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  
Team Otter

Lake Weed Spraying Feed Back...

Recommended Posts

Team Otter

Additional questions, concerns and comments will be addressed here following tonight's gathering.

Gotta run! whistle.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gunderson21

Tonight was a great learning oppertunity. We definately need to incorporate the lake owners in to the discussion more to find a better balance. Hopefully this will also educate lake owners who are currently modifying their own shorelines for improved access, look and/or convenience. Anyways, I thought tonight was quite beneficial and look forward to the next meeting! Good job T.O.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Matt C

That was great info, as a lake shore owner and as a fisherman. It really enlighted me, and hopefully it did to others.

Thanks TO!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Team Otter

Thanks to all who attended. I would have liked to seen a larger group of people but those that did attend made up a diverse crowd. Those that attended, beyond the general public, were Jacquelyn Bacigalupi (Region 4 Habitat Specialist - MN DNR), Mark Bacigalupi (Fisheries - MN DNR, Waterville), Jack Lauer (Regional Fisheries Manager - MN DNR), John Cross (Columnist - Mankato Free Press), members of both the Lake Washington and Tetonka lake associations and members of Muskies, Inc.

Several topics were discussed, questions were fielded and concerns were raised, etc. Although there are many, some of the highlighted topics include:

1. Chemical Application and Alternate Options

2. Chemical Effects on Lake, Fish and Mammal

3. History of Curly Leaf Pondweed

4. Treatment Plans

5. Permitting and Lake Surveys

6. Plant Management and Habitat

7. Clarification of Rumors

8. Field run-off and/or tiling and its effects

9. Native and non-native vegetation definition

10. Government, lake association, property owner, sportsmen and women and general public influence

11. Different types of milfoil

Again, I would like to thank the DNR officials and lake association members that I have worked with, now, and in the future.

We all need to get educated on this subject and tonight it was apparent that some are and some are not quite there yet. These types of gatherings are intended to assist in the education of such an important topic.

Moving forward, I plan to actively attend lake association meetings from time to time, hold similar gatherings to the one tonight and ultimately pull together one voice that will be heard at the level it needs to be heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quetico

I didnt attend the meeting but people really need to look at how their lake shores effect the lake. I am landscape designer that studied lakescaping. The way your lake shore is landscaped effects significantly effects the lake. Change your lake shore and you can improve your lake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MPH

I missed the meeting because of forgotten prior commitments. Is there a way to sum it up? I would like to know whether or not to waste my money paying for spraying in front of my place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hookey

Shoot me a email and I will call you.

klbowe@gmail.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Team Otter

It depends if you're spraying for "curb appeal", lake access and/or convenience.

Ken will get you the information you need. If you need anything else, just let us know. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MPH

It was basically for all 3 of the above. I talked to Ken and he confirmed everthing that I thought about the situation. I will be saving my money this year and using it for some boat accessories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Muskiefool

Thank You for putting together a greatly needed forum last night Jamison, I'm not convinced that pouring toxic chemicals into our lakes that are already suffering is going to help in light of the fact that it will not eradicate the weed and will kill over 50% of the native plants, cutting clearly is just spreading the problem further, it's time for a biological impact assessment on lakes that have been Poisoned Cut and left alone, if there is a lake thats been left alone with this Curly Leaf Pond Weed to find out exactly what these treatments are dong to the fish, the people, the other aquaculture, birds and mammals, maybe our efforts and resources would be better spent reducing phosphates and creating buffers for agricultural drainage to archive a truly healthy lake, once again Thank You.

John Underhill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bigeye30"

