interesting

[Yooperguy]

http://www.startribune.com/sports/outdoors/241411611.html

[shamalex72]

Good article.

[Gordie]

Very good article.

[tca12]

Who wouldn't want to see one northern over 30 inches PER YEAR?

[Yooperguy]

Who wouldn't want to see one northern over 30 inches PER YEAR?

you read the second page right?

[Early Riser]

As a spearer, I diverge from some in the MDAA, and I agree with many others that more, not less should be done to protect the bulk of the large pike in some lakes. The biggest pike in a system are far more vulnerable to spearing than angling. Anyone who has spent a lot of time in the spear shack knows this. Those big girls come in a lot of times to just check their territory or to inspect the decoy nose to nose, from the side mouthing a fin, or even following from behind after jigging, and will not bother to chase a live tethered minnow.

Lake by lake management is likely the ticket, as many lakes are hammer handle factories due to habitat and forage, and no special regulations are going to ever change them. On the other hand, there are select lakes statewide, including several in the metro, that have the potential to grow 40" plus pike. On those lakes I would favor more slots, or lowering the "one per day" size from 30" to 24".

[shamalex72]

Well said early riser.

[Jameson]

LOL...a couple years back as far as I know I was the first to mention making the one over 30" per day limit into a per year limit that is mentioned in the article. Others had said one over forty per year, but that just wouldn't have enough impact.

[Early Riser]

Yes I recall that as well.

While probably a good idea in combination of allowing one over 24" a day, a law of "one per year over 30 inches" would not have enough risk of immediate punishment/enforcement penalty to dissuade unscrupulous people from bending the rule at will (granted their "bad will").

It is interesting to note that MI allows two pike per day of any size, with a minimum size limit of 24". On some lakes you can take greater than two pike per day, but only one over 24". They also have a tag system for Musky, allowing one harvested per year. Maybe someone from MI can clarify.

Come to think of it - a tag would offer the immediate risk of enforcement action needed, as any pike over 30" in possession would be required to have a non-transferrable tag attached and marked with date and time.

[tca12]

I did read the whole article, which is where I noticed that the pike regs are really about protecting the walleye fishing. I remember experimental lakes in the past (Melissa, Sallie, and at least one other) that tried the 6 pike limit but they had to be under 24 inches. What were those results? There have been experimental pike lakes for years but not as much data released as might be helpful. I agree that a lake-by-lake approach would probably make more biological sense since all lakes are not the same. Good luck with enforcement though. If I get that 30 plus fish on Jan. 1st and eat it the next day, then what? Perhaps we'll just make the rule that if you catch a northern under 24 inches you have to keep it and it cannot be returned to the water.

[pushbutton]

I did read the whole article, which is where I noticed that the pike regs are really about protecting the walleye fishing.

I am probably on the opposite side of the fence as you, but got the same thing from the article. To me the article is simply talking points and politics……using the coveted walleye to justify the reason for the future push for more slots/regs on pike. Like Early Riser and Shamelex, do think there needs to be protection for the big pike though; not to save the stocked walleye in non natural reproducing lakes, but rather for the sake of protecting an apex predator, and the resulting balance they help provide. Will this work for every lake? Absolutely not. Some lakes will produce hammer handles despite anything we try to do. There are however, plenty of larger and productive lakes that will benefit from this approach and for the sake of all interests involved, hope that single issue politics do not get in the way practical lake management that try to include all of the multiple interests.

[mrklean]

I wouldn't mind seeing one over 24" or 26" per day. The only issue I could see if they did do 1 over 24" or a lower number like that would it discourage people from even fishing for them anymore. So many complain they don't like the smaller ones because of the bones, similar to what the article said its almost an attitude change for fisherman more then anything to keep those smaller fish. Will be interesting to see what happens but I'm 100% in favor of lowering the size limits.

[jasonmichalski]

Yes I recall that as well.

