IceShanty.com's Ice Fishing Community
IceShanty Main => General Ice Fishing Chit Chat => Topic started by: 52isntbigenough on Mar 07, 2024, 08:17 AM
-
Just downloaded our Wisconsin DNR 2024 Spring Meetings questionnaire and saw #22 as a bit interesting. It wont happen, but there had to be support for it to be brought to an actual proposal.
Any other states looking to do the same?
(https://i.postimg.cc/k6mHVtH5/20240307-081329.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/k6mHVtH5)
-
Have not seen this in MN yet, but have seen this floating around social media discussing WI proposal.
-
Shocked to see it come up in WI before MN. Although both states DNR are well down the rabbit hole of micromanaging everything when it comes to fishing
-
Shocked to see it come up in WI before MN. Although both states DNR are well down the rabbit hole of micromanaging everything when it comes to fishing
Well said!!
-
Shocked to see it come up in WI before MN. Although both states DNR are well down the rabbit hole of micromanaging everything when it comes to fishing
X 2
-
I don't understand why people are so butt hurt about live scope. Flashers are fine, LCD display sonar was fine. GPS maps that let you pinpoint your spot down to just a few feet was fine, spot lock and other fancy trolling motors were fine. Side imaging was fine. Underwater cameras were fine. There's guys out there in $40,00 boats, $70,000 snobears, and whatever Argos cost.
But suddenly livescope just takes the cake huh? Out of everything, that's the one thing that ruins it for you? Good grief.
P.S. depending on how that gets written, it looks like it would ban way more than just livescope.
-
It's probably too early to tell what affect Livescope tech has had, or is having, on overall fish populations, but I am not surprised to see the question being asked already. It would appear that many states have reported an increase in angling that has been sustained for a few years now (starting largely post covid). With increased numbers of people fishing, there is obviously more pressure on fisheries. Advancements in tech in theory are making fishing easier and more efficient, though one still has to present the right baits/lures at the right time and manner. But, assuming that there is some correlation in tech advancement and angling success, it could mean that fish populations and/or size/year class distributions may take a hit. I know in Idaho, there is concern that the top end of the perch in the famous Lake Cascade is seeing a decline. That lake is certainly facing increasing fishing pressure even in the last couple of years. And there still doesn't seem to be 100% agreement on how/why that lake is able to support said perch fishery. So any decline, without fully understanding/knowing how to recover/maintain could lead to less fishing hours and losses to the local economy.
Even as someone who has spent their entire life in fisheries science, I don't know if banning certain tech is the right answer...yet. But, if research can eventually show that it, along with that increased angling presence and/or other factors, is contributing to declines, banning or limiting certain tech may need to be part of the equation (along with seasonal closures, bag/size limits if not already in place, etc.)
I suspect more states will join in that conversation and start surveying anglers on their thoughts. At this stage, asking the question and getting the conversation going is a good thing. Unless there is good evidence of negative impact on fisheries, or unless anglers overwhelmingly support a ban, I don't see them happening soon. Except maybe in some tournament settings.
-
Technology will not stop nor will population growth. I dont think that catching more fish is the problem I believe harvesting is.
Here in pa we have basic regulations on most lakes and can keep up to 50 combined species of panfish on lakes of minimal size
in my opinion way to much. They have started to limit that on some lakes to 20 combined as a panfish enhancement program but it only helps those lakes not the rest.
-
Like FishDoktor said, this is just to get the conversation started. These advisory questions are just that, advisory. If it goes any further, there will be much more specific language before it goes to a final vote.
Comparing forward facing sonar to a flasher is like comparing an F16 to a single engine bush plane. FFS allows you to scan an area around you, locate fish, and drop a bait right in front of them. Like old school hole hopping without any of the guess work as to which hole they're under. What might've taken hours to locate active fish in the past can be accomplished in seconds.
Surprised it hasn't been banned in bass tournaments yet. They can't use a net, but they can use FFS. Figure that one out.
-
Surprised it hasn't been banned in bass tournaments yet. They can't use a net, but they can use FFS. Figure that one out.
