Free: Contests & Raffles.
I don't think I have provided false information and I am definitely not crying wolf as you have described. I am just stating some facts which are real and you don't agree with them. You may not like the fact that I am challenging your theories of why you should have 50" or more Muskies in Curlew Lake. Your facts are based on your own personal speculation as well as a few others. That is not a fact, that is speculation. Facts are information backed by scientific findings, such as the studies bioligists conduct for the state coming to the conclusions they do, which I have presented to you. Take it as you will, but you have NOT provided anything backed by evidence other than personal speculation.As you have said you have fished Curlew for years and their used to be bigger trout in Curlew as stated in my earlier post. I think another person on this forum who commented earlier agreed to. What is interesting when I viewed the nwtigermuskie website, most of the content in based on tournament fishing and the mission statement to promote healthy muskies in the environment. I did read about the introduction and management of the fish. But, then again why would you continually allow 500 muskies yearly as you stated in your post to help with the management of a small ecosystem? Because of the rough squaw fish, really come on. There were plenty of trout in Curlew prior to the introduction. And as you have state the WDFW has no business releasing fish in certain lakes in WA. Releasing tiger muskie in Curlew lake is one of them. It's based on tournament fishing because it is an opportunity for the club members to get together, raise money for the program, and to use the resource the state has provided. Again I'll say this, yet you seem to keep ignoring it. The state planted the tigers well before the clubs were formed. It was the states decision, not the clubs. The clubs formed to take advantage of an awesome resource provided to use by the state as well as help further research and funding for the program. They allow 500 tigers a year because that is what science says needs to go in. They dont naturally reproduce and fish die every year. In order to maintain the current population, no more, no less, they need to release 500 a year. It's not hard to understand.I also think that you will find that the average trout fisherman and family spends more money (rental, gas, food, licenses,boats) in the surrounding economy than a group that wants to promote a fish for the state record.Which is fine, because theres still plenty of trout in the lake. Tiffanys is sold out every year in July and August. I've talked with the owners and they love the tigers. I havent heard anything bad from them, and especially havent heard that anything is slowing down up there due to lack of fish!You have to be realistic here, and I agree that the muskies are their to control "rough" fish as you say and the muskie group. But, the main purpose is to create the state record. Just look at your recent tournament on Sept.17, 2011 (Curlew Lake) with a 50" fish. This is not a natural fish in Curlew lake, you can take that how you want. But, my point is that you shouldn't have a species of fish that you are allowing to grow into 72" (stated on the website)or more and think that it will naturally balance the ecosystem out. That is pretty real, just look at the pics that are provided on the nw tigerwebsite. The state record has nothing to do with this. If the state didnt introduce the fish, there wouldnt even be a possibility for a state record. If the state didnt introduce the fish, there wouldnt be tiger clubs to support the fish. This has nothing to do with tournaments or a record. Saying it does is blindly ignoring facts. Bass arent a natural fish in Curlew lake either. Lets eradicate them as well.I guess as stated earlier, you and I won't agree. And you are definitely blinded by others opinions of this topic. You only want the road to go one way. I am not against fishing for the Muskies. I think the limit of length should be reduced back to the 36".
The Tiger muskies control the squaw fish. Curlew is (in my mind) one of the best lakes in the state to fish for trout and Tiger Muskies. I have never not limited on trout at Curlew. Last summer we stayed at Spectakle Lake. We fished Spectacle, caught a couple small trout. Next day went to Wanacut and caught one trout. Next day went to Palmer Lake and caught an 7.8lb Largemouth bass and a couple smallies. I had a craving for a trout dinner so on the last day we drove over to Curlew. We put in at the State Park, motored up to the tressel, had had three limits of 12 in. or better trout in 2 1/2 hours.Whether fishing from dock or boat, I personally know of no lake that has better fishing or divercity of fishing then Curlew. My boys are even on the wall of fame at Fishermans Cave, fishing from the dock, lol.
