Overharvest of a fishery vs two lines proposal

*Yawn*

Tell us something we haven’t heard before.

Chris,

The problem with diminishing numbers of young fishermen has nothing to do with recruitment. We are very good at recruitment, and have been for many many years. Our failure is with retention of those young people once they get to about 16 years of age.

You hit the nail on the head about other technologies taking our youths attention away from fishing, its true. XBox’s, Wii’s, MP3’s, Blackberry’s are fishings greatest distractors. It’s also possible that all of our fish finding technologies make the fishing much less interesting to our techno minded youths. They don’t see any challenge to it. Kind of like asking a kid today if he wants to play a game of Pacman. Its old and outdated, so they aren’t interested.

Adding 1,2,3 lines isn’t going to make it more interesting to them, its only going to make it more work, and they seldom see work as being much fun either.

This excerpt is from the DNR Telemetry study. This goes agains your insistance that fish from Pool 4 are “Stocked” from sources such as Winona and points south.

Near exclusive use of lake habitat by walleye and sauger throughout two winters provided additional evidence against the hypothesis. We found walleye and sauger to partition their habitat throughout the year. With the exception of spring, both walleye and sauger relied heavily on lake habitat, partitioned by depth between the species. During spawning, both species exclusively used riverine habitat above Lake Pepin for spawning, sauger using side channel border habitat and wing dams, and walleye principally using flooded backwater habitat. The lowest 18 km of the pool were never used by tagged walleye and only briefly by tagged sauger.

I am not saying that fish NEVER move up from one pool to the next, but this particular study shows monitored fish rely on Lake Pepin and the Riverine structure.

Here is another excerpt:
The Pool 4 walleye and sauger recreational fisheries have been open to continuous angling since 1969. This is in contrast to inland Minnesota lakes that have a closed season from mid-February to mid-May. Because of this difference, and Pool 4’s close proximity to a major metropolitan area (Minneapolis and St. Paul, MN), Pool 4 supports a very popular spring tailwater fishery. Thorn (1984) investigated the effects of continuous fishing on Pool 4 walleye and sauger stocks and concluded that no significant impacts existed.

So this tells my little pea sized brain that hooking mortality may not play as big a role as some may think.

Both walleye and sauger exhibited seasonal changes in their longitudinal distribution throughout Pool 4. With the exception of spring, both walleye and sauger utilized lake habitat in Lake Pepin almost to the exclusion of all other available habitat types in Pool 4. All study fish of both species used riverine habitat above Lake Pepin to spawn. Interpool movement was only observed for two walleyes that bypassed Lock and Dam 3 in 1998 by migrating up the Vermillion River, returning to Lake Pepin following spawning. Otherwise, all spawning for both species was limited to the upper 18 km of Pool 4. Walleye were never observed to use the lower riverine reaches of the pool, while sauger used this reach only briefly during the winter of 1997-98. Ranges were smallest during the summer for walleyes and during winter for sauger. The greatest ranges were observed during the spring for each species.

My only point here is lets let facts drive the debate. Here it shows two fish traveled UP the Vermillion! Reverse stocking!

Anyways…the point of this study was to look into the possibility that the Nuke plant was depleting walleye from Lake Pepin which was the common thinking when the fishery slowed down. What they found was habitat food was the key. Throughout this time, two and three lines were and are still allowed. And the fishery is arguably better than at any point in recent history!

Here is the link to the whole study once more.
Telemetry Study

Exactly Jack!

It’s the parents (mostly Dad) who has to get the kids involved in the outdoors at a young age. It has nothing to do with the amount of lines in the water.

Quote:

---

*Yawn*

Tell us something we haven’t heard before.

---

Feel free to offer up your evidence on the subject and enlighten us all to whatever helpful information you possess.

Quote:

---

Adding 1,2,3 lines isn’t going to make it more interesting to them, its only going to make it more work, and they seldom see work as being much fun either.

---

Jack, I see this as our biggest disagreement on this issue.

The telemetry study I was refering to was conducted by Wisconsin DNR and was completed somewhere around 96-97. Its study wasn’t as focused on spawning migrations, which would explain those 2 walleyes swimming up the Vermillion. Its the largest spawning bed on the upper Mississippi.

