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.

  • RECEIVE THE GIFTS MEMBERS SHARE WITH YOU HERE...THEN...CREATE SOMETHING TO ENCHANT OTHERS THAT YOU WANT TO SHARE

    You know what we all love...

    When you enchant people, you fill them with delight and yourself in return. Have Fun!!!

Sign in to follow this  
Daze Off

Moving Opener/Reduce Walleye Limit Proposal

Recommended Posts

Daze Off

Saw this on-line and thought I would share it. Daze Off

Make fishing opening earlier, lawmaker proposes

BY DENNIS LIEN

Pioneer Press

Article Last Updated: 12/19/2007 03:33:24 PM CST

A key Minnesota lawmaker has proposed moving up the state's fishing opener a week, in part to reduce conflicts with Mother's Day.

State Sen. Satveer Chaudhary, DFL-Fridley, sent a letter this week to Department of Natural Resources Commissioner Mark Holsten and to members of an upcoming DNR roundtable. He said he plans to introduce the change during the upcoming legislative session.

"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,'' Chaudhary, head of the Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee, said in the letter.

He also unveiled plans to set a statewide daily limit on walleyes of four, instead of six.

The DNR was not immediately available for comment.

In an interview, Chaudhary said moving up the mid-May opener a week is a proposal worthy of discussion and he welcomes the opportunity for feedback from the DNR forum in early January.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IFallsRon

Changing the walleye opener because it conflicts with a holiday made up by greeting card companies makes zero sense. If the lefty from Fridley had done any amount of research he would know that the opener corresponds with the walleye's reproduction cycle and the average time that water temps are warm enough for that to naturally occur, allowing for a buffer time of recovery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hanson

Why do we have state senator's establishing fishing limits?

Let the DNR do their job please!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IFallsRon

Here's more:

Minnesota state lawmakers will consider major fishing changes

John Myers

Duluth News Tribune - 12/19/2007

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
mtheis

All of the rule changes so far that I have heard (i.e. 1) no fish house license needed for attended portables 2) eating fish on the ice 3) turnback the opener one week, etc.) do nothing but benefit and expand our fishing enjoyment on the water. If they want to reduce the daily possession limits for walleyes to four....so what! You guys would complain if you were hanged with a silk rope for crying out loud! The DNR enforces the rules set by the legislature. I for one, think it's about time.

I looked this up. Here is the mission statement of the DNR:

“Our mission is to work with citizens to conserve and manage the state's natural resources, to provide outdoor recreation opportunities, and to provide for commercial uses of natural resources in a way that creates a sustainable quality of life.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DTro

As I said elsewhere:

Years past=Statewide 6 walleye limit with no slot

Fast Forward to selected lakes having reduced limits and slots

Fast Forward even more to a good portion of lakes having some sort of reduced limit and or slot

Now we are back at statewide regs?

I'm all for it, but anyone else really think this will hold for more than a few years?

Pretty soon it's.....well ya know, lake X isn't doing so well, we need to impose some additional regs.

Then it's lake Y and Z as well

Next thing you know we are right back to a statewide reg of a 2 fish limit.

Honestly, just for the mental ease, I would love to see a statewide regulation, but if that happens, let's leave it that way for a while....please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
King Canada

With the earlier ice outs and lakes warming to spawning temperature earlier an earlier opener does make sense. I also think it's time to lower bag limits and set a statewide minimum size. The impact of ice fishing needs a good examination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WaveWacker

I agree completely with Hanson. Let the DNR propose any regulation changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mtheis

Why doesn't Minnesota have a rule like Wisconsin where a family license can include children 16 and 17?

Wisconsin Fishing Regulations...page 5 states,

• Nonresident annual family license—Fee $65.00. Includes children 16 & 17 years old.

Let's see...in Minnesota...Combination Angling License (husband and wife).....$25.00

Individual Angling license.....say age 16....$17.00

Individual Angling license.....say age 17....$17.00

-----------------------------------------

Total cost of Fishing...(husband, wife, 16 and 17 yr old children)======$59.00.

