One over 20"

[32 degrees]

I hope you guys can help me out here. I was recently informed that there is a bill in the state legislature that could change the walleye reg from one over 24" to one over 20" here in Minnesota. How would a guy get started in showing support for such a bill? Names, phone numbers, even email addresses would be great. I just dont know where to start. Thanks

[walleyewacker]

You can sure have mine.....

[arbuck]

Try this, Type in your zip code and it will tell you who your representatives are. That would be the best place to start. A letter is usually better than a phone call, It shows you actually spent some time on this showing that you care about the issue.

http://www.leg.state.mn.us/leg/Districtfinder.asp

arbuck

[32 degrees]

Hey, thanks arbuck. I will definitely write a letter. Hopefully others will also show thier support for this bill. Its not much, but its a start.

[gunflint]

32 degrees,

I'm not arguing with you. But I tend to lean towards less regulation not more. Why do you think we need to keep less fish than we already are?

I fully support selective harvest. However I get a little jumpy whenever the legislature gets involved with fishing or hunting.

[riverrat56]

Personally i dont think there is alot of people that keep walleyes over 20 anyways but i have had a few days out where all me and dad have caught is 2 22 inch eyes and when you drive a ways to go fishing it would really be a shame not to be able to keep those 2 fish, and yes we kept them because we wanted a fish dinner so dont give me a speech on how i ruined that lake because someone keeping 6 18 inchers did more damage than i did and even then they were still legal so it isnt that big of deal. Basically what im saying is let the regs alone or if they do change them maybe down to non between 22-26 that way if you have a day where you catch a 28 incher and decide to keep it for the wall and then pull in a possible state record ( im dreaming here) you would be legal to keep it.

[Mike Walerak]

Riverrat,

A 1 over 20" rule would allow each of you to keep 1 fish over 20 inches.

[gunflint]

riverrat is right, most fisherman don't keep walleyes over 20 inches. The reason they don't is because of their belief in catch and release, selective harvest, etc. the point is that most fisherman are releasing them without laws forcing them to do so.

If I guthook a 21 inch walleye at say 6:00am I've got 2 choices. I keep the fish and spend the rest of the day fishing for small eaters or I throw it back hoping it will be ok but knowing it will die, just so that I can continue to fish without restrictions. I don't care for that option.

What if over the course of the day another 21 incher swallows the hook? Now I have to throw it back.

I know the same arguement can be made for fish over 24 inches but realisticly we catch alot more fish between 20 and 24 inches than over 24 inches. Besides the size has been set at 24 inches I see no reason to rehash that.

I would have no issues if the DNR were to set different size limits for different lakes based on the needs of a certain fishery. However I cannot support a blanket law based more on feel good politics than on science.

Once you let the legislature restrict something you almost never get it back. Just my oinion.

[efgh]

Any time the Minn. Leg. trys to improve some service or restriction, they end up screwing it all up, the fisher persons now days are more conservation minded than the fisher P. in the past, just take enough for a meal now and then and everthing will be fine, examples of big time screwup, break up of ma bell, raise gas mileage of cars, not bad Idea, cry about lost gas tax revenue, this should not have been a suprise, I don;t think the leg. thinks things thru before they act.

[32 degrees]

Sorry, but I have to disagree with you. To me this is a pretty simple issue. First of all, every lake that I fish is heavily pressured and could benefit from more restrictive regs. For someone to believe that most anglers release 20"-24" fish is absolutely crazy talk. Yes, preservation minded anglers do, but these fisherpeople are not the problem. The other 90% is what concerns me. These females on almost every walleye lake are very important. Not only are they the future reproducers but are potential trophy class fish. 14"-18" males or, "eaters" become more expendable when reproducing year classes are available. Even if you are on a lake sustained by stocking you are loosing trophy potential by keeping these fish. How many times have you gut hooked two 20+ fish in one day? Hopefully never, but if you have you need to change your methods.