First and foremost, thank you Jamison for putting this together, this gathering certainly brought out a few opinions that may or may not have ever been heard, from what I gathered last night, is that there is a positive outlook among sportsmen and women to finally get involved with some of the issues that surround our interests, as many of us learned the we as sportsman like to lay low, keep quiet so to speak, people the reality is the gov't, dnr, lakes associations etc all want the most amount of information,opinions, debates, concerns, comments,etc available. I believe that last night was the start of many more postive results, these sort of issues take an enormous amount of time and dedication to keep pursing for the greater good, fortunately it finally seems like there is an overall interest for once to continue forth, as far as the overall topic was concerned, I certainly learned a bit and will add that no matter what, one cannot say that the spraying of a toxic chemical into a water chain system is beneficial, it's just one of those simple concepts, toxic chemicals and flowing water, hmm. I also was a bit suprised to see that the amount of back data research to confirm the overall effects of this chemical were not quite known, but the biggest concept that I feel was brought out is the issue of the sportsman and women having no say where the decisions are made, only due to their own self behavior, the other key idea that I noticed is that we were all on the same page with the exception of one or two in the regards that education amongst ourselves is vital to survive, we need to stay informed and up to date, so when an issue does arise we have solutions to common problems. To find a perfect balance amongst a large population is nearly impossible, however to find a neutral agreeance is achievable, as a human one can adapt to change if they so choose,As a sportsmen I feel we have a long road to trudge, but the future will be bright, I look forward to additional gatherings, Thanks again Jamison Ken I'm sending an email

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hookey

One of messages I took away from the meeting is that the DNR grants permits based on demand and LAW not by what they personally feel is best.

A well organized group creates demand and as a result changes law. Laws grant rights and rights in this case change the Lake.

Why should you care?

Presently property owners are granted the right to wharf out to navigagable depth. My understanding is they have the right to eliminate weeds that restrict their access to the lake.

Recently a Bill was introduced to the Senate that would grant property owners the RIGHT to mechanical and chemical control of submerged vegetation and algae for 100 feet of shoreline by 150 feet lakeward. (Senate Bill SF0506) This bill was defeated and I must have been sleeping or out fishing when it was written.

Personally I am under the impression that chemical control is not a long term solution but it appears to slow the spread of pondweed which may be better than doing nothing at all, I do not know.

I do understand the Lake Washington Associations position on the matter and truly appreciate the time Greg has spent helping Jamison and I understand their course of action. He truly cares about the health of Lake Washington.

My fear is that the secondary effects of herbicide use due to weed destruction, decomposition and loss of habitat for invertebrates may affect aquatic life more than the herbicide itself.

While curly leaf is not the “best” habitat for game fish it may better than nothing at all.

I thank everyone who took the time to attend the discussion .

Ken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Team Otter

Moving forward, OUR involvement, collecting historical data and the continuation of experimenting will play a key role.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Team Otter

Doing your homework and getting educated will get you to a position where Ken is now if you want to. Great post buddy; well said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
smnduck

Thank you T.O. and others for your time and reports from the meeting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Team Otter

No problem. Look for a similar gathering to take place in late June or early July.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hookey

For those who have requested additional information. My in box is a bit cluttered but I believe I have replied to all. If I missed you send me another note (email addr above) and I will send it.

Thanks, Ken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1lkstage

Thanks Hookey, Got the info today. I have alot of reading to do.

TO, Jacquelyn, and others, Great job on passing on all the info.

Jacquelyn,and Greg, I feel sorry for you, seems like you took the blunt of everything with ease. Seems as your doing your jobs to the fullest. My hat is off to you.

My biggest disappointments, I could not believe the voice of the sportsmen. These people are looking for our input, and no-one give them it, they are doing what they are told, But their opinions only come from others, unapposed. We, as sportsmen, need to give the DNR, Lake Associations our point of view. Whether heard or unheard!

Is the lake spraying wrong? My opinion would be the timing of the physical spraying. With the water temps in shallow at 55-60 deg. Which is Perfect spawning temps! Pushing fish out at such a critical time of the year. (Although Washington has kept it to only 9% of feaseible spray area). I have not read the info yet, but does the pond leaf only grow in a specific bottom structure? Mud,Sand,Etc.?

The hardest thing for me to believe, "In this world of science" Scientist find cures for everything under the sun that has little or no effect on anyone, yet our own DNR cannot tell us the long term effect to the spray. One would exspect them to find a different spray to only kill off the pond leaf, or even milfoil, but not the fish. Even our farmers figured out a way to use Roundup- on their corn/soybeans without killing it, but helping them to produce more.

After reviewing the survey from the Tetonka Lake [PoorWordUsage]., Why spend money on a research team to tell us what problems we know already exsist. Instead, have the DNR/scientist research new chemicals to treat the problem,and kill it, not put a blanket on them.

All in all, I'm still open minded, I'm sure that everyone involed are doing the best they can with what they are given.

Look forward to the next one.