While probably a good idea in combination of allowing one over 24" a day, a law of "one per year over 30 inches" would not have enough risk of immediate punishment/enforcement penalty to dissuade unscrupulous people from bending the rule at will (granted their "bad will").

It is interesting to note that MI allows two pike per day of any size, with a minimum size limit of 24". On some lakes you can take greater than two pike per day, but only one over 24". They also have a tag system for Musky, allowing one harvested per year. Maybe someone from MI can clarify.

Come to think of it - a tag would offer the immediate risk of enforcement action needed, as any pike over 30" in possession would be required to have a non-transferrable tag attached and marked with date and time.

The musky tag was new this year as for a few lakes with the slot deal, the standard is two pike 24" min, on our no size limit lakes you can take 5 fish no more then one over 24" that's new this year to, one lake I fish has 400-600 pike per acre and is a no size limit lake there's few over 24" so the rule makes perfect sense.

[mrklean]

400-600 per acre holy cow that sounds like a day full of fun in the spear house but would imagine the panfish population in that lake is pretty rough?

[jasonmichalski]

The lake avg depth is 6' it's Lake Saint Helen it's actual one of the top gill lakes in the area, the lake has good crappie few bass and lots of walleye that avg 24"

On the last weekend of season last march, three of us took home 15 pike, between 18"-24".

[Jameson]

...Good luck with enforcement though. If I get that 30 plus fish on Jan. 1st and eat it the next day, then what? Perhaps we'll just make the rule that if you catch a northern under 24 inches you have to keep it and it cannot be returned to the water.

You would have to validate your one 30"+ pike tag when you take possession of your animal. It works for sturgeon, deer, bear, turkey, etc... So, as asked, then what? The next 364 days when you went out fishing if you caught and kept a 30"er plus you would have to be worried about being checked by the CO while having that fish without a tag for it.

And I would be for the gotta keep a hammerhandle if you catch it rule on many lakes!

[Yooperguy]

I took from the article that it was the perch that were the first to take the hit. Then the walleyes. Some how all of us as fishermen need to think how our actions can either help this problem or make it worse.

[merkman]

I must be missing something.

The regs didn't go away; they were just capped at a number the group's agreed to previously.

There are special regs on a hundred waters in Minnesota; the legislature didn't change that.

That to me sounds like a compromise.....

Some people wanted regs removed from all lakes.

Some people wanted regs applied to all lakes

isn't a compromise what we were all pushing for?

Just like any other human endeavor.... the compromise isn't good enough for some, so they continue to push.

I myself would be much more receptive to slot limits if they were designed to work with darkhouse spearing. Darkhouse spearing is a legal method of responsibly harvesting fish in Minnesota and as such, it has been around a lot longer than slot limits. Certain individuals and groups used/ignored the fact that the current implementation of slot limits in Minnesota is indeed biased against darkhouse spearers (ie kill a slot limit pike with a hook throw it back; kill a slot limit pike with a spear face criminal charges.. same sportsman, same house, same hole, same dead slot limit fish, totally different penalties for the same outcome) to further their personal missions against darkhouse spearing.

So as for the article.... it is just more of the same.... painting the darkhouse association in a bad light since they're trying to protect both the public resource and people's ability to actually repsponibly enjoy it by the legal method of their choice. ... Instead of listening to the real problems with the current implementation of slot limits in Minnesota we are just looking at more ego building and mudslinging with no real change in sight. Heck; the "unbiased reporter" didn't even reach out to the darkhouse association to get their views on the subject. (and no my comments are not the views of the darkhouse association.... they are strictly mine)

Maybe it's not insane to think that the mud slinging will actually work this time.....

If nothing else, the mudslinging is indeed effective at increasing the numbers of darkhouse spearers in Minnesota; as evidenced in license sales over the last 3 to 5 years.....

Carry on... nothing new here.... yawn....

At least there is one bright spot with the darkhouse spearing ban and other special regs on Mille Lacs lake.... you can't blame darkhouse spearers for that one....

