limits for family fishing

[Mark Christianson]

Yes, we have been over this before, but there is a difference in possession versus immediate release. But, it is ultimately in the opinion of the law enforcement that may doing an investigation too.

Here is specific language on the subject(kind of a little more than this topic talks about, but good info to understand):

These rule violations aren't on the payables list yet, which means a mandatory minimum fine of $300.
(MR 6262.0100)
Subp. 5. Possession of fish while on state waters.
A. Fish that are taken by angling and not immediately released into the water after capture are considered to be in possession. Once a limit of fish has been reduced to possession, no culling or live well sorting (the act of replacing one fish with another one) of that species is allowed.
B. A person shall not angle for, including catch-and-release, or reduce to possession any species during its closed season.
C. Once a person or persons fishing as a party as provided in Minnesota Statutes, section 97C.317, retain a daily limit for a species, all fish of that species that are subsequently taken must be immediately released into the water after capture.
D. Length of a fish is determined by measuring from the tip of the nose to the tip of the tail when fully extended. While on or fishing in state waters with size restrictions that differ from statewide regulations, including experimental waters, special management waters, boundary waters, or any other waters with size restrictions, all fish for which the different size restrictions apply must be undressed and measurable when in a person's possession, regardless of where taken, except when a watercraft is docked or moored to shore and a person is in the act of preparing and using the fish for a meal.
E. It is unlawful for a person to have in possession, regardless of where taken, any fish in excess of or outside of the limits for that water body when fishing in that water. A person must immediately return to the water any fish that is taken by angling that is in excess of or outside the limits.
F. A person who is in transit on the water, taking the most direct route back to the person's lodging or docking, and not fishing, may possess fish outside of or in excess of the limits for that water body, if the species were legally taken from connected waters.

[This message has been edited by biglakeba$$ (edited 06-07-2004).]

[united jigsticker]

I just got off the phone with the MNDNR.

I stand corrected.

You can NOT TARGET a specie of fish once the limit of that fish is reduced to possesion. You must switch your targeted species.

You may not cull or sort fish once a limit is reached for that specie, BUT you MAY cull or sort live fish before the the limit of that species is reduced to possesion.

I asked about when a fish is defined in possesion and was told that it is when it is caught. But when I used slot fish, or accidently catching fish out of season as an example for illegally possesing fish for a brief time, I got alot of studdering and hmm's, well's, uh's. etc.

So it seems even though the law is written and stated, there still may be some gray area and is ultimately the discretion of the enforcing present officer.

Ohhh well.

I'll just C&R Crappies with only 9 fish in the livewell if I am going to keep any until I am ready to go home.

------------------
Good fishing,
UJ
[email protected]

[say_der]

Thanks for admitting it UJ. Takes a stand up guy to come on here and say it. I can see you are a regular here by the number of posts.

Was it fair for that family to take over 30 "eater" sized walleyes out of a 55 acre lake? Legal maybe. Fair to the rest of the fishing population? No, in my opinion.

[fiskyknut]

Well maybe it was'nt fair in your way of thinking, but it is legal for them to do so if they so choose, as long as they have paid their license fees. In my book it's fair if they so choose. Would'nt the DNR put special regs on this body of water if they thought the lake could'nt support some harvest? One would hope so anyhow.

fiskyknut

[maxx rpm]

The original topic was a good one. I have seen in the winter, a guy fishing tip ups out of his car, place six rigs out. There was him, a boy around 8-10 years old, and an infant in a car seat. The only one that left the car was the father. TO me, this is fishing unethically and poaching. When you fish for someone else, with them not participating in the process, i see that as wrong. If a group is in a boat, and everyone else stops fishing, it should tell you something. Either help them fish, or call it a good day and do something else. Someone who keeps kids shackled in a boat until he catches limits for everyone is a sick person. I dont think that anyone said it was wrong to take a kid fishing and for them to keep fish, or even for you to help them out. It is the loophole of bodies in a boat to justify poaching that bothers me.

[deadminnowcatcher]

Hey guys-the law is clear here-If you do not like the law do what you can to change it.We cannot expect people to count the acreas of a lake and then see what eveyone thinks is an ethical limit.

