Bow Fishing for Channel Cats?

Question of the day.

It’s been proposed to the MN DNR that the bowfishing law be changed to allow bow fishing for channel cats. The same bag limits would apply for the body of water that your fishing as if you would be using hook and line.

Clearly, this would not include Flatheads and the channels would be used for table fair, although I don’t know how this could be enforced. Either way, only 10 or 5 is the limit.

I’m guessing these fish would mostly be taken at night in the shallows. I’m not a bowfisherman, so I’m just guessing here.

The MN Catfish and Sturgeon Alliance has asked it’s members this question, but I would like a broader view from folks out of the area too.

Your input is appreciated!

What a waste of a good fight. Those big enough to arrow aren’t very good to eat anymore. They have plenty of carp targets now and do the fishery some good by getting those numbers down. Channel cats actually clean up your lake and local river by eating the dead stuff. Seems to me to be a double whammy of wrongs.

Is it easy enough to distinguish flats from channels before shooting?

Quote:

---

Is it easy enough to distinguish flats from channels before shooting?

---

Good answer!

Quote:

---

Is it easy enough to distinguish flats from channels before shooting?

---

I would guess slightly easier than seeing the difference between a musky and a northern.

But a good question.

I hear you Kev, but there are 100’s of thousands of pound taken out of the Mississippi each year by commercial netters. Would the few people that bow fish and actually saw a channel make a difference?

Certainly aren’t talking about eradicating them from any body of water.

Just being the devil’s advocate here.

I am against!

I see what is done with the Redhorse, Buffalo, Bowfin, Gar, and Carp.

It is disgusting and there are plenty of carp to shoot without creeping onto another species. I like catching the large ones and watching them swim away!

Let’em have at it. I’d be curious to actually go out with someone and see how they can actually spot them. I’d guess most of the fish they see anyway are small fish surface feeding. Just a guess.

They can’t harvest more than hook and line fishermen, so they certainly can’t do more damage. And what is the percentage of bow anglers to hook and line?

Quote:

---

Would the few people that bow fish and actually saw a channel make a difference?

---

That’s a good point, but to me It’s not really about that. Are they looking to classify channel cats as rough fish?(not that I under appreciate rough fish) Why not bowfishing for bass? What about walleye? Northern pike? I’m with Aaron on this, no more added species to the bowfishing list.

Quote:

---

Would the few people that bow fish and actually saw a channel make a difference?

---

I would think that the totals would be so low that they would be of no consequence. Give it a try and if it looks like harvest is too high, cut it back or stop it.

Increases in opportunities are a good thing!

I bowfish alot and have no intrest in shooting catfish. To me there more of a game fish. Bow fishing should be left to the rough fish that need to be removed from the water. As far as I know catfish do no harm to the waters there in…

I think it would actually be too difficult trying to even spot one in the day time. At night along shore in the shallows would be the best chance to get an arrow off. Im sure it wouldn’t make a dent in any fish population. I consider catfish a couple steps above bowfishing for them though, even spear fishing, I think thier a better quality fish meant for hook and line.

The one piece that I’m realizing more and more about myself is that I always think about how a new law will effect me and the area I fish. Natural I ‘spose.

..posting here brings other views from other areas.

The harvest would be very low, so that isn’t a big concern of mine. What I don’t like however, is keeping catfish on a same plane as some of the other rough fish species. Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate all fish, even the roughies, but when it comes to the general fishing public, a rough fish is…….well a rough fish. We have made great strides at moving catfishing into the general fishing populous and this would be like taking 2 steps forward and 3 steps back.

On a side note, we have people that fish cats quite regularly who still can’t tell the difference between a flathead and a channel, even after they have measured it, weighed it and posed for a picture with it. So I don’t buy for second that there won’t be “mistakes”

I vote a big NO

Quote:

---

Why not bowfishing for bass? What about walleye? Northern pike?

---

Well, to be honest…unless a person is catch and release fishing…why not? Too easy? Try it sometime! (Yeah I know this will never happen)

BTW for the record, I will be supporting the out come of the MNCSA.

Quote:

---

That’s a good point, but to me It’s not really about that. Are they looking to classify channel cats as rough fish?(not that I under appreciate rough fish) Why not bowfishing for bass? What about walleye? Northern pike? I’m with Aaron on this, no more added species to the bowfishing list.

---

It does kind of seem to put them in a strange classification where they don’t have ridiculous limits on under utilized fish when bow hunting (I haven’t confirmed this, but it is an assumption), yet they have a reasonable limit proposed for catfish.

I’d be really interested in hearing what a bowfisherman who actually wants to do this has to say and not just a bowfisherman.

This not addressed to anyone in particular:

I try not to be selfish and understand when people want to do something that I have no interest in, but could affect what I do or is similar to what I do. Now if there are bow hunters who like eating catfish, I have a hard time saying no. Although I’ll admit I would be tweaked if I saw full bow limits of 15-20 pound channels.

