Thoughts on Pike regulations (40"+)

[Nick Kuhn]

I disagree with you on the fishing aspect. If I'm going out fishing specifically to target pike, I'd prefer going to go to a lake with regs on it. The chances of catching numerous 'quality' fish is better, and keeping them isn't an issue. I also realize that not all fisherman have the same outlook as I do, but most guys I fish with love catching big pike, and don't keep any.

Yep, I go to a lake with a 32" minimum on it fairly often. Every outing, somebody in the boat has caught one over 30". I'd say we get roughly 10x as many 30+ inch pike, despite it being a small lake.

[Shawn Kellett]

Every lake is a little different, and with slot limits, less people fish ,and spear those lakes, so they won't know the real reason there might be more fish.

Actually you're 180 degs the wrong way with this statement. The Little Falls DNR sent out a postcard to the area spearers and found about 70% of them utilized the slot lakes, even though there were many times more lakes in the area w/o slots. Why? Because that's where the quality pike were.

Quite frankly the standard reg on pike for this state needs to be looked at. There's no reason why someone should be able to take 1 pike over 30" EVERY DAY OF THE SEASON. Just the same that most lakes need MORE HARVEST of fish under 24". Pike spawn very well in most lakes and quite frankly we'd have many more "eaters" if we were able to get a protected size of large fish and a more liberal harvest of the smaller ones. We've just had too many decades of fisheries management that didn't understand pike dynamics like we do today. Now that we have the knowledge there's a small group of people that have their heads stuck in 1952 and either don't want to understand or can't understand the data that is being learned and presented.

[merkman]

The Little Falls DNR sent out a postcard to the area spearers and found about 70% of them utilized the slot lakes, even though there were many times more lakes in the area w/o slots.

[Gordie]

Shawn I have speared alot of pike but I'll Guarantee that I have not speared a pike 30 inches or bigger everyday of the season and I would almost bet any amount that most other spearers don’t either. I would also think it would be safe to say that not every angler will catch a pike over 30 inches every day either. and the anglers probably out number the spearers quite abit at least thats what the DNR number show...

Your just speculating on that .

[popriveter]

I love catching an 8 lb pike and eating a 3 lb pike. This approach is better for the fishing and the diet. The older/larger the predatory fish, the more mercury and PCBs become an issue.

I'm all for regs that encourage anglers to view small to moderate sized fish as "eaters" and big ones as honored residents of the lake.

[merkman]

Actually you're 180 degs the wrong way with this statement. The Little Falls DNR sent out a postcard to the area spearers and found about 70% of them utilized the slot lakes, even though there were many times more lakes in the area w/o slots.

A survey is just that, a survey. You can twist a survey questions and or results around any way you like.

Shawn you might want to study that survey a little more.

The actual text reads:

Although a majority of spearers opposed experimental pike regulations,

76% of them indicated that they had fished on a lake with a northern pike slot limit.

1) The "study" shows that sportsmen who darkhouse spear had fished on a lake with a northern pike slot limit, not by what method or season, only that they had fished on a lake with a northern pike slot limit. Given the number of lake choices for darkhouse spearing though the ice in the Minnesota summer, and the fact that you are not made a criminal for killing a slot limit northern pike with a hook and line, I would bet a vast majority of these darkhouse spearing sportsmen were fishing these lakes in the summer time with the hook and line method.

2) It is also interesting that 54 of 87 individuals (a whopping 62%) classified as "spearers" in this study were not licensed darkhouse spearers in 2008 (the data year this study was based on).

3) But as always I am attacking the MnDNR data when it doesn’t coincide with my preconceived notions.

a) Having said that; I guess I can take it to the bank that 28% of Minnesotans darkhouse spear then; made clear by the 95% confidence limit shown on this survey.

And no I do not believe that 28% of Minnesotans darkhouse spear based on this survey.

