1. Welcome to Taxidermy.net, Guest!
    We have put together a brief tutorial to help you with the site, click here to access it.

Skin mounts & the C & R philosophy

Discussion in 'Fish Taxidermy' started by dougp, Sep 9, 2010.

  1. dougp

    dougp Active Member

    extreme angler.....I agree!! LOL ;D

    Keep scratchin' your head Marty..LOL!! It doesn't get any better with their mentality..!! ::) ::)

    dc, at least you answered the question LOL! ::) ::)

    Seems like I seriously overestimated your ability to grasp certain concepts.

    OK...that's OK... ;D ;D You guys have shown your colors.

    I guess I'm pretty much done. As Jeff Lumsden said...this is a waste of time... ;D

    Time to move on....

    DougP ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;)
     
  2. dcmusky

    dcmusky New Member

    13
    0
    :-\ AWWWW shucks. I answered your question and you made it very open ended. You never gave me any details, like type of guide, YOUR C&R ability's.
    So will you answer mine? Were are you getting your mortality rates from? I showed you 2 pieces of SCIENCE that all of the muskies caught on artificial lures lived. Now if this guide that catches 200 muskies a year is using single hook swallow rigs then I'd say him, because he is killing 200 fish. But if it's what I am finding then it may be 1 or 2 fish a year dieing and they might be small males or what ever it's not size selective.

    I do allot of things to my baits to make sure the release process goes smoothly. I mainly use spinnerbaits that have 2 single hooks, my bucktails only have 1 treble and my trolling baits have their rear hooks removed because muskies always hit them in the front anyways and the rear hook is nothing but bad for the fish and you.

    So far no one has come up with any studys on any claims that they have made yet. Still waiting for a real answer but all I get is BS but that's cool I've been called worse by better people. ;)
    DC
     

  3. Manny

    Manny New Member

    Hey Dougp,

    They are blinded by there love to fish.... Which they know there are mortalities, they cant controll how the fish is going to hit the lure.

    Do the hook up with one and go home ? Not

    They know how to fish these fish better than your average angler who might get lucky and hook up with one on an outing.

    The only way to catch and release this fish with 100% no mortalities is not to use hooks at all.

    So for them its got to be the thrill of being able to brag on what they did.

    If they love these fish and dont want to see harm to them.... Then dont fish them.
     
  4. dcmusky

    dcmusky New Member

    13
    0
    Here's something for ya.
    The Future
    What do more anglers mean for the future of fishing in Minnesota? While we can't predict the future, we can make some suggestions to help determine the fate of tomorrow's fisheries. Anglers can influence the future of Minnesota's fisheries as much as the DNR can. This control is practiced every time an angler decides to harvest or release a fish.

    Is harvest harmful? No. Harvest should always remain a part of fishing in Minnesota. Is excessive harvest harmful? Yes. With more anglers fishing with better boats and gear, it is possible to overfish--to harvest more fish than growth can replace in a lake. Overfishing causes the average size of fish to decrease.

    How much harvest is excessive? The answer is not clear-cut. Some anglers want lots of fish, some want big fish, some just want to fish.

    Fisheries managers must evaluate a variety of opinions and try to be fair to all anglers. Often this is impossible, because the desires of anglers are so varied. The DNR uses a management philosophy known as "individual waters management." That means it customizes management of different lakes. In using this approach, managers are able to provide for a variety of fishing experiences. The biggest drawback to individual waters management is that it often requires more fishing regulations.

    Currently, Minnesota fisheries are managed essentially with no harvest restrictions. Many of you reading this probably just thought, "What about bag limits?" Sure we have bag limits, but actually bag limits on average do little to limit harvest from Minnesota waters. Because few anglers harvest a limit of fish during a fishing trip, bag limits have little effect on total fish harvest. In most cases, the function of bag limits is to prevent some people from becoming fish hogs when the fish are really biting.

    So if bag limits do not control harvest from our lakes, what does? Two things: Fish don't always bite, and more anglers are practicing catch-and-release fishing.