The Wisconsin study showed some walleyes moving over 50 miles in only a couple days. Red Wing to Wabasha, and back to No Point in 3 days (?). The bottomline is fish do move through out that river system, as evidenced by the constant encrouchment of the Silver and Asian Carp towards Pepin and P4.

I’m done. I’m not going to continue this constant back and forth. I’ll go hang with “my cronnies” as you said, and you hang with yours here and in time we’ll see what happens.

Feel free to PM or call if you want to discuss this in private.

Ron Payer himself participated in this study. Why would they not consider two lines for trolling (Which to me is where it makes the most sense.) and 1 line for live bait? Their own test shows that hooking mortality with live bait is “More detrimental to the fishery.”

It makes sense. Using live bait takes more attention by the angler anyways. Or would compromise not be in the thought process of the DNR?

I ask because I do not know. Jack, maybe you could ask on our behalf?

Oh, and Klawtitter? How come I didn’t get an invite to fish on “Your” pond???

Quote:

---

Here is another excerpt:

The Pool 4 walleye and sauger recreational fisheries have been open to continuous angling since 1969. This is in contrast to inland Minnesota lakes that have a closed season from mid-February to mid-May. Because of this difference, and Pool 4’s close proximity to a major metropolitan area (Minneapolis and St. Paul, MN), Pool 4 supports a very popular spring tailwater fishery. Thorn (1984) investigated the effects of continuous fishing on Pool 4 walleye and sauger stocks and concluded that no significant impacts existed.

So this tells my little pea sized brain that hooking mortality may not play as big a role as some may think.

---

Comparing a lake to a river is like comparing an apple to an orange. Most of the fishing done on pool 4, or at least the best bite anyway, is when water temperatures are at a cool level which would reduce the mortality rate of released fish. Most rivers are much shallower than lakes, so you don’t have that threat of popping the fishes air sacs as much as you do when fishing deep water in lakes. Pulling fish from deep water is almost a guaranteed dead fish. Some of the studies done on mortality rate of released fish is not very accurate. Some fish die immediately after release, some fish die a couple hours after release, some fish die a week after release, some die a year after release due to injuries from being caught. The delayed mortality rate is not taken into account. Also, most people believe that fish will float when they die. This is simply not true. A lot of fish sink to the bottom when they die and so sometimes you think you had a successful release when actually you had just the opposite.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

They have a policy of never engaging in internet discussions. That is why you have never seen any DNR official on any discussion board anywhere.

---

Might want to visit the catfish forum more often.

---

Does Mille Lacs have catfish?

Please explain to me where you are getting your hooking mortality info. One hand you state the DNR is the all knowing all powerful. The next, I give you a study by the MN DNR that is the “gospel” yet you state hooking mortality is way higher than anyone thinks. Please give us some place to read this statistical data that you are so adamantly hanging your hat on.

You and the few others that don’t want this will definitely be able to say “I told you so” this year. However, as with all things, change is inevitable. Don’t worry, you will not be forced to fish with two lines.

For those that oppose this law change. How many of you fish two lines during the winter??

So much for bowing out of the Conversation Jack!….

Quote:

---

Project Statement and Objective:
Sauger are the most sought after sportfish in Pool 4 of the Mississippi River. During winter, fish concentrate below Lock and Dam 3 (LD 3) and become vulnerable to exploitation. Recently, anglers and biologists have voiced concerns about high hooking mortality during winter months for sauger. Our objective was to examine post-release hooking mortality of winter-angled sauger below LD 3 of the Mississippi River. Results from this study will be used to educate constituents on the effects of catch and release angling below such tailraces.

---

……..

Quote:

---

Winter 2006-2007 – Our first successful attempt at evaluating post release hooking mortality occurred on 12/18/2006 when environmental and flow conditions were ideal. We were able to position the net pen near LD 3 in a slack water area, which provided good depth and quick fish transport times. Thirty-six sauger, averaging 13.2 inches, were caught by angling from a depth range of 23 to 50 feet and were individually marked with fin clips identifying the depth from which they were caught. Fish were then placed in the net pen after capture. After 72 hours of being in the net pen, thirty of the thirty-six sauger were alive.