[say_der]

You guys are right - I guess it just kind of made me sad/upset to see so many good sized fish taken from such a small lake. I emailed the DNR about it and asked why it doesn't have special regulations. Haven't heard back yet.

This lake isn't particularily close to my home, not a favorite lake by any means. I don't think I'll bother fishing it again this year.

I caught 3 bass while I was out there, had fun doing it. I guess I should focus on the positive.

My apologies to everyone for coming off a little harsh towards families.

Family is very important to me and time shared on the water is some of the best.

[MuleSkinner]

OK, I am neither Pro-Life, nor Pro-Choice. But what if mom had a baby in the hopper. May be some day that would qualify as another limit?

If so, if a young couple had the CO find them with 13 walleyes, they could say they just got done "rockin the boat", and by golly, they were fishing for that 3rd family member...(And maybe twins, triplets, etc.) Suppose the regs need to say kid must be able to hold a rod...

I am not serious about this. And I do not mean to offend anyone. It is just that I thought about this when reading this thread, and if I didn't say it, I would waste time while fishing thinking about it... And now, I can think just about fishing... or Rockin the Boat...

[genegodawa]

If your boat is arockin', we won't come...

[IFallsRon]

I was pretty happy with the "dump rule" at the landing but I'd guess you'd have to be a hillbilly to use the "rockin' rule" while you've got the rest of your family in the boat.

[wade22]

One time, during rush hour, I spotted a guy fishing in a boat with four kids and two mannequins. He obviously was counting the mannequins as people, and his stringer indicated a gross violation of Minnesota law. To top it off, he was a drunken state legislator that was playing hooky from a special session that was taking place that season.
So my question is, should I report him for being over his limit? For being drunk on the water with kids in his boat? For having mannequins in his watercraft? For playing hooky from a special session? Or for being a state legislator?
Loopholes...loopholes. Patch cloth and croquet...We need more regulations, special slot limits and individual lake slots. I propose that no fish under twelve inches should be kept for more than three minutes excluding border waters that should mandate a 14", 6 minute minimum. While we're at it, let's propose a gill netting season on all inland lakes north of the Alexandria meridian for native Polish citizens residing in Minnesota born between 1952 and 1961. They're an oppressed group with questionable dietary habits. They need more mercury. We need more Poles. And fishing regulations.

[walleyehawk]

I think it was a cry for help from the legislator. Maybe the mannequins were his “friends” and he was talking to them about critical legislation he needed to consider.

Are you sure he wasn’t wearing a dress?

And if he was drunk, why wasn't he at work. Sounds like he would have fit right in based on the report on Fox 9.

If this is a real story and not humor, this guys smallest problem was the overlimit. I think being intoxicated on a boat is a major penalty. Then if he had children he was endangering while intoxicated, that is charge two. The poaching would be the throw away charge for the DA.

[Mark Christianson]

HA!

Way too funny.

Anyway, yep the bottom line its legal to party fish, so I will just go fishing and follow the rules and used some good ethics.
Heck, its a win/win!

[bigbucks]

I have no problem with the party fishing rules, like someone said, it takes a mess of fish to feed a family. I take my kids fishing as much as they want to go, which isn't real often. Believe me, you're not going to stay out there & catch your own limit very often, let alone theirs, if they're not having a good time, because they'll make it so miserable you'll be ready to go.

I've taken my son when he's been dying to go fishing all day & about the time I park the truck after unloading the boat he's changed his mind. I'm not going to teach him that whenever he commits to something he can just change his mind & back out of it. He may not fish at all, but we're still going. I might tell him, okay we'll only fish for an hour & if you're not having fun then we'll go home. Like someone else said, he often puts his rod down & says he's not going to fish anymore cause he wants to play with the minnows or whatever. If we're bobber fishing or jig fishing, I just throw it out for him anyway & keep an eye on it for him. If he catches a fish that way, it's the same as doing it all himself as far as he's concerned. If he misses it because he wasn't paying attention, then he gets a free fishing lesson from the fish like we all get on most outings anyway.