What do you think of the "proposed" new slots .

[REA]

In reverse order, there is more "cheating" than most people realize (locals & others).
Its depressing because not only is it breaking the law, but the Upper Red Lake
comparisons are slowly taking shape.
A buyout of the Wisconsin tribes would seem logical (it worked well for Leech Lake), but its not apples to apples, there are different issues involved. However I, for one, would like to see an attempt, because it would seem to be a win-win situation.
Stamps, or more accurately a user fee, was used for funding on the Leech Lake buyout, but was abandoned after a couple years and diverted to increased license fees for everyone (if I remember correctly).
Wouldn't it be fun to just talk fishing on Mille Lacs, instead of the politics of Mille Lacs!

[Grabs]

I have to agree about the cheating thing! It seems like 90% of the people I speak to are taking illegal fish! It just doesn't seem worth it to me yet, but these guys must be a lot more frustrated with the situation than I am and they have probably seen this lake through its many changes for many more years than I have. And after speaking with most of them they state that "I wouldn't be doing this if I think it was harming the lake, this lake has never had more fish in it!"

The DNRs inabilty to stop this "cheating" or lack of attempt, starts asking questions about whether or not they really personally care. Maybe they too realize what is going on therefore they are turning the cheek on these situations, so to speak.

I don't know but there is just way too many politics involved in this situation and not enough good ol' fashion fishin'!

[This message has been edited by Grabs (edited 02-06-2002).]

[bturck]

The resort owner I was talking to also alluded to the Presendial power of this treaty. he told me that Norm Kollman is in favor of this and would probably be in a position to draft a bill, or support this legislation. In order to do that he would need to beat Sen Wellstone in the next election.

[Guest]

The answer is obvious. The state should build a casino on the east side of the lake. Roughly the size of the Mall of America. The procedes would go to stocking and maintaining the habitat. You'd be able to walk across on the walleyes.

[avrg.joe]

GRABS

Let us know who these two resort owners are, I know I would be sure to not spend my money there.

As Far as a solution to all the restrictions, I support a buy-out. I spoke with a DNR officer a year and a half ago, and he said the DNR was taking a wait and see stance to see what the tribes come up with before putting any solutions out. I've waited and waited, and I've seen my fishing rights reduced every other month. If they EVER go to a complete night ban, I'm done. I will take the two thousand plus dollars I spend there and go to another lake, maybe even to Wisconson.
What a sad state of affairs we are in.
GOOD LUCK!

[This message has been edited by avrg.joe (edited 02-06-2002).]

[Grabs]

I never said anything about resorts or resort owners. I have spoken to many people on and off the lake, and I said 90% are taking fish out of slot.
To be honest I am not so quick to jump on the "Let's turn them in" band wagon here. Think about it, we all know that there is a very large population of large fish in that lake, especially 20-25" classes, these are very active feeders, and too many of them could really damage the bait fish population and eventually send the lake in a downward crash! If I thought that the people I was talking to were "damaging" the lake I would consider turning them in, but in this case since the DNR can not manage this lake by biology, maybe taking a few fish out of the slot could actually help the fishery out. Seriously guys, step back and look at the situtation. I didn't want to believe it at first, but all the signs point that we could be heading in the wrong direction. I can remember myself saying, "In a few years we will be catching huge fish left and right out of this lake." Well that was just last ice season, and we are already there! The numbers are outstanding, but the lakes biology can not support these great numbers of fish, hence the great fishing we are seeing now! What else could explain it, these fish just didn't grow to 20+" in a year. They have finally eaten the cupboards dry and now they are starving and they will bite on just about anything that gets their attention.

Lets think about the lake here and realize that we as the people of MN and more precisely those who frequent the big pond need to start taking some further action. All the management of this lake is run by gov't, but we are suppose to be a nation run by its people and this lake is being neglected by us. Its time we stand up and do what is ethically right!

[This message has been edited by Grabs (edited 02-06-2002).]

[This message has been edited by Grabs (edited 02-06-2002).]

[Evenflow]

Jiffyfoot,
Can you imagine how much money a casino that supported wildlife and was built in that region would generate?!?!?!? The DNR would never have a shortfall again, poachers wouldn't stand a chance, WMAs would flurish, stocking would happen every year in every lake (if needed), wetlands would have the money to be restored or maintained to provide better habitat for waterfowl.... WOW.... I'm in, Where do I sign up?

Evenflow

------------------
It's all just theory till you hit the water.

