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.

  • Announcements

    • Rick

      Members Only Fluid Forum View   08/08/2017

      Fluid forum view allows members only to get right to the meat of this community; the topics. You can toggle between your preferred forum view just below to the left on the main forum entrance. You will see three icons. Try them out and see what you prefer.   Fluid view allows you, if you are a signed up member, to see the newest topic posts in either all forums (select none or all) or in just your favorite forums (select the ones you want to see when you come to Fishing Minnesota). It keeps and in real time with respect to Topic posts and lets YOU SELECT YOUR FAVORITE FORUMS. It can make things fun and easy. This is especially true for less experienced visitors raised on social media. If you, as a members want more specific topics, you can even select a single forum to view. Let us take a look at fluid view in action. We will then break it down and explain how it works in more detail.   The video shows the topic list and the forum filter box. As you can see, it is easy to change the topic list by changing the selected forums. This view replaces the traditional list of categories and forums.   Of course, members only can change the view to better suit your way of browsing.   You will notice a “grid” option. We have moved the grid forum theme setting into the main forum settings. This makes it an option for members only to choose. This screenshot also shows the removal of the forum breadcrumb in fluid view mode. Fluid view remembers your last forum selection so you don’t lose your place when you go back to the listing. The benefit of this feature is easy to see. It removes a potential barrier of entry for members only. It puts the spotlight on topics themselves, and not the hierarchical forum structure. You as a member will enjoy viewing many forums at once and switching between them without leaving the page. We hope that fluid view, the new functionality is an asset that you enjoy .
Sign in to follow this  
Bluegill1510

Waska Opinion

Recommended Posts

Bluegill1510    0
Bluegill1510

Hey guys I just wanted to get everyone's opinion about a slot limit on walleyes for Minnewaska? Since Chaudary thinks that there should be a statewide slot, and daily limit dropped down to 4 instead of 6....what do you guys think of Waska getting a slot?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
alex1    0
alex1

IMO, I would also support a statewide limit of 4, and a slot limit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hhguide    0
hhguide

I think it would be a great idea! I know that i've seen some people throw 12 and 13 inchers in the livewell as i'm shaking my head and throwing them back. Its the same with the big fish if its above 20 inches I might take a picture or two but thats going back into the lake too. I think it would be great for the future of not only waska but all lakes in minnesota. As for the number of fish I could be pushed either way. I mean not to many people go out there and consistantly put limits in the boat. Sometimes you get a person going out at night and catching 2 or 3 walleyes and that suits them just great their not out there just to catch a limit but to enjoy the moment. Plus it wouldn't affect the tournament fisherman because they can still have the 6 in the boat. but on the other side I think it would help the quality of fish in the lake alot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the buck    0
the buck

Limit of 4, slot of 15 - 19 would work great. With 4 you still get a couple of good meals and it will keep you coming back. Anything over 19 should be thrown back anyway to help produce more little fishies. It seems to work great on Lake of the Woods and if you really do get into them . . . there is nothing wrong with practicing Catch & Release!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
waska    0
waska

 Originally Posted By: the buck
Limit of 4, slot of 15 - 19 would work great. With 4 you still get a couple of good meals and it will keep you coming back. Anything over 19 should be thrown back anyway to help produce more little fishies. It seems to work great on Lake of the Woods and if you really do get into them . . . there is nothing wrong with practicing Catch & Release!

agree completely

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
scaup    0
scaup

I would like to see some kind of slot on waska if it would help the fishery overall. It get's really frusterating watching people keep 24" - 26" fish. I put several 20" and larger back in the lake this year but it kinda seems like one step forward and two steps back. I hope others are doing this as well. However, I hear from many people that don't put them back and I just shake my head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bluegill1510    0
Bluegill1510

Waska do you attend BSU in Bemidji?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
fishfarmeat    0
fishfarmeat