Secondly, when you say its ok to keep these fish because you drove so far or are hungry, thats also wrong. Here is a great example. LAKE OF THE WOODS! Look at what happened to that fishery. 3-4 times the maintainable harvest. Look at the new regs. All fish from 19.5-28 go back. 4 fish limit. Why? HMMMMMMM And LOW is HUGE! If you dont think this is happening on many lakes in MN on a daily basis I would like a ticket to your planet. The DNR continues to up its stocking quotas. Why, because we are taking more than the lakes can supply. Like I said, this reg is not much, but its a start. If you disagree thats fine. I just wish I fished for bass or muskie, those guys are way ahead of the game. When was the last time you heard a bass angler say,"Well, I caught two 22" fish but I could not find the eaters so I kept them both. There I said it.

[Fishing-Around]

32DEGREES - your right on the money!!!! well said....

We all know of several honey holes that we USED to have but now alot are gone. Is it because someone drove to far or the bite wasnt the best so they "death welled" any thing they caught, I dont know.

But I do know that we are all paying the price for people looking at the reg's as a "Guide Line" and not the RULE. I'm all for slot limits and reg's when it's going to better are fisheries and our children's fisheries. If you need to eat a fillet that bad and you can only catch the larger "out of the slot" fish, go to the store, they sell Wallye, Catfish, Cod, ect.... Not only that you'll save a ton on gas!

[bigbucks]

Sorry guys, but I'm with gunflint, riverat, etc. on this one.

I don't think saving a fish or two in the 20-24" range is necessary, nor would it solve anything. As much as they're a pain to keep track of I'd prefer lake specific regs to that. Even with the lake specifics, I'd almost prefer they lower the total & forget the slot, measuring is a pain & so many fish are "right there" with the line no matter what the reg is. Besides that, slots all but totally wipe out certain age fish from the fishery. I think most of the people that will very often catch that one over 20" per person on an outing, or more, are the same guys who'd throw them back anyway, but I still don't want the added regs for situations the other guys listed.

[riverrat56]

Your right mike i didnt think of that but either way im against a change to the rules, like people stated before the state will screw something else up if they change this rule, i think they should just leave it be as far as the length limits and such, what i wouldnt be agaisnt is lowering the limit on walleyes to 3 or 4, if you go out and catch 4 walleyes that are 16-18 inches on average you have enough for 4 people to have a fish dinner with some baked beans on the side and if you have 2 people fishing you have enough to have a meal there and take some home, a 4 a day limit would be a better option in my opinion, but if you want to keep the most people happy leave it as it is, a 24 inch walleye is out of most if not almost any fishermans "eater range", but a 20 incher is in most peoples, i dont feel guilty keeping a 20 incher were rules allow, if you dont want to keep it dont keep it toss it back, i have more respect for you as a sportsmen because you realease those fish, but when you live around the area i do were to have a legitimate chance at brinigng home some nice fish you have to drive 45 mins to and hour so i take what i can get when i can ( with in the rules )

[gunflint]

I don't believe trophy potential should be the only criteria for managing walleyes. Every lake is different and should be addressed in such a way that maintains a healthy population of all species.

I can't agree on your number of 90 percent. Sure there will always be a few slobs but to regulate the entire fishing community for the actions of a few is overkill. Besides the slobs may accidently catch a few big walleyes but not many. Slob fisherman just are'nt that good.

I honestly cannot speak to the issue of pressure because I haven't fished the walleye factories for years and I hear the pressure is unbelievable. However I still think the DNR can handle the needs of those fisheries better than the state legislature.

32 degrees, you don't need a ticket to my planet, just go to Grand Marais and take a left. Because of the limited availability of lodging, limited campsites, and very little private land, fishing pressure here is nonexistant. Although there were 6 boats on East Bearskin on the 4th of July. (It was a madhouse.)

My point is that managing all lakes the same is not good science. You can't manage the state's deer heard that way, and you should'nt try to manage fish that way either.

[32 degrees]

Gunflint, I wish I did live up there. Then I would not get so frustrated about the central MN lakes I fish. I also agree that a 3-4 fish limit would be great. The problem is its almost impossible to enforce possession limits. I was looking at the new regs last night and saw that a number of lakes in Cook and Itasca counties have a 17"-27" protected slot. The thing that gets on my nerves is I did not see one lake from this area with any special regs for eyes. Is it because of the DNR, lake associations, resorts, tourism, gov't???? Ok, thats it. I'm packing my stuff and moving in with Gunflint Managing each lake seperatly would be the ticket but thats not possible is it? Or is it?

