Jump to content
  • GUESTS

    If You  want access  to member only forums on FM, You will need to Sign-in or  Sign-Up now .

    This box will disappear once you are signed in as a member.

Recommended Posts

Posted

Well it is not great, but I am ok with it. Guess things will really depend on how the bite is next year. Another year like this one could mean really tight restrictions or no fishing on the back end of this 5 year deal. I wonder if the tribe is banking on that?

Posted

This works for me. I just wonder if this really will be a 5 year plan. Remember the last agreement was supposed to be long term and it barely lasted a year.

Posted

I don't really see a change. How is this a good deal? So the min. size increased from 16" to 17" with no bottom, but really, who is going to keep a eye less then 14 inches? Still can't keep anything between 17-28. I just don't see how this is such a better deal. someone please explain if I am totally wrong here.

Posted

I caught a lot of walleyes that were just under the 14" mark last year. Not that I wanted to get a limit every time out, but it got a little frustrating throwing back a fish that was just a 16th of an inch short. Not too mention that as long as the public sees this as a positive move, it'll bring more people up there and help out the local economy.

tjhunter

Posted

This same slot has been in place on Rainy, Winne, and various Canadian lakes for a while now. It has proven results for these waters, granted not all lakes are the same, but it seems like the right kind of plan to me.

Posted

All I know is that next spring when they survey me at the landing, I didn't catch a **** thing out of the slot. That 10% mortality they hit you with is a bunch of BS

Posted

There has been alot of talk here that the tribe has been trying set quotas in order to hurt the resorts so they can buy them out. I do not know whether or not this is true and not trying to pass judgement. What everyone needs to remember is that they are now a business and a big one at that. If you want to get their attention it will have to be done with dollars, either putting into the till or taking out. Well taking out is alot cheaper than putting in! I have an idea that may or may not work but is sure worth a try. The casinos at millelacs and hinckley are always having concerts, these are not put on out of the goodness of their heart. They are done to generate revenue as in cold hard cash. The casinos know that each person who attends will spend a certain amount of money and they have this figured out to the penney. My guess is that they generate in the $200 per seat range. (Tickets, meals, drinks, and gambling) Now it would be very tough to keep 500 or 1000 people away from a concert. But if all the members of this site were to send a E-mail to a performer saying if they play that venue they and all of the friends and family would stop paying to see or hear them perform. That performer would back out of that concert date faster than you would beleive. If this could be done just a couple of times I believe that you would have the tribes full and undivided attention. Also word would get around entertainment industry real fast that a booking at a Millelacs band casino generates thousands of peices of ex-fan mail. And no entertainer would want to deal with that. As everyone knows a lack of money can have a powerful effect on ones state of mind!!! Believe me if one concert were to be canceled and hundreds of tickets refunded it would get their attention fast, just think of the pain in the *** it would be to do all those refunds and field all the calls from angry customers. Gives me a warm fuzzy just thinking about it. grin.gif

Posted

I agree in principle kwkfsh! I don't mind the regs and think the DNR is doing an acceptable job managing the lake given the situation. I do not think the band should be able to harvest ANYTHING unless they use birch-barks to do it or they can follow the same regs we all follow. Hey Mille Lacs Band the time IS coming when you won't be able to have your cake and eat it too!!! The time is long overdue for us to write government offices and DEMAND a change! If the tribe wants walleye then they can afford to buy them with the casino revenue.

Man, I feel better now with that off my chest!

[This message has been edited by chiro (edited 12-04-2002).]

Posted

Good idea KWFKSH. I'm sure your idea would work! You're a clown!

Posted

But you did mean clown? Hey I resemble that remark!!! grin.gif

Posted

ds, if the article is correct it lists 260,000 pounds attributed to mortality, and list 4,000,000 pounds caught, that means mortality rates were about 6.5% and that sir I belive to be pretty accurate. I think most people would agree that this is reasonable. I do not like the fact that we only got to keep 86.6% of our harvest was wasted though.