Add the license fees at $2.00 per license......grand total......$64.00.

I can fish in Wisconsin as a non resident with my family of two boys the same as I can in Minnesota.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nick Kuhn

Every lake is different so the DNR should be the one imposing regulations. There simply is no set of regulations that will be ideal for every lake in the state. It should be up to the DNR to go through lake by lake and decide what needs to be done. A good example is the change the WI DNR made to bass regulations: the end result was an explosion of bass populations and near extirpation of walleye's in smaller lakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farley

They should change mothers day so it doesnt conflict with the minnesota opener as far as I'm concerned grin.gif. What if there is still ice on the lakes? We go to Kabetogama for opener, very possible that we would have enough ice to not put the boat in and not enough ice to walk on. I guess we'd have to go to the Rainy river then but imagine how packed that would be if that was the case.

I dont see a need to change to a statewide slot other than it would be less confusing given all the lakes that impose slot limits. But it doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure it out.

No need to change the limit either, if you are having a hard time catching walleyes on a certian lake, then go to a differnt one. The whole state doesnt need to cater to your fishing needs because "it should be easier". Screw that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DTro

Quote:

They should change mothers day so it doesnt conflict with the minnesota opener as far as I'm concerned
grin.gif
. What if there is still ice on the lakes? We go to Kabetogama for opener, very possible that we would have enough ice to not put the boat in and not enough ice to walk on. I guess we'd have to go to the Rainy river then but imagine how packed that would be if that was the case.

I dont see a need to change to a statewide slot other than it would be less confusing given all the lakes that impose slot limits. But it doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure it out.

No need to change the limit either, if you are having a hard time catching walleyes on a certian lake, then go to a differnt one. The whole state doesnt need to cater to your fishing needs because "it should be easier". Screw that.


While I agree that each lake should be managed differently. You have to admit, the micro managing has got to a point where it kind of is rocket science to figure it out. Especially for the weekend warrior.

It has got to be a nightmare to enforce all these rules/regs. Where did you catch that fish? Are you transporting it correctly in regards to that lakes regs. Did you eat any fish while you were out there? Hey, is that a weed on your trailer? Where did that come from?

Do you have all your endorsements on your license? I see you have a bait bucket there, where did the water in there come from?

I can see why new fisherman are in a decline. There has to be a better way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nutty Fisherman

Mothers day is a national holiday, and the MINNESOTA fishing opener is a state afair. I would think if they want to change something it would be a lot easier to change the opener.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farley

Nutty, it was a joke, hence the " grin.gif".

Dtro, well said. And although I have nothing but respect for the DNR officers, that is the job they signed up for.

My whole problem with it is this: Who the **** is this lefty senator from Fridley to speak for the whole fishing state? I dont care what little committe you run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Black_Bay

This issue is being discussed in at least 3 other threads. Is there a way the mods can combine them into one? It's a good discussion but it's hard to follow in that many places at the same time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nick Kuhn

Quote:

This issue is being discussed in at least 3 other threads. Is there a way the mods can combine them into one? It's a good discussion but it's hard to follow in that many places at the same time.


This is a UBB board and new versions of UBB do allow thread merging, but whether fishingMN has it enabled is another question. I know I wish the phpbb site I mod had that ability (at nearly 2 million posts (fishingmn has just over 1 million) it definitely is needed).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BoxMN

If I am not mistaken, the opener really isn't scientifically set for spawning seasons, but more a "tradition" of having an opener. It is socially set. Most states do not have an "opener" like we do. It is sort of like the noon opener for duck hunting, that was recently changed to 9 am (few years ago).

Doesn't matter to me, really, we will still keep our traditional trip dates regardless, with the main trip the week after "opener" as it is usually better fishing then, for us anyway.

It sure would give the crappies a bit of a break in the spring wink.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BLACKJACK

Nobody needs to take home 6 walleyes, thats just filling the freezer. Then multiply 6 times ma and the two kids - thats overkill. Even 4 walleyes/8 fillets is a lot of fish.