This is surprising to me as well. I would not be surprised though to see it become a hot topic in the near future. I saw one article recently where one pro was looking at augmenting some googles or something so that his livescope image would display on them, right in front of his face while fishing. Seems like overkill.
-
Surprised it hasn't been banned in bass tournaments yet. They can't use a net, but they can use FFS. Figure that one out.
I can afford FFS but not the tournament grade Ranger with a 400 that most pros run. Where does one draw the line? If they ban FFS, are they going to put limits on the boats, engines, other electronics, etc.?
-
I have seen both the argument for and against live scope. One article that I read was one angler had the technology amd was not doing that well in pre fishing. Then broke his transducer off and just went back to what he had remembered and fished that way and still did good in the tournament. So it is just technology and some get really good at reading it while others struggle. But very interesting on how all the talks about it are going, even some are really heated talks. I have seen it used and even used my buddies a bit and we are hopefully going to play with it on open water, but it has not helped me catch any more fish this ice season. Another buddy said he is not fishing out of his boat until he gets his all set up and ready to fish. He just was with another buddy that would say cast 20 feet over there and bam another walleye hit the jig. Always interesting for new technology, but as for me I cannot afford the new things all the time. Once the next best thing comes around I might be able to get the 360 or live scope when they become more affordable.
-
if research can eventually show that it, along with that increased angling presence and/or other factors, is contributing to declines, banning or limiting certain tech may need to be part of the equation (along with seasonal closures, bag/size limits if not already in place, etc.)
That's the problem with such research. You can always finagle your data to fit your narrative. Lets be reasonable and realistic here. Whatever effect our sonars have on fishing, they are not even in the same league as what fishing numbers and bag limits have. The fact that you would be open, and expecting of banning certain sonars sets a really poor example from someone who says they have been in fisheries science for a long time.
You guys want to talk numbers? As best as I can tell there are fewer than 150,000 Livescope's sold in the USA. I can't find the number for Humminbird Megalive or Lowrance Active Target, but I doubt it's much different being as the price is similar for all three (all are extremely expensive), maybe even less because of Livescopes brand recogntion. Lets be generous and say there are half a million of the units out there, although it's probably under 300,000. I can't find the exact number, but there was likely about 40 million fishing licenses sold in the USA last year according to Statista. That means at MOST a whopping 1.25% of people who bought fishing licenses last year may own one of the newer live forward facing sonars. Realistically the number is lower than that, and of the units sold, how many are to new customers? I'd be willing to bet a lot of the units sold were multiples to the same person. There are very, very few forward facing sonars out there. I only personally know a single person who has one.
-
You know what this "discussion" reminds me of? Crossbows during the bow season. Despite the data showing basically no effect from doing so, there's always people that cry until the next new thing comes out for them to cry about. A perfect example was last year Minnesota allowed crossbows during the archery season for anyone (over 60 or disabled was allowed before too). 43% of deer during the archery season were shot with crossbows. No more deer were taken than any other year within variation. More deer were killed with vertical bows.
And people are still angry about crossbows.
-
I am totally honest when i say live scope helps me catch more fish and yes I'm sad to admit it but only harvesting a low amount keeps more fish in the water. That is reality but goes with any device that helps. My guess is if you take any pro bass fisherman now days still bank catfishing he would cast out his rod and be more focused on his cellphone than his rod tip for a bite. Sadly we all need stimulated at all times instead of patience
-
I am totally honest when i say live scope helps me catch more fish and yes I'm sad to admit it but only harvesting a low amount keeps more fish in the water. That is reality but goes with any device that helps. My guess is if you take any pro bass fisherman now days still bank catfishing he would cast out his rod and be more focused on his cellphone than his rod tip for a bite. Sadly we all need stimulated at all times instead of patience
Well of course it helps, otherwise why spend $3000-$4000? The question was is it effecting fish populations, and it should be pretty obvious it is not. Pro Bass fisherman is an entirely different discussion. Rules for competition are a whole different ballgame than a regular fisherman who's doing it for fun or food. I really doubt you will see much of the professionals ever giving up tech, not only because they want to win, but also because those brands are their literal paycheck.