Posted

ds, I'm with you. The DNR asks me what I have caught, I'm telling them "just whats in the boat, thats it".

GOOD LUCK!

Posted

maybe the mortality rates are close, but I think the DNR way underestimatest the population of the walleyes. Just remember this phrase (Honestly everything I caught is in the boat.)

Posted

I like kwkfsh's idea!
It would work and also put the band way back in the profit category! I LOVE IT! grin.gif

------------------
FISHSTUNNER

Posted

I've been a life long fisherman on Mille Lacs and have seen it go through the cycles over the years, the only real difference in the fishing is the pressure and arming bad fisherman with good equipment that's why the catch rates have gone up! Now onto the indian issue, I have no problem that they want treaty rights as long as they want to abide by the entire treaty which I'm sure many of you have read. It defines what is considered legal and illegal (aka what is considered illegal for the natives, gas motors ect,) but they seem to forget about this part of the treaty. Now we sportsmen in Minnesota can talk until we are Blue in the face about how pissed we are the the Native's up there. The best way to get back at them is to NOT go to that **** casino no matter how bad you like to gamble like me. I haven't been into see the Devil since they got their initial treaty rights back. That means BOYCOTT Grand Casino Mille Lacs and Hinkley and any other business they own or have an interest in. Some of you like to talk smart in the local pubs, but then when you drive by the parking lot there's Your Truck in the Devils Pen. If you have to gamble either get a game going in your shack or head up to your favorite watering hole and do a little chartible gambling for a local youths sports team.
Hopeful the only prefishing post, hoping for drivable ice by the 20th.
keep it real
Da biggest shooter

Posted

I really don't see the sense in this new agreement, unless the DNR is expecting the fishing (catching) to seriously decline over the next 5 years. If fishing remains as good as it has been for the last 3-5 years, this plan gets us no where.

Does everyone remember how many 16 1/4" fish you caught last open water season? And how hard was it to catch a slot fish? Once the 16"-17" fish are harvested, there will be few left in the 14"-17" range because they were cleaned out this last summer.

The DNR must have a lot of faith in the big perch hatch....they are banking on the fact that the walleyes will have so much to eat that fishing will be poor. If fishing is poor, then those 16"-17" fish will carry sport anglers for a year.

Long term, I think this agreement does little for sport anglers, little for the local economy and perhaps little for the walleyes. As all of these larger fish begin to die off, what will replace them?

There is continued evidence that the DNR is unwilling to promote the radical changes necessary to allow the lake to be managed biologically, not politically.

Posted

All the talk about fish mortality reminds me of my trip to mille lacs this summer. My group of 3 and another small group went out of a resort I will keep nameless. When fish in the 18-21 inch range were hooked deep and it was obvious they were going to die, the guide insisted on keeping them for that reason. I personally didn't think the risk was worth it so the other group kept the non-legal fish but I think the guide had a point. If there was only some way where fisherman could keep fish that were going to die anyway...but that would be way too subjective

Posted

I couldn't find it, but I know somewhere on this forum someone posted an idea of a total length limit. I really think its a good idea. Say the limit is 50", if I got 2 24 inchers, I was basically done. Or a couple 14's and a 20. Bottem line is, if you get that one 18-20 that is hooked to deep, you would beable to keep it.
critics would say you'd get guys that would catch 3 fish, go back put them in their car and go out for more. Well the same guy that would do that will do it anyway.
Wouldn't, couldn't something like a total length limit work?

Posted

To all those who insist that the slot fish had been 'cleaned out' last summer. Talk to some people who were out there this fall, alot more of those slot fish were showing up, despite a pretty tough bite. So they haven't all been caught. Remember many of the 18-25" fish were slot fish once as well and enough of those seemed to make it. I don't understand, before people were complaining about having a harvest slot over a protected slot, now we will have a protected slot and many people are still not happy. The fish are not starving anymore and people are still claiming the lake will crash. I'm convinced that no matter what is done, there always will be a very large group of Mille Lacs anglers who will be complaining about one thing or another. Like I said it seems to work for Rainy, Winnie, Lac Suel etc... why not use this slot on Mille Lacs? It's time for me to shut up and fish now.

