Heads up to MN catfishermen using live bait

So how do these new laws effect commercial fisherman who transport live fish to be sold alive?

Quote:

---

Anyway, laws only apply to the downright stupid, because anyone with have a brain was practicing them before they were ratified (in most cases).

-Mike

---

i’ll just leave it at that….

Sometimes I think the legislature is like a corporate HR department. They spend more time inventing things to do and causing problems for other people than they do accomplishing anything worthwhile that actually benefits anyone.

So are Senators Rosen, Fredrickson and Anderson just too ignorant to understand that the spreading of invasives is primarily due to ducks, geese, herons, cormorants, pelicans, and so on?

And before anyone jumps on me about preventative measures, I firmly believe in reasonable preventative measures. However I believe that “reasonable” not only means that they cannot be generally unreasonable as perceived by the public, but they must also be *scientifically valid* and, more than anything, effective in accomplishing their ends. Since the goal of this legislation is to stop the transmission of invasives and yet accounts for neither the number of transmissions it’s likely to stop nor the fact that a minimum of 90% of new infections are due to waterfowl and/or aquatic mammals, it doesn’t constitute anything “reasonable”, but it does place a confusing and complicated burden on the people of the state.

Dang, it’s too bad IANAL.

No matter how you slice it, “stupid, stupid, stupid” is about the only way you can describe this legislation. If it had a snowballs chance in hell of changing anything other than how many tickets law enforcement writes, that’d be one thing… but it won’t.

At least 3 guys hanging in St. Paul will have something to feel smug about…

Quote:

---

…the fact that a minimum of 90% of new infections are due to waterfowl and/or aquatic mammals, it doesn’t constitute anything “reasonable”, but it does place a confusing and complicated burden on the people of the state.

---

Where did you get that number from? Even if it is true, 10% is still a significant number and I bet that humans are much better at spreading certain things like invasive fish and plants.

I think you guys are all just being lazy.

Quote:

---

I think you guys are all just being lazy.

---

If I fished only a couple times a month, I would feel the same way Pug.

Make no mistake, this new reg is a direct shot across the bow of people who are serious about using live bait to fish. Not only with regards to gathering and collecting the bait, but also on the water using it.

I fear that It’s only the start of much worse things to come.

This issue has much more sticking power (to me) than any silly length limit, or how many poles we are allowed to use. If live bait is taken away from us, you might as well find a new hobby.

Quote:

---

I think you guys are all just being lazy.

---

and why do you think I took up cat fishing?

Quote:

---

and why do you think I took up cat fishing?

---

Quote:

---

Where did you get that number from? Even if it is true, 10% is still a significant number and I bet that humans are much better at spreading certain things like invasive fish and plants.

---

I got it from a DNR enforcement guy. I was fishing at a place where there was a Sign About Invasives and I asked him about it. He kinda shook his head and proceeded to tell me that the legislature is doing all sorts of pointless things to look good but that 90% of the problem is with waterfowl, specifically, picking up mussels and milfoil in infected waters and then landing in clean waters and dropping off their cargo.

As for transporting invasive fish, consider Cenenko Lake up by Coon Rapids Dam. Supposed to be exclusively a trout pond, but it’s full of bass and even a few muskie. Why? Because eagles swoop down and grab the fish out of the river, try to fly off and drop them into the lake.

And hey, just FYI – if they were to pass a law that made sense even if it cost me money and effort (like needing separate anchor ropes for infected and clean waters), I’d happily comply with a “Dude, that makes total sense!” But this bogus crap just p1sses me off.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I think you guys are all just being lazy.

---

and why do you think I took up cat fishing?

---

because the Captain Cokes were getting too warm in the mid-day sun.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Where did you get that number from? Even if it is true, 10% is still a significant number and I bet that humans are much better at spreading certain things like invasive fish and plants.

---

As for transporting invasive fish, consider Cenenko Lake up by Coon Rapids Dam. Supposed to be exclusively a trout pond, but it’s full of bass and even a few muskie. Why? Because eagles swoop down and grab the fish out of the river, try to fly off and drop them into the lake.

---

I’d say Cenaiko probably has other species in it due to the few and far between flood events up this way that can push the river over the berm, or more likely people intentionally ‘stocking’ it with other fish either to be destructive or thinking it will be their honey hole.

Quote:

---

…more likely people intentionally ‘stocking’ it with other fish either to be destructive or thinking it will be their honey hole.

---

That would be where I would have placed my bets. Unless there was a eagles nest dangling over the water, but I have never seen one passing by the lake in the spring.

Its kind of like the lake my brother has a cabin on that was reclaimed. Crappies were supposed to be stocked after the other species established themselves and poof, they magically appeared before that happened.

So…if I have this right, I go to lake A and fish for a bit with say crappie minnows…er…bullheads in a minnow bucket that gets hung over the side of the boat, I now want to fish lake B which is a bit down the road.

I now have to drain the minnow…er…catfish bucket and find different water to put them in, before I go to lake B ????

Looks like the bait stores are going to make a foutune on bags of just water.
Maybe buy two bags of bait and get one bag of water free???

While I understand they’re trying this sounds about as bad as when they dumped a half million walleye fry into Holly Name lake…which is all of 7 foot deep and suffers from repeated winter kill.

The inmates are running the asylum.

Al

Quote:

---

I now have to drain the minnow…er…catfish bucket and find different water to put them in, before I go to lake B ????

---

Missed one…maybe two parts.

1)It doesn’t matter if the bait “holder” was over the side of the boat. If it was in the boat, it needs to be changed.

2)After changing the water, the bait holder needs to go into your car/truck.

No water in the boat.

Pop coolers when the ice melts included.

Dirk Peterson, Head of Fisheries hasn’t responded to my inquiry at this time.

