# 40" Minimum Length for Muskies Needed Now!



## Ol'Bassman

A day or two after the recent stocking of advanced musky fingerlings at CC, I noticed a couple (man and woman) working there way around the north shore ramp where the muskies were stocked with a couple of long handled crappie scoop nets scooping up fish and putting them in a 5 galllon bucket. While I watched, they scooped up a half dozen fish in about a five minute time span. They were pretty good at scooping up these fish. The kind of success you get from experience. Which made me wonder how many other times they had been there scooping up muskies. Needlesss to say, it was pretty depressing watching this happen realizing all the effort put into this stocking and the fact that, as far as I know, what they were doing was perfectly legal. There is no minimum size limit on muskies in Ohio. It is mind boggling to me that the state of Ohio does not have a minimum size limit on muskies. They are ignorant of the potential financial impact a well maintained musky population can have on the local economy. All you have to do is look at Kentucky and Cave Run to see how many jobs and business's have been created supporting and maintaining a healthy musky population. If the state is looking for a shovel ready way to stimulate local economies, then stocking more muskies is a good one. This would creat the need for more hatchery employees, bait shops would open that catter to musky fishermen (musky tackle is expensive), guide services, motels, local business have more traffic, etc. It starts with the Ohio DNR treating muskies with the same respect they have for bass and crappie. It starts with a 40" minimum size limit! Its time we got this done!!! I'm calling on all fishermen to contact the DNR and push them for a 40" minimum size limit on muskies state wide.


----------



## blackxpress

There is no size limit but there is a creel limit. 1 per day, any size. It is also illegal to net game fish. Those people are poachers and should've been reported to ODNR immediately.


----------



## Snakecharmer

blackxpress said:


> There is no size limit but there is a creel limit. 1 per day, any size. It is also illegal to net game fish. Those people are poachers and should've been reported to ODNR immediately.


+1 ... How would a 40" limit help in this situation?


----------



## Ol'Bassman

I am not going to defend these people, but if there had been a sign posted at the boat ramp stating a 40" minimum on muskies like the 9" one for crappies, it probably would have been enough to keep this from happening. They probably couldn't tell a musky fingerling from a big gizzard shad. I'm not going to comment on the legality because it blurs the bigger issue of getting the state to post a 40" minimum size limit on muskies. Please comment on whether or not you are for a 40" limit or not and your reasoning.


----------



## Legend killer

You can't go from no size limit to 40". 30" was the old limit at cave run till they moved it to 36" a couple years ago. You caught them red handed why didn't you contact anyone then? Even with a size limit people like that will still ignore the rules.


----------



## jlami

Absolutely!! There is no reason to keep a musky anyway? C&R

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


----------



## Ol'Bassman

Legend killer said:


> You can't go from no size limit to 40". 30" was the old limit at cave run till they moved it to 36" a couple years ago. You caught them red handed why didn't you contact anyone then? Even with a size limit people like that will still ignore the rules.


Why can't you go from no size limit to 40"? Rules like locks only keep honest people honest. There will always be someone out to get around the rules. If we could get a 40" limit set and posted signs where muskies are stocked it would improve the numbers and, above all, the quality of the fish being caught and would put Ohio on the map of musky fishermen worldwide. Go big or go home is my thinking on this! 

I am no park ranger and I'm not up on all the laws about netting game fish so I did not know for certain that a law was being broken or I would have called. I did throw a bunch of outboard motor wake a the rocks they were working to flush any fish in there out away from them before they could get them.

PS: Gone fishing!


----------



## Burks

jlami said:


> Absolutely!! There is no reason to keep a musky anyway? C&R
> 
> Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


Supposedly some people like eating them. I watched a guy harvest 3 muskie at Clear Fork. Called the Ranger......but they didn't really give two craps. "We will look into it when we have time." The guy was still fishing and I had a photo of their plate. But they said they couldn't "prove" it was his car or something. Whatever. Lazy Ranger is all. 

But I'd fully support a size limit. 36" is a good starting point, I wouldn't be against a 40"+ limit either as I personally will never keep a muskie short of a record.


----------



## M.Magis

Why not 20&#8221;? How about 15&#8221;, it would have done the same thing? Just playing devils advocate, but you&#8217;re making it clear this is about you wanting zero catch and keep musky fishing, and not about a size limit. In one sentence you say that a sign would have stopped them, then in the next you say they wouldn&#8217;t know a shad from a musky? So it seems the sign wouldn&#8217;t help a thing. They were already doing something (a couple things) illegal, and you simply let them go about their business without saying anything. Now you want more laws. If citizens don&#8217;t help officers enforce the current regulations by reporting poachers, new regulations don&#8217;t help a thing. It seems you don&#8217;t even know the current regulations?


----------



## Legend killer

I didn't want to bring this topic back up, but if there was no muskie fishing past 80 degree temps the fishery could afford to lose a few fingerlings. Most fingerlings die anyways. I would rather protect the already developed muskie from getting killed by anglers in the heat of the summer.