    Catch-and-release fishing is one way anglers as a group can control their own destiny. Many anglers realize the limitations of Minnesota's fisheries and have begun to release medium and large fish in the hope of catching them again. By practicing catch-and-release, anglers can help assure that fish--even big ones--will still be biting years from now.

    Growth and Death
    Growth and death rates are two population characteristics that influence how many and what size fish are in a lake. Death rates for Minnesota fish are high--up to one-half of the population dies each year. Starting with 100,000 fish age 1, only 50,000 will live to age 2. Of those, 25,000 will survive to age 3, and so on. Yet each year, another 100,000 fish will enter the population. Since most fish species reproduce in large numbers, lakes have more small than large fish.

    Growth rates influence how many large fish a lake has because the faster a fish grows, the more likely it will grow large before it dies.

    Lakes with the greatest trophy-fish potential have low death rates (this is where catch-and-release plays a part) and fast growth rates. Even in these lakes, trophy-sized fish will always be less common than smaller fish.The odds are against a northern pike surviving to a weight of 20 pounds or a walleye to 10 pounds.

    Can we reduce mortality to grow more large fish? Fishing seasons, bag limits, size limits, and gear restrictions are all designed to reduce fish mortality. The only control the angler (or the DNR, in many cases) has is reducing harvest. If fishing pressure continues to increase, voluntary release of larger fish will become even more important to maintain some large fish in the population.
    http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/volunteer/mayjun99/biting.html
    This is were I got it from if you'd like to see the whole thing.
     
  5. WNWA

    WNWA New Member

    278
    0
    hey manny its not the love for the muskie they have its the
    love for the money they make as being the guide!!! the money
    they make in a day we as taxidermiest would have to turn out
    2-3 muskie mounts to make same amount of money!!!! wit them
    pushing c&r their able to get the money for being a guide and
    then they get a precentage or all the money for reproduction
    of the their clients catch... so in all they want it all. not some but
    all of it. but in the long run they will lose out all together.. in the
    near future im planning a trip to fish for the great muskie gods
    of waters, and will contact them and hope to meet these beloved
    muskie guides while, i love meeting bullies or ones who think they
    are..
     
  6. FishArt

    FishArt Well-Known Member

    "More Anglers" DC??? I read the link you provided and first off it's from back in '99. Secondly, the references made to angler numbers leaves a gap when they get to the 70's. It's a known fact that fishing nationwide and it's interest started tanking in the late 70's and except for a couple of anomolies from year to year has continued going on a downward spiral. I look at the link you provided (from the MN DNR) more as a marketing ploy to attempt to attract more fishermen and women than any useful data. It speaks of the increase in Minnesota license sales since 1911 and then mysteriously stops at the 70's. Fishing use to be the #1 Recreational Sport in the U.S.. Now, it's fallen considerably (Doug knows the actual slot for fishing now - I think it's like 10th on the list???).

    The point I'm trying to make is your "sky is falling/massive fishing pressure" angle is a load of crap. Many of the weekend warriors have bowed out of fishing. Does that mean fishing pressure because of fewer numbers is less? Not necessarily. Today we have more educated fishermen (YOU GUYS!), electronics and fine tuned equipment. I'm guessing that fishing pressure has probably remained fairly consistent due to fewer fishermen offset by more educated fishermen. Along with the DNR's tighter bag limits and this C&R thing catching on. Untimately, the health of any water is in the DNR's hands to some extent. But, my personal thoughts on that (as far as the quality of a fishery goes) is the DNR does very little actually. I believe that most waters are pretty resilient. Animals always amaze me as to how they find a way to survive and flourish.

    Your comment about maybe only 1 or 2 fish dying out of 200 caught is simply either ignorant OR you're intentionally moving on from this debate because you KNOW the FACTS would make you guys look bad. 200 muskies boated in one season tells me this guide is fishing thru the summer. We BOTH know summer water temps cause far more mortality than the 1/2 to 1% mortality you're proposing.

