Anyone see any nets on the lake

nhamm wrote:

Which causes greater harm

A. Thousands and thousands of 14″ fish coming up from 30′, or giving way too much time on slip bobbers or livebait rigs and watching fish swim away with hooks in their bellies, or maybe reeling in a fish 150′ out on lead in the summer months.

Or

B. One net of fish.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
But of course there are principles involved here.

Well I certainly know which one provides a greater benefit the dozens of local businesses and the community as a whole. You’re right, it’s not just about protecting the fish.

All snarky comments aside, I have just as much disdain for people who gut hook, poorly handle, consistently take limits, and keep trophy sized fish as I do for the netting situation.

lindyrig79 wrote:

Somebody should forward this and an explanation of the situation to the White House. The treaties clearly state “at the pleasure of the President”, right? Seems like 45 would be our best ever chance at getting something done about this, he’d probably take care of it just to urine off the Left.

lindyrig79 wrote:

Somebody should forward this and an explanation of the situation to the White House. The treaties clearly state “at the pleasure of the President”, right? Seems like 45 would be our best ever chance at getting something done about this, he’d probably take care of it just to urine off the Left.

These comments pretty much sum up what SHOULD and NEEDS to be done.

That was me actually. And after posting that, I actually went and found the White House’s contact information, and sent an email. Mainly just so I can tell myself I actually did something besides complain about the situation. So far I’ve just got an auto-response that says thanks for my concern, but I’ll let you guys know if anything comes of it (not that I’m expecting much).

TMF89 wrote:

When you have a group of people who have a special privilege that most disagree with, and those people are able to abuse that privilege with no visible consequences, it’s only going to cause negative opinions and criticism to form.

Absolutely agree about this and to boot here is an interesting article regarding the “secret sessions/negotiations” that take place each year that really fuels the mistrust.
http://www.brainerddispatch.com/news/3877787-public-shut-out-mille-lacs-fisheries-meetings

TMF89 wrote:

That was me actually. And after posting that, I actually went and found the White House’s contact information, and sent an email. Mainly just so I can tell myself I actually did something besides complain about the situation. So far I’ve just got an auto-response that says thanks for my concern, but I’ll let you guys know if anything comes of it (not that I’m expecting much).

And good for you on this one too. There’s always those that say “somebody should do something”…without actually doing it themselves.

Thanks very much for the shout out and the article. I think a little compromise and a lot of transparency would go a long with towards fixing this issue. Then again, I don’t have a problem with not filling the freezer and I do love catching crazy numbers of walleye, so maybe I should keep my mouth shut!

TMF89, I sent you a pm.

TMF89 wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>nhamm wrote:</div>
Which causes greater harm

A. Thousands and thousands of 14″ fish coming up from 30′, or giving way too much time on slip bobbers or livebait rigs and watching fish swim away with hooks in their bellies, or maybe reeling in a fish 150′ out on lead in the summer months.

Or

B. One net of fish.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
But of course there are principles involved here.

Well I certainly know which one provides a greater benefit the dozens of local businesses and the community as a whole. You’re right, it’s not just about protecting the fish.

All snarky comments aside, I have just as much disdain for people who gut hook, poorly handle, consistently take limits, and keep trophy sized fish as I do for the netting situation.

TMF89
Although I do agree with you regarding the facts you stated, there’s only one thing in my mind that Differentiates the 2 and that is the fact that in almost all
cases, the netted fish haven’t spawned yet therefore killing the resource before it even has a chance to be created.
My $.02

TMF89 wrote:

Thanks very much for the shout out and the article. I think a little compromise and a lot of transparency would go a long with towards fixing this issue. Then again, I don’t have a problem with not filling the freezer and I do love catching crazy numbers of walleye, so maybe I should keep my mouth shut!

There’s nothing wrong with enjoying fishing for what it is. I commend you for that. Bass and muskie anglers don’t measure their day by the number of fish they go home with in their livewell. For years they’ve pursued their target passionately because they enjoy it. Walleye anglers need to realize that its not JUST about being a meat hunter and harvesting fish. The days of harvesting 4 or 6 fish is over. Its completely unsustainable.

