“It’s funny you mention that because I have a LiveScope sitting here on the floor of the boat…and you don’t need it,” was Darren Troseth’s answer when I asked him about electronics for the catfish we were after. Darren is the owner of 3 Rivers Fishing Adventures.

He went on to explain that he’s tried it and in particular situations you could use it, but for what we were doing, it wasn’t necessary. And what we were doing was pretty unique…it involves shrimp!

More about that later, but it was interesting to hear a guide’s perspective on the advancement of technology and how it impacts his business. To be fair, Darren is primarily a catfish and sturgeon guide on the river and in most situations, you probably won’t be using LiveScope as much as a walleye, crappie or bass guide might. We did use it with him when we filmed this Prairie Sportsman episode ice fishing for sturgeon but we didn’t when we fished flatheads on this episode.

See there are times when you can fish without it.

That being said, I like having mine with every time I fish. There’s so much more that goes into it than just trying to convince a fish to eat. I use it to make sure my bait is on bottom and running true. I will use it to see how fish react to my bait and if I need to change cadence. Mostly I like to use it to see if there are fish around so that my time on the water is more effective. I guess you could say that this does help you catch more fish, but it’s just another tool.

“I honestly think mapping could be more detrimental than LiveScope,” Darren explained. “People didn’t know about these reefs and humps and sunken trees and now everyone knows exactly where they are. Where do you draw the line?”

That’s the debate. Where DO you draw the line? Underwater cameras have been allowed for years and that was ok. You lose visibility when its dark or if the water is stained. LiveScope, in a sense, clears that up. But what about GPS, side scan or even ol’ fashioned 2D? Electronics will continue to evolve and as long as there is no refutable evidence that says the fish are hurting, then I don’t know how you ban anything.

“The way I look at it is, if you like using it, use it,” Darren said. “If you don’t, then don’t. To me, people are out here to enjoy themselves and get away from the real world.”

Ultimately, that’s what it’s about isn’t it? Keeping people involved in the outdoors and making sure it’s fair chase. Some have argued that it’s just the opposite, but to me, why isn’t it fair chase? Because fish could “hide” in places?

Why does a suspended fish all of a sudden mean it’s in a sanctuary? So now we can only fish at the bottom or with top water? Can you chase fish with LiveScope that you wouldn’t see get away before? Sort of, but fish swim faster than most trolling motors, so they can still escape the beam.

The challenge of catching fish is still what attracts many anglers, and even those with LiveScope will tell you that it can still be a challenge. The hook set and the tug are all part of the package and no one wants to see fisheries depleted. So are we in danger of it happening?

Mississippi just lowered limits on 4 lakes that are famous for crappie fishing. They are blaming LiveScope for the reduction. But, as some of the guides who were interviewed mentioned, the pressure on the lakes has increased significantly in recent years. They said that LiveScope usage was up from 20%-70% and while I have no reason to doubt their methodology, that is a bigger jump than I’ve ever heard in any other research. No question that Forward Facing Sonar (FFS) is getting more and more popular, but can you really blame it for the need to reduce bag limits?

For example, the limits were 15 crappie per day over 12″ on one lake with another going from 30 crappie per day to 20 over 11″. THIRTY CRAPPIES PER DAY TO TWENTY. Maybe the limits should have been reduced anyway. Clearly those lakes have a long growing season and seem to be doing well, but you could say that the increased pressure has resulted in more fish caught. Why was there increased pressure? Was it because LiveScope was catching more fish? Or was it because people were posting pictures on social media? Maybe local radio shows were talking about the hot bite? Should we ban Facebook?

It’s hard for me to blame the tech, even if it is helping you catch more fish, when anglers have a responsibility to not over harvest. This is a problem we have in this country in general. If we can’t be accountable for our actions, the government will step in and create more rules and regulations. No one wants that.

In Mississippi, how have recent year classes been? Has there been a forage change? Guides in that area talk about going back to the fishery 4-5 times per week with clients, so they are taking a lot of fish out. So is that LiveScope’s fault?

I also don’t want to lay any blame on guides, since most are just trying to make a living and introducing people to fishing. I also know that there are anglers who habitually take more than their limit allows. But, in today’s world there are a lot of places where new guides are popping up daily with some running multiple guide trips per day, something that when the managing agency set limits probably didn’t take into account. So is that the tech’s fault?

I don’t necessarily want to put more restrictions on business, but after spending some time in Canada, I’ve gained some respect for how the guide system works. There are zones that can have X number of guides who are then given a set number of days that they can guide. That helps keep some of the pressure off the fisheries. There are states in America that require guide licenses for bigger bodies of water or just to guide in general. I’m not against having some sort of guide licensing in Minnesota. The only issue I see in Canada is that some guides treat their license as an investment and that can cause them to go unused.

