Northwest Fishing Reports

I thought I read someone was trying to get the WDFW to change the size limit on the tigers to 48". Does anyone know how that is going and how hard it will be to change the size limit. The fish in Silver Lake are getting over the 36" size and I know alot of people are keeping them. I would like to convince them to let them go, but not many people are interested in it. FEAR NO FISH!

If you go to the WDFW website you can send your opinion in on the proposal. I sent mine in yesterday. I think it looks good for them to up the minimum size for retention. Mike

I agree with jigman..though I did get the info from the WDFW newsletter that in fact it is up as a new proposal. Its on the agenda for a change from 36 to 48 inches. Looks like it may in fact take place in 2008. It was asked to be moved to 50 inches but from the sound of it the WDFW would be okay for move to 48". The main thing about these fish is that they DO NOT REPRODUCE!! So the increase is very importatnt. And there are NOT going to be any fish released this next year do to the VHS virus back in Minnesota, where our state obtains the eggs from. So please catch,photo and release these creatures...thanks!!

I filed the proposed rule change last spring with encouragement from WDFW warmwater staff, who support a higher size limit. I originally filed it as a catch-and-release only rule, but support for that was lacking in both WDFW and Muskies Inc. Chapter 57, so I refiled it as a 50-inch minimum size limit. WDFW endorsed the rule changed, with a modification to 48 inches. Internal pressure for the modification came from Region 5.

The F&W Commission meets November 2-3 in Chelan to consider and adopt rule changes. You have until Nov. 1 to get written comments to WDFW. I may or may not attend the Chelan hearings in person; probably not, since I live in Seattle and it's a long trip.

I will argue for adoption of my 50-inch proposal. If you want to catch 30 lb. tiger muskies in Washington, then we need a 50-inch minimum. Most 48 and 49 inch fish are not going to break 30 lbs.; these fish typically weigh around 27 to 29 lbs. Obviously, the 48 and 49 inchers are where any future 30's have to come from, so we've got to leave these fish in the water.

I'm not aware of any organized opposition to raising the tiger musky minimum size limit, and I think it is likely to be adopted, but unless I can make a very persuasive case for the 50-inch limit, it's most likely the Commission will go with the Department's recommendation (i.e., 48 inches). If you agree with me that we need a 50-inch limit, it's important you tell the Commission, because letters and messages supporting the higher limit could make the difference. Nothing persuades a public rulemaking body like a show of support from the public for a proposal!

You should all understand that adopting a 50-inch or a 48-inch minimum size limit will not end the killing of smaller fish. There will always be people who either are ignorant of, or don't follow, the regulations. Some people don't know a tiger muskie from a walleye. It's one thing to adopt a regulation; enforcing it is another thing. Game wardens are spread thin, and enforcing tiger muskie size regulations probably is not high on their priority list, and forget about trying to get a county prosecutor to handle a case involving someone killing a 30-inch or 40-inch tiger muskie when they've got their hands full with drug cases. And there's probably at least a few people who resent being regulated enough that they'll flout the regulations just to show they can. Regardless of what the Commission does with this rule proposal, there is still going to be harvest of smaller muskies. And then you have fishing mortality; despite our best efforts, there is no guarantee all of the fish we release will survive.

Thus, it is important that we also support stocking levels adequate to maintain quality fisheries in our tiger muskie lakes. WDFW calculates mortality this way: 2/3rds of the fingerlings die within 1 year, and thereafter 33% per year. To put this in perspective, 48-inch class fish comprise around 1% to 2% of the total population. To keep big fish in our waters, we must:

1) Release our catch;
2) Handle with care;
3) Educate others;
4) Stay on top of, and involved with, the stocking program;
AND
5) Get the minimum size regulation changed so at least the law-abiding folks will release them;
AND
6) Encourage (we can't force) WDFW's enforcement division to support this regulation by enforcing it when needed, i.e., we do want the wardens to write citations when they catch people taking undersize tiger muskies.

I would argue the first (3) items are the most important things we can do, especially (3), starting with getting WDFW to post notices of the new size rule at all boat landings on all of our tiger muskie lakes.

