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  
KabNam

'07 walleye regulations

Recommended Posts

KabNam

Anyone heard any preliminary info. as to what the proposed walleye limits will be for next year? Earlier this summer a resort owner mentioned something like 13"-19" with a 3 or 4 fish limit. I guess I would be ok with that. I hope some sort of slot limit is kept because I feel fishing is certainly better than it was 10 years ago. Especially the 20+" walleyes!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Timber

The DNR did a study a few years ago that indicated approximately 8-10% of fishermen actually catch a limit of walleyes while out fishing. That would mean that lowering the limit to 3 or 4 would do little to improve walleye fishing. What has proven to be successful are slot limits. Since fishing has improved in the Crane, Namakan, Kab area the last several years, maybe just leaving the present regulations as they are would be the best choice. I might add, that cessation of commercial fishing has certainly helped.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
diesel

I would agree that leaving the slot alone for awhile or making small adjustments would be just fine with me. I also agree that I have seen walleye fishing improve on Namakan ever since Kocheski, or Killcheski as we like to call him, gave up his nets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farley

I read in outdoor news that the DNR is thinking of doing anything under 17" and one over 28", similar to Rainy.

Personally I would like to see no slot, and a limit of 2 fish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
guts

KabNam, the DNR plans to implement a 17"-28" release immediately, 4 fish limit, 10 year regulation, or at least that is what they strongly suggest. I really only want to see a regulation for 5 years, then review again, 10 years will be a lifetime if it doesn't work.

Personally I would like 18"-28" release 4 bag limit, 5 year reg.

A meeting is coming up near the end of the month in Orr, or email the DNR with your suggestions, probably wont help, but can't hurt either, guts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Xplorer

IMHO, If they're planning on that, then I would rather see them leave the 13" mimimum in place, and also only do a 5 year timeframe. 10 years is quite a long time, and tho it (the 17-28 slot) has worked on Rainy, they are 2 different fisheries in some respects.

No matter what we end up with, I will be back up for as many days as possible next year grin.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
fishkab

Hello,,,, Just a couple of thoughts... The DNR says they are trying to have similar regs on Kab and Rainy...Then the limit should be set with an 8 fish limit and only 4 can be walleyes. Then the saugers would be exra. That is the reg on both Rainy and Lake of the Woods...You could then have, for example, 6 saugers and 2 eyes.. That type of thing....Hard for resorts to compete with 4 fish when the neighbors have 8.... What are your thoughts. That's what I am going to the meeting with.... Fishkab

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
booter

Having consistency among the lakes in the flowage area would make it a bit easier to keep track of the slot limits and "even" the field for the resorts. Having the saugers would be a plus. It seems to me the fisheries folks have done a good job with Rainy, and to Xplorers point about the differences in Kab/Nam and Rainy, I agree 10 years is a bit long before review.

I'm with you Xplorer, whatever they might devise (and I did send Kevin Peterson my comments) I'll be back to spend as many days as possible on Kab & Nam for many years to come.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Big-Al

I agree with you guts on your suggestions. There are far too many 12" ers killed by folks yanking the hook and at least they would get utilized. I would also love to see a barbless rule implemented.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
upnorth

Quote:

There a far too may 12" ers killed by folks yanking the hook


I don't quite understand the "Kill a fish to save a $.10 hook" philosphy of some folks. Cripes if it's in deep cut the line and sacrifice a hook, at least then there is a chance the fish will make it. I have seen people spend 3 or 4 minutes trying to dig out a hook and then through the fish overboard, talk about a waste of rescouces crazy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lakertaker

I agree with fishkab, simplicity and a level playing field are good, there are still people that claim they did not realize there was a slot. it's interesting how accepting fisherman are of a (4)fish limit today compared to ten and even five years ago, I'm not sure it is required on Kab but I'm all for protecting the resource to provide better fishing for years to come. I hope they will implement a bottom end on the slot 13" is just fine with me. Good Fishin!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wade Joseph

If they impose a 13-28 inch slot how is a guy supposed to catch and eat a few for shore lunch or dinner while camping? 12 inch walleyes have smaller fillets than a 10 inch perch! How often you think this rule is going to get broken?

Drop the slot so that 13-18 inches you can keep all others released and you'll improve things and still be able to keep a few eaters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dock Boy

Wade I think you should go back and review the posts. They are thinking of putting an 18-28 slot in not a 13 to 28.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wade Joseph

Sorry, I misread...I still think anything over 18 should be release only....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
upnorth

I do believe the release is 17 to 26 inch, ain't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
guts

Kab,Nam, Sand Point, Crane current walleye regulation is:

6 fish limit includes Sauger, all Walleye less than 13" must be released immediately, eyes 13" but less than 17" may be kept, as well as 1 over 23" all eyes between the 17" and 23" length must be released immediately. Sauger of any size may be kept but they count in the 6 bag limit.

The proposal suggested by the DNR for the next 10 years begining the 2007 season, is as follows:

Walleyes less than 17" may be kept, all walleyes between 17" thru 28" must be released immediately. 4 fish bag limit. Experimental regulation would be enforce for 10 years.

They mentioned they would be open to an extra 2 Sauger, but they oppose 4 Sauger, as the lake may not be able to sustain the increased sauger pressure.

Two points of view I have on the next regulation for Kab is put the special reg in force for 5 years only, and determine at that time what needs tweaking. Possibly find a way to let eyes up to 18" be kept, and set a minimum size if necessary, then it will not be quite as restrictive.

There is a meeting in ORR,MN the 26th of Oct, Thurs, they are looking for input from the public. They are taking suggestions into consideration until November, time is running out.

