Lake Winnie needs your help

[Colter]

Lake Winnie needs your help. The DNR wants to change the 6 fish daily limit to a 4 fish limit. There is no biological reason for the 4 fish limit. Winnie already has a 17-26 slot that protects the smallest and largest fish. We do not need this change, spread the word and please contact Chris voicing your opionion!!!

You are asked to contact the DNR: [email protected] and support maintaining the current regulations.

[Navigator]

I'm going to apologize 1st Sean because I respect you. For me, I have always practiced catch and release while keeping a few for the frying pan. Years ago as a guide I would talk to my customers about selective harvest not just in terms of size but in how many fish we would be keeping. Most would agree and abide in my "boat" rules and for those that wanted to push it, they were invited to hire someone else.

I am in favor of this based on the simple fact that a 4 fish walleye limit per person represents what I believe in and have practiced for the past 20 years regardless of the fishery. "Less is best". My comment to everyone that fishes with me is, "that was a blast, let em go so we can do it again". Nav

[Dylan33]

I agree with NAV. A couple of extra points..

1. Why do most people need to keep 6 fish/day?

and 2. I would think that a lower limit would help the fishery. Fewer fish being taken out of the lake would equal more fish there to be caught, right?

[slovene]

Sounds great, but if you're not hurting the fishery by keeping two more per individual, what are you gaining???

I have fished the lake every weekend since the opener and haven't experienced better fishing on the lake in my life (30+ years). If the resource shows it can handle the pressure, and it appears it has if you visit the Cutfoot nets each spring, why would you change anything?

In discussing this with one resort owner, his fear was exactly this, and hopes they will not change the current slot and limit. Fearing a loss of business from customers was his main concern.

Sean, if they went to a four fish limit, would the slot remain the same, or would that change as well? Wish I could have been at the meeting, but those afternoon shifts are a killer!

IMO, I think the DNR has already made it's mind up and these meetings are merely a formality.

[fry em up 2 day]

Hey Sean I agree with you .I quit fishing winni, vermilion and mille lacs because of the slots, I will not come from the cities for 4 walleyes 17 and under) that once cleaned are the size of a perch. I do release the larger fish ,Im all for that, (over 22). and why the lakes that we get all the stock from ? its funny the guides support all the regs, they catch the most!I like to go only a couple of times a year.what are we all paying for?

[Navigator]

The math is pretty simple, taking fewer fish equals more carry-over that become productive for future generations.

A fear from loosing business over two fewer fish per person doesn't make sense?? At least to me.

Also I fish for recreation and challenge, not to eat.

[thatoneguy]

"I quit fishing winni, vermilion and mille lacs because of the slots, I will not come from the cities for 4 walleyes 17 and under) that once cleaned are the size of a perch."

Sounds like you need to brush up on your walleye filleting technique

Walleye fishing on Winnie - summer and winter - has improved dramatically since introduction of the slot limit. Would a bag limit reduction further improve the fishery? Probably. Would it improve it enough to offset the decline in business it would likely cause to area resorts? I'm not a fisheries biologist, so I can't say, but my gut instinct would be "no."

Winnie is one of the best things going right now. I don't know why they would want to mess with it, unless they have some unreleased data that causes them concern, which I doubt.

[fry em up 2 day]

no< I filet just fine, I just catch really nice perch, if the walleye were all

16 3/4 i wouldnt mind, but please not just 4

[Colter]

Nav, Before long if we don't protect things it will be like Canada. Stats and years of reports show that the vast majority of anglers only harvest 2 fish a day throughout the year, dropping to 4 fish is not going to make Winnie a better fishery, because over the course of 20 years it will increase the fish population by a very small percentage. It makes no sense to make the change, anglers come to Winnie for the chance to harvest 6, not that they do.

I do appreciate everyones opinion on this, but one should really get some facts on the subject before supporting or not supporting it.

[Huskie]

I fish Winnie 3 or 4 times a year, we have a 6 hr. drive and each trip usually is only 3 or 4 days long. This past fall our fishing was the best that we have experienced since the slot was put into place. I could live with a 4 fish limit if the bottom end of the slot was increased to say 19 or 20 inches. However, if the slot remains the same, I would favor the same 6 fish limit that currently is in place. The DNR may have already made their decision, but I'll send out an e mail to them anyway, I'd rather act than wish I would've a year down the road.

[Dylan33]

Why do most people automatically assume that any new reg the DNR proposes is a bad one? Don't you think the DNR would have done the research about what is best for the fishery? I don't think the DNR just pulls numbers out of hat to determine what the limit will be. I know there are "independent" studies out there that prove both sides of the arguement, but don't you think the DNR has done their own research?

