[MoFugger21]

Originally Posted by helium

This is an interesting thread with good intentions that started out trying to do the right thing and unfortunately at times has turned into a bashing match and finger pointing; all with from what I can see is un-substantiated information, only experience. I also have spent some time at Travers, I would hate to see the faces of kids sitting on the dock waiting for the lake to open so that they can start fishing as I pull away with my boat because I am fortunate enough to have one or un-fortunate(BOAT - Bring On Another Thousand).

Originally Posted by Horseshoe

I went to the meeting about this closure of the west arm at Travers Reservoir. I can confirm that the west arm will be closed until June 1st, 100 hundred yards west of the dock. As discussed in the meeting, the dock and main lake will be open May 8th (Keeping this open for families & kids to fish off the dock.) Thanks to Walleye Unlimited for support on this closure on the west arm (to help with the spawning).

You don't have to worry about that, as it seems the docks aren't included in the closure.

Originally Posted by helium

For those of you who say there is lots of places for the shore fisherperson/fisherkid to fish, where the @#@$ are you talking about, have you been there, hope you like to walk. The campground is at the West end where the dock in question is, are you saying they should camp somewhere else or just drive somewhere else to fish.

This is especially true in the spring when the water level is usually at it's highest. From my experience, there is little to no shoreline to walk in the spring.

Originally Posted by helium

You wouldn't be writing about this if you also weren't guilty of fishing in the area's in question, how else do you know, are you taking others word for this?

Until someone steps up to provide the data that supports the closure, this is all most of us can go on. I don't personally fish Travers in the spring, so all I can go on is what others have said. That said, I would still like to see some hard data that shows the reason for the 'west arm' closure.

Originally Posted by helium

For those who say the lake is in trouble, is that because you couldn't go hammer the fish you used to. Did I say used to or still are but more people are getting better at watching you, listening to you, or talking to the so called experts, I bet you have learned a few things over the years, I know I have and that is thanks to lots of avenues, including the organization listed in this thread.

For me personally, see my comment above. It applies here too. I cannot comment for others obviously.

Originally Posted by helium

I have had really good days on this lake and others, as well as really bad day, is that because the Walleye are a moving, schooling, and spawning species or are we fishing it out? I would like to try some of you waypoints to see if I just haven't found the good spots yet or have and just gotten lucky.

The data that the majority of the people in this thread are looking for, including me, should speak to this.

Originally Posted by helium

I like to catch fish and show others including kids how to catch fish, I can release most of them with no ill effects, some just are ill hooked or I get the hankering to eat a fish, tell me the rest of you haven't and I will show you a liar for each no. My beliefs are if someone wants to keep the Walleye, any over 60ish cm’s are probably good spawners and should try to keep smaller legal fish if so desired and allowed by the law(debatable if the law is right). Again this is my belief and if someone can definitively prove me wrong I will certainly listen, can I debate the fact without being singled out?

As I said before, I cannot comment for others, but I am led to believe that many people share this same sentiment.

Originally Posted by helium

I will be at the next meeting to meet all of the posters that feel so strongly about the regulation changes and discuss what is best, for the future good of the fishery (discuss not bicker, not everyone will have the same opinion). I don’t know all the spawning beds, but it sure sounds like some of you all know and I am glad for that. Is it because you caught really well at certain times or is there more proof? At least it looks like there has been some steps to taken by the fisheries with the good intentions of some people and WU as it was recognized by The Biologist(All the people quoting what the Biologist is saying, has he been notified his quotes are being stated in this post).

All you negative posting members bashing the work of what has been done towards the good steps please comment on the work you have done to make this fishery better, besides buying a boat, I would like to hear those success stories as well. Can we start a debate over them as well?

I don't know that people are bashing the work of others... It's more bashing the transparency of the whole process. No one who was actually involved in the process seems willing to fill in the 'regular joe fisherman' on how and why these changes have been implemented. I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone who was against the change if it could be shown, or communicated, the how's and why's.

Originally Posted by helium

I do agree that shutting down fishing in a lake can be a good,,, for the fish, and as someone already commented all fish not just the Walleye (Burbot and Whitefish don't eat the walleye eggs do they)(Pike don't sit at the mouth of Walleye spawning grounds and eat do they)(Someone should tell them about the closure as well). Sure hope the commercial netters, who are only taking out the evasive species, still keep selling their Walleye so I can have one every once in a while when I have enough money left from fixing my boat.

Sure glad those big noisy wake board boats slow down over the spawning beds so as to not disturb the spawning Fish, they can power up later and have fun as long as their tiny wakes aren’t causing any damage to the shoreline.

Who gets to take on all the issues, or do we start somewhere knowing not all will agree?

PS. Can’t wait to see what this response starts!!! By the way I am aware of my Handle, yes I might be full of it but can’t wait to hear what the posters can come up with?

I'm not entirely sure how to respond to the sarcasm in this post.... Surely you don't expect someone to argue the point the lake should be closed down to all boats to protect spawning fish? Maybe I'm missing something in this part, I don't know...


Anyways... In the spirit of transparency, here's where I sit with everything:

I'm all for a longer closure IF it is in fact for the long term benefit of the lake. As it stands right now I have no idea if it is, because no one has provided any data to show me one way or the other.

The people that supposedly led the charge for this closure came in here, made a post/announcement, patted themselves on the back, and then subsequently left without providing the hows and whys supporting this closure. I would just like to some transparency in the process and some data to support this.

I personally don't understand why the closure to only the 'west arm' of lake and not the whole lake, which is where some hard data would come. As I said in a previous post, I'm positive the 'west arm' isn't the only spawning grounds for walleye in the lake, and if the push is protect spawning walleye (pre/during/post), then why only one part of the lake?? It very well could be that the 'west arm' is the only spawning grounds in danger (or something to that effect), but no one is going to know for sure until some data on the state of the lake and fishery is provided.

The reluctance of people to provide answers and provide some transparency has me scratching my head, and wondering what exactly the motives are? Is it in fact to save a failing fishery? Or is there some other ulterior motive behind all of this? Until any of this is addressed, all any of can do is speculate and argue in circles, like we have currently been doing, and ultimately get no where.