Change the inland lake trout season!

[ripstick]

You know this topic has been addressed before and well here we are again. Maybe this time sombody could listen (probably not). One never knows in this day and age. Earlier opener, drop the shelters. Could be it wont stop there.

[Steve Foss]

Almost every topic on every online board already has been addressed, not including news stories. That's never stopped us before.

[Great Outdoors]

Steve,

You misinterpreted my statement on Lake Superior.

I threw it in to show the difference between it and inland lakes, with no intention to change anything.

Casey, I was referring to fishing regs on LS.

I was unaware that any other states controlled it, other than the water sharing veto powers that all great lakes states have.

What control do the two others have in regards to fishing??

[DTro]

I think anyone that who is passionate about fishing a particular species can make a good argument for 3 or 4 changes in the regs that would make absolute sense. God knows the Catfishing regs are a mess.

As fishing evolves, so should the laws.

The problem is that the DNR is always going to lag due to the red tape and politics.

It’s really too bad that everyone couldn’t be responsible and a steward towards the future fishery. We’ve come a long way, but not far enough so that the DNR can make a snap judgment call (although that indeed seems to be the case on the big time walleye lakes).

[caseymcq]

G.O. -

Michigan and Ontario have control over fishing regs for the parts of Lake Superior that are "theirs".

Minnesota and Wisconsin actually have the smaller two portions of the four. Michigan has the lions share of the lake. There control extends beyond Isle Royal, which is only 30 miles off of the Minnesota shoreline.

Here is a map with jurisdiction lines.

[Duffman]

Leave the season as is, otherwise it'd open a whole new can of worms. You would have people hitting the lakes up north at the end of April or first of May claiming they are *cough* fishing for lakers *cough*, when in fact they would be targeting other species. It'd be sort of like the spring crappie fishing, with guys chucking large spinnerbaits and rubber worms. We see and hear about that type of blatant targeting of species out of season every year.

The pressure on lakers would increase, no doubt about it. People would be hitting them hard during late ice and early spring, times of the year where hooking into one is considerably easier than during the summer.

There's enough unsportsman like behavior out there, no need to increase it by allowing further loopholes in the regs.

I think it'd be great if it were open from Jan till fall spawning time, I would take full advantage of it, an ice-out paddle in the BW catching lakers would rock. Or some early April ice fishing for lakers, that'd be worth an icebath or two. But I'd be willing to forgo that pleasure for myself to ensure the safety of the resource.

[Great Outdoors]

caseymcq,

Interesting to see that the Michigan lake trout season is opened year around on Lake Superior.

[Steve Foss]

Different state, different politics, is my guess.

[Great Outdoors]

Politics, you got that right.

If I read the Wisconsin regs correctly, looks like year around there, 2 fish per day on Superior. (Did I read that correctly??)

Haven't looked at the Ontario rules but guess it wouldn't matter.

Appears that Minnesota is the only state that promotes fishing, but doesn't want you to catch any:)

[chunkytrout]

Ok, I'll dive in.

Things I've personally observed on ONE lake. One rather large deep lake. Burntside to be exact. No, I don't have decades of laker fishing all over the northen states under my belt. But I do have exclusive personal data on my little nick of the woods. Approximately 10 years of data. (Albiet some a little fuzzy) I believe some folks will back me up on this.

I believe the current regs and limits stand on their own regarding our inland buddies. In my first couple of seasons I flailed about until I caught on to a couple of patterns. I'd say over 75% of those fish were stocker 2-4 pounders. These were caught on many different tactics over many styles of structure. Many differerent variables. Then about 5 years ago I observed a change of what was being brought into the boat and on the ice. Not just by me but a number of different anglers. More and more unclipped fish and a definite increase in AVERAGE size. This tells me a couple of things. This ONE lake is responding to it's relative regulative pressure and possibly the lake's infrastructure/food chain/water quality might be improving.

Before I get too fishtechy and make an arse out of myself....seems to me things are working quite nicely. Or at least something's gone right for once.

Not to say I wouldn't mind seeing a second trolling line allowed per angler

[Great Outdoors]

Chunkster,

I'll chime in here with a quick comment.

The unclipped fish puzzle me.

Absolutely no natural reproduction of Walleyes, Ciscoes, Whitefish, etc so I find the natural trout reproduction questionable, at best.

Have talked to DNR personnel about this.

They too have seen this, and didn't have any answers as to why.

Hard to believe only one species could make a comeback.

Perhaps the hatchery guys have been a snoozing, when they should have been a clipping???

[chunkytrout]

I could snoop around and get you hard data I guess. Just what I've witnessed more than anything. You have far more hours on that lake than I do. I just call them as I see them (with a healthy dose of speculation).

[Great Outdoors]

CT,

If my old mind remembers, I'll give the fisheries crew a buzz tomorrow.

If I run to Virginia, I'll swing in to the Tower HQ when coming back.

That is, if I remember

Now, with that having been said, where am I??

[chunkytrout]

 Originally Posted By: Great Outdoors

Absolutely no natural reproduction of Walleyes, Ciscoes, Whitefish, etc so I find the natural trout reproduction questionable, at best.

Have talked to DNR personnel about this.

I have also had the same conversations with usually the same results however some side with my end of the speculation. SPECULATION being the key word but given the length/depth/timeline of inland laker studies, it's still pretty new territory as far as they and I are concerned.

[chunkytrout]

 Originally Posted By: Great Outdoors

CT,

Now, with that having been said, where am I??

I don't know...if you're within a block of me you're within 5 blocks of you which means we're within 10 blocks of Steve or 18 miles of Casey or 10 feet of Justin which means I better goto bed.....

[Steve Foss]

The DNR guys also make a point of saying that some lakers with all their fins intact may be stocked fish but with healed clips. Apparently, once in awhile the clips aren't deep enough or a fin grows back.

That being said, I have caught so many unclipped fish in Bside, probably 40 to 50 percent of my catch in the last few years since I've been paying close attention to that, that I believe not all of those could be clips that didn't take from stockers, so like Chunky my speculation is that many of them are native fish. And since many of them are 2 to 10 pounds, they would have been spawned since the smelt population exploded and started eating eggs and outcompeting other species for the micro-organisms all the fish in Bside need at some point in their lives.

Whether that constitutes a comeback I don't know. I haven't been on the lake that long, and I don't know that there have been any records kept since smelt came in about 50 years ago that allow an accurate look at native vs stocked laker populations.

Like any fishery, the biological give and take that is the Burntside food chain is complex, and it's likely we'll never understand it thoroughly. If even the experts have to speculate now and then, it's certain I don't know all the ins and outs, and even if I'm lucky enough to spend the rest of my life fishing Burntside, probably never will understand it all. It's hard enough just to catch the darn things on some days, let alone trying to be an armchair fish biologist. But it IS fun to speculate and argue about it.

What I should have been doing the last five or six years is photographing every unclipped fish and keeping actual catch data for all Bside lakers. I can tell you that I haven't caught a Bside laker over 6 pounds with a clipped fin in the last three years (winter and summer), and I've caught about 15 from 6 to 12 pounds. But it's just so much more fun fishing and catching them than writing down stuff in my notebook.

[JustinG]

 Quote:

or 10 feet of Justin

Huh? Wha? What's that supposed to mean????? I think I'm being targeted here.....

Justin

[Steve Foss]

Justin, maybe chunky was just "plink"ing at you.

[JustinG]

I can endure any amount of abuse you guys can dish out!!!!!!!! I can dish it right back too!!!!