NEW WALLEYE LIMITS PROPOSED

[bturck]

A bill is currently before the legislatures to set a State Wide limit of 4 wlleyes for all Minnesota lakes. Should be interesting to see what kind of debate this brings about. it doesn't surprise me that this is finally being discussed. Two major walleye fisheries are already at that limit (MilleLacs and LOW). We'll just have to see what the outcome is. Bill

[slim1]

I hope it goes through

[steeplechaser2]

would this really mean ALL LAKES...like Upper Red, Mille Lacs, etc...?????????

[YummiYammis]

Count me in as a supporter of this one! However, I haven't been able to find the bill online...any links for specifics?

[woodman]

I support it 100% and wish they would add 17-26 slot state wide also!

[Bluegill1510]

If they pass it I hope the possession limit stays at 6 and the daily limit goes to 4. It would affect all lakes in Minnesota, even Mille Lacs, Winnie, Leech, etc. Plus all those lakes are already watched like a hawk that if new regs are needed on any of them I am sure the DNR will change them. Red will stay at 2 yet until the DNR and the Red Lake tribe feels the walleye population is at a safe level to increase our daily limit to 4 on it. If the DNR adds a statewide slot I hope its fairly common and fair enough so that as an anglers we can keep some fish to eat at least.

[Sartell Angler]

I'm in support of the lower limit and the slot...really anything that improves the fishing I am in support of. Can always get a meal if you really need one that bad!

[mrklean]

I support that 100%, would also like to see harsher fines for poaching and other things like that.

[Thump'n em big]

i think they should do like south dakota does and reduce the limit to 4 and let a guy fish 2 lines and 4 in the winter no one needs to take home 6 fish a person and fishing the extra line is nice to get a feel for what the fish want... i like the idea of the larger slot limit as well but i think it should be 20-26....

[Bluegill1510]

 Quote:

let a guy fish 2 lines and 4 in the winter

How the heck do you fish 4 lines for panfish in the winter? Man 2 is hard enough, and 2 lines for bluegills and crappies in the summer would be alot of work, when its hard enough to keep up with one! I think the number of lines is fine for our state, this isn't SoDak. If your all about reduced limits and slots for walleye I don't see the point for extra lines? Whats the point of a slot then when fish are not caught and released properly (deep hooking and handling practices) because of extra lines in the water and not having the skill to run your lines, control your boat, netting fish, CPR, etc....the end result is seeing a bunch of floaters on top of the water and thats really helping the lake. Grant it some people may be able to handle it but IMO the majority of people won't.

[gopher_nation]

I support the lower limit and statewide slots would be great to protect the females. Right now you can keep one over 20" and I really hate to see them big one go home to be cleaned, bring home a trophy or better yet get a replica made. Whenever I fish in SD with four lines three of them are usually tip-ups, nice for covering ground. With the number of anglers in MN two lines is plenty, if you want more lines to cover more water and different presentations just have more licensed anglers with you.

[jaydog]

3 lines in the winter would be fine two rods and a tipup or rattle reel

[ret swabby]

Interesting comments on this. I see protected slots on the big end but what about a protected slot on the lower end? I think the state should set a slot that anything (walleyes now) under 14" be released. I know this isn't popular but I saw so many 10 inch walleyes cleaned at our lakes resort last year it was really sad. As for the number of lines one can use would you want it 4 in the winter and two in the summer? or 4 in the winter and leave it at one in the summer? Being able to troll with boards with two lines would be nice on bigger waters but if they leave it at one line I won't lose sleep over it. Just my 2 cents worth.

Ret Swabby

[bturck]

The story was on Channel 5 news last night, moderated by Joe Mason. I am totally in favor of it, along with the slot being uniform. I also believe we need to closer monitor size and limits on the panfish as well. Just because it swims and has fins doesn't mean it should end up in a bucket.

MrKlean: Fines for DNR violations are set by the legislatures also. I agree the fines are low, however when you look at other fines relating to misdemeanors they are in line or gross misdemeanors for that matter. 172 fish over the limit and a 3000.00 fine. That is definitley gross negligence of the 1st degree. As stated this change if enacted would not raise the limit on Red, but would lower it on any of the lakes currently with a 6 fish limit. Bill

[Stick in Mud]

I must say that I am also in favor of the proposed regs, though the idea of a statewide slot seems a little tenuous. Why only protect walleyes? If we pass a slot limit for walleyes, shouldn't we pass one for bass, northerns, crappies, etc?

Like helmet laws and smoking bans, this does seem like another extension of the government into the lives of private citizens. And as much as I like going out to the bar and coming home wthout the stench of cigarettes all over my clothes, I'm still uncomfortable with the law.

Wouldn't increasing education programs for anglers be a solution?

[mdhmdh]

Education programs for anglers would be nice, but it probably will not keep some folks from keeping those 10" walleyes. Unfortunately common sense is not terribly common.

[Bluegill1510]

 Originally Posted By: ret swabby

I know this isn't popular but I saw so many 10 inch walleyes cleaned at our lakes resort last year it was really sad.

