MN-fish Conference – FFS was a hot topic

isu22andy wrote:

My wife wanted to buy FFS for my birthday and I declined . Was honestly concerned I was going to catch less fish with it cause I’d be dicking around with it too much . The worst is the species – I’d be chasing a 8 lb drum on the river thinking it’s a 28 inch walleye . Ice is a different story .

I still like to argue I bet it’s 5 percent or less that actually use it to an advantage . I see hundreds of FFS poles on pool 4 … and they ain’t catching anymore than the next guy .

I agree that it’s everywhere and a majority of people either don’t have enough experience with it or aren’t using it in a way that significantly increases their success rates. With that said, I think the next generations of FFS will do way more of the interpreting, managing settings, and even turning to stay with pods of fish in a simplistic more user friendly way that’s basically automated.

mnfisherman18 wrote:

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realize FFS is impacting muskie fishing negatively. Same goes for panfish on smaller lakes. So over time your average angler will be catching smaller and less fish thus impacting their enjoyment. Its so early that there has not been time to actually conduct long-term credible studies, but seeing and hearing countless stories about the negative impacts at least warrants a conversation.

Its obvious other technologies have impacted fishing, I don’t think theres a person here who would dispute that. I am not advocating for a blanket ban on FFS by any means, but the question is where do you draw the line? I don’t understand why people think we cant or shouldn’t even consider regulating it when other sports such as hunting have clearly demonstrated its possible.

Great post.

The “where to draw the line” needs to be established before technology runs well beyond that line. It’s not about what FFS does now, rather what technology will do moving forward. The technology for average anglers to decimate fish populations in multiple settings without a huge learning curve is not that far off. …and that’s coming from someone who isn’t supportive of some widespread ban on FFS in its current form. My concerns are for “tomorrow” not today and think proactive policies will have to be put in place at some point. I have very very little faith in common people to manage a public resource on their own free will when technology makes it so easy to exploit the resource.

So the fishing industry leaders known as Mnfish who are all owners, reps or talking heads for the fishing industry will fund an unbiased opinion of FFS? Am I the only one who sees the joke here? Next thing you know the head of the Sinola Cartel will be appointed head of the DEA because he knows how things work.

And then they raised the walleye limit on Red.
Go figure

The difference is with FFS most people are looking at the screen the ENTIRE time they’re retrieving a cast.
[/quote]

Everyone in the boat is or just the Captain calling signals?
Kinda like how a Guide does it and when you get on fish it is fun as he$$ to watch the fish either take it or leave it. IMHO

blackbay wrote:

I wonder if anyone is working on front facing thermal imaging that a guy can mount to the front of a SXS to pick out grouse as you drive down a trail. A limit is a limit ya know.

BuT iT sTiLl CaN’t HeLp yOu sHOoT StRaiGHT!?!!!

EPG (corona in one hand, cigar in mouth, calling shots off the FFS):

“I’m the captain now!”

I’m not looking to start a war here, I just have a question and would like some perspective.

How is FFS much different from super powerful binoculars or rifle scopes or practically invisible blinds for hunting? Its technology used to improve outcomes, but it doesn’t guarantee anything… I 100% agree that this technology COULD be abused by folks who have no intentions of following the laws (fish possession in this case) but that can be said about mankind for pretty much everything…

JoeMX1825 wrote:

I’m not looking to start a war here, I just have a question and would like some perspective.

How is FFS much different from super powerful binoculars or rifle scopes or practically invisible blinds for hunting? Its technology used to improve outcomes, but it doesn’t guarantee anything… I 100% agree that this technology COULD be abused by folks who have no intentions of following the laws (fish possession in this case) but that can be said about mankind for pretty much everything…

I don’t think that’s the applicable comparison. It would like if you could use thermal imaging for hunting.

Do your super power binos and scope have heat signatures to show you the animals hiding in the brush or cattails? Or just a better view of what you already know is there.

It would be like if you could use thermal imaging, but also shoot a deer and then release it back into the woods unharmed

Hunting and fish never compare well. Apples to oranges comparison

I wish they would let us all drop a net down and then use FFS to locate the fish to pluck them out one by one.
I’m sick of watching the fish all scatter in shallow water from being spooked.

Certain lines have been drawn with technology and the harvesting of large game. It’s illegal to use 2 way radios in a way that helps harvest deer. I believe most states have laws on the books that forbid the use of drones while actively hunting large game. Yet for some reason many feel that fishing cannot possibly have lines drawn on technological assistance to harvest (or harvest and release) fish.

I don’t know what the “line” is for fishing. I don’t feel the current versions of FFS are something that need to be banned or strictly regulated. I DO feel that there has to be some kind of parameters at some point and planning for the future isn’t a bad idea. It’s not as if technology is just going to stop.

Was there just a lot of conversation about it making it a “hot” topic. Or controversial?
Someone who was there:

Attachments:

1. 

   Screenshot_20250401_093219_Instagram.jpg
   

The “line” for muskie fishing is, unlike hunting, you are not allowed to kill a muskie in Minnesota, unless you catch that <1% fish that’s 54″+ or you are poacher

IMHO jumping to the conclusion that FFS is going to affect fishing for everyone and needs to be regulated is a kneejerk reaction.