Posted

Southwest F Man
Ponder this.
I grew up in (and learned to fish in) a state where it was ILLEGAL to "release" a fish that was "mortally hooked". If the fish would obviously not survive, that one had to be kept and counted against your daily limit. Amazing at least one DNR in this nation had some COMMON SENSE eh?

Posted

Beckman,

I was one of those people who claimed the lake was going to crash due to an over-representation of large fish in the walleye population. The massive perch hatch seems to have replenished the prey fish numbers and the walleyes will eat well for a while now. Was I proven wrong? So far, it seems that I was. That's the first mistake I've made this year! wink.gif We'll see how many of those new perch reach keepable size.

I have only been seriously fishing Mille Lacs for 4-5 years. Over that time, it seems that the DNR's main management concern was picking a harvest slot drawn from the year classes that have the smallest representation in the overall population. In other words, to keep harvest down, they let us keep fish from year classes that are already relatively low in population.

I see the "new" management plan as an attempt to achieve the same results as previous plans. Kind of a "We'll let them fish, but they ain't keeping much" approach. Within the constraints of the current system, that's fine. That's all they can do.

My point is that for the long-term future of the fishery and, accordingly, the Mille Lacs economy, the DNR needs to aggressively try to remove the Band from the management equation. They have not done so and are afraid to try.

Although other large walleye fisheries have a similar protected slot plan, none of them get the pressure that Mille Lacs does. None of them have another management team indiscriminately harvesting 50,000 lbs. of fish. None of them have the same level of economy relying on the fishery.

You're right.....someone will always complain. I'm not complaining that I can only keep fish under 17".....I am complaining that the DNR has once again struck another "deal" that is nothing more than a continuation of the policy that has been in effect since the court ruling.

According to the DNR, that policy gave us 260,000 lbs of crayfish food last summer. Is that acceptable?

Posted

From what I understand and have read, The DNR's goal in setting the slot is to have the fish that consume the majority of small baitfish removed from the lake. The smaller walleyes are the ones that eat the majority of small baitfish. Notice how the perch numbers are almost completely shot? Those big walleyes gobbled the perch up and now the goal is to bring back the baitfish by harvesting the small walleyes that consume them. This is not factual, just what i read. It makes sense though right?

Posted

Ok first of all the band has certain rights that weren't given to them by the u.s. gov't but were the rights that weren't taken away.I understand how frustrating It can be to sportsmen, but this is the way it's going to be.As for making them use Birch Bark for this that is just silly to say. What if we had to use rafts and cane poles or, we had no mono, or electronics, we probably wouldn't catch very much. We probably wouldn't even go. We must be carefull because They (the band) has a lot of power when it comes to this issue. As for kwkfish's idea It won't work even if you had the nerve to try it. There are plenty of people that will go to these concerts that aren't worred about a bunch of mercury infested walleyes.

Posted

Bigguns!,

I have heard the same thing...but I also don't know if that is factual info.

If the DNR indeed wants small fish harvested because they eat the majority of bait fish, then I'd like to pose the following question.

According to the DNR, 4 million pounds were caught and 113,000# were kept and killed, 260,000# died from hooking mortality. If every 14"-16" walleye that was caught was kept, that means that we kept 2.8% of all the fish caught.

Anyone who claims that the DNR regs targets small walleyes to help the perch recover needs to provide some proof to me. If 2.8% of the walleye population is responsible for the "majority" of the perch being eaten, then things are very, very wacky.

I contend that the DNR regs target small fish because they weigh less and are less abundant.....which means it is harder to reach their agreed-upon harvest totals.

