Proposal for 54″ size limit on muskies/ Green Bay

Passing along this info for a friend for the up-coming meeting on Monay, April 16th at 7pm at all locations.

“Hey Everyone!

Here’s the current update on where things are at for the upcoming Spring Hearings and the 54″ proposal for Green Bay.

We have had an excellent response and it looks like we are sure to get the point out there that this is what the musky community is in support of for the Green Bay fishery.

We have drafted a resolution for Green Bay and it’s tirbutaries in response to the alarming number of 50″ muskies that we’re harvested from the waters of Green Bay in 2006. Not only were the harvest numbers alarming, these were very young fish in the 10 to 12 year old range with at least 5 years of steady growth, perhaps more.

Passing this would also put Wisconsin in conjunction with the current Great Lakes size limits enforced by Canada, which is 54″.

We have also received a wide range of suggestions on other ways to address this system and at this time the overall opinion is that this 54″ proposal is an achievable goal for this system. We have writen the proposal with guidance and help from the WDNR and believe this is the right course of action.

I have e-mailed the final copy of the proposal to the authors for each county. Here’s another point of concern. There has been discussion about proposing this only in the counties adjacent to the Green Bay system to avoid introducing it in counties where folks may not care and vote it down. On the other hand, introducing this around the state and getting it passed around the state would make A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT IN SUCCEEDING with this proposal.

While we have a great number of authors (which is half the battle) the other HUGE factor is getting as many people to each county hearing to vote in support of the proposal. It will not matter if we get an author to submit this if there isn’t anyone there to vote insupport of it…..so the “other half” of the battle is in YOUR hands, YOU who are reading this….PLEASE attend and vote.

Here are the counties, authors, and locations this is getting proposed at for those of you who want to attend and vote.

Baron County – Bob Bebson
Old Courthouse Building Lower Level – Auditorium
330 E.La Salle Ave – Barron

Brown County – Jay Zahn
Green Bay Southwest High School – Auditorium
1331 Packerland Dr. – Green Bay

Dane County – Gerard Hellenbrand
Dane County Alliant Energy Center
1919 Alliant Energy Way – Madison

Door County – Mike Healy
Sturgeon Bay High School – Auditorium
1230 Michigan – Sturgeon Bay

Douglas County – Roger Olsen
Superior Senior High School
2600 Catlin Ave. – Superior

Forest County – Dan Lazzeroni
Crandon High School – Auditorium
9750 USH 8 W – Crandon

Iowa County – Rolly Squire
Dodgeville High School – Gymnasium
912 W. Chapel St. – Dodgeville

Jefferson County – Jim Furley
Jefferson County Fairgrounds – Activity Center
503 N. Jackson Ave. – Jefferson

Kenosha County – Terry Bitz
Bristol Grade School – Auditorium
20121 83rd St. – Bristol

Kewaunee County – VACANT – SOMEONE PLEASE TAKE THIS COUNTY
Kewaunee High School – Auditorium
911 2nd St. – Kewaunee

Manitowoc County – Rob Howe
UW Manitowoc – Theater
705 Viebahn St. – Manitowoc

Marathon County – Mike Seager
D.C. Everst Middle School – Auditorium
9302 Schofield Ave. – Schofield

Marinette County – Dave Wineburner
Crivitz High School – Auditorium
400 South Ave. – Crivitz

Milwaukee County – R.J. Sokolosky
Greenfield High School – Auditorium
4800 S. 60th St. – Greenfield

Oconto County – Dale Vercauteren
Suring High School – Cafeteria
411 E. Algoma St. – Suring

Oneida County – Jim Stewart
James Williams Jr. High – Auditorium
915 Arcadia – Rhinelander

Outagamie County – Tim Sheppard
Riverview Middle School – Auditorium
101 Oak St. – Kaukauna

Portage County – Mike Bolinski
Ben Franklin Middle School – Auditorium
2000 Polk St. – Stevens Point

Racine County – Charlie Buhler
Union Grove High School – Auditorium
3433 S. Colony Ave. – Union Grove

Shawno County – Curt Fleener
Shawno Middle School – LG Rm
1050 A. Union St. – Shawno

Sheboygan County – Greg Wells
Sheboygan Falls High School – Auditorium
220 Amherst Ave. – Sheboygan Falls

Vilas County – Steve Heiting
Sayner Community Center
Golf Course Road – Sayner

Washburn County – Jim Strode
WI AG Research Station – Conference Rm
W6646 HWY 70 – Spooner

Waukesha County – Dennis Radloff
Waukesha County Tech. College – C052
800 Main St. – Pewaukee

Waupaca County – Don Ladubel
Waupaca High School – Auditorium
E2325 King Rd. – Waupaca

Winnebago County – Joe Junion
Webster Stanly Auditorium – Auditorium
915 Hazel St. – Oshkosh

All locations will be meeting on Monday – April 16th, 2007 @ 7:00 PM.