[Dylan33]

And no one answered my other question...Why do you NEED to keep 6 walleyes per day? Especially on a lake like Winnie where you can easily supplement your "eating fish" with a few perch or pannies.

[slovene]

To answer your question, 2 days a weekend of fishing, if, theoretically, I catch my limit both days, that's 24 fillets total. So with a family of four, that's 12 fillets per day, just about right for a fry or grilling. Cut that by 4 fillets per day, and I only get one fry or grilling. And, yes, I/we do like to eat fish THAT much, so I do fish for the challenge, but also for the rewards.

So I will ask you a question...do you need a whole deer, 5 partridge per day, etc., etc., etc. Please don't tell me or some of us that 6 is too much, because, like Sean says, very few people actually catch their limit, and for those of us that do regularly, they go to good use!!!!

How about this...keep the current reg. in place, but put a minimum of 13 or 14" to protect the new, young recruitment year classes coming up through the system. You are already protecting the spawners, maybe this would protect more of a percentage of fish without "hurting" the lake at 6 per day.

As I said earlier, I think this is a done deal already, unless LOTS of people put up a big stink!!!

And yes, the resort owner is worried about the regs, because customers he has talked to about this issue have said if they cut to 4, they will not be back. In this economy, not a good picture.

And I would like to see the actual numbers, creel studies, etc. for biological proof that the lake is in trouble. This one stinks to high heaven, IMO!!

[Dylan33]

Again...I will say that I trust the MN DNR to make the right decisions.

Slovene- you said you want to see the DNRs research to make sure it is the right way to go, but then offered up your own solution without having any numbers to back that up....long story short, we are all sportsmen who want what is best for our particular sport. Why don't we leave the decisions on regs/limits etc to the people whose job it is to set those regs. example; can you show me a study that says what the effect of a walleye limit of 20 per day on Winnie would be? Most people won't keep 20, but what would happen if that were the limit? I don't know, but I bet the DNR has a better handle on that than you and I do.

[slovene]

And I will reply that it's not a solution that I was implying, rather an idea that would keep the 6 fish limit in place. I'm not a biologist, just a fisherman that has fished the lake my whole life, and, as I said before, the lake just doesn't appear to be in trouble, IMO.

True, we all want what's best for the lake, but that's why the DNR asked for OUR input on the subject, and there could be room for compromise on the issue, that's why I threw that idea out there (they did something similar on Kabetogama with the minimum size a while ago).

P.S. I'd really have to have a lot more kids that were very hungry for a 20-fish limit, plus I don't know if I could afford that much bait.

[Colter]

I trust the DNR as I have had numerous meeting with Chris. I have heard more then once that by changing the limit from 6 to 4 will do very little for Winnie. I have been supportng them on everything when it comes to the slot and making sure we educate others to understand why it is so important to have those fish stay in the lakes, but on this one I feel like they are making the change "to make a change" and make things a bit simplier from a regs standpoint. Keeping things consistent from lake to lake is the easy way out, managing each lake, laka by lake is the right answer. It's clearly not our problem as sportsman if the DNR does not have the resources to clearly manage each lake.

As a parting note, they have numerous studies each year that clearly show that the average angler only harvests 2 walleyes per outing, so if that is the case, why do we need to drop the limit, as most anglers are clearly not hurting the lake right now. Another point that we have heard, our fishing right now on Winnie is better then ever, Maybe committing to stocking more lakes to relieve the pressure from Winnie is a better answer then reducing the traffic, because anglers are not willing to come here anymore due to the limit reduction.

With that being said, I hope everyone hears me out and will spread the word that we do not want the limit changed!!!

I do want to clarify things a little, they are looking at four options, one would be changing from 6-4. Here is what they are looking at

1.) MAintain 17-26 slot, bag limit 6

2.) 17-26 inch slot one over 26 bag limit 4

3.)Slot 18-26 one over 26 and bag limit 6

4.) Slot 18-26 one over 26 bag limit 4

Hopefully this will clear things up some, but please do your part in helping keep it to 6.!

[Getanet]

I have absolutely no opinion on if going from 6 to 4 on Winnie is good or bad for the lake. However, I do sympathize with the resort owners.

A bunch of the guys in my family take a 4-day weekend trip to that area each Spring and Fall. We have been fishing out of the same resort on Leech for a few years now because we like the resort and love the lake. However, we have tried resorts on other lakes and aspects like slots, possession limits, etc do come into play.