    Let me clarify my position though because it sounds like I'm totally against musky fishermen. I'm not. In fact I support most of you guys because I don't think your educated, fine-tuned fishing techniques and increased catch and increased mortality impacts our fisheries. I think it impacts our fisheries more than the weekend warrior harvesting an occasional fish does, (and more than you guys are willing to admit), but with BOTH types of fishermen utilizing OUR resources OUR fisheries are doing pretty darn good! I attrinute this to many factors (obviously) including C&R - BY ALL OF US - NOT just those sitting on their high-horses here!

    My problem comes with (mainly) the musky crowd that belittles and sometimes threatens physical harm to the weekend warriors that want to keep a legal fish. That's simply wrong. Not only is it LEGAL to keep, but guys like YOU are HYPOCRITES because YOU kill MORE muskies than the weekend warrior does. I GUARANTEE you that YOU have killed more muskies than I (although I'm not the delicate surgeon that many of you guys are - lol!). GUARANTEED. I have only caught 2 muskies in my whole life. Don't have the patience for it. Released both and they were in very good shape. Now, let me ask you this - IF I catch that 3rd musky of my life and it's a 42" legal musky and you see from your boat that I'm putting it in my livewell, are you going to give me grief about it??? Because if you did, you would be a hypocrite!!! You MURDERER - lol!



    http://www.allbusiness.com/science-technology/earth-atmospheric-science-meteorology/12441056-1.html

    P.S. I'm not sure why the link is coming up dead. But, if you're interested you can do a search like I did and find this article or many others supporting the lack of fishing license sales through the years...
     
  7. dougp

    dougp Active Member

    Good post Marty right on target.

    Well, I said I was done, but dcmusky DID answer my question and then went so far as to follow up with a more in-depth explanation of his answer.

    OK, fair is fair. He asked where I'm getting my mortality rates from. I'm not in my shop today to provide that, but I can answer tomorrow. Actually if you look in the Lac Seul article above they mention a 30% mortality. IN-Fisherman must put some credence in those numbers or I doubt it would be in there. I agree that is probably very high. Ask THEM where those #'s came from.

    There is plenty of evidence of C&R mortality harming a fishery. You haven't addressed the Doug Stange article which points this out very clearly and convincingly. BTW..I spoke with Doug about this article this past year and he stands behind what he wrote. Talk to HIM...I didn't write it.

    Obviously we have different opinions about certain aspects of angling. There is no reason that we can't DISCUSS our differences without the trashy input of people like Underhill [muskiefool] & crew. I know you guys work hard to promote musky fishing and the protection of the fisheries. I've never disputed or doubted that. I strongly disagree with some of your methods and extreme views. The tactics some of you guys use works directly against what you are trying to accomplish and push some people who are "on the fence" over to your opposition. I'm surprised you and your buds don't see that. ??? ??? Buuut, you seem to hold onto that approach and continue to receive a backlash. OK, so be it.


    So, unfortunately, rather than being a donor to the chapters of Muskies Inc. as I have been in the past, these attitudes and attempts at indoctrination have made me an adversary to many of your goals that are based on emotion rather than good science and management. I'm not the only one.....by far. Too bad.

    BTW...maybe you could pass some of this info on to Johnny Dadson and silversides. I haven't seen them around for awhile. ;)

    Cordially,
    DougP
     
  8. pete_k

    pete_k New Member

    3
    0
    I've held off jumping in as I have been tracking down some science. I haven't found any yet to support the old fish have weak eggs or any numbers regarding post release mortality.

    There have not been any studies of the viabillity of eggs in aging musky. And the people I talked to haven't seen anything to suggest that older fish don't spawn or that their eggs are any less viable then that of young fish. In fact the egg takers want eggs from bigger fish so they don't end up with a stunted population.

    The only good study of musky mortality just finished up and is at the printers. (A source leads me to think that the rate is much lower that many think.)

    As for the big Bay of Green Bay fish not spawning, well they could be setting up too early, late or in the wrong place. It took the state of MN a few years to find the big spawners on Leech Lake.

    The INDNR stocked 700+ musky in a 460 acre lake and they never could find any fish when they looked. But we were catching them a ton.

