Allowing 2 lines

I have one question that if one or more could answer, I could vote for a new 2 line bill.

When I am catfishing, one may catch more flatheads if they could use 2 lines to fish different areas around structure. Seems I rarely deeply hook a cat and most if not all are released. Should not harm the fishery.

Come trolling for walleyes which I do alot, it would be nice to run 2 lines to see what color or action crank the eyes would prefer and again, rarely do I have a deeply hooked fish that would not live on a release. Maybe no damage to the fishery here.

The question I ask is, why do we need have allow 2 lines?

Seems over the years I have had very good fishing and when it was slow, I doubt that an extra line would have changed the catch for the day except for a rare occasion.

I do not know how it would effect the fishery but I do not believe it would be that bad but I do not know.

We have some world class fishing in Minnesota and I wonder why we may need to jepordize that.

I just do not know what would the results be to the fishery and would it be worth it to take that chance?

I am happy with what I catch now. I know when I was younger, if I did not catch my limit, I did not have a good day on the lake. Now that has changed to I simply enjoy a day on the lake and what I catch is fine. Maybe it’s an older guy thing.

So, please let me and others who are on the other side of allowing 2 lines to allow it.

Thanks for the replies.

Ok, I will bite. Instead of asking “why” ask why not. The limit is the limit is the limit. The number of lines coming out of the boat will not affect any fishery. Having spent an opener weekend watching the fishing behavior of my fellow Minnesotans, I am not worried about the safety of the fish. For the very few, educated and dedicated anglers, another line would be a great way to try another presentation and to further enjoyment of the sport. Most of the people who are more dedicated to the sport have self imposed slot limits, and release far more fish than they keep. All of the states surrounding MN allow multiple lines and seem to have no major issues. This issue is not about a limit of fish. The guys who think that they are trying to feed the neighborhood are getting to be fewer and farther between. I think that most of this issue is bound in emotion and hysteria much like the concealed carry law was and continues to be.

My problem in Iowa, is that I have reached the stage where I have to keep my bobbers really close togeather.

So a guy has 4 hours to fish. With one line he catches and keeps 3 fish but with two lines he catches and keeps 5 or 6 fish. Multiply this by a million. How does that NOT affect the fishery? The limit number is just part of the equation. If you increase lines then you must decrease the limit number to keep the same number of available fish.

first of all is the limit the number one part of the equation?? really? wisconsin uses multiple lines iowa and michigain as well and they all seem to be doing pretty well .. i think if an effective angler wants to keep 6 fish or 4 or 3 isnt going to be effected that much by how many lines we use !! the way the bill reads is a joke they think they can allow one type of fishing to use two lines but not the other??? come on . either pass it or dont ! i do see ur argument though suzuki , the future of our waters depends on people being true to the laws and to the sport !!!!take the fish you are going to eat no one needs a freezer full! but some people seem to think they do !!

Thanks. I am trying to be open minded and consider both sides. Only out of my love and respect for the environment.

Give guys that option to buy a two rod tag. Doing so cuts their limit in half at all times throughout the year, even if they only fish one rod.

I’d do that in a heart beat. I get to fish two rods, the DNR gets some extra fund-age and the ‘two rods will get me to a limit faster” argument is out the window.

Quote:

---

So a guy has 4 hours to fish. With one line he catches and keeps 3 fish but with two lines he catches and keeps 5 or 6 fish. Multiply this by a million. How does that NOT affect the fishery? The limit number is just part of the equation. If you increase lines then you must decrease the limit number to keep the same number of available fish.

---

So in order to help the fishery, I need to leave my Gal at home? Will you tell her??

Quote:

---

Give guys that option to buy a two rod tag. Doing so cuts their limit in half at all times throughout the year, even if they only fish one rod.

I’d do that in a heart beat. I get to fish two rods, the DNR gets some extra fund-age and the ‘two rods will get me to a limit faster” argument is out the window.

---

I am with you James

Quote:

---

Give guys that option to buy a two rod tag. Doing so cuts their limit in half at all times throughout the year, even if they only fish one rod.

---

I like that!

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Give guys that option to buy a two rod tag. Doing so cuts their limit in half at all times throughout the year, even if they only fish one rod.

---

I like that!

---

The downside is it is too simplistic and based on a common sense approach to finding a solution. For those reasons no politician would ever support it…

Quote:

---

So a guy has 4 hours to fish. With one line he catches and keeps 3 fish but with two lines he catches and keeps 5 or 6 fish. Multiply this by a million. How does that NOT affect the fishery? The limit number is just part of the equation. If you increase lines then you must decrease the limit number to keep the same number of available fish.

