|
Post by Joel on Oct 12, 2008 7:50:52 GMT -6
Here's a letter to the DNR Commissioner from a concerned Local Bass Angler. FYI-
Hello,
Please take the time to resend this message to Mark Holsten, commissioner of the DNR to stop the muskie stocking program at Pokegama Lake. Mark.Holsten@dnr.state.mn.us
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Muskie Stocking in Pokegama Lake Itasca County Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2008 06:58:06 -0500 From: Joe Bonelli <info@mediasensemn.com> To: Mark.Holsten@dnr.state.mn.us
Hi Mark,
It has been brought to my attention that the DNR intends to start stocking Muskies in Pokegama Lake as early as this fall.
I would like to voice my strong opposition to this as an angler on this body of water. I am primarily a bass fisherman, but have experienced the broad range of species in this lake from bass to walleyes and even some trout. I believe (from experience) that introducing this species is a mistake.
I have been fortunate enough to fish some of the great bodies of water in this state, and Pokegama would have to rank in the top 3 lakes as far as bass fishing goes. It is diverse and has a tremendous population of 17-20 inch bass. It appears to me that the diet of these bass consists mostly of perch, and by introducing another species, you will reduce the amount of feed for this native species.
I have witnessed first hand the invasive nature of the muskie when it is introduced into a non-native habitat. I have been an avid angler on Lake Vermilion (St. Louis County) for some 20 plus years, and have seen the changes the muskie brings when it takes over a lake. They move walleye and bass from their traditional areas into other areas where they become vulnerable to other forces of nature. They compete for the same feed, and they even impact populations directly by eating small and juvenile bass and walleyes.
The DNR spends hundreds of thousands of dollars marketing for the stop to the spread of invasive species, but they then turn around and want to introduce in invasive species into what I consider one of the most perfect bodies of water in the state? It just doesn't make sense to me.
The DNR must not stock Pokegama Lake with muskies.
|
|
|
Post by suckerfish666 on Oct 12, 2008 18:54:39 GMT -6
you sound like a walleye fisherman. the top bass lakes in the state can be debated, but it cant be debated that the following lakes are some of the best in the Minnesota: Minnetonka Leech Mille Lacs Woman Lake Chain Little Boy Chain what do these lakes have in common? Top end muskie fishing. fear fishing pressure, pollution, shore line development, etc. dont fear the muskie.
|
|
|
Post by j0eb0nelli on Oct 13, 2008 18:30:32 GMT -6
Muskie force the bass to the shallow cover like reeds, rice, pads, millfoil etc. Pokegama lacks the necessary shallow cover to support the population of largemouth and more importantly smallmouth. I've been fishing smallmouth on Vermilion since they introduced muskie, and you rarely find smallmouth deeper than 6 or 7 feet in that body of water.
It's funny how a small spiny crustacean can be considered an invasive species, but a 50 inch long eating machine like a muskie can be introduced and not effect the ecosystem.
|
|
|
Post by tackleman on Oct 14, 2008 8:56:50 GMT -6
Sorry to hear you guys got stuck with the muskie stocking . They were dead set on putting them in Gull also . Don't know how that got shut down but as far as I know there will be know Muskies in Gull I do see the problem with putting them in Pokegama . Lack of weeds out deep and limited shallow cover will make the bass easy prey . Muskies INC has a lot of political pull I think in this state . If bass guys were that organized we wouldn't be having the troubles we have every year .
Smitty
|
|
|
Post by j0eb0nelli on Oct 15, 2008 14:38:24 GMT -6
I recvd an email from Chris Kavanaugh at the DNR in Grand Rapids, and basically, the DNR had a wild hair up their butt to put muskies into lakes that didn't have them and went out and did the surveys and regardless of the response they will move forward. I have the documents if anyone wants them to look at - Muskies Inc was very active in lobbying for this and he even mentioned that many comments in favor of were from outside the state (WTF). Local comments made showed 43 in favor and 22 opposed (that's 34% against by the way) and even the GPLA had 18 respondents to a survey 10 for and 6 against with 2 no opinion (that's 33% agains). So long story short, people from outside of the state want muskies planted, more than one-third of the people are against the plan, 42% of winter fisherman opposed it, so the DNR deems it a good idea. I look at some of the research, and it states that significant increases and decreases in CPUE's existed, but because the mean CPUE didn't consistenly change negatively, it was deemed that the muskies coexisted well with other species. They also noted that bluegill and crappie CPUE's rose significantly after muskies were introduced (they didn't draw any conclusions from this? ). I guess my next step is to post delicious recipes for muskellunge. Stay tuned.
|
|
|
Post by whydoit on Oct 15, 2008 21:19:31 GMT -6
I don't understand how you can draw or correlate that muskies mean good bass fishing. I'd liken that to saying that adding Timberwolves helps deer hunting. Sure some of those lakes are good for both. That doesn't mean that'll be the case on Pokie. You are willing to take a chance? Is it worth the risk? The fact is something will change, no one knows what that will be, we (including the DNR) can only theorize.
The fact of the matter is...Pokegama is a lake that is on fire right now for all native species. It is one of the best lake in the state. No need to change it. Managing Muskies cost more tax payer money then raising walleyes etc. Why do I care (and I am 1 that represents the majority of the anglers)? Muskie anglers represent a small population of the whole. This is purely a St. Paul issue to push something that isn't needed here.
There are a lot of reasons why it was stopped in Gull. Public oposition was a HUGE part of it. The DNR is funded by us, if we say no, they listen. The real question is, who is willing to stand up and say NO. Please follow suit with Mr. Bonelli. My hat is off to you.