    And for Mr. Stange does he have any peer reviewed science to back up his story?
     
  9. EA

    EA Well-Known Member

    Short Article in this month's BassTimes.."Are Length limits Still Relevant". Basically it stated --20 yrs. ago size limits were much more important..They brought some fisheries back from the brink of collapse.They were a tool to help biologists protect OR MODIFY fish populations (slot limits)..The effectiveness of length limits or slot limits is just not there like it used to be 20 yrs ago..Arguments supporting length limits are becoming harder to justify..For one -IF anglers don't keep fish .what is the use of having such regulations ? If regulations were removed ,would it encourage abuse of the resource ?? They emphasize biologists can only do so much. It will require SOME EFFORT on the part of anglers to make slot limits relevant again..Which brings us back to the old truth about fisheries biology..You can't manage a fishery without managing the people who use it..

    In other words..The Regs are in place for a reason..With slot limits, they WANT you to take legal fish to modify the fishery. They know more about the particulars of a fishery than us..Keep advocating fanatical C&R and you could possibly see length regulations disappear altogether..Now ,Who wants that ?
     
  10. pete_k

    pete_k New Member

    3
    0
    Yep that's what happened to bass in a lot of places. Know of any musky lakes with the same problem?

    Truth is most musky size limits are a compromise between those that want to keep fish for whatever reason and those that value big fish.
     
  11. pete_k

    pete_k New Member

    3
    0
    Crossman/Casselman: Assessing Sustainability of Big Muskies

    "If annual mortality rate of record-sized muskellunge 25-30 years old were increased by 2%, it would be necessary to DOUBLE recruitment to compensate for this change".

    "If the mortality rate of large muskellunge 21-23 years old can be decreased by only 2%, this is comparable to increasing their initial recruitment by approximately 70%".

    "Only exceptionally large year-classes produce the oldest, largest trophy muskellunge".
     
  12. muskiefool

    muskiefool New Member

    10
    0
    Just exactly what is quite a few country's Marty? 1 and a couple states inside Germany so you are mistaken again. But you are right about them euros growing big pike, they do. Mainly due to their high C&R ethic and ultra low pressure; the few country's that are more to your liking are the eastern block hand to mouff living.

    Bill its 2010 all of your garble comes from the stone ages. The article is and was a challenge for Muskie anglers to do a better job; and we have. We do all we can to teach and help others on and off the water. If I or anyone see's people having trouble we come to help and to educate people especially by-catch anglers whats needed and how to best release these fish.

    Is catching fish harmful to them of course it is, its a hook in their %$#@&^@ head. Is it lethal? potentially if it rips the artery yes. Bleeding gills are not a death sentence Bill they can live without a few just like a person can go on one lung.

    You have nothing but a few garbage editorials from 15 to 30 years ago to base your dimwittery on. Pull up your britches and Dance Billy Boy; Dance in Lens Muskie Cape wearing your Grandmothers Wedding Vail praying for a day to return that never will.


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kxSpQV0kJE&feature=related
     
  13. dougp

    dougp Active Member

    pete k.....I don't know what Stange has in the way of science. I think common sense plays a big part in the article he published along with personal experience of his and his assoc.

    You mention Crossman/Casselman, Dr. Crossman also wrote an article entitled "Live release of Angled Muskellunge" in which he mentions the Nogies Creek research of angling fatigue on musky's. His statement was that angling stress under the worst enviromental conditions probably killed no more than ...30% of the released fish....no more than 30%! :eek: He mentioned a much lower mortality in better weather conditions.......what maybe 5-10%, or more?

    Science is great but common sense needs to be applied also and that seems to be lacking with some who are only interested in their agenda, re; zealots.

    Here is a study done some years ago published in the IN-FISHERMAN.....garbage study?.......you decide for yourself, as will I and others who read it.

    Yes musky anglers have done a better job of handling fish and the care of the fisheries. ALL the angling community has.......but C&R is NOT a "no-kill" practice. That has been my point all along.