Lonnie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hookey

1lkstage

I understand your frustration but think that many of the people attending such as myself are still learning and may not have formed a opinion I think as we learn more most everyone will be to the point where they can express a concern with conviction.

The subject of displacing the residents of the weed beds needs to be researched. It appears studies are aimed more at is the chemical safe vs what are the secondary affects of burning down the village. (even if it isn't the best village)

I am not sure if fish would be spawning in "these" weeds nor do I know if they move out to the middle of the lake when the weeds are sprayed. Someone did make that comment but was it theory or fact ?

These are the types of things we need to establish as fact then write our letters.

As far as the DNR not knowing the long term effects of endothol or the chemical I will talk to them more about this as I am not sure they all had time to respond at our meeting.

I have spent a few hours trying to find long term studies on the internet from unbiased sources but unbiased people have no reason to do a study. ya know what I mean ?

You can find tons of information on LAB studies of Endothal on the Web and EPA. According to the EPA and other reliable sources the chemical is the safest when tested in the lab, "the chemical itself, will not kill fish" and when applied properly is safe according to the EPA.

ltr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hookey

In case anyone is interested in more information on Minnesotans for Healthy Lakes. You can find them on a direct link from the chemical companies website, killakeweeds. Surprised ?

As well as a copy of SF506 and sample letters they sent in support of the bill.

Minnesotans for Healthy Lakes MHL Talking Point Summary

March 22, 2006

1.) MHL was formed by lakeshore property owners due to concern over DNR practices regarding management of aquatic vegetation and algae, especially nuisance/invasive species

2.) Repeated meetings and correspondence with DNR to understand their concerns and to express ours, have transpired

3.) When the proposed rules were revealed in December, 2005, they contained none of the provisions presented by MHL and other constituents.

4.) The new rules were applied in the field in 2004 and 2005 even though the changes have not gone through the rule-changing process, which started officially in December, 2005

5.) We believe that these new rules continue to provide over-protection to invasive species, thus allowing them to continue to spread across an ever-increasing number of Minnesota lakes.

6.) In addition, while making it even more difficult to maintain clear and clean shorelines, these proposed rules will lead to increased non-permitted and non-regulated shoreline management (“vigilantes”)

7.) These new, more restrictive rules will require a higher level of DNR inspection and enforcement of routine permit applications, while the threat of new invasive species (e.g., zebra mussels, the next generation of Eurasian Water milfoil, etc.) comes into our state with inadequate attention by the limited DNR staff.

8.) MHL is appealing to our state legislators to represent the interests of Minnesota lakeshore property owners to enable them to maintain their shorelines in a clean and healthy state. A fairer balance between the interests of the general public, and lakeshore property owners, is requested. Property values are at stake!

9.) In addition, we are asking our legislators to require future proposed rule changes to be submitted and approved by the appropriate committees of both houses. Greater legislative oversight is needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Team Otter

Hookey,

Thanks for posting the additional information.

Send me an e-mail when you have a chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Team Otter

Received this e-mail from Jacquelyn Bacigalupi, Region 4 Habitat Specialist, MN DNR, yesterday. She was also in attendance at Gander Mountain on Tuesday, February 5.

Thanks for organizing a good discussion last week. We appreciate

hearing from the angler in forums such as these, and I will bring your

concerns up as our APM rule revision continues. The DNR has been

attempting to make rule changes in the current revisions to reduce the

amount of vegetation allowed for destruction at properties, and prevent

large stretches of denuded sediments. As you may be aware, rule

revisions only happen about every decade or so, so this is an opportune

time to get involved.

You as an organized group of angler have more power than I do in

getting your positions heard and incorporated into rules regarding

aquatic plant removal. I encourage you to stay involved.

Here is the website for the current rule revision:

http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/input/rules/apm/index.html

look under process for current status: The DNR is currently in the

process of developing the draft rule and SONAR. Once the proposed rule

and SONAR is drafted it needs to be reviewed and approved by the DNR

Commissioner and Governor's Office. If approved the proposed rule is

published in the State register and a 30-day comment period follows. All

of the persons who were notified of the proposed rule during the request

for comments period as well as those people who have commented or

expressed an interest in the rule changes will receive notification and

information on how they can receive a copy of the proposed rule.

