Jump to content
  • GUESTS

    If You  want access  to member only forums on FM, You will need to Sign-in or  Sign-Up now .

    This box will disappear once you are signed in as a member.

Recommended Posts

Let's start a big post regarding the changing of the State Regs. Some of the members of the State Leg. are considering some changes.

I understand that the DNR watch these sites so let's let them know what we think and maybe it will help.

I would like to see a state-wide slot limit. I was thinking up to 20 inches and and one over 28. This will make the lakes get bigger fish and allow for more natural breeding. Let's be honest, guys, we don;t need to each a 24-inch eye.

Next I think we should drop the state limit to 4 eyes per person.

I think the opener should be a week earlier except for way up north to protect the late spawn. That would make all of the moms happier and would be a good for business state-wide in many areas.

Any other thoughts? Let's hear them and get a BIG thread going.

Thanks

Hit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Dahitman44

    14

  • DEADhead

    12

  • fisherdog19

    6

  • Rodbldr4fun

    4

opener a week earlier no way.if that happends i'll have to bring my ice auger with me.as for the 20 inch slot.all inland lakes you can only take 1 over 20 inches.most of the great walleye lakes in minnesota already have the 4 limit on them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you are looking for a big discussion on management techniques and regulations, it would probably a good idea for most users to read the forum policy before posting. Thank You. I'd like to keep this discussion civil, or the topic will likely get bumped over to the Outdoor Discussion forum.

Hitman, I'm a lot more progressive than you are. There are a lot of issues right now facing the state of our fisheries. first and foremost is funding. Right now, special interest user groups are demanding that fisheries and wildlife get funded based on the amount of revenue that they generate. What that means is that currently, fisheries is spending $4 million more than the revenue they generated through license and stamp sales. The overage came from funds derived from hunting license sales. Groups want that money returned to wildlife immediately. Ironically enough, it is quickly overlooked that funding from fish license sales supported the low revenue earning wildlife section for decades. It was not until recently with the increased sales from "bonus" deer tags, that wildlife revenue began to exceed that of fisheries. Bottom line is, unless we generate more revenue for fisheries through increased license sales, or more likely, increased license fees, fisheries will start to see serious cuts to their budget next fiscal year. The cuts will basically affect most programs statewide, especially when it comes to staffing. This could be another reason to support constitutional funding, if our legislators propose a clean bill, with no goofy riders like funding for the arts.

Here's my solution. Let's adopt what Ontario has done for years. Cut bag limits in half. Adopt a management license, which would essentially double your bag limit for the price of another license. Most fair-weather anglers would likely not be affected as they typically do not take a limit home with them on every trip. This would still allow resorts and other anglers on a "trip" to take a limit home with them. This would also give the opportunity for the meat-hunter angler to take home their limits to "feed their family". This would help increase revenue; the highest-use anglers that would put the most strain on the resource would be contributing more $$ towards the management of the resource. Kind of like a progressive tax, the more fish you take, the more you pay to replace them. I realize that there will be all sorts of arguments from "it's my god given right to keep as much as I want", to "I can't afford a license increase". Let's face it, the current system in place cannot go on forever. With modern electronics and equipment, it is much easier to deplete a resource to a point where fish populations can crash. Equipment has changed, so must the management techniques.

Here's my final rant: Contact your legislators. Tell them that you do not want them making natural resource management decisions, and that it needs to STOP NOW! They are not resource management experts, so they should leave the decision making process of resource management to the professionals. Think of it this way, if you needed to get brain surgery, would you rely on your legislator to perform the procedure? Likely not, you would utilize the services of a neurosurgeon. The same principle should go for natural resource managemnt. Some of these legislators have good intetnions, other have quite selfish ones. There is currently WAY TOO MUCH political influence in regards to our current management guidelines. That needs to stop, let our resource professionals make the call.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This really gets to be a complicated issue. You can't establish one set of rules that work for every body of water. On the other hand, you need to be a lawyer with your regs book to understand what you can and can't do on any given lake.

Could they classify lakes into, say, four catagories? Each catagory has it's specifications that are relative to that lake classification. All bodies of water would have to fit in one of these.

I'm all for the reduction of walleyes to four. If you need more than four to feed your family, take a kid fishing.

I'd be in favor of a fifteen minimum size limit. I know this would encourage cropping off the population at that size, but I think the benefits of having them get to fifteen inches would make for better quality fish.

The issue brought up by Deadhead is interesting. I can see the point of the bonus license thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Originally Posted By: Cicada

The issue brought up by Deadhead is interesting. I can see the point of the bonus license thing.

