One fish bluegill limit !!!

[Bart Sterling]

I am sure this idea isn't going to sound good to a few people and resort owners, but here is my opinion. I want to see more lakes with a one fish bluegill limit and nothing under 10 inches. Would this keep 90 percent of the fisherman off that lake. Well if it does perfect!! I know the other 10 percent of the fisherman are trophy fisherman. We need a few more lakes in this state set aside just for that. I know that the whole ecosystem of the lake has to be right to produce a fish this big but if you have that plus a one fish limit you would have a gem!! I would love to see those occasional 12-14 oz fish put back. How many times do you see fisherman throw back a 12-14 oz gill. Very Rarely!! You have to make a law to throw them back. Some may say that keeping, "if your lucky" one trophy fish to put on the wall is just as bad. I disagree!! Keeping a bucket of 1/2 - 3/4 pound fish is what kills a lake. Not one or two fish a season!!

Just my opinion!!

Bart Sterling

[ole matty]

i think its joke to have one fish limits.. unless its 5 or 10 limits with no sizes resstriction. then i m ok with it.

[Bluegills1512]

Bart this rule wouldn't fly period no matter what area of the state your in. If your only aloud to keep one bluegill over 10", you might as well make the rule "All bluegills are not to be kept and caughtand released." If you want to trophy fish then do it, because I don't want lakes in this state to turn into designated trophy lakes for a certain fish species. If you want that then go down to Iowa or Indiana and fish some farmers ponds then. Most people who fish for crappies or bluegills fish to eat them not for the trophy part. I agree most people don't release those 12-15 oz bluegills, which I wish they would learn too, but its their choice. I guess I am one of those "rare" people you talk about that releases 12-15 oz bluegills so they can make it to that pound mark, and just keep and eat the half pounders (7-8"ers), not a problem with me. Maybe I am just different but once you catch bluegills that are a pound or over you realize that they are a rarity in most lakes across this state and it takes many years for a bluegill to get that big (about 10 yrs.), and once you realize that I think panfisherman do put self imposed slots for themselves to follow. I really believe there are bluegills out there in this state over the 2 lbs. mark and even some state records out there. But you gotta put your time in (fish 3 or days straight, if possible all day sunrise to dark) and work at it, scout, research on lake maps, read articles, and if you find a nice spot keep it quiet and to yourself once you catch nice fish. To many people tell others and then wonder why they don't catch those nice fish anymore months or years down the road. Also to many people can only fish weekends (travel friday night or sat morn. fish saturday and sun morn., travel back sun afternoon) which doesn't give you the time you need to find nice fish and your always chasing a so called "hot bite" report from a buddy, neighbor or local baitshop, when your not familiar with an area of lakes you haven't fish before.

My theory is anyone can go out and catch bluegills, but catching big bluegills 10" or over on a consistent basis is something most fisherman can't do and is a skill which requires certain techniques just like walleye, bass, and muskie fishing is like. Alot of it boils down to you and your priorties and how serious you take fishing, and where you live in the state. If you have to travel to good panfishing lakes (2-3 hrs.) and can only fish weekends it is hard to develop a pattern for the fish or even find them sometimes and you won't succeed, especially if you don't have the right equipment, and if your out there for a good time, getting away from family or work rather than taking the attitude that "I am out here to catch fish, not to relax or mess around". Sorry off topic a little bit but just my opinion on why we do not need a one fish limit rule on any Minneota lake and if you put in your time you will find and catch big panfish. Plus its fishing your not going to succeed everytime!

[Luck e 1]

I also think a one fish limit is a little harsh. Although I wouldn't mind seeing a five fish limit...but one is harsh.

[TurnUpTheFishing]

I think it would be neat to have a few "trophy" panfish lakes in the State. It would be a blast to be able to catch big gills consitantly. Bluegills are available in almost every lake. If you want 'eaters' go fish those waters but if you want to have a good time catching bulls and a shot at a trophy you would have a chance.

[fish500]

If you can catch fish in a certain size range consistently, then they are not outsized fish anymore. At that point they become common. If you could succesfully manage a lake for one pound bluegills for example (assuming this is possible), then anybody who went to that lake would have a really good chance at catching a one pound bluegill. Out of that particular lake, a one pounder would no longer be much of a trophy in my opinion. Determining that a fish is large is a relative concept. For example, a one pound perch is a nice fish off of Mille Lacs, and I would throw it in the bucket to take it home and eat it. On Gull Lake where the keepers average 3 or 4 to the pound, a one pounder would be a monster, and I might take a picture of one to remember it from there.