I just spoke with Steve Enger, our program supervisor about your

concerns last week, and he assured that there is still plenty of

opportunity for comment and input.

You can sign up on our site to be on a list-serve so that you are made

aware when the next comment period opens.

Could you please share this opportunity with other interested anglers.

Tell me this isn't good to hear...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
smnduck

I am not trying to start a fight but when your post includes comments

#6 "clean shoreline" ?

Past the waterline is the general publics and should not be altered and what you do on your yard also effects the public resource.

#8 "Property values" ? Come on that is a joke!

When you by a lot that is in a muddy bay you have to expect that there will be weeds.

No one made you buy lakeshore. It was your choice.

Remeber that you are a steward of a public resource when you are a lakeshore lot owner and with that comes a responsibility not to alter it beyond recognition.

I grew up on a lake and my parents still own lake property so yes I do see both side of the fence.

I do see some of these invasive speices as a threat but to get rid of them by the means that are being used seems to be worse that leaving them be.

To put it into an intersting perspective, what will your great granchildren think of your actions when they are adults.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
250XB

smnduck I am glad that someone out there thinks like I do. The group MHL are a bunch of rich lake home owners wanting to kill all the vegetation in lake if they could. They always want to use invasive species as an excuse to kill more. The people that are fighting to be allowed to kill more vegetation do not care about the lake and for the most part do not fish. This is why it is so important for the fisherman to get their voice heard. Please if you all care about our lakes call Steve Enger and let him know that you want the rules more restrictive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Team Otter

This is why education is at the forefront of most of this. Your comments are not out of line and should be transpired into the right ears (i.e. Steve Enger). The time is now for the sportsmen to step up and make a difference.

Organizations that support a more liberal treatment plan have a much different definition of "healthy lake" than most. Unfortunate but true.

Be sure to communicate your concerns all the way to the top.