Vermilion is a case where it didn't go as suspected.
|
|
|
Post by j0eb0nelli on Oct 18, 2008 19:26:06 GMT -6
Muskie signs are already posted at Pokegama public access. they don't waste any time.
|
|
|
Post by suckerfish666 on Oct 19, 2008 4:06:30 GMT -6
i was not making a correlation between muskie population and good bass fishing. was making a point that muskie population in any given water system doesnt necessarily destroy said bass fishery. many a good a point has been made in this vein. however, none of it makes any real connection between muskie and bass populations. this cannot be attributed to our ignorance. rather, it CAN be attributed to the dearth of knowledge the DNR has on the muskie's effect on different freshwater systems. regardless, i find the prescence of muskie in the lakes I bass fish to be a positive, not a negative. as setting the hook on a 50" essox is a rush, regardless of how jaded we bass fisherman tend to be. the popularity of muskie fishing is growing exponentially every year. there is no stopping it it. with only 89 official muskie fisheries in this state, something has to give. Would LOVE to see muskies in gull and whitefish chains. to make more people on this server angry, would also love to see Eurasion water millfoil on previously mentioned lakes.
|
|
|
Post by timberspin on Oct 19, 2008 4:38:12 GMT -6
So, maybe the first step to be done in the muskie planting scheme is to increase the capacity of the existing boat landings or provide new boat landings for Pokegama. If muskie plantings are going to draw more fisherman as suggested, where are they going to launch and park their vehicles. It is already a cluster on most weekends. I've caught and released bass up to 16 inches in length that were raked by muskies. I have to wonder how they will affect the smallmouth population.
|
|
|
Post by Bill M. on Oct 21, 2008 5:51:27 GMT -6
A letter to Holsten? Tell your friend Joel that was a complete waste of time in his life and 10 to 20 minutes he can't get back.
Anyone who is opposed to this should call the DNR or stop by their office in St. Tax Paul. Letters, wrote 5 to Holsten last year and never heard a thing.
Whomever wrote about the boat ramp issue at Poke has a good point.
|
|
|
Post by Bill M. on Oct 23, 2008 12:53:20 GMT -6
If anyone is interested, I can send the documents that were sent to me by Chris Kavanaugh, area fisheries supervisor in Grand Rapids, regarding this issue.
Post your e-mail address on here or send me a pm with your e-mail or e-mail me directly and I'll send you the information I received.
|
|
|
Post by Bill M. on Oct 23, 2008 13:07:03 GMT -6
Quote from DNR:
Justification: In addition to Pokegama Lake having more trophy potential than other area lakes, a new muskellunge lake would help distribute fishing pressure from other local lakes. Pokegama Lake is a large and diverse water body with nearly 44 miles of shoreline and literally hundreds of diverse underwater structural elements. The lake size, depth, physical habitat, water quality and prey base is very similar to Deer Lake where trophy potential has been realized. Nearby muskie fishing opportunities include Blandin Reservoir and the Mississippi River downstream of Blandin Dam, Deer Lake (approximately 12 miles north), Moose, Spider and North Star are further north. Leech Lake is approximately 30 miles to the west (straight line distance).
One important aspect to providing a diversity of angling opportunities is accessibility. Currently, fishing pressure on other smaller lakes has increased to the point were anglers often compete for a limited amount of spots to fish. Lakes managed for muskies have some of the highest angler use per acre in the area (Mero 2002). Pokegama Lake has seven designated public accesses developed with ramps and parking areas, as well as several resorts and campgrounds that also have launching facilities.
|
|
|
Post by Bill M. on Oct 23, 2008 13:08:56 GMT -6
Pokegama Muskie Stocking Proposal – Public Input and recommendation (10/2006)
A total of 256 comments were received, 227 support, 28 opposed and 1 neutral. Additionally, two petitions in favor of the stocking were received. One included 91 names and the other included 48 names, however, a number of the names on the petitions had also submitted an individual comment. Several individuals also took the opportunity to submit multiple comments over the course of the comment period.
The Muskies, Inc. clubs were very active in promoting the proposal and many comments were from outside the area and even from other states such as Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois, North Dakota, California, Arizona and Idaho. A number of comments in support were from the Twin Cities Metro Area. Of the more local comments (Grand Rapids/Cohasset) that could be identified, 43 were in favor and 22 opposed. Of those that opposed the biggest concern was that the lake may be closed to spearing. Other comments expressed concern to existing gamefish, particularly walleye, increased boat traffic, and the perception that we spend a disproportionate amount on a special interest group.
The Greater Pokegama Lake Association was addressed at a lake association meeting in July and there was general support for the proposal. The GPLA polled their members via e-mail in September and 18 responded, 10 in support, 6 opposed and 2 neutral. Again, several of these comments were duplicates of individual comments submitted earlier.
Finally, a creel survey was conducted in 2000 on Pokegama Lake and part of the interview included a question about muskie stocking. The results from 734 summer interviews were 67% supported, 23% opposed and 10% had not opinion. Results from 208 winter interviews were 37% supported, 42% opposed, and 21% had no opinion. Interviewees that responded opposed were asked a follow-up question; “Would you change your opinion if the DNR had no intention to ban spearing?”. Of the 87 interviews that included the follow-up question 24% said they would change their response if the know spearing would remain open.
RECOMMENDATION: Based on the comments received overall, and in particular from the local area, we recommend that we proceed with the proposal to stock muskies in Pokegama Lake following the proposed plan beginning as soon as fish are available.
|
|