-
X2 with Tom and Ive owned Livescope for 4 years now. Locating and getting fish to bite is much easier with Livescope. I do practice selective harvest, but many people do not. I have many experiences where people have been fishing near me and not catching anything. I share my lures, presentations and sometimes my spots with them, but then they start catching and keeping every fish they catch. As a result I stop sharing so much. Livescope is a game changer as opposed to other sonar devices, boat improvements and cameras IMHO. As a long time viewer of BASS, FLW, and other fishing tournaments, I don't enjoy watching guys staring at their screens all day.
-
I wouldn't go so far as to say it's a game changer. It's the same game, you are still looking at marks on a screen the same way we've been doing for decades. It's just the newest, best version so far. Eventually we will likely see a 360 version of livescope, and suddenly the old 2D livescope we have now will seem mundane. You said it yourself, you've been fishing next to people who were in the right spot. You simply had better experience on what to do. You could have handed them your entire boat, they would have been in the same spot, and they still wouldn't have caught anything until you told them how.
-
I wouldn't go so far as to say it's a game changer. It's the same game, you are still looking at marks on a screen the same way we've been doing for decades. It's just the newest, best version so far. Eventually we will likely see a 360 version of livescope, and suddenly the old 2D livescope we have now will seem mundane. You said it yourself, you've been fishing next to people who were in the right spot. You simply had better experience on what to do. You could have handed them your entire boat, they would have been in the same spot, and they still wouldn't have caught anything until you told them how.
You are right it is the same game called fishing. Livescope personally helps me more than any other tools I have to win and thats just me speaking for myself not for others. I respect the game though and throw alot of my fish back.
I truly think livescope is like putting metal bats in major league baseball, you still have to hit the ball though. I really believe over harvesting in the long run hurts the fishery. In reality if the fish are there then you are not hurting the fishery so to speak
The game changers are still gonna happen thats just technology. Its not just live scope its any real time imaging
Ps I believe that crossbows helped me kill more deer also than my bowtech patriot thats just me It gave me a more accurate shot at a longer distance with more speed and confidence I love my crossbow but as i said before select harvest
An old guy once said to me you cant win them all because there wouldnt be any left to win. I think that goes with anything in life
-
With so many manufactures making different models, this would be an enforcement nightmare. Especially if units can be used as FFS, 360, DI and as flashers/standard LCD finders.
-
You are right it is the same game called fishing. Livescope personally helps me more than any other tools I have to win and thats just me speaking for myself not for others. I respect the game though and throw alot of my fish back.
I truly think livescope is like putting metal bats in major league baseball, you still have to hit the ball though. I really believe over harvesting in the long run hurts the fishery. In reality if the fish are there then you are not hurting the fishery so to speak
The game changers are still gonna happen thats just technology. Its not just live scope its any real time imaging
Ps I believe that crossbows helped me kill more deer also than my bowtech patriot thats just me It gave me a more accurate shot at a longer distance with more speed and confidence I love my crossbow but as i said before select harvest
An old guy once said to me you cant win them all because there wouldnt be any left to win. I think that goes with anything in life
It seems like you are thinking in terms of competition, which doesn't really matter if we are talking about how it effects fish populations. In competition, you would be foolish not to use every advantage you could. In the real world, whatever effect livescope has for people, it's not a significant factor compared to most other things.
A crossbow is easier to learn than a vertical bow, yet I have never seen a state where deer harvest was effected by them. You might find it helps you, yet statewide, harvest is the same it always was. And that's with something that makes up a significant portion of hunters, 43% in Minnesotas case. There is likely under 1% of fisherman who have livescope.
-
i=PKvGGFhPYpqczKfQ
I agree w/ this guy
-
There's been absolutely no studies done on this in Wisconsin that would lead anybody to believe that the effects of FFS's are any worse than trolling motors, fluorocarbon line/leaders or flashers on fish populations. Its conjecture until then.
"this might happen" is not the same as "this is happening".
