Guests - If You want access to member only forums on FM. You will gain access only when you Sign-in or Sign-Up on Fishing Minnesota.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
lunker-1967

Size of "keepers" ???

10 posts in this topic

Just wondering what everybody else considers to be keeper walleyes? I and the people I fish with will not keep any walleyes less than 15" or anything 20" or larger, unless they are hooked really bad. My thoughts are that the < 15" fish need to grow a bit and the 20" plus fish are the main spawners. Hope others use this mentality so there will be fish to catch in the future. I could have had my limit at times if I would keep everything I caught, but chose not to. I also would not mind if the state would reduce the daily limit to 4. What does everyone think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the slot limit thats usually what i go with too! I don't like thoes inexpierenced fishers who think they're cool and take out like 3 three pounders. It kills the pop..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like to keep walleyes 14 or greater, crappies 10 or greater. As for dropping the limit down to four, it wouldn't help the overall population that much. I think it would save like 17% only when you dropped the limit down to 2 would you see any real significance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Walleyes can be tough. The body of water can change the size of keepers for me. Some lakes with very high populations of small fish I would probably keep fish 14"-20". Lakes with slot limits can also determine which fish you can keep the regulations for the Iowa Great Lakes reads all walleyes from 17-22" must be imediately realeased and only one of your 3 fish limit can be over 22".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading the posts I thought I was the only person who thinks that there should be a slot limit on all lakes of 15” to 20” keep. Anything over 20” goes back. I think a person should be able to keep one fish over 28“. And the daily limit should be four with possession limit of 8 fish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I totally agree with you stratos. There is no reason for a person to keep a walleye over 20". I have had a lot of experience eating walleyes from all around the state and into Canada, and in my opinion, the best tasting fish is the 15-16" fish. The fish that are over 20" are the best spawners and produce the most fry. 4 fish is plenty for a meal for 2 people. I practice catch and release for the most part, generally keeping my limit on opener and having several meals just from that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it looks like something might happen in the future about a slot and limit change on walleyes. I found this today leaving school in the Duluth News Tribune

Minnesota state lawmakers will consider major fishing changes

John Myers Duluth News Tribune

Published Wednesday, December 19, 2007

Minnesota lawmakers may be about to mess with some longstanding Minnesota fishing regulations.

A key lawmaker on Wednesday unveiled plans to move the state’s walleye fishing opener a week earlier and impose a statewide limit on walleyes of four, down from six daily.

The proposed changes were relayed in a letter from State Sen. Satveer Chaudhary, DFL-Fridley, chairman of the Environment and Natural Resources Committee, to state Department of Natural Resources Commissioner Mark Holsten.

The proposals still must pass both the state House and Senate and be signed by the governor to become law. But they signal some major changes in the state’s rich outdoor heritage.

In the letter dated Dec. 17, Chaudary wrote that “we will be considering legislation to begin [the] fishing opener one week earlier than the present schedule. The benefits of this change include bringing the fishing opener to a date consistent with border lakes and border states, benefit resort activities, and reduce conflicts with Mother’s Day. I believe climate changes have impacted the spring spawning such that much, if not all, has occurred by the existing opener date. This should leave any biological impact minimal to none.’’

If the rule were approved and ready for 2009, the fishing opener would be held on May 2 instead of May 9.

DNR officials were not immediately available to comment Wednesday afternoon.

Chaudhary also said lawmakers will consider a statewide slot limit, or length limit, for walleyes. For example, on some lakes only walleyes between 14 and 18 inches are legal to keep; smaller and larger fish must be set free.

While many of the state’s top walleye fishing lakes already have lower limits and more-restrictive size limitations, this would be the first time those limits were imposed statewide.

Biologists have said that lowering the statewide limit to four from six will do little to reduce the number of fish caught because so few anglers catch even four walleyes per trip.

Chaudhary also informed Holsten that he would support a plan, likely emerging from the DNR, for the state to pay farmers to allow hunters access to their land for free. Many Minnesota hunters have complained of having too few places to hunt, especially game like pheasants.