2-part question for all. In the last 40 years there have been several technological advancements that have made it easier to find fish. With the addition of sonar flashers, 2D sonar, side imaging, gps mapping, cameras, larger more capable boats, etc., in your personal experience have these advancements made fishing worse for you in the state of MN? And if you think it is worse overall, which of those items is responsible?

My personal experience is that fishing is as good now as at any time in the last 40 years. I see ups and downs on the lakes I fish (no doubt a smaller sample size than some of you), but generally speaking the fish are still there.

tswoboda wrote:

It would be like if you could use thermal imaging, but also shoot a deer and then release it back into the woods unharmed

Hunting and fish never compare well. Apples to oranges comparison

Agree. The comparison to hunting is silly IMO. There is only one outcome when hunting.

I think it’s worth noting MN has added reduced panfish limits on 150+ of the most popular panfish lakes in the last 5 years. Restricting bag limits is happening. Does killing 5 bluegill using FFS do more harm to the fishery than taking 20 bluegill using a vexilar?

I went out of my way to fish 5 fish limit panfish lakes this winter and the numbers and size structure is incredible on them that have had it for some years.

LabDaddy1 wrote:

BuT iT sTiLl CaN’t HeLp yOu sHOoT StRaiGHT!?!!!

Everyone always shoots straight but it depends where they’re aiming!!

10klakes wrote:

Was there just a lot of conversation about it making it a “hot” topic. Or controversial?
Someone who was there:

So, were the enthusists the general public or MnFish?

This will be my 6th season with LiveScope but didn’t use it much in the boat the first season since I didn’t have a pole for the boat. It has actually made fishing/catching more fun for me. I’m 65 now and have always liked gadgets. I like catching fish and this gadget increases the chances for me to catch a fish because it helps you find fish quicker, especially ice fishing for panfish. I’ve also learned a lot about how fish react to presentations. I always have it in the boat but don’t always use it. For walleyes on the ice, if I use it it’s for entertainment for watching the fish come in and bite or not bite or telling someone else in the house that a fish is coming your way.
I probably keep fewer than 30 walleyes, 15 crappies and 15 bluegill a year so I’m not a threat to any fishery. Haven’t kept a bass in years and the same for northern, sorry Glenn57. Still love to catch them, though.
I don’t know how to handle the issue of targeting muskies post spawn when they are vulnerable to being caught and handled. Can’t close down a lake for fishing them like you can a river or bay for walleye or maybe you can. I would think this is only being done on a handful of lakes.

I don’t think I’m as concerned about Joe Blow having it and using it. My concern is the guides and glory seekers. Especially when it comes to Muskie. You almost never saw a guy hunting Muskie in a open basin prior to FFS. The reason, A) you ween’t certain they were there, B) they could be anywhere. It was a crap shoot to stumble into one for most guys. Thats not the case anymore. These units are becoming more and more powerful with a longer reach. The fish that weren’t previously being harassed and hunted are now being found. Maybe it’s the guides that disgust me the most. The same guys paying lip service to conservation are the ones leading the “look at me” charge.

Is it the basin fish specifically that make a muskie fisherman a look at me glory seeker?

Maybe I’m not following the right FB feeds or something. But haven’t Muskie fisherman always taken pics of their catch? I mean when you only catch 1-2 fish an outing you’re more likely to take a picture. No?

If guides are posting picks well that’s called marketing. If you owned a gym would you post pics of jacked people or fat people. Or just take a picture of an empty bench press machine.

So is it the FFS sonar tech that annoys some or is it FB Twitter Utube etc? Cause those things annoy me too but are easily avoidable as well.

Those deep water trollers are mysterious!

Not when they are blasting rock music in a pontoon with giant boards off a pontoon going 5mph.

Joe Jarl wrote:

2-part question for all. In the last 40 years there have been several technological advancements that have made it easier to find fish. With the addition of sonar flashers, 2D sonar, side imaging, gps mapping, cameras, larger more capable boats, etc., in your personal experience have these advancements made fishing worse for you in the state of MN? And if you think it is worse overall, which of those items is responsible?

No, all the stuff I use and depend on in order to catch fish has had no impact. The stuff I can’t afford or just don’t want to buy that is the downfall of fishing as we know it. (end sarcasm) I agree fishing is as great as it’s ever been imo.

Dutch there were a bunch of basin musky videos from Lake Vermillion a decade or so ago. I think they were Lindner produced, but could be misremembering.

JoeMX1825 wrote:

Those deep water trollers are mysterious!

I was thinking the same thing.
I know nothing about muskies but there are plenty that have promoted basin trolling for walleyes for over 25 years.

Full draw wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>JoeMX1825 wrote:</div>
Those deep water trollers are mysterious!

I was thinking the same thing.
I know nothing about <strong class=”ido-tag-strong”>muskies but there are plenty that have promoted basin trolling for <strong class=”ido-tag-strong”>walleyes for over 25 years.

There’s a dedicated group on my lake that are always trolling over 80′ of water, I always feel like i’m missing out on something cool…I don’t think I’d have the patience for it…