----------



## blackxpress

Ol'Bassman said:


> Please comment on whether or not you are for a 40" limit or not and your reasoning.


Fine. The answer is "No" and here's why. I trust the biologists to know how to maintain a healthy fishery. If they thought a 40" limit was necessary to protect the fishery they would impose one. I expect the reason they don't is that they don't want the lake to get overpopulated with short fish. You'll get more 40" fish if they're not having to compete for food and habitat with a lake full of hammer handles. That does not excuse people illegally netting fry though. As I said before, those people are poachers and ODNR could ring the whole lake with signs and it wouldn't have any effect on people like them. They either don't know the law or don't care (I suspect it's the latter) but there is no excuse for anybody who buys a license to be ignorant of the law. That's why they give away those free brochures at all the licensing outlets. You know, the ones that have all the game laws in them? 

Bottom line: The fishery belongs to all of us. The game wardens can't be everywhere at once. If everybody obeys the game laws the fishery will thrive. Those who willfully violate those laws destroy the resource we all enjoy which is why it's all of our duty to report poachers when we see them.


----------



## dtigers1984

Legend killer said:


> I didn't want to bring this topic back up, but if there was no muskie fishing past 80 degree temps the fishery could afford to lose a few fingerlings. Most fingerlings die anyways. I would rather protect the already developed muskie from getting killed by anglers in the heat of the summer.


Then why did you bring this topic back up? This comment really shows how little you understand about aquatic ecology. Where do you think developed muskies come from?


----------



## Legend killer

No, I think it shows your ignorance. A fingerling has a rough road to hoe. Disease, being eaten by other fish, etc. The only predator an adult muskie has is man.


----------



## Net

Getting back to the original topic...

So was there any muskies in their bucket or not  

Launch ramps are usually the most popular place to shore fish. We've all heard stories of certain ethnic groups using nets & buckets on small sunfish & crappies so I'm wondering why you would asssume those were muskies? As a rule, do stocked muskie fingerlings stay put near the ramp for days like that? 

I agree with the others. This is a poor example from which to base a size limit argument, but hey I can see you're fired up about it.


----------



## ShutUpNFish

Net said:


> Getting back to the original topic...
> 
> So was there any muskies in their bucket or not
> 
> Launch ramps are usually the most popular place to shore fish. We've all heard stories of certain ethnic groups using nets & buckets on small sunfish & crappies so I'm wondering why you would asssume those were muskies? As a rule, do stocked muskie fingerlings stay put near the ramp for days like that?
> 
> I agree with the others. This is a poor example from which to base a size limit argument, but hey I can see you're fired up about it.


You'd be surprised the shock that a fingerling or immature muskie experiences when they get dumped into a new body of water. I've seen them get stocked in very convenient places and just lay there just to get devoured by bass and other predatory gamefish. It takes them some time to get acclimated to their new environment and chances are slim that any significant percentage of fingerlings survives their first few days in it. Thats why efforts have recently been being made to keep juvenile muskie in the hatcheries longer....this all costs money, so what my local clubs have been doing is raising moneys to feed these muskies and keep them in captivity longer so that they can be stocked at an age where their chances of survival are much higher...

On a side note. Yes higher size/creel limits help, but not as much as one might think really. I would say that an educated/fair guess of serious muskie fishermen in the U.S. that strictly C&R would fall over 80%...Therefore the fish are safe from them. Now you have other fishermen....What percentage of muskie do you seriously feel are getting caught by non-muskie targeting anglers?? Then take that percentage and break it down even further and ask yourself what percentage of them are keeping or killing them? IMO, not any significant number to be alarmed about thats for sure.

These are put and take fisheries really....but people are choosing to C&R and thats terrific. And the main reason for muskie fishing making leaps and bounds over the last 25 years in the eastern part of the country and everywhere else for that matter. However, I DO believe the muskies biggest threat IS disease....overpoplulation is real and a serious issue and nature will take its course whenever needed...I believe that. We need to keep focus on proper management and educating folks/novices the importance of preserving the fishery through good practice and upkeeping/supporting proper management tactics. Thinking about a regulation chage of size is just one of those minute distractions and deals where you're just keeping the honest people honest. Anyone who wants to kill a fish vindictively or take a big fish home to brag or eat; will probably do it regardless of any regulation/law anyhow.


----------



## dtigers1984

Legend killer said:


> No, I think it shows your ignorance. A fingerling has a rough road to hoe. Disease, being eaten by other fish, etc. The only predator an adult muskie has is man.


You're right, I am ignorant.........for trying to argue with an idiot.


----------



## Legend killer

Fingerlings are not thrown into caverun. After the hatchery they go into holding ponds to grow.


----------



## Net

ShutUpNFish, excellent response! Thank you sir.


----------



## ShutUpNFish

dtigers1984 said:


> You're right, I am ignorant.........for trying to argue with an idiot.


