William Schlafer Go to Quoted Post
I would agree that the eco-systems between the northern and southern parts of the state are different and should be managed in a way that recognizes the differences of those environments. It would be good to hear what our DNR scientists have to say on the matter.


While I don't disagree and maybe enough time has passed but there was a ton of complaining about the "old" early season because streams in the Driftless were open and others weren't so "everyone was coming to the Driftless and catching our fish".

Biologically, it makes sense. Socially, it may not be so easy.

Guillermo  
#16 Posted : Thursday, February 22, 2018 1:12:39 AM(UTC)
Guillermo
Rank: May Fly

Joined: 6/25/2013(UTC)
Posts: 423
Location: Wisconsin

Thanks: 18 times
Was thanked: 24 time(s) in 22 post(s)
Brevitz, regarding trophy regs/special regs on freestoners, its been tried before. On a relatively famous river. It worked well. Very well. The average size of Brookies increased exponentially in a relatively short period of time. But those regs went away due to pressure from locals. The size structure unfortunately detoriated after that.


Trapper, that was a nice article in the last WON. Heck of a brookie Mr. Small caught.
NBrevitz  
#17 Posted : Thursday, February 22, 2018 2:00:51 AM(UTC)
NBrevitz
Rank: Super Fly

Joined: 3/16/2013(UTC)
Posts: 1,342
Man
Location: Lake Elmo, Mn

Thanks: 48 times
Was thanked: 34 time(s) in 29 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Guillermo Go to Quoted Post
Brevitz, regarding trophy regs/special regs on freestoners, its been tried before. On a relatively famous river. It worked well. Very well. The average size of Brookies increased exponentially in a relatively short period of time. But those regs went away due to pressure from locals. The size structure unfortunately detoriated after that.


God I f*cking hate people...
Let’s just have 1/2 the rivers go to a bag of 10, and the other half go to a bag of 2 under 10”. If they rape their half and the fish are stunted, tough shit...
This is coming from someone who’s filleting fish as I type this. Why can’t we have trophy streams too? Is a 15 inch Brookie worthless if you have to let it go?
"I fish because I love to: Because only in the woods can I find solitude without loneliness."
NBrevitz  
#18 Posted : Thursday, February 22, 2018 2:37:17 AM(UTC)
NBrevitz
Rank: Super Fly

Joined: 3/16/2013(UTC)
Posts: 1,342
Man
Location: Lake Elmo, Mn

Thanks: 48 times
Was thanked: 34 time(s) in 29 post(s)
Guillermo, we’re talking about special regs, I think we don’t need to look any further than the Canadian tribs to Superior. With a bag of 1 over 22 inches, the average size of the resident fish is outstanding...
"I fish because I love to: Because only in the woods can I find solitude without loneliness."
Guillermo  
#19 Posted : Thursday, February 22, 2018 4:08:35 AM(UTC)
Guillermo
Rank: May Fly

Joined: 6/25/2013(UTC)
Posts: 423
Location: Wisconsin

Thanks: 18 times
Was thanked: 24 time(s) in 22 post(s)
Originally Posted by: NBrevitz Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: Guillermo Go to Quoted Post
Brevitz, regarding trophy regs/special regs on freestoners, its been tried before. On a relatively famous river. It worked well. Very well. The average size of Brookies increased exponentially in a relatively short period of time. But those regs went away due to pressure from locals. The size structure unfortunately detoriated after that.


God I f*cking hate people...
Let’s just have 1/2 the rivers go to a bag of 10, and the other half go to a bag of 2 under 10”. If they rape their half and the fish are stunted, tough shit...
This is coming from someone who’s filleting fish as I type this. Why can’t we have trophy streams too? Is a 15 inch Brookie worthless if you have to let it go?


The other thing is that these regulations were only on a 5 or 6 mile stretch of a river with over 40 miles of trout water and the rest of it had very favorable harvest regs. The special reg section was strategically enacted in the section containing the largest amount and highest quantity of spawning gravel and many spring upwellings. The size and numbers of brook trout increased exponentially. It was around this time they quit stocking Browns there and it’s been a strictly wild fishery ever since. Today there’s still plenty of Brookies in the upper half of the river but you’d be lucky to catch one above 11 inches. For example, I fished it this past September and caught countless Brookies, none of them eclipsing 9 inches.
rschmidt  
#20 Posted : Thursday, February 22, 2018 12:27:06 PM(UTC)
rschmidt
Rank: May Fly

Joined: 1/16/2015(UTC)
Posts: 460
Location: West WI

Thanks: 15 times
Was thanked: 30 time(s) in 26 post(s)
I don't understand the under 12" harvest rule. I believe that although the intent may be to increase harvest of smaller fish, I bet harvest decreased on almost all streams with that regulation. I bet it is having the exact opposite outcome. I harvest during some of the legal period and I don't spend near the time on under 12" streams that I used to before the reg change. R
Users browsing this topic
3 Pages<123>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Powered by YAF.NET | YAF.NET © 2003-2018, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 1.085 seconds.