We have a very long list of lakes in Minnesota with special regulations already. On many of these lakes, the sunfish limit has been reduced by over 80 percent (all other lakes by 33 percent or more). Based on my experience, this has greatly reduced the number of panfish fishermen on many of those lakes. I would like to see the scientific results of these regulation changes before we move on to even more drastic changes.

I would also like to see some science supporting the fact that fishermen kill lakes. I hear this statement made a lot. Under some unique circumstances, I believe that fishermen have the ability to have a large negative impact on a fishery. However, I think that usually there are other factors that play much bigger roles. For example, it is well known that panfish populations can be cyclical. Sometimes a year class or two will grow to large sizes. This situation invariably attracts larger numbers of fishermen. When the fish from these year classes are gone, fishermen usually take the blame for their dissappearance. In reality, those fish would have died soon with or without the fishing pressure because when they are big, they are old and near the ends of their life cycles. My point being that there are many other variables that are usually not considered.

I do not think that being a trophy fisherman has anything to do with being able to go to a special place where only "big" fish can be kept. To me, being a trophy fisherman means working harder and smarter than the average fisherman to catch outsized fish. Some trophy fisherman will feel differently, but I do not think that the remaining 90 percent should have their way of fishing taken away on some lakes because of it. Its up to the 90 percent to seriously question topics like this. If they don't, then the other 10 percent will take away the rights they currently have so their own personal goals can be met.

[Bart Sterling]

Wow, I suggest taking a few lakes out of a state with about 10,000 lakes and making them into a yes "harsh and strict" regulation and its like the end of the world is going to come. Why should I go to Iowa, Indiana, or up to the northern part of the state if I would like to have a lake like this. I bet if we had a lake like this in the central part of the state and all of you who are against this would hear that there a some trophy fish coming out of it you would be right there fishing it with a big smile. And if you don't get your "meal" Go to one of the other 10,000 lakes in this state. Nobody says you would have to fish a lake like this. Now I know that a one fish lime sounds crazy but RELAX, I am simply saying set a few aside for the people who would enjoy a lake like this. And I know there are fisherman out there that would like to see this. Whenever people talke about special reguations the first thing I here is there are a few up north or they don't want to see it on a lake that they fish. Well I think the DNR should take a lake with a good size fish in it and make it a one fish limit. I don't care if it is in the heart of the cities or wherever. As far as people saying it would not make a difference. Bull!!! Are you telling me that throwing back a 12-15 oz bluegill would not make a difference!!! And if a fish dies of old age GOOD. I would rather see a few fish die of old age than a fillet knife going through it. I am holding my ground on this one guys. One fish bluegill limit nothing under 10 inches. . .

Bart Sterling

[Bobby Bass]

Having a hard time wrapping my mind around a one fish pan fish limit. Pan fish are among the most prolific breeders swimming in the water. Removing but a single fish on any water would I think create a stunted population rather then a trophy lake. Trophy waters and trophy fish are usually higher on the food chain. Muskies, Northern, Walleye and Bass all of who are predator upper end of food chain species. I don't see how that would work, even in controlled farm ponds where owners are trying to have large sunfish there still has to be some predator fish to keep a balance in the pond. Otherwise the water is soon over ran but to many sunfish and the food source is reduced by to many mouths to feed resulting in many smaller fish. I am no biologists by any means but reducing your limit to one is not going to get you a trophy on what are basically a feeder fish for other fish. Harvesting the smaller fish and releasing the larger ones to grow would be your best bet.

[Mr.Seaguar]

10" blugills are a lot more common than you think. Problem is, most of them are basically uncatchable. I fish a very popular ice fishing lake in Iowa. There is plenty of 10" and up blugills in this lake. The water is very clear, you can see the fish simply by looking down the hole. I catch all kinds of 8-9", but the closer they get to 10", the less chance you have of catching them. Heres the real kick in the shorts: if the big ones are looking at your bait and another fish comes in to look, the bigger one swims off. Every single time! And the largest ones usually swim with 2-3 smaller ones, so you are pretty much fubar from the start. So a one fish might increase the number of 10" blugills, but you would probably never catch one.