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

    • Chill62
      Buddy had a camera down on Saturday and he said he'd get a mixture of panfish to come in then they'd fly out of the hole and in comes a pike or two.  He said that when the gills would leave it was because a pike would be around the hole and he knew it was safe again when he'd see his first panfish.  That was in 18-22 fow.
    • redneckdan
      Just pulled two out of st Mary's in eveleth. It was close. Please make good choices out there.   That said, I'm off to find a cup of hot chocolate and a long finlander hot shower....
    • Rick
      No chronic wasting disease was detected in more than 11,000 precautionary samples from deer that hunters harvested this fall in north-central, central and southeastern Minnesota, according to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.  “This is good news for Minnesota,” said Lou Cornicelli, wildlife research manager for the DNR. “The results lend confidence that the disease is not spread across the landscape.” In all, 7,813 deer were tested in the north-central area, 2,529 in the central area and 1,149 in the southeastern area outside deer permit area 603, the CWD management zone. Researchers still are submitting samples from cooperating taxidermists so final results will updated online at mndnr.gov/cwdcheck as they become available. Given no deer with CWD were found in north-central and central Minnesota, the DNR will narrow surveillance next fall to areas closer to the farms where CWD was detected. A fourth precautionary surveillance area will be added in fall 2018 in Winona County because CWD recently was detected in captive deer there. Precautionary testing in north-central and central Minnesota became necessary after CWD was found in multiple captive deer on farms near Merrifield in Crow Wing County and Litchfield in Meeker County. It also was conducted in the deer permit areas directly adjacent to southeast Minnesota’s deer permit area 603, the only place in Minnesota where CWD is known to exist in wild deer. Minnesota’s CWD response plan calls for testing of wild deer after the disease is detected in either domestic or wild deer. All results from three consecutive years of testing must report CWD as not detected before DNR stops looking for the disease. Three years of testing are necessary because CWD incubates in deer slowly. They can be exposed for as long as 18 months before laboratory tests of lymph node samples can detect the disease. Proactive surveillance and precautionary testing for CWD is a proven strategy that allows the DNR to manage the disease by finding it early and reacting quickly and aggressively to control it. These actions, which were taken in 2005 to successfully combat bovine tuberculosis in northwestern Minnesota deer and in 2010 to eliminate a CWD infection in wild deer near Pine Island, provide the best opportunity to eliminate disease spread. Precautionary testing is necessary to detect the disease early. Without early detection, there’s nothing to stop CWD from becoming established at a relatively high prevalence and across a large geographic area. At that point, there is no known way to control the disease. “Overall, hunter cooperation and public support has been tremendous,” Cornicelli said. “While there are always challenges when you conduct this type of surveillance effort, it really couldn’t have been successful without the cooperation of hunters, taxidermists, landowners and the businesses that allowed us to operate check stations.” Complete information about CWD and DNR efforts to keep Minnesota deer healthy are available on the DNR website at mndnr.gov/cwd. Discuss below - to view set the hook here.
    • Rick
      Boundaries for a special late-season deer hunt to help control chronic wasting disease in southeastern Minnesota’s Fillmore County have been expanded to include portions of three surrounding deer permit areas, the Department of Natural Resources said.  The expansion of boundaries for the nine-day hunt that lasts from Saturday, Jan. 6, to Sunday, Jan. 14, became necessary when CWD test results of harvested deer revealed two infected deer in Forestville State Park and a suspected infection north of the disease’s core area around Preston.  During the upcoming hunt, deer may be taken in an approximate 10-mile radius surrounding the new discoveries. That area includes all of deer permit area 603 as well as the portion of permit area 345 south of Interstate 90, the southern portion of permit area 347 and the northern portion of permit area 348. A map of the area and complete details are available on the DNR’s website at mndnr.gov/cwd. “Hunters must plan ahead,” said Lou Cornicelli, the DNR’s wildlife research manager. “Private land makes up most of the area and hunters must have landowner permission. Public land in the area likely will be crowded. And hunting opportunities will be limited and available only by permit at Forestville State Park and Pin Oak Prairie Scientific and Natural Area.” Within 24 hours of harvest, each deer must be taken to one of four stations where DNR staff will register the deer and collect lymph node tissue for CWD testing. All electronic registration will be turned off. With the exception of fawns, deer cannot be moved from the hunt area without a test result that shows CWD was not detected. Prior to test results, hunters may properly quarter their deer and bone-out meat but the head, spinal column and all brain material must remain in the area until the animal’s test results show a not-detected status. Designated dumpsters where hunters can dispose of carcasses and parts will be available in Preston and Forestville. A refrigerated trailer will be available in Preston for temporary storage of the entire carcass if hunters choose to wait for the test result before processing