I know there may be a few counties listed that show different authors than that of the initial list. I appologize if you are not listed here as the author of a county you volunteered for…with all the help and shuffling of papers I finished this with the majority of folks I had on my e-mail lisiting. If you volunteered to author and are not listed here…please still attend and vote, and know that your were not “omitted” on purpose. It has been a challenge to contact everyone and maintain contact info.

Thanks again to everyone for all your support and feedback along the way. This is a great move for Wisconsin which can give Green Bay something more than the Packers to be proud off…a future world “

Why do you think there was an alarming number of 50″ fish harvested on Green Bay and where do you get your harvested fish numbers from? There was a large number of 50″ fish caught and a number of 55″ fish, where is the threshold published that constitutes an alarming number? Where is the data to back up your claim and how many fish were caught and released during the season vs those caught and kept illegally in the spring?

You know as well as any avid musky fisherman that a 50″ fish is a trophy of a lifetime and some seasoned angler may choose to mount the one caught in their life. That is a personal choice and not one that should be taken away because you feel there is an alarming number of fish caught because you saw a few pictures on the internet. Although it would not be my choice to keep any fish why do you have this elitist attitude and want to prevent someone else from their trophy of a lifetime caught during the open season? Why do you site the Great Lakes size limits enforced by Canada, which is 54″. We have a different climate around Green Bay than what Canada does so why should we manage our fish like they do? There are very few anglers that possess the skills to catch those larger fish on this massive body of water after opening day and these regulations will do nothing to stop the people from illegally harvesting such trophies before the opener. The select few musky anglers that do catch these fish during the open season are extremely respectful and release them all because they know it might be them that catches the next world record.

Again changing this size limit will do nothing to curtail the walleye fisherman from catching this class of fish in the spring before the season is open and certainly will not stop those that are going to break the law just because they caught a 50″ fish. If you are trying to regulate the extremely low number of fish caught during the open season by the worm soakers you will have again missed the mark as a number of them that fish the “bay” and catch fish accidentally will not know or care about the law and if are so inclined to keep a fish of that caliber would do it anyway.

Here are a couple of things that would help all fishermen and in the end be time better spent.

1. Help stop out of state landowners and lake associations from trying to privatize “THEIR LAKES”
2. Ask the WDNR to provide more or improved access to our waterways
3. Ask the WDNR to be more pro-active with invasive species and not throw up there hands and limit anglers rights after years of ignoring the root problem
4. Ask the WDNR to stop land owners from cutting or killing or removing habitat from the waters in front of their homes (weeds, wood or other natural occurrences)
5. Ask the WDNR to crack down on the large number of perch anglers on the bay that take multiple limits each day so the muskies have the forage to grow to more than 54″

IT IS NOT PERSONAL, WE DO NOT NEED MORE REGULATION OR RESTRICTION – WE NEED ENFORCEMENT OF EXISTING LAWS!!!

As you will read in my very first sentence, I am not the author of the info I posted, I was posting it for a friend. I will see about getting the info you have questions on and posting that as well.

Hey fishcrazy, here is what Dennis Radloff wrote in responce to your questions (your questions are in black and his answers are in blue)…….

“Alright….here’s some responses to the best of my ability…..this is not a “solo” effort….there is a large level of support through the musky industry including support at the DNR level from some of the folks who work on the Green Bay system.”

“Why do you think there was an alarming number of 50″ fish harvested on Green Bay and where do you get your harvested fish numbers from? There was a large number of 50″ fish caught and a number of 55″ fish, where is the threshold published that constitutes an alarming number? Where is the data to back up your claim and how many fish were caught and released during the season vs those caught and kept illegally in the spring?”

“I don’t know how many…if any…were kept illegally…and the number of 50″+ fish that were kept in the fall of 2006 are figured to be around 20 in the 50″ – 53” range, which is an incredible number of fish considering a 7 mile stretch of river in a period of about 60 days. Nobody is “getting down” on anyone for keeping leagaly caught fish, during open seasn, by liscensed angler. The alarming aspect of these figures is that half of these fish were aged by the DNR and they were only in the 10 – 13 year old bracket of their life….these are fish with a solid 10 years of growth ahead of them and given the dynamics of this system there is a legitimate chance of Green Bay generating a new world record fish in the next decade….giving these young giants a few more year to grow will surely increase those chances.”

