Could we get some new catfish laws?

[DARK30]

Did a search for the word cyclic. Thought it was someone who really likes to ride bike a lot but no...

http://digestive.niddk.nih.gov/ddiseases/pubs/cvs/

[Blue Kayak]

Two potential new laws seem to be the most popular in this thread.

1. The closed season for flatheads during winter to prevent snagging.

2. Using two lines.

Approaching the DNR to implement a closed flathead season seems pretty straight forward (at least compared to using two lines). There have been articles about catching flatheads in the winter. These anglers give the appearance of making legitimate catches. However, as these catches are investigated more thoroughly it appears the flatheads are snagged. It seems that a closed season would help protect flatheads from unsportsmanlike angling during their dormant period.

Approaching the DNR on using two lines is more difficult. I can think of four reasons (and there probably are more) the DNR would be reluctant to allow two lines:

1. It affects all fish species, not just catfish.

2. More rigs would be using some type of bait instead of artificial lures increasing the number of gut hooked fish.

3. More fish are likely to be caught depleting the resource.

4. It appears there is an increasing problem with ice fisherman using more than two lines or having unattended lines (at least according to FM posts in the ice fishing forum).

Ironically, item four might give us an opportunity to discuss the two line issue with the DNR. I believe the current 2 line law for ice angling is somewhat vague. For instance when fishing with a party you have to remain within unaided visual and vocal contact. This apparently means that if you step out of your fish house and can no longer see your fishing partner, you have violated the law if you left your line in the hole. There may be other language that could be improved. You have to remain within 200 feet of a tip up, but tip downs are not mentioned. Neither are audible strike sensors.

As I mentioned earlier, shore anglers probably deserve two lines more than ice anglers. Certainly shore anglers have very limited areas where they can fish.

There should be some benefit to the fishery if two lines are allowed. A combination of some or all of the following might interest the DNR.

1. Two lines are allowed for shore fishing and anglers must be within ___ feet of their equipment and also must maintain visual or audible contact with their equipment.

2. Two lines are allowed if barbless hooks are used on both lines. We could make the point that this would get more anglers using barbless hooks.

3. Two lines are allowed if all game fish are immediately returned to the water (catch and release only). Perhaps also require that barbless hooks be used. This might get more people practicing catch and release and having higher survival rates.

4. Two lines are allowed if an additional fee of $____ is paid.

5. Two lines are allowed if anglers complete a course (perhaps online) for practices to improve catch and release survival rates.

Do you have any other ideas for making two lines more acceptable to the DNR?

[Guest]

Blue Kayak.. I know your intent is for the anglers, and the fish both.

I think #1 on your list is about all I can agree with... except for the audible part. If you cant see your rod, dont cast it there.

Barbless hooks and live bait dont mix. I am not putting a $2 minnow on a hook that the bait will wiggle its way off. Many people are skeptical on the barbless hook issue claiming more fish swallow them.. tru or not, I really dont know, and I dont intend to find out. I will not fish barbless unless it is a law, period.

An additional fee for the extra line.. IF within reason I wouldnt kick and scream too much.

As for higher mortality from gut hooked fish because of an extra line? I think not. I dont know how you catfish, but I think there are 20 people on this site that will vouch for me that I am always on top of my rods, and what is happening on the end of the line, or lines in waters where more than 1 line is allowed. I fish with a lot of folks, every one of us *regulars* are very responsible, and rarely gut hook a fish because we are on top of it.

I am not starting a debate, just expressing my views is all. Barbless hooks would be a serious problem for catfishermen.. we would need 4 rods then.. so we at least had bait left on one for 10 minutes.

I do understand, and respect what you are getting at, but sometimes the shoe doesnt fit.

[fiskyknut]

Thanks for that post Dennis, well done with your mention of mother natures roll in some of these things fishey, and also your opinion of how we as anglers may fit into the waters and the fishes we enjoy. Much of what you posted could be applied to other watersheds and fish species within MN as well.

