Good article

[Pallansch]

http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_22404617/dave-orrick-is-mille-lacs-out-balance

[bturck]

Going to be another interesting thread, it certainly has gotten the juices flowing in the past

[Pallansch]

Yeah I wanted to hear everyone's thoughts before I shared. It's interesting to see what people think and how they justify it.

[bturck]

Interesting to note that the State even shuts down fishing for certain species of fish during the spawning period ie: walleye and bass. Read into this what you will....just sayin

[leech~~]

"In a few days officials with the DNR and American Indian groups will meet behind closed doors to figure out the acceptable tonnage of walleyes that can be harvested from the lake this year"

So much for transparent government!

Is the Tribe going to help out with the costs of the pricy study? And why even do a pricy study when you have all the netting you can want to test done by the Tribe each and every year! If they don't know what is coming out of the nets now, then why even meet to talk about more?

Seems to be a lot of holes and unknowns in the whole process here!

[gregg52]

YA kinda same ole same ole

but from the pictures Ive seen of the bigger walleyes over there

I think they need to be concerned why those fish are so skinny

those bellies should be hanging wayyy down full of eggs

the one thing I think the DNR is wayyyyyyyy off is saying hook and line took 300,000lbs of fish outa there last summer

the article said 60 fish a day no keepers how many other fisherman had the same days i know i did

its says 300,000 killed that could be true because I'm sure alot of those bigger fish that were dropped in the boat 10 time tryig to take pics and then thrown back into 70 degree water didnt live long after

plus I think those meetings should be open to pulbic as we are paying the taxes.....

[eelpout1]

The numbers puzzle me...if anglers caught 309,000 Lbs of fish, thats 177,586 fish, at 1.74 lbs per fish, that would mean that 44,400 anglers would have caught a limit of fish, assuming that 1.74 lb per walleye is used, thats alot of limits, thats over 1050 limits of fish per week by anglers during the entire open part of the season(aprox 41 weeks). what if the fish weighed less?? thats more fish, more limits seems very high to me, just going by my experience ,and others I know, that fish Mille lacs, just a thought, and a little calculator time. I do know that at the current pace things will be out of sinc, soon, to me it seems letting some of the bigger fish geting put into the bucket would slow down the cannibalizing or the smaller fish, maybe reduce the limit to 3 of which 2 fish being under 22 inches and a posible 1 over 28"??? dont know just a thought again.

Keep fishing gang, good luck. (sorry for the poor speelin)

[Pallansch]

I like it, interesting when you break down the numbers like that.

[jigginjim]

but they also figure in a weight for those fish that either died or {could have died, caught during the summer.) I CO checks #number of anglers then multiplies number angler checked in creel survey, with number of trailors/ boats to come up with a number. So, if everyone told the CO's we fished 12 fish and only caught 1 walleye 12" long. or zero fish. Does that change the fish count? we get to keep more and bigger fish.

[tom fellegy]

the co's have NOTHING to do with the creel survey. their only responsabilty is enforcement. the numbers are taken by the creel survey person, yes person, one guy that travels around to the different landings and gathers the creel information. they might add a another person or two during high pressure weekends. i remember a few years back, people were not giving up any information so the co's were at the landings with the creel survey guy and would check livewells to get the size of the fish that were kept. you will not find a mndnr co anywhere close to mille lacs during the netting season, it is watched over by tribal co's

[eelpout1]

Tom, that is correct info, I always comply with those checks, why would anyone not? It just seems that 309,000 lbs of fish is such an incredibly high number, in my mind those numbers just dont make sense. but you are privy to more of that info than me. I am always sceptical about survey numbers because it is mostly a guess, just like my numbers, I used what was available to me, creel survey is just that, a survey, so we have to take it with a little salt. Lets just hope common sense prevails in those meetings and a common sense resolution for the upcoming fishing season is voted on.

Keep fishing, good luck.