their deer. After receiving a not-detected test result for the deer, the hunter can take the entire deer out of the area. Since the mid-September start of the archery season 1,334 deer have been tested in permit area 603 and results have shown six confirmed and one suspect cases of CWD. Although the number of CWD-infected deer is down from the 11 positives found last season, three of the new positives were found outside the core area. “We were glad to see the prevalence go down but we’re unsure if we have a disease expansion or if males recently moved into a new area,” Cornicelli said. “Test results of deer taken during this special hunt will help us determine what the new disease management zone boundary will look like in 2018.” Complete information about CWD and DNR efforts to keep Minnesota deer healthy are available on the DNR website at mndnr.gov/cwd. Special hunt rules Hunt dates are Jan. 6-14, 2018. Hunt is open to residents and nonresidents. There is no bag limit, the antler point restriction will be eliminated in this area and cross-tagging (party hunting) will be allowed. Hunters can use any unfilled 2017 license or purchase disease management tags for $2.50. You do not need a deer hunting license to purchase disease management tags, which are valid for deer of either sex. Legal firearms are shotguns, muzzleloader or crossbows using either a firearm or muzzleloader license. Archery equipment must be used if the person is hunting with an archery license. Centerfire rifles are not allowed. All deer must be registered in person at one of the stations below. Registration stations will be staffed 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. daily during the season: Chatfield – Magnum Sports, 20 Main St. S; Preston – Preston Forestry office, 912 Houston St.; Forestville State Park; Rushford – Pam’s Corner Convenience, at the intersection of Minnesota highways 16 and 43. Submission of a CWD sample is mandatory. All deer will be tagged and tested by DNR staff. Fawns will be allowed to leave the zone. Carcasses from adult deer must remain in the zone until a “not detected” test is reported. This test takes three to four business days so hunters should make the appropriate arrangements prior to killing a deer. Test results can be checked on the DNR website at mndnr.gov/cwdcheck or by calling the DNR Information Center at 888-646-6367. Hunting at Forestville, Pin Oak Prairie and Cherry Grove
      Forestville State Park and Pin Oak Prairie SNA will both be open to limited deer hunting during the special hunt. To avoid overcrowding, permits for these areas will be issued on a first come, first served basis starting at noon on Monday, Dec. 18. Forestville State Park will remain open to visitors during the special hunt. Hunters must have a filled or unfilled 2017 firearm or muzzleloader license to obtain a permit. There is no group application for these hunts. Permits can be obtained online or wherever DNR licenses are sold. There is no fee for these permits. The same hunt rules as described for permit area 603 apply to these areas. Successful hunters can use any unfilled tag, or purchase disease management permits for $2.50. Specific hunt numbers, dates and available permits are: 801: Forestville State Park, Jan. 6-9, 2018, 130 permits. 802: Forestville State Park, Jan. 10-14, 2018,130 permits. 803: Pin Oak Prairie SNA, Jan. 6-9, 2018, five permits. 804: Pin Oak Prairie SNA, Jan. 10- 14, 2018, five permits. The Cherry Grove Blind Valley SNA, which adjoins the Cherry Grove Wildlife Management Area, also is open to deer hunting and no special permit is required. Food safety
      The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports that, to date, there have been no reported cases of CWD infection in people. However, the CDC advises people not to eat meat from animals known to have CWD. Go to www.cdc.gov for more information. Discuss below - to view set the hook here.
    • Rick
      Pheasant hunters still have time to harvest roosters this December.  “We had a late corn harvest which affected the early pheasant season but things are shaping up nicely for late-season hunting,” said Nicole Davros, farmland wildlife research supervisor for the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. “Additionally, despite the lower overall count on our roadside surveys this year, our rooster index went up slightly. This means there are still birds to chase out there.” Field conditions were wet enough that the corn harvest was significantly delayed this fall. “Now that the crops are out of the fields, there are fewer places to hide and hunters should be seeing more roosters,” Davros said. Despite warmer weather in late November, pheasants are already using both grassland cover and winter cover such as cattail sloughs and willow thickets, according to Scott Roemhildt, DNR Walk-in Access Program coordinator. “Hunters who are willing to work these tougher-to-reach areas will have opportunities to harvest birds,” Roemhildt said. “The colder weather in our forecast will make wetlands more accessible to hunters as the water freezes up.” Both Davros and Roemhildt agree that late-season pheasant hunting is a great excuse to get away from the hustle and bustle of the holiday season, regardless of whether any roosters are put in your bag. “Pheasant hunting is a great way to stretch your legs and clear your mind when things get hectic,” Davros said. Added Roemhildt: “It’s also a chance to introduce someone new to pheasant hunting as kids get time off from school and family comes to visit.” On Dec. 1, the daily bag limit increased to three roosters with a possession limit of nine roosters. Hunters need a small game license and a pheasant stamp to hunt pheasants in Minnesota. A small game license costs $22 for Minnesota residents age 18 to 64, and the pheasant stamp costs $7.50. Pheasant hunters 65 and older need to buy a small game license for $13.50 but are not required to buy a stamp. Hunters age 16 to 17 must buy a $5 small game license but do not need to buy a stamp, and hunters under 16 can hunt pheasants without a license or stamp. Hunters can also purchase a Walk-In Access validation for $3 to gain additional public hunting opportunities on private land that is enrolled in the program. As of September, 25,335 acres of land across 241 sites in western and southern Minnesota have been enrolled in the program. Minnesota’s 2017 pheasant season is open through Monday, Jan. 1. Shooting hours are 9 a.m. to sunset. Additional details on pheasant hunting are available at mndnr.gov/hunting/pheasant. Additional details on the Walk-In Access Program are available at mndnr.gov/walkin. Discuss below - to view set the hook here.
