MN DNR in the news

[rjthehunter]

So wait… fishing is so poor that almost no one can catch a limit of a native sport fish, yet things are hunky dorey and nothing should change?


If habitat is such an issue that natural reproduction of a native fish is unsustainable, it seems to me the state should have reduced limits long ago? Speaking as a reformed fisheries person, this just makes zero sense to me.


Then what is the issue? Again, if 95% of fisherman can’t catch a limit, there is a significant one. What is the issue as you see it?

I will fully admit I’ve never fished MN. But I’ve fished walleyes in Canada, North Dakota, and Montana. Struggling to catch a limit is largely incomprehensible in those places, which all have more stringent limits. I have thrown back keepers all day in all of those places. I’m not understanding why all the resistance, particularly if the vast majority of folks struggle to limit out?

I get that you are passionate about this, but none of this makes any sense on even a basic level. This seems like an “opportunity” argument rather than a biological argument?

I've fished across the Midwest as well. Familiarize yourself with MN regulations and seasons for walleye. They're far more stringent here than in ND. Same with south Dakota, and Montana. Season closures aren't a thing most places like MN, the only thing MN has in terms of more lax regs is a 6 fish limit instead of 5. We have tighter slots, seasons, and possession limits.

Populations in most lakes are healthy. Most lakes in the state aren't meant to have walleye in them. The ones that are, are thriving. (Leech, red, winni, mille lacs, lake of the woods, etc.)

Most lakes like the ones mentioned above, are managed at their own levels. For example, you can only keep 4 walleye on leech, 4 on red this year, 6 on lake of the woods, but only 4 can be walleye, the rest sauger.

The lakes covered by the blanket statement of 6 fish limits are lakes that aren't destination walleye lakes, or aren't on the radar for the DNR to manage the walleye numbers. They just keep stocking them.

https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/regulations/fishing/index.html

Pages 38-56 have all the special regs.



Do you think reducing the limits will make fish easier to catch?

If there are only 270 self-sustaining walleye populations DUE TO SPAWNING CONDITIONS what is happening in the 11,842-270 lakes? That is 11,572 lakes that have impaired spawning. Why/how? I'm very curious. Of course, 12 lakes in Minnesota are bullhead lakes, so let's throw them out and look at the 11,560 remaining. You say they can't spawn. How so?

Most lakes in mn don't have the big rock/ gravel shorelines walleye need to spawn.

Dare I say if you are catching “1000’s” of walleyes a year you are a part of the problem.

If it’s only due to poor spawning conditions what are you doing to improve them? Are you advocating for improved wetlands, dam removal, less pesticide and fertilizers on our yards? How about prairie plantings and erosion control?

There's a huge difference between catching and keeping. I'm a fishing guide. It's what i do.

 

[BrentD]

Most lakes in mn don't have the big rock/ gravel shorelines walleye need to spawn.

There's a huge difference between catching and keeping. I'm a fishing guide. It's what i do.

All the lakes I know have extensive rocks and gravel. They still get over fished and a 6-fish limit is an issue.

There are simply too many people (and too much technology).

 

[rjthehunter]

All the lakes I know have extensive rocks and gravel. They still get over fished and a 6-fish limit is an issue.

There are simply too many people (and too much technology).

Explain how a lake like leech does so well? Or lake of the woods? Leech gets an absurd amount of pressure and guides take limits of fish out daily for clients. Same with lake of the woods

 

[BrentD]

Explain how a lake like leech does so well? Or lake of the woods? Leech gets an absurd amount of pressure and guides take limits of fish out daily for clients.

Didn't you just say that leech has a 4 fish limit?

Leech is a big place. Not all lakes are like leech even though they have superb spawning habitat. They just have too many people. LoW has Canada.

 

[rjthehunter]

Didn't you just say that leech has a 4 fish limit?

Leech is a big place. Not all lakes are like leech even though they have superb spawning habitat. They just have too many people. LoW has Canada.

I mention leech because the immense amount of pressure it receives.

What about red lake? Most of that lake is a 10 walleye limit.

Winni is phenomenal and has a 6 fish limit, along with cass, vermillion, Bemidji, ottertail, woman, Minnewaska, reno, Miltona, Osakis, traverse, big stone, etc?

Are you saying that walleye should be able to naturally reproduce most places?? The lakes don't have suitable spawning habitat for walleye. If they did, they'd have high numbers of natural fish.

 

[Gellar]

@rjthehunter when did you become a fishing guide? I thought you were a project manager for a construction company?

 

[BrentD]

I mention leech because the immense amount of pressure it receives.

What about red lake? Most of that lake is a 10 walleye limit.

Winni is phenomenal and has a 6 fish limit, along with cass, vermillion, Bemidji, ottertail, woman, Minnewaska, reno, Miltona, Osakis, traverse, big stone, etc?