There is one slight difference though in that bow fishermen ‘might’ have an upperhand because it ‘might’ be easier to harvest with a bow an arrow.

Quote:

---

On a side note, we have people that fish cats quite regularly who still can’t tell the difference between a flathead and a channel, even after they have measured it, weighed it and posed for a picture with it. So I don’t buy for second that there won’t be “mistakes”

---

Don’t forget accidently shooting the ‘blue cats’!

I think opening up bowfishing for cats is a bad idea. A number of anglers dont even know what species they have when it comes to cats. they see it as a cat is a cat so the mistakes will increase due to lack of knowledge. Granted the limits are fair still creates a problem especially at night for a safety reason as well. I agree with keeping bowfishing within the rough fish category and leave cats where they belong and keep climbing the ladder for agame fish.

Dude, we don’t have blue cats in MN.

As for the “OMG this means they’re rough fish!” line seems a bit absurd to me. It doesn’t mean cats have been pulled into the rough fish category, it means the state of MN has FINALLY started to expand the bowfishing rules a bit to include non-under-utilized fish. They spear Norhterns in the winter, so does that mean Northerns are rough fish?

Hardly.

However I can see a huge issue with bowfishermen shooting at a splash in the shallows and taking a big flattie, saying “OH SH*T!” and dumping it. In MN the 2 cat species have one season and trying to separate them in a sight-based sport like bowfishing is a matter of concern.

I get so sick of the whiny anti-bowfishing sentiment among self-professed “real” fishermen. It’s probably a more ancient, more traditional way to take fish. Can we try to stick to the facts and not pass laws based on “But I don’t like how those guys ‘go fishing’!” I don’t give a crap what you like, I care about balancing how many people it’ll get out of their houses and on the water with what it will do to the fish populations and the health of the river itself.

/soap-box

And now I’m off to have my morning . Maybe I should have waited till after I had my coffee to respond. Nah, this is more… umm… colorful.

It sounds pretty silly to me…. good luck trying to arrow a channel cat for petes sake!

Quote:

---

…. good luck trying to arrow a channel cat for petes sake!

---

I think this every time I come into this thread. This is also why I would like to hear from a bow hunter who actually wants and thinks there is a good reason to hunt them.

Lets face it, its more hunting than fishing, not that there is anything wrong with that.

Here comes the devil!

What about only shooting rooster pheasants?

There was a time when we could shoot 3 drake wood ducks and only 1 or 2 hens. Very comparable. Some would say if a person can not tell the difference between a flat, a channel or a blue..they shouldn’t have a bow in their hands.

But I do get your point D, those people that say they caught a blue in MN should not have a bow either.

I hate to break it to ya, but Northerns were classified as rough fish, that is why spearing was allowed. The classification was removed a year later, but the spearing was grandfathered in and remains today.

I am far from anti bow fishing, in fact I’ve done it a few times myself. It’s a lot of fun!

As long as bag limits are adhered too, why not an M80 or dry ice bomb to harvest? Or heck why not set lines, ditty poles, and jugs? At least with those, the bigger ones can be released sometimes.

You cannot tell me for one second that a bowfisherman will pass up a big channel to shoot a smaller one.

Question…..how realistic is it to harvest cats bowfishing?

Quote:

---

You cannot tell me for one second that a bowfisherman will pass up a big channel to shoot a smaller one.

---

So what?

And M-80s are illegal in MN, but if they want to pass a law letting people use sparklers, who am I to judge?

oh and by the way, what other species that you can legally arrow has a slot limit in place such as channels do?

can o worms

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

You cannot tell me for one second that a bowfisherman will pass up a big channel to shoot a smaller one.

---

So what?

And M-80s are illegal in MN, but if they want to pass a law letting people use sparklers, who am I to judge?

---

Fine, let’s just use gill nets and hoop traps then

Quote:

---

Fine, let’s just use gill nets and hoop traps then

---

Now those are truly indiscriminate. What do the commercial fishermen use?

Quote:

---

You cannot tell me for one second that a bowfisherman will pass up a big channel to shoot a smaller one.

---

I don’t think anyone did?

That might be an issue too. It’s a well know fact that taking all the larger fish out of the body of water leads to smaller fish over all.

Then again as an angler that would keep fish, wouldn’t they return smaller fish to the water and keep a larger one when caught. (yes, I know once a fish is reduced to possession it can’t be released legally.)

Quote:

---

oh and by the way, what other species that you can legally arrow has a slot limit in place such as channels do?

can o worms

---

Really want to open a can o worms? Propose this regulation, only substitute “Bass” in place of “Catfish” and post it up in the bass forum.

Of course you would have to omit the table fare part.

Right, that is EXACTLY what I’m saying Stevens.

Why not propose it on walleye, bass, musky, and pike? Catfish belong in the same conversation as those species, and I think the whole thought of it underminds everything the MNSCA would hopefully stand for.