Moving the opener would be ok by me, I don't fish it anyway. Why face the zoo on the opener when I can go out Mon or Tues evening and find only 1-2 boats on the lake?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nutty Fisherman

Farly I saw your grin.gif But I thought I would say it because it has been brought up many times when ever this came up before. Sorry it came across to strong. Sometimes I think the mothers like the idea of having the day to them selfs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lookincalifornia

although not yet a minnesotan, i have an opinion on this issue.

mn has such a variety of waters, that state wide regs would seem silly. from the deep tanic waters of the north, to the over pressured waters of the metro, to the shallow weedy lakes fo the southwest, to the many river systems. all of witch need there own type of management.

a 6 to 4 walleye limit sounds about right. and that hidden part of more land for pheasnt hunting laugh.giflaugh.giflaugh.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SDbowhunter

One great thing about South Dakota is there is no opener. Though I allways seem to be in minnesota for the opener. I usually have a couple days on the water and countless days shore fishing before then. They do limit fishing in creeks and streams in certain counties in the spring. I also think a 4 walleye limit is more then fair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
slipperybob

Gotta think like a marketing analyst...

Trying to collect some spending revenue from Fishermen by giving us one more week of fishing! That proposal, (same as some past hunting season proposal) was so that it compete with neighboring states. The other flip side was so that consumers not combining their activity in one weekend but end up doing two things separately. More spending revenue...down the line. grin.gif see what college does to people.

Good thing I quit before I got brainwashed...or did the fishing brainwashed me insted. grin.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
river rat316

It amazes me that all they try and do is INCREASE your fishing enjoyment and make it EASIER for everyone and all people do is complain.... only in Minnesota

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Northlander

Keep opener where it is and set the walleye limit at 4. 6 eyes a piece is too many. Heck I fish mostly on a water with a 2 fish limit and thats cool with me. Of course I very seldom keep a limit no matter where Im at.

Believe it or not up north and in most of MN. the opener does protect the spawning fish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
primetime49

Opening the season one week earlier would just even out the 6 fish compared to 4 on limits.

With a better early season bite they [DNR] would obviously just end up with the same number of total fish being caught with limit number change.

It would definatly help trade for buisnesses associated with fishing and tourism.

Kinda would end traditon of border jumping thou that has become tradition for thousands of fishermen.

Share this post


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



  • Your Responses - Share & Have Fun :)