Scaup is right on!!! I would leave the limit at six/ one in posession over 28", 20-28" go back. Not all people get to fish all the time so leaving limit at six assures them of catching a meal. Keep all the big ones in the lake and eat those 12". If everyone did that there would be so many (natural fish) in the lake the Association would't need to stock it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hhguide    0
hhguide

Nothing against you "fishfarmeat" but if you keep all those 12 inchers were going to be in trouble in the future! you need to throw fish back that are smaller than 14 inches otherwise were not going to have a future for the youngsters!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
waskawood    0
waskawood

 Originally Posted By: fishfarmeat
Keep all the big ones in the lake and eat those 12". If everyone did that there would be so many (natural fish) in the lake the Association would't need to stock it.

Where are the natural fish going to come from? The DNR states that natural reproduction is very low in Minnewaska. I don't think it is from a lack of spawning size fish but rather from a lack of hard gravel for them to spawn in. To me the whole problem is common sense or the lack of it. Why keep a 12" walleye? If you enjoy cleaning a mess of small fish target the sunnies, they are much more active and entertaining. Likewise, why keep the big fish? Somewhere around 15" to 19" would make way more sense to me. As far as a possesion limit. That is another common sense question. I have no problem with someone on occasion keeping a limit of 6 walleyes but when you come back day after day and keep taking fish it doesn't take long to hurt a lake when there are as many houses as Minnewaska has on it. There are plenty of resources to go around but we need a little self regulation. Something that is severely lacking with a certain percentage of anglers today. I must say that I think most anglers are concerned about our resource but there are enough out there that think otherwise to ruin it for all. It seems like the Minnewaska Lake Association is being villified for trying to maintain the level of walleyes in Minnewaska and I do not understand this mentality. My feeling is that the DNR would rather manage Minnewaska as a bass lake, at least the MLA is trying to fight for the walleye angler. What are the rest of us doing? Just my 2 cents worth for what it is worth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bluegill1510    0
Bluegill1510

I hear ya waskawood, I never really thought of Waska as a walleye lake or walleye destination, just a panfish or bass lake. But for its size I guess you can say its a decent walleye lake, but man does it get pressured! Which disgusted me the last time I was out there fishing which was 4-5 years ago. Plus I hardly make it over there anymore with family selling the majority of grandma and grandpa's land (my mom is orginally from Glenwood/Sedan area). So no loss in my book, especially Mille Lacs is only 30 minutes away, and Brainerd is only an hour compare to an hour and half drive over that way. I just wanted to see what the majority of you guys thought about a slot for that lake....and of course with many slots on the majority of Minnesota premier walleye destination lakes anglers are going to go to lakes just Waska with no slot and keep whatever they catch even if its a 15" or a 26" walleye, cuz they legally can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
scaup    0
scaup

Waska,

You used the "B" word and that word scares me. I used to fish Green Lake by Spicer on a regular basis. When the DNR changed the management of that lake to create a trophy smallmouth lake it really hurt the walleye fisherman. I do not know if the DNR is managing Waska as a Bass lake but I would like to find out. I also probably need to get involved the MLA instead of just sitting on the sidelines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mlaker3    8
Mlaker3

There is a pretty good discussion going about state wide change in limits and slots on this local board as well. An interesting point is the local DNR has mentioned in the press how the recent high Northern pike numbers were detremental to the walleye numbers. What about the bass? A study that was noted in In-Fisherman showed a New York lake where walleye stocking pretty much just fattened the bass population. By the time you feed the northerns, bass and those that keep small fish there aren't many left. The fisherman is the last to get what the lake has to offer. We need to impose some restraint (4 fish limit) to be able to share the resource. IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nate larson    0
nate larson

I have seen this lake change dramatically over the years. I would definately say that it has changed from a walleye lake to a bass lake. I don't know what the sollution is... Nobody keeps bass, which is part of the problem. Maybe we all need to start eating them. HAHA Another big problem is the lack of natural reporduction. This lake used to have good natural reporduction. The lake structure hasn't changed...so why has the spawning changed? I think a lot of spawning sized fish have migrated to nearby lakes.