[SpikeRoberts]

This is a really interesting thread and some very interesting points have been raised in this discussion. There are several points i would like to speak to:

1) I think we need to be cautious about playing "armchair biologists." Granted, the DNR management of Mille Lacs is severely constrained by politics, but that does not lead to the conclusion that all their decisions are without some biological merit. They are doing what they can to maintain a healthy population of walleyes and we need to do our part as well. That includes turning in people that break the current slot and daily limits. If we start to turn a blind-eye to illegal activity on Mille Lacs because we have a gut feeling that it's doing no harm to the lake, we could be setting a dangerous precedent for the management and maintenance of all of our resources.

2) Although the President does have the authority under the 1837 treaty to dissolve it at his pleasure, there are a number of reasons politically why I believe he shouldn't/wouldn't. First, a treaty is only as good as a signer's word -- that is to say the signees are honor bound to follow a treaty. In the big picture the US, as a nation, needs to do all that it can to maintain high levels of respect in the global politcal environment. Backing out of a treaty could very easily provide politcal fodder for other nations and could inhibit global cooperation on any number of very important issues. Second, I think it is unlikely that Bush would back out of the treaty because it could be perceived as overturning and discrediting the Supreme Court that put him in office. I don't think that Bush is willing to take that politcal risk.

Given these political realities, I do believe there is a productive way to approach this very sticky issue. I think the "buyout" option is a course of action that should be seriously pursued. Negotiating a buyout of part (commercial harvest) or all of the native allocation has worked in other situations and IMHO makes sense in this one. D-Man's walleye stamp proposal seems to be a creative and effective means to fund such a buyout. Until such a buyout (or other remedy) occurs, we need to do our part to obey the laws and make sure that others do as well. Thomas Jefferson wrote that citizenship in this country is based on a compact with one another -- we all get a chance to participate in the decision-making process so we have to abide by the decisions whether or not we personally agree with them.

my 2 cents.

Spike

[Evenflow]

I've been thinking, and if I had to buy a stamp to fish Mille Lacs I would probably go fish somewhere else, there are too many other great fishing lakes with no restictions. I feel VERY opposed to the stamp idea, probably because I already buy 6 stamps to fish and hunt in the state and a stamp for Mille Lacs concerns me, where will it end? I pay for a license in this state for the right to hunt and fish, the stamps just squeeze more money out of people. If they want more money, raise the license fee. The biggest issue I have with a buyout is that it will only increase the harvestable amount of walleye in Mille Lacs by 30%, We still will not be able to catch over the max sustainable harvest projected for the lake. So now the question is, do you want to pay for a stamp that will allow the slot to be two inches wider than it is currently? And if we approach that max. harvest how will you feel then when the slot is tightened.

Just my 2 cents

Evenflow

------------------
It's all just theory till you hit the water.

[Guest]

Just wondering where your getting your figures from?

------------------
MILLE LACS AREA GUIDE SERVICE
651-271-5459 http://fishingminnesota.com/millelacsguide/

[Evenflow]

Mine D-man?

I was off a bit, it would be a 33% increase.

All I'm saying is that, if we buy out the treaty (which I'm not opposed to) we still need to abide by the safe harvest level agreed upoon by the tribe and the DNR. Otherwise why would they have picked that number in the first place unless they both think it's important to stay under it?
As for the 2 inch slot increase, it might be slightly larger than that, but we all know that if they open the slot more than just a couple of inches anglers would fill the 100,000 pounds of fish extremely fast because there are so many 23+ inch fish in the lake.

Here's the info-

http://www.startribune.com/stories/767/1109961.html

Evenflow

------------------
It's all just theory till you hit the water.

[Guest]

<<I proposed a "walleye stamp" a couple of years ago. Since we cant count on the state and tribe to put fish back in, i would be in favor of a $10-$15 stamp to loosen up the slot. Hire a private contractor to do the stocking. I realize that some of "our" stocked fish would eventually get in the nets,but i think we would see the boats again and get the people to come back. i cant tell you how many times on a weekend last summer i could look from shore and count the boats on one hand. >>

Just a few observations:

1.There is no problem with the population of walleyes in Mille Lacs....if anything there are too many and they are eating themselves out of house and home. Why do you think we have such a hard time staying under the harvest level? Mille Lacs has traditionally had a much higher level of harvest that has been pretty stable since the early night fishing ban and other pretreaty regs were imposed.

2. How on earth do they estimate a population of walleyes. What is the formula? I will bet you a case of Killian's that any statistician worth his salt could shoot holes in any formula they have been using.

3.If we need more walleyes in Mille Lacs and nobody has been coming up ther to fish themand you can't find any in the slot to take home...how on earth can we be exceeding the harvest level.

4. 170,000 lbs of fish in the first 25 days of fishing with a slot that gives you an average fish size of 2lbs that means 750 guys coming off that lake EVERY DAY from opener to June 5 with their limit of slot fish..That was not the experience of anyone I talked to in May that was on the Lake, Guides,Launch Fisherman, Joe Sunday fisherman anyone...