I sure wish the MnDNR would stop wasting money, time, and resources on “studies” such as this and put the time and money where it is useful for all sportsmen; such as getting more CO’s out in the field to catch the “bad guys” rather than trying to make the “good guys” who will follow the laws pay the price for those who won’t.

_

[Jameson]

Thank-you merk for clearing that up.

[goblueM]

didn't clear very much up to me - care to give us a little copy paste of the methods from the study, Merk? or better yet post a link?

like you said, without knowing the methodology, you can't extrapolate very well

for instance, seems like the survey targeted those who indicated they spear or have speared in the past, in which case there is absolutely no validity to extrapolating the data to statewide angling populations because it is a nonprobability sample

[merkman]

there is absolutely no validity to extrapolating the data ... because it is a nonprobability sample

Agreed 100%

_

[goblueM]

...depending on the methodology of the survey, which would be fantastic to see. care to paste it or link it? thanks

[merkman]

...depending on the methodology of the survey, which would be fantastic to see. care to paste it or link it? thanks

The post with the link to get the data has been removed.

Sorry, I tried,

looks like you will have to google it like I did.

[theiceman]

I for the longest time I was against spearing, for I thought that's were all the big pike were going. I also thought that spearing should be outlawed. That came from people I had known that speared every big fish that came threw the hole. Talking with some hardcore spearers I came to the conclusion that not all spearers are alike. I speared for first time this year, and I had a blast. But I had made my mind up before I went that I wasn't going to spear a trophy fish only ones to eat. I think it great that more young people are getting into spearing but they should learn ethics first and that you don't have to spear every big fish that comes threw the hole. I'm all for a slot on state wide but maybe like 27-36.

[goblueM]

ah ha, found it. an interesting little study.

First of all Merkman, I think you drew the wrong conclusion when you think that the study suggests 28% of all minnesota anglers spear. That is clearly not the case, nor was it the goal of this survey. The study is saying that between 23 and 33 % of anglers responding to the mail survey of Little Falls area anglers spear northern pike.

Secondly, the MN DNR is not trying to extrapolate data statewide with this survey, they are trying to better manage Little Falls area lakes by collecting angler opinions on regulatory options.

To calculate the true % of anglers that speared northern pike in the Little Falls area, you'd have to randomly select mail survey recipients from the entire pool of spearers and anglers. However, the DNR sent surveys to (proportionally) about twice as many licensed spearers as it did to licensed anglers, since it was interested in comparing the opinions of northern pike anglers and spearers to better inform management, and relatively uninterested in the the total percentage of anglers who spear. They already knew it was a low percentage from license sales.

Given that spearers take more trips per year and are more specialized anglers (which are usually more more active in the management process) and the obvious evidence that spearers simply responded at a much higher rate than non-spearers, it's only mildly surprising the 28% of responses to the survey identified as spearers.

What IS interesting to me is that there are more people who spear than were licensed in 2008. There are only 3 explanations:

A) an apparently large amount of spearing occurring by folks without a spearing license

anglers who used to spear, but hadn't in 2008, yet still reported they spear northern pike

C) people not comprehending the question.

I'd guess it is mostly A and B.

Another interesting nugget of information is that 70% of spearers want larger pike, but only 28% support slot limits. It seems like a bit of a case of wanting your cake and eating it too, but it may be that spearers are just anti-slot and would actually support a regulation like reduced bag limit or some other non-slot length limit. I certainly hope so, because you aren't going to get large pike unless you redistribute harvest patterns to increase harvest of smaller fish and reduce harvest of larger fish.

Lastly, Merk you're certainly entitled to your opinion regarding this study as a waste of taxpayer money, but the way I see it they're going out of their way to survey the opinions of a small segment of the angling population to better include them in the management process, and provide a diverse array of fisheries that all Minnesotans can enjoy. Not to mention the cost of a mail survey is pretty low

[My_Key]

Shawn I have speared alot of pike but I'll Guarantee that I have not speared a pike 30 inches or bigger everyday of the season and I would almost bet any amount that most other spearers don't either. I would also think it would be safe to say that not every angler will catch a pike over 30 inches every day either. and the anglers probably out number the spearers quite abit at least thats what the DNR number show...

