Mille lacs Slot Change- Effective July 9th

  • hwalleye18
    Coon Rapids MN
    Posts: 163
    #587351

    Quote:


    My only comment is this. It’s very important for everyone to remember that these regulations are being put in place for POLITICAL reasons, not for any kind of DNR fish management reasons and not for what is considered “GOOD” for the lake. In other words, reducing the slot to 14-16 is probably not going to be beneficial to the overall lake health. All it does is keep the non-Indian harvest quota under the court mandated harvest poundage. Nothing more.

    -J.


    Is this all you got Why don’t you throw something new out once in a while.

    erick
    Grand Meadow, MN
    Posts: 3213
    #587404

    Is this all you got Why don’t you throw something new out once in a while.


    What do you mean that all you got? Seems to me it is heading that way as well. If they do plan to put a slot limit in the public I see no reason that the Spring netting should not be monitored and/or managed with a tighter slot as well to make things even out for everyone to make it a level playing field. So commenting is that all you got makes no sense at all when it was a very well put statement about the situation that is going on ,and what could happen in the future to fisherman and/or fishery.

    big_g
    Isle, MN
    Posts: 22538
    #587410

    While that is true, I would hope that the numbers the ruling(Judge) put in place, did take some consideration into what is the best to sustain the lake. I don’t think, and will admit I don’t know, but would wager somebody gave the numbers for the ruling, after some discussion of what is best for the fishery. If not, then Jon is right in his post 100%.

    big g

    jon_jordan
    St. Paul, Mn
    Posts: 10908
    #587421

    Erick,

    I think B.Petersen is jusk poking some fun at me. My message on this topic is very consistent year to year.

    Quote:


    I see no reason that the Spring netting should not be monitored and/or managed with a tighter slot as well to make things even out for everyone to make it a level playing field.


    It’s also important to understand how the process works. In a nut shell without going into all the details, here is how it works. The courts, DNR and Tribes. Come up with a 3 year harvest goal. Currently, the tribes get 50% of the total lake harvest, hook and line anglers get a shot at the other 50%. After the 3 year harvest number is agreed on, the slot is set. If hook and line angles approach or exceed the agreed upon total, the courts mandate that the slot be tightened. If that does not work, the courts would require the DNR to close the lake to walleye fishing.

    So when I say changing the slot has nothing to do with the health of the lake, that’s why! Seems to me that changing the slot now to target the 14-16 inch fish. The same fish that have been pounded on since opener makes no sense to me. I’d rather see that year class protected. I’d also like to see an opportunity to cull out some of the fish that have been protected by the slot for the last 6 + years. How that get’s done? I don’t know. I do see some very similar thing going on with the lake that happened back in 02. Too many big fish and not enough baitfish in the lake to support that population.

    If anyone is interested in supporting the non-Indian viewpoint or learn more about how we got into this situation, please join PERM. Visit >>> http://www.perm.org

    -J.

    David Anderson
    Dayton, MN
    Posts: 520
    #587422

    Hunting4walleyes,

    Just my opinion but come on, Meat hunter?!?!? The average Launch captain takes more fish in 4 hours than Chomps probably keeps in a year. Using your logic, launch captains are meat hogs. But wait, they get paid to help people catch fish to keep. I guess this is different than Chomps. And what about the many guides, alot of them who post on IDA with fabulous reports, who fish 50 days or more a year. Lets assume an average of 8 fish an outing and total release(you know this is not the case but for sake of arguement) is 400 fish. Using the DNR numbers at approx 8% mortality this is 32 fish to the bottom of the lake. I’ll bet Chomps would be happy to have 1/4 of that to have a nice fish dinner for his family. How come you are not calling the guides meat hunters, as a group they are affect the “harvest” much more than Chomps.

    Sorry, we got enough problems with the politics of this lake to start throwing additional labels on the guys who either make their living on the lake or simply go there to spend money. Chomps doesn’t deserved that label anymore than the rest of us who like to fish, have released a lot of fish in the last 6 weeks, and take a few fish home to eat. It still is legal to do that regardless of size.

    Just my opinion.

    hwalleye18
    Coon Rapids MN
    Posts: 163
    #587424

    Quote:



    Is this all you got Why don’t you throw something new out once in a while.


    What do you mean that all you got? Seems to me it is heading that way as well. If they do plan to put a slot limit in the public I see no reason that the Spring netting should not be monitored and/or managed with a tighter slot as well to make things even out for everyone to make it a level playing field. So commenting is that all you got makes no sense at all when it was a very well put statement about the situation that is going on ,and what could happen in the future to fisherman and/or fishery.


    Let me re-phrase before eveyones panties get in a bind.

    Jon which politicians are changing the slot to 14″-16″?

    I would like to call them and give them my 2 cents. Yes just poking fun thats it.

    jon_jordan
    St. Paul, Mn
    Posts: 10908
    #587425

    For the record, you all can count me on the side of “Meat Hunter” or “Meat Hog” or whatever. I keep all the legal fish I’m licensed to take. AND I EAT ‘EM!!! Nothing better than a nice fresh Mille Lacs Lake walleye…nothing!

    -J.

    David Anderson
    Dayton, MN
    Posts: 520
    #587428

    BTW, it’s easy to stick up for Chomps with that great picture under his name!

    jon_jordan
    St. Paul, Mn
    Posts: 10908
    #587429

    B. Petersen. I said “Political” not “Politician” Anytime you get a bunch of suits sitting in an office trying to manage how to comply with a court order. That’s politics, not proper DNR fisheries management.