Are you saying that walleye should be able to naturally reproduce most places?? The lakes don't have suitable spawning habitat for walleye. If they did, they'd have high numbers of natural fish.

So what? Some lakes can take it and most cannot. Is this news to you? I think you have lost track of what your arguing about.

Vermillion, "phenomenal"?

 

[Northwoods]

Almost all of my walleye fishing is done on wilderness lakes in MN and right across the border in Ontario so I don’t have much experience on heavily pressured lakes. Many of the lakes in the Boundary Waters that don’t get much fishing pressure are not nearly as productive as some of the well known walleye lakes in Northern Ontario that receive a lot more fishing pressure. It seems once you get north of the range of those damn smallmouth bass, lakes will support many more walleyes. Smallmouth gorge themselves on walleye fry and put way more pressure on walleyes than anglers ever will.

I’m not against additional restrictions but let’s not restrict ourselves out of an enjoyable experience. I would like to see a daily limit of 4 walleye with a possession limit of 8. There is really no reason to keep a walleye over 25”. MN seems to allow for anglers to keep a “wall hanger” with their pike and walleye regulations but skin mounts on fish are kinda a thing of the past. Personally I prefer the nostalgia of a skin mount.

I was deer hunting in southeast MN last month and saw a special regulations sign by a small trout stream. The regulations included a slot size and no live bait. When I was a kid we would go dig up some worms, jump on our bikes, and go catch some brookies. That opportunity does not exist for kids that live by the particular stream that I was hunting by. What do regulations like that accomplish? This little stream will never be a trophy stream. Maybe fishing is a bit better for some adults but it’s at the expense of kids or families with young kids.

 

[rjthehunter]

@rjthehunter when did you become a fishing guide? I thought you were a project manager for a construction company?

I've been guiding for 4 years now. As most guides I know, I have a main source of income which is being a PM, then in addition to that, a fishing guide.

So what? Some lakes can take it and most cannot. Is this news to you? I think you have lost track of what your arguing about.

Vermillion, "phenomenal"?

Yes, fishing on vermillion is great. .

The whole point is that there's lots of natural reproducing lakes that handle a 6 fish limits with ease.

There's a lot of lakes in Minnesota. The majority of them are stocked. The big lakes are the ones with natural reproduction and they're managed more closely than the stocked lakes. There's special regulations everywhere in 100s of lakes. If you struggle to catch walleye, you're probably doing something wrong, or it's a crummy lake for walleye fishing. Going from a 6 fish to 4 fish limit isn't going to make it easier to catch walleye. All it's doing is making it easier to catch a "limit" which is what too many people obsess over.

 

[tom338]

Seems that almost everyone says going from 6 to 4 isn't a big deal...so let's get it done.

 

[Gellar]

I've been guiding for 4 years now. As most guides I know, I have a main source of income which is being a PM, then in addition to that, a fishing guide.


Yes, fishing on vermillion is great. .

The whole point is that there's lots of natural reproducing lakes that handle a 6 fish limits with ease.

There's a lot of lakes in Minnesota. The majority of them are stocked. The big lakes are the ones with natural reproduction and they're managed more closely than the stocked lakes. There's special regulations everywhere in 100s of lakes. If you struggle to catch walleye, you're probably doing something wrong, or it's a crummy lake for walleye fishing. Going from a 6 fish to 4 fish limit isn't going to make it easier to catch walleye. All it's doing is making it easier to catch a "limit" which is what too many people obsess over.

Vermillion has a slot limit and 4 walleye daily bag, correct?

 

[Gellar]

Leech lake has a slot limit and and daily bag of 4.

 

[Gellar]

Kab has a slot limit and a bag limit of 4.

 

[nastynate]

If there are only 270 self-sustaining walleye populations DUE TO SPAWNING CONDITIONS what is happening in the 11,842-270 lakes? That is 11,572 lakes that have impaired spawning. Why/how? I'm very curious. Of course, 12 lakes in Minnesota are bullhead lakes, so let's throw them out and look at the 11,560 remaining. You say they can't spawn. How so?

Minnesota stocks walleye in over 1000 lakes and I think RJ is right on that 270 lakes. I’ll have to look it up but it’s close to that and spawning is the issue. They got finicky spawning conditions, and most places in the state don’t have them.

 

[Gellar]

Your argument of the natural producing lakes sustaining a 6 bag limit is flawed.