Your just speculating on that .

[Muskiefool]

Roughly less than 15% of all DHS harvest anglers are dissatisfied with the Pike they are fishing so 2200; of that 2200 about 3% are very dissatisfied, so 68 people in MN are starving because they cant kill all the pike that go through their hole while 165 DHS say they don't even take fish they just enjoy looking into the lake.

Why do .5% of the DHS seem to be so worried about allowing harvest of Muskie after Dec 1? True intentions shining through.

Now make a gun or bullet argument haha,, maybe you think we should be able to slug hunt in WPA; so people living close to them can have an opportunity to shoot Deer and Ducks out of the same blind, but then claim people will come from thousands of miles to save the town next to it.

Too many regs on small lakes, medium lakes and large lakes; LOL my favorite quote of all time.

Are there too many frivolous Refuges and sanctuary are keeping us from enjoying them to the fullest?

You may think a spring hunt would maybe suit some better because of their work or inactivity?

[Lucius]

You know, I wish I lived in minnesota. Here in colorado we have like 15 pike waters in the entire state with only 3 lakes having some form of regulations on them. Of the 3 other states I lived in, neither of them have any regulations on pike (keep as many as you want no matter the size of which 1 state was Idaho). Currently my former state of Washington only has 1 consistent producing pike water. they are so afraid and caught up on the horror stories of pike eating everything in the lake they are currently gillnetting during the spawn in hopes of reducing the number of pike. they think by removing the bigger females which have the most eggs they can drastically reduce the number of pike. In turn by having fewer numbers of pike will also reduce the chances of bucket biology. I could scream. This body of water last year in back to back days we caught and released 28 fish all over 22" with the biggest 28" and 31 fish with the biggest being 33".

I am envious of you guys that have a DNR that actually cares to protect a good resource.

[MyFishHasRabies]

So how did the speech go?

[Gordie]

I really don't want to take sides in this argument, but he never said anything about spearing 30" fish everyday.

I know that and was just stateing a fact that I dont spear 30 inch pike EVERY DAY OF THE SEASON.

[delcecchi]

You know, I wish I lived in minnesota. Here in colorado we have like 15 pike waters in the entire state with only 3 lakes having some form of regulations on them. Of the 3 other states I lived in, neither of them have any regulations on pike (keep as many as you want no matter the size of which 1 state was Idaho). Currently my former state of Washington only has 1 consistent producing pike water. they are so afraid and caught up on the horror stories of pike eating everything in the lake they are currently gillnetting during the spawn in hopes of reducing the number of pike. they think by removing the bigger females which have the most eggs they can drastically reduce the number of pike. In turn by having fewer numbers of pike will also reduce the chances of bucket biology. I could scream. This body of water last year in back to back days we caught and released 28 fish all over 22" with the biggest 28" and 31 fish with the biggest being 33".

I am envious of you guys that have a DNR that actually cares to protect a good resource.

Our DNR is trying but has to fight heritage of harvest uber alles. Aren't the western states pretty trout oriented and don't want anything around that could interfere with the trout, no matter if it would provide enhanced fishing opportunities?

[Spike76]

I don't agree with the results of your studys. The lake that I make statements about mostly, used to have 16 to 20 fish and spear houses on it, and this year it only had 3 houses on it. This is a fact, not a study. PMS or put more slots, maybe you can eliminate the 3 houses out there.

[walleye101]

I don't agree with the results of your studys. The lake that I make statements about mostly, used to have 16 to 20 fish and spear houses on it, and this year it only had 3 houses on it. This is a fact, not a study. PMS or put more slots, maybe you can eliminate the 3 houses out there.

Here are a couple more facts.

