Why the slot animosity?

[Scott M]

I read the first part of this story in the St. Cloud Times with the usual quotes from the DNR and some information but was a little surprised at the quotes towards the end of the article. Two business owners knock the DNR regarding the slot. Read it for yourself At Mille Lacs, be wary of limit

Quote:

---

"They (the DNR) made it real clear a few years back that they don't care about the business community up here," Lundeen said. "This will have a dramatic impact on this area and I don't know how the angling public will react this time, but I know how they reacted last time and it wasn't good."

---

Quote:

---

"The biological factor should be the decision maker when it comes to slot regulations, not quotas," Johnson said. "This lake is in great shape from a walleye numbers standpoint, and it needs to managed so that remains, not so a certain poundage of fish can be caught each year."

---

I like to stroll over to the URL section and read what the Petrowskes say about slots and protection after not being able to fish for almost a decade. I'm pretty sure they are happy with the quota and slot system on Red. I can't believe how people can't think that the smaller slot is used for protecting the fishery, and that the long term picture isn't what is in focus. Those are some caustic statements and accusations, IMO.

[Schnauzer]

I think a lot of people look at it as a court/political decision... not necessarily one for the betterment of the fishery. The court says each party can take X pounds so the lake is managed for two takes of x pounds. When the slot is tightened, it isn't done so with the betterment of the fishery in mind, it is done so to stay under the court mandated number. I think that is where the frustration stems from.

I personally am not a fishery biologist, nor am I a resort owner on Mille Lacs. I'm not sure what to believe but I write this simply to illustrate where some of the hard feelings originate.

[Bigfife]

I will throw my $.02 into the bucket. I think the DNR went a little overboard on this one. If the harvest had been on track, the protected slot would have been shortened to 22-28". The fishing usually slows down this time of year and so does the pressure. This year the DNR says we are ahead of harvest. I haven't heard the final numbers, but I really can't believe it is much over. Leaving the slot at 20" would have been a change in the plans for this year and it would have decreased this year's harvest. Last weekend I witnessed the slowest bite this year and the least amount of anglers on the lake. These two factors would have been enough to slow the harvest rate way down. I know we all go there to catch big fish. Not me. I have never kept over my legal limit (daily or posession), but I do like to eat fish. I know first hand of a handfull of people that have cancelled trips based on this slot change. I can see why places like Lundeen's would be upset and they have a right to be.

[dolsmi]

Just my opinion: I don't believe you can compare the situations between Mille Lacs and Red Lake as apples to apples.

On Mille Lacs it is very tough to catch a walleye in the 14-16" slot. Which will end up hurting the resort owners because people will not go to Mille Lacs and fish.

On URL, the lake just openned for fishing after the walleye population was eliminated for certain non-angling reasons. The walleye population is still in the process of building.

Fisherman can still catch many slot fish, even though the limit is 2, hence they can take some home so they will still go there,

I believe in slot limits to control harvest, but I think the DNR should look at other types of management styles other then this type of harvest poundage quotas and then shut the lake down with a slot that will make it very tough to hit. In essence taking the fishermen off of Mille Lacs.

On ML, Maybe the limit should be 2 all summer and keep the slot the same. At least that way the resort owners don't take the knock-out punch when the slot is changed to a slot in which you rarely can catch a fish.

I would have to say I am on the side of the resort owners on this one. They need fishermen to come to the lake to spend money so they can support their business and families.

This style of fishery management is not in the best interest of everyone.

[MNUser]

They should just make the limit 3 state wide and nothing over 20" statewide as well. This way, it would be an equal playing ground statewide and people would still fish ML. I think this would help many of the lakes around the state that receive too much pressure. Many of the fish could then reach their potential and more lakes would produce the trophy class fish we all seek.

[fear_no_fish]

[note from admin: Please read forum policy before posting again. Thank you.]

[Muskycrazy]

Oops . Your hood is showing .

[iland99]

Quote:

---

Oops . Your hood is showing .

---

This post is an instant classic! Time to wipe down the monitor. At least it was only water....

[palisade1kid]

Your hood is showing .

LMAO!

There's tons of other lakes to catch eaters on.

If you want hogs,spend the $3plus a gallon gas to drive to the big pond.

It' makes no difference to me as I do not go down there much.

I've got plenty of water to fish around here.

Too bad for the resorts though.They really have to be taking a hit!No wonder leeches sell for 40$ a lb.

[PierBridge]

Things could not better for resorts or business's on Mille Lacs right now.

I doubt the pressure will subside much but it sure would nice to pull up on flat without litterly a hundred boats on it.

[NEANGLER]

Personally I do not think the slot will hurt the tourism because I have been to ML 4 times ( 5 next week) for one reason to catch trophy fish. I can catch all the eaters I want at other lakes but to have the chance to catch a fish of a lifetime or my kids fish of a lifetime is priceless. It is almost like having Lac Suel in the U.S. to the people who are complaining - there are 9,999 other lakes to choose from to get your fish for the pan. Let ML be THE lake for trophy walleyes IN MN and let em go!

[fishorgolf]

Yes the resorts have done Very well this year. I just hoped they banked some for the next few months.

[dolsmi]

I know I am going to get blasted for this, but,

(I'm not a resort owner)

You may think the resorts have done very well this year, but with the 4-5 months they have had to make real money.

2 in winter and 2 in summer so far. Kind of hard to put some away with 4-5 months of good tourism.

The point is with this slot change, the people will not be coming up like they were. 4-5 months of revenue do not make a good year.

[kunk]

We usually take a trip to the pond about this time every summer. But after spending a week at another lake where the slot was increased and only catching protected fish, we are staying home this year. I only want to bring home some eaters for the mom's. If I want to throw fish back, it's just as much fun to fish bass and northerns close to home. I'm sure that's fine with a lot of you, and it's fine with me too. But it's probably not with the resort owners on ML.

[james_walleye]

I've talked too dozens of people in rochester here about the slot restriction and i've yet too have 1 person say they are changing plans or would change plans and not go too Mille Lacs because of it. Everyone has the same response, "I dont go too Mille Lacs for fish too eat, if i get some great, i go too catch big fish. It doesnt matter what the slot is." If this attitude is across the board than there shouldnt be that big a drop off in tourism from what thing would have been without the change.