DNR pinch, anybody else see this?

[Igor Drackenwolf]

Here's a thought, you don't have to harvest every fish caught or your limit every time out.

Heck, I haven't filleted a fish this year. I do it for fun and sport, not to put meat in the freezer.

I'm the same as you. I harvest my walleyes once a year from Lac Seul, and crappies once or twice a year in the spring. That does it for me. Most of the time I'm almost exclusively catch-and-release, no matter what species I'm targeting.

My questions about this discrepancy are rhetorical, for the guys out there who do like to harvest more fish, who gladly obey the 6-per-day rule, but who run afoul of the law based on what's in their freezer.

[Igor Drackenwolf]

The Regs are the Regs and that's that. end of story.

[harvey lee]

We could what if till the cow's come home. if they changed the current laws, then someone else would want to keep even more.

In my eyes, 6 is plenty. if you have a fish fry for 12, catch some gills and crappie, heck they are just as good tablefare.

Your example of one taking 6 a day is a stretch at the best. I know of very few if any that fish every day or even 3-4 times a week and take 6 each trip out. If they are taking that many fish, bad for the lakes to say the least.

I do not understand why anyone would need more than 6 in thier freezer anyways.

I use to fish with a fellow that always wantyed to keep every fish caught and the limit did not matter as he always said, I only fish a few times a season.

My last trip with him was the time he said he had a pile of fish in the freezer at home.

Just no need for that type of abusing the specie or any fish or game for that matter.

[Red Miller]

Well if a person was keeping walleyes and fishing Mille Lacs exclusively, the possession limit is 2...not 6.

[Kyhl]

It's limited possession while on that body of water (including tributaries to posted boundaries).

For Mille Lacs it's two walley, for Vermillion it's four.

Daily and possession limits are the same unless noted.

Therefore, regulations limiting possession on a body of water end at that body of water and the possession limit then becomes a daily limit for that body of water.

Once the fish leave the lake it becomes the regular state possesion limit of six.

So someone fishing Mille Lacs can possess two while on the water. They can't keep any more that day. They can add those two to the freezer where there are two more that were caught the previous day.

Same with Vermilion, you can keep four on day one, then two more on day two up to the total of six (assuming none were consumed because that resets, depending on when they are consumed).

At no time can they possess more than six caught from MN waters, that includes the sum of (freezer, livewell, stringer, whatever).

Note, a fish in hand is not considered in possession. Possession starts when the fish enters some type of storage.

[Red Miller]

Im not sure where you are getting all of that, but possession limit is possession limit period. If those are Mille Lacs walleye you are only allowed to have 2 in your possession. It doesnt matter where you have them..live well, freezer, under the seat of your truck, etc.

[Igor Drackenwolf]

Im not sure where you are getting all of that, but possession limit is possession limit period. If those are Mille Lacs walleye you are only allowed to have 2 in your possession. It doesnt matter where you have them..live well, freezer, under the seat of your truck, etc.

Right... but I think what he may be getting at is that say you harvest those two from Mille Lacs, you could then go to any other body of water and harvest 4 more, and still be within your legal possession limit.

That said, the convoluted regulations are pretty ridiculous, and burdensome to keep track of.

Try keeping track of whether you're legal or not legal when trout fishing the Lake Superior tributaries on the North Shore. You pretty much can't fish without your reg-book along with you stream-side.

[Kyhl]

When on or fishing experimental, special, border or other waters with size

restrictions different from statewide regulations, all fish for which the size

restriction applies must have their heads, tails, fins, and skin intact and be

measurable except as follows:

(1) Fish that are legally taken on that water body may be used in the

preparation of a meal while docked or moored to shore or while on the

ice of that waterbody. Fish used for a meal still count towards the daily

possession limit. Fillets may be possessed only if the person is in the act of

preparing a meal or have been packaged by a licensed fish packer.

(2) On the shore or ice of experimental and special management waters a

person may prepare fish for a meal that have been packaged by a licensed

fish packer. The total number of fish in possession may not exceed the

statewide possession limit.

The experimental regulations are for when you are on that body of water.

edit, I'm sure there is probably another rule somewhere in the book that contradicts this one.

[live-2-fish]

(2) On the shore or ice of experimental and special management waters a

person may prepare fish for a meal that have been packaged by a licensed

fish packer. The total number of fish in possession may not exceed the

statewide possession limit.

"on ice of experimental waters" you can posses 6 walleyes?? You could have fun in court with this one.

[Kyhl]

"on ice of experimental waters" you can posses 6 walleyes?? You could have fun in court with this one.

I never said you can have six while on the lake. That would definitely be over the limit.

Six off the lake may be a gray area.

Page 13 under the Possession heading.

"Daily and possession limits are the same unless otherwise noted."

Then

"When on or fishing experimental,... Fish used for a meal still count towards the daily possession limit."

To me that means that experimental water, which Mille Lacs is, has a daily limit of two fish.

For another example.

While on the lake, fish or carcasses need to be measureable. Off the lake the fish may be filleted as normal for transport. Here the special rule ends at the lakeshore.

Can one rule about possession for an experimental lake end at the lakeshore while another possession rule for the same experimental lake extent to the state boarder? I think they would end at the same place, the shoreline.