2006 Walleye REGS debate

[fishinkrop]

Hello i may be new to this forum but in not new to walleye fishing, the 2006 regs are 1 walleye over 20' now to me a 20' walleye is a nice fish and a fine meal. Now i can undestand that they would like every walleye lake to have trophy size eye's but is it being micro managed?. I love catching my limit just as much as the guy on the dock with a bucket full of bullheads and baby sunnies- and those are forage fish. Anyone else here disagree with the new 20' limit? who here has a favorite walleye lake were they all seem to be over the limit by a inch or more?

thanks, Jeff

[Blackduck]

Personally I think the slot should run from 20"-30" and 1 over 30" if you want to mount your trophy.

Hard Subject. I can get a meal of fish pretty much anytime I want, a lot of people can't and I am not taking them into consideration. I am just posting the way I would like to see it.

[gunflint]

It's now the law and there's nothing that can be done about it. It's the way things are these days. I don't like the smell of ciggartte smoke so you can't smoke. I don't like guns so you can't have them. My lake needs a slot, so every lake needs a slot. I don't like the taste of a 23 inch walleye, so you shouldn't eat one.

The old days of going out to catch a meal are slowly comming to an end. Now it's all about catching trophies, taking a picture of it, putting it back, and having a piece of synthetic material hanging on the wall. I stand 100% behind selective harvest and cpr, but soon all we will have is cpr. And that's where PETA steps in for the final knockout punch. They will have an excellent case because if you're not keeing any for food, all your doing is traumatizing them.

The great tradgedy in all this is that come October when the fish are deep, alot of walleyes over 20 inches will be floating on the top because it's the law. Wait a minute I have an idea for a new law. No fishing deeper than 20 feet after turn over. Better yet, I don't fish in October so you shouldn't fish in October.

[tonyjor]

Well put, Gunflint!

[eyechaser99]

I think this reg is alright. When Ive gotten 1 over 20 inches I have only gotten another one over 20 a couple times. I think the dnr will be measuring more fish in peoples coolers or livewells from now on. They can be a pain sometimes when they ask questions and check over your boat. Guess there just doing there job but I think the fishermen shoulda voted on this law for the size of walleye instead of the government.

[fishinkrop]

The new Reg is a good idea in THEORY. sure it would be nice to have a lake full of only trophy walleye. but what happens when everybody gets their trophy, then its another 5 years untill it cycles to that again. Now here is whats so great about up north walleye fishin, the people willing to spend 1500$ on a trip to winnie are the conservitive sportsman who fish mostly for sport (yeah we all love a nice slice of walleye) but within the metro area there are the fish horders we've all seem them, we've all wanted to kick over that bucket of 60 baby fish( for what they spent on bait they could of baught a decent bag of frozen filets). the bottom line here is what eyechaser says; a reg like this needs enforcement. id be glad to let the DNR measure my catch. I hope he also says somthing to that guy robbing the lake of producers.

[Boedigheimer]

Although this statewide slot may seem a little extreme, it is absolutely neccesary. Alot of our premiere walleye lakes are top heavy, having mostly 19-23" fish. If the harvest of these fish is unregulated you could damage a fishery during an an extended hot-bite. The average fisherman today using GPS, mapping software, powerful electronics, and lake by lake literature, is ten times as efficient at finding and catching fish as they were 10 years ago. We cannot rely on fishermans ethics of catch and release anymore, I applaud the DNR and the new regulation.

[john.wells]

I am with Gunflint on this one 100%. the anti everything's are chipping away at our rights. I am not for raping our resources at all. I am mostly catch and release, but I do keep what I can use and want to retain that ability. There are plenty of times when I catch just one or two walleyes, and they may happen to be 22 or so inches and they are great for eating and that is all I need for my wife and I to have a meal. Lots of folks have bigger families and a several fish of this size would be good. Going to the store and buying frozen (yuck) fish doesn't cut it for me. We all talk about the future of fishing and how good and important these restrictions are. They won't be worth a hoot if fishing is banned altogether.

[ASMOLEY]

Lets face the facts and relize what the DNR is trying to accomplish here. Most people don't keep the big walleyes because it's true they don't taste as good. However it's the people that are keeping limits of 20+ in walleyes every outing to feed there entire family are going to ruin our lakes. Those fish are the spawning stock you get rid of those you get rid of walleyes. The DNR just wants to protect our natural resource so generations to come can enjoy catching fish. If your only fishing to catch a meal then you could have saved yourself some money by not buying a boat,fishouse,vexilar,rods,jigs,GPS,ect.... and just buying fish. A 20+ caught walleye is going to taste the same as the one you bought in the store.I enjoy fishing Mille Lacs because you might not be able to keep everything but you sure catch some dandies! Those fish wouldn't be there if it wasn't for the slots emposed on the lake. I really enjoy fishing and catching big fish but every year it becomes more of a challenge. I wonder why?

[gunflint]

I think that a slot is a great idea for Mille Lacs. But, not everyone fishes Mille Lacs and not every lake in the state has the same issues.