I would definately be in favor of having a slot imposed with a 3 or 4 fish limit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
beer batter    0
beer batter

Another way to help is to start keeping the northerns. They are everywhere and they're hungry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hhguide    0
hhguide

I think that so many of the smallmouth and other bass are moving up onto the rocks where the walleyes spawn and scare the walleyes off. And its a struggle over power in the spawning areas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wayne Ek    0
Wayne Ek

With walleyes and bass spawning at differant times of the year and at differant water tempatures I really don't think that this is a problem. I guide on "waska" for both bass and walleye. We take most of our walleyes alot shallower than most people fish. One of the problems maybe that some anglers are still stuck on dragging rigs over the sand and rocks. The primary food source on "waska" seems to be perch and sunfish. And all summer long the shallow weeds hold that food source. I take walleyes all summer out of the weeds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hhguide    0
hhguide

Thats a good point because I know that walleyes are takin right next to the weeds. But although the fish dont spawn at the same time they are still on the lake. we may never know what the problem is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
eyehunter01    0
eyehunter01

Beer Batter....

I agree. I've always suggested northerns and muskies eat a lot of little walleyes. I think this is also happening on Mille Lacs. With monster muskies that need a lot of food and nobody keeps them. So they still swim around eating a mass quantity of bait fish. After hearing of all the monster muskies caught this year on Mille Lacs, and extreme fishing pressure this summer, this might suggest why the DNR netted near record low walleyes in Mille Lacs this fall. Muskies are very territorial fish as well and I believe they are taking over lakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
goose89    0
goose89

Or, maybe they would eat all the bass, or stunted sunfish, and even out some of the imbalances. j/k

The Mille Lacs netting #'s this fall were not accurate. Old news. Mille Lacs walleye population is nowhere near record lows. I'm not saying let's throw muskies in every lake, but the fears walleye fisherman (I am one) have regarding muskies isn't warranted, I believe. i'm with Agape. Walleyes today, a good number at least, aren't in the traditional bar, reefs, classic structure places Buck Perry taught us about. Alot of them have found sanctuary in the weeds. Maybe they wouldn't feel so safe and have easy pickins in the weeds with some muskies around. There are alot of lakes where they coexist, both in healthy numbers. Again, I'm not saying put them in Waska or Green, just that they aren't the scurge some make them out to be. Maybe, just maybe, some lakes in the area would be overall healthier with a litter more "top of the food chain" predators, like large pike and muskies. Just a thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
eyehunter01    0
eyehunter01

It's funny! All you guys think the walleyes are hiding??????? Are you kidding me? It makes no sense! We'll see what the DNR nets say this spring. But it just doesn't add up. You think muskies don't eat little walleyes? Cuz that is a joke! I don't care how many different kinds of fish their are to eat. Plus, you say they walleyes are hiding in the weed beds? Where you think the muskies hide out? (VERY CURIOUS). The nets show extremely low numbers, NO ONE is caching many fish this winter (granted the perch explosion), DNR lowered the slot limit (mid season last summer), and you guys think their just hiding in the weeds??? I've caught many walleye over the years trolling with dare devils (fishing for northern) in the weed beds! I'm not an rookie! I know where to find the walleyes! Thanks for the advice but its just old news! At least 5 years. Thanks anyway!!!

AND "lets put more predators in the lake"?? GREAT IDIEA!!!!!!Your not a walleye fisherman (obviously because you want more walleye predators) Are you kidding me?

ps: you think the DNR doesn't know where to set their nets? They are far from rookies also! Please explain your opinion..........