    • leech~~
      Here's a little back ground. The Dakota originally called the lake Mde Maka Ska (modern spelling Bde Maka Ska, pronunciation: Be-DAY Mah-KAH-Ska)[5] meaning White Earth Lake,[6] or White Bank Lake,[7] a name that probably was given by the Ioway who inhabited the area until the 16th century. Another Dakota name for the lake may have been Mde Med'oza, which was the name initially adopted by settlers, either as Lake Medoza or in translation as Loon Lake.[8] The Dakota also described it as Heyate Mde, meaning "Lake Set Back (from the River)".[9] The United States Secretary of War, John C. Calhoun, sent the Army to survey the area that would surround Fort Snelling in 1817. Calhoun had also authorized the construction of Fort Snelling, one of the earliest Euro-American settlements in the state. The surveyors renamed the water body "Lake Calhoun" in his honor. The Fort Snelling Military Reservation survey map created by Lt. James L. Thompson in 1839 clearly shows the lake as bearing the name "Calhoun".[10] Minneapolis skyline reflected in the lake in 2010 Calhoun's legacy as a pro-slavery politician has led critics to question whether he is the best person to be honored. In 2011 the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board visited the issue. Their legal counsel concluded that the board could not legally change the name, as state law gives that power to the Commissioner of Natural Resources, and then only in the first 40 years after the name was designated. Following the Charleston church shooting in June 2015, a fresh drive to change the name started via an online petition. The Park Board indicated it would look into whether they could change the lake's name through state action,[11][12] and in fall 2015 added the Dakota name to signage below the official name.[1] On March 22, 2016, an advisory group decided via majority vote to urge the Minnesota Park and Recreation Board to restore the lake's former name.[13] In 2017, the Minneapolis Park Board voted unanimously to change the lake's name back to that of Bde Maka Ska[14] and the Hennepin County commissioners approved it more narrowly.[15] The change needs final approval at state and federal level in order to go into effect.[16] There was also a proposal to rename the lake for Senator Paul Wellstone, who is buried in nearby Lakewood Cemetery.[17]
    • Rick
      The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources today announced the State of Minnesota has approved changing the name of Lake Calhoun in Minneapolis to Bde Maka Ska. The DNR’s decision follows a Hennepin County Board resolution requesting the change.  “The DNR respects the role of elected county boards in determining name changes for geographic features,” DNR Commissioner Tom Landwehr said.  “In this instance, I am confident the Hennepin County Board carefully considered community values and citizen perspectives in determining that this was the right action to take. DNR’s role is to ensure the county followed the proper process.” The DNR’s decision means the lake name change will become official in Minnesota when the DNR’s approval is officially recorded by Hennepin County and published in the State Register. Hennepin County commissioners voted to seek the name change Nov. 28. The DNR will submit the Hennepin County resolution, along with the state approval, to the U.S. Board of Geographic Names, which will approve or deny the name change for federal use. The DNR is the state agency that approves or denies name changes for geographic features, after Minnesota counties consider name change resolutions, gather public input and vote on proposed changes. In considering county requests to name a geographic feature or change a feature’s name, the DNR’s role is to consider 1) whether the county followed a proper public process prior to taking its action, and 2) whether the county-approved name complies with naming conventions. For example, names must avoid confusion with similarly named features, and names may not commemorate a living person. A copy of the DNR’s order for this name change and details on how Minnesota geographic features are named are available on the naming geographic features webpage. Discuss below - to view set the hook here.
    • monstermoose78
      Saturday is the day I will open blue lake wide open If I have to
    • opsirc
      I had too go to his face book page
    • shaneD
      my dad grew up in The Pas, my grand parents owned the avenue hotel and they had a place on Clearwater. Summers we would go up and fish and ski and such. Lots of good memories, other than the horseflies (Bulldogs). My experience was always it really didn't matter what you used, for lakers as long as it was shiny it got hit. Our technique was pretty simple, drop it to the bottom and reel is up fast. they hit hard on the way up and its clear like superior so you can see them a long way down if you have good ice. The river right out of town is good for char too.
    • Poseidon
      Yeah, ok, I'm using the 8. My drill also overheated after punching 5-6 holes in quick succession. Thanks for the responses... sorry for hijacking the thread
    • shaneD
      So I just came back from Lake Winnipeg, and the 3 feet of ice they have there and found my auger lacking. I gave up the gas auger years ago to switch to the clam plate and drill. Around here, even Bemidji where I fish the most, I have never had a problem with getting through the ice. Lake Winnipeg is a different story. Anyway, I have a 6 inch bit now, and when with drilling a couple holes side by side to deal with the big fish but thinking back to my old 10 inch strikemaster I was almost willing to deal with all the issues I had with it to have some space to wrangle a fish. Soooo, im looking at going with an 8 inch bit, with the Milwaukee and the clam plate. I know that clam had a gearbox in the past that would help with that but seems they no longer offer it. will I tear up my drill with the bigger auger? I have two 9 amp batteries  and double the torque now too so I'm figuring a few  extra holes compared to the five amps and 650inc pounds I had for the previous drill setup. Suggestions? thoughts? other than getting a gas auger, cuz that isn't happening.
    • mrpike1973
      That would make a difference now wouldn't it?  Oops my mistake I have a 6 inch just got done fishing today with 5 amp battery I got 27 holes at 19 inches of ice. I noticed the drill seemed warm after drilling 5-6 in a row but no problems. I don't have a gas auger any more but I see what the guys are saying about a power auger.
    • Pat McGraw
      Thank you.
    • Capt. Quicksteel
      If you want to get in there by snow mobile or walking over, Wolf Lake is worth a try.
  • Share & Have Fun