This was discussed as an option in the past by fisheries management. It may be time to evaluate and reconsider the idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also liked Deadhead's idea's. I think the bonus thing would bring in some extra revenue. I would like to see the limit lowered and also a minimum size with one over 20 for Walleyes. I would also like to see a minimum size on every species. I see too many people keeping little dink fish and then bragging about catching their limit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you guys are serious about the "management licenses", or any other management regulations, please contact Area Fisheries Supervisor Dave Friedl, Detroit Lakes Fisheries @ (218) 847 1579.

New phone number After 2/12/2008: (218) 846-8340

Link to comment
Share on other sites

adopt the minimum size regs like several of the lakes on Otter Tail county. Slabs can't get to 15"-16" if people keep cropping off the population at 8" or 9"ers...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with deadhead. Lets put a slot on them slabs at 11 inches. A 10 inch crappie isnt that big and there is hardly any meat there. The walleye limit should go to 4 and you should have to throw back everything from 20-28 inches. Just my .02.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I agree with Ray also, and with f-dog. I like my crappies and keeping them 8-10"ers is MADNESS... HA HA. They should have a statewide 11" minimum on them. Man that would be cool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the 11 inch minimum on Crappies. That is one of the reasons I like fishing on Lida. You may get a few small ones but the chances of getting some very nice slabs is that much better. A crappie under 11 inches isn't worth messing up the cutting board in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the idea of a minumum size limit and a smaller catch limit. There are positives and negatives of both. I personally know of one lake were the 15" mimimum was in place for more than 10 years. ALl it did was great the worlds largest cigar factory. There were so many 12" eyes, that it would be like catching bull heads or sheepheads all day. They actually axed the minimum size and went to a 4 fish limit. That has helped, but people like da Hitman were sad because the 12" started to grow and disapear.

I would support the 4 fish limit and a 2 fish limit on snot rockets with a minumum size of say 24" for snot rockets.

I would support a decrease in crappie limits from 10 to maybe 6 with a 11" minimum.

As far as a our wonderfull elected officals are concerned. I don't want them making any rash decisions based on political payola.

ANd sorry Mom, but the fishing opener should stay. and for 2 reasons. One is that any earlier would screw up the spawn in many areas. IF it were one week later it would create an over harvest of eyes. We all know that the best time to catch eyes is usually the week after opener. So if we sent 500,000 boats out one week later imagine what that would do to all the hungry female population.

Just my .0000000003784 cents worth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the idea of a minumum size limit and a smaller catch limit. There are positives and negatives of both. I personally know of one lake were the 15" mimimum was in place for more than 10 years. ALl it did was great the worlds largest cigar factory. There were so many 12" eyes, that it would be like catching bull heads or sheepheads all day. They actually axed the minimum size and went to a 4 fish limit. That has helped, but people like da Hitman were sad because the 12" started to grow and disapear.

I would support the 4 fish limit and a 2 fish limit on snot rockets with a minumum size of say 24" for snot rockets.

I would support a decrease in crappie limits from 10 to maybe 6 with a 11" minimum.

As far as a our wonderfull elected officals are concerned. I don't want them making any rash decisions based on political payola.

ANd sorry Mom, but the fishing opener should stay. and for 2 reasons. One is that any earlier would screw up the spawn in many areas. IF it were one week later it would create an over harvest of eyes. We all know that the best time to catch eyes is usually the week after opener. So if we sent 500,000 boats out one week later imagine what that would do to all the hungry female population.

Just my .0000000003784 cents worth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as crappies go -- there was a goofy guy from Hawley-wood that kept everything he caught on Lee Lake. That is one of the reasons there are so few and small crappies. He was out every day keeping 8-inchers. Kinda sickening.

A min. of 11 inches would b best, IMO. Limit of 8-10?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hitman you have really been on the front end of alot of 10" jokes lately whats up with that??? either some hard feelings about outfishing somebody or has it just become easier as the season has gone on???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously it is jealousy they wish they could be DaHitman!

As far as the 10-inch deal, well at least I don't spend all day "Milkin' the Big Females" like Deadhead does. ;\)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Originally Posted By: Paul

ANd sorry Mom, but the fishing opener should stay. and for 2 reasons. One is that any earlier would screw up the spawn in many areas. IF it were one week later it would create an over harvest of eyes. We all know that the best time to catch eyes is usually the week after opener. So if we sent 500,000 boats out one week later imagine what that would do to all the hungry female population.

I don't think that moving the season later will effect anything. It's basically a gamble on weather and timing. Some openers are really good and others suck. That can even change just by going to a different part of the state. Moving it earlier during the spawn I do believe that would effect it. I don't think it would screw up the spawn so much, you just have a better potential of harvesting major breeders that haven't done their "business".

