Overharvest of a fishery vs two lines proposal

Who fishes 24/7? I want that gig. Besides, what’s wrong with catching more fish?? There is a huge difference between catching and killing. Something you opponents seem to have no concept of.

Quote:

---

I hope they charge you guys $100 for that 2nd line!…

---

I would be happy to pay that knowing that my money would be going towards improving the overall quality of fishing (more stocking programs, increasing qualtity fishing habitat, updated creel surveys etc…).

Quote:

---

My honest opinion is rather harsh, but I’m going to throw it out there any way. If you need 2 lines to fish with in order to feel like you are getting the most out of your time on the water, you are out there for all the wrong reasons and the sport would be much better off if you stayed on shore an played video games. Fishing IS NOT a matter of making contact with the most fish possible in any time frame allowed. If it was, marry an American Indian and get yourself a gill net, because any 2 line legislation is only a hair short of giving everybody a gill net.

If you can’t catch enough fish using 1 line, maybe you need to accept the fact you are not as good a fisherman as you thought you were. STUDY! PRACTICE! If that doesn’t work, accept the fact you are not really as good as you’ve been telling yourself you are after all these years.

Sometime the truth sucks and hurts at the same time.

---

Boy, I am a weekend fisherman because I work for a living and I don’t live next to the bodies of water I like to fish, so my chances to get on the water are less than many. So yes I want a second line so I am getting the most out of my time on the water. I like to troll so it would be nice to have a second bait down because I don’t have much time on the water so I am not tuned in to what bait or color is working. I don’t have the time to STUDY and PRACTICE so I guess I will be selling my boat and equipment because I am bad for the sport.

Let’s see, last year I kept about 20 walleyes for the entire year, and most of those were for shore lunch in Canada so I wasn’t even impacting the MN fisheries. Jack, you are PAID to get people on fish. Did all of your clients through the year take home less walleyes than me? Is so, congrats on teaching catch and release. If not, then I would argue that you are worse on the sport since you are being paid for people to take fish. How about those apples? Yes, I am just horrible for the sport because I want to increase my chances of catching fish without quitting my job so I have more time to become an expert.

Jack, you are concerned about those 1 or 2 day a year fisherman doing the damage with two lines? How about all the locals and guides who fish a body a water multiple times a week? They are doing more damage than the occasional angler, 1 or 2 lines. You can’t say everybody is for catch and release because I see lots of pictures of stringers taken on land. I always wondered if the DNR went to the homes of the local guys how many would be over their possession limit in the freezer.

I grew up in WI and we mostly used 1 line, even for panfish. Occasionally we would use two with different baits to find what is working. We never used a 2nd line to fill our limit faster (My dad is a meat hunter and I grew up a meat hunter). We found (which I think is an argument being made here) that we were actually less efficient using two lines versus one. Most other people we would see would use 1 line and occasionally 2. Just because it is allowed doesn’t mean everybody does it.

I will be selfish and say I think MN should change the law to allow for 2 lines for trolling applications only, since that is the only time I would do it.

Quote….I grew up in WI and we mostly used 1 line, even for panfish. Occasionally we would use two with different baits to find what is working. We never used a 2nd line to fill our limit faster (My dad is a meat hunter and I grew up a meat hunter). We found (which I think is an argument being made here) that we were actually less efficient using two lines versus one. Most other people we would see would use 1 line and occasionally 2. Just because it is allowed doesn’t mean everybody does it.

I can assure you you are not the only one to fish two lines, only to find that it is not as effective as one! There are instances where an extra line can play to your advantage, but trust me it isn’t that often, and certainly won’t impact any fishery as long as you’re abiding by the rules.

