WCMC
Feedback
We are not
taking additional comments at this time as the Feedback Page is
being revised.
I say change it to 50". It only makes perfect sense given the limited amount of large fish able to reproduce Get a fiberglass replica...even if it is over 50".
Nunzio <nunzio1977@yahoo.com>
- Tuesday, February 27, 2007 at 22:23:34 (CST)
It has always come down to the size to call it a "TROPHY CATCH" so my answer is definitely raise the limit to 50" and to inscent someone for "catch and release" of 40 to 49.9" the angler simply proves their catch via a photo, submit it to the local DNR and the reward is a 10, 20, 30% discount off (whatever works) for the local taxidermity for your home trophy which is what most anglers really want, BRAGGING RIGHTS. Everyone wins this way including the next angler that gets a chance at the same fish.
Cliff Harvengt <charvengt@fmtinv.com>
- Sunday, February 25, 2007 at 13:51:07 (CST)
Your site is very useful.
Jim Dobson <bpb_Dobson8245@your-pop3.com>
- Tuesday, February 06, 2007 at 02:03:06 (CST)
I believe there are a few waters that "need" such a size limit and maybe even a catch & release only for a few years. I'm a guide and taxidermist, BUT when it comes to musky, I PUSH HARD for replica mounts and offer discounted prices for people who do practice CPR. I will not try to rake your wallet for higher priced replicas. Yes, it's that important to me and my group! The Wisconsin River, Mohawksin Lake area, could very well be (in my humble opinion) the BEST Musky water in Wisconsin, challenging even Canada & Minn.!! I didn't move here 7 years ago because of small fish!! They have been steadily started disappearing. 1 HUGE reason, unethical "sports" shops offering weekly fishing contests to tourists. When they bring in a dead 48"er and find out how much it is to mount, guess where it ends up! The dumpster!! I've been asked to serve on the Mohawksin Lake Fisheries Board and will do everything I can to restore this GEM water!! Please feel fre to contact me!! Jeff Frick 715-453-6860
Jeff Frick <bigtales@charter.net>
- Thursday, October 26, 2006 at 11:05:08 (CDT)
How about a tag [like a hunting tag] for a first legal fish [once in a lifetime]. This way if its a 36 incher or a 50 incher, and assuming its legal on the body of water it is caught, the happy angler has their "trophy muskie" [my first was a 30 1/2 incher when I was a kid, tells you how long ago that was, and its proudly displayed on my wall]. I think the time has come for some increases in length limits, but 50 inches across the board? I wonder if some lakes have ever produced a 50? I like the idea of wilderness lakes where the adventure of fishing, not hunting for meat and glory, is what were there for. Besides, we all have cameras these days for the big catches, and replicas of great fish are quite realistic. I say raise the limit on lakes that routinely produce big fish [i.e. over 45-48 inches], this way no one is denied catching a musky, first-timer's still have their shot, the rest of us trophy seekers have some assurance that the ultra-fish are still out there....somewhere.
Dr. Mike Karpowicz <drkarpowiczphd@sbcglobal.net>
- Wednesday, September 20, 2006 at 16:32:38 (CDT)
The DNR has not come up with any SOUND biological reasoning to justify raising the size limit to 50" on their proposed list of lakes. The main emphasis of the proposal is a scam developed by the DNR, resort owners, & guides so they can advertise "trophy" water and stop the on-rush of "trophy hunters" bypassing WI and heading to Minnesota and Ontario. With todays attitude towards catch and release, the jump to 50" is unnecessary. I would support a more modest increase to 40". If the goal behind the increased size limit is "more big fish", a more effective rule change would be the negotiated end to tribal spearing of muskies. How come the DNR never releases the tribal take numbers on muskys? Because it is an embarrassment that must end. How many 50"+ (the big female spawners) are unnecessarily slaughtered each spring? I am in favor of mandatory registration of all "kept" muskys in order to get REAL HARD NUMBERS on the actual populations and sizes of muskys in these waters before I can support the excessive size increase.
Terry March <veeshta@earthlink.net>
- Saturday, September 09, 2006 at 09:32:56 (CDT)
The answer is ABSOLUTELY YES!!!!! The time has come for this as well as musky tags for harvest management. Allow the professionals to determine growth potential and set 50 inch limits for those lakes where appropriate. My local lakes (LCO/Grindstone) are 50 inch and deserve the classification. Forward looking guides, sportsmen, and resort owners of the area were prime supporters.... waters with small fish are numerous...."50 inch" waters are special.......
Dennis Hare <esoxlanding@yahoo.com>
- Monday, August 28, 2006 at 19:07:47 (CDT)
I'm all for a 50" size limit on the Chain, and a other lakes that could tolerate that limit. In this day and age of replicas, why would you need to keep one. The replicas last longer and look as good as the fish you caught. Those that are worried about people not coming up north because they can't keep a fish, not going to happen. They are going to go to MN to catch a 50+ like they are doing right now. It's time to get out of the old ways of Northern Wisconsin and start living outside the box. You have a great resource here that would only get better.
Also, I'm with Josh in that there should be some sort of livewell requirement. I know that only 1 fish was "kept" last year, but how many died because of improper handling. I know of a few fish that I saw registered that were brought in to the stations not so delicately.
Joel Michel <dancertails@yahoo.com>
- Wednesday, July 12, 2006 at 09:47:46 (CDT)
To answer this qusetion, I will ask a few.
How old is a 50'' Musky? I'm 48.
How long is the average mateing size?
How many muskies are getting stocked by the DNR?
Will the new size limit do anything to increase numbers?
Do private clubs PAY to stock more Musky than the DNR?
Can we compromise and say we need a slot law that says ALL Musky in a certain mating size bracket (30" to 45" for example) must be released immediately? That way the Catch and Release practice will more insure a higher survival rate. Also, how about a limit to one trophy fish a year over 50"?
John Willock <jewpmw@yahoo.com>
- Tuesday, June 27, 2006 at 04:30:22 (CDT)
Yes- raise it to 50"! Though many do and will continue to release most all fish, it removes the chance that some one excited with a nice 45" or 48" fish will not be tempted to keep it. They are a special resource and however infrequent, it is still brutal when they are removed from fisheries forever.
B.Recka <bcrecka@yahoo.com>
- Tuesday, June 20, 2006 at 16:33:43 (CDT)
If the DNR increases the size minimum to 50" will we be able to transport our muskies to the check-in station for tournament weight & length? Also, if you don't have a big livewell, what is the best way to transport the musky to the check-in station so you don't harm the fish? What do you all do?
Dan Nichols <dannichols@execpc.com>
- Friday, June 16, 2006 at 09:52:51 (CDT)
I agree wholeheartedly.
Nate <jonasborg@NOSPAMgmail.com>
- Friday, April 21, 2006 at 02:08:23 (CDT)
Yes, I agree with the limit being 50 inches. I wouldn't even think about keeping a fish under 50 inches anyway. If it was over 50 inches, I would take a photo, release the fish and get a replica. Let the fish grow, and have somebody else enjoy catching and releasing the fish. In order for our sport to evolve over time, we need to release and protect our fish. Yes, I agree with the 50 inch limit. Can't wait to cast!!!! Best of luck to all!!!!
Scott Weber <webs5@comcast.net>
- Wednesday, January 11, 2006 at 18:12:03 (CST)
I do not agree with DNR on the change to 50" I for one
would maybe keep a fish over that if it approached a record
fish, but feel that its an individual decision and need DNR
concentrating on other pressing matters.
Tom Mller <tommiller@steakhouse100.com>
- Tuesday, September 20, 2005 at 10:20:47 (CDT)
First of all thank you to all the volunteers and the rest for
putting on a great tourney. I enjoy it very much including the
awards ceremony. The MC does a good job with the ceremony. Not
too long not too short with some humor thrown in. I would like
to suggest that you let the individual winners say a few words.
I enjoyed the story Henry Hempe told about his Muskie when he
grabed the mic. I would have liked to had a chance to hear what
Mark Wellstone had to say about catching his winning muskie. It
would only add a few moments to the ceremony which would be a
small price for the winning muskie story.
Brian Zander <Brizander@aol.com>
Glenview, IL USA - Thursday, September 15, 2005 at 13:27:43
(CDT)
I think it would be a bad idea to raise the limit to 50" on
musky's. I fished the Classic last week and even with a
35"-40" size limit almost everybody is releasing fish
anyway, out of 55 legals turned in only 1 was kept. According
the the booklet handed out on Fri. there has never been a
50" fish registered in the classic in the 29 years they
have been running it. There is fish of this caliber all over the
place up here, but raising the limit to as high as 50"
would ruin events like this.
Ely Faretta <efaretta@safrotoyota.com>
- Tuesday, September 13, 2005 at 12:43:08 (CDT)
NO!! Do not increase the size limits. We feel if you do increase
them, there will be fewer people spending the money to come to
the north woods and many lakes will choose not to participate in
this event. We need to think of improving the event and adding
incentives for the fishing people to enjoy. Ex. Have all
equipment at ALL check-in areas working all the time ( this is a
big problem, poor equipment). Also why not provide free lunches
at check-in areas for fishing people and workers. Also why not
have toilets available at all check-in areas. Have a pretty day.
David Theesfeld <datcat43@centurytel.net>
- Monday, September 12, 2005 at 11:36:30 (CDT)
There is no quick fix here. Fishermen and the state need to work
together so eventually we can see more big muskies caught and
released. With inferior genitecs now swimming around in most of
WI's prime musky waters, I know many fishermen are making trips
to Minnesota instead of Wisconsin. The smaller WI communitees
that rely on income from fisherman should also be worried about
this issue. Musky fishermen want to catch big fish and Musky
fisherman spend money...... I'm not a scientist but I would
suggest that the DNR should only stock the waters with excellent
musky stock and we fishermen release all but the true trophies
(over 45", and only if it's the biggest you've ever
caught).
Dan Nichols <dannichols@execpc.com>
- Monday, September 12, 2005 at 11:25:47 (CDT)
Instead of the 50" size limit we should be concentrating on
proper fish handling and livewell requirements. I see many fish
handled improperly every year.
Josh <JoshLenda@wi.rr.com>
- Thursday, September 08, 2005 at 12:58:28 (CDT)
I would be for it if indians were subject to the same limits...
ha!ha!ha! - that's a good one.
bob peterson <unklchunky@yahoo.com>
- Friday, July 22, 2005 at 01:27:21 (CDT)
I am all FOR keeping the size limit in the upper 40's or 50's!
We have a reached a critical time where the chances for such
fish are getting better and better due to catch and release.
With replicas as awesome as they are, why keep ANY Musky when
you have the ability to release his or her majesty back into
it's environment. I hope that there comes a day when the Musky
become so plentyful that we actually HAVE to keep them. That
won't happen. For now, give them ALL back to the water.
Photograph them quickly, and share your stories. Encourage safe
handling and worship our mighty musky. Imagine a world without
them. Safe and happy Musky Hunting, Jen
Jennifer Reisch <MuskyManiacJen@aol.com>
- Monday, July 04, 2005 at 08:47:23 (CDT)
A 50 inch size limit does not make much sense, especially since
the problems with the wdnr stocking situation and questions of
what size the muskies will even grow to because they used
inferior breed stock. I think a 40 inch size would be much
better. I think the mortality rate of the fish between 40 and 50
inches would be high and a lot of these fish would never make 40
inches. Ant a 40 inch musky is a real nice trophy fish for
someone to keep.
john Bramble <jbramble@pasty.com>
- Thursday, June 30, 2005 at 12:47:55 (CDT)
i am from southern wis. and fish the wis. river around the
portage area and there is a slot limit on walleye's, 20-28 is
stricktly c.p.r and only one over 28 maybe kept, the size of
fish we are catching now are huge, 6#-8# are getting to be the
norm, so your idea of a 50" size limit on muskies i think
is a real good idea, after all is'nt all about big fish when it
comes to skies, the kids 12 an under some how give them a
break??? or teach-en the right way from the git-go????
Eward Sandsrtom <esandstrom@equitycoop.com>
- Friday, April 22, 2005 at 14:10:08 (CDT)