As far as lake classifications, I don't think you could classify them down to just four types. It would probably be more like 20-30. I think there are just to many factors to say 4. Unless you just decide to use depth and water clarity that right there gives you four types of lakes. Thats just not practical. Depth, bottom content, water clarity, water quality, inlet/outlet, fishing pressure, current condition/population of fish..... just to name some.

I am not trying to rant here just trying to put some ideas out there.

Has any one else noticed if there is a coralation with a minnimum size and ending up with small fish in that lake. Just curious??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Quote:
Has any one else noticed if there is a coralation with a minnimum size and ending up with small fish in that lake. Just curious??

No actually i've seen the opposite. I"ll use Big Pine as an example and why not Upper Red Lake. Both these lakes have slots and both have, in my mind, helped these lakes develop into great walleye fishing opportunities. Are they needed for every lake, probably not, would it be easier if it was imposed on all lakes for the people that complain there are too many regulations, then the answer is yes.

Changing the limit to 4 is one management change that i would greatly support. Too the people who state that it doesn't matter because its hard to catch that many, then i guess this change wont affect you.

This could change our fishing for our kids, and if the MN DNR believe that it will change it for the better, im all for it.

A. Shae

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2-Shae is right on the money. The limit moving to four would be no big deal. Also, why not have a "management" tag available for purchase. Would help out the DNR as well. The people that take the most fish should help in the restocking effort.

As far as the slot -- I think a statewide deal would make it easier to tell what the rules are on a given lake. Should help in the natural reproduction as well.

hit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love the idea of the management tag. I go to LOTW every year and that is all I buy because we fish in Canada but stay in Minnesota so we can take our possesion limit home for MN. I personally don't take fish home that often and if I do they are usually to be cooked right away. If I want a meal of fish I can usually catch fish just about anytime of year so I don't need to stock up on fish. I agree make the people who consume the rescource to pay more for it.

As far as the slot goes I don't know why people need to take home small fish anyway. First off they are a lot tougher to clean and for the effort what do you get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW --

Barry -- how did that 25-inch walleye taste that you ate, you crazy cat! U R supposed to be a "sportsman" and toss those back U know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree with both the limit reduction and the opening date change.

There is no biological reason to change the limit to most MN lakes. Yes, the large, classic lakes such as LOW, Mille Lacs, Leach, Wnnie, and Red Lk can and are being impacted by high fishing pressure. They put fish out all year round and are being heavily pounded. I believe the potential 7% DNR is arguing could be saved is with these lakes.

Few people are able to bring home a limit year round while fishing "non-classic" lakes. This is true for lakes such as Big C most of the time also. To have the chance to continue catching limits, you need to be on the water daily. Most of us can't do that; we have jobs and families. That leaves retired folks and guides.

The times limits come are mainly early summer/late spring and fall. Most fishers don't fish the fall bite. I don't know of a lake around here that is impacted by over fishing other than by net.

Classic walleye lakes put fish out and are pounded throughout the year. They are also the places where most of the guides are located. Nothing against guides. They are normally the best fishers, they also are on the lake constantly and are communicating amongst themselves. They are on fish the majority of the time. That also means their clients are in a position to catch limits most of the time. This is where fishing pressure has a major impact on walleye numbers; not lakes like we have around here.

All lakes are not the same. That is why they started differences in lake management. One size does not fit all. I agree reduced limits are needed for the classic lakes, but not all lakes. This could easily be accomplished by different regs for the classic lakes.

I don't have the chance to fish lakes that produce year round like guides on classic lakes and their clients. I would like to bring 6 fish home the limited times the opportunity arises and I don't believe that has a biological impact on the fish populations.

They keep saying the numbers of fishers is declining. If that is the case, there shouldn't be a problem in the future years. Fewer fish will be taken by fewer anglers.

I agree with most that the 1 week earlier option is not good. The weather is crappy on opener as it is now. The change will only make it worse. The change can also open spawning fish to greater pressure. To me, the only folks who will benefit are the resorts. We should not be managing for the benefit of resorts.

If we want youngsters to get the fishing bug, bringing them out into worse weather is not going to help that goal. Its hard on folks used to bad conditions and are fanatic enough to be out in that weather to fish. Putting kids in those conditions is the best way I can imagine to chill their desire and push them to the computer games.

If mothers day is so important, switch it with fathers day. To me, it is a power thing with women who demand their husbands stay home. Make it mothers day the rest of the year and the day shouldn't be a major issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rodbldr4fun- well thought out post!