[ERdeerhunter]

I think the slots limits as they now stand are doing more damage than good. A local outdoor publication reported on Oct. 25, 2012 that the non-tribal harvest at that time stood at 163,000 lbs with another 126,000 lbs of hooking mortality. Why does nobody seem to have a problem with that second number? We had thrown back roughly 44% of our take back into the lake to rot, that is 63 TONS of walleye as of this fall. The guys trolling the mudflats on a hot July weekend, fighting walleyes to exhaustion up from 35 feet of water and releasing them back into surfaces temps in the upper 70s to low 80s. Catching and releasing 60 walleyes and complaining about the lack of keepers while we continually throw slot fish back in to die, face it we are part of the problem with the slot we have in place. That article also mentioned the tribal take at that time was 80,000 lbs. We left 1/3 more walleyes to die than the tribes entire take, so if we are going to point fingers we better be looking in the mirror as well.

I am part of the problem as well, who doesn't want to keep fishing when they are jumping in the boat? I don't think many of us are concerning ourselves with the welfare of the fish when the bite is good and we are having fun but in reflection I know it can't be good for the fishery.

[eelpout1]

ER, I guess I wasn't arguing anything, I was just trying to state the fact that until someone, it doesnt matter who, but till someone comes up with a accurate system to count lbs of fish or numbers of fish, its all a dump shoot, everyone must come clean in order for anything to make a difference, how many fish do we really

need to keep , how many fish do we really need to net, surveys and polls are like frying pans, every one has one and they are used for "cooking", you just threw somemore numbers out into the mix, how were those derived??I not trying to argue anypoint, just stating so far nothing seems to be working to balance the lake, really nothing has changed dramaticly as far as harvest numbers in the past 10 years, so where do we go from here, its going to take a big commitment by all, Tribes, DNR, Sport fisherman. drastic change is the only option that has not been tried.

Lets not for get the local economy is a huge player, resorts will suffer, local businesses will suffer. nobody really takes that into account.

Lets throw a wrench in this with, "what about the Zebra muscles???

Keep fishing , keep safe.

Really I was just making conversation, really....no really.

[northender]

I think the slots limits as they now stand are doing more damage than good. A local outdoor publication reported on Oct. 25, 2012 that the non-tribal harvest at that time stood at 163,000 lbs with another 126,000 lbs of hooking mortality. Why does nobody seem to have a problem with that second number? We had thrown back roughly 44% of our take back into the lake to rot, that is 63 TONS of walleye as of this fall. The guys trolling the mudflats on a hot July weekend, fighting walleyes to exhaustion up from 35 feet of water and releasing them back into surfaces temps in the upper 70s to low 80s. Catching and releasing 60 walleyes and complaining about the lack of keepers while we continually throw slot fish back in to die, face it we are part of the problem with the slot we have in place. That article also mentioned the tribal take at that time was 80,000 lbs. We left 1/3 more walleyes to die than the tribes entire take, so if we are going to point fingers we better be looking in the mirror as well.

I am part of the problem as well, who doesn't want to keep fishing when they are jumping in the boat? I don't think many of us are concerning ourselves with the welfare of the fish when the bite is good and we are having fun but in reflection I know it can't be good for the fishery.

You can't blame anything but the netting for the negative slot impacts. The slot is in place because of the netting. Before the netting , there was no slot limit like we have had the past 12 years. You were allowed one over 20" and or a limit under 20". The slot limit is to accomodate the projected netting quota, not the actual number the nets kill.

[GravelBar]

Our Native American friends have a possession limit of 10 Walleyes with no size restriction when using a rod and reel. I wonder how much this affects the population.

[buzz1ng]

IM pretty sure Im fine with catching no keepers & Biggies. If you are catching walleyes in 35ft of water & releasing them, dont fish that deep. Plenty of fish in other places. Id be more worried about the invasives than anything else. I dont want to get into the whole netting thing. Do I think its a joke: Yes. Seems like the lbs they keep in comparison to other numbers is meager at best. Seems like the Main concern in articles Ive read is that the netting contains mainly males and that could be one of the reasons for the decrease in numbers of smaller fish?

[gregg52]

this is an endless debate month after month

the nets gotta go and close it for 4-5 years let mother nature take its coarse

northender is right it was a great fishery and reasonable slots

wayyyyyyyyyyy to many experiments going on now

that obivously are not working

look at the pics of the fish that have come out of there this winter

skinny raggie lookin fish....for whatever the reason

it is most likely the same reason they are biting like crazy

lack of forage for what ever the reason!!!