How many lbs of fish per week will a Muskie eat? And who eats Muskie? They just eat what I would love to eat (walleye, perch, pan fish, ect)! JUST PLEASE TELL ME WHY WE NEED MORE MUSKIE AND NORTHERNS IN OUR LAKES?!?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
goose89    0
goose89

whoa there eyehunter,

When I stated that more walleyes today are in the weeds that in the past,(maybe they've been there all along) I was speaking to Minnewaska, mostly. But my point was maybe your traditional walleye spots would have more walleyes on it IF muskies / larger northerns were in there with them. (I didn't say we needed them.) A walleye's not dumb enough to stay there if it doesn't feel safe. Walleyes seem pretty adaptable. Rivers, weeds, deep, shallow, rocks, mud, they seem to make it everywhere. They are gonna be whereever they are safe and can easily find food.

Weeds in Minnewaska fill that bill, right now.

I know muskies have been tried in Minnewaska before and didn't make it. How was your walleye fishing back them??? There's a few nice northerns on Waska, but maybe a few more would be beneficial to weed out the small bass and stunted sunnies, and push a few walleyes out of the weeds and back your way. Or maybe we have to change or techniques and spots.

BTW, I am a walleye fisherman (and bass, crappie, sunfish, northern, muskie, perch). I am not a scared walleye fisherman. I don't see muskies as "walleye predators." I see them as a beneficial "top tier" predator. There's a good number of lakes in Minnesota that have Muskies in them and have health populations of all the other fish. I also realize each lake is different. Bottom line, I'm not convinced, or scared, that muskies decimate walleyes and other smaller fish populations. They usually do more good than bad.

We as fisherman need to step it up in helping walleyes out. WE are the ultimate predator. WE'VE done exponentially more harm to walleyes and other fish populations with careless ethics and overharvest than all the muskies put together. How many lbs. of fish do we have to eat to make it??? A muskie doesn't have the choices we do, except an occasional duckling, I guess. I love eating fish that I've caught, but have significantly different practices of keeping fish than my grandfathers had.

I'm just an arm chair fisheries biologist. Sometimes I probably don't know what I'm talking about. Just stating my observations and views. Sometimes nature makes no sense. Alot of times the correct answer has been exactly what I thought would be wrong. Then it's time to try something different and change.

I didn't mean to rile you up. Just stating my observations and views. Please read this without feeling threatened Thanks for your views also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
goose89    0
goose89

I've reread alot of this thread and have to make a correction. I stated the low netting #'s on Mille Lacs were inaccurate and that was old news. I don't know that for sure. There's speculation that record low water levels, warm water temps this spring, poor 2004 walleye hatch &/or record fishing pressure was to blame. I chose to believe all these, because I had fear of what the truth might mean. The fishing this fall, although it seemed like a short fall, was excellent for many. I don't believe the walleye population dropped as significantly as the net #s show. Fishing success didn't seem to drop in that proportion. I could be wrong...

The media did it's job in twisting and exagerating the facts and creating fear in those prone to it. I remember the gloom and doom reports that nite the DNR reports came out. I haven't heard any follow-ups. They've moved on because there really wasn't much of a story. Good for a nite though. The low counts have NOTHING to do with musky predation on walleyes, that I'm pretty sure about. "Muskies eating all the walleyes", that sounds like another mistruth the media would use, not a fisherman.Read what the DNR says about this belief at http://www.lakevermilion.com/muskies/htmls/diets.html

I was wrong stating the DNR #'s were inaccurate. But I've never once read or heard anything that suggested the muskies were responsible for the low #s. IMO

Sorry to get off the "Waska Opinion".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
eyehunter01    0
eyehunter01

I agree with the over harvest. I'm not saying muskies/northern are the only problem, but they cant help. And suggesting we need more of them in the lake is just stupid. A growing population, advanced technology, and no statewide limit is the biggest danger to our walleye population in most lakes. and you did suggest putting more gators in our lakes. I just disagree completely...

"Maybe, just maybe, some lakes in the area would be overall healthier with a litter more "top of the food chain" predators, like large pike and muskies. Just a thought."

I didn't mean to fly off the handle. But when I talked to the DNR this winter (on Mille Lacs), he just seemed dumb founded. He had no explanation as well as many of us don't. I'm just saying something needs to change, and fast.