[fisherking01]

you might have better luck with a catch and release of 9-11 inch bluegills and a 1 over 11 inch included in your limit. simply stopping the harvest of all bluegills might be detrimental to a lake with overpopulating. It would have to be a lake managed solely for bluegills without the elements of predator fish. There are a lot of lakes in MN with 10 inch plus sunfish, you get out, do your homework, spend your time and you'll get into trophy panfish.

[JustinG]

Oh geesh... I thought we went through this like 2 days ago under "Crappie Slot Limit" I don't even know where to start, so I am not going to because this is going nowhere. The only thing that I will say is this-a lake that is managed for "big panfish" (whatever that means) with the strictest of regulations does not mean that you are going to catch one.

Maybe we should tell the Northern Pike not to eat any panfish over 9"?? Or tell the 7 year old that he can't bring his fish home because its 9.75"??

[sticknstring]

Quote:

---

Harvesting the smaller fish and releasing the larger ones to grow would be your best bet.

---

Precisely.

[Coach1310]

I like catching big gills as much as anyone, but they are considered "pan fish" and are targeted because of the meals they provide. I can't see a lot of support for such a thing because the majority of "panfisherman" keep fish for a meal, and one gill isn't a meal. I also think this would get a negative response from bait shop owners and resort owners. Just my thoughts. I personally like fishing "5 fish limit" lakes. They have some giants in them and I go know I am going to practice catch and release.

[huntingmaxima]

I think what we need to do, is to post the spawning bed areas like they used to. It used to be that you could not fish in the spawning beds. The other option would be to close the season during spawning, they do for walleyes and notherns.

[TurnUpTheFishing]

I wouldnt be for a one fish limit on all lakes but it would be interesting to see it on a few lakes. I really doubt it would ever happen, even on just one lake. It seems that in the minds of the general fishing population panfish will always be table fair regardless of size.

I think if the one fish limit ever went into effect on a few lakes and quality of fish increased then people could see first hand what may happen to many lakes if only they released larger panfish and didnt have to get a limit every outing.

[Bluegills1512]

Bart I respect ya for standing to this rule you want to be imposed on a few lakes in central minn. But in reality I doubt there is a lake that can be managed for bluegills, because of a lakes ecosystem and have a balance of predator fish in it as well. Because if you have a one bluegill limit of one over 10" then you have to have very strict rules on bass and northern limits as well. So you might as well make it a C&R lake only, which I am sure some guys on here would love but the common fisherman wouldn't especially locals who fish that lake regularly. Now if you could find a lake that can hold a good bluegill population with a balance of good forage and predator fish, that could take all the fishing pressure that it would recieve, because believe me every tom, Dick and harry would fish this lake if they could have a chance at a 1 lb or higher bluegill and this lake is in a vacinity where there are many other lakes around so people that are locals do not get peed off when one of their lakes gets very restrictive they could just go to another lake close by, then it could maybe work.

But I like how one guy previously stated that if you manage a bluegill lake for big ones (pound or over) then a pound bluegill really wouldn't be a trophy anymore. Just like on Mille Lacs before they had the slot limit like they have now, it was very hard to catch a walleye over 28" and if you did it was considered a trophy, but now with the slot that is there and seeing how many people caught 27,28,29, even 30" walleyes this last 2006 season out of that lake I wouldn't consider anything under 30" to be a trophy walleye anymore especially on that lake. I personally won't mount a walleye unless its 10 lbs or over, but thats just me.

Bart my comment towards you going to Indiana or Iowa if you want to catch big bluegills is because they are down there. Its just like you telling us " if you don't get your "meal" Go to one of the other 10,000 lakes in this state." If you don't get your fill on catching big bluegills in Minnesota then travel somewhere else to do it, instead of imposing rules like this. Its kind of like the muskie's inc. and muskie fisherman wanting to stock Gull Lake when there are already a number of muskie lakes minutes from Brainerd, such as Alexander, Shamineau, Fish Trap, and Mille Lacs. Its all about convinence for us (fisherman), money, and what we want for fish species in our lakes, and not whats best ecologically for them. So in a way I am kind of fed up with people suggesting these new "thought up on my own" rules when A) lakes they live by are over fished and over pressured want to take the easy route and do not want to put any time and effort into catching big bluegills, because that is what I enjoy about fishing for big bluegills is the rarity of finding them, getting them to bite, and figuring out big bluegills on other lakes as well. Oh and Bart I bet if there was a lake like this in central Minnesota you wouldn't see me fishing it because I hate fishing by alot of people, and I like to find big bluegills on my own on normal lakes that wouldn't have a 1 fish limit.

