5 sunfish is utterly ridiculous

I heard from a metro lake guy today that he plans to start keeping his 6 bass every time he goes out now. I guess that’ll teach’em?:???:

Only in America, can you find people complaining about something being done legally by another person…

Maybe you’ll all be happier when your State closes down the winter panfish season like they do for game fish, and then have a season opener a month later than usual… Or worse yet, to also create a slot size protecting all panfish, stating that all gills over 8″, crappies over 10″, perch over 8″ “shall be released…?”

Sometimes, “its best to be careful of what you wish for…”

Jim Clark wrote:

Only in America, can you find people complaining about something being done legally by another person…

Maybe you’ll all be happier when your State closes down the winter panfish season like they do for game fish, and then have a season opener a month later than usual… Or worse yet, to also create a slot size protecting all panfish, stating that all gills over 8″, crappies over 10″, perch over 8″ “shall be released…?”

Sometimes, “its best to be careful of what you wish for…”

Who is complaining about something being done legally by another person. Sorry you lost me there.

Seems like you are complaining from another state. Seams ironic don’t you think.

mn-z wrote:

I live on a lake that has a 5 <strong class=”ido-tag-strong”>crappie limit as they are easy to catch on this lake. All it did was cause people to bring 4 kids in the boat when they come <em class=”ido-tag-em”>crappie fishing.

…soooooo, this special reg is getting kids out fishing? Sounds like a win!

Love it when panfish regulations bring out the meat hogs.
Keep a few 12″ or smaller bass if you’re so hard up for food. They taste the same as a 10″ gill.

shefland wrote:

thousands of lakes to fish sunfish, and for those that think they will always keep 5 big ones? the same people would keep 20 big ones. I love the idea. Now enforcement? that will be a issue.

I laugh as well. The lakes their putting these restrictions on, you don’t have to really worry much about keeping the “big ones!” And when it gets to that point, well, then what they did worked.

gimruis wrote:

Guys, the solution to this is simple and legal. Ten 21-inch northern pike provides a lot more filet than 5 sunfish. Plus they’re abundant and need to be thinned anyways so its a win-win.

I totally agree. I could do more than my fair share of helping lakes out by keeping a ton of those under 22″ pike. The cleaning on them is not hard if you just take the backstrap and the tail section and toss the rest. Its just the slimy mess I cant seem to get past. Even if you bleed them and put them on ice, they are still a slimy mess by the time you get home to clean them.

I hardly think my keeping fish 5 days out of 365 qualifies as “meat hogging”, but sure.

Everyone here is getting pissed but the fact is the people on this website generally fall into the resource conscious crowd. Most sportsman don’t rape the resources although its basic human instinct to do so. There is nothing we can do about the masses so regulation is the only way to keep some waters from being depleted.
The alternative is one I have witnessed my whole life. Lakes cycle. Im used to that and understand most good Gill fisheries will be good for a while then crash once word gets out. They eventually come back. Im okay with that approach too but a little more regulation might be a good combination?

This may deter you from fishing a particular lake that the DNR thinks is worthy to preserve the fishery for the future it is not as if the fishery is closed. I fail to see the collateral damage or anyone one person or group being punished.

Follow up questions. Do you think this is a trial, or a ramp up to these regs being implemented everywhere? I think its the latter, as it appears mine is a minority opinion and the DNR has been increasingly basing its policy on public opinion, for better or worse.
Should that come to pass, would that change your assessment of the situation?

They eventually come back. Im okay with that approach too but a little more regulation might be a good combination?

I have no problem with regulations, just quibbles with the details of these. Hopefully they don’t go full state without some modifications, but there’s little I can do about it, beyond give my opinion and ask questions.

I prefer to keep musky. the cheeks are as big as a sunfish fillet too.

shefland wrote:

and for those that think they will always keep 5 big ones? the same people would keep 20 big ones. I love the idea. Now enforcement? that will be a issue.

Ding Ding Ding, we have a winner! I came here to say the same thing.

Bearcat89 wrote:

Fish a few days and get your 20. No big deal. Many lakes near me have been killed because guys keeping every big fish they catch

the possession limit is also 5

ClownColor wrote:

The lakes their putting these restrictions on, you don’t have to really worry much about keeping the “big ones!” And when it gets to that point, well, then what they did worked.

