Quote:
I guess those 3 lines have ruined the WI fishery, 5 lines in New York so there must not be a fish left in the water there. Do you really believe that one more line will destroy the fishing? Maybe they should cut ice fishing back to 1 line and a limit of 1 walleye. I think spearing does a lot more damage.
You weren’t replying to me, were you? I never said it would destroy fishing.
There is no comparison on the amount of fish harvested in the winter versus summer. Summer wins that hands down for obvious reasons.
I’d prefer to fish 2 lines in the summer with some slightly reduced bag limits to off-set the increase in fish taken.
Quote:
There is no comparison on the amount of fish harvested in the winter versus summer. Summer wins that hands down for obvious reasons.
I’d prefer to fish 2 lines in the summer with some slightly reduced bag limits to off-set the increase in fish taken.
What are the obvious reasons? I always thought ice fishing took more fish because because people can camp right over good areas and congregated fish? I want to know the truth.
Quote:
I want to know the truth.
wait for it…
wait for it…
wait for it…
YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH!
Quote:
Quote:
I guess those 3 lines have ruined the WI fishery, 5 lines in New York so there must not be a fish left in the water there. Do you really believe that one more line will destroy the fishing? Maybe they should cut ice fishing back to 1 line and a limit of 1 walleye. I think spearing does a lot more damage.
You weren’t replying to me, were you? I never said it would destroy fishing.
Not you Pug, you have common sense and realize that one extra line is not going to ruin fishing.
I’m opposed to HF 327 (Nornes) allowing fishing with 3 lines through the ice. Minnesota has the highest per capita fishing license sales in the nation. What makes him think that adding 33% more fishing pressure will protect our limited fisheries resources. If he says we are losing anglers to the Dakotas tell him that while they can have 3 lines there, many of the lakes only have a 2 or 4 walleye limit and Hennepin county sells more fishing licenses than ND & SD combined. We need sustainable fishing not over fished waters.
Quote:
Quote:
I want to know the truth.
wait for it…wait for it…
wait for it…
YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH!
Quote:
I’m opposed to HF 327 (Nornes) allowing fishing with 3 lines through the ice. Minnesota has the highest per capita fishing license sales in the nation. What makes him think that adding 33% more fishing pressure will protect our limited fisheries resources. If he says we are losing anglers to the Dakotas tell him that while they can have 3 lines there, many of the lakes only have a 2 or 4 walleye limit and Hennepin county sells more fishing licenses than ND & SD combined. We need sustainable fishing not over fished waters.
This assumes every one would actually use three lines, heck most of the Minnesotans I fish with don’t even own three poles. People go to SD and ND to get away from the crowds, and the fishing happens to be better. Not because you can use three lines. I also assume Hennepin county has more residents than ND and most of SD combined, so it goes to reason they should have more fishing license sales. 
Quote:
I’m opposed to HF 327 (Nornes) allowing fishing with 3 lines through the ice. Minnesota has the highest per capita fishing license sales in the nation. What makes him think that adding 33% more fishing pressure will protect our limited fisheries resources. If he says we are losing anglers to the Dakotas tell him that while they can have 3 lines there, many of the lakes only have a 2 or 4 walleye limit and Hennepin county sells more fishing licenses than ND & SD combined. We need sustainable fishing not over fished waters.
I agree.
I wonder if there’s been any MN surveys taken that shows how many times the “average” angler actually wets a line in MN.
I know the Ido survey was skewed because of the many die hard anglers that frequent here. I’m going to guess “most” people that buy a license only fish a couple times per year.
No facts, just a guess.
In the meetings I’ve attended, all the professional fishermen (that are to represent us) have the same take as Buzz.
I believe the DNR’s thoughts are more about delayed mortality from the bobber anglers that let the (walleye) swallow the bait because we can’t watch three corks at the same time. I guess this assumes the fish was returned to the water.
I for one have always bought an annual licence for every state that I fish in. When I travel to fish out of state it is for at least 4 and up to 7 days on the water. The reason you may ask even if I only go once in a year, just trying to do my part to fund the sport that I love the most!
Quote:
I’m opposed to HF 327 (Nornes) allowing fishing with 3 lines through the ice. Minnesota has the highest per capita fishing license sales in the nation. What makes him think that adding 33% more fishing pressure will protect our limited fisheries resources. If he says we are losing anglers to the Dakotas tell him that while they can have 3 lines there, many of the lakes only have a 2 or 4 walleye limit and Hennepin county sells more fishing licenses than ND & SD combined. We need sustainable fishing not over fished waters.
In regards to the laws of ND and SD, specifically ND, very little of what you posted is accurate.
