2017 WI DNR Spring Rule Hearing~ Results

  • Brian Klawitter
    Keymaster
    Minnesota/Wisconsin Mississippi River
    Posts: 59992
    #1687917

    Sorry, no way of posting it. It’s a PDF file.

    Attachments:
    1. 2017_StatewideResults.pdf

    Brian Klawitter
    Keymaster
    Minnesota/Wisconsin Mississippi River
    Posts: 59992
    #1687920

    Mississippi River “3 fish over 18 inches” daily walleye limit; March 1-May 31
    For: 2487
    Against: 651
    Pass: Yes

    Mississippi River 15 to 18-inch slot limit March 1-May 31 (470116)
    For: 2126
    Against: 862
    Pass: Yes

    More details in PDF file.

    riverruns
    Inactive
    Posts: 2218
    #1687921

    waytogo toast

    badgerbacker
    Posts: 75
    #1688019

    They seem to contradict each other. If the slot is 15″ to 18″, how can you keep three over 18″? I even looked up the actual wording. Seems like they voted yes to both options.

    buckybadger
    Upper Midwest
    Posts: 8127
    #1688021

    I’m assuming the “vote” just means they will take those proposals to the next level – whatever that may be? From there, they’d push just one of those two proposals if there’s ample support and the MN DNR agrees?

    I’m all for a tightening of daily big limits on the border waters. I think a simple step such as a daily limit of 3 or 4 saugers/walleyes would maintain and possibly strengthen the fishery. I have my reservations about “slots” on a river system. Slots always have to be adjusted and bring more guesswork into the equation. However, the 15″ minimum should stay in-place and be extended to saugers also. I’m not a huge fan of adding more date contingent regulations with March 1 – May 31 in the vote.

    Ideal Year-Round Regulations:

    -limit of 3 or 4 saugers/walleyes with a 15″ minimum on both species. Only 1 may be over 20″.

    -closed fishing year round 500′ below all dams

    riverruns
    Inactive
    Posts: 2218
    #1688040

    It would also be nice if anything is decided, that MN would also follow suit. Sure that won’t happen, but at least there is some talk being generated, and from the looks of it way more are in favor of some sort of regulation than leaving this as is. applause

    Outdraft
    Western Wi.
    Posts: 1149
    #1688055

    What most don’t understand is generally the higher water in the spring creates a a better year class, I’d bet money this years class will be lower. The river is not a lake, the food source is awesome for all species that’s why the fish have shoulders. I’m all in favor of protecting spawning fish but what the people that only fish the pre spawn don’t realize is the amount of big fish that are taken during the post spawn, if you fish the river then you know what I’m talking about. I wish they would push it til the end of June

    Brian Klawitter
    Keymaster
    Minnesota/Wisconsin Mississippi River
    Posts: 59992
    #1688097

    “Mississippi River Walleye/Sauger grow fast and die young (compared to lakes in MN/WI)” ~ Many DNR Biologists and River Reports

    whistling

    Dutchboy
    Central Mn.
    Posts: 16640
    #1688103

    I think Minnesota should just file suit in Federal court to gain ownership of the whole river down to the gulf. After all it does start here. We might as well go for a 1/4 mile management strip of land off of both banks while we are at it.

    riverruns
    Inactive
    Posts: 2218
    #1688208

    “Mississippi River Walleye/Sauger grow fast and die young (compared to lakes in MN/WI)” ~ Many DNR Biologists and River Reports

    whistling

    So the point is?

    popcorn
    Posts: 64
    #1688235

    There are a number of regulations out there that were basically put there by special interest groups. A few examples would be the antler restriction in the SE and a 50″ min length on muskies. If you don’t like it then do your part and go to the meetings I’m not sure how this would affect MN residents yet if it was put into place.

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.