Posted

anglerific,

I respect your opinion BUT, they are using NETS, one more time NETS. So to compare them using birchbark(the traditional method) to us having to use cane poles is apples and oranges. They have started letting annual whale harvests to certain tribes in the Pacific NW and they sure as hell don't let 'em use stinger missiles, they have to do it traditionally with hand made harpoons and wooden boats that are powered by humans...I have absolutely NO problem with that! Now send them out there in a modern Japanese whaling ship...that's where the problem begins!!!
As the tribe ALWAYS does they want to pick the part of the treaty that suits them and the heck with the rest. The reason they still have the power that they do is because not enough of us (me included) have gotten off of our lazy butts to start a campaign to end this nonsense!

Posted

Anglerific, are absolutly right about not being able to stop the people from going. You could however stop the artists from performing, and if they don't show then no one can go and it will cost the tribe lots of money!!!!!!! grin.gif

Posted

did you see that stat?

of 370,000 lbs caught 2/3 of this total was attributed to fish kill after release.

this means we wasted twice as much walleye as we kept.

I don't believe I killed many fish out of the couple hundred I caught last year. in fact a couple times I kept fish that were bleadin. if it's bleadin it's crazy to toss it back

who came up with this killed after release figure? this number does not pass the smell test

I like the move to 17 inches, the 14 inch fish last year were smaller than I would usually keep because all the fish were so thin

I got three limits last year, that's enough for me, if the perch'd come back a little that would be good

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


  • Your Responses - Share & Have Fun :)

