Poll, for or against new limit proposal on LOW

[Fisher J]

Great! They could'nt wait till next year they have to screw up the fishing this winter. AGGGGG! As you can tell I am 100% against this proposal!

[nunzio]

Thank you Sandee for the heads-up. I've already responded to the poll.

[Polak]

I am for the changes, was up the last time in August, gets to be tougher fishing every year.

[marine_man]

Here's the announcement from the DNR Website:

http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/news/releases/index.html?id=1100027634

marine_man

[GrouseHunt'R]

If I read this right, for our early spring/late ice time trips (March 1st -April 14th) we can only keep 2 fish and none over 19.5"?

I have a feeling this is really going to hurt the resorts for late ice time reservations. No way am I going to travel 5-6 hours in March for 2 fish and not be able to keep the monster if I do manage to find him.

[widetrack]

How do you get that from this?

Lake of the Woods (not including Fourmile Bay) - March 1 through April 14

- walleye/sauger aggregate limit will be eight (not more than four walleye) - walleye and sauger between 19.5 inches and 28 inches must be released immediately - only one walleye over 28 inches may be possessed.

Four mile bay, and the River yes.

Rainy River (including Fourmile Bay) - March 1 through April14

- walleye/sauger limit will be two - no walleye/sauger over 19.5 inches may be possessed.

[GrouseHunt'R]

My bad, I was confusing FMB with Big Traverse bay. Looks like the regs for the area around Long Point will be the same from Dec 1st - April 14th.

[casting]

The press release suggests 3/4 million pounds walleye harvest 2 of past five yrs. Are these new numbers? Numbers I saw were winter peak to date 400-410 thousand pounds. Summer average was billed at 230-250 thousand pounds. I don't recall seeing 350 thousand summer and really don't remember anybody throwing out the 3/4 of a million term or 750,000 for walleyes during this process.

[Hammer-Smites]

Great news. It's the catching that's fun. No problem putting them back.

[Fisherman For a Lifetime]

That's just a little too tight, so put me against.

I believe 1 should be kept in the slot for the simple reason we'll probably have 1 hooked bad, ya put her back & she'll just be left to decompose.

Might as well be able to keep that 1 for the table instead of left to rot.

[MLaker2]

For: lots more fishing pressure, bigger boats, better equiped, more mobile, more informed fishermen. If you are going to make a mistake prtect the resource!

[Guest]

I'm for it.

Play it safe. It can always be changed later.

[hanson]

Why Not??

Dad & I have been chewing over this one for a number of years in the ice house. It doesn't bother either one of us one way or another. I can honestly say we've never limited out in the last 5 years up there with what I'd consider "keeper" walleyes. If I kept 12 inchers, I'd be off the ice in an hour.

[walleyes4me]

Against and thats about all I have to say!!

[MJCatfish]

I'm with Hanson on this one. I think the limits are still reasonable at 4 walleyes or up to 8 saugers. That's plenty of fish. It just gives me more reason to go back up there. (Tell my bride we need more fish.)

[augernaut]

geez, a 4 eye limit? You MN guys still have it good. Here in Wisconsin, we have mainly 3 fish limits (varies by lake), and some lakes I fish have a 3 fish, only one over 14" limit! Talk about screwy. Anyways, someone made the comment about having to throw back the monster - well, a monster certainly isn't any fish under 28!!!! IMHO, that slot should run up to 29 or 30. Keep the small ones for eating (and be reasonable on that one), and let the big girls go -they are the prime breeding stock. It's a good reg, be happy with it.

[walleyenerd]

Casting,

In 2002-03 (summer 2002 winter 2002-03)just the summer and winter harvest was 790,152 pounds. In 2003-04 (summer 2003 winter 2003-04) the summer, winter, spring Rainy River, fall Rainy River and Minnesota portion of the Northwest Angle area totalled 765,785 pounds.

These aren't new numbers, you just have to add the numbers together. The numbers were available at the public input and planning meetings.

By the way, the five-year average summer walleye harvest is 361,449 pounds, winter 210,647, spring Rainy River 10,931, fall Rainy River 28,133 and Northwest Angle based (fishing in MN) 21,816 pounds. The walleye caught in the spring and fall Rainy River fisheries have to be included since they spend most of their lives in Lake of the Woods, but run into the Rainy seasonally. The Angle fish have to be included since the safe harvest estimate of 450,000 pounds is based on the acreage of the entire Minnesota portion of Lake of the Woods. Those five-year averages add up to 632,976 pounds, and that is what drove the regulation change.

[grumpyoldman]

For 100%

The world according to grumpy.

[boener]

I'm for it!!

[peerchking]

? when are these new regs going in to affect!

[rich4walleyes]

The new regulations take effect Dec 1, 2004

[lnerison]

The new regulations are probably OK but I strongly object to the practice of putting them in place while the current rule book is in effect

[peerchking]

a lot of fish might not make it back down the holes!

[bubblehead1]

For & Against.

For a slot, and reduced limit.

Against the proposed slot.

Many lakes have seen this type of limit imposed to protect the large females "egg layers" but with limited success.

I see far too many small walleyes in buckets on LOW. Something has to be done to keep 10"-12" walleyes out of buckets for a few years. It worked wonders on Big Stone lake when they imposed a 14" minimum.

[DP]

I agree with the new regs, quality vs quantity in my mind.

[Orion]

For the new regulations

[Minaki Lord]

Against

There is absolutely no good that can come from a smaller slot like this one. Haven't we learned from our failures on millacs?

[92python]

Against.

I would suggest 4 eyes / 4 saugers and put a 21" to 26" protected slot on the eyes. 19.5" to 28" seems a little restrictive.

So are they going to do away with the cleaning / cooking / eating walleye out in the sleeper house tradition as well? Am I wrong or didn't some sort of similar legislation come out when they imposed a slot on Mille Lacs?

[curt quesnell]

Python,

Since there already is a slot on LOW the rules say you

cannot clean Walleyes on the water/ice. There is no

exception for sleeper houses.

That said, I have heard that if you keep the carcass's of the fish you clean so that the COs can see how big your fish were you can avoid a problem. That is not what the

rules say. It sounds like it might depend on which game

warden comes a knockin.

Good Luck

[jigit]

Against