It just really irritates me when people suggest putting more muskies/northern in our lakes. Put them in the rivers, where most people don't eat fish out of anyway. Don't get me wrong their a blast catching. I only fish them when the walleye fishing is slow (dog days of summer). But I just don't think we need more of them for any reason. We used to catch numerous northerns. We literally caught 9 northerns, one morning, 3 hours, with two people, all over 30" and ever since the muskies moved in we've only caught a handful of northerns over the past few years. I know they are territorial fish, and I was just suggesting they may be taking over spawning areas for other fish. Just a suggestion...

By the way, when was that article written? And I just have a thought about the article. I've heard from many people the tullibee population is hurting on Mille Lacs (netting tullibee was discontinued if I remember correctly), the walleye population is hurting, I just don't understand what good these fish are creating...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
goose89    0
goose89

Eye,

Good point on the tulibee populations of Mille Lacs. Muskies would be easy to point a finger at. I don't know what the correct answer is on that one.

Like I said before, I am just an "arm chair" fisheries biologist. I don't claim to have any solid answers. I never suggested we NEED more muskies / large pike. I put it out there as food for thought. Yes, I did suggest it, but didn't say we NEED to. Let's not continue changing / adding to each others debate.

I'm not sure when the article was written. I don't believe musky diets have changed that much since then for it to matter.

I'd love to know the fish populations and sizes in Minnesaska before we wet a line in it. I'll venture there were alot more and larger pike and panfish in it. I'd guess the same to be true for walleyes too. I'm not sure though. I believe that muskies / large pike do serve a beneficial purpose to fisheries. I understand we'll never get back to those times, but without man in the equation, top predators serve a vital role in the rest of a lakes fish population. Maybe we've filled their role. I'd say they did a better job of it. You'd have to understand food chains / fisheries pyramids to agree with me.

"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principle is contempt prior to investigation."

Show me proof of your investigations. Show me evidence muskies harm walleye populations in any size or type of lake anywhere in Minnesota.

Eye, maybe we should start a new topic. This started out as a slot limit debate, which we both seem to agree on. I'll be honest, I love both the debates. I don't want this to turn into an ego driven, name calling, peeing match. I've seen that happen, and have been an active part of it here before (and regret it), and the topic quickly gets shut down, as it should. I don't think any of your views are stupid. We are both pretty entrenched in our foxholes, yes. But that doens't mean we have to shoot at and try to hurt the other. We may never totally agree with each other. Live and let live. Hopefully a couple of idiots sharing views can somehow stimulate others to think and come up with something better. We both want change. I hope others can add their input.