“Where I see it from a guide issue, is that if there are 4 or 5 guides who are using (LiveScope) and consistently putting more fish in the boat, business is going to sway that way,” Darren said. If guides who are using it and having more luck they could grow their business which will make the other guides get the tech so they can keep up.

“As technology evolves, guides are picking up the stuff because it makes their job easier,” Darren said. “Whether it be a trolling motor with mapping or spot lock, a 300 hp motor, you know, they’re all tools.”

As far as guides having a license or a limit on guide trips in a day, Darren thought that if you get on a good bite, you’re bringing in a lot of fish.

“The DNR will have to figure that into the bag limits, it’s a tough one. It’s hard to tell someone you can’t do your job,” Darren added.

While I’ve spent a lot of time with fishing guides, I’ve seen something in the waterfowl world that is somewhat comparable. I filmed at Horicon Marsh last year and heard the same stories that I’ve heard about many other Canada goose staging areas: “The geese don’t come here like they used to.”

So, why is that? Is it changes in migration routes, is it wet/dry cycles or is it hunting pressure around those areas? While hunters have historically not had major impacts on waterfowl populations since limits were set, there can be behavioral changes caused by hunting. In Rochester, guides would pack ten hunters into an underground pit and as flocks come in, shots ring out. For years, ten man limits would be had early and a new group of ten hunters would jump in a have the chance to shoot their limits. That’s a lot of geese getting shot. Did that affect patterns? Or is it as simple the closure of the local power plant that kept water open year round?

30-40 years ago at Lac qui Parle, 100,000+ Canada geese would stage and hunters would get in line long before sunrise at the DNR headquarters to draw for a “state blind” around the refuge. As geese would fly out to feed in the morning, hunters that have formed a ring around the large lake would shoot at every passing goose, some upwards of 70 yards in the air. As birds dropped, hunters would sprint to beat the other hunters nearby to the fallen bird. Limits were only 1 bird per person then, but geese would start to fly out higher and higher to avoid the barrage.

Guides popped up and fields were leased with blinds, pits and other places to hide. Farmers rented out their fields for $25 per hunter. Those days the goose numbers peaked around 150,000 or so and today it has decreased to 10k-20k at a time. Is this due to hunting pressure? Increased bag limits? Or just changes in the flyway?

One could argue that birds are staying longer in Canada because of the abundance of food available there and when they migrate down they may not stage as long because ponds and lakes begin to freeze up shortly after they arrive. We watched as the refuge froze over multiple years in a row earlier than normal and the geese would circle overhead and then continue south. Did this change the imprint for their migration route?

It’s hard to say what is the exact cause, but there’s no question that staging areas have changed. While there are still plenty of geese that travel through these states, the big groups have splintered, with the exception of Fergus Falls (for now). With a limit on guide services in an area, you potentially could have less pressure on the resource and allow for more freelance opportunities.

I want to be clear that I’m not for changing rules for business owners, but if it were to come down to restricting tech or lowering limits and easing pressure on a resource, I’m going to vote for the latter within reason. I’m all about fair chase, but no one wants to go back to cane poles and single shot 12 gauges.

I’m on the technology workgroup with the MN DNR so these discussions are ongoing as we speak. The DNR is carefully reviewing things and will make data-driven decisions. They’re actually using LiveScope for research purposes right now. They’ve also talked about the most effective way to manage a fishery is with limits or size restrictions. For one thing, trying to tell someone that they can’t bring a LiveScope to Mille Lacs will be impossible to enforce.

And, in the end, isn’t it ultimately up to us to make sure we are ethical hunters and anglers? For those out there that feel like we have a right to hunt and fish without interference from the government, shouldn’t you want to make sure that people are responsible so we always have the ability to hunt and fish? The mindset that rules shouldn’t exist did some serious damage 100 years ago. Some would argue that the DNR is what saved hunting and fishing for us, even if they don’t always get everything right.

I don’t think you can blame technology when it’s not physically killing or catching anything for you. I believe trail cams and LiveScope are still within the boundaries of fair chase and can be used as important educational tools. If you are taking limits, fishing where barotrauma can be a factor or double dipping, you need understand that if a fishery is hurting, maybe it’s not the tool, but the person behind the tool, that’s the problem.

Darren and I talk more about this in our latest podcast, along with highlighting a unique catfish opportunity in Minnesota where we use bobbers in shallow water with raw, frozen shrimp. Yep, the same stuff you buy at the grocery store! We also filmed it for Prairie Sportsman, so watch for the episode coming next year. Plus, Joe Henry breaks down some of the structure on Lake of the Woods to help you find walleyes in some unexpected places. Don’t forget to sign up for this contest before you watch! You can win a $50 sunshirt just for watching this podcast, but you have to sign up before you watch. Go here to sign up!