Fantastic overview Don...I agree also with all 6 points at the end.It is important for all outdoorsman/women to look at and follow the regs set by the state WDFW. If your going to fish or hunt,then, study up!! Make sure you know what the regs are for a particular species. Especially if your hunting or fishing somewhere you haven't before. If you have multiple species in the same area make sure you know what is there. DO NOT play the well I DIDN"T KNOW CRAP !!! Be an educated outdoorsman. Don't be a dumb ass and ruin something for someone else. Nothing worse than a dumb ass on the water or in the woods...I'm done..see yah..

muskyhunter wrote:Fantastic overview Don...I agree also with all 6 points at the end.It is important for all outdoorsman/women to look at and follow the regs set by the state WDFW. If your going to fish or hunt,then, study up!! Make sure you know what the regs are for a particular species. Especially if your hunting or fishing somewhere you haven't before. If you have multiple species in the same area make sure you know what is there. DO NOT play the well I DIDN"T KNOW CRAP !!! Be an educated outdoorsman. Don't be a dumb ass and ruin something for someone else. Nothing worse than a dumb ass on the water or in the woods...I'm done..see yah..

I agree with all of the previous points, but the biggest issue with Silver is that some of the fisherman that are keeping the muskies dont give a crap anyway. The Outlook magazine has a picture of a guy claiming that he caught a legal fish only two years after the original plant. Some of them just do what they want no matter what. Makes me mad.

Tollefs, You should turn them into Fish and Game.
Write down there Boat registration number and turn them in!!!
It makes me mad too.

tollefs, I saw that picture too that fish wasn't even 30". If I remember right that guy was holding it on a stringer from shore. I cant believe someone from fish and game did not see that picture and question that guy. If I saw him with that fish I would have done more than question him. The game dept. is pretty good out there they are alway ticketing people for no license out there and for not haveing your parking pass. Maybe instead of trying to educate people, they should just try to stock the lake with pike. Pike fight just as hard, get just as big love in the same cover and can reproduce. Just a thought. FEAR NO FISH!

Interesting read Don! I'm not familiar at all with these Tigers, but I can understand why you want a minimum size up as far as possible. I wouldn't mind seeing some trout lakes adopt minimum sizes and less liberal limits. I understand it wouldn't gain the most favor amongst fishermen, but it does make for some better trout fishing and I'd rather fish at a better lake regardless of the regs, just as long as I caught better fish..

Sam, WDFW does manage some trout lakes as "quality" fisheries, i.e., artificial lures only, single barbless hooks, and catch-and-release. Check your regulations pamphlet or contact WDFW for more details or to find out where these lakes are.

Don Wittenberger wrote:Sam, WDFW does manage some trout lakes as "quality" fisheries, i.e., artificial lures only, single barbless hooks, and catch-and-release. Check your regulations pamphlet or contact WDFW for more details or to find out where these lakes are.

Yep I know where a lot of these lakes are. And many of them are my favorite lakes to fish...

Thanks for getting the ball rolling on this Don. I sent this to them today.

Ms. Preuss,
I would like to add my comments to this proposal #6 (Tiger Muskie Rules) that is going to hopefully be added to state wide fishing regulations in 2008.

I am all for changing the minimum size of Tigers that may be kept. I think that a 50” minimum would be best for the program, but any increase to the min size would be better than not changing it at all.

Here are my reasons for supporting the change:
-Allowing them go grow to a larger size allows them to get big enough to each the fish that they
are meant to target like Pike Minnow and Tynch.
-Allowing them to grow to a larger size gives a better return on investment since they will be in the
body of water for a longer period of time eating the targeted species
-Allowing them to get bigger adds to the sportfishing aspect of stocking them. Most of the anglers
that target these fish want to catch a larger fish. The majority are not fishing for them to eat them.
-This would make it harder for poachers to keep illegal fish. I have seen 33/34 inch fish stretched out
at the launch by fisherman to make them look 36 inches. Would be really hard to make a fish look
50 inches decreasing the chance for poachers to “stretch the truth”.

Thanks you for taking the time to review my comments and I hope that you will add them to the list that is presented at the public hearing.

Thanks,

Frank Tollefson















[quote="Don Wittenberger"]I filed the proposed rule change last spring with encouragement from WDFW warmwater staff, who support a higher size limit. I originally filed it as a catch-and-release only rule, but support for that was lacking in both WDFW and Muskies Inc. Chapter 57, so I refiled it as a 50-inch minimum size limit. WDFW endorsed the rule changed, with a modification to 48 inches. Internal pressure for the modification came from Region 5.

The F&W Commission meets November 2-3 in Chelan to consider and adopt rule changes. You have until Nov. 1 to get written comments to WDFW. I may or may not attend the Chelan hearings in person]