 

[nastynate]

Minnesota stocks walleye in over 1000 lakes and I think RJ is right on that 270 lakes. I’ll have to look it up but it’s close to that and spawning is the issue. They got finicky spawning conditions, and most places in the state don’t have

Where to Go Walleye Fishing in Minnesota

For many anglers, the sight of an elusive olive and gold fish with an unmistakable white tip on its tail is enough to send chills up their spine. Here is how you can increase your chances of catching walleye, the most popular fish in Minnesota for a reason....

www.exploreminnesota.com

I don’t like getting my biology from tourism websites but at least here’s where that figure is coming from…

 

[MNElkNut]

I dont believe that 260 one bit. I live in lakes area of MN and have 300 lakes within 20 miles of me, all with walleyes. All have always had walleyes. Unless every one of those 260 is by my house, that number is incorrect. Due to pressure, they are stocked. But all of them have some natural reproduction. The lake I live on is a great example. Before stocking we had a low walleye population, but it was there and we caught walleyes. Now we catch more, which is great.

The 1,300 is just the DNR stocking. A LOT of lake associations, including mine, stock walleyes.

I have no problem moving the limit to 4. Another great step would be to stop the tournaments.

 

[nastynate]

I dont believe that 260 one bit. I live in lakes area of MN and have 300 lakes within 20 miles of me, all with walleyes. All have always had walleyes. Unless every one of those 260 is by my house, that number is incorrect. Due to pressure, they are stocked. But all of them have some natural reproduction. The lake I live on is a great example. Before stocking we had a low walleye population, but it was there and we caught walleyes. Now we catch more, which is great.

The 1,300 is just the DNR stocking. A LOT of lake associations, including mine, stock walleyes.

I have no problem moving the limit to 4. Another great step would be to stop the tournaments.

Id like to see the source on that 270 beyond the explore mn website (talking to myself, not you!) as it’s probably simplified. The fish composition in many lakes was altered substantially before any of us were alive, too.

But I do think Minnesotans are often surprised by how few lakes have sustaining walleye populations and we have a giant put and take stocking effort here.

I don’t see the downside to moving limit down. If RJ is right about the psychology of anglers wanting to catch that limit, it'll result in more fish in the lake and more happy anglers. I go to Canada and catch tons of walleye and have no issue keeping the couple I’m allowed and turning back the rest.

 

[Gellar]

I don’t see the downside to moving limit down. If RJ is right about the psychology of anglers wanting to catch that limit, it'll result in more fish in the lake and more happy anglers.

I agree with Rj on the psychology of anglers wanting to be able to catch a limit, we talk about this in hunters safety classes as sportsman go through phases they call that “the limiting out phase”. but like @huntingwife said if 95% of anglers (according to Rj) can’t catch a limit of 6 in a day than we have a problem. Lowering the limit will still allow them to catch enough fish for a meal, and hopefully leave some in the lake to spawn and increase the natural reproduction and they can still brag they got their limit. They will just have to leave out the part it was 4 instead of 6.

Biologists balancing the social impact of hunting and fishing rules and regulations like bag limits and size limits with what’s best for the population of the species is a huge part of the puzzle when they talk about these changes, and often why they can take so long to implement.

 

[rjthehunter]

Leech lake has a slot limit and and daily bag of 4.

Winni, LOTW (4 walleye, 2 sauger), Red has a 10 fish limit for most of the lake, Ottertail, etc.

It's almost like the DNR is managing lakes that the fish are naturally reproducing in appropriately. Those aren't the lakes that get affected by the rule change though.

Your argument of the natural producing lakes sustaining a 6 bag limit is flawed.

Harvesting higher numbers of fish from non-natural reproducing lakes doesn't hurt their future like it would natural reproduction lakes. It makes room for the yearly or bi-yearly stocking that occurs. Young fish have to eat too.

If all the fish in lake X are stocked, what good would it do to leave them in there vs harvest them?

This same thing happened a few years ago with panfish. They changed the limit to 5 on certain lakes for bluegills and crappies. Most of those lakes went from high producing lakes to small stunted populations of bluegills & crappies. It's a little different when you're the one dealing with it in real time and have experience with these changes vs just reading about it on the internet.

95% was an arbitrary number. I don't know if it's 99% or 75%. It's high though. This is regarding smaller lakes where fish are stocked. People don't realize stocked walleye act differently than natural walleye like you find in the rainy lake, leech lake, mille lacs lake, etc. They relate to weeds when they're stocked fish. Natural fish relate more to rock, sand, and gravel flats. Stocked fish relate less to wind like natural fish do. The average angler hasn't figured that out yet, or is too stuck in their ways. The average angler is stuck in their ways of what used to be. Lindy rigging a sucker minnow isn't effective many places now. The water has become crystal clear in the past 10-20 years with the zebra mussels.

It's not as simple as lower limits = more walleye.

Mille lacs is a great example. They lowered the limits, and the fish began starving. There was too many walleye and not enough baitfish to feed the immense amounts of predators in the lake.