Possession Limit

[blackice25]

This may be a question I should know, but I wanted to make sure...

I understand the daily/possession limit is 4 fish. Now if I am staying on the lake I can catch my 4 fish on Day 1, eat my 4 fish on Night 1 and do the same on Day 2?? So I can keep/eat 4 fish per day (within the slot of course)??

Now say I spend a couple days at lake of the woods before stopping at URL on my way home... I have my 4 walleyes an 4 sauger fileted and frozen... I cannot keep any more fish? And am not supposed to be targeting that species at all??

Say I have 2 eyes and my 4 sauger... I can only take 2 more eyes off URL then?

So my best bet would be to eat up some walleyes on LOW, bring home 8 sauger and then I would be able to take my 4 eyes from URL??

Just wanted clarify before I head nort next monday....

[Walleyehooker]

To be perfectly legal you would need to eat the walleyes before URL and make sure the saugers are identifiable. Legaly you arnt even supposed to posess walleyes in your freezer at home and be out fishing.

[DREZLER]

what you really should do is lobby to our legislators to change the possession limit from 1 daily limit to 2

[kelly-p]

what you really should do is lobby to our legislators to change the possession limit from 1 daily limit to 2

Then we could cut the daily limits by 1/2 to keep from overfishing the lakes. The collapse of the walleyes in the Red Lakes showed that there is not an endless supply of fish. It was a harsh lesson that we were taught. Perhaps we should remember it.

[Feathers Rainin]

Then we could cut the daily limits by 1/2 to keep from overfishing the lakes. The collapse of the walleyes in the Red Lakes showed that there is not an endless supply of fish. It was a harsh lesson that we were taught. Perhaps we should remember it.

Netting and angling are two very different things. Lets not forget you can only angle on a small portion of the lake. I don't think angling pressure caused the overfishing of Red.

I'm fine with the limits where they are, in fact I would actually like lower panfish limits. I just wanted to point out that the overfishing of Red should not be contributed to angling pressure.

[LABS4ME]

I just wanted to point out that the overfishing of Red should not be contributed to angling pressure.

Really? not contributed? and your statement is based on fact?

Good Luck!

Ken

[Feathers Rainin]

Really? not contributed? and your statement is based on fact?

Good Luck!

Ken

Tribal netting.

You can only angle on about 1/4 of the lake.

[Hoyt4]

It all contributed from Tribal netting ,commercial fishing ,angling it all had its part.

Tribal netting was not the down fall by its self.

[Hoyt4]

This may be a question I should know, but I wanted to make sure...

I understand the daily/possession limit is 4 fish. Now if I am staying on the lake I can catch my 4 fish on Day 1, eat my 4 fish on Night 1 and do the same on Day 2?? So I can keep/eat 4 fish per day (within the slot of course)??

Now say I spend a couple days at lake of the woods before stopping at URL on my way home... I have my 4 walleyes an 4 sauger fileted and frozen... I cannot keep any more fish? And am not supposed to be targeting that species at all??

Say I have 2 eyes and my 4 sauger... I can only take 2 more eyes off URL then?

So my best bet would be to eat up some walleyes on LOW, bring home 8 sauger and then I would be able to take my 4 eyes from URL??

Just wanted clarify before I head nort next monday....

Make sure you don't have any fish from LOW on you when your fishing. I think you can leave on shore at one of the resorts to hold unless that changed over the last couple years.

[LABS4ME]

Tribal netting.

You can only angle on about 1/4 of the lake.

You may want to check your facts before you post. Easy to do. It doesn't matter if it is only 1/4 of the lake that anglers fished... double and triple limits per day were the norm for decades. And then a quick stop to buy another 50 pounds of illegal fillets on the way home...It all had a bearing on the demise. No one can point a finger at the other... both sides contributed.

Good Luck!

Ken

[Feathers Rainin]

The numbers of fish taken from netting compared to angling are not even close.

Of course angling had a small contribution because people were keeping fish but suggesting that angling led to the bust or that it was even a significant contributor is ridiculous.

No netting and there would have never been the bust no matter what the limits for angling were. You can't overfish (strictly angling) a walleye factory like Red when you are only able to fish a small portion of the lake.

I'm not trying to finger point at the Natives. I just wanted to point out that suggesting that limits for angling had an influence on the bust of Red is not a good example to use for overfishing a lake.

[LunkerCity]

I wish that lake was all crappie like it was ten years ago!!!!! I won't drive that far for 4 walleyes, but we used to get buckets of 13" crappies:) I blame everyone.

[LABS4ME]

not going to debate this with you... unless you have data and facts or you are a biologist with the DNR it is then solely your opinion. To think you cannot overfish a lake by angling is purely rediculous. Of course netting played an enormous role in the crash... but angling pressure was a contributing factor. anglers taking out 12-18 fish a day (morning, noon and evening limit) adds up very quickly when there are a thousand anglers on the lake... my father in law admits to doing it. Leech was overfished... not sure you can lay that on netting...

I have discussed this with the biologist that was in charge of Red Lake during the recovery... he obviously felt compelled to lie to me with his facts of the crash... must have done it so he could stay in my fishouse.

Good Luck!

Ken

[Feathers Rainin]

not going to debate this with you... unless you have data and facts or you are a biologist with the DNR it is then solely your opinion.

I have talked to a biologist who worked on the Red recovery. He explained to me that the crash was attributed to over netting not overangling.

You can't out fish a lake the size of Red when you can only fish less than a 1/4 of it. Pure and simple. I don't need a biologist to tell me that. I don't care if you and everyone elses relatives double or triple dip. It won't happen.