Amen to that Grant. Heck I barely ever fished Mille Lacs back when you could keep em, now over the last couple years it’s become my favorite place to fish for walleye! I’ll take 100 fish days with a few dozen over 25″ and an empty livewell any day of the week! Personally I’d hate it if I only focused on one species, lake, or type of fishing. I think that by limiting your enjoyment to a certain species, lake, or mainly judging the quality of your day by how many fish you have in the box, you’re doing yourself a disservice! I realize that some guys feel differently, but being able to be versatile not only makes you a better fisherman, it also gives you way more options to enjoy the sport.

And Mike, I agree 100%. I know a different thread beat the topic of letting netters and sport fishermen co-mingle to death, but I would much rather see that (and the full prosecution of anyone who causes any issues) than the netting going on during the prespawn/spawn period. Heck, I’d even prefer them closing down the lake for a week or two in the fall for the Natives to net. That wouldn’t be my first choice and I wouldn’t be that happy about it, but it’s not like we aren’t used to random closures throughout the season anyway at this point!

Walleyestudent Andy Cox wrote:

8) No member shall fish with any gillnet unless the gillnet is marked in compliance with the following provisions:
(a) Each gillnet shall be marked with two flags or floats, one on each end;
(b) Each flag pole shall be two feet or more above the water and have a diameter of two-and-one-half inches or less;
(c) Each flag shall be white and ten inches square or larger; or
(d) Each float shall be visible from shore;
(e) A net shall have attached securely to it an identification tag issued by the Department of Natural Resources showing the band member’s identification number.

So it appears the net was initially placed in compliance based on what you observed and photographed.

But here is another violation;

3.03 Waste of Natural Resources.
No member shall unreasonably waste, injure, destroy, or impair natural resources while engaging in the exercise of treaty rights regulated by this ordinance.

Good to know that the Indians have some laws around nets needing to be marked with owner’s ID and must be tended. But of course it now comes down to what the bands choose to do about it.

But back to my point, you can’t blame this situation on politicians in MN “not doing anything”. There’s nothing for them to do and nothing they can do. I get that people don’t like the answer, but the “sovereign nation” status of the tribes and the rights in the treaties really do put the enforcement ball in the indian’s court.

Grouse

Well put TMF89
To me it’s never been as much about the Harvest as much of the lack of respect regarding the resource! One would think there could be some sort of compromise
to prtoect that but, for now, it stays unchanged.

Gonefishin,

Thank you for the effort!

I’ve had a place on the lake for 6 years now. The first year I think I kept two fish and haven’t kept a fish for 5 years straight. I was disappointed that we couldn’t keep at least one this year. Not that I would each time out, but maybe a handful throughout the year. I practice selective harvest in everything I do, and rarely keep a limit even though I know people who tend to focus on that. Agree, that mentality has to change.

Having said all of that, for 6 years I have spent my money in the area. Restaurants, bars, resorts, bait, gas, paid property tax, ect ect. For me not to be able to keep a single fish, and watch the Indians NET DURING THE SPAWN and then not even friggin pull their net properly leaving piles of spawning walleyes to ROT…….. better believe it gets me p/ssed off. I hope those responsible for this get a severe punishment. But who really believes that will happen??

Lindrig79, I agree it can be depressing. You just have to take it for what it is with a grain of salt. There is still some fantastic fishing to be had out there, I’m sure you’re aware. I don’t agree with the nets during spawn cycle (I don’t think there should be nets used anytime, anywhere, actually) either. The lake has changed too much the past decade because of many factors that we are all aware of and its not going to return to the way it once was. I’m in favor of what needs to be done to help the long term sustainability of the fishery, for every species of game fish out there.

lindyrig79 wrote:

I’ve had a place on the lake for 6 years now.

By now you most know at least 100 locals who would keep plenty of walleyes for you.
Back when I frequented the lake, limits and slots and quantity of lines meant nothing to many many locals.

Not too depressed. I enjoy C&R very much and have had a great time showing my now 6 yr old how to fish. In fact, his nickname is Mr Walleye, LOL.