No sir...



> The only predator an adult muskie has is man.


Thats ignorance.


----------



## Anzomcik

Legend killer said:


> Fingerlings are not thrown into caverun. After the hatchery they go into holding ponds to grow.


Where do they go after they grow in ponds?

It has been my understanding that musky fingerlings were stocked in the fall, as they hatched in the spring. But if they are held over winter they would be called yearlings. 

I know nothing about how KY does there stocking, so weather or not they went from tanks when they were fry to ponds in the summer to grow should not change the term of fingerling. In the end they are dumped in the lake.


----------



## Legend killer

Anzomcik said:


> Where do they go after they grow in ponds?
> 
> It has been my understanding that musky fingerlings were stocked in the fall, as they hatched in the spring. But if they are held over winter they would be called yearlings.
> 
> I know nothing about how KY does there stocking, so weather or not they went from tanks when they were fry to ponds in the summer to grow should not change the term of fingerling. In the end they are dumped in the lake.


A 15' to 20" fish has a higher survival rate then something under 10"...


----------



## MassillonBuckeye

ShutUpNFish said:


> No sir...
> 
> 
> 
> Thats ignorance.


I'm not so sure.. I also understand an adult muskellunge to be an apex predator. What other animal preys on adult musky?

To the original poster. Proposing a rule to stop what you witnessed isn't going to work for reasons already pointed out in my opinion. If those were gamefish of any sort they were netting, they were already breaking a rule. So you are just giving them another rule to break. They didn't care about the rules and regulations to begin with so what makes you think they are going to care about 10 new ones?


----------



## dtigers1984

Legend killer said:


> A 15' to 20" fish has a higher survival rate then something under 10"...


In Kentucky, Muskies are stocked before they reach 15-20 inches. Here is a good article about the musky raising process in Kentucky:

http://fw.ky.gov/pdf/newsletter0410.pdf


----------



## firstflight111

they are a put and take fish just like the rainbow trout are ..i bet you dont put them back do you ..i keep muskies too .they are good to eat just like bass and gills...


----------



## imalt

ShutUpNFish said:


> You'd be surprised the shock that a fingerling or immature muskie experiences when they get dumped into a new body of water. I've seen them get stocked in very convenient places and just lay there just to get devoured by bass and other predatory gamefish. It takes them some time to get acclimated to their new environment and chances are slim that any significant percentage of fingerlings survives their first few days in it. Thats why efforts have recently been being made to keep juvenile muskie in the hatcheries longer....this all costs money, so what my local clubs have been doing is raising moneys to feed these muskies and keep them in captivity longer so that they can be stocked at an age where their chances of survival are much higher...
> 
> On a side note. Yes higher size/creel limits help, but not as much as one might think really. I would say that an educated/fair guess of serious muskie fishermen in the U.S. that strictly C&R would fall over 80%...Therefore the fish are safe from them. Now you have other fishermen....What percentage of muskie do you seriously feel are getting caught by non-muskie targeting anglers?? Then take that percentage and break it down even further and ask yourself what percentage of them are keeping or killing them? IMO, not any significant number to be alarmed about thats for sure.
> 
> These are put and take fisheries really....but people are choosing to C&R and thats terrific. And the main reason for muskie fishing making leaps and bounds over the last 25 years in the eastern part of the country and everywhere else for that matter. However, I DO believe the muskies biggest threat IS disease....overpoplulation is real and a serious issue and nature will take its course whenever needed...I believe that. We need to keep focus on proper management and educating folks/novices the importance of preserving the fishery through good practice and upkeeping/supporting proper management tactics. Thinking about a regulation chage of size is just one of those minute distractions and deals where you're just keeping the honest people honest. Anyone who wants to kill a fish vindictively or take a big fish home to brag or eat; will probably do it regardless of any regulation/law anyhow.


excellent post


----------



## crittergitter

It's hard to believe the things that get posted in the musky fishing threads anymore. 

A. Musky are stocked in Ohio reservoirs in the fall at an advanced fingerling stage and are between 9-12"s in length. Not a lot of game fish are eating 9-12" musky. I have heard that gulls will feast on them upon release, and for that reason I have heard some clubs will motor around the stocking area and keep the birds at bay and try to encourage the young fish to take cover in their new environment.

B. *Poachers* catching game fish with a net *should always be reported*. Period.

C. As for a size limit in Ohio, I was formerly the BIGGEST proponent for this regulation change. I do feel that more fish are kept and harvested than the ODNR recognizes. Clearly, not all musky fishermen report their catch on the Musky Angler Log, and since harvest of musky is very unpopular any anglers that would keep a musky would be reluctant to report that he kept it. Anglers that are not targeting musky are likely unaware of the MAL and would not report their harvest. However, I believe that the number of musky harvested under "this proposed" 40" mark each year to be a very small number. If CC Reservoir has thousands of musky in it, and 20 were kept this year the result is minimal. The fishing would not be SO much better if those 20 fish had not been kept. It's a numbers game. In fact, purely speculating, 20 fish might be the grand total that a specific reservoir would lose all year counting harvest, delayed mortality (due to hot water and gill damage during fight), and natural causes. There is a *daily bag limit of 1 musky per person*. A size limit would not improve the fishing for most of Ohio's reservoirs in my opinion. 