I can only speak to the lakes I have experience on, but overall I disagree with your statement. The new regs are going on lakes that have big bluegills, or at least a history of big bluegills. There’s 25 of the reduced sunfish limit lakes in my two county area and I’ve fished about half of them. Of the lakes I’ve fished, I’ve caught 10″ bluegills out of all of them but 2.

cass wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Bearcat89 wrote:</div>
Fish a few days and get your 20. No big deal. Many lakes near me have been killed because guys keeping every big fish they catch

the possession limit is also 5

The new lakes are all listed as DAILY limit of 5 (or 10). The lakes that already had reduced limits were listed as possession limit of 5 (or 10) – the possession limit is basically unenforceable.

eyeguy507 wrote:

I prefer to keep musky. the cheeks are as big as a sunfish fillet too.

That’s the only thing I eat on a Musky…..I cut the cheeks out and toss them back so they can grow their cheeks back and I can catch them again.

not sure if it is true or not but I heard on the radio that deer can grow 2 trophy bucks in succession in the same time frame as one 10″ blue gill. so probably 7-10 years.

mn-z wrote:

not sure if it is true or not but I heard on the radio that deer can grow 2 trophy bucks in succession in the same time frame as one 10″ blue gill. so probably 7-10 years.

Growth rates in Minnesota studies are about an inch a year for the first 6-7 years. Then growth slows substantially. Most 10″ fish are going to be 13-15 years old. You’ll have genetic “freak” outliers of course that will continue on a much faster track. Lots of variables to account for, but this data is based upon 77,485 sunfish sampled in 41 out of 43 lake classes in Minnesota.

Wildlifeguy wrote:

This may deter you from fishing a particular lake that the DNR thinks is worthy to preserve the fishery for the future it is not as if the fishery is closed. I fail to see the collateral damage or anyone one person or group being punished.

Follow up questions. Do you think this is a trial, or a ramp up to these regs being implemented everywhere? I think its the latter, as it appears mine is a minority opinion and the DNR has been increasingly basing its policy on public opinion, for better or worse.
Should that come to pass, would that change your assessment of the situation?

I would prefer policy based on something “other” than entirely public opinion. If nothing else it has been evident lately that some people do not look at things through a rational lens but instead thru an emotional one – which is not good

tswoboda wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>shefland wrote:</div>
and for those that think they will always keep 5 big ones? the same people would keep 20 big ones. I love the idea. Now enforcement? that will be a issue.

Ding Ding Ding, we have a winner! I came here to say the same thing.

That’s a good point, and the five fish limit is an improvement in a lot of ways. I feel like it would be better if they couldn’t keep one (or maybe more than one) over X”, and then it seems like it wouldn’t be tough for most lakes to support a larger limit. But enforcement of a panfish size limit might be tough, and I get it anyway. This new reg should help panfish populations significantly.

Maybe a better option would be to go down to 10 state wide and none over x length.

Ice fishing popularity has continued to explode and equipment keeps getting better. Wheel houses, portables, tackle, rods, and more specifically – electronics are making it easier than ever to stay on top of fish. An average fisherman can purchase Livescope or a 360 and fairly easily find/drill right on top of vulnerable panfish populations.

I love modern electronics and use them. I’m also not naïve enough to believe they don’t have a massive impact on fish populations and quality. I like the idea of decreased limits. Does it hurt the guy who fishes 5 times a year? Possibly. But I’d rather have an outing with many quality fish catches in those 5 days than catching small, stunted fish.

Lastly, it’s 2021. Why does the success of a fishing trip still depend on putting the knife to a pile of dead fish? Again, just my opinion. Nothing more- nothing less.

Andy Fiolka wrote:

Lastly, it’s 2021. Why does the success of a fishing trip still depend on putting the knife to a pile of dead fish? Again, just my opinion. Nothing more- nothing less.

Sometimes it just does if you like fish meat. The year has nothing to do with it. Its no different than hunting and there is no C&R there. There’s Nothing like fresh fish you harvested yourself. Its a deep down feeling of accomplishment and survival. Your eating a rare item that few get to sample. The key is intelligence and restraint. Especially when you have a good bite figured out.

Wildlifeguy wrote:

This may deter you from fishing a particular lake that the DNR thinks is worthy to preserve the fishery for the future it is not as if the fishery is closed. I fail to see the collateral damage or anyone one person or group being punished.

Follow up questions. Do you think this is a trial, or a ramp up to these regs being implemented everywhere? I think its the latter, as it appears mine is a minority opinion and the DNR has been increasingly basing its policy on public opinion, for better or worse.
Should that come to pass, would that change your assessment of the situation?