---

MN DNR Report December 21, 2006

Quote:

---

Comparing a lake to a river is like comparing an apple to an orange. Most of the fishing done on pool 4, or at least the best bite anyway, is when water temperatures are at a cool level which would reduce the mortality rate of released fish. Most rivers are much shallower than lakes, so you don’t have that threat of popping the fishes air sacs as much as you do when fishing deep water in lakes. Pulling fish from deep water is almost a guaranteed dead fish. Some of the studies done on mortality rate of released fish is not very accurate. Some fish die immediately after release, some fish die a couple hours after release, some fish die a week after release, some die a year after release due to injuries from being caught. The delayed mortality rate is not taken into account. Also, most people believe that fish will float when they die. This is simply not true. A lot of fish sink to the bottom when they die and so sometimes you think you had a successful release when actually you had just the opposite.

---

Quote:

---

Comparing a lake to a river is like comparing an apple to an orange. Most of the fishing done on pool 4, or at least the best bite anyway, is when water temperatures are at a cool level which would reduce the mortality rate of released fish. Most rivers are much shallower than lakes, so you don’t have that threat of popping the fishes air sacs as much as you do when fishing deep water in lakes. Pulling fish from deep water is almost a guaranteed dead fish. Some of the studies done on mortality rate of released fish is not very accurate. Some fish die immediately after release, some fish die a couple hours after release, some fish die a week after release, some die a year after release due to injuries from being caught. The delayed mortality rate is not taken into account. Also, most people believe that fish will float when they die. This is simply not true. A lot of fish sink to the bottom when they die and so sometimes you think you had a successful release when actually you had just the opposite.

---

Have you ever fished Pool 4? Have you ever heard of Lake Pepin? Do you have any idea the acreage of Pepin and the River? I will let those assumptions pass as I am pretty sure by your accusations, you have not and do not. In fact, most people who can and do fish Pepin may agree it is a lake that most compares to Mille Lacs. As far as “Air bladders rupturing?” If you are comparing or relating this to Mille Lacs…I have yet to pull a fish out of Mille Lacs with an air bladder in their throat.
As for assuming there is no fishing pressure on Pepin or the River in the Summer months? Further proof in my book that you have not fished it. It’s proximity to the Metro Area and Iowa, Pepin and Pool 4 get a ton of fishing pressure.

Do you think it is possible that fish die of old age or natural causes as well? Or do they all live forever? Are fish that die of natural causes counted in mortality studies? Are fish not a renewable resource? These questions need to be asked and addressed.

While we are at it…where is the DNR with the “Netting Mortality Study on Mille Lacs?” The one that addresses fish that get out of the nets only to die later?

Jack, thanks again for your contribution to this debate! This was a good one!

I have caught hundreds of walleyes and perch out of Mille Lacs where the air bladders were hanging out of their mouths. I was not referring to Mille Lacs when I said it either, but since you brought it up….. I was talking about lakes in general. It seems that when fish are pulled from 30 feet of water or more is when this becomes an issue. Walleyes 17″ or less, crappies, and perch seem to be at the most risk from what I have experienced with air bladders exploding. I have even experienced this problem with very large muskies fishing in open water where the fish were pulled up from deep water where the water was much cooler to warm water at the surface. There was 15 muskies that were found within a couple of days later floating in the area they were caught. The DNR was called about it and they said anytime a fish is pulled from deep water, there is a very high risk those fish will not live. So if it can happen to large muskies, it can probably happen with any other species and size fish as well. I don’t know if the air bladders exploded on these muskies or if it was just such a high stress on the fish to pull them from deep cool water to warm surface temps. Whatever it was, it was not good.

Go ahead and keep telling me I don’t know anything, I have no reason to make anything up.

Quote:

---

Go ahead and keep telling me I don’t know anything, I have no reason to make anything up.