D. Having said all I have to this point, the greatest challenge facing some of Ohio's musky fisheries is flushed fish. After all, it's a numbers game. If a great many of the fish that are stocked are getting flushed through or over the dam, then you have a major problem affecting the quality of the fishery. Places like Alum Creek and Salt Fork clearly lose a lot of fish during high water events in the spring. If we could fix this problem, then we would have a much better fishery. I admit that I am unsure if this is a problem at the other Ohio musky reservoirs. 

E. My final point is simple. Why do you want a size limit that is 40"s? Is a 40" musky a trophy in your eyes? Is that a "mount" worthy fish? Are you comfortable with every musky 40" or bigger being harvested? Why not set the limit as 46"s? Why not set it as high as 50"s? Serious questions to. Some places have a limit set as 54"s, so why not have that as the size limit in Ohio? At what size are you comfortable with other anglers taking musky out of the lake?


----------



## ShutUpNFish

MassillonBuckeye said:


> I'm not so sure.. I also understand an adult muskellunge to be an apex predator. What other animal preys on adult musky?


What other predator?? Nature, Disease, Sustinance....All more detrimental than humans IMO.


----------



## MassillonBuckeye

Although I understand the point you are trying to make, those aren't predators. Those are various causes of mortality.


----------



## Legend killer

crittergitter said:


> It's hard to believe the things that get posted in the musky fishing threads anymore.
> 
> A. Musky are stocked in Ohio reservoirs in the fall at an advanced fingerling stage and are between 9-12"s in length. Not a lot of game fish are eating 9-12" musky. I have heard that gulls will feast on them upon release, and for that reason I have heard some clubs will motor around the stocking area and keep the birds at bay and try to encourage the young fish to take cover in their new environment.
> 
> B. *Poachers* catching game fish with a net *should always be reported*. Period.
> 
> C. As for a size limit in Ohio, I was formerly the BIGGEST proponent for this regulation change. I do feel that more fish are kept and harvested than the ODNR recognizes. Clearly, not all musky fishermen report their catch on the Musky Angler Log, and since harvest of musky is very unpopular any anglers that would keep a musky would be reluctant to report that he kept it. Anglers that are not targeting musky are likely unaware of the MAL and would not report their harvest. However, I believe that the number of musky harvested under "this proposed" 40" mark each year to be a very small number. If CC Reservoir has thousands of musky in it, and 20 were kept this year the result is minimal. The fishing would not be SO much better if those 20 fish had not been kept. It's a numbers game. In fact, purely speculating, 20 fish might be the grand total that a specific reservoir would lose all year counting harvest, delayed mortality (due to hot water and gill damage during fight), and natural causes. There is a *daily bag limit of 1 musky per person*. A size limit would not improve the fishing for most of Ohio's reservoirs in my opinion.
> 
> D. Having said all I have to this point, the greatest challenge facing some of Ohio's musky fisheries is flushed fish. After all, it's a numbers game. If a great many of the fish that are stocked are getting flushed through or over the dam, then you have a major problem affecting the quality of the fishery. Places like Alum Creek and Salt Fork clearly lose a lot of fish during high water events in the spring. If we could fix this problem, then we would have a much better fishery. I admit that I am unsure if this is a problem at the other Ohio musky reservoirs.
> 
> E. My final point is simple. Why do you want a size limit that is 40"s? Is a 40" musky a trophy in your eyes? Is that a "mount" worthy fish? Are you comfortable with every musky 40" or bigger being harvested? Why not set the limit as 46"s? Why not set it as high as 50"s? Serious questions to. Some places have a limit set as 54"s, so why not have that as the size limit in Ohio? At what size are you comfortable with other anglers taking musky out of the lake?


A fingerling 9-12" is not the size of a bluegill or crappie, they are like a pencil easy prey for other fish.


----------



## ShutUpNFish

MassillonBuckeye said:


> Although I understand the point you are trying to make, those aren't predators. Those are various causes of mortality.


I know that...I was referencing something that was said above....Thanks


----------



## Anzomcik

Legend killer said:


> A 15' to 20" fish has a higher survival rate then something under 10"...


I would agree, whats your point?


----------



## imalt

I still can't believe you saw someone netting musky and didn't report it to the dnr. Not that the officers at caesers creek would do anything anyway but that is besides the point. You can't tell me that you didn't think what you saw was wrong. If you have a bag limit of one fish per day I don't see that a size limit does any good.


----------



## MassillonBuckeye

Legend killer said:


> No, I think it shows your ignorance. A fingerling has a rough road to hoe. Disease, being eaten by other fish, etc. The only predator an adult muskie has is man.