I’ll begin by stating that I have no strong opinion either way. I live in Wi and while I can fish with multiple lines, I can count on one hand the number of times I do each year. Those times include dragging a sucker behind the boat while casting for Muskies (I did this twice last year….no fish caught )The other times are tip up fishing for Eyes during the ice season, and cat fishing with live bait on the bottom. In the past year, I kept a total of 3-4 fish (eyes while tip up fishing). As you can see, it would make no difference to me even if lived in MN. For those whose argument is adding the POTENTIAL for using one additional line would allow for more fish to be caught and then in turn more fish to be killed would ruin the MN fisheries and kill Lake ecosystems, I ask this: has the advent of technology advances in the past 30 or so years had a huge negative affect on those same fisheries? And if you believe this to be true, would you be willing to for go those advantages “for the sake of protecting the fisheries”? In my opinion, the the use of technology, weather it is scientifically “scented/flavored” plastic baits, GPS with lake maps that include ultra fine contour lines, fish/depth finders that show every thing from bait fish being present to actual fish and where they are in the water colume, right down to the motors and boat/hull designs that allow anglers to cover a body of water like Mill Lacs (sp) from reef to ridge to flat in a single day in order to find the bite, has had a greater affect on the amount of fish caught than the number of lines used ever will .
Anyway, as I stated before, it will not affect me no matter what happens. Just my 2 cents! Good discussion with some good passion on both sides!
See you on the water
Labman

My head is still hurting.. Guess I need more…

I have to say that I take just about as many people fishing who do not care to keep fish as I do people who want to keep fish. As a guide, yes, I see and clean more fish than probably most people on this site. It was September this last season before I had a group NOT have a couple of limits to eat at the end of their day! That said, those people I took, and normally take, are usually using a 1 day license, and won’t be fishing again until next year. In answer to Ben’s question, no I am not harder on the fishery than others because of a couple things. I fish where 75-80% of the times you get a bite, it’s a slot fish. My boat is not weeding thru numbers of “overs” to get a couple fish to keep, so I am not exposing many, if any fish at times, to hooking mortality. I am a professional, and am very concerned about the resource(as if you couldn’t tell already) so those fish that are to be released are always handled carefully and quickly returned to the lake. The people who I am most concern about having 2 lines are those that spend 5 minutes holding the fish, taking pictures and usually dropping it a couple times before they just toss it over the side.

Too many of you here are taking what I say as a personal afrontment. It is not. We are all good outdoorsmen and sportsmen on this site, but as such it is our obligation to maybe suffer a set back to things we would like so as to protect those things we love as much as we do from those that are not as educated or concerned for protecting these limited and fragile resources. In our hands, the use of 2 lines most likely will have limited impact on the future of our resources, but that second line in the hands of all those with less experience or knowledge could be very bad.

Hooking mortality is real. I’ve learned a lot about it with my work on Mille Lacs. When the water is warmer than 70 degrees, fish will die after being released. It does not matter if it is you or I that handled them, some WILL DIE. Giving people less in tune to protecting our valuable and diminishing resources a second line is just exposing many more fish to the consequences of hooking mortality.

I’ve said enough. It is much smarter to be pro-active than re-active because re-active means you let things get out of line to begin with.

Also, I know for a fact that the DNR Fisheries Director is adamently against the use of 2 lines, and he will use his position to prevent it from ever happening on Minnesota’s inland waters.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I’m not worried about there ever being 2 lines on open water on Mille Lacs, because it is not going to happen. The 2 line subject came up in an InPut Group meeting not too long ago, and the idea will not ever be allowed as long as we have to meet the terms of the court decision. So until the day comes that the Treaty decision were to be over turned, it is a non issue on Mille Lacs, regardless what happens in the rest of the state.

---

Correct if if I’m wrong, but isn’t this is a legislative decision and not up to the DNR or any Fishery Input Group? I believe they can only influence the decision right?

---

No, the legislature has absolutely no say or control over anything that happens on Mille Lacs in regards to fishing regulations. Its all between the states DNR, the Input Group, which is just an advisery group, and the Indian’s DNR. Everything has to meet the requirements of the Supreme Court rulings.

Nice thread… unfortunately, I don’t have an opinion either way….. I am happy with 1 line on the open water and 2 on the ice. If you give me 2 on open water, I will use it. If not, I will continue to fish with 1 line. Kinda nice to be on the fence for once. Lot’s of good comments on both sides

big G

What evidence can you cite for hooking mortality during Winter? I would like to know how they do it with the ice being on the lake. I would be willing to bet that fish caught on rattle reels at night are swallowing a lot of hooks.

Quote:

---

Also, I know for a fact that the DNR Fisheries Director is adamently against the use of 2 lines, and he will use his position to prevent it from ever happening on Minnesota’s inland waters.

---

It is a good thing that he is one and we are many.

Quote:

---

because any 2 line legislation is only a hair short of giving everybody a gill net.

