Support for Minimum Walleye Size

[B mac]

Great to hear others' opinions. I have to admit that I am surprised that more people don't think a min. slot would be beneficial.

The lake I fish the most has two resorts on it and it's a small lake. There have been numerous times where the resort's cleaned fish pail is full of carcusses of 11-13 inch fish. It's very disheartening to see this....just wish there was something that could be done without upsetting too many. I believe that the local fisherman, such as the guys frequenting this site, are not the ones to worry about. It's the tourists coming from afar to catch and eat the almighty "walleye"....so they keep anything that the knife can possibly cut through. Our state definitely needs the tourist dollars, but something could be done to restrict this embarrassing harvest! These are also the same people that have no problem keeping and cleaning the fish over 20"!!!

[walleyehawk]

I would not be opposed to a 14 inch state wide limit for walleyes. There is minimal meat on them anyhow. If you want to keep smaller fish, fish rivers and keep small saugers. Same taste and they don't get as large as walleyes.

There have been days where I have caught over a dozen small walleyes under 15 inches on a river with a 15 inch minimum. Could have easily had my limit without the restriction. Frustrating to get the dinks but fun to have the action. We need these restrictions on pressured waters.

We have too many people that will take any walleye over 10". To me, catching any walleye under 14 inches does not even count if you want to say you caught your limit.

With the high cost of stocking, we have to give the fish a chance to grab hold and maybe reproduce.

Cutting the limit from 6 to something less is something I am opposed to as there are times I go on a trip and fish 12+ hour days. If I get 6 fish in a few days, I think I should be able to keep them.

Finally, my pet peeve. Guys that fish on lakes with size limits and no ruler. So they keep them cause they look close and complain when the DNR busts them because it is 1/4 inch under. Buy a ruler!

[Cyberfish]

Holy moly! 11 inch wallys, man, they are robbing the cradle! Straight outta the hatchery and onto the stringer! I have found bigger walleyes in the stomachs of fish I have cleaned! LOL

------------------
simul iustus et peccator

><}}}("< ---><!>

[walleyehawk]

Cyberfish

Don't give fishface a hard time. The guy is probably on no sleep. Works more nights than a vampire. And when he gets out fishing, the kids call on the cell and say "Dad....

You are right, people in polatics(politics) are a form of tick or a parasite. They suck the money right out of the our wallet and into their worthless pet project. Glad I no longer live in Iowa as the place is totally infested until after the caucus Monday. We need to send Dale Gribbold from King of the Hill down there to drop one of his bug bombs--just watch out for the black United Nations helicopters Dale.

[This message has been edited by walleyehawk (edited 01-17-2004).]

[Cyberfish]

hehe poor fishface!

You been out fishin' lately? I might be goin' to the dead sea next weekend...

------------------
simul iustus et peccator

><}}}("< ---><!>

[walleyehawk]

Going north with the Walrus and Neilpout. Gonna hit Red on Wed eve and LOW on Thurs and Friday. May hit Winnie on the way back.

Otherwise, I have only been out once this year with fishface and we limited on crappies with a few to throw back. Guess fishface has caught a few crappies this year. But he has not been out as much as he would like to because of work, family...

[walleyehawk]

Going north with the Walrus and Neilpout. Gonna hit Red on Wed eve and LOW on Thurs and Friday. May hit Winnie on the way back.

Otherwise, I have only been out once this year with fishface and we limited on crappies with a few to throw back. Guess fishface has caught a few crappies this year. But he has not been out as much as he would like to because of work, family...

[BLUESHARP]

Remember the smaller ones have less contamination in them.Better for you.

[davemeyer]

I would rather not keep any walleye unless it is a once in a lifetime trophy to get mounted or in rare cases harvesting a certain size and number of walleyes to maintain a healthy population. I've heard of Lake Oahe, in South Dakota allowing people to take as many as ten walleyes home as long as they were less than 14 or 15".

[iffwalleyes]

Oahe had a 10 fish limit because they had so many small fish in the lake. This year they have changed the limit and it is now 6 fish only 4 of them can be between 15-18 one over 18 and the rest have to be smaller than 15". They were using the higher limit to thin the lake population down and between that and the dropping water elevation it worked. Lots of nice fish in the lake. Like it stated before it is tough to implement a state wide min because the lakes vary to much. Like someone mentioned earlier though it is tough to manage a like for both walleyes and Northerns. There are only a few lake in MN were that is possible and the are large lake like LOW, Mill Lacs, Upper Red, Leech to mention a few where it is possible.

