Proposed walleye limit change?

[james_walleye]

Well what is the difference between a blanket 1 fish over 20" reg or a reg that says all fish between 19-26" have to go back as far as what the fisheries biologists are doing??? I'd love to see the DNR go in an individually manage every lake in this state. I'd love to see the DNR go in and put the perfect slot on the 1,000 acre lake i love to fish for walleyes. But if you are looking for the DNR to go in and individually manage every 1,000 acre or less lake in this state you will never see it. They arent going to individually manage 20,000 lakes in MN. Again the bottom line is this in my opinion. If someone catches a 14" walleye and they want to keep it, they will with or without a slot. If someone catches a 16" walleye and they want to keep it, they will with or without the slot. If lake X has a year where the 14-16" walleyes really go nuts and the population gets hit hard, they will get hit hard with or without the slot. If lake X has walleyes "stacked" up at a certain length such as 13", it certainly wouldnt be because of a slot that MN puts in. MN very rarely puts in a slot that has a bottom end. A 17-26" or a 17-28" slot is the common numbers in MN. So in such a case with a lake "stunted" with 13" fish a statewide slot of putting back fish that are say 19-26" sure wouldnt hurt that fishery. Will it help a lake like this? Maybe, maybe not. Again, if say a 19-26" protective slot were put in, no lake would be hurt by having these fish put back. It does not help any lake whatsoever to take 22" walleyes out of it. And again, no not every lake would benefit. But i have to believe the majority of lakes in this state would see an improvement in their angling. I fully believe the DNR is working toward this slowly but surely. They see the effectiveness of slots but you can't go from no walleye reg whatsoever to a slot. Because as we've seen just in this thread, people don't like change. So you do it slowly, and slowly you get to where you want things to be.

[Team Otter]

Great discussion. Keep it up.

JW, thanks for getting it started.

[james_walleye]

T-O what do you think about a statewide slot? Is it possible for a lake to suffer from a slot?

[Team Otter]

I'm all for a state-wide slot; perhaps having it similar to SD, where you have a 14" minimum and 1 over 20", across the board. I'd also like to see a 4-fish limit.

Both of these things, regardless of the lake, would not hurt.

[fiskyknut]

Well don't go changing the LOTW slot to allow 1 fish kept over 20 inches guys....No fish between 19.5 and 28 is a good thing. 1 over twenty ain't gonna let them grow past the average tourist trophy size!

[Bluegill1510]

Bassboy thats cool your going to school for natural resources and wildlife but just some advice you need to make connections and/or know people who can put in a good name for you if you plan on working for the DNR either forestry or natural resource management, otherwise plan on becoming a CO. Also if you register with the state employment HSOforum they post all the DNR open jobs there. Just some ideas for ya, but I'm still firm on my stance on no slots because the 1 over 20" is pretty self explanitory and easy slot to follow anyways IMO. Its when you start making a minimum slot such as 14-19" you can keep the rest go back when I believe fish can get stunted at having to many at 13" and not enough forage in the lake for all those 12-13" walleyes. I guess I can live with a drop to limit of 4 fish per day, but a possession limit kept at 6 would work I think. Im no biologist by any means (wish I was, really interests me, already graduated college though) but moving the opener 2 weeks is pretty ridiculous especially for lakes in northern minnesota...look at some of the lakes on the canadian border, or even Mille Lacs some years the ice doesn't leave until the beginning to middle of May. Meaning the northerns just got done spawning and walleyes and suckers still have to spawn and the Sentor chair of the natural resources committee wants to bump up the opener 2 weeks when the half the lakes in Minnesota are in the prime of walleye spawning?......Like John Stassel says on 20/20 "Give me a break!"

No offense taken bassboy we all have our opinions on here and at least we get to voice them even though half the time I disagree with someone on here. I would just like to see as I stated before in my previous post, more land set aside for wildlife, WMA or public land. Also would like to see more commen sense used by our legislators and get this dedicated funding bill passed already...the big vote day is the 14th!