Wow are you serious red? That is really sad, and I would of said something to those people or offered them $10 to go out and buy walleye at the store for keeping fish that small. I can maybe understand one or 2 fish that size with a few other keepers (15-22") for a shorelunch meat run meal, but really that is sad if it happens at a consistant bases. Maybe that particular lake needs a minimum slot then? Did you say something to the resort owner or local DNR fisheries, because they can do something about it. Like the previous poster said, common sense isn't so commen anymore in today's society!

[Borch]

I do not support minimum slot limits. I've seen too much damage done to the overall size structure in lakes when minimum limits have been in place. They sound good but what actually happens is that once the fish hit the minimum length it goes in the livewell. So lets say there's a 14" minimum limit. Even if many usually have a personal 15" cut off they keep 14" walleyes on those waters affected by the minimum slot. After a few years all you can catch are 12-13.75" walleyes. It's the reason you don't seen many minimum size limits anymore. Without a minimum the harvest is spread out more and one year class doesn't get hammered. So a few guys keeping the little eyes actually helps more than it hurts.

In regards to the reducing the limit from 6 to 4 it doesn't make as large of a difference as one would think. Based on the MN DNR numbers from the last round of proposed limit reductions the average catch for walleyes was about 2 per angler per day of angling. As you can see two is half of 4 and will only be impacting a small number of walleye anglers who frequently limit. Certainly in the case of a hot bite it may slow harvest a bit and hopefully the bite slows before too many are removed from the fishery.

I can't think of a guide who would be against lowering the limit. It's easier to get clients on a limit of walleyes if it's 4 rather than 6. Nothing wrong with that at all.

[SJS]

I'm all for it. We fish for the fun more than we do the fish. 4 is still plenty in my book.

[frogtosser]

the DNR is trying to simplify the limits throughout the state. I do agree with borch as the majority of walleye anglers do not limit out everyday, but I am in favor of lowering the limit to 4 also.

[Stick in Mud]

Ummm...no offense or anything, but some of you guys don't limit out every time you get on the water?!?

[chasineyes]

As a very casual fisherman, I don't mind the new limit but do away or modify the slots. I get tired of spending all day on a lake and then the one you catch you have to throw back. Don't give me the [PoorWordUsage] about the future, I've been fishing for 30 years and still have never, ever caught my limit of eyes, pike, perch etc.,. What the DNR seems to forget is that they are selling me a product(fish), if I feel as though my enjoyment on this product isn't worth my time and money, I can pursue other interests. Remember the lake itself is free!! Just not the fish (which whoever came up with that idea) Ultimately their competing for my money just like a golf course, campground etc.,. All in all it comes down to enforcement. In my time fishing I have been checked 4 or 5 TIMES THATS IT!! Stop spending money on rules, laws and more fluff items.

[Sartell Angler]

that is a pretty lame philosophy you have for fishing there chasineyes...read my signature if you don't understand what I'm talking about

and not to be a [PoorWordUsage] or anything but if you have been fishing for 30 years and still haven't caught a limit of something, maybe you should take up golf

[Bluegill1510]

 Originally Posted By: chasineyes

Don't give me the [PoorWordUsage] about the future, I've been fishing for 30 years and still have never, ever caught my limit of eyes, pike, perch etc.,. What the DNR seems to forget is that they are selling me a product(fish), if I feel as though my enjoyment on this product isn't worth my time and money, I can pursue other interests.

Pretty typical response for a "casual fisherman" from the cities who thinks in business terms and not in natural resource/wildlife terms. Fish and lakes are not a business product but are natural resources that are part of mother nature and our environment. People do tend to get the concepts mixed up and always look towards the all high and might dollar aspect. Fishing and hunting are privileges and that is why we pay license fees to do them, because they are a privilege and we do not live in a society anymore where we need to hunt and fish to support our families or yourself (even though I wish we did, because life was much simpler back then). The DNR isn't selling you sh!t, because its your choice and privilege to either hunt or fish, you don't have to do it if you don't want to, but if you do your going to have to pay for a license just like the rest of us. Just like a driving a vehicle and having a drivers license its our privilege to drive and a choice we make. Because there are other means by which we can travel, and I don't see MnDOT trying to "sell" us a product as your analogy to the DNR "selling" a product in fish. I guess my advice to you Chasin is either put your time and refine your fishing skills so that you can catch more fish, otherwise if its not worth your time and money then pack the rod away, sell your boat and equipment and get your golf clubs ready and pray for warm weather.

[chasineyes]

If as suggested I decide to stop fishing (less revenue for DNR) and take up golf, are you going to come to me again 10 years from now for more taxes to pickup the hole that I have left in the account? I bet I can predict what someone will say...What about the stadium, guthrie, etc.. This is exactly why the state is in such disarray. Were all looking for our handout. It's funny nobody commented on the number of times I've been checked? I guess you all see the DNR on a regular basis? Truthfully, enforcement is the only action that will truly deter overharvesting.

[prechlerker]

you haven't been checked that much cause you don't fish enough. I have been checked three times this year. I usually get checked two to three times a year. I am glad i get checked most likely i have a question for them.If you see them enough they might even tell ya were they are biting.