---

I don’t think a million limits of fish get or will get caught. Like I said, emotional responses in the place of facts.

How about a trial “Two rods, but no live bait?” I can’t remember when I released a fish tolling cranks where the fish didn’t swim away without more that a couple holes poke in their lip.

Quote:

---

Give guys that option to buy a two rod tag. Doing so cuts their limit in half at all times throughout the year, even if they only fish one rod.

I’d do that in a heart beat. I get to fish two rods, the DNR gets some extra fund-age and the ‘two rods will get me to a limit faster” argument is out the window.

---

I could vote for that option maybe if it could fly. I might have an issue with the fact of cutting the limit in half.

Quote:

---

How about a trial “Two rods, but no live bait?” I can’t remember when I released a fish tolling cranks where the fish didn’t swim away without more that a couple holes poke in their lip.

---

No way on that one. I river fish 90% of the time. I am out there for fun I chase many species and use live bait and I rarely deep hook fish except drum. I have one rod out with cut bait one with crawlers. I like catching a variety of fish not just one species and to lines allows me to do this. People are worried about walleyes and this state has so much more to offer!

I believe that the more fish people catch the better off our sport is.

There is absolutely no possible way that two lines would double the catch rate. Limits have a much more significant impact than anything. I see two lines as an additional fishing opportunity in a way, so I’m 100% in favor of it. I’m also in favor of significantly more restrictive limits.

Yes, people will throw out more baits from shore. The muskie zealots are concerned about fish swallowing live baits. There are more arguments against it, too.

In the end, I think I’m more of a “why not” person. I don’t want any more rules and regulations than are necessary, and I’ve always thought it was silly to restrict us to one line.

Of course, WI allows three lines which to me isn’t a bad thing but isn’t exactly helpful in most situations. Maybe WI could give us one line and we’d both have two.

So, given the way the DNR thinks, the way politicians think, the way the tribes think, how long will it take for the “mortality” issue to come to the forefront?

There is zero chance that if the 2 line bill passes one of the three above wouldn’t revisit the way “mortality” rates are figured.

I favored one line when they first started talking about it. I have heard nothing that would change my mind. Why fix it if it’s not broke?

Because Wisconsin and North Dakota do it Brian !….

Oh and a limit is not a limit the DNR doesn’t set our limits based on everybody getting a limit. Obviously the harvest and mortality goes up with 2 lines across the board. How much is hard to say I’m thinking 10 percent under that criteria which should be manageable with some adjustments in the regulations.
I like James proposal but it’s only going to appease a very, VERY small segment of us anglers and as much as I’d like to see it I think it has very little chance to come to fruition..

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

So a guy has 4 hours to fish. With one line he catches and keeps 3 fish but with two lines he catches and keeps 5 or 6 fish. Multiply this by a million. How does that NOT affect the fishery? The limit number is just part of the equation. If you increase lines then you must decrease the limit number to keep the same number of available fish.

---

I don’t think a million limits of fish get or will get caught. Like I said, emotional responses in the place of facts.

---

If someone had all the facts there wouldn’t be a debate now would there?

I think James proposal makes the most sense, but like he said it makes too much sense so it’ll probably never fly. All we can do is hope that something with this much logic will pass someday.

As for Suzuki’s theory. I think he’s spot on as well, some of you forget your “average” angler keeps anything he/she catches. Until you see 10 people on a pontoon filling a fish basket with honest 10-12″ walleye I don’t think you guys will understand.

If we allow two lines to everyone including the “average” angler it’s going to result in more fish harvested and there is no disputing that. Yes I don’t have all the facts, but this is just plain common sense.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

So a guy has 4 hours to fish. With one line he catches and keeps 3 fish but with two lines he catches and keeps 5 or 6 fish. Multiply this by a million. How does that NOT affect the fishery? The limit number is just part of the equation. If you increase lines then you must decrease the limit number to keep the same number of available fish.

---

I don’t think a million limits of fish get or will get caught. Like I said, emotional responses in the place of facts.

---

Look whos talking. Take out the million part and tell me how my statement doesnt make sense. How do take out more fish yet the same number remains???????????

Quote:

---

Because Wisconsin and North Dakota do it Brian !….

Oh and a limit is not a limit the DNR doesn’t set our limits based on everybody getting a limit. Obviously the harvest and mortality goes up with 2 lines across the board. How much is hard to say I’m thinking 10 percent under that criteria which should be manageable with some adjustments in the regulations.
I like James proposal but it’s only going to appease a very, VERY small segment of us anglers and as much as I’d like to see it I think it has very little chance to come to fruition..

---

Because North Dakota and Wisconsin do it. OK, that’s the argument that will make me change my mind.