    • Rick
      The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources is accepting public comments on an environmental assessment worksheet (EAW) prepared for the Wright Bog Horticultural Peat project in Carlton County, about 8 miles west of Cromwell.  Premier Horticulture, Inc. proposes to develop approximately 316 acres of the Wright Bog in Carlton County for horticultural peat extraction. The proposed site would be cleared and ditched, with drained water discharged into Little Tamarack River. Sphagnum moss peat would be collected using the milled peat vacuum harvesting method. The agency will take comments during a 30-day public review period ending at 4:30 p.m. Jan. 10. A copy of the EAW is available online on the project page.  A hard copy may be requested by calling 651-259-5126. The EAW is available for public review at: DNR library, 500 Lafayette Road, St. Paul. DNR northeast regional office, 1201 East Highway 2, Grand Rapids. Minneapolis Central Library, Government Documents, 2nd Floor, 300 Nicollet Mall. Duluth Public Library, 520 West Superior Street, Duluth. Carlton Public Library, 213 Chestnut Avenue, Carlton. McGregor Public Library, Center Avenue and Second Street, McGregor. The EAW notice will be published in the Dec. 11 EQB Monitor. Written comments must be submitted no later than 4:30 p.m. Wednesday, Jan. 10, to the attention of Bill Johnson, EAW project manager, Environmental Policy and Review Unit, Ecological and Water Resources Division, DNR, 500 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, MN 55155-4025. Electronic or email comments may be sent to environmentalrev.dnr@state.mn.us with “Wright Bog” in the subject line. If submitting comments electronically, include name and mailing address. Written comments may also be sent by fax to 651-296-1811. Names and addresses will be published as part of the EAW record. Discuss below - to view set the hook here.
    • Rick
      A walleye stamp can be a gift for an angler that keeps giving, because stamp sales help the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources provide more places to fish for walleye by stocking walleye into lakes where there would be none. “Anyone can buy a walleye stamp any time of the year, even if they don’t have a fishing license,” said Neil Vanderbosch, DNR fisheries program consultant. “The collectible stamp is based on art chosen in our annual stamp contest.” Funds from walleye stamps go toward the cost of purchasing walleye from private fish farms for stocking into lakes. A walleye stamp is not required to fish for or keep walleye. There are several ways to purchase a walleye stamp. Anyone can go to a license agent and purchase a pictorial walleye stamp for $5.75, which is mailed to the buyer. Copies are on hand for purchase from the DNR License Center at 500 Lafayette Road in St. Paul. The stamps can be purchased online at mndnr.gov/buyalicense or by phone by calling 888-665-4236. Alternatively, a form can be downloaded from mndnr.gov/stamps and returned to the DNR to have the stamp mailed. Anglers with a fishing license can purchase the walleye stamp validation for $5, and for an extra 75 cents can have the pictorial stamp mailed to them. “True, everybody has to buy their own stamp, but there’s nothing stopping a person from giving away the collectible as a gift,” Vanderbosch said. “It could make a statement about how you helped improve an angler’s opportunity to catch walleye.” The overall walleye stocking effort ramps up each year in April when fisheries staff collect walleye eggs, fertilize them and transport the eggs to fish hatcheries around Minnesota. The eggs spend two to three weeks incubating before hatching into fry that are soon released – two thirds into lakes and one third into rearing ponds. The fish in rearing ponds grow into 4- to 6-inch fingerlings that are stocked into lakes in the fall. In addition to raising and stocking walleye, the DNR also buys walleye fingerlings from private producers to be stocked into lakes, and walleye stamp sales help pay for these fish. Since 2009, funds from the walleye stamp have purchased over 40,000 pounds of walleye fingerlings that have been stocked in the fall, all over the state. Walleye are stocked in lakes that don’t have naturally reproducing walleye populations. Anglers catch the lion’s share of walleye from waters where the fish reproduce naturally – about 260 larger walleye lakes and in large rivers. Because of stocking, walleye can be found in an additional 1,050 Minnesota lakes spread throughout the state. More information about habitat stamps can be found at mndnr.gov/stamps. Discuss below - to view set the hook here.
    • Rick