    • SkunkedAgain
      https://www.timberjay.com/stories/moccasin-point-upgrade-has-longtime-users-concerned,22802   Moccasin Point upgrade has longtime users concerned DNR hopes to get major remake of key access underway later this year Posted Thursday, March 20, 2025 10:36 am   Marshall Helmberger LAKE VERMILION— With funding finally in place, the Department of Natural Resources is planning to move forward with an estimated $2-plus million renovation of the Moccasin Point landing, and users of the site say they’re concerned about the changes. The landing has been heavily used for decades by anglers, Boundary Waters visitors, residents of nearby islands and other remote-access properties on Lake Vermilion and, perhaps most critically, by emergency responders for everything from fire to medical response. Moccasin Point has also been a protected harbor for private barges loading and unloading as they service the many water-access properties in the area. Sarah Schmidt, who spends summers with her husband Jake at their cabin on nearby Pine Island, said there’s a lot at stake for people who depend on the landing. “A lot of people have designed their dream home around having access to that landing,” she said. “People need propane, they need lumber, and if they need to install a septic system, they need lots of gravel,” she said. For the many hundreds of island or other water-access property owners on the lake, all of that material comes by barge. Moccasin Point is particularly well suited for such use, since it is arguably the most protected harbor on Lake Vermilion, with islands and mainland protecting it from wind from just about any direction. It’s also centrally located on the sprawling lake and close to concentrations of island homes and cabins. Scott Kelling, northeast regional manager for DNR Parks and Trails, said the plans for the reconstruction of the landing are still being finalized, but insisted they will take into account the unique mix of recreational and commercial use of the landing, including use by all three of the barging companies that service customers on the lake. According to Kelling, the remake of the landing will include removal of the old pier and the reconstruction of a new one in nearly the same location. “The new pier will serve the same function,” said Kelling, and will include an additional ramp that will be dedicated for barge loading and off-loading. Kelling said an engineer’s inspection of the existing pier determined it was near the end of its useful life, although Schmidt said she thinks that opinion reflects the DNR’s desire to remove the structure rather than its actual condition. Kelling acknowledges that it’s not the only reason for replacing the structure. “With our redesign it’s just not in the right location,” he said. Adequate parking is another major concern of longtime users of Moccasin Point. Tim Logan, whose family has owned island property near the landing since the 1950s, said plans the DNR had shared a few years ago seemed to show less parking than is typically used at the site. Schmidt notes that during high-traffic weekends, the parking area is frequently full and overflow parking can extend for hundreds of feet along Moccasin Point Rd. She said she counted 163 vehicles parked at the landing at one point last Memorial Day weekend and said there are routinely 90-100 vehicles during the summer season. Many of the regular users of the landing, particularly those on island properties, use the site for long-term parking of their vehicles for days, weeks, or months at a time. That’s unusual at public landings, which are typically limited to day use. Kelling said the DNR is making an exception to that rule for Moccasin Point, given the many varied uses of the unique property. “Overnight parking will be allowed,” he said. Kelling said the current plan will allow parking for a bit over 100 vehicles, which is more than some original plans for the site. “We’re doing everything we can to maximize the parking there, at some considerable expense,” he said. Longstanding issues Kelling said the DNR’s plan for reconstruction is motivated by a desire to “manage the site more responsibly on a number of fronts.” The DNR acquired the site in 2008 and had planned to undertake reconstruction of the landing back in 2013 but lacked the funds at the time to accomplish the work. The funding was approved in 2023 and the DNR has been working on design of the project ever since. According to Kelling, the site has operated essentially as a “free-for-all” for years, with uses and resource impacts that aren’t typically permitted at DNR-managed access points. “There are currently a number of transgressions out there,” said Kelling, including long-term storage of personal property and building materials. He said the site, which slopes toward the lake, also contributes large amounts of sediment into Vermilion during heavy rainfall. “We need to better manage the stormwater,” said Kelling. “Currently, a lot of sediment and other things end up in the lake when it rains.” Schmidt questions whether the change will be an improvement, since the DNR’s reconstruction of the site will convert the existing grassy hillside that currently serves as the site’s parking lot into a paved parking area. Kelling said the parking area will be leveled before being paved and that stormwater will be directed into one of two planned stormwater ponds in order to contain sediment. Schmidt claims the ponds will become a mosquito breeding ground. Kelling said he expects the final design will be completed soon and he is expecting to hold an open house in early summer so interested users can see what’s planned for the site. He expects actual construction to begin sometime in October if all goes as planned. That initial work will include blasting of some underlying bedrock in order to level the site. But most of the work will take place in 2026, he said, and during that period, it may be difficult to maintain public use of the site, although he said use of the site by barges should still be possible, with potentially some minor delays. But he said other users of the site may want to explore other access options for that summer. Kelling said he hopes to have more information on that at the open house later this year. “A goal of the open house is to really share the timeline and alternatives for users,” he said. “They might need to park somewhere else in 2026.”
    • smurfy
      i wanna change mine to the 29th of april...........i've been seeing ice reports to much up that way. 🙄
    • leech~~
      Agreed, but I had a bit of a technicality and had to change.   You!  🤣
    • CigarGuy
      I think once you guess your date, that should be it. If you can change right up to their date, that kind of takes the fun out of it.....in my humble opinion! Let vote on it!😀
    • leech~~
      OK April 25TH  
    • JerkinLips
      As long as we haven't reached the date you originally chose, you can change your guess to any open date.  At least those are the rules for my "big dollar" raffle board.   Always fun to keep guessing the ice-out date on Vermilion as the melting season progresses.  This is our first year living on a lake (150 acre shallow lake between Duluth and Ely) so I am enjoying watching the melting process on our lake.   Board is updated below.  Dates are slowly disappearing but many middle dates are still available.  
    • mbeyer
      Gonna revive an old topic after seeing an announcement from MN DNR about improvements/upgrades to Moccasin Point. Read 2+ million dollars invested but didn't see any detail plans. Anyone have the inside scoop?
    • leech~~
      I hear yea, I've got way to much shot shells laying around. I've been known to shoot some old lead duck loads at grouse!  🤭   To bad there's no good old Sportsman swaps like Twig use to have. Great place to unload sporting goods "overstock" 🤗
    • Wanderer
      I took about 1.5 cases and came back with about 1 case.  I wanted to burn up some cheap shells I bought for a North Dakota trip several years ago.  After the first day of ripping through as many of those as I could, I switched over to my good stuff, shot less, and got more birds.   So I still have 6-7 boxes of shells I don’t even want to have around anymore.  I don’t think I even got through a second box of good shells.   The cheap shells are Estate BB; the good ones for me are Black Cloud 2’s for geese.  BC 4s for ducks.
    • leech~~
      How many shells did you bring? How many did you come home with?  
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.