[decoy]

I'm sorry but this is Hilarious.

In my area of the state, it's not a porblem. We don't need these kinds of rules. I fish primarily for Bluegills. I keep a lot of fish that are 8-9 inchers to eat. I eat fish once or twice a week and LOVE it. I fish to eat fish, and oh yeah, because it's fun as he11.

I have released a few 11.5 and one 12 incher this year. Of larger fish, I try to keep more of the larger females than males. In my opinion a one fish limit would be crazy statewide! If a lake has the biomass to produce big fish, and has a good preditor base, it's going to keep on producing big fish.

One sunfish does not make a meal for my family... 5 fish won't even feed my crew. It takes 8-10 to make the table.

If you live near highly populated areas like the cities. You're going to have a pressure problem. The kind of rule you may need is a reduced limit, but even then limits are for law abiders. Law breakers are everywhere and they can't be stopped by a new rule or regulation.

I would even dare say, if there was such a lake, someone would have a filleting Hay Day.

On one or two lakes near the cities it may be worthwhile.... fine with me.

State wide? Absolutely No Way.

Beyond Ridiculous

Later

PS

reply with your email if you have High speed and want to see my latest aquaview panfish clip from Monday. Cool.

[eurolarva]

I have high speed I would like to see the footage. [email protected]

[Bluegills1512]

Thank you decoy, because I understand where you are coming from because in your area of the state you shouldn't have a rule like this. Those are some monster bluegills a 11 1/2 and footer wow! My biggest is an 11" and I hope to improve on that this spring.

But your right, law breakers are law breakers and they will break the law no matter what the rules and regulations are. They might stop if you take away their fishing privileges and huge fines, but even then they could still get away with fishing without a license. I do think the rules are getting out of hand though for fishing, and I think pretty soon you won't be able to keep a meal of fish for the table. Decoy I rarely fish for trophy fish and I am a firm believer of Catch and Release into the grease! (Buddy of mine came up with that) I always fish for a meal or my limit, because I like to eat fish and I have the right to do so in keeping my limit if I choose too. Saying that doesn't mean I don't throw fish back because I do, and I make a self imposed slot limit on myself for bluegills. My rule of thumb is keep anything 7-9" and everything bigger goes back unless I plan on mounting it. So basically for me now anything under 11" goes back because I'd like to top my personal best of 11".

In defense of Bart though I think he was just talking one or 2 lakes near the metro area, and not state wide, because if this rule was state wide I know and I will admit I would break it everytime when I go bluegill fishing. Otherwise I'll just move to Wisconsin or North Dakota as other options or just fish in those states, and go to Canada more!

[decoy]

Catch and Release into the grease!

Let me tell ya, I love that line.

Euro, you got mail. Sorry about the low quality, but it's still pretty good.

If it's a problem near the Cities, I can totally see that, and understand why a guy would want those limits. I agree, it would be fun to have a little lake near home that was loaded with monster bulls, but the science makes absolutely no sense because the lake would probably stunt....

Unless, it was C&R Muskies as well... Now that would be an awesome lake.

You can bread um, fry um, boil um, bake um, saute um, broil um, put um in a sandwich, put um in a stew........

Fried Gill Sandwich for lunch. MMMM MMMM

[gurkster]

Hi decoy. I would like a look. [email protected]. Thx.

[FishGUY]

Hi decoy, I would be interested in a look, [email protected]

[spotter]

[if you want to trophy fish then do it, because I don't want lakes in this state to turn into designated trophy lakes for a certain fish species. If you want that then go down to Iowa or Indiana and fish some farmers ponds then.]

well said bluegill1512

If you manage a lake for trophy fish then in my opion there are no trophies in it, It kinda like fenced hunting or shooting fish in a barrel.

Don't get me wrong it would be fun to go catch jumbo gills but in a managed lake anybody could do it and that takes the sport out of it. just my 2 cents