I agree that there will always be fish poachers and hogs that will keep fish that they shouldn't but having new laws that restrict ethical fisherman ( which I believe the vast majority are.) Won't effect the bads guys at all. They will just keep doing what their doing.

I would almost be willing to bet a GLOOMIS rod that the next push will be for a 4 fish limit. Because that's what Mille Lacs needs.

[Big Ick]

What bugs me the most about a state-wide slot is that the DNR is using a 20# hammer to nail in a thumb tack...it's just overkill. What is the 1 walleye over 20" geared to help or fix?...Spawning? If so, then what about the lakes where the only occurrence of walleye are the fish that were stocked? I think the DNR calls these lakes "put and take" lakes. There's no natural walleye reproduction going on in these lakes. So, the 1 over 20" isn't going to help the spawning here (it will keep more fish in the lake though).

Also, is it the DNR or legislature that came up with the 1 over 20"? My guess is legislature.

I also can't remember the last time it took 6 walleye to make a meal for myself. I would rather see the limit dropped to 2 walleye of any size. Two 22" walleye could easily feed 3 or 4 people. What about the fishermen that have families and consistently catch walleye to feed their family versus the bachelor fisherman. Who's the bigger consumer?

The unfortunate thing is that there is no "good" solution for everyone. I guess when the fishing laws get to out of control for this bachelor, I'll just move out of state.

[fisherman27]

gunflint,

mille lacs already has a 4 fish limit as does leech.

[Rost]

We have a 4 fish, 1 over 20 inch limit here in SD, and to be honest, I love it! Since moving to SD (from MN) I have caught more fish from 20-28 inches in the last 4 years than I have in my entire life back in MN. I left

MN thinking that catching a 23-25 inch walleye was a treat...now, I almost expect to catch a fish that size each time I go out!

Each year my brother makes the trip over to SD for a fishing trip. And each year he comments just how impressed he is with the quality of fish we have. He is amazed how we can catch 25-30 quality walleyes with nearly half that are over 20 inches long. Now that's fun stuff!

Sure, I like to take a few fish home once in awhile, but I can't remember that last fish I have taken over 20 inches. A 20-25 inch fish looks silly on the fillet board. Let them go.

[Blue Kayak]

In Minnesota it seems that most of the complaints about DNR policy is that there are too many laws. In Illinois there are lots of complaints that their fishery laws are too lax. For example, the Illinois sport catfish anglers complain that persons can use up to 50 unattended lines (bank lines or jug lines), or a trot line with up to 50 hooks. Even worse, for $35 you can become a commercial fisherman and harvest catfish for sale using up to 500 hooks.

I think our fishery is more fragile than we realize. The Minnesota Historical Society wrote an article in their Summer 2001 issue titled: "Without Careful Consideration: Why Carp Swim in Minnesota." It's on the web, and you can find it easily with google (why carp swim in Minneosta). Our fishery was damaged once by over harvesting, and stocking carp was thought to be the solution.

As Boedigheimer stated in an earlier post, most fisherman today have lots of aids. I'd rather live in a state where the resource is protected.

[john.wells]

Without having read the article, I can tell you with certainty that our DNR is run by morons.

[Stenzel]

I believe this topic was brought up last November - December. I have a few questions and maybe someone can help me out. Who within the DNR came up with this? The biologist or some English grad who talks a good game (NO offense to the English grads on here but I think you get my point) Was there any public input into this decision? Was the slot put into place for biological reasons or knee jerk sympathy reasons? If it was done for a biological reason for the betterment of the fisheries, I want to see the report.

Like it was posted, after 5 years everyone will have their trophey's and will complain about something else so the DNR will change the rule so that you can only fish on the weekends from 9 am to 5 pm because that's when it is convenient and fair for every one. I can't wait to see all the 20+ inch fish floating this summer.

As far as I'm concerned DNR = PETA

[gunflint]

I have another point. The state record walleye was caught in 1979 on a system that, at the time, wasn't managed all that much. In 26 years of micro managing for trophy walleyes state wide, the record still stands. Something isn't adding up.

[fisherman27]

The reason the record still stands is because people are keeping the big walleye and not letting them grow to the monster record breakers!

[Rost]

I just emailed the MN DNR asking for an explanation. We'll see what comes of it.

While reading through these comments, these posts all have one thing in common. It seems that people are very threatened by any new law the DNR passes. And I don't blame you! IMHO,MN has enough stupid laws and you don't need any more. However, I don't believe MN created this new rule to harm any of you. In fact, I have to believe that they have good scientific reasoning behind the decision. And if I were in MN again, I'd probably support it.

We need to understand that the sport of fishing has changed (and will continue to change). Therefore, the rules must change along with it. The number of walleye anglers in our country has more than quadrupled in the last 25 years. We no longer have lakes all to ourselves and the odds are now stacked against the walleye. We have cutting edge technology put into fish graphs that help us to find and catch more walleyes than ever before! And to make matters worse, now people can simply log on to the web to find out where the best bite is. One post on the web can be responsible for cleaning out a small lake! (I've seen it done). And these are the reasons we won't see a new record for awhile.