ShutUpNFish said:


> What other predator?? Nature, Disease, Sustinance....All more detrimental than humans IMO.





ShutUpNFish said:


> I know that...I was referencing something that was said above....Thanks


No need to get snippy, I know full well what you were posting in reference to. You think he's a goof and tried to correct him but he was right. Just trying to say don't let your personal matters ruin decent conversations. Sorry


----------



## jlami

Burks said:


> Supposedly some people like eating them. I watched a guy harvest 3 muskie at Clear Fork. Called the Ranger......but they didn't really give two craps. "We will look into it when we have time." The guy was still fishing and I had a photo of their plate. But they said they couldn't "prove" it was his car or something. Whatever. Lazy Ranger is all.
> 
> But I'd fully support a size limit. 36" is a good starting point, I wouldn't be against a 40"+ limit either as I personally will never keep a muskie short of a record.


I have eaten musky and that is exactly why I said there is no reason to keep them. Lol, they are kinda like carp and gar. A blast to catch but unless they are cooked by an old black guy they taste horrible.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


----------



## jlami

Legend killer said:


> No, I think it shows your ignorance. A fingerling has a rough road to hoe. Disease, being eaten by other fish, etc. The only predator an adult muskie has is man.


Which would be all the more reason to allow the harvest of mature fish, whether it be for trophy our consumption. Otherwise we wind up with lakes overpopulated by mature musky and nothing else forcing them to become canibals our even worse aggressive "man eaters". I seen it happen to small lakes MN. You may think I'm joking but I recall several children and adults losing digits off the side of boats, docks and even wading at the beach. In. fact one of the coolest things I ever witnessed myself was a mature goose being aggressively murdered by a huge musky. See now I miss MN!

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


----------



## Legend killer

jlami said:


> Which would be all the more reason to allow the harvest of mature fish, whether it be for trophy our consumption. Otherwise we wind up with lakes overpopulated by mature musky and nothing else forcing them to become canibals our even worse aggressive "man eaters". I seen it happen to small lakes MN. You may think I'm joking but I recall several children and adults losing digits off the side of boats, docks and even wading at the beach. In. fact one of the coolest things I ever witnessed myself was a mature goose being aggressively murdered by a huge musky. See now I miss MN!
> 
> Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


Give me a break!


----------



## jlami

Legend killer said:


> Give me a break!


Google Christmas Lake, Minnetonka MN, better yet google musky attack excelsior MN.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


----------



## muskyhound

The state is doing a tag study, they are planting micro chips in muskies and have anglers on stocked lakes in Ohio that will have a scanner to scan each fish they catch and will be able the report back to the DDR on the fish that have chips, along with that the are doing a study with scanners at out flows that check the escape rate as well, as far as a size limit it won't do a thing in Ohio, I have fished for muskies since the late 80s and I can say every lake goes threw cycles, of lows and hi s, fishing pressure has the greatest effect on the fish more then anything else, except disease, I don't post on the Muskie forums because you guys get Way out of control let the state do there job, we don't always agree with what and how they do it, but I think over all they do a good job, just fish for the fish if you want to eat it eat it don't just take it home and show the gang and throw it in the trash, the best thing you people on here can do for the fish is to help people to understand how to handle these fish so they can be released and survive, so instead of arguing on here educate others on CPR.....


----------



## MassillonBuckeye

I have high tech side scan technology on my boat and I'm here to tell you Alum Creek isn't packed full of huge musky. I've got a decent amount of recordings from the sonar if anyone wants to see it. I can post it to YouTube


----------



## bubba k

jlami said:


> Which would be all the more reason to allow the harvest of mature fish, whether it be for trophy our consumption. Otherwise we wind up with lakes overpopulated by mature musky and nothing else forcing them to become canibals our even worse aggressive "man eaters". I seen it happen to small lakes MN. You may think I'm joking but I recall several children and adults losing digits off the side of boats, docks and even wading at the beach. In. fact one of the coolest things I ever witnessed myself was a mature goose being aggressively murdered by a huge musky. See now I miss MN!
> 
> Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


LMAO!!!!! This dude is CLASSIC!!!!! KILLER MUSKIES?!?!?! HILARIOUS!!!!!


----------



## Weatherby

I can tell you from personal experience that the DNR does not feel a size limit is needed.

I have spent several hours in meetings with DNR officials. We explained our side for wanting a size limit and they explained theirs for the reasons they felt it was not needed.

Basically they feel a trophy is relative. One fisherman may feel that a trophy muskie is 50" whereas another fisherman or child may feel a 30" muskie is a trophy. They do not want to deny anyone the right to legally keep a muskie if they choose to.

The Ohio muskie fisheries are considered a "put and take" resource. If muskie were able to successfully spawn every year to the point there was little need to stock, maybe a state wide size limit would be in place.