There are a lot of awesome lakes in that area. If it came down to it I'd more than likely pick a lake where I could bring 6 fish home from a trip over 4.

[slovene]

I trust the DNR as I have had numerous meeting with Chris. I have heard more then once that by changing the limit from 6 to 4 will do very little for Winnie. I have been supportng them on everything when it comes to the slot and making sure we educate others to understand why it is so important to have those fish stay in the lakes, but on this one I feel like they are making the change "to make a change" and make things a bit simplier from a regs standpoint. Keeping things consistent from lake to lake is the easy way out, managing each lake, laka by lake is the right answer. It's clearly not our problem as sportsman if the DNR does not have the resources to clearly manage each lake.

As a parting note, they have numerous studies each year that clearly show that the average angler only harvests 2 walleyes per outing, so if that is the case, why do we need to drop the limit, as most anglers are clearly not hurting the lake right now. Another point that we have heard, our fishing right now on Winnie is better then ever, Maybe committing to stocking more lakes to relieve the pressure from Winnie is a better answer then reducing the traffic, because anglers are not willing to come here anymore due to the limit reduction.

With that being said, I hope everyone hears me out and will spread the word that we do not want the limit changed!!!

+1...Well said Sean and I will spread the word over my way. I will e-mail my dismay to the DNR on this in the morning.

[Dylan33]

Hey Guys- I understand your concern, and if you do have the research from the DNR that supports the idea that lowering the limit will have no positive effect on the lake, then I am with you. I was, in effect, playing devels advocate there, so I apologize if I got some emotions worked up. Take care, and fight the good fight. Set the hook once for me next time your on Winnie!

[Colter]

I do want to clarify things a little, they are looking at four options, one would be changing from 6-4. Here is what they are looking at

1.) MAintain 17-26 slot, bag limit 6

2.) 17-26 inch slot one over 26 bag limit 4

3.)Slot 18-26 one over 26 and bag limit 6

4.) Slot 18-26 one over 26 bag limit 4

Hopefully this will clear things up some, but please do your part in helping keep it to 6.!

[bmc]

It wouldn't bother me one way or the other. If they went to 4 fish, I would like to see them bump the slot up to 18 or 19" and under as keepers.

With Mille Lacs, Leech, and Red Lake having 4 fish limits, maybe a 4 fish limit would alleviate some fishing pressure from Winnie?

I don't believe that if the limit went from 6 to 4 fish, resort owners would lose business. There are many reasons why people go to resorts, family, tradition, friendship, etc and I don't think 2 less walleyes in the box at the end of the day is gonna make or break a person's vacation, especially since the average fisherman catches 2 walleyes a day, as stated above.

I do believe the slot has really helped the lake and trust whatever the DNR comes up with.

Brian

[Jim Almquist]

Thanks for the heads up Sean. I really like option 3 but would have no problem if things were left the same. The lake is in such great shape I would hate to see them mess with it too much.

I never keep 6 walleyes unless friends are coming over for a fish fry. I just don't like eating walleyes that have been frozen so 3 fish is enough for our family.

I would like to think that anyone going to a resort would get to eat enough walleyes while staying there and that 4 fish each per person for taking home would be more then enough.

[ryan p]

I think they should keep it the way it is.We cant compare Winnie with the other lakes. If the DNR wants to change the limit and they fell the lake is in trouble they should stop stripping all the eggs, and get them elsewhere. Alot of the old timers will tell you the lake is in the best shape its been in over 30 years.

[gregg52]

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

just got home from up there (2weeks) love every minute of it

when was the meeting..and where...just curious

I dunno what to say but I hate to see them change it

Not sure it would hurt the resorts but i dont think its going to help them..not only resorts but just business in the area in general

Some guys make day trips...would they still do that for 4 fish

geepers i eat 4 my self..lol..if the lake was struggling it would be different...i was at the milking last spring no shortage of fish and remeber the cutfoot is just a percentage of where fish head to spawn

cant imagine how many head up 3rd river etc etc

and as someone said the average catch is 2 per man

i remember last yr openin talking to the guys at the 46 landing

saying most had some fish the better guys had maybe 5 and that opening

when the number of fisherman is very high and fish seem to go pretty good

up there

but still theres that old saying 10% of the the fisherman catch 90% of the fish so thats not really alot of limits even if they got their limit every time

which i know doesnt happen i dont care who you are..one day last week

i was fishin next to 2 guides and niether boated a fish and one was a very well known guide up there (not to say he didnt move and find some)

but i doubt he took limits that day

i think just leave well enough alone till......who knows

as they say dont fix it if aint broke

and IMO its far from broke

Mille lacs is 2 hrs from the cities less than that for alot so 4 fish there is alittle different you can maybe make a few more trips

[PEATMOSS]

Thanks for the heads-up on this Sean. I'll call the DNR in the next few days and try to talk to Chris. I was afraid that the 4-fish thing was going to get pushed because of the other big lakes statewide having this limit.