    BTW, I agree that ADVANCED TAXIDERMY does some beautiful work. I don't agree with Sean's explanation of a skin mount. I think that was just self-serving advertising rhetoric. We can forgive him for that ;D

    Cordially submitted for your review,

    DougP
     

    Attached Files:

  14. dougp

    dougp Active Member

    I'll leave you guys with a couple other pieces that may be dated but have not been refuted.

    On the C&R fisherman's pressure harming a fishery, I post a piece from the Chicago Tribune by John Husar in an interview with Gordon Pyzer who was provincial fisheries manager for the MNR in Kenora, Ont. regarding the Lac Seul fishery dated March 2, 1997. Pyzer talks about the "swiftly deteriorating muskie population on Lac Seul."

    Johnny Dadson mentioned in an earlier post that Lac Seul and other Ont. lakes STILL have not rebounded favorably. Lac Seul as mentioned has been a 100% C&R fishery for decades.

    I'll end by posting an editorial by a past president of MUSKIES INC. INTERNATIONAL. It pretty much spells out my position on this C&R thing. I think most of us here would agree with the message it contains.

    I think those who would oppose Jim Bunch's writing could be fairly called "Extremist" and "Elitists" and "Zealots." Those are generally attitudes I won't support.


    Most Cordially,
    DougP
     

    Attached Files:

  15. dougp

    dougp Active Member

    Here's the Jim Bunch piece. It might be hard to read but maybe you can copy & paste & enlarge.

    Also pay attention to the "Purposes of Muskies Inc." Pretty interesting.... ;D

    Very Cordially,
    DougP
     

    Attached Files:

  16. FishArt

    FishArt Well-Known Member

    Muskiefool - I noticed you nitpcked one of my comments not specifically related to this topic here in the U.S., in lieu of answering a couple of my much more pertinent questions. Namely my comments on the overall U.S. fish numbers that you are WRONG about. And my 200 fish question and also whether or not you're a hypocrite. You've conveniently AVOIDED these pertinent questions and redirected attention away from the meat and potatoes to something relatively benign. A typical debate technique to attempt to hide the truth when you're losing an argument. I sort've expected it though. That's what happens when you think with emotions and sit on your brain.

    I'm done. I feel like I'm attempting to discuss a topic with a teenager. I've got three of them "know-it-alls" here at home and I get enough of that crap already and don't need more of it HERE - lol!
     
  17. dougp

    dougp Active Member

    LOL!!

    I hear ya Marty ;D ;D ;D
     
  18. hodx

    hodx Herman Darr

    is it skin a musky month yet?
     
  19. muskiefool

    muskiefool New Member

    10
    0
    I don't know what questions your referring to but if its fantasy scenarios or fallacy numbers; I cant comment because I live in reality. The fact that Bill has no idea how far we have come in the tools and safe release of Muskies and Pike over the past 15 years is no real surprise, all he knows is its bad for the business of stuffed fish; no matter if your stuffing them with saw dust, beads, foam, or wrapping a replica to preserve it essence. Its not not happening like it used to and you can bury your head in each others backsides kissing and smacking till the flavor runs out and Muskie anglers are gonna keep fewer and fewer till it wont matter to anyone but you, just like right now.

    Its much bigger than you guys and you can do nothing to change it, sure you may be able to get someone to kill a fish with your little poster that's fine. Get all the Muskie killers to kill all their gonna kil; and it amounts to not one more fish than you are getting right now. I don't have any problem with that or taxidermists. But its a fact we cannot go on killing fish Like the Goliath Grouper or Muskies forever because those fishery's are not resilient as Martyr cries. They are fragile and those giants do not just get replaced by another giant overnight.

    So you keep doing what you do; crying about people releasing fish, and we'll keep releasing fish and giving our business to guys that do both skin and replicas but don't push people into killing the cow. I don't have any issue with anyone doing a skin mount, fish die; but more importantly so do old ways.
     
  20. dougp

    dougp Active Member

    m'....fool, I'ts about respect for a different view & "Attitude".....so John,
     

    Attached Files: