Early this year on the ice I was stopped and surveyed and asked what my thoughts were on a limited number of harvest tags for muskies in a certain size range. The other question is if I would be willing to pay for one. Have you guys heard of this, and what are your thoughts? I personally have never heard of anyone keeping a muskie. I'm assuming the people that are keeping them are doing it over and over so it may be good on that end, but if they lower the length on what is harvestable maybe more would be harvested. Let me know your thoughts.
[signature]
My first thought would be that I'd oppose it. Sets a precedence that could be expanded elsewhere. We shouldn't be making fishing a sport for only the wealthy.
Larry
[signature]
I guess it depends upon what they would use the extra money on the tags for. If it's designed to be able to purchase more tiger muskie minnows to be planted, I could understand the reason behind having the tags. If it's intended to be used as just another way to raise money for the general fishing fund (i.e. tags used for other specifies), I think it kind of defeats the whole point. As far as I am concerned, the only reason a tiger muskie would want to be kept is for bragging rights. They really are a beautiful and furiously looking at the same time. I've never heard of anyone eating them, but I'm sure there are people out there that have. Of course there are already options available where you can keep a similar species (i.e. pike). Again I don't know, but I would imagine that they would taste the same. So in the end, I guess it just depends what they would use the money for.
[signature]
People will keep them, regardless of whether or not they need a tag. Drought wasnt the only reason the population plummeted at Newton. Watched dozens of them get poached out of there! I personally think they should make bait fishing for them illegal too! Watched a lot of them get killed, intentional or not, by bait fishermen.
I personally have never had a desire to keep one. On the other hand I had one die in my hands once from a hook catching an artery and it was nearly bled out by the time I got it to the boat. Mandatory catch and release, so back it went......
In Idaho you have tot tag all your steelhead and salmon...... Might work, but how well can it be enforced? I still think there should be a 40" minimum, regardless.
[signature]
Let me guess. SFW wants to start offering muskie expo tags to what they peddle at the Conservation Expo drawing every year. In addition, auction a few more off at banquets for extra funds. The rest of us would have to participate in a drawing. All in the name of "conservation". [:/]
No thank you.
[signature]
Everything with it's own special tag and it's own Special Fee for applying. The fees collected add up to more than the license revenue for some of these special opportunities.
No reason you can't include the taking of any fish in the General fishing license, after all that was it's intended purpose. This is just Charging fee after fee for each individual species that gets removed from the general License.
[signature]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000]I'm absolutely, 100%, dead set agin' it. And I don't even fish for 'em. Where will it stop? Can fish check stations and trophy fees be far behind?[/#800000][/font]
[signature]
[quote Kipe]Early this year on the ice I was stopped and surveyed and asked what my thoughts were on a limited number of harvest tags for muskies in a certain size range.[/quote]
Who was conducting this survey??
[signature]
It was the DNR, I don't recall his name though, sorry. As we were the only ones fishing the lake he waited a few hours for us to finish and then met us at the truck. I also got the chance to talk a little bit about scofield res.
[signature]
Lame. Fun and challenging fish to catch, but who would want to keep one? There are may better tasting fish out there plus they smell bad.
[signature]
I'd like to keep one.
but I wouldn't support a tag system.
[signature]
[quote PBH]I'd like to keep one.
but I wouldn't support a tag system.[/quote]
Well that answers my question. [
]
[signature]
A mounted Tiger Musky is about the coolest looking fish mount I have ever seen and I can easily see why someone would want one of them. I personally wouldn't want a mount I'm just not into that. I absolutely don't think they should have a trophy tag for taking them. With the recent planting a couple years ago it could be some really good fishing for them soon and if they are worried about controlling the population by letting people take a few it probably won't make a difference if they kept a few or not. I say that because back in the 90's when it was really good fishing for them lots of the big fish that were caught died anyway. That was when you could keep one over 40. I remember you always seen them washed up on the bank and floating belly up after seeing someone catching one. Fishermen handling them properly helps but is not a sure thing. Anyway let us enjoy them as long as we can they won't last they never do!
[signature]
[quote Moosedog]... back in the 90's when it was really good fishing for them lots of the big fish that were caught died anyway. That was when you could keep one over 40. I remember you always seen them washed up on the bank and floating belly up after seeing someone catching one. Fishermen handling them properly helps but is not a sure thing. Anyway let us enjoy them as long as we can they won't last they never do![/quote]
Which is exactly why I think it's ridiculous to continue to up the minimum size restriction to harvest one. How many of those 50" fish actually get caught a second time by an angler? How many of those over 40" end up dying in the lake?
There is nothing wrong with allowing people to keep a big fish. Allow people that opportunity. Without a special tag.
[signature]
I agree 100%. They aren't mystical God fish, they are nothing more than a stinking pike.....no big deal as far as I'm concerned. I've eaten plenty of pike and one keeper musky from pineview that my buddy caught......they're delicious! But also, there is nothing wrong with someone keeping one for the really cool mount that they make.
I'm against a tag for any fish in Utah waters because it then makes it a fish that can only be kept by those willing to shell out extra money....what if it's a kid that catches one and ants to keep it? As long as it's a legal length I think he/she should be able to without any extra expense.
Mike
[signature]
No to tags for Fish. Look what's its done to big game hunting.
[signature]
I've caught some nice fish that had some "sore Lips" from other anglers. I'm glad they released them because it made my day to hook into that fish. I just don't understand people who hook into a big fish and their first thought is to remove the fish so others can't share the same experience. Yet the catch and release guys are called the "selfish" anglers on here. I don't get it. Oh well, I'm glad PV is 100 percent catch and release. There are some nice fish in there.
[signature]
I have no problems if the state wants to require a tag to harvest. If they do require a tag then the size limit should be increased.
Most states that I researched that require a tag...the tag is free if you have a fishing license. So no big deal....even if there is a nominal fee we'll pay it...but we won't harvest one.
Heck if you really wanted to harvest one you can just go out to Bullock, Cottonwood, Joes Valley, Johnson even Fish Lake and you can harvest one at 40" or more...only places you can't is Newton and Pineview.
With PV being a designated Utah blue ribbon fishery it should stay catch and release only or increase the size to 50" and must have a tag. As no way a size limit of 40" is justifiable for that body of water.
So you don't need a tag now to harvest one Tiger Muskie...just go get one at the above mentioned bodies of water that allow a harvest of 1 40" minimum...again only bodies of water you can't harvest from is Newton and Pineview but you have 4 even 5 bodies of water that you can harvest from.
So guess for us if the state wants a tag then they need to increase the limit from 40" as for us anyways...a 40" tiger is nice but not anywhere near being a 'true trophy' for the species...but for some I'm sure that it is a big fish they can catch and have mounted for their man cave bragging...so heck like I said there are already bodies of water now you can harvest if you really wanted to harvest one and I bet they are over 40"...So head out and fill that bucket list for that man cave bragging mount as you already can harvest a Tiger Muskie without a tag.
[signature]
If people want a mount I can understand that, they are beautiful fish and hard to catch,. But there is no need to kill the fish to have a mount. Take a few pics. measure the length, girth and release the fish. You can get a great mount made, and maybe someone else can catch the fish another day.
[signature]
Agreed wyoguy...a replica acrylic mount would be the way to go for us and I've seen some awesome replica mounts...unfortunately skin mounts over time well I'm sure you know they end up not looking the best...but hey if one wants that skin mount so be it...and like I said a tag isn't needed just go out and fish for them on the bodies of water I mentioned...
[signature]