Currently there IS a size limit on boundary waters.


----------



## jlami

bubba k said:


> LMAO!!!!! This dude is CLASSIC!!!!! KILLER MUSKIES?!?!?! HILARIOUS!!!!!


Obviously you take things quite literal, I am not even going to expose the stupidity it would take to assume that I was stating musky actually kill people. I will in fact stand by the fact that in overpopulated bodies of water there have been toes and fingers removed due to muskies that were overly aggressive due to a lack of food source. I will also stand by the fact that I watched a musky consume a full grown goose. It was probably the coolest thing I've ever seen.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


----------



## MassillonBuckeye

Sure it wasn't snapping turtles? I'm having trouble visualizing a musky surgically removing some phalanges so that had to be something totally brutal eh? Brb googling

Yep, you won't see me dangling my feet off the boat at Alum lol! I couldnt find many missing digits but they've definitely caused some injuries to humans. Sorry I doubted you haha


----------



## bubba k

jlami said:


> Obviously you take things quite literal, I am not even going to expose the stupidity it would take to assume that I was stating musky actually kill people. I will in fact stand by the fact that in overpopulated bodies of water there have been toes and fingers removed due to muskies that were overly aggressive due to a lack of food source. I will also stand by the fact that I watched a musky consume a full grown goose. It was probably the coolest thing I've ever seen.
> 
> Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


When a body of water becomes overpopulated with any predatory fish they become stunted. The more fish and less forage, the smaller the fish. They become stunted resulting in them requiring less food than if they were larger. This actually happens fairly often in northern lakes that are loaded with pike...the end result is all hammer handles. The same holds true in Ohio ponds with bass. The fish don't become flesh eating maniacs that try to attack people, birds, etc. Now, I agree that there have been instances where muskies have bit people and eaten birds, but I don't believe that either instance was due to starvation.


----------



## jlami

MassillonBuckeye said:


> Sure it wasn't snapping turtles? I'm having trouble visualizing a musky surgically removing some phalanges so that had to be something totally brutal eh? Brb googling
> 
> Yep, you won't see me dangling my feet off the boat at Alum lol! I couldnt find many missing digits but they've definitely caused some injuries to humans. Sorry I doubted you haha


 http://books.google.com/books?id=e8...a=X&ei=hvyFUKLQN4Pm8QTlqYDoBA&ved=0CFgQ6AEwCA

After a quick search on my phone while steaks are grilling. Do I think this will happen in OH?, no. Am I saying don't let your kids swim in lakes in MN?, no. just saying that it happens. I don't have a fear of it happening to me and I am sure it is one in a million chances. But it still makes the hunt a little more fun!

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


----------



## crittergitter

While I am no longer in favor of a size limit I fail to understand the argument that they don't reproduce naturally. Saugeye don't, but there is a minimum size limit for them. Look up the reason supporting it. Interesting!

Also, northern pike reproduce naturally and there are NO protections on them. So, why would it be different with musky? 

Esox are treated like the trophy fishery they should be in other states. They aren't in Ohio. Yet, the opportunity still exists here to catch a trophy. It is what it is. 

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


----------



## backlashed

Legend killer said:


> The only predator an adult muskie has is man.


You're forgetting about osprey.


----------



## backlashed

jlami said:


> I will in fact stand by the fact that in overpopulated bodies of water there have been toes and fingers removed due to muskies that were overly aggressive due to a lack of food source. I will also stand by the fact that I watched a musky consume a full grown goose.


Muskie don't have the teeth for that kind of eating, nor the belly to hold a full grown goose.


----------



## blackxpress

jlami said:


> I have eaten musky and that is exactly why I said there is no reason to keep them. Lol, they are kinda like carp and gar. A blast to catch but unless they are cooked by an old black guy they taste horrible.
> 
> Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


I've never tried but have eaten a lot of pike and like it very much. Are they not similar?


----------



## Ol'Bassman

Let's look at the economics of a 40" minimum size limit. Most of Ohio's lakes are in rural areas that are economically challenged. It is my belief that, over time, a 40" size limit would make Ohio a premier musky fishing location and spur the development of musky related businesses and services in these areas and contribute to the local economies like lodging, gas stations, restaurants, etc. because of the additional human traffic it would bring. 

I know many musky fishermen are not for the additional human traffic at our lakes. Im not too fond of that either but population growth and the need for economic growth to feed and support a health human population are unstoppable forces and we must accept the reality that economic development and additional human traffic at Ohio lakesare inevitable. Just like CC's marina. 

Ohio has an opportunity to get out in front of other states by establishing a 40" minimum size limit.  It would show the world that Ohio is a serious musky fishing destination and, if you want to catch the "Big Un", come to Ohio!


----------



## jlami

blackxpress said:


> I've never tried but have eaten a lot of pike and like it very much. Are they not similar?


No they are not, I like pike as well.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


----------



## jlami

backlashed said:


> Muskie don't have the teeth for that kind of eating, nor the belly to hold a full grown goose.