The new age fisherman is coming down the pipe boys! Catch and release is becoming more and more popular and I don't see it going away. Yeah, I had my glory days--pictures of me with stringers of 23 inch fish was common. I've matured as an angler since then though. I realized that if I want to eat walleye every day, I should sell my boat, drive to the grocery store, and save some money.

I also seriously doubt the PETA Organization is going to take the world over anytime soon. Especially with folks like us around. We just need to do our job and pass our hunting and fishing along to the youngsters.

We'll see what the MN DNR replies to me and I'll pass it on. On a side note, I also asked why MN is the ONLY state in the region that allows only one line. I am anxious for that response....oops, that could open another can of worms

[john.wells]

It isn't just PETA- there are a pile of organizations that have the "new age" agenda hidden in their creed. Sierra Club, Humane Society, and most of the "Foundations" (such as Ford, Cargill, Rockerfellar) to name a few. Anyone remember Alan Garber during the Ventura administration? That joker had no business running our DNR! (and Ventura had no business running our state. I'm a little worried about this "impaler" jacka$$ who also used to be a wrestler). I know that there are many, many facets of the DNR beyond hunting and fishing and it is a difficult process to put everything together and try to maintain a balance. Biology is very complex and people with college degrees are needed to make it work. BUT- to get a job in the DNR even digging a ditch you need a college degree . They need to get to the roots and get some "real world" folks in there. They have pounded tons of walleye and other fish into our lakes and rivers to compensate for the increased demand, and it works. Big fish are out there to be caught, maybe not as many as in the past, but there are more lakes now that have the potential! Most walleye lakes now have not always had walleyes, same goes for smallmouth and muskies. These are riverine species that have been planted all over the state mostly with success. Commercial fishing is what has been the source of fish depletion. I agree that there need to be limits-but let's keep it from getting ridiculous!

[gunflint]

I'm having trouble stating my case clearly and for that I apologize. I am 100% in favor of catch and release used in conjunction with selective harvest. My opposition is to making laws based on emotion instead of science when it comes to walleyes.

Using Upper Red Lake as an example. From what little I've read about URL, it seems that fishing pressure and commercial netting all but destroyed the walleye population. The DNR wisely closed URL to walleye fishing for a few years to give the walleyes a chance for a comeback. It sounds like the program worked. What the DNR didn't do was close every lake in the state to walleye fishing just because URL needed restrictions.

What has happened now with the new 1 over 20 law is the DNR has decided to regulate all lakes in the state because of the needs of a few, all be it heavily pressured lakes.

On a side note: The DNR announced that there was a mistake on page 5 of the 2006 reg book. You can have more than 1 walleye over 20 inches in your possetion if, they were caught in succesive days.

[ASMOLEY]

Rost i agree with you. If you think that the DNR is out to stop you from catching a meal of walleyes than you are no more intelligent that a wrestling governer. Take a look at the big picture here guys. Lets keep our lake plentiful with walleyes so we don't have to go through extesive stocking effort to replenish an overhavest of walleyes.

[Rost]

As promised, here is the response I recieved from the MN DNR.

"Hello,

The 1 >20" replaced the 1>24" during the 2005 legislative session, and was initiated by the legislature, not DNR, though DNR supported the move. More and more we're managing for quality fisheries while trying to sustain a harvest tradition, and restrictive regulations are the only method to accomplish that goal. However, the current 1>20" will not likely have much effect. The main problem is that it applies tothe daily limit, not the possession limit (page 5 on the 2006 synopsis incorrectly stated that it did apply to possession). That means if an angler wanted to accumulate big walleyes, they could, for example, harvest a 20"+ walleye every day for six days.

The question on number of lines has come up a lot this winter (there must be some forum somewhere generating the interest!). MN has historically managed fish rather conservatively. With increasing angler proficiency and demand for quality fisheries, I think it's the other states that ought to be looking to restrict their number of lines. Just my opinion."

Well, there you have it. I have to admit, I was suprised he did not take a stronger stance.

[First Ice-Mike]

I don't believe this new reg. was based on an "emotional response" or is a "knee-jerk reaction." I think the people raising a big stink about this are the ones giving an emotional reaction. This really isn't that big of a deal - how many 20" plus walleyes does a guy need anyways?? Don't give my any of that "we need to be able to feed our families" junk either. If you want to feed your families 22" walleyes then buy them a license and take them fishing. That way you can keep a couple more fish and you get to spend quality time with the family. If you're a bach. one walleye over 20" will easly feed you - probably twice. I see no problem with this - it can only help. I just hope they enforce it.

FI

[honker23]

The thing I get tired of hearing is the "prime breeders" arguement. The DNR has stated most of the lakes south of Alexandria are all stocked fish. Taking a 25 incher is no more damaging to the resource than a 15 incher, except for the trophy potential. In that case make the entire lake CPR and grow a bunch of 8-12 pounders so you can go out and catch 10 pounders one right after the other.

We can't treat the entire state the same when we have such a large variety of lakes and systems.