[Bassboy1645]

hmmm....Im workign on my connections already bluegill...Im not going to be a co Cuz the jobs arent there unless you go federal and work out west. I like fishign and hunting too much to hafta miss all the openers to be working....I see you concerns for stunting and that is a very real consideration we all need to make. But as I stated before the only way to know is through more research. maybe impose a few more slots on various ecological lake types and see how the slot effects it?? Ice could be a problem in the northern state. no doubt. I dont know about the spawn though. There has been research that suggests walleyes dont feed during the actual few days of running and mating. They used Redwing as an example...anyone know about this and could share some knowledge?? But there are some areas like Pike bay on lake vermilion or pipestone bay and river on Basswood where they dont allow fishing for a week or two after opener, If they moved opener up 2 weeks what would stop the Dnr from closing these areas or others for the same amount of time?? orlonger?? I dont know about moving opener up but maybe this year and next could be an "experimental regulation" if it shows signs of being bad in the populations then we go back to standard season....sounds like an idea to me...

[james_walleye]

I don't think you'll see a bottom end if MN puts a statewide slot on. A fisheries biologist told me once that in general keeping 13" walleyes do not affect a lake much biologically. Very few lakes in MN have a bottom end. I think what we would see is a slot that would protect prime spawning females such as everything between 19-26" must go back.

[Team Otter]

I don't necessarily need to see a minimum length on the slot but rather I used SD as 1 example, just to clarify.

Bottom line, the prime spawning females need to be protected, regardless of the lake.

[eyepatrol]

Agreed.

4 walleyes, 6 walleyes, or 1 walleye. As long as they don't eliminate it, I'm golden!

[grousehunter]

Bassboy i have to disagree on even trying to experiement with an earlier opener. I didnt read the whole thread so not sure what has been said, but I believe all fish are highly suseptable during the spawn and that would let people fish walleyes smack dab when all the big mammas are all grouped together. All of the walleyes will not be spawing at the same time so some will be feeding and all grouped up in the same area. It could really hurt a fishery if these large females were being kept in record numbers and especially hurt smaller less known lakes if locals who know the spawing areas fished and kept these fish. To me i say why risk it when there is no reason to move to opener up. Try to help the fishery not make the general public happy that opener isnt on mothers day...

[fishermatt]

Everyone wants walleye fishing to be EASIER.

Maybe if there's a slot my fishing will be easier.

Maybe if they reduce the limit my fishing will be easier.

Maybe if they make it harder for the really good fishermen, it will become easier for me to catch fish.

To Everyone that's on board with these new regulations: This is when Democracy ends and Socialism begins. When you let politicians make your decisions regarding Fishing and Hunting, know that the restrictions will always be getting tighter, never looser, and that the fish and game is not what is being managed, but the Fishermen and Hunters instead. I can't believe there are people on here (a fishing forum) that don't understand this.

It's really very sad.

[charliepete2]

I think lowering the bag limit from 6 to 4 will increase the number of big fish being put under the knife. Instead of bringing home 6 little ones, more guys will be apt to bring home 3 little ones and one big one.

Personally it won't have any effect on me. I do worry about making laws on public sentiment instead of science though. That's how hunting and fishing gets axed all together.

[james_walleye]

Yeah, I can't believe there are people that want to actually catch more walleyes when they go fishing. I can't believe there are people on here who actually want to catch bigger walleye. I can't believe people on here actually want healthier fisheries where bigger females actually make up the proportion of the fishery that it should. Its not as if slots have been put on lakes and they havent worked and now some of us want something that doesnt work put on all lakes. Slots would improve alot of our fisheries and make them much more healthy and i can't believe your going to tell me i'm somehow crazy for wanting this. I'm not in favor of moving the opener, there is no biological reasoning behind doing this. Moving the 4 fish limit i've read won't make much difference although some lakes may benefit from it so i don't care either way on this. It doesnt matter if your a novice fisherman or the best pro, we all would like to catch more and bigger walleyes! Duh!! If slots makes this possible, lets get er done! When you go fishing Matt do you go to good walleye lakes or lakes with very few walleyes? Do you fish Otter Tail Lake? Do you fish Rush Lake? Or do you go to the pothole down the road that is almost devoid of walleyes and fish there because its a bigger challenge? You don't ever fish Otter Tail lake or any of the other 100 great walleye lakes around you because it might be EASIER to catch walleyes there than the little pond down the road? You don't ever use a vexilar because it might make it EASIER to catch fish? Slots, technology, information, its all tied together to help us catch more fish. So unless your fishing with a birchbark canoe, using some sort of piece of metal to check your depth and using a canepole 100% of the time, don't tell the people on this forum about not understanding whats goiIng on. I fish Mille Lacs alot. I fish Winnie alot. I've fished these lakes before and after the slot. I've watch these lakes improve. This post is not hostile. Walleye fishing is my passion and seeing what slots have done for these lakes that have them its impossible to wonder what it might do for some of the other bodies of water i fish.