Just really gets me steamed to see the netting during spawn, much less a net-full of walleye totally wasted. Sickening.

Feathers wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>lindyrig79 wrote:</div>
Just really gets me steamed to see the netting during spawn,

Please explain how a fish netted in Spring before it spawns is any different than that same fish netted in the fall, summer or winter. Dead fish don’t lay eggs. Doesn’t matter when they were harvested.

The guys who say the fish shouldn’t be bothered during the spawn are the same guys who are out there fishing the years we have a late spring and the fish are still spawning or about to spawn during open season. I always get a chuckle out of that.

Back on topic, nets suck. Wasted fish in nets suck even more.

Feathers, this was recently discussed thoroughly in another thread. You can find mine and others comments there. I’m not going to waste my time explaining it to you in this setting, it’s off topic anyway.

Feathers wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>lindyrig79 wrote:</div>
Just really gets me steamed to see the netting during spawn,

Please explain how a fish netted in Spring before it spawns is any different than that same fish netted in the fall, summer or winter. Dead fish don’t lay eggs. Doesn’t matter when they were harvested.

The guys who say the fish shouldn’t be bothered during the spawn are the same guys who are out there fishing the years we have a late spring and the fish are still spawning or about to spawn during open season. I always get a chuckle out of that.

Back on topic, nets suck. Wasted fish in nets suck even more.

I’m feeling rather cantankerous this afternoon, so I’ll bite.

Why don’t we shoot hen mallards during the spring…it’s just eggs going to waste? Why don’t we shoot doe deer in the spring…it’s just a fawn or two. Get the picture?

Simple math would prove that harvesting any given animal after it produces offspring means you get one additional year class out of it.

If Fish 1 and Fish 2 are equal, and Fish 1 gets pulled before the spawn and Fish 2 gets pulled after, that’s an extra spawn cycle Fish 2 has been involved in. By netting after the spawn, you’re basically adding +1 to however many spawn cycles those fish are involved in.

Not only that, but the ruckus the DNR was making about potential issues lakes will face by having Opener before/during the spawn should tell you that the professionals agree.

Having said that, I think we can all agree with you on the “nets are bad” part!

Fish 2 equals fish 1 the following year. Nice theory but fundamentally flawed.

If a train is heading south at …

The spawn doesn’t get undone if it is harvested afterwards.

Therefore, fish 2 is, and always will be, fish 2.

nhamm wrote:

Fish 2 equals fish 1 the following year. Nice theory but fundamentally flawed.

Uh, what?

Fish 1 and Fish 2 get to spawn in Year 1, Fish 1 is netted in the fall, Fish 2 spawns next year. That’s three “spawns”.

If netting occurs in the spring, and Fish 1 is netted, and Fish 2 lives until next spring (and lets say it misses getting netted again) that’s two “spawns”. Even if the only benefit is in the first year, the overall number of spawns will always be greater. Also netting in the fall will most likely reduce the amount of fish taken, since they’re typically not as bunched up.

And Feathers, I would love to know what lakes you’re panfishing that haven’t suffered to some extent over the last couple decades. Aside from farm ponds and hidden gems, the vast majority of the state’s panfish lakes aren’t anywhere near what they used to be. It’s gotten better over the years, but I still don’t have much faith in John Q Weekender and his buddies’ abilities to self-regulate. Ignoring the fact that your average Dakota glacial lake has a much healthier forage base due to the grass shrimp, they also (to my knowledge) don’t have any netting. Those guys that you chuckle at for fishing the spawn probably throw a lot more back than the nets do.

At the end of the day I don’t really get why we’re arguing about this. Moving netting to the fall is a bad idea because it “might” not help? Again, whether or not it affects the amount of eggs laid, I would be shocked if they net nearly as many fish when they’re not concentrated in shallow due to the spawn. That alone should be enough of a reason for all of us to be in favor of it.

The debate at hand stems to you don’t trust the DNR unless it agrees to your position. Nuff said. Right? The DNR policy has gone a muck from this situation to forcing musky stocking to limits on musky on a non designated water of musky. They have an agenda.