“You know as well as any avid musky fisherman that a 50″ fish is a trophy of a lifetime and some seasoned angler may choose to mount the one caught in their life. That is a personal choice and not one that should be taken away because you feel there is an alarming number of fish caught because you saw a few pictures on the internet. ”

“We are not trying to “take away” anyones right to mount a fish…they will just have to wait until it’s 54″ instead…all the better in my opinion…if they want to keep a 50″ fish for a skin mount or for whatever reaseon ther are hundred of musky lakes through out Wisconsin with a 34″ size limit with many of them offering 50″ opportunities.”

“Although it would not be my choice to keep any fish why do you have this elitist attitude and want to prevent someone else from their trophy of a lifetime caught during the open season?”

“I hardly believe that our stand point is “elitist” we are making a combined effort to conserve and preserve a fishery that has become something truely special and unique for the state of Wisconsin, passing a 54″ size increase would surely preserve this fishery that has had thousands of dollars invested to establish…and as stated earlier this size limit would help contribute to the possiblilty of generating a new world record for this body of water. “

“Why do you site the Great Lakes size limits enforced by Canada, which is 54″. We have a different climate around Green Bay than what Canada does so why should we manage our fish like they do? ”

Because they are managing for a trophy caliber fishery which is something Green Bay has the components to do also.

“There are very few anglers that possess the skills to catch those larger fish on this massive body of water after opening day and these regulations will do nothing to stop the people from illegally harvesting such trophies before the opener. The select few musky anglers that do catch these fish during the open season are extremely respectful and release them all because they know it might be them that catches the next world record. ”

There are very few anglers that possess the skills to catch those larger fish on this massive body of water after opening day and these regulations will do nothing to stop the people from illegally harvesting such trophies before the opener. The select few musky anglers that do catch these fish during the open season are extremely respectful and release them all because they know it might be them that catches the next world record.

“Again changing this size limit will do nothing to curtail the walleye fisherman from catching this class of fish in the spring before the season is open and certainly will not stop those that are going to break the law just because they caught a 50” fish. If you are trying to regulate the extremely low number of fish caught during the open season by the worm soakers you will have again missed the mark as a number of them that fish the “bay” and catch fish accidentally will not know or care about the law and if are so inclined to keep a fish of that caliber would do it anyway”

I agreed that you made a ton of great debate on all the points listed through out here, however, on this closing statement I disagree with every word. I don’t see anyone keeping htese fish in the spring, and we’re not talking about the worm soakers, and more so….if someone is going to break the law and violate that’s hardly a reason to not make any effort to make a change to improve a fishery…if 54″ passes in the end I believe the greater majority will obey 54″…..until it’s 54″ though they are obeying 50″.

Hopefully you will join us and vote YES to get this on the ballot for next year…we need all the support we can get…and when (if) this ever passe I don’t think it will be long before Green Bay has more to be proud of besides the Packers!!!!!!!!

Here’s my 2 cents……if you feel that you don’t want this ruling passed, then feel free to go and vote NO, the choice is yours. My only intention here is to pass the word along. Also, if you further wish to debate this matter, I have permission to pass on to you his phone number where you can talk to Dennis in person – just PM me and I’ll give it to you.

this special reg for a special body of water with such growth potential sounds good to me, imagine the amount of income that would come into the area first from a world class musky fishery with real world record possibilty’s, then if a few monsters are caught or a world record it would be huge for the local economy plus a very nice feather in our great states cap. One thing I have learned over the years is this- true blue musky fishermen are a breed apart so I would imagine you will recieve alot of strange reaction to this from people of that ilk. This is nothing personal just my opinion from observations. Take the guy that fished his whole life for a trophy and kept that huge musky row trolling last year, biggest musky in the state in 20 years. You would of thought that someone had shot there first born by keeping that musky the way some people reacted. They certainly are a strange breed….

“Statewide total was 1108 for it and 343 against in the 27 counties where it was brought forth for a vote.

Next year we’ll see how the whole state feels as it will appear on the statewide ballot in all 72 counties.”

in agreement with fishcrazy, 54″ is ridiculous. Pretty soon we will have a 32″ walleye size limit and a 11″ bluegill limit. Fishing is about, just that FISHING, not about “creating” a new world record.