Quote:
Quote:
There is no comparison on the amount of fish harvested in the winter versus summer. Summer wins that hands down for obvious reasons.
I’d prefer to fish 2 lines in the summer with some slightly reduced bag limits to off-set the increase in fish taken.
What are the obvious reasons? I always thought ice fishing took more fish because because people can camp right over good areas and congregated fish? I want to know the truth.
PB2 might not be a very deep thinker or experienced fisherman. I know many people that are big musky or bass fisherman that fish out of their boats and never keep a fish all year. Then the lakes freeze up and it’s time to pull out the auger, flasher, and grab a 5 gallon bucket with the intent of filling it to the brim with whatever bites. When it is 90 degrees out in August, how many people catch limits of crappie, and of that number how many keep them to eat mushy fillets? Some ice anglers CR, but as a general rule the percentage of “meat hogs” ice fishing is much higher than those that pursue the sport in open water.
Here is what I would propose. 2 lines in summer. 1 live bait and the other must be a lure. Or trolling 2 lures. Once you reach a limit, you can only fish one line. I’d also make that extra line a fee of $25+ dollars.
It may be true that more panfish are harvested in the winter, but I am not so sure about walleye and other fish. I don’t think the math is going from 2 lines to 3 is an automatic increase of 33% harvested. If you get skunked, that’s 0%. And once you catch a limit, it doesn’t matter how many lines you have, you are now harvesting 0%. And the difference between keeping a limit with 3 lines instead of 2 is more than likely just the time spent fishing.
If it ain’t broke don’t fix it.
One summer line is all thats required. Lifelong residents have grown up that way and there is no reason to change it.
Quote:
If it ain’t broke don’t fix it.
I think you are pretty safe there, even though I still would like to see 2 lines.
Being a troller I to would like to use 2 lines. However it’s for purely selfish reasons. I see no need for it unless somebody could prove it would somehow protect the resource, which we all know it wouldn’t.
I’d like to see them prove it would hurt it. I liken it to gun legislation.
Uh, I might have started another gun thread. 
Quote:
I see no need for it unless somebody could prove it would somehow protect the resource, which we all know it wouldn’t.
..Can it be proved that it Hurt the resources?..I have never heard that where you can fish more than one line has damaged any “resource”. Have you.?. 
…rrr….Ps. Thank God i live where i can fish 2 or 3 lines year around. 
.
The last time I fished in SD and ND you could use 4 lines and the fishing is still great there.I think its ridicuious you can use more lines in MN. You can’t tie a plain treble hook to your tip-up cause they consider that 3 lines but if you put a bead and a 1/4″ blade 3″ above it thats ok, WTF. I thought when you go fishing the objective is to catch fish
My understanding is what may or may not work in another State needs to be seen in context with the all the over-all rules, reg’s and fisheries resources which includes types of water bodies, fishing pressure,and lake and river carrying capacities.
To pluck a particular regulation, be it three line or bag limits is liken to taking Chevy parts and trying to use them on a Ford. SD and ND systems work in part due to the other parts and pieces. I’m not saying that we shouldn’t be looking to increase Sportfishing here in MN, but that it needs to be weighed against our waters.
How much of SD & ND are large impoundments versus MN’s smaller pothole bowl lakes? How much stocking is being done in the Dakota’s v.s Minnesota?
My sense is that there are many moving parts to this.
Quote:
Quote:
I see no need for it unless somebody could prove it would somehow protect the resource, which we all know it wouldn’t.
..Can it be proved that it Hurt the resources?..I have never heard that where you can fish more than one line has damaged any “resource”. Have you.?.
No, but then I wouldn’t run my car without oil to see if it really would damage the motor either. 
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I see no need for it unless somebody could prove it would somehow protect the resource, which we all know it wouldn’t.
..Can it be proved that it Hurt the resources?..I have never heard that where you can fish more than one line has damaged any “resource”. Have you.?.
No, but then I wouldn’t run my car without oil to see if it really would damage the motor either.
..Motor>No Oil>Damage>Yes…2 or 3 lines.? ”’rrr
Quote:
[
I had a couple Explorers in the past that went bone dry. I can vouch for that!
Like I said, I am not going to cry over not having 2 lines in the summer.
However, if they aren’t go to go to 2 lines in the summer, I think they should stick to 2 in the winter. It doesn’t make sense. What is their reasoning again? So one line is sacred in the summer but lets push the limits (so to speak) in the winter. I just don’t get it.
To Brian’s point, obviously we don’t run our engines without oil because some did studies and tests and based it all on reasoning. I would like the DNR once and for all to come out with a little article with fact, figures, studies, anything, that shows us why they allow the number of lines like they do. I have only heard a few things thrown out there, but not a cohesive and in-depth argument to their position.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