5. Something not compute here?

6. What is the excuse for imposing almost the same regs in the past few years on Lake Winni? I don't think any tribal fishing is going on there?

[Guest]

I was wondering if anyone caught the Kare 11 News on Sunday Feb 3, 2002...It talked about the land of the reservation its boudaries and so forth.. The whole point to the story is that the land in which the casino is on is actually NOT part of the reservation nor part of the land turned over via the treaty..I had just caught the end of the story and was wondering if anyone else has heard anything about this..
Easton

[Guest]

About this commercial selling of walleye by the WS bands. During the hole process didn't the bands justify their need to harvest walleye was because it was part of their religion? They eat the walleye at Pow Wow's.

[huskminn]

Man, it's really hard for me to stay off my soap box with this topic....

I think I better just go fishing instead.

Like I said in previous posts regarding Mille Lacs, enjoy it while you can.

[Guest]

I don't have a problem with the proposed slot. I release anything over 18inches anyway, the smaller walleyes are the best tasting. If I was fortunate enough to land a trophey (10# and up) I would probably keep it and have it mounted. My biggest walleye was 8 pounds and I released it. I am against any nightfishing ban on Mille Lacs.
I feel real good about the future of Mille Lacs, this is the top walleye lake in the country and it will remain so. As with any lake, you will have have some years better than others. I think people will continue to make the trip to fish this beautiful lake and the resorts that provide the good customer service will continue to do well.

[Guest]

Thats what they said. But it looks like its a case of "givem an inch,take a yard" It looks like the 4 fish limit is here to stay. I cant believe the state is going to keep letting the big fish damage the bait population.

------------------
MILLE LACS AREA GUIDE SERVICE
651-271-5459 http://fishingminnesota.com/millelacsguide/

[This message has been edited by D-man (edited 02-10-2002).]

[fisher13]

i dont know if anyone cares but here is my 2 cents. The slot is something everyone is going to have to live with. I dont agree with it, but i have to follow the rules. I think if we keep the slot 14-16 for the next three years like they are talking about than that size fish is going to decline almost to nothing. That size fish is the most productive spawners also. If we allow fisherman to hammer that same size fish for three years straight there is going to be nothing left and it is going to hurt the whole population.

[james_walleye]

I think slots are a good idea personally...dont know if there is a point when they become too strict though. This is the question i'd like answered though. I want to know what the lake would look like if u had the same restriction as the rest of the state...1 over 24". Now i was up there this weekend and we caught 3 in the slot and about 20 from 19-23". Now assuming because im a Mille Lacs rookie that a lot of people did this well or better...imagine in 1 weekend all the 19-23" fish that would have been cropped off. I personally wouldnt have kept the over 20" fish for sure. But i bet 3/4 of the fisherman on that lake would be keeping them. Now imagine a whole season with all those nice spawners gone. All the 14-18"ers that are being kept like right now....but now thousands up thousands of bigger fish also. To me...this is a recipe for disaster. Not only are the 14-18"ers taking a beating...but now your spawners are too.

[Willy]

Couldn't they have a two or three week period in the spring or something where you could keep fish say 19-23 inches? You would think that a lot of these fish would be taken out and it would maybe bring things back to normal a little bit. I don't know but I know that it can't be healthy for the lake to have the same size fish pounded year after year. I myself wouldn't keep this size of fish because I don't like walleye steak, but I know a lot of people that would.

[bmg]

question - why does everybody 'assume' that the slot fish will be 'decimated' if we keep it the same for several years, saying that certain year classes will be wiped out? any biologist will confirm that it is impossible to catch the majority of fish within a lake, not to mention fish of a specific size.

what I'm getting at is the size of the slot has been relatively consistent since it's inception 4 years ago. it began with a 14-20" slot, followed by 14-18", followed by 16-18, followed by (this coming summer) 14-16". by the reports that I'm seeing from everywhere this past year, there seems to be an all-time high of walleyes between 19-25". these fish must have found a way to survive the death trap commonly referred to as the slot. if this many fish can make it, why does everybody assume the opposite will happen in the future? I look around & I see an unprecidented number of big fish (26"+), medium fish (18-25") and small fish (less than 15") all at the same time.

Let me know what you guys think. all these 19-24" fish were slot fish only a couple years ago.

[Grabs]

Very vaild point,.....one that makes me wanna say,....duh! I don't know why I didn't think of that point of the situation. I guess that makes me a little less concerned, but I am still concerned that too many big fish could eat up the entire lake.

[Scupper]

Bait Fish decline?
Might not be a bad time to get into the "MINNOW BUSINESS". I can see it now. Tanker trucks full of minnows dumping there payload at the public access.
After all, we have sportsmens clubs that feed starving deer when the winters get to harsh.
Seriouly guys, I don't have a clue as to what the outcome will be. I support the effort that "PERM" has established and also attend there funtions and make donations.