---

I’m not saying you don’t know anything, but I am saying please give me source for your info. The last thing any of us want is to ruin our great fisheries. However, common sense prevails when I can look at just about any state in the country and they allow the use of more than 1 line.

The doom and gloom portrayal of two lines simply doesn’t hold water. MN waters are not so unique and special, I’m sorry if I just burst your bubble. It’s great here and the fisheries are awesome, but I’ve been to many others that are just as good. Oahe, Erie, Devils Lake are a few that come to mind.

Pulling fish out of deep water is a whole different issue all together. It shouldn’t be done with one line even if the fish are to be returned to the water.

I stand by my “Theory” supported with enough facts to convince me that teo lines is not going to be a noticable detriment to the fishery. If it was, they would have outlawed it for ice fishing years ago. The Dakotas and WI would have repealed it as well.

Now bring on the warm temps so I can get down to Pool 4 and drag jigs with two lines!

I think a lot of people think that if it was legal to use 2 lines everyone would be using 2 lines and that isnt the case.2 lines can be difficult to run even for an expierienced fisherman and not even practical in some situations.With CPR,limits and slots I dont buy that it is going to ruin any fisheries.If it has please tell me which one?As far as pulling fish from deep water pull them up at a rate of 1 foot per second or slower and you wont have a problem.

Just to clarify “AGAIN” nobody is saying the Fishery is going to be decimated or ruined if we go to 2 lines state-wide and 4 lines on Pool 4….

4 lines on pool 4!!! Sweeeeeeeeeeeeet I just have to add a couple more rod holders

I wonder if revenues from an extra line stamp could help here:

The Department of Natural Resources would trim all $2.8 million of general fund dollars now going to the Fish and Wildlife Division — 3.5 percent of the division’s total funding. That means the division would be funded almost entirely by hunting and fishing license fees from the Game and Fish Fund and would receive no tax dollars from the general public.. Here is a link to the article: Fish and wildlife programs could take big hit during budget cuts

So where is the money from that new tax bill I didnt vote for Well at least the arts will be playing a different tune

The nice feature of the extra line stamp is it would be completely voluntary to purchase or not depending on the angler.

awe heck just double the extra line fee for us out-of-staters! That should take care of it! Just imagine how quick we could fill out our bullhead limits!

Quote:

---

The nice feature of the extra line stamp is it would be completely voluntary to purchase or not depending on the angler.

---

I wonder how easy that would be to enforce? Probably no different that getting checked already?
I wonder…

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The nice feature of the extra line stamp is it would be completely voluntary to purchase or not depending on the angler.

---

I wonder how easy that would be to enforce? Probably no different that getting checked already?

I wonder…

---

I think this is where the compromise is going to be.

I’ll just throw this out for starters.

$10 for the 2 line Stamp with all or a large portion of Lakes with size restrictions one-line only. Then use the money if it’s not diverted elsewhere to help the lakes in need.

I do think it will hamper and slow the CO’s in the Field down some. When they are glassing people from a distance they aren’t going to know if the extra line is legal or not. So instead knowing before they get to them they have one violation they may have none. Just a small inconvenience I guess.

Im in favor of just raising the licence fee $10 to pass this law.And maybe $20 for out of staters to help protect the bullhead population

Quote:

---

Im in favor of just raising the licence fee $10 to pass this law.And maybe $20 for out of staters to help protect the bullhead population

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The nice feature of the extra line stamp is it would be completely voluntary to purchase or not depending on the angler.

---

I wonder how easy that would be to enforce? Probably no different that getting checked already?
I wonder…

---

I think this is where the compromise is going to be.

I’ll just throw this out for starters.

$10 for the 2 line Stamp with all or a large portion of Lakes with size restrictions one-line only. Then use the money if it’s not diverted elsewhere to help the lakes in need.

I do think it will hamper and slow the CO’s in the Field down some. When they are glassing people from a distance they aren’t going to know if the extra line is legal or not. So instead knowing before they get to them they have one violation they may have none. Just a small inconvenience I guess.

---

I hope they would keep the rules about this very simple. 2 lines or 1 line. No stamps for extra lines. Maybe we could just do something like 2 line Tuesdays.