I think you were referring to me. Do I think 5 sunfish will be implemented everywhere? No
Do I think policies should be based on public opinion? No

Andy Fiolka wrote:

Ice fishing popularity has continued to explode and equipment keeps getting better. Wheel houses, portables, tackle, rods, and more specifically – electronics are making it easier than ever to stay on top of fish. An average fisherman can purchase Livescope or a 360 and fairly easily find/drill right on top of vulnerable panfish populations.

I love modern electronics and use them. I’m also not naïve enough to believe they don’t have a massive impact on fish populations and quality. I like the idea of decreased limits. Does it hurt the guy who fishes 5 times a year? Possibly. But I’d rather have an outing with many quality fish catches in those 5 days than catching small, stunted fish.

Lastly, it’s 2021. Why does the success of a fishing trip still depend on putting the knife to a pile of dead fish? Again, just my opinion. Nothing more- nothing less.

Well played Andy. Great response

suzuki wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Andy Fiolka wrote:</div>
Lastly, it’s 2021. Why does the success of a fishing trip still depend on putting the knife to a pile of dead fish? Again, just my opinion. Nothing more- nothing less.

Sometimes it just does if you like fish meat. The year has nothing to do with it. Its no different than hunting and there is no C&R there. There’s Nothing like fresh fish you harvested yourself. Its a deep down feeling of accomplishment and survival. Your eating a rare item that few get to sample. The key is intelligence and restraint. Especially when you have a good bite figured out.

Well put Suzuki. I won’t support this limit idea either, while I don’t need to limit out every time out, I also like to eat fish and provide it for family, friends and coworkers in the form of a good old fashioned fish fry and this will make it harder to do so.

suzuki wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Andy Fiolka wrote:</div>
Lastly, it’s 2021. Why does the success of a fishing trip still depend on putting the knife to a pile of dead fish? Again, just my opinion. Nothing more- nothing less.

Sometimes it just does if you like fish meat. The year has nothing to do with it. Its no different than hunting and there is no C&R there. There’s Nothing like fresh fish you harvested yourself. Its a deep down feeling of accomplishment and survival. Your eating a rare item that few get to sample. The key is intelligence and restraint. Especially when you have a good bite figured out.

See that is the problem right there. The key you said is intelligence and restraint. Over 50% of anglers don’t have that.

Panfish are too dumb and easy. When you get on them, generally you can take all you want. They need protection from the freezer fillers, guys that go back day in and day out, etc.

Do I necessarily like the 5 fish limits? No, but unfortunately, there are just too many people that have no restraint and are basically walking cormorants that ruin it for the rest of us.

Andy Fiolka wrote:

Ice fishing popularity has continued to explode and equipment keeps getting better. Wheel houses, portables, tackle, rods, and more specifically – electronics are making it easier than ever to stay on top of fish. An average fisherman can purchase Livescope or a 360 and fairly easily find/drill right on top of vulnerable panfish populations.

I love modern electronics and use them. I’m also not naïve enough to believe they don’t have a massive impact on fish populations and quality. I like the idea of decreased limits. Does it hurt the guy who fishes 5 times a year? Possibly. But I’d rather have an outing with many quality fish catches in those 5 days than catching small, stunted fish.

Lastly, it’s 2021. Why does the success of a fishing trip still depend on putting the knife to a pile of dead fish? Again, just my opinion. Nothing more- nothing less.

In my opinion we need lower limits across the board, on all species. I’ve seen too many lakes decimated over the years. Honestly it blows my mind that people can’t see the damage that has been done already.

Hell, I’d fish just the same as I do now even if it was catch and release for everything all of the time.

In this day and age if you’re still fishing purely for the food, give it up. Fishing had become a hobby/ pastime. Nobody should be using natural resources for subsistence in MN. It’s far cheaper to buy fish at the store than to go and legally catch them yourself. Im not saying we shouldn’t keep fish just that it shouldn’t be why we fish.

What is the DNRs reason for this small limit? I will say this, here we have a local, State owned and managed lake. Man made, good lake, 160 acres or so. For a long, long time the limit on Crappies on that lake was 5/day. That said, 14 inch and larger were not uncommon. After running that program for years, 2 or 3 years ago they increased the limit to 10/day. And last year increased the limit again to 25/day. Still lots of good sized crappies there, not as many as before, but still a great Crappie Fishery.