I sometimes scratch my head on some peoples motivations and intention with their opinion on different reg change arguements, and even more so with topic starters and/or the more vocal players. Dennis your post here shows you may grasp what I anyhow see as that big picture we all should maybe focus on a bit more, and it is obvious that you are sincere. I da man touched on it with a sentence containing...."not what you or I want". I feel some of those who may want to see or try to make this, that, or some other things happen reg changewise are also somewhat blind to the other users of our fish stocks, and the how, why, and for whom the agencies manage our watersheds the way they do. Worse than that they may not see the big picture of management of the resource as a whole ecosystem. The 'always more and bigger' mentality of the strictly 'aesthetic' anglers of any species of fish seems to weigh awefully heavy on their opinions of our regs and just what should be done down the road, which could be detrimental to the fishery as a whole, and does not take into account the 'consumptive' anglers. Add to this some anglers enthusiasm for a particular fish and there can only be a one-sidedness to their opinions. Many times it looks like one 'proposal' just defeats the goal in general, that cake and eat it too syndrome. Hard to justify cutting back or shutting down harvest and in the same breathe try and open up regs to allow for what many would see as easier capture. Those of us that do now, or may in the future have an interest in any useage of our resources beyond that of the every day average joe angler should take special heed of this.

I have watched this one since it popped up, 'catfish' and 'laws' always spark my interest, on top of that I also saw mention of one of my favorite fisheries, and one which I am quite familiar get stirred or sprinkled right in too. Well founded and grounded debate is good, as are random opinions from all, whether they know whats really up with a particular fishery or not. Fortunately we also have science helping with our regulation decisions, and not just emotion no matter how well meaning, or to any or anyones particular aim's or agenda. I'm not boned up on the MN Flathead fisheries at all but do find it most interesting. I was Catfish when Catfish was'nt cool and all this new age thinking is just what I like eh! Although I can't really give an honest assesment/opinion on MN's Flathead fisheries down south there bear with me if I do jump into this one later in a more generalized way, I was tempted the other day anyhow and I have now!

Peace all....fiskyknut

[hanson]

Good to hear from you Fisky, I knew you'd be popping into this conversation sooner or later.

One problem that I foresee is that when we are talking about catfish, we are really talking about 2 distinct species obviously- Flatheads & Channel Cats. Both species of fish are distinctly different and have to be approached with regulations differently. I think that is a given.

The other problem is the bodies of water that these fish inhabit. Having statewide regulations for catfish in general is probably a mistake. Red River channel cats and the tributaries, Minnesota River flathead cats, and Mississippi River flathead cats all deserve to be treated as special cases IMO. The Mississippi River could be broken down into the respective pools as well with P4 receiving a critical eye with respect to winter angling of flatheads.

Is an overabundance of special catfish regulations a good thing though? I have a hard time keeping up to speed on our ever changing walleye regulations now.

When is that ice going to melt anyway???

[fiskyknut]

Chris, you figured I'd 'pop' in eh? Felt almost chummed and baited I did!

I totally agree with your 'given' paragragh.

I have been as you have said before, 'rehearsing' another long and windy, complete with some very enlightening links for the good ole 'concern' thread. Much of which could/would apply here and would also reach a broader element as well here, and those on that thread would likely see it here too.

I have also nailed down an 'alias' from another site who has posted there, one of those 'incognito's' I had mentioned and will end up posting on another HSOforum eventually as well as the 'truth is out there' and must be told to another segment who may not be aware of FACTS.

5 days a week on the ice has kept me from posting much this winter, things are slowing up a bit now for the midwinter lull, and I may just find the time to get some thoughts posted sometime this week here and there by golly! Interested? LOL!

I have a hard time expressing myself just right here in type, and must 'dance oh so daintily' around certain subjects and sensitivities. You have heard some of these things while we were fishing the Red last fall so you would know what I mean eh!

Ice will be around up here till April anyhow....-16 here this morning, brrrr!

Take care.....fiskyknut