If you are ever lucky enough to see a 50"+ musky you would not question its ability. Do some research and eat crow like others have. Again I am not talking about your typical OH musky...

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


----------



## jlami

Ol'Bassman said:


> Ohio has an opportunity to get out in front of other states by establishing a 40" minimum size limit. It would show the world that Ohio is a serious musky fishing destination and, if you want to catch the "Big Un", come to Ohio!


Ohio will never be a world class musky destination. Regardless of what limits we put in place. We have some great resources, but musky fishing in OH will never surpass "good" at its best.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


----------



## ShutUpNFish

MassillonBuckeye said:


> No need to get snippy, I know full well what you were posting in reference to. You think he's a goof and tried to correct him but he was right. Just trying to say don't let your personal matters ruin decent conversations. Sorry


I wasn't getting snippy. 

Mybe you shouldn't get so defensive.

So lets talk about the mortality of an adult muskie then (The apex predator)....I'll keep it short and simple...Do you think humans are the #1 threat to their mortality? If so, I believe that you and your buddy there are mistaken. If so, and getting back to topic, a 40" size increase would seem logical. However, I do not believe this to be true at all and I'm confident to say I don't believe the change will improve muskie fishing in Ohio whatsoever....We got it changed here in PA and its no better or more of a quality fishery because of it....IMO, we just made some extremists a little more happy for the time being....today they're crying about fishing in hot weather...

Disease, Nature, Overpopulation, even getting hit by a boat motor prop are ALL what I believe to be more of a threat to adult muskies life than humans.

Savvy?


----------



## imalt

Ol'Bassman said:


> Let's look at the economics of a 40" minimum size limit. Most of Ohio's lakes are in rural areas that are economically challenged. It is my belief that, over time, a 40" size limit would make Ohio a premier musky fishing location and spur the development of musky related businesses and services in these areas and contribute to the local economies like lodging, gas stations, restaurants, etc. because of the additional human traffic it would bring.
> 
> I know many musky fishermen are not for the additional human traffic at our lakes. Im not too fond of that either but population growth and the need for economic growth to feed and support a health human population are unstoppable forces and we must accept the reality that economic development and additional human traffic at Ohio lakesare inevitable. Just like CC's marina.
> 
> Ohio has an opportunity to get out in front of other states by establishing a 40" minimum size limit. It would show the world that Ohio is a serious musky fishing destination and, if you want to catch the "Big Un", come to Ohio!


So if you want it to be a destination to catch the "big un" why not set the size limit at only keeping fish under 36" or something like that. Leave the big ones to grow bigger.


----------



## crittergitter

Ol'Bassman said:


> Let's look at the economics of a 40" minimum size limit. Most of Ohio's lakes are in rural areas that are economically challenged. It is my belief that, over time, a 40" size limit would make Ohio a premier musky fishing location and spur the development of musky related businesses and services in these areas and contribute to the local economies like lodging, gas stations, restaurants, etc. because of the additional human traffic it would bring.
> 
> I know many musky fishermen are not for the additional human traffic at our lakes. Im not too fond of that either but population growth and the need for economic growth to feed and support a health human population are unstoppable forces and we must accept the reality that economic development and additional human traffic at Ohio lakesare inevitable. Just like CC's marina.
> 
> Ohio has an opportunity to get out in front of other states by establishing a 40" minimum size limit. It would show the world that Ohio is a serious musky fishing destination and, if you want to catch the "Big Un", come to Ohio!


This is a forum board where ideas and topics are discussed. It seems you didn't even read any of the responses. You're just grand standing as if your ideas are the only ones that matter. 

Good luck with your efforts in futility.


----------



## ShutUpNFish

crittergitter said:


> This is a forum board where ideas and topics are discussed. It seems you didn't even read any of the responses. You're just grand standing as if your ideas are the only ones that matter.
> 
> Good luck with your efforts in futility.


I seriously think he was being facetious...Maybe not, who knows, stranger things have happened 'round here.


----------



## M.Magis

Ol'Bassman said:


> Let's look at the economics of a 40" minimum size limit. Most of Ohio's lakes are in rural areas that are economically challenged. It is my belief that, over time, a 40" size limit would make Ohio a premier musky fishing location and spur the development of musky related businesses and services in these areas and contribute to the local economies like lodging, gas stations, restaurants, etc. because of the additional human traffic it would bring.
> 
> I know many musky fishermen are not for the additional human traffic at our lakes. Im not too fond of that either but population growth and the need for economic growth to feed and support a health human population are unstoppable forces and we must accept the reality that economic development and additional human traffic at Ohio lakesare inevitable. Just like CC's marina.
> 
> Ohio has an opportunity to get out in front of other states by establishing a 40" minimum size limit. It would show the world that Ohio is a serious musky fishing destination and, if you want to catch the "Big Un", come to Ohio!