I can’t even catch my limit with two lines.

Even with two lines you can only catch your limit that day. If the fishings slow its nice to have a second line out uping your chances. Two lines dosen’t hurt anything or put any more pressure on an area. If its a good or a great bite you only need one line anyway, but its nice to have the second pole option. You can fish with two lines here but most just fish with one, maybe 50% of the fishermen at times if theres a good catfish bite. Another line out and you hook two fish at one time and your buddy can take that pole. If your by yourself all you have to do is have your pole tied down so you don’t loose it. If you get two fish on at the same time and the second one you get is hooked deeply where it might not survive then take it home and clean it and keep it to eat, or give it too someone after you do, its that simple. Two lines doesn’t hurt anything down here.

I appreciate everyone’s concern for over harvest and mortality. That is why next session I am getting a legislator to author true limit regulations. That means once you catch 10 crappie, whether you release any or not, you are done for the day. Same goes for your first 4 walleye.

Now back to reality. As for people’s concerns about over harvest, remember, it is a possession limit. So unless someone is eating 4 walleye a day…

No it doesn’t address mortality, but neither does you sitting in your boat with a limit in the freezer. Sure, you aren’t bringing any home (right?), but you are sticking a hook in a awful lot of fish. But when the water temps are over 70, there’s no need to worry about mortality with one line, right?

Trust me when I say that some people who travel long distances feel they are entitled to a limit of fish. There are those who will look at limits and determine where to go based on that. I’m sure the South and North Dakota Department of Tourism is thanking Minnesota all the way to the bank. Speaking to resort owners around the Leech Lake, Mille Lacs,and Upper Red areas, they were thinking back to the not so distant past when their reservation books were filled with families from Iowa and Ill. Now they are suffering. Economy? Somewhat, but those families are going somewhere. Oahe and Devils Lakes have a pretty decent limits and you can use more than one pole, granted these are special fisheries, but they are getting tourism bucks from those who had been Minnesota faithful. Don’t mess with limits if you want to keep some tourism dollars, keep it to one pole and things will be as good as they are now, if the State wants to charge for the use of an extra pole, I don’t see why I would buy it, but I do see why others would.

Giving us all the option to purchase a 2nd line for an additional fee and tying it into a conservation license is the most obvious and easy answer to appease those of us that would support this.

I’ve been in contact with several reps and senators trying to get this idea (stamp/conservation license) pushed through once again this year and it appears to be stalled and going nowhere.

Too bad it got vetoed last year because of other garbage added to the omnibus bill.

If only 50,000 people bought a $10 stamp, that’s a half a million much needed dollars for the DNR. To me it’s a no brainer and a win win.

Glad to see you are on board with this idea now Tom. Maybe those that support it aren’t so greedy after all.

I have no issue with the 2 line bill for some types of fishing but I do worry about other types.

I as much as anyone else would love to catch more fish but I in no way want to hurt the fishery in any way.

I guess as much as there are times I would like 2 lines, I simply want to make sure in no way the future of the fishery is hurt.

I realize that the game and fish hogs will be out there no matter what the laws are.

I do feel that as far as catfishing and trolling for fish, there should be next to no or very little harm done.

As far as the bobber fishing goes with 2 lines, I do have concerns with that.

I have been on ML when the water was very warm and watched people to pull up eyes from the deep water and still continue to fish the spot. With 2 lines, the damage would be all the greater as the warm water temps and the deep water was killer on the fish when released.

I guess the 2 line proposal has it’s time and place. To find a new 2 line law that would satisy all may be totally impossible.

Each side will have to give a bit for it to become law.

I would rather see the state go to 2 lines for everything and everywhere than to have 2 more pages of rules if it were to happe

Maybe just a bit gun shy. I just do not know.

I would really dislike to be one of the chosen to have to make this decision as some are for and some are against.

I hope the right thing is done for the majority whatever happens.

Having two lines is a nice option when bobber fishing for panfish I like to throw a spinner or crank bait to see what else is swimming around me. When I’m walleye fishing I will only use one line anyway. I dont think two lines is that big of a deal. When your talking mortality I have been to the lock & dam walleye fishing & seen many guys pulling dozens of small eyes & saugers up from 50 ft & throw them back belly up & brag about how many fish they caught & released that day.

Those people I know will always do that but with 2 lines, twice the damage.

Quote:

---

Those people I know will always do that but with 2 lines, twice the damage.

---

Absolutely not true.^ Well, the people part might be but not the number.

Inconsiderate people will do what they do and you can’t regulate them into different people.

The sentiment seems pretty clear that they don’t want some average joe out using his multiple bobber flotilla catching their fish. Accidental or not.