    -J.

    big_g
    Isle, MN
    Posts: 22538
    #587433

    I also keep all the eyes I catch, within the limit/law, in the slot. If that makes me a meat hunter, then I am guilty as charged. What I won’t/don’t do, is hit the lake every chance I get, to get a limit, because they are biting, and are easy pickings, (thats what god invented panfish for) Uh, oh, opened a can there. That to me is a limit after limit guy.

    big g

    t-ellis
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Posts: 1316
    #587434

    I am much more concerned about the netting situation. If you leave the “fox in charge of the hen house” by not closely monitoring the Walleye netting, the population is going to be exactly like the buffalo and bison population “decline by slaughter” in the Dakotas back in the 1800’s by herding & running 500-750 animals at a time off a cliff in order to have dinner. What happened to the bison/buffalo poplulation until regulations were put in place to help them rebound? Don’t we ever learn by our history (mistakes)? Is there that many band members to eat all that meat? Where is the extra going?

    hwalleye18
    Coon Rapids MN
    Posts: 163
    #587435

    I guess they are doing what they can with what they have to deal with.

    by the way it is son not sen.

    t-ellis
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Posts: 1316
    #587437

    I’ve been checking out the PERM site. Is there any Mille Lacs specific action groups sharing similar views on the lake. I don’t know if allowing netting in shallow spawning areas at night is “doing all they can”. Why don’t we allow them to electroshock them and just skip making them throw nets? Equal rights would be everyone using one line in summer and two lines in winter.

    Hunting4Walleyes
    MN
    Posts: 1552
    #587551

    Quote:


    You know, someone who calls me out as a meat hunter probably should have their shorts re-adjusted


    I guess meat hunter was a strong statement. I do also keep fish for a fish fry. I guess I was more taken aback by the statement, if I don’t get all the fish I want I am not going. Everyone that has done at least a little research on this lake knows this is a possibility every year, and they plan accordinly. I guess I am like Dan and tired of hearing people complain about this. If you want to guarantee fish, come up in May or June. I am sorry also to hear that the only way your kids will have fun is if they can throw their fish into a livewell. I think if you checked around the lake you find some of the smaller fish. I want to close by saying that for those that took my comments, that you should keep no fish in Mille Lacs, took my comments wrong. My post was intended to say cancelling a vacation and complaining about it when it needs to be done to keep the lake healthy is not right. And the only one you are hurting at this point is the resorts, because they have absolutely nothing to do with it. Everyone has their opinion and this is mine. Good luck perch fishing this winter.

    EyeSlayer1
    MG
    Posts: 55
    #587962

    Quote:


    I am much more concerned about the netting situation. If you leave the “fox in charge of the hen house” by not closely monitoring the Walleye netting, the population is going to be exactly like the buffalo and bison population “decline by slaughter” in the Dakotas back in the 1800’s by herding & running 500-750 animals at a time off a cliff in order to have dinner. What happened to the bison/buffalo poplulation until regulations were put in place to help them rebound? Don’t we ever learn by our history (mistakes)? Is there that many band members to eat all that meat? Where is the extra going?


    Wow???

    You either learned American history from a much different book than I did or you forgot a few very pertinent facts in your post.

    t-ellis
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Posts: 1316
    #588044

    Eyeslayer, You are right I forgot these facts, quote from:

    Buffalo Tales: The Near-Extermination of the American Bison

    Shepard Krech III, Brown University

    ©National Humanities Center:

    “When the average American thinks about the dramatic decline in bison populations the image that pops to mind is likely the scene from the motion picture Dances With Wolves in which native Americans look over a hillside covered in slaughtered buffalo. In this movie the message is clear, the bison population declined due to uncontrolled hide hunting by white America while the horse riding native of the plains only took what was needed to survive. The image presented by the motion picture industry is reinforced in the mind of the average American in grade school, where history books teach that the bison disappeared due to over-hunting. However the written reports from the first settlers differed greatly.”

    “The most efficient technique was what Crow Indians called “driving buffalo over embankments,” which involved enticing and leading buffaloes to the edges of cliffs or bluffs up to seventy feet high, then driving them over to instant death or a broken back or leg or other crippling incapacity, ended by a thrust from a lance or blow from a stone maul. This hunt involved an entire society: the “chaser” or “runner,” who possessed special skills and knowledge, led animals he had found toward the precipice, where other people, hidden behind trees or rock piles, waved blankets and shouted the animals onward to their doom at the base of the cliff. Yet others waited to kill, butcher, and transform buffaloes into useful products. These communal techniques were tightly controlled by leaders and societies whose duties were to police the hunt, preventing any single man from premature action that might spoil the attempt to obtain such an important resource for all.

    The average mature bison weighed some 700-800 pounds and yielded 225-400 pounds of meat, and communal hunts resulting in the deaths of dozens or hundreds of animals (30, 60, 100, and even 600, 800, and 1000 were reported killed) produced fantastic quantities of meat: 50 cows, for example, yielded 11,000-20,000 pounds of usable meat. Many European observers were struck by gourmandizing as well as by what struck them as subsequent “profligacy” or “indolence.” At times, Indians used everything. But on occasions they did not, and the observers remarked upon “putrified carcasses,” animals left untouched, or Indians who took only “the best parts of the meat.” Sometimes Indians were said to kill “whole herds” only for the fat-filled tongues.”

    All I’m saying is the netting needs to be more closely regulated, just as the taking of multiple limits or over limits by some needs to be prosecuted, and if fines are not stopping this behavior (which it often does not) the next step should be jail.

    Now if you could please answer my questions?

    birddog
    Mn.
    Posts: 1957
    #588080

    Quote:


    Just released from the DNR.

    Mille lacs walleye slot limit will change to 14-16 inches at 12 midnight on Monday July 9th. Bag limit of 4 and one fish over 28 inches per person will remain the same.


    WHAT! There’s a slot limit on Mille Lacs?

    BIRDDOG

Viewing 17 posts - 31 through 47 (of 47 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.