      The deadline for firearms wild turkey hunters to apply for early season spring hunting permits is Friday, Jan. 26, according to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. The spring season, which runs from Wednesday, April 18, to Thursday, May 31, is divided into six time periods. Only people age 18 and older who want to hunt using a firearm during the first two time periods (A or B) need to apply for a spring turkey permit. Permits for the remaining time periods (C-F) can be purchased over-the-counter. Archery and youth turkey hunters can hunt the entire season without applying for the lottery. Permits for the last four time periods and youth licenses are sold starting March 1. Surplus adult licenses from the first two time periods, if available, are sold starting around mid-March. People applying for permit area 511, the Carlos Avery State Wildlife Management Area, are advised that the sanctuary portion of the WMA will be closed to turkey hunting except for the special hunt for hunters with disabilities. For turkey hunting, a person may only use shotguns 20 gauge or larger, including muzzleloading shotguns. Only fine shot size No. 4 and smaller diameter may be used, and red dot scopes and range finders are legal. Visit mndnr.gov/hunting/turkey for more information about turkey hunting. Discuss below - to view set the hook here.
    • Rick
      The commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources has appointed 11 Minnesotans to three-year terms on citizen oversight committees that monitor the agency’s fish and wildlife spending.  The appointees are responsible for reviewing the DNR’s annual Game and Fish Fund report in detail and, following discussions with agency leaders and others, prepare reports on their findings. Appointed to the Wildlife Oversight Committee are Garry Hooghkirk, Duluth; Amanda Leabo, Fergus Falls; Mark Popovich, Welch; John Schnedler, Richfield; and Martha Taggett, Golden Valley. Appointed to the Fisheries Oversight Committee are Karl Anderson, Greenbush; Jess Edberg, Ely; Nicole Hertel, Shoreview; Benjamin Kohn, Hudson; Mark Owens, Austin; and Craig Pagel, Duluth. The new appointees join other members whose terms are continuing. The committees will resume work after the mid-December publication of the DNR’s Game and Fish Fund report for fiscal year 2017. “We look forward to working with these citizens,” said Dave Schad, DNR deputy commissioner. “The appointments continue our commitment to share detailed budget information, bring new participants into the oversight process and ensure revenue generated by hunting and fishing license sales is used appropriately.” The Fisheries and Wildlife oversight committees continue a citizen oversight function first created in 1994. Sixty people applied for oversight committee positions this time. Factors in choosing the new appointees included geographic distribution, demographic diversity and a mix of interests. In the weeks ahead, committee chairs and four members will be selected by each committee to serve on an umbrella Budgetary Oversight Committee chaired by another appointee, John Lenczewski. The committee will develop an overall report on expenditures for game and fish activities. Those recommendations will be delivered to the DNR commissioner and legislative committees with jurisdiction over natural resources financing for further consideration. Minnesota’s Game and Fish Fund is the fiscal foundation for much of the state’s core natural resource management functions. About $110 million a year is deposited into this fund from hunting and fishing license sales, a sales tax on lottery tickets, and other sources of revenue including a reimbursement based on a federal excise tax on certain hunting, fishing and boating equipment. Past DNR Game and Fish Fund expenditure reports and citizen oversight committee reports are also available at mndnr.gov/gamefishoversight. Discuss below - to view set the hook here.
    • Rick
      Conservation grants awarded by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources will help restore, enhance and protect habitat throughout the state.  This latest round of 73 conservation grants is funded by the agency’s Conservation Partners Legacy (CPL) grant program. Now in its ninth year, the program has awarded over $50 million to nonprofit organizations and government entities for conservation projects. The DNR recently received $9.9 million in grant requests from 86 applicants during round one of the application cycle. The DNR has funded $7.5 million of these requests. “Projects include habitat improvements that benefit deer, turkey, pheasants and a wide variety of species,” said Jessica Lee, DNR conservation grants coordinator. “Oak savanna, wetlands and pollinator habitat are restored through this grant program, to give a few examples.” Conservation groups and others interested in applying in the future are encouraged to plan in the coming months so they can apply when funds are again available. The DNR’s CPL program provides grants ranging from $5,000 to $400,000 to conservation nonprofit organizations and government to help fund projects to restore, enhance or protect fish and wildlife habitat in Minnesota. The Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council recommended the grant program, which was approved by the Minnesota Legislature and has been in place since 2009. Funding has been provided annually from the Outdoor Heritage Fund, which is part of the Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment and funded by a voter-approved statewide sales tax of three-eighths of 1 percent. Round one of the proposals for fiscal year 2017 included the traditional grant cycle, the metro grant cycle and the expedited grant cycle. The expedited cycle for standard types of projects is currently open for another funding round, with the maximum grant award being $50,000. Applications are due online by 4 p.m. Friday, Jan. 19. More information on the program’s grant cycles, and a complete list of the most recent grant applications and past awarded projects are on the DNR website at mndnr.gov/cpl. Discuss below - to view set the hook here.