[gixxer01]

Then where are all the crappies from years past? Perhaps they figured out where the boundary line is. "Overharvest" of the resource, whether nets or thousands of fishing lines, are to blame. It's absurd to think that all the crappies pulled during the HOT BITE, didn't have a huge role to play in today's SLOW BITE. I do agree that there are probably thousands more across the line, but those fish mean nothing to me since I can't fish them. I'll opt to protect those that I can fish.

[Stcloudangler]

Good point Gixxer, I would rather drive that far and have great fishing and bring home 4 fish while throwing back 6 times that many than not. While someone could argue that the crappies really didnt have a chance when the walleyes were re-introduced, the point you make is solid.

[Walleyehooker]

You cant just leave your walleyes on shore and still be legal. Back in the crappie days when walleye was closed on URL guys would leave their fish from LOW on shore because it wasnt a good idea to have them on the lake unless they were packaged by a licenced packer and labled.

[Walleyehooker]

Heck with the walleyes you can catch them darn near anywhere. I wish they could have stocked it back with crappies. Man I miss those crappie days.

[Fisherman For a Lifetime]

I wish they could have stocked it back with crappies. Man I miss those crappie days.

So do I.

But the Walleyes are nice.

[steeplechaser2]

IMHO taking fish home is a bonus...we actually drive 4 hours to catch fish, talk smart, and take pictures....yeah, we keep a few for a meal or two...we take a few home, but the real "catch" is being able to go someplace where a guy can catch fish most trips with real regularity...I loved the crappie boom, but the walleye surge has been just as fun. We don't fish it very often, but we always look forward to our trips with the Petrowskes...they steer us in the right direction and keep us out of trouble.

[walleye101]

Then where are all the crappies from years past? Perhaps they figured out where the boundary line is. "Overharvest" of the resource, whether nets or thousands of fishing lines, are to blame. It's absurd to think that all the crappies pulled during the HOT BITE, didn't have a huge role to play in today's SLOW BITE. I do agree that there are probably thousands more across the line, but those fish mean nothing to me since I can't fish them. I'll opt to protect those that I can fish.

Not to pick on you personally gixxer because this same topic comes up often.

"Then where are all the crappies from years past?"

Dead.......The great crappie year-class hatched in 1995 would be 18 years old this spring. How long do you expect them to live?

"It's absurd to think that all the crappies pulled during the HOT BITE, didn't have a huge role to play in today's SLOW BITE"???

It is absurd to think that it did play a role. There would be no more of those fish around today if the limit had been one a day. If they were not harvested they would have been lost to natural mortality by now. The demise of the crappie population was not over-harvest of a single year-class. It was failure to produce another major year-class to replace them that resulted in the decline. Spawning stock was at record levels for many years after the 1995's matured, so there was plenty of opportunity. The Red Lakes are simply not suited for consistently producing and sustaining that level of crappie production, no matter how much we miss the good old days.

[Walleyehooker]

Wasnt this about possession limits? YAWN........

[John Mickish]

Lets get this back on topic. I too am curious what the rules are when you are mixing LOW and URL fish.

Say you have 4 URL walleys, properly cleaned, labeled and packaged, what can you get on LOW?

Or another way, say you have 8 sauger from LOW, what, if any, can you take from URL?

[gixxer01]

You cant just leave your walleyes on shore and still be legal. Back in the crappie days when walleye was closed on URL guys would leave their fish from LOW on shore because it wasnt a good idea to have them on the lake unless they were packaged by a licenced packer and labled.

I would imagine this would be the only sure way of convincing a game warden. A completely frozen block of fillets labelled and dated with absolutely no sign of carcasses within a 1/2 mile radius "might" convince them as well. It's definitely a grey area. What do those with sleeper houses do? I know they only fish one lake, but they deal with possession limits.

[Walleyehooker]

You can only have 1 limit of walleyes in possession period. You would have to eat or do something with those before you can have another limit on another day and not the same day.

Now if you have 8 identifiable saugers from LOW you could go to URL and get a limit of walleyes. But if a warden stops you after URL you might have a fun time explaining you got the walleyes and saugers on 2 different lakes and might have to prove it.Wouldnt hurt to keep your road passes for some proof.

[Walleyehooker]

If your in a sleeper house rules are the same. 1 limit in possession. Even if you eat those fish you arnt supposed to keep any more that day and you are supposed to keep the carcasses and dispose of them on shore. If you eat your limit one day and dispose the carcases properly you can posess another limit the next day.

[gixxer01]

Daily and possession limits (bags)– For most species of fish, the daily and possession limit is the same. One exception would be the inland limit on yellow perch, which is 20 per day and 40 in possession. The daily and possession limits include fish possessed by the person at all locations including such places as livewell, cold storage, at home, or at a resort. Daily limit is the number of fish an angler can take in one calendar day. Eating those fish or gifting them away on the same day does not allow an angler to possess additional fish taken in the same calendar day.

Sounds like only one limit in possession per species, except for perch. No more grey area.

[blackice25]

Thanks for the info guys. I could see an issue with the 8 LOW sauger on (or leaving) URL. But I guess it comes down to being honest and hopefully the CO believes you.

[Walleyehooker]

It would also be worth a call to the DNR about the 8 sauger deal. Technically you are at your possession limit and done fishing with 8 saugers on LOW and replaceing the walleyes with 4 more saugers. I dont know for sure if that would effect going to another lake that doesnt have saugers. Definitly leaves a gray area there.

[Walleyehooker]

Also any fillet with the skin removed is considered a walleye.