[Ebiz]

 Quote:

I fish Mille Lacs alot. I fish Winnie alot. I've fished these lakes before and after the slot. I've watch these lakes improve.

These are lakes with natural production, a statewide slot doesn't make sense as there are a ton of lakes without natural reproduction where I can't see the reasoning to further protect the larger females.

[james_walleye]

Yeah, ok, how about the 1,000's of lakes which do have natural reproduction? Does a slot not make sense for them? Is it that hard for people to have to release a 24" walleye? I think its a case of some people just don't want to be told what to do no matter if being told what to do will be a benefit. I mean everyone here who has opposed the slot, thats what it comes down to. They don't want someone telling them that they have to release a walleye. No one here has been able to come up with any biological reason how a 19-26" protective slot would hurt a lake.

[walleyeslammer]

I am all for the 4 fish limit and a 14"minimum with one over 20. I grew up fishing small lakes in SW MN and have seen many of them get fished down to nothing because catch and release is rarely practiced there as a generalization. More important than setting a limit I wish people would just love to catch fish and not feel the need to "limit out" in order for it to be a great day. My favorite fishing memories are evenings when I went out got a dozen walleyes and came home with 2 16" fish for me and my family to eat. The other sad reality is that without enough conservation officers around to enforce the laws there will still be people who poach 50-100 or even more walleyes. It is really too bad and don't know what can be done about this. I think what needs to happen is for those of us who care deeply about our fisheries help police them by reporting individuals who we see take limits of fish out every day of the week so people realize it can happen to them if they are going to have a freezer full. Just my two cents, great discussion though, and great to get all opinions.

[james_walleye]

I agree slammer, keep the TIP number handy.

[Bluegill1510]

Yeah JW, I do believe its hard for people to put back a 24" walleye, just for the fact that the average person does not get out to go fishing alot especially walleye fishing. Unlike other people on this HSOforum who would fish everyday if they could (including me), or choose to fish other species (pike, muskie, panfish, carp, etc.) because thats their favorite type of fishing. People just really don't get out as much as others do because of different reasons (not owning a boat, financial reasons, no fish house, etc.)

I've witnessed this personally during my internship with the local city recreation department, where we took a bus load of people for a Mille Lacs fishing trip on a launch. It was a great experience because these people that went on the trip I know half of them "might" get out fishing maybe once every year or 2 years. So when they did catch a walleye...which alot of people did, they all wanted to keep it no matter the size. Luckly we did get a few fish under the slot, but there a few that were in that 24-26" range where the captain of the launch had to explain to everyone why the fish had to be released and put back and explain the rule on Mille Lacs. Most of the people understood and were ok with putting the fish back after of course a picture of them holding the fish, but one thing that discouraged me about the whole releasing of the fish was the whole time out of the water that the fish was (pictures, measuring the fish, netting, taking the hook out) and then just being tossed back in like it was an eel pout or rock bass!! Luckily the fish swam away on its own but how do I know an hour later that fish didn't float belly up because it died from not being released properly, especially on that particularly day it was upper 80's lower 90 degree weather. Also to add look at all the pictures that are displayed in the Outdoor News sometime, of people holding nice walleyes with the caption of C&R, to show it was caught and released. How many of those fish you think make it? One picture I do recall it was a few weeks ago a guy from St. Cloud caught a nice 30.5" walleye on Woman Lake near Longville/Remer and it said he released it, but the eyes were froze and the fins and tail had ice sickles hanging from the fish, and your going to tell me that fish lived after being released?