Lastly, they intend to suggest to the State to make a reguation for all inland lakes to have a 4 walleye bag limit. If this regulation comes to be, figure it would be two years away in the making. guts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hockey Guy

I’m pretty much a catch and release guy unless I’m camping and want to have a couple for shore lunch. I’m trying to look at this from every point of view. I know there are a number of people that like to go out and catch as many fish as they legally can and bring them home. I don’t have a problem with that either. What I don’t like is seeing a 12.5” fish tossed back that was belly hooked just to feed the seagulls. I think a 4 Walleye limit up to 18” with no minimum is fine. I also think that allowing two additional Saugers to get to 6 fish is fine. So basically I’m saying 6 fish limit but not more than 4 Walleyes. I would also like to see the 5-year period not 10. Now… to whom do I email my opinion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
guts

Hockey guy, send your suggestions or comments to kevin.peterson@dnr.state.mn.us or phone # is 218 286 5220, anyone else wishing to comment should do so soon. guts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Black_Bay

I think the reason that they are doing a 10 year time frame is that 5 years is too short to see if it is having a difference. These fish are fairly slow growing in the border lakes. A 13 inch walleye up there is only about 4 years old. After only 5 years you'd be lucky to have 2 new year classes of fish in the slot and that would be on the low end of the slot. Not much can be determined with that little of information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
guts

Black Bay, I agree that 5 years of a special regulation is a short time frame for a study, however we are on the 7th year of are slot now, add to that another 5 year reg, and that gives them 12 years to develope a plan. Between now and the next 5 years alot of things can happen that a regulation change may help. What if having no minimum size turns out to be a detriment, I'd prefer making a change sooner than later. guts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
upnorth

I could be mistaken on this, but isn't the purpose of having the slot to keep people from taking the breeding size fish, the 17 + ones? So with that thinking the lower size restriction shouldn't have a detrimental effect, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Timber

I would like to believe that decisions of this sort are based on scientific and biology, and not on "feel good" reasons. As stated before, DNR research itself has shown that 7-8% of people who fish actually catch a limit. Therefore, lowering the limit to 4 does not protect the resourse, and has almost nothing to do with too many fish being taken. It may be "nice" to have limits the same lake to lake, or "nice" that more people can say that they've "caught a limit", but these are poor reasons to base such an important decison on. The limits on Namakan vs Rainy have been different for years with no problems, and each lake system is different, so different rules/regulations should apply. The 13-17 slot with a 6 fish limit has worked very well in Crane, Namakan, Kab, etc. improving the quality of fishing since it was installed. It should remain the same.

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

    • gimruis
      I would avoid them if I were you.  All season.  There's often at least some current flowing through there and with these warmer winters, its just a bad idea.
    • gimruis
      If your getting some pretty close shooting (and gauging by your photos you are in those setups), you might want to use an IC (improved cylinder) choke instead.  Spread that pattern out a little more and switch to some smaller shot size with more velocity, especially if you're mostly just shooting as small ducks like woodies. I almost exclusively use an IC until the calendar turns November, for ducks, pheasants, and grouse.  Later on when you get more shooting at bigger, smarter birds that are on the edge of range you could go back to a modified.
    • Sunset Lodge
      Hello from the NW Angle!   Water temps are hovering around 48 degrees and fall fishing is phenomenal! Walleyes are biting anywhere from 14 to 30ft with jigging being the most effective method. Crappies are continuing to bite around sunken trees and deep holes with a good amount of perch mixed in. Anglers have had success trolling for large pike and muskies with jigging also bringing some to the boat.    We are getting fish houses ready for the 2017-18 ice fishing season and are very excited for hard water!   We recommending checking availability for winter ASAP!   Sunset Lodge
    • fishingdad
      Thank you for the responses everyone. You are correct Del I do not have the Fiber option.  We do use the Hot spot from AT&T at times but to be honest the Data does not last all that long, Even though we are right by Moccasin point & the tower is at the end of Frazer our signal is not the best at times.  We could also do DSL but according to one neighbor we may be faster sending up carrier pigeons & waiting for a response.
    • gunner55
      It's been a 1/32 oz. unpainted jig head & a small split shot along with a crappie minnow for me most of the time. Still barely see the rod tip load or wiggle a little on the bite. Even tougher with the wind lately & 20' or more down.
    • h8go4s
      Any channel on any lake is dangerous. 
    • PSU
      We are done as of Saturday as well. Was fishing in 35 feet in Smarts Friday and had a monster, monster fish on. Thought I was snagged for a few minutes, but then felt the wiggling. Fought if for probably five - ten minutes (drag flying out) and then up came an eight inch walleye. Never saw the monster, but guessing it was massive fish, perhaps a muskie? Anyone else ever have this happen?
    • Chris-Stanton
      added many new features and options
    • MNoutdoors99
      Hey I am planning on ice fishing on Lake Minnetonka this winter with a friend and I am using a snowmobile to get to the lake from the trails. I would enter onto the lake in Orono off the Luce line trail and end up in Stubbs bay. I was reading on other forums saying avoid the channels but it seems to be the only way to get around the lake to other bays especially since I am on a snowmobile. I was wondering if they eventually are safe enough to hold up a snowmobile in mid-late January, and if going through them faster helps possibly? I would like to fish around the Smith's bay area and the only way I can do that is going through channels. I know Lake Minnetonka can be sketchy with ice thickness and I don't want to end up through the ice, thoughts? Thanks.   Jim
    • delcecchi
      The DSL service is great since they ran the fiber down 24 a few years ago.   I was presuming that the poster didn't have that option if they were considering satellite.     AccessMN is another possibility if they are still around.