You cant actually believe any of this that youre writing, do you? You want us to believe that making an arbitrary size limit for musky will somehow make Ohio *the* musky destination and in turn, improve the economy? Any chance youre into politics? You should be if you can get anyone to buy that.


----------



## Legend killer

ShutUpNFish said:


> I wasn't getting snippy.
> 
> Mybe you shouldn't get so defensive.
> 
> So lets talk about the mortality of an adult muskie then (The apex predator)....I'll keep it short and simple...Do you think humans are the #1 threat to their mortality? If so, I believe that you and your buddy there are mistaken. If so, and getting back to topic, a 40" size increase would seem logical. However, I do not believe this to be true at all and I'm confident to say I don't believe the change will improve muskie fishing in Ohio whatsoever....We got it changed here in PA and its no better or more of a quality fishery because of it....IMO, we just made some extremists a little more happy for the time being....today they're crying about fishing in hot weather...
> 
> Disease, Nature, Overpopulation, even getting hit by a boat motor prop are ALL what I believe to be more of a threat to adult muskies life than humans.
> 
> Savvy?


Your mistaken...


----------



## Legend killer

backlashed said:


> Muskie don't have the teeth for that kind of eating, nor the belly to hold a full grown goose.


The state record muskie in KY had a 15lb carp in its belly....


----------



## ShutUpNFish

Legend killer said:


> Your mistaken...


Can you back your statement up with some sort of logical explination LK? I'm not trying to start anything either...just trying to educate a novice muskie fisherman like yourself.


----------



## Legend killer

Cave Run Lake is a true muskie destination. The ky state record of 47lb's caught a coupe years ago is one of the largest catches anywhere of recent time. Morehead is a small college town, the fishery draws money to the area. There are numerous guide services on the lake. Tony and Greg's teams stay busy in the spring and fall. Crash's service is mostly his son and he stays busy as well. Cave Run pro shop located across from scott's creek is ran by some older folks, they are opened from spring till end of fall. In the spring and fall passing hotels in the areas you can see boats and when the PMTT comes to the lake every april restaurants and hotels get a boost. It will take a long time for places like CC to become a muskie destination. Muskie naturally reproduced in the Licking river till the dammed it in the early 70's and has been stocked ever since. Until Ceaser's has been stocked for 20-30 years it won't be a great muskie lake. Stocked muskies live till about 20 years old.


----------



## Legend killer

ShutUpNFish said:


> Can you back your statement up with some sort of logical explination LK? I'm not trying to start anything either...just trying to educate a novice muskie fisherman like yourself.


Since your in PA, I will probably never meet you face to face. It is easy for you to talk smack...


----------



## jlami

Legend killer said:


> Since your in PA, I will probably never meet you face to face. It is easy for you to talk smack...


There is always one guy... You should really use your fb account more often, there are plenty of cyber soldiers to tiff with on there. Don't clutter our forums with ignorance.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


----------



## Legend killer

jlami said:


> There is always one guy... You should really use your fb account more often, there are plenty of cyber soldiers to tiff with on there. Don't clutter our forums with ignorance.
> 
> Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


Jlami do some research, shutupnfish has been talking smack showing his ignorance for months toward me.


----------



## ShutUpNFish

Legend killer said:


> Jlami do some research, shutupnfish has been talking smack showing his ignorance for months toward me.


Listen dude...This is an open discussion forum, we debate and discuss specific topics....pretty simple. I'm NOT afraid of your threats either, if you feel froggy just leap...It wouldn't be really hard to find out who I am seriously....you can just ask your buddies Gregg, Crash and his son, they certainly know me. But I'm willing to bet they have NO clue who the heck you are!! 

Debate is healthy as long as it stays civil...I've been very civil, though it is very hard at times to contain myself with some of the things that you say. Dude, you even admitted that you've only been muskie fishing for 2 years! How could you possible know ALL that you claim to know in just two short years?? You even admitted to only catching a few muskie in that two years. However, you chime in on every thread and every person and make smart comments to people who are seeking advice all the time. Its an open forum, and people will certainly come to my defense on it I assure you. Please don't make me pull up the numerous arguments and comments that you've made with various members of this forum. 

I don't look for trouble dude, but trouble will NOT be a problem for me I'll tell you that. I speak my mind, but I do it with confidence of the knowledge and what I have learned from fishing experiences since I was a youngster. You have proven, through your antics, that you have a lot to learn. I appreciate your passion though really, I know how exciting all this can be and I understand that you're really into this. But you must realize that we are all in the position to learn from eachother as well as share/teach through our own experiences. Don't take any of this the wrong way my man...two years of muskie fishing makes you a novice, but you do not talk or act like one. And you don't have to either, I'm not saying that...all I'm saying is that DON'T act like some experienced pro which you are definately not. As far as I'm concerned, its a bit of a slap in the face to those members here who have been at this for many years and REALLY know what they are talking about.


----------



## KaGee

Take it to PM fellas...


----------