Feathers wrote:

I’m shocked there are any fish left in Devils Lake or the rest of the Dakotas for that matter. Fishing during the spawn year after year should have destroyed the populations by now right?

Have you been to the Dakota’s? Relative to MN, no one lives there. In Ramsey County (where Devils Lake is) and the surrounding 5 counties the total population is 35,000. If you add in Grand Forks county (70k and hour and half drive), you are at 105k. Or the population of the greater St Cloud area. Similarly in the 9 counties of NE South Dakota the total population is 85k. You would have to expand out to Sioux Falls (pop 175k), which is a 2 hour drive, and even with that would be equivalent to about the northern suburbs of the Twin Cities metro. So it’s an apples to oranges comparison.

Same as comparing netting during the spawn on ML to angling during the spawn on the border waters of MN. Anglers have the option (and exercise it at an increasing rate) to catch and release females full of eggs that nets do not (even if they only catch specific sizes there are still a lot of females mixed in). Additionally, the border waters (P4 in particular) have growth rates that exceed our inland lakes, also helping overcome any hardship from angling during the spawn.

Feathers wrote:

TMF89, if a fish is netted in the fall it is the same if that fish is netted in the spring. They take a certain number of fish and those fish don’t reproduce the next spawning season no matter when they are taken.

Statistically this is just not true. It would be like saying it doesn’t matter if your mortgage is at 4% or 5%. Fish can die for a wide variety of reasons throughout the year, hooking mortality, eaten by another fish, old age, lightening strike etc etc, but the ones that survive to spawn are what provide the fish of the future. Taking them while they are trying to spawn has a small % effect on the amount of eggs that hatch that year (which gets compounded every year netting during the spawn occurs), as well as blocking areas via net also could impact the % of viable reproductive areas. Fish reproduction at a basic level is based on a numbers game, the more eggs and milt in the system, the more fry that are hatched, the more fry hatched the more that survive to year 1, and on and on until they are able to reproduce.

“As for panfish, get out of the metro areas and you can find great panfishing. I agree a lot of lakes aren’t what they were or could be but I blame that on the explosion of ice fishing and not due to fishing in the spring during spawn. The amount of ice fishing pressure now vs 10 to 20 years ago is astounding. I have contacted several folks at the DNR to push for cutting the panfish limits in half. I think it would turn things around quickly.”

This is so true. The explosion of ice castles and other permanent structures on the ice that people leave out there for weeks at a time so they can go drink beer, watch satellite TV, socialize, and play cards in has increased tenfold. Joe Meat Hunter has decimated panfish populations, especially the larger ones that take longer to reach quality size up here in the cold northern waters. I think panfish limits should all be cut in half and there should be a minimum harvest size too.

TMF89 wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>nhamm wrote:</div>
Fish 2 equals fish 1 the following year. Nice theory but fundamentally flawed.

Uh, what?

Fish 1 and Fish 2 get to spawn in Year 1, Fish 1 is netted in the fall, Fish 2 spawns next year. That’s three “spawns”.

If netting occurs in the spring, and Fish 1 is netted, and Fish 2 lives until next spring (and lets say it misses getting netted again) that’s two “spawns”. Even if the only benefit is in the first year, the overall number of spawns will always be greater. Also netting in the fall will most likely reduce the amount of fish taken, since they’re typically not as bunched up.

Both your arguments are true but Nhamm is more correct IMO. You have to remember spawning is a cycle (or circle), not a straight line. The only time netting during the spawn (vs after the spawn) “TRULEY” (and I use that lightly, but for this argument only) affected the spawn, was the first year they did it. Every year after didn’t “really” have an affect. Clear as mud?

You lost one spawning cycle from the first year they netted. If they started their first netting season during the fall, they would have gained one more spawning cycle, but again, every year after that, dead fish is a dead fish and can’t reproduce.

The problem is the disruption during the spawn.

Here is release by PERM.

http://hosted.verticalresponse.com/778299/70a7c37757/1482944983/cdba221a74/

Thanks Bob, didn’t have the want to type it out.

all the publicity has gotten to the front page of the pioneer press I see.

Abandoned net of 67 dead walleye on Lake Mille Lacs angers conservation group