1) Most MN lakes had far fewer permanent fish houses out this year. Poor ice conditions early, then heavy snow and flooding made ice travel poor to impossible. Seasoned fishermen know better than leaving a house out when flooding conditions exist if they ever had one freeze in. By the time conditions improved late in the winter many anglers just left the permanent houses in the yard.

2) With more and more new portable fish house options available now like "The clam", otter sleds etc, many fishermen are opting for portability. There has been a continuing trend of fewer and fewer permanents left on the ice.

3) Recent legislation eliminated the license requirement for portables so only houses left on the ice need shelter license further reducing the incentive for the permanent house option.

When discussing facts it is best to include all of them, but if you want to blame the protected slot limit, just use what supports your argument.

[Spike76]

I go by what I see. We can all assume the reasons for less permanents, but I had three permanent houses on another lake because of the slot experiment on the lake I was on.

[goblueM]

ah, another worshiper at the altar of correlation = causation

coupled with "my single observation MUST be more correct than a survey of hundreds of people"

not to mention the study (it IS a study) didn't really say definitively if folks spear slot lakes, they just found that most spearers "fished" for pike on a slot lake. that could mean anything, that they fished OR speared once. doesn't say anything about the frequency

[merkman]

not to mention the study (it IS a study) didn't really say definitively if folks spear slot lakes, they just found that most spearers "fished" for pike on a slot lake.

Actually the question asked if they fish on slot limit lakes.

Not for what species..... only if they fished on slot limit lakes.

*******************************************************************

Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson go on a camping trip, set up their tent, and fall asleep. Some hours later, Holmes wakes his faithful friend.

"Watson, look up at the sky and tell me what you see."

Watson replies, "I see millions of stars."

"What does that tell you?"

Watson ponders for a minute. "Astronomically speaking, it tells me that there are millions of galaxies and potentially billions of planets. Astrologically, it tells me that Saturn is in Leo. Timewise, it appears to be approximately a quarter past three. Theologically, it's evident the Lord is all powerful and we are small and insignificant. Meteorologically, it seems we will have a beautiful day tomorrow. What does it tell you?"

Holmes is silent for a moment, then speaks. "Watson, you fool, someone has stolen our tent."

Anyone who supports the responsible harvest of northern pike in Minnesota (by any method) better wake up and understand that there is a group of individuals out there, that would like nothing more than to "steal your tent"

Our public lakes are quickly becoming private aquariums.

[smallie_hawgin]

Wow guys,

Great discussion!

The link to the study in question BTW is here : Little Falls DNR Special Surveys

Another one worth looking at that shows what pike regulations have done on several lakes in the Grey Eagle area can be found here: Little Falls DNR Events

Please take the time to read on these before making general judgments. The information is available for folks to consider. If you have other questions, give our office a call. We'll be glad to try and clear things up for you.

The biggest part of the equation revolves around overall production capacity. In most pike populations there is a high production level of pike that are 2 and 3 years of age. For pike older than say age 5 the average annual production is 1/10th of a pound, per acre, per year. It stands to reason that most of a lakes capacity is taken up by younger individuals. We have often discussed allowing additional harvest of 2-3 year old pike. However, this has been met with considerable resistance in most cases. It may be brought up again.

The big moral of the story; a lake and for that matter is like a field and a given crop on it. We can only expect so much out of a given water body or field. When we take away those older (and in most cases larger pike)pike it takes far longer to "re-create" that pike than it does to grow a pike that is only 2-3 years of age (17-20") we usually see in central MN.

So, the smaller lakes actually seem to benefit more by protection of larger pike than larger lakes in general. Why? Less production capacity. Larger lakes by comparison, have more production capacity, habitat complexity and prey complexity etc. to grow and hide larger pike.

Just a reminder: As someone who has spent time in Colorado and Texas where the resources were considerably less abundant, we are truly "blessed" in MN to have so many lakes, rivers and streams that have potential and opportunity. We seem to take for granted that there are always options on where we choose to go and pursue our method of choice. Just a thought.