-
Oh boy Randy is a treat ::). I won't support him by watching, anyone want to summarize his video
-
i=PKvGGFhPYpqczKfQ
I agree w/ this guy
Screw that guy. He just spent 3 minutes talking out his butt about nothing. He never stated a shred of evidence. There's zero evidence they have any effect, and they are not even close to what I would call popular. Unless someone can prove me wrong, the numbers I got were from Garmin. Until like 25% of people own them there's no reason this should be on anyones mind.
That guy in the video is just another sore crybaby.
-
I just checked some of his videos. The guy appears to be a sponsored pro with every trick and gadget in the book. There's probably more money in his boat than my entire net worth. Seriously, all that and the new sonar is where he draws the line? Why not give up your power anchors which do, objectively cause more damage to a lake? What a hypocrite.
And no, I don't want to ban power anchors.
-
I just checked some of his videos. The guy appears to be a sponsored pro with every trick and gadget in the book. There's probably more money in his boat than my entire net worth. Seriously, all that and the new sonar is where he draws the line? Why not give up your power anchors which do, objectively cause more damage to a lake? What a hypocrite.
And no, I don't want to ban power anchors.
Yep and he's absolutely oblivious to it. I don't know how anyone takes him serious
-
Screw that guy.
X2 can’t stand him. I watched/listened to this a while back and the dude is legit a whiner/baby and uses subjective examples (I.e. his followers told him something, so it’s true). He just can’t hang in the big leagues anymore with these younger kids so he’s pointing the finger at FFS/Livescope. He’s got all the same tech/tools that everyone else does, but he’s gotta find something to point the finger at to justify why he’s irrelevant in the Bass world (hasn’t placed top 30 since 2020 and last win was in 2000)
-
I believe that more of these units out there will eventually have states dropping bag limits for species that are vulnerable to overharvest. Here in Quebec, most areas I fish have a 50 perch bag limit, and crappies are unlimited. I've seen pics of guys with livescopes with mountains of harvested fish on ice, just when they are filled to the gills with eggs. Not hard to imagine that all it takes is a few people to wipeout the population of a small to mid size lake within a few seasons.
So, while I'm against banning these units, I'm for better management of out fisheries. Unfortunately, Quebec is light years behind the rest of North America. Nothing proactive ever gets done here, they tend to wait until it's too late, and then just puts bans and moratoriums in place as bandaids.
-
I believe that more of these units out there will eventually have states dropping bag limits for species that are vulnerable to overharvest. Here in Quebec, most areas I fish have a 50 perch bag limit, and crappies are unlimited. I've seen pics of guys with livescopes with mountains of harvested fish on ice, just when they are filled to the gills with eggs. Not hard to imagine that all it takes is a few people to wipeout the population of a small to mid size lake within a few seasons.
So, while I'm against banning these units, I'm for better management of out fisheries. Unfortunately, Quebec is light years behind the rest of North America. Nothing proactive ever gets done here, they tend to wait until it's too late, and then just puts bans and moratoriums in place as bandaids.
i love my livescope i also agree they could change a fishery if overharvested
-
I can put a hurt on fish populations without livescope! I can only imagine what, anglers with those units could do.
-
YouTube video that's very informative on this subject.