The letter also expresses support for a new conservation fishing license, similar to an option offered in Ontario, where anglers agree to keep fewer fish each day in exchange for a less-expensive fishing license.

Moreover, Chaudhary raised the possibility of eliminating all license fees for children under age 18 to bolster youth participation in hunting and fishing. National trends show fewer youths are going afield.

DNR officials have said that change would cost the agency $2 million annual in lost revenue.

“I believe the Legislature has the ability to compensate this short-term loss, and that the costs are outweighed by the long-term benefit of recruiting youth who will become adult fee-payers,’’ Chaudhary said. “This is an inexpensive investment in our future.”

Other issues likely to be raised during the 2008 legislative session include raising the limit for pheasants; expanding requirements for the use of steel shot and fishing tackle instead of toxic lead shot; and new rules for fish farming, especially minnows in public waters.

Also expected during the session is an agreement on a constitutional amendment that would allow Minnesota voters to dedicate part of the state sales tax for conservation, fish and wildlife.

DNR officials are expected to reveal their priorities for the coming year at their annual roundtable event in St. Cloud the first week in January.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Slot limits are great.... for a while. Lac qui Parle had it for a number of years. It is a very fertile lake and according to fisheries a 15 inch walleye was two year old. 5 years after they put in the 15 inch minimum, they could see the stunting was beginning. A 14.5 inch walleye was now 4 years old, thus they got rid of the minimum two years ago. The idea is in the right place but putting all of minnesota's lakes into a bucket might not be the right thing to do. What is good for the goose is not neccessarily good for the gander. The interesting thing is when you hear all of these proposals. For once I wish they had what fisheries thinks we could do instead of legislators. I believe they have the knowledge of what to do. I know when LQP was having their roundtables, they told the public how many fish we would save by cutting one fish, two fish, etc. Just my two cents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Slots and limits are good things, but to be managed properly it can't be a blanket state wide thing. The ecosystem of a prairie pothole is not the same as the ecosystem of Lake Bemidji and that ecosystem is not the same as a flooded iron mine who's ecosystem is not the same as a weedy north metro lake which ecosystem is no where near similar to the Minnesota river.

For the sake of simplicity it would be absolutely wonderful to have the same regs on every lake state wide. However, that would be doing our resource a serious injustice. These lakes need to be managed on an individual basis according to each individual lakes needs, not by politicians. Even managing all lakes within one particular county would be wrong. Take where I live, for example. Lime lake, Shetek, Sarah, Graham, and Talcott the same? Not even close.

As far as keeper size goes? Walleyes over 20 inches I toss back in the lake. If I manage to pull one out, say 28 to 30 inch range I'm seriously thinking I don't know if it would go back or if it would hang proudly on the living room wall. I'll cross that bridge if/when I get there. My favorite eater size is 15-18 inchers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Six walts with one over 20". Thats the law and thats my slot. Some lakes encourage releasing anything under 16". Others say keep the dinks and release the big ones. Keep what yall eat and get on with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Posts

    • Neighbor_guy
      I'm hoping the snow they are forecasting shows up. Because then it's on for sure.    Put new glass on the light weight .223 so I don't have to carry the heavy target weight gun around. Just not practical where I hunt to have a 300yard gun. A 150yard gun will do just fine.    When you cary a shotgun and a rifle on almost every stand a few extra pounds can add up in a hurry.    Good luck tonight moose
    • Neighbor_guy
      Twin is pretty deep. One of the last to freeze over in most years.    I wasnt home yesterday evening to see if any more kids went through the ice.    I will did the spud out and see how thick  it is by shore tomorrow. 
    • tworiversman
      that's insane! 
    • Neighbor_guy
      The East Central Chapter of the MDAA will be holding its December meeting at Junction Bowl in Isanti Sunday December 11th st 6:00pm.   
    • CousinEddie
      We wait until the snowmobile club stakes the trail before going through the narrows.