Winnie is doing well, and unless the DNR has compelling evidence that the 6-fish bag limit has been somehow detrimental, then there is simply no need to change it.

To those that would argue that I don't NEED 6 walleyes, you're right. I don't NEED any, but I and my friends and family enjoy eating a meal of wild caught walleyes and I assure that none go to waste. I would counter your question simply by asking why you seem to think of walleyes as TOYS ? What is it that drives certain c&r folks to go out to a lake and pummel 10...20...50 or more walleyes a day? What makes you feel entitled to have our fish and game populations managed to be your personal playthings?

My biggest worry in this proposal is what the 4-fish limit on Winnie is goingto have on the nearby lakes of Sand, Bowstring, Jessie and Round. There are already certain guides that are clubbing Sand like a baby harp seal. Are these lakes going to get wacked even harder by those seeking their 6 fish limit. I'm afraid so.

[fridron]

I have been going up to Winnie for 10 yrs, the last 4 to my seasonal since I retired. I have seen the results of the slot get better each year I have enjoyed the opportunity to be there. I won't leave if they drop the limit, but I can see no benefit to the fishery that isn't being met now. Believe me, I do not catch a limit every time I go up, but when I do I share meals with friends and relatives. In fact, I do not see the fishery being hurt if the slot is changed to 18-26/6. I have heard from locals that parties from Leech are making a concerted push to drop it as they feel they are being slighted, but they are coming back from a bad drop in a fishery population and really should consider themselves lucky their seasons were not shut down to recover like URL. I have to believe the economy, rather than 2 more fish, is the reason for lower amounts of people [could fool me when I go to Walker and Reeds]. They have recovered well and could possibly have the same slot and possession as others in a few years. As far as Mille Lacs, don't forget, they are under a different set of circumstances and more closely watched than Winnie. But we have the same problem as to the fish we have to release. With the increased amount of 17+" fish I have released in the last couple of years I can see no problem for the future, even if we leave it as it is. AND......have you seen the size of those perch this year? C'mon ice!!!!!!!

Ron

[Coach1310]

DISCLAIMER.... I have not read or collected any data so the following are just my thoughts... I have fished Winnie/Cutfoot every year for the past 15 or so. The area is absolutely gorgeous and Cutfoot holds a special place in my heart.... that being said, I would trust the DNR if they had data to support Why? My feeling is you would be better off leaving the limit 6, but not allow folks to keep anything under 13 or 14. These small fish would be protected and may have the same numbers affect as switching to a 4 fish limit. The only person I really see the limit affecting are resort/business owners. A change in limit will DECREASE traffic and use to some degree. Maybe not a lot, but it will to some degree. Maybe instituting a 4 fish limit statewide is the answer???? It would eliminate the preference of one lake over another because of the 4 fish limit. I'm not smart enough to know what the perfect solution is, just throwing my thoughts out there.

[Bobberboy]

It sometimes seems that we forget the best part of fishing, fishing! Winnie is a great lake and a great experience every time I go there. I enjoy the challenge of finding the fish and figuring out the best presentation for that particular day. I hope to one day put a replica of a 36 plus on my wall. If the daily bag limit changes it won’t change the enjoyment that comes from putting in the boat at the Birches and heading over to Ravens or to Zoomers. It may however help me put that 36 incher on my wall.

What ever happens I’ll still make the drive just for the adventure.

[gregg52]

i hope you are young cuz i've been going up there for bout 30yrs

and personally have never boated a fish over 27-28 and dont know of any over 30 really to speak of..its a great action lake but size has never been a trait of winnie that i know of

i'm sure an ocassional 9-10 comes out but they are few and far between

but you right i love being up there i have a RV up there and goet up there as often as i can

36incher i think you might want to drive another 2 hrs to LOW or beyond..lol

[ryan p]

Greg is right I have been fishing winnie for a while now I have got one 27.5 I have seen many at 26 but just because they change the limit does not mean you will start seeing 30 inch fish. There are many other things to account for besides that.