---

Wow. I didn’t realize two lines was almost like using a gillnet. That is new info for me.

Tim

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Whos the guy who got the ball rolling?

---

Ever since the Sturgeon Excursion up at Wigwam…he’s been a trouble maker.

---

Come on Brian, I was a trouble maker long before the Sturgeon Excursion

This is a good discusion. Anytime you can have different opinions and viewpoints giving valid concerns and discussion without resorting to name calling helps us all. I really enjoy reading it.

I’d be more than happy to call Jack names.

Yup, great discussion. Even though those who oppose this rule change are wrong.

In my experience, using more than one rod in the majority of situations would be a hassle and not worth the effort. There are times, though, that I would really like the option. I would love to drag a sucker while casting for muskies. I would also love to put out a 6-crankbait spread for walleyes. Slip bobbering is another option…..

Tim

Quote:

---

What evidence can you cite for hooking mortality during Winter? I would like to know how they do it with the ice being on the lake. I would be willing to bet that fish caught on rattle reels at night are swallowing a lot of hooks.

---

The only thing I can “cite”, is what Ron Pyer explained to us at an Input meeting during a discussion about hooking mortality.

In short he said that he does not know of any studies dealing specifically with ice fishing, but that deep hooking would be the biggest reason for mortality besides improper handling of the fish by the person who caught it. He did say the fact the water is cold helps a released fish. Metabolism maybe??

He also was not too concerned about the ice fishing mortality having a big effect on the lake (Mille Lacs) in the annual mortality numbers since there are not nearly as many fish caught.

All the fisheries biologists that have been involved with Mille Lacs have all repeated the same things ….the 2 greatest factors in hooking mortality are water temp, and size of the fish. Bigger fish 20+” do not survive nearly as well as smaller fish when released and the water temp is over 70 degrees. Because of thier size, and the lighter lines and action rods most of us use, they can stress thier bodies beyond recovery before we ever get them in the net. We can handle them gently, unhook and release them quickly, but it will not matter if they have already built up a high lactic acid level in thier bodies. They swim down to the bottom, stay there for maybe 1-3 days, then roll over dead. Those are the fish you never see floating on the surface that the DNR is always talking about. If a fish’s air bladder does not pop, it will seldom float when it dies.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Also, I know for a fact that the DNR Fisheries Director is adamently against the use of 2 lines, and he will use his position to prevent it from ever happening on Minnesota’s inland waters.

---

It is a good thing that he is one and we are many.

---

Makes no difference. There is no democracy in natural resource managment.

Yes, but we are his boss. He is employed by the state government. His position is appointed by elected officials, right??

great debate. 2 lines wins

time for me to hop in, I’m purely recreational when it comes time to fish, catching fish is actualy one piece in this experience. When I plan a trip, I don’t have two days in advance to pre-fish for a vacation or a short get-a-way. Even when on vacation, my time on the water fishing is limited, due to the fullfillment of those other small pieces of the vacation puzzle. I’m for two lines, if this means one more fish in the livewell, or coming in early to surprise the family so be it. Keeps everyone happy. Less time catching means more time for

Quote:

---

the 2 greatest factors in hooking mortality are water temp, and size of the fish. Bigger fish 20+” do not survive nearly as well as smaller fish when released and the water temp is over 70 degrees.

---

If the people in this post who oppose 2 lines reasoning is hooking mortality, shouldn’t the state close fishing when water temps hit 70 degrees or mandate that all fish caught be kept?
Or look at it a totally different way. Should the state outlaw all hook and line fishing and allow everyone to net? Then that would eliminate all hook and line mortality, right?

-J.

One more thought on the topic.

As simply an effort to “Stimulate the Economy” the state should allow 2 lines. That would get all of us into the store to buy some extra rods/reels/tackle. One would think the change alone would create millions in new revenue and create jobs!

-J.

Quote:

---

Yes, but we are his boss. He is employed by the state government. His position is appointed by elected officials, right??

---

That is correct, he is appointed, and his job is to tell us what is best for our resources, and to manage them for thier immediate and long term good. Science dictates his decisions, not the wishes of the people, and that is a very good thing!!

If he is asked and tells the legislature that 2 lines would be a very bad thing, the legislature still has the right to ignore what he says and pass the change if they