------------------
Grip it and Rip it

IFFWalleyes
I Fish For Walleyes
[email protected]

[Borch]

Personaly I don't care for the idea of a statewide minimum. Not because I like to keep little walleyes either. But I noticed a trend a long time ago and it effect on certain fisheries. When you set a minumum that's what everyone will keep. Even if they think they're too small. Just look over at Big Stone in SW minnesota. The average size of walleyes has actually gone down since the 14" minimum was implemented(according to the MN DNR person I talked to last year). Soon as they are 14" they get plucked because that's what the DNR thinks is an acceptable sized fish.

I really liked the old Mille Lacs slot of 1 over 20". A simple slot based on the biology of the lake that didn't target anyone year class.

Personally 15" is my minimum and if it's a skinny 15" I'll toss it back.

Another trend I've seen on this board. Post that you're keeping a fish of nearly any size and you'll catch flack from someone. Whether it's a 14" walleye for the pan or a 30" walleye for the wall.

[Sandbar]

Personally, I don't mind a minimum length on Walleye. I spend %99.9 of my time fishing the St. Croix river, 15" minumum length on Walleye. I think some of the best eaters run 15"-17" anyway. I generally will not keep anything over 20". One interesting thing about the St. Croix, it seems you can catch 14.50" Walleye all day long.

Sandbar

[gophish]

after fishing with new people this year than i have in the past i'm beggining to see how many people keep the fish they catch as i rarely ever do unless i'm gong to eat them that day in the BWCA. I am all for a minimum size limit. But as far as a lake to lake basis goes it would strongly oppose that because our system is just getting to hard to follow. there are too many different hunting zones and lake specific reg.'s etc. to keep track of these days.
14" let go and 15-19 are all for eating!
thats my opinion.
gophish.

[gophish]

on another note, in response to b mac. I agree about the tourist part of minnesota because there is no doubt 1000's of people who rely on it. but it seems to me that people would be more likely to come back if they were catching larger fish. They may not be happy the first year or so, but once the reg's start to take effect wont that avg size tend to increase, then for the sake of a meal they will be keep 15-16 fish and hopefully releasing some bigger and therefore having more fun.. just a thought, i'm no tourist... i dont even keep fish.
gophish.

[can it be luck?]

Borch makes a good point. Wisconsin used to have a 15" min. on most lakes. Many still do, as well as some newer regs which allow 1 fish over 14" and 2 under. However, there are soooo many different regs for each individual lake. When fishing new waters, a check at the launch for the current regs for that particular lake is a must. Where the 15" minimum applys, I've noticed a drop in the numbers of "legal" walleye. Heck, I can catch literally hundreds of fish that are just under 15"s but hardly any over. Hopefully the new regs will eliminate the takeing of specific year classes. Makeing for a more diverse fishery.

------------------
http://groups.msn.com/canitbeluck

[tdk]

The last couple of times that I've stopped and watched them strip walleyes at Cut Foot Sioux the majority of the females that they have separted out for stripping are the 16 to 18 in. size. The majority of the males are the 14 to 15 inch size. At least if you take the 14 to 15 in. fish there's a good chance you're not getting a female in the prime of her egg laying life. And it stands to reason that the more females that are left out there swimming the more eggs will be deposited in the rocks. One male can take care of a lot of females. We got checked at the boat landing at CFS a couple of years ago (the 17 in. max was in effect), I asked the CO about a minimum size. We had caught at least 16 12 in. walleyes on Winnie and returned them all. But we watched the guides (I know that they were guides because I fish there a lot) and they were keeping 12 in fish. The CO said that from what he understands about the fisheries, that was ok. He said that half of those fish will never make it to maturity. How does the saying go "90% of the the fish caught are caught by 10% of the fisherman" If the people on this board are the 10% then we need to watch what we're doing. When it comes down to it we need to use common sense when it comes to putting a knife to a fish.

[cashcrews]

I'm not in support of anything that imposes a slot or minimum size on a statewide basis. For the most part, I think DNR Fisheries biologists know what they're talking about, and if they see a particular need on a certain lake, they can seek a special regulation.

Keep in mind, people fish for different reasons, as is often evidenced by the varying responses to these types of posts. Further regulation/restriction on a statewide basis is not a good solution.