Quote from: DuckDr.Duke on October 05, 2011, 10:56:48 AMI don't think I have provided false information and I am definitely not crying wolf as you have described. I am just stating some facts which are real and you don't agree with them. You may not like the fact that I am challenging your theories of why you should have 50" or more Muskies in Curlew Lake. Your facts are based on your own personal speculation as well as a few others. That is not a fact, that is speculation. Facts are information backed by scientific findings, such as the studies bioligists conduct for the state coming to the conclusions they do, which I have presented to you. Take it as you will, but you have NOT provided anything backed by evidence other than personal speculation.As you have said you have fished Curlew for years and their used to be bigger trout in Curlew as stated in my earlier post. I think another person on this forum who commented earlier agreed to. What is interesting when I viewed the nwtigermuskie website, most of the content in based on tournament fishing and the mission statement to promote healthy muskies in the environment. I did read about the introduction and management of the fish. But, then again why would you continually allow 500 muskies yearly as you stated in your post to help with the management of a small ecosystem? Because of the rough squaw fish, really come on. There were plenty of trout in Curlew prior to the introduction. And as you have state the WDFW has no business releasing fish in certain lakes in WA. Releasing tiger muskie in Curlew lake is one of them. It's based on tournament fishing because it is an opportunity for the club members to get together, raise money for the program, and to use the resource the state has provided. Again I'll say this, yet you seem to keep ignoring it. The state planted the tigers well before the clubs were formed. It was the states decision, not the clubs. The clubs formed to take advantage of an awesome resource provided to use by the state as well as help further research and funding for the program. They allow 500 tigers a year because that is what science says needs to go in. They dont naturally reproduce and fish die every year. In order to maintain the current population, no more, no less, they need to release 500 a year. It's not hard to understand.I also think that you will find that the average trout fisherman and family spends more money (rental, gas, food, licenses,boats) in the surrounding economy than a group that wants to promote a fish for the state record.Which is fine, because theres still plenty of trout in the lake. Tiffanys is sold out every year in July and August. I've talked with the owners and they love the tigers. I havent heard anything bad from them, and especially havent heard that anything is slowing down up there due to lack of fish!You have to be realistic here, and I agree that the muskies are their to control "rough" fish as you say and the muskie group. But, the main purpose is to create the state record. Just look at your recent tournament on Sept.17, 2011 (Curlew Lake) with a 50" fish. This is not a natural fish in Curlew lake, you can take that how you want. But, my point is that you shouldn't have a species of fish that you are allowing to grow into 72" (stated on the website)or more and think that it will naturally balance the ecosystem out. That is pretty real, just look at the pics that are provided on the nw tigerwebsite. The state record has nothing to do with this. If the state didnt introduce the fish, there wouldnt even be a possibility for a state record. If the state didnt introduce the fish, there wouldnt be tiger clubs to support the fish. This has nothing to do with tournaments or a record. Saying it does is blindly ignoring facts. Bass arent a natural fish in Curlew lake either. Lets eradicate them as well.I guess as stated earlier, you and I won't agree. And you are definitely blinded by others opinions of this topic. You only want the road to go one way. I am not against fishing for the Muskies. I think the limit of length should be reduced back to the 36".I am using science from biologists, people who go to school to study fish and the ecosystem. These peoples lives revolve around these kinds of studies. I'd trust their findings and judgment a lot quicker than a few hearsay from fishers because they had a bad day on the lake. The only one blinded here is you and your inability to rationalize scientific facts presented to you.What would you say if i wanted to eradicate the Largemouth and Smallmouth bass from the lake?
Teal101-Quote from: teal101 on October 05, 2011, 12:58:32 PMQuote from: DuckDr.Duke on October 05, 2011, 10:56:48 AMI don't think I have provided false information and I am definitely not crying wolf as you have described. I am just stating some facts which are real and you don't agree with them. You may not like the fact that I am challenging your theories of why you should have 50" or more Muskies in Curlew Lake. Your facts are based on your own personal speculation as well as a few others. That is not a fact, that is speculation. Facts are information backed by scientific findings, such as the studies bioligists conduct for the state coming to the conclusions they do, which I have presented to you. Take it as you will, but you have NOT provided anything backed by evidence other than personal speculation.As you have said you have fished Curlew for years and their used to be bigger trout in Curlew as stated in my earlier post. I think another person on this forum who commented earlier agreed to. What is interesting when I viewed the nwtigermuskie website, most of the content in based on tournament fishing and the mission statement to promote healthy muskies in the environment. I did read about the introduction and management of the fish. But, then again why would you continually allow 500 muskies yearly as you stated in your post to help with the management of a small ecosystem? Because of the rough squaw fish, really come on. There were plenty of trout in Curlew prior to the introduction. And as you have state the WDFW has no business releasing fish in certain lakes in WA. Releasing tiger muskie in Curlew lake is one of them. It's based on tournament fishing because it is an opportunity for the club members to get together, raise money for the program, and to use the resource the state has provided. Again I'll say this, yet you seem to keep ignoring it. The state planted the tigers well before the clubs were formed. It was the states decision, not the clubs. The clubs formed to take advantage of an awesome resource provided to use by the state as well as help further research and funding for the program. They allow 500 tigers a year because that is what science says needs to go in. They dont naturally reproduce and fish die every year. In order to maintain the