Yearly Limit

[Guest]

SKin dog, yes you would be legal.

The Daily limit there is 4, and the possession limit is twice the daily limit as far as I know on the Mille Lacs limits also.

The minnesota Daily Walleye limit is 6, The possesion limit is 12. How this fits in with special regulated lakes, ask a CO, or call the DNR.

If you are fishing and you have 9 walleyes in your freezer/fridge at home, and none of them were caught the day you are fishing... you are allowed to harvest 3 more walleye with only 1 over XX" IF you dont already have 2 fish over the 1/day length limit(only allowed 2 25" walleyes in a possession limit, 1 daily for an example).

Read the regulations, its layed out very easy to understand in the inland regulations. The Mille Lacs regulations are a bit more complicated.. It tells us the limits and slots will be posted at the access on Mille Lacs.

Minnesota DNR HSOforum .. www.dnr.state.mn.us .. you can get the current regulations rather than rely on what anyone else tells you.

[Mark Christianson]

Maybe we should have a CO check your freezer That Guy.

Read the regs yourself. Possession limit is NOT twice the daily limit for most species.

You posted earlier in this thread to call TIP if you see people breaking the law. Careful what you wish for.

[Guest]

Ok

I just looked at the regs and I stand corrected. They must have changed this for 2005.

The daily and possession limit is the same unless otherwise noted in the regulations.

That would leave us allowed 6 walleyes with 1 over 24" overall. I would safely assume this also means you are only allowed 4 fish from Mille Lacs. If you have 3 in your freezer, you can harvest 1 within the slot limits until your fish are consumed.

I think its kind of bogus.. I feed my family of 3 during the winter because I am the only one that will fish on the ice.. 10 crappies is not a decent fish fry for 3 unless they are huge.

[Guest]

blb.. i was typing as you responded.

The CO is more than welcome.. as I stated before, I only keep a meal of fish in the freezer. Right now I have 2 16" walleyes frozen.. thats it. I usually stock up a little more at the end of the ice season on panfish. Now that the possession limits have changed, I guess I will have to add a couple more species to hold us over for the open water.

A couple decent northerns will go a long ways.

[Mark Christianson]

No there wasnt a change for 2005 in possession limits(for the most part) That Guy.............

Especially not the walleyes that you used in your example above.

[Captain B.R.K]

Interesting read here guys and good ideas/questions being served. I'm not getting into the limite dilema because quite frankly, I have 12 walleyes in my freeze as we speak all from Mille Lacs I'm KIDDING!

I think fisher people for the most part are doing a better job of harvesting and doing more C&R than in the past. I think people are more responsible and tuned into the ideas of C&R. I do believe it starts with us though as some of the things said are asking way to much from the DNR. Personally, I think we pay enough for fishing licenses, trout licenses that people would be fed up with paying an additional fee for walleye fishing. I get your drift, but it would be a tough sell especially when gas, income tax, housing and everything else prices are going up at signifcant rates. There is only so much money a guy has to give before he runs out of $$$$.

To be honest with you, I am one that practices a lot of C&R. If I'm not planning on eating my catch in the week, then it goes right back the hole. People at my work think I'm crazy. I call it responsible and looking out for our future outdoors people

[Guest]

Quote:

---

No there wasnt a change for 2005 in possession limits(for the most part) That Guy.............

Especially not the walleyes that you used in your example above.

---

Is correcting myself not good enough BLB?

Your more than welcome to come look in my freezer. You seem to be on top of things enough where you can research which year recently the possession limits changed if its that important to you. I have no idea.. I cant remember, or notice every new rule in the book. If I was a freezer stacker, I would be in violation. The fact is, I am not. I harvest fish in a resposible manor that most would find very acceptable. In fact, as soon as I had noticed I had made the mistake, I corrected myself and made it public to those who asked the origional question. What else can a person do?

Its hard enough to figure out what you can harvest these days at the start of a new season and to make sure I'm not putting an illegal fish in the boat with all the *new rules*.

Its late, I'm going to bed to wake up and catch some crappies... I can still keep 10 right? Theres no regulation saying I can only keep 1 over 9"? Or some new law stating I cant fish from 30 minutes before sunset to 1 hour after sunrise except for tuesdays?

I dont think its there now.. but next week it wouldnt surprise me... until then.. I'm going fishing.

[walleyeiceguy]

I feel that something needs to be done reguarding the number of fish people keep. I know there isnt a way to inforce what people have in there freezers. I feel that the DNR could make the fish size slot smaller so people stop reaching there limit so soon. I see people at Lake of the Woods filling there limit with a bunch of tiny fish. Unless they reduse the size limit slot to say 13 to 18 the fishing up there will be like milacs soon.

We need to start letting the small fish grow up so we can start catching bigger fish and keep letting the huge ones go so they take care of the breeding.

I know I kind of rambled of on a tangent and may have lost the subject of this post but I feel strong about this. It can also be a way of preventing how many fish people take home.

The lakes are starting to get to much pressure and we need to do things to keep the fishing good for years to come.

[HarryG]

If spending a little more money on stocking helps, then we should do it. I can't say if more stocking is the answer, but I believe it would help on many lakes in Minnesota. I think the money would be well spent. I don't buy the argument that a guy would run out of money due to an additional fee. $500 augers, $500 Flashers, ATV's not to mention the money spent on open water fishing. All this spent on equipment, but not $40 for a stamp? ($40 is very high). If the DNR can make fish populations better, they should and someone has pay for it. A stamp would be the least expensive way, in my opinion.

[iffwalleyes]

Relax guys. That Guy as long as I can remember walleyes possesion is the same as your daily limit. So there has been no recent changes. Glad to hear you are responsible in your harvesting of fish though it is all up to us. Harry G I don't think that anyone is saying they don't have the money to pay for stamps for stocking. My biggest concern is that a portion of our license fee should already be doing that. I really wonder if they did have a stamp would it go to stocking or would it be a "user fee" as the governor like to call them to everyone else TAX. I personally am not in suport of a state wide slot either as mentioned. Many lakes need to be managed individually. A state wide slot will not fix all of the fishing in every lake. Just my opinion on this topic. I love these kind of topics because you find out others viewpoints. Many I agree with and many I don't.

[Pat K]

This isn' a shot at That Guy. Just trying to remember when the possesion limit changed. I found a '96 MN. regs book and at that time the daily limit and possesion limit were already the same.

Pat K