Share this post


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



  • Posts

    • seifjr
      Keep the reports coming Curt, much appreciated.  Unfortunately, I'm not able to get back up there until September 22-25th., so it going to be tough keeping my mind on work and not LOW.  Are you just moving around in the basin until you mark a school of fish, and then jigging them?  I see all of your waypoints on the screen you showed, so those must be spots that have held fish at one time.
    • guideman
      Hey everybody, I have my last two guide trips on the 22nd and 23rd of August. A bad back and old age have taken their toll and I will retire from a job I have loved to do for the last 27 years.  I still enjoy it but unfortunately my body just can't take the pounding anymore. I'll still be out there fishing but no longer on a daily basis. I will miss all the regular clients I have had over the years and all the new people I have met that I can call my friends. Thanks to all of you that have shared the boat with me over the years, I hope you all had a good time. "Ace"   "It's just fishing man"
    • guitpic
      Bought a couple of baitcaster reels..my first....Lew's BB1 speed spool and Daiwa Tatula CT R. After about two weeks of daily practice casting in the river behind our house....lots of backlashes(birds nests)...I gotta say, I've come to love casting with these reels....much more accurate than my spinning reels. Any other baitcasting fans out there?  If so, what do you use?      
    • rundrave
      dont worry moose we all need a little of aromatherapy to cure that up about this time of the year:
    • BigVwalters
      How's the bite been recently.   Coming up for the weekend and curious at what depths to start at. 
    • RuddyDuck
      On the lighter side, I am 'SpoonBillSlayer' on that other site. For whatever reason years ago when I joined these sites I used two different userids. Both odd duck names that fit an odd duck! I just wanted to get the new updates out on this mess, it just seems like the only people being notified of it are those in  lake assoc's.  We'll see what happens.   
    • Wanderer
      I've massaged the trigger finger this summer by shooting the sporting clays league at Rice Creek.  Good way to make sure I got out! Started a little rough as to be expected but got back the groove toward the end.  Finished the summer at a charity shoot with 39/40.  That felt good. 
    • mrpike1973
      Same here saw on another site I will be taking off work and letting them know my opinion.
    • Rick
      Through a federal grant from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources’ has awarded more than $450,000 in local grants to protect and enhance inland coastal resources. The annual grant program is managed by the Minnesota’s Lake Superior Coastal Program, which is a voluntary federal-state partnership distributing federal dollars to projects along the inland coast of Lake Superior. This year, grant funding is being awarded to nine projects in the coastal area: Researchers at the University of Minnesota will monitor and analyze measures designed to reduce erosion of bluffs adjacent to North Shore streams. Results will inform guidance on design criteria for future projects. $35,900. The Arrowhead Regional Development Commission will conduct an economic impact assessment of paved trails within the coastal area; determine the number of users of four popular trails (Duluth Lakewalk, Willard Munger State Trail, Gitchi-Gami State Trail, and St. Louis River Trail), and simultaneously conduct large-scale survey of trail-user habits and impacts on coastal economy. $11,500. Laurentian Resource Conservation and Development is planning to host a two-day conference for academia and coastal managers to bridge a gap between research results and practices of watershed assessment, protection and stream restoration. $23,000. Researchers at the University of Minnesota will increase scientific understanding of success rates of coastal forest seeds. Results will inform coastal managers for improved adaptive management and help determination whether coastal trees should be protected and treated as a unique seed collection zone. $98,875. Duluth Children’s Museum in collaboration with Positive Energy Outdoors will create a year round, innovative outdoor science, technology, engineering, and math active learning experience for children, particularly those in low-income households with limited access. $33,100. University of Minnesota Duluth – Natural Resources Research Institute and several partners will develop protocols for assessing the biomass of periphyton (algae attached to rocks) in Duluth area trout streams for use by professional aquatic and citizen scientists. $77,440. City of Duluth will improve public safety and access to the St. Louis River estuary through upgraded wayfinding signage and amenities on the Western Waterfront Trail.  $89,080. Lake County will develop engineering designs and construct trailhead for Lake County Mountain Bike Trail System, a planned 100-plus mile mountain bike trail system. connecting both beginner and advanced cyclists to nature and physical activity in the coastal area. $70,000. City of Carlton will replace an outdoor restroom facility at the Willard Munger trailhead in city of Carlton. The updated structure will meet current sewer requirements and meet compliance with Americans with Disabilities Act. $11,225. For 18 years, the DNR and NOAA have worked together to better Minnesota’s inland coast. Together, the agencies have granted $12.6 million in pass-through funding to more than 550 local projects and provided thousands of hours of technical assistance. Projects are selected for funding through an annual competitive grants process. For more information about Minnesota’s Lake Superior Coastal Program, visit www.mndnr.gov/mlscp. Discuss below - to view set the hook here.
    • delcecchi
      Second the guide.  Fishing a lake in the north is totally different from fishing Mississippi or lake Zumbro or other lakes in the southern half of the state.  Otherwise you should look at the best place to launch your boat to be close to good fishing.  Rainy is a very big lake.. Ask in http://fishingminnesota.com/forums/forum/98-rainy-lake-fishing-reports-hunting-events/ the rainy lake forum.