You sir are welcome in my fish house any time :-)

I may not agree with everything you said, but you made some very good points. I don't keep fish very often so the limits don't really bother me one way or another: As for changing the date, my mom got used to it, my wife is used to it, in-laws have come to understand it, and the walleyes may be (on occasion) very vulnerable starting one week early: Leave it the same:

Good post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rod whats the difference between 4 fish and 6 fish? I know lots of people that can catch there limit of fish on big c. I still dont think that 2 fish are going to make a bit of difference. If you think it makes a difference, keep 4 17 inchers and 6 14 inchers and tell me the difference in fillets. You will get more off them 4 17 inch fish than them 6 14 inch fish. Just my .02 and im not trying to start an argument but things have to be done for are children to be able to have the same fun that we have had fishing. Good luck to all and remember try to release all walleyes over 19 inches, it will make everything better in the long run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is, IMO that most of us practice good to excellent catch and release, but it is the "goofs" out there that this will help.

I think that the reduced limits will help the smaller lakes when they get "hot" and the larger lakes that get PUNISHED by high pressure.

I, for one, would enjoy catching and throwing back a lot of 20-25 inchers trying to weed my way toward getting 3-4 16-18 inch fish to bring home for the pan. Plus if you want to catch more, get a management tag.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • Your Responses - Share & Have Fun :)

    • leech~~
      Nope not me.  May want to go nextdoor and ask around?  
    • smurfy
      Looks to me like Leech brought his chair home!!😅😆
    • Brianf.
      I'm not there, so I can't tell exactly what's going on but it looks like a large area of open water developed in the last day with all of the heavy snow on the east side of wake em up Narrows. These two photos are from my Ring Camera facing north towards Niles Point.  You can see what happened with all of snow that fell in the last three days, though the open water could have been wind driven. Hard to say. .  
    • SkunkedAgain
      Black Bay had great ice before but a few spots near rockpiles where there were spots of open water. It looks like the weight of the snow has created a little lake in the middle of the bay.  
    • LakeofthewoodsMN
      On the south end...   Thanks to some cold spring weather, ice fishing continues strong for those still ice fishing.  The bite remains very good.  Most resorts have pulled their fish houses off for the year, however, some still have fish houses out and others are allowing ATV and side by sides.  Check social media or call ahead to your favorite resort for specifics. Reports this week for walleyes and saugers remain excellent.   A nice mix of jumbo perch, pike, eelpout, and an occasional crappie, tullibee or sturgeon being reported by anglers. Jigging one line and using a live minnow on the second line is the way to go.  Green, glow red, pink and gold were good colors this week.     Monster pike are on a tear!  Good number of pike, some reaching over 45 inches long, being caught using tip ups with live suckers or dead bait such as smelt and herring in 8 - 14' of water.   As always, work through a resort or outfitter for ice road conditions.  Safety first always. Fish houses are allowed on the ice through March 31st, the walleye / sauger season goes through April 14th and the pike season never ends. On the Rainy River...  The river is opened up along the Nelson Park boat ramp in Birchdale, the Frontier boat ramp and Vidas boat ramp.  This past week, much of the open water skimmed over with the single digit overnight temps.   Areas of the river have popped open again and with temps getting warmer, things are shaping up for the last stretch through the rest of the spring season, which continues through April 14th.   Very good numbers of walleyes are in the river.  Reports this week, even with fewer anglers, have been good.  When temps warm up and the sun shines, things will fire up again.   Jigs with brightly colored plastics or jigs with a frozen emerald shiner have been the desired bait on the river.  Don't overlook slow trolling crankbaits upstream as well.   Good reports of sturgeon being caught on the river as well.  Sturgeon put the feed bag on in the spring.  The bite has been very good.  Most are using a sturgeon rig with a circle hook loaded with crawlers or crawlers / frozen emerald shiners. Up at the NW Angle...  Ice fishing is winding down up at the Angle.  Walleyes, saugers, and a number of various species in the mix again this week.  The bite is still very good with good numbers of fish.  The one two punch of jigging one line and deadsticking the second line is working well.   Check with Angle resorts on transport options from Young's Bay.  Call ahead for ice road guidelines.  
    • CigarGuy
      With the drifting, kind of hard to tell for sure, but I'm guessing about a foot and still lightly snowing. Cook end!
    • PSU
      How much snow did you get on Vermilion? 
    • Mike89
      lake here refroze too...  started opening again yesterday with the wet snow and wind...  very little ice left today...
    • Hookmaster
      A friend who has a cabin between Alex and Fergus said the lake he's on refroze. He texted me a pic from March 12th when it was open and one from 23rd when it wasn't. 🤯
    • SkunkedAgain
      I don't think that there has been any ice melt in the past few weeks on Vermilion. Things looked like a record and then Mother Nature swept in again.   I'll give my revised guess of April 21st
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.