Oh yeah, by the way happy new year yooperguy.

.

.

[BOUNCED]

How's this working for Mille Lacs?

[Early Riser]

Other changes that I would like to see, from a spearer's perspective, would be to eliminate all spearing bans and allow a biologically responsible legal limit for both spearers and anglers on all species of fish, like they do in Montana.

Merkman and others bring up a lot of good points.

We are all in the same fraternity of people who care about the resource, however we all spear/angle for different reasons, so compromise is the answer.

When I am looking at fish in the darkhouse, I typically can identify four classes of pike: The 23" an under crowd (small ones); the 24-28" (nicer fish); 28"-31" (getting to be a bigger fish); Greater than 32" (big fish, at least where I spear).

Slots are problematic for spearers versus anglers to Merk's point because of the difficulties of precise identification between those ranges of sizes from 23-24", 29-31", and 38-40" on Lake of the Woods or Rainy River. This is why implementing either the tag system allowing one or two pike of 30" or over per year, or one over 24" or 26" per day makes the most sense to me the more I think it through.

[hillbilly...]

your telling me you can tell if a fish is between 28-31

[mwal]

Do they take into account the C&r Mortality probably exceeds the take of the darkhouse guys? Just my opinion not backed up by anything. Say a group of people are tipup fishing in this weather even with quickstrike rigs and they C&R 10 pike over 30 inches and 20 under sized ones in weather below 10 degrees how many live after the measuring the dropping in the snow the hook removal partially frozen gills/eyes. Just watch any of the ice fishing shows putting the pike against an aluminum ruler take a picture almost all get dropped. The 2 spear shacks on the lake watched the pike and took home one or 2 still less impact on the resource. I like walleyes as much as the next guy but many walleye fisheries are not natural reproducing and stocking just does not work that well as the lake does not have their natural habitat for spawning or living the rest of the year. The lakes are natural home to Pike,bass and panfish perhaps should be managed as such. There are also lakes that just do not have the right feed to have large pike as well even if harvest is restricted as there studies have shown. There is no perfect on size fits all solution. I just do not agree politicizing fish and game management. Look what slots have done to Mill lacs / Leech these were not done for biological reasons. A body of water can support only so many lbs of fish there can be 1000 1 lbers or 100 10 lbers that is what they created. Look to the studies done at Lac Suel in Ontario the true birth place of slots that created a great fishery based on biology. They protect the walleye that have the most fertile eggs that have the most chance of survival. Those are not old giant fish do 65 year old women have babies? Nope they protect 18 inch to 21 inch which in that system are the most fertile. you are allowed to take one bigger fish as people still want big fish but they do not matter to the survival of species. Read up on it. Very interesting it was the same scenario as our Red lake over netting and fishing caused it to be a dead sea by late 70's now its one of the best place to go in the world to catch walleyes and pike which also have a slot based on biology for the lake. Enough of a rant

MWal

[Early Riser]

Hi Hillbilly -

If your were responding to me, I was implying that 28-30" or 31" is one of those hard ranges for most to discern, and is why I would lean toward exploring other regulations besides just slots, that as Merkman pointed out have the potential to be more limiting to spearers than anglers.

[hillbilly...]

I was riser that what I was wondering. we speard 5 one day that we were all sure were over 30 got them on ice and they were 28-29 1/4. I was reading an article the other day about some lady that was spearing some were that had a 24-40" slot and she tossd her spear at one and all she seen was a flicker in the loosing light and got it up the hole and it was 40 1/2... for me that's way to close to not making it.

[mrklean]

I was riser that what I was wondering. we speard 5 one day that we were all sure were over 30 got them on ice and they were 28-29 1/4. I was reading an article the other day about some lady that was spearing some were that had a 24-40" slot and she tossd her spear at one and all she seen was a flicker in the loosing light and got it up the hole and it was 40 1/2... for me that's way to close to not making it.

No that's just foolish we preach know before you throw and when a story like that gets published it makes us a look bad