Good Luck...

[MJR]

Allowing them to net the fish for money is rediculous. The tribes do not take nearly as much as the sport anglers but not many sport anglers are selling what they catch. If all they want is money couldn't the people that fish the lake just buy them out? I know that when you buy a fishing license in Wisconsin they ask you if you would like to donate a dollar for lake improvments. I would think it would be a pretty easy sell to ask fisherman for a dollar or two to buy out the indians netting rights on Mille Lacs. However even if this does take place I believe that there will still have to be a slot of some sort on the lake but at least you would be releasing a fish for another angler to catch not for someone to make a few $$'s on.

I may be wrong but I believe that within the treaties that were signed also included a part that dealt with more that 3 indians together off of the reservation is considered a war party...

[This message has been edited by D-man (edited 02-11-2002).]

[Guest]

I have to agree with D-Man, to let the large unproductive fish gobble up the forage source is going to end up killing the lake.

In questioning the DNR about supportive levels of fish populations, they will go on and on about the lake can only support X amount of biomass. Well is does not take a rocket scientist,(or a fishies biologist) to figure out, for example, that if the fixed biomass = 1,000,000Lbs you can have:

A: 1 1,000,000Lb Fish
B: 2 500,000Lb Fish
C: 4 250,000Lb Fish

See where I am going here? And guess what? I haven't even had to take off the shoes yet!

D: 133,333.33333 7.5Lb Fish
E: 400,000 2.5Lb Fish

So it is my contention that the DNR thinks if the lake is filled with 10 and 12 pounders, that everyone is going to be happy, and therefore off their back. But just what the hell is going to replace the year classes that they are wiping out by leveling the same slot year after year??? And do they think the big fish are imortal?

How many years before we have a big(+26")fish population crash, the slot fish are gone, and we have another great Crappie fishery in the making??

Ok, off the soap box for now!

[Guest]

Sorry Fisher13, but the 14-16" fish are not the most productive spawners. Currently in Mille Lacs most of these fish aren't even mature. In the current 14-18" slot you will find some mature males and rarely you will find a mature female. A good example of this is the twelve fish 15-17.5" my buddy and I took home the other day. Of those twelve fish, one was a mature female and three were mature males. Basically, the fish have more competition from larger fish for spawning and they have to get bigger before they can compete. This is a good thing. Fish grow quickly until they are mature. Once they mature their growth rate slows down as their bodies contribute more food and energy towards the production of offspring.

The decline of the baitfish population may become a big concern.

[blackdog]

Ban night fishing? Then, ban twilight fishing, and then fishing on cloudy or rainy days. But lets allow spearing and netting to continue. What planet are these lawmakers from?

I know, lets think of more ways to make fishing harder in one of the worlds greatest fisheries.

How about barbless hooks and no live bait. Or you can't reel with your arms. Or, no angling from a boat.

I don't think telling us what time to fish is a very good idea.

[Guest]

<<Can you imagine how much money a casino that supported wildlife and was built in that region would generate?!?!?!? The DNR would never have a shortfall again, poachers wouldn't stand a chance, WMAs would flurish, stocking would happen every year in every lake (if needed), wetlands would have the money to be restored or maintained to provide better habitat for waterfowl.... WOW.... I'm in, Where do I sign up?
Evenflow>>

How many times? Once Again...HOW MANY TIMES!
has this state promised us more money for natural resources ( reinvest in minnesota, the lottery monies etc.) and figured out a way to piss it away on something else or just out and out take it away from Natural resouces...Casino on Millelacs? The DNR wouldn't see a dime. You can make book on that.

Michael

[Guest]

Oh yes I forgot the Missouri 3/16ths plan..LOL You know if all the sportmen and other outdoors enthusiasts voted together on candidates and got organized we could get anyone! elected that felt the way we do. We are the largest single voting block in the state. Support candidates this falll that only support wildlife initiatives. The level of expertise of current legislators is not that great (unless you count shoplifting and drunk driving) so don't worry if you support some inexperienced candidate that thinks like us. After all we have just about survived Jesse Ventura

Michael

[MNUser]

I say build a big fence around the reservation and require a passport to anybody who wants to get in and out of their sovereign nation. They wanted to be a sovereign nation so maybe it should be a little more difficult for them to use the fantastic resources of the USA.

No more hiding behind the idea that "our" laws don't apply to them because of their status.

I'm sick out it. Sick of hearing about, sick of reading about, sick of the whole mess. The treating was written many years ago. Times have changed and it needs to change with them.

Just my two cents worth. I do like fishing the lake and would have no problem renewing my passport.