[gunflint]

32 degrees,

I would welcome you with open arms.(for a visit)

Just a few things to keep in mind about this fishing eutopia. Most of the lakes up here are canadian shield lakes which means they are very clear and very deep. Most are loaded with excellent forage for walleyes such has ciscos, smelt, herring, etc. The lakes can be challenging to fish, and sometimes down right frustrating.

Then don't forget the motor restrictions. 25 hp on some lakes 10 hp on others. Some lakes have no restrictions other lakes nothing but paddles.

Still not ready to fish because we have'nt got the permits yet. You may need a day use motor permit if one is available. And you're probobly going to need a border crossing permit and a canadian fishing license. We still have to pay to park in some locations. Now all we have to do is get the regs out and figure out what we can keep and what we can't. Now lets go fishing!!

[Chris Haley]

I just got an email back from senator Carrie Ruud, she said she was at a meeting this morning and it came up. The DNR said it's on a bill due to be introduced next week!!! I'll post the bill number when she sends it to me!!! This is good news!!!

[32 degrees]

That would be great. I went on the HSOforum and saw it was not there yet. Thanks in advance.

[Chris Haley]

People don't realize that there are a lot of people that don't catch fish like that, that often. But when they do they keep them. They also need to realize that the vast majority of people that hire guides and aren't big fisherman, want to keep everything legal they catch.

[augernaut]

well said Chris. Here in Wisconsin we have a major problem in that every tourist comes up and keeps everything legal they catch. It makes me almost cry when I see the endless pics of 36" musky and 25" walleyes that people kept in the local paper. If they only knew or cared what they are doing to the resource.

[jas]

One thing some people from other parts of the state don't realize is that when the fish start biting in some (west-central) parts of the state, they are not hard to find/catch. Everyone runs back to town and tells people, and two days later the whole town is there and if you think the majority of these people throw walleyes back, your flat out crazy. I have personally received responses I found to be unbelieveable after releasing walleyes of all sizes. And as for the people who go once or twice a year, keep your limit, good for you. The people who ruin lakes are the "locals" who go back day after day and keep their limit. These people get no gratification apparently from simply being fishing and catching the fish, they have to keep them to prove they are a good fisherman, or something. And this is not a shot at all locals, I am one. 32degrees, your right.

[Rost]

Chalk another point up for 32 Degrees. 1 fish over 20 inches is perfect in my opinion. Why would anyone want to keep several eyes in the 20-24 range anyways? I suppose for that extra few pounds of meat to help feed our starving families.

[Willy]

I'm all for the one over 20" rule too. That would still allow people to keep one over 20" say if you gut hooked one, or just wanted to skin like a 21 incher. I also think there needs to be a 14 or 15 inch lower limit. Down here in southern Minnesota, you wouldn't believe the amount of people that keep those 11, 12, 13 inchers. Jeez, give them a chance to grow up a little. The DNR stocks a lot of these lakes and as soon as the fish get to 12 inches, there are all kinds of yahoos out there filling the bucket. A minimum limit, I think would help improve quality. Maybe there could be a one under 14" too, just in case of gut/gill hooking issues.

[HC Eye Hunter]

Yep, I definitley agree with one 20" or bigger but not sure that I agree with minnimums anymore. I used to think that a minnimum would be the ticket until they put a 15" restriction on Lac Qui Parle. What the lake has ended up with is a bunch of stunted fish. We have to many small fish and not enough forage to grow the little buggers. Our 15" restriction is comming off after this season and we are going to a four fish limit which I am in total favor of.

I personally think the four fish limit should be statewide.

[jas]

My thoughts exactly. It's nice to know there are others who truly believe the same things I do. When you are in conversation with people, you don't always know if they truly agree with you or not. I don't know what the answer for LQP is, I grew up ice fishing it, and there was no resemblance to what it is today. Lots of nice fish. It just gets pressured so much, I think it will be difficult to get anything going for a while.