current population, no more, no less, they need to release 500 a year. It's not hard to understand.I also think that you will find that the average trout fisherman and family spends more money (rental, gas, food, licenses,boats) in the surrounding economy than a group that wants to promote a fish for the state record.Which is fine, because theres still plenty of trout in the lake. Tiffanys is sold out every year in July and August. I've talked with the owners and they love the tigers. I havent heard anything bad from them, and especially havent heard that anything is slowing down up there due to lack of fish!You have to be realistic here, and I agree that the muskies are their to control "rough" fish as you say and the muskie group. But, the main purpose is to create the state record. Just look at your recent tournament on Sept.17, 2011 (Curlew Lake) with a 50" fish. This is not a natural fish in Curlew lake, you can take that how you want. But, my point is that you shouldn't have a species of fish that you are allowing to grow into 72" (stated on the website)or more and think that it will naturally balance the ecosystem out. That is pretty real, just look at the pics that are provided on the nw tigerwebsite. The state record has nothing to do with this. If the state didnt introduce the fish, there wouldnt even be a possibility for a state record. If the state didnt introduce the fish, there wouldnt be tiger clubs to support the fish. This has nothing to do with tournaments or a record. Saying it does is blindly ignoring facts. Bass arent a natural fish in Curlew lake either. Lets eradicate them as well.I guess as stated earlier, you and I won't agree. And you are definitely blinded by others opinions of this topic. You only want the road to go one way. I am not against fishing for the Muskies. I think the limit of length should be reduced back to the 36".I am using science from biologists, people who go to school to study fish and the ecosystem. These peoples lives revolve around these kinds of studies. I'd trust their findings and judgment a lot quicker than a few hearsay from fishers because they had a bad day on the lake. The only one blinded here is you and your inability to rationalize scientific facts presented to you.What would you say if i wanted to eradicate the Largemouth and Smallmouth bass from the lake?Hearsay is an out of court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. Hearsay is he said she said garbage that cant be proved either way.The hatchery trout are not native species either, so lets eradicate them.Rainbows are a native species. Hatchery fish are a supplement to the natural population because of the fishing pressure. Another false statement.Why should you have a say in eradicatiing squaw fish? I have caught plenty of trout full of squaw fish. Furtermore, Your tiger group and WDFW have already eradicated the bass and et. al. I dont have nay more of a say then you do. You know who had a say in eradicating the squaws. The WDFW Director and six other federal agencies. Eradicated the bass where? In Curlew? You're nuts. More false statements backed by nothing.I have educated my self, you directed me to your website that you are likely a member of. The website is full over ego muskie fisherman who want to introduce a false species into a lake that cannot sustain fish of that type and I should say the WDFW. I am not a member of any of the websites I linked for you. The lake is sustaining just fine. Has been for over 10 years.I will bonk the first muskie that I catch in Curlew that is over 50", now that is eradication
Teal101-Pathetic fear induce ignorance. Lets go back to the argument.I thought we were discussing why the Tiger Muskies are in Curlew Lake.I not going to argue your biology reports that you listed, junk science the reports are not from WDFW or certified. I don't think biologist go off and study fish without any input from anglers and the general public. Actually the one report is a WDFW report on the Musky lakes in this state and a few articles I linked are from the NMDFW and the WIDNR. I guess those arent certified enough. Again, check the source.Okay so lets say your calculation is right (500 muskies a year released), not the 4,000 (that you said not me). Lets say that 200 die every year, probably low but a good #. So you have 300 left and they eat 2 trout a day at .5lb each or if you want bass, that is 600 trout/bass a day for those 300 fish only, not the holdovers. If I do the math right it is 109,500 trout/bass per year to sustain 300 tiger muskies.So lets break it down more. You have 100 of the 500 planted live. They eat 2- .5 lb per trout/bass that 100lbs of fish a day and that is 73,000 trout/bass per year. That's a lot of fish to sustain 100 tiger muskies. Again if you read any of the cited literature from multiple recognized and accredited sources such as the Wisconsin DNR, you'd have read that 50% or more of the muskies captured during their diet studies had empty stomachs. Muskies dont eat 2 trout a day every day. Thats ludicrous. Again you provide information based on nothing but speculation. NO facts.And I bet if you dig into the reports from the WDFW biologist their reports would change your mind about how much fish the muskies harvest each year and day.I have, I even linked the WDFW diet study and a Wisconsin DNR study which you obviously failed to read. I think you will be the one surprised.Why do you think they release 80,000 + trout into that lake every year, it is to sustain the muskie population. The hatchery by Tiffany's never went in until the Muskies were introduced.Actually the net pen on the lake was in operation before the Musky were introduced. The rainbow population kept declining despite the net pen releases so the state added muskies as part of the solution. STOP spreading false information.Now lets look at the overall pic. Lets say a 1000 muskies are in that lake (holdovers and all). And each of those muskies eat 1 trout a day .5 lbs per trout= 500 trout or bass a day which = 182,500 trout/bass a year. Now these are simple #'s, and no scientific proof of these numbers but you know you cannot forget the base rate, Muskies do eat at lease 1 fish per day to survive. Even if they ate 1 fish every other day it is still over 90k. Wrong. Read the studies I posted. They dont eat at least one fish per day to survive. Cite literature supporting such if you would.Why whould you argue with me, I am just stating a fact that you don't want to hear. You should request the WDFW to provide you with the reports and if you get them share them with me and I will believe you.
My calculation was off in the first paragraph it should be 600 fish a day for (300 muskies only that were planted this yr) x 365 days a year=219,000 fish a day. Now that is what I call eradication of the trout, bass or what ever else game fish are in their.