Uff Da… you get a big headache just thinking about all the “what if” scenarios, which really aren’t what ifs as a lot of guys do hit up multiple lakes/rivers in a day quite often.

How much water is a guy going to have to carry with him?

This is just borderline rediculous.

Quote:

---

This is just borderline rediculous.

---

Remove the word “borderline” and you’ve got it nailed. I’d even go so far as to say “well beyond” instead of “borderline”.

COOLER WATER? WTF?

Do I need to drain the freakin water out of my batteries, too?

how about a bottle of water in the boat, if i don’t finish it, does it have to be thrown out before i leave, since it was in the boat?

you can call me stupid all you want, but its water, and its in the boat, therefore it is illegal to transport, and a CO could write you a ticket on that.

i feel this is appropriate by now….

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I now have to drain the minnow…er…catfish bucket and find different water to put them in, before I go to lake B ????

---

Missed one…maybe two parts.

1)It doesn’t matter if the bait “holder” was over the side of the boat. If it was in the boat, it needs to be changed.

2)After changing the water, the bait holder needs to go into your car/truck.

No water in the boat.

Pop coolers when the ice melts included.

Dirk Peterson, Head of Fisheries hasn’t responded to my inquiry at this time.

---

“”
This is just borderline rediculous.
“””

That just might be the understatement of the month.

Ok, so now I have a 60qt or larger cooler stuck in the back of my truck containing pure untouched by any lake water, to keep it cool so the damn bait doesn’t die I have a small electric cooler hooked up to it, so we have what…$250 tied up in this.

Now I then have to figure out how to get somebody to not steal the darn thing while I’m off fishing.

All the while the big lake boats are still dumping tons of outsourced water into the great lakes and BP is wiping out the fishing industry down south…sigh…

Al

Lucky this law is only concerned with water inside the boat, otherwise those with carpeted bunks on their trailers would have to wring them out before leaving the access, too!

Perch,

You keep tossing the DNR in there…it’s the people WE voted for that did this. (not saying the DNR didn’t give it a nod…but I don’t know that.)

Thanks Brian, I was gonna say the same thing but I wasn’t sure whether the DNR was behind it or not.

It wasn’t a rule from the DNR in any case, it was the legislature that put this in place. I bet if you ask a DNR enforcement guy about this he’ll just shake his head sadly and say “It’s the legislature, we don’t really have any more control over it than you do.”

Joel is pretty clear in all his early posts about how it went down to the best of his understanding. He came here and posted a heads up and provided great suggestion to keep us all from getting tagged, so I think we owe Joel, a representative of the DNR, a big thanks.

All egging aside, if the DNR and their biologists were behind this (in terms of support, not in terms of creating the regs) then I would have no problem with it. However being it was created by legislators apparently with little or no input from the DNR I do think it is a bit asinine.

Quote:

---

Joel is pretty clear in all his early posts about how it went down to the best of his understanding. He came here and posted a heads up and provided great suggestion to keep us all from getting tagged, so I think we owe Joel, a representative of the DNR, a big thanks.

---

Agreed.

Joel, please note that all the hating on the DNR is from a minority around here. You guys have a LOT to do and no time or money to do it with and I admire your dedication to the science of maintaining and improving our environment.

I’m betting most here have nothing against the local DNR guys, I think in 40+ years of fishing I have only run into a couple who were having a bad day, and that’s dam few considering.

I’d think most of the complaints are steered towards management and policy makers, whether they are upper DNR people or them moronic bozo’s in govt.

I’d add my thanks for those of them in the DNR, who take their time to come here and help us try and keep up with all this crap, here’s to you…

al

Quote:

---

Agreed.

Joel, please note that all the hating on the DNR is from a minority around here. You guys have a LOT to do and no time or money to do it with and I admire your dedication to the science of maintaining and improving our environment.

---

i about spit up on my keyboard there! NO MONEY!?! are you kidding me???

2010-2011 biennial budget for the dnr is $835.1 million.

how about we start holding them accountable for what they are spending this money on, before we(you) make ludicrous statements that they have no money to work with.

go look at all of the money wasted on “green” projects, and other BS, and then reevaluate whether they are really getting the short end of the stick.

Ask Joel what his research budget is, or whether the West Metro Fisheries guys are understaffed.

I agree that we need to hold the DNR responsible, but at the local level the folk who actually DO the work are under-represented in the budget and are chronically understaffed. I know that because I know a good many people who work for the DNR and deal with these issues every day.

Quote:

---

Ask Joel what his research budget is, or whether the West Metro Fisheries guys are understaffed.

I agree that we need to hold the DNR responsible, but at the local level the folk who actually DO the work are under-represented in the budget and are chronically understaffed. I know that because I know a good many people who work for the DNR and deal with these issues every day.

---

of course they are understaffed, and underfunded, when they blow money on unnecessary “green projects”, and steal money to fund one big party the weekend of the Warden convention in st paul – that $200,000 getting spent every year that was unaccounted for, could have helped out a lot of areas.

until i see some major house cleaning in the DNR and the lawmakers that run it, i have zero sympathy for them or their “budget”.

with the amount of taxes we pay every year in this state, no one should feel bad about any agency supposedly not having enough money.

Thanks Joel. I was wondering about this myself and your post clears everything up.

Remember, they can never do to much to you…er…to help you, and they’ll spend whatever money you have to prove it.

Agreed, they spend money like it ain’t theirs and then boast about what good they did us all…grrrrrr

al

It’s true. My cup is half full.

In looking at the whole picture, I feel (and have photo’s) that we have the best fishing (and pretty damn good hunting) of the states that surround us.

From what I’ve seen, I believe the MN DNR as a whole does and outstanding job for what they are charged with. Sure, I have my frustrations too but all in all, we have some awesome fisheries in the state…and we have to give them credit for that.