-
Thomasthepikekiller
Do you use Livescope? If Livescope wasn't a game changer, then professional fishermen (like Randy Blauket) wouldn't be in a major debate about it's use. They also wouldn't be spending thousands of dollars on units and winning major tournaments using FFS. A good example was the recent bass tournament at Lake Okeechobee. Where Scott Martin sat on a spot way longer than anyone would in the past because he could see out in front of his boat and see big bass. It's equal to sight fishing bass during spawn. If you can see fish then you are going to spend way more time trying different lures/baits and actions to catch those fish. I was out ice fishing this past weekend. I walked out among about 100 anglers. I drill a hole, put Livescope down and scan 100 feet 360 degrees. If I don't see any fish I move. As I search out fish I see other people not catching anything and waiting for fish to come to them. Within about 20 minutes and a few holes, I was on fish and caught many. As per usual, guys start moving towards me in hopes to get on same school. Sometimes disrespectfully close. Another example would be fishing in shallow water where traditional sonar would only be showing fish directly under transducer and approximately a cone 1/3 of water depth. That's a 3 feet cone area at very bottom and smaller as you get closer to the bottom of the ice. Where as with FFS I can scan the entire water column from bottom of lake to bottom of the ice for 100 feet or more. I can also tell which direction the fish are moving and with experience, what type, size and mood of fish. If this isn't a game changer than I don't know what is IMHO
-
Thomasthepikekiller
Do you use Livescope? If Livescope wasn't a game changer, then professional fishermen (like Randy Blauket) wouldn't be in a major debate about it's use. They also wouldn't be spending thousands of dollars on units and winning major tournaments using FFS. A good example was the recent bass tournament at Lake Okeechobee. Where Scott Martin sat on a spot way longer than anyone would in the past because he could see out in front of his boat and see big bass. It's equal to sight fishing bass during spawn. If you can see fish then you are going to spend way more time trying different lures/baits and actions to catch those fish. I was out ice fishing this past weekend. I walked out among about 100 anglers. I drill a hole, put Livescope down and scan 100 feet 360 degrees. If I don't see any fish I move. As I search out fish I see other people not catching anything and waiting for fish to come to them. Within about 20 minutes and a few holes, I was on fish and caught many. As per usual, guys start moving towards me in hopes to get on same school. Sometimes disrespectfully close. Another example would be fishing in shallow water where traditional sonar would only be showing fish directly under transducer and approximately a cone 1/3 of water depth. That's a 3 feet cone area at very bottom and smaller as you get closer to the bottom of the ice. Where as with FFS I can scan the entire water column from bottom of lake to bottom of the ice for 100 feet or more. I can also tell which direction the fish are moving and with experience, what type, size and mood of fish. If this isn't a game changer than I don't know what is IMHO
I have used it, but I don't see myself saving up the money to buy my own unit anytime soon. They are simply way too expensive. I can think of a lot of better things to do with $3000. As for gamechanger, I guess for you it did change what you are doing. I think that for whatever reason people tend to dismiss, or simply overlook like side imaging or down imaging, or 360 which is side imaging with a special transducer that spins. That's not new tech either, those are from 20 years ago. It appears 360, which is what would be useful for ice fishing only came out about 10 years ago. All those things that you describe, being able to see 100' out or more, those are things that have existed way before livescope. In some ways the sideimaging is superior to current livescope due to how much clearer a picture you get. The thing Garmin Livescope brought to the table was the fact you are now getting instant feedback like a flasher, yet you get the larger range like 360 which had a refresh speed of like 10-15 seconds.
So you absolutely could do everything you describe 10 years ago, it's just that it wasn't quite as nice as livescope is now. That's why I don't view it as the all mighty end of the world like some do. Where are we supposed to draw the line? Instant feedback was fine (flashers), seeing long distances was fine (side imaging), seeing long distances in all directions was fine (360), but now seeing long distances with instant feedback is just way too much? If the criteria is how does instant feedback long distance sonar like Livescope allow fisherman to significantly effect the fish populations that other sonar tech doesn't, the answer seems pretty clear to me. If the question is a moral one, for sporting purposes, then that's a different discussion. I just don't see how you can morally ban one particular thing, while saying all other sonars are perfectly fine. So you ban that, what happens when some new tech that doesnt even rely on sonar comes out? We are going to ban that too? 2002 was somehow the perfect level of fishing technology for people, not too much, not too little?
-
How about pairing Livescope with Apple Vision Pro? :) Only a $6,500 set up!
-
If I had almost $7000 laying around, Id be buying a brand new Yamaha YZ250X.
-
If I had almost $7000 laying around, Id be buying a brand new Yamaha YZ250X.
I’d spend the extra on a 450!!😁
-
I’m old school and have almost, always fished by instinct. Whatever happened to going fishing and figuring out the fish??? 🤔 FFS would wreck it for me.
-
Thomasthepikekiller
i=GmhYg05EhS-sKtyI
Even a life long professional tournament fisherman states that FFS is a game changer. Another pro says "it's not fishing"
i=T1ob9pdzNmsQW2u6