Thats one pet peeve of mine is, yes catch and release and slots are great for a fishery but what happens when a fish does die on you or you see someone mishandle it, release it and then 5 minutes later it goes floating by your boat and it is in the slot? You can't tell me you don't feel bad or that you want to keep it so it doesn't go to waste? So how do you justify this problem because educating people on proper fish handling and releasing only goes so far to reaching a certain percentage of anglers? Maybe if a guy saw the fish belly up net it and take a knife and cut its air sack so it sinks to the bottom for the turtles to eat? How do you really justify that part of the equation?

Also fishing pressure plays a huge role hear, just look at Mille Lacs this past summer and Red and Leech years ago. Just ask people sometime when do they plan on going "up north" to go fishing, what they are going to target and the majority of anglers no matter the season say they are going to go for walleye. Not northern, not muskie, bass or panfish but walleye. Honestly who goes to Mille Lacs just to fish northern or small mouth bass? Maybe a few diehard pike guys or bass guys from southern states but virtually not alot of anglers...So there in lies the problem to me, how do you limit the fishing pressure? Because its only going to get worse, with another million people supposidly going to be living in this state by 2020, so how do you limit lakes from being bombarded regularly (meaning all year round) by everyone and their mom (locals, out of staters, city folks, tourists, indians/natives, etc...)?? To me thats the real problem, because slots will work to an extent but really limiting the number of people to a fishery is about the only thing you can do to make a fishery stabilize or "come back". Just look at Canada, the BWCA, and lakes with no public access or are placed under non-motorized category in this state, not much pressure...good fisheries, enough said.

[james_walleye]

Your not going to limit fishing pressure. We as outdoorsman are suppose to be introducing people to the love of fishing. Not discrouaging people from fishing so our lakes dont have as much pressure. Fishing pressure gets greater and greater every year. Pressure is reason #1 for tighter regs and there is no way around it. It will come a time when tighter regs will be needed just to maintain the fisheries we have. Forget improving them, we'll need them just to maintain what we have right now. Pressure on lakes is what it is and we have to find a way to deal with it. A HUGE part of Minnesotas economy is based on fishing. I don't see how you can limit people from fishing. Pressure is here, its not going away, and our fisheries if not now, will in the future need something to offset the pressure and sustain our fisheries. If you oppose slots, not much i can do. But you have to recognize the problem before it happens. I choose to be proactive and would rather something get done now rather than wait until the problem rears its head.

As far as releasing fish? Yeah its a joke what you see sometimes. But i make it a point when i take people fishing to impress upon them the need to have everything out and ready for a quick release. The needlenose, net, camera, its all out and ready. The fish is netted, its unhooked in the water, the person who caught the fish doesnt pull that fish out of the net until the person with the camera is ready. The fish comes out of the net, the picture is taken, the fish is back in the water in mere seconds. Dozens of different people fish in my boat in a year. I don't preach to them. But i try to teach by example. Make it a point before you even drop your line to get everything ready and tell people why are you doing so. If you net their fish, or they net your fish, tell them why you are keeping the fish in the water and tell them not to hoist the fish out of the net until you have the camera ready. People arent dumb. They'll get the picture. And next time they are in the boat they will impress upon others the importance of this. Its a crappy effect. Some fish will not make it and it stinks. But you have to ask yourself is the big picture better or not? I have 2 young kids. What will the state of our fisheries be when they are my age? What will my grandkids be able to expierience on our lakes if regulations don't change? I listen to what my grandfather talks about as far as fishing in the Mankato area 30 years ago. It is not what it once was. I don't want to tell my grandkids about how good the fishing was early in this decade. They should be able to expierience it for themselves. Its not about total catch and release its about selective harvest. Some fish need to stay in the system to maintain what is there. If your of the opinion that "well some lakes in this state don't have natural reproduction so a slot isnt needed", you might just as well suggest that these lakes don't need a season on them either. Whats the point of closing the season on these lakes biologically speaking? There isnt one. And if moving the limit from 6 to 4 will have no effect because how often does the average fisherman catch his limit, then why have a limit at all if most people can't even catch 6? Having a limit of 6 walleyes doesnt help every lake just like having a slot limit wouldn't help every lake and just like having a closed season doesnt help every lake. But there IS a 6 fish limit and a closed season because enough lakes benefit from it to make it worth it. My point is that enough lakes would benefit from a slot to make it well worth it.

[PerchJerker]

 Originally Posted By: james_walleye

No one here has been able to come up with any biological reason how a 19-26" protective slot would hurt a lake.

What about the lakes that already have slots that are something other than 19-26 inches ---- slots that were implemented by the DNR and public input, not by politicians? Winnie and Red are two such lakes, Mille Lacs could be a 3rd. Don't you feel those slots are better for those waters than a statewide blanket slot?

I am 100% in support of slot limits, but I don't believe a statewide blanket slot is the right way to go about it. Especially since we already have a statewide "one over 20 inch" rule. I know that's not the same and not as tight as the 19-26 inch protected slot that you advocate, but the "one over 20 inch" rule should be protecting many of those fish already.

[Ebiz]

 Quote:

I am 100% in support of slot limits, but I don't believe a statewide blanket slot is the right way to go about it. Especially since we already have a statewide "one over 20 inch" rule. I know that's not the same and not as tight as the 19-26 inch protected slot that you advocate, but the "one over 20 inch" rule should be protecting many of those fish already.

I was just in the process of typing this exact same thing. I'm not advocating a free for all slaughter of 22" walleyes on lakes without natural reproduction, but with one over 20" already in place I don't see the need to slap a feel good blanket slot on the entire state just because the legislature thinks it's a good idea.

[james_walleye]

Maybe i'm missing something but i'm not talking about the legislature. I havent read a thing about the legislature thinking slots are a good idea. I'm talking about fisherman who think its a good idea. But your right i don't want the legislature making decisions about slots and limits. I want fisheries biologists and the DNR doing so. If the DNR didnt think the female walleyes of this state needed protecting there wouldnt be a 1 over 20" and it never would have started with a 1 over 24" reg. They obviously see the need. A statewide slot is the next step you'll see.

[Bluegill1510]

 Quote:

I don't see how you can limit people from fishing

You can & it happens, just take a look at the BWCA and Quetico of Canada and many other lakes in Canada. There is a permit system in place that only allows a certain number of people in each area in which you need to apply for just like a doe permit for deer season here. Yes there are write your own day permits but there are only a certain number of them as well. Im just using these areas for example because there are many areas in both of them that are untouched with a fishing line every year.

 Quote:

What will the state of our fisheries be when they are my age? What will my grandkids be able to expierience on our lakes if regulations don't change? I listen to what my grandfather talks about as far as fishing in the Mankato area 30 years ago. It is not what it once was. I don't want to tell my grandkids about how good the fishing was early in this decade.

Why do you think at my age of 24, a recent college graduate of Bemidji State, is trying to fish as much as I can and willing to stay, work, and live in northern minnesota while the fishing is still pretty decent and is still somewhat rural & wilderness, before it does get over ran with people and the fishing pressure gets worse! So I can experience what decent fishing is left in this state and perhaps have just as good if not better fishing experiences than what my grandpa and dad had in the St. Cloud & Brainerd Lake areas. Plus you can still be out by yourself with no one bothering you unlike down in St. Cloud or Brainerd. I'd like to think these areas of Bemidji, Walker, Cass Lake, Blackduck could stay somewhat secluded, wilderness and rural and not turn into another St. Cloud & Brainerd/Baxter area but I am probably wrong on that. Then either I'll move farther north if Im still single or just not fish as much, unless I get married have kids & grandkids who actually might like to fish if there are any decent, non polluted lakes to take them fishing on. I guess there is going to have to be something done if we want to maintain if not improve our fisheries....cuz they can improve unless this global warming trend continues...but JW your posts have made sense and I can agree with you on some things I'm just curious what if a statewide slot would get passed..how effective it would be, and how it would effect the fishing pressure/tourism in this state?

[PerchJerker]

 Originally Posted By: james_walleye

Maybe i'm missing something but i'm not talking about the legislature. I havent read a thing about the legislature thinking slots are a good idea.

All the recent talk about moving the opener, reducing the limit, and implementing a statewide slot was spurred by a politician trying to gain support for it (his idea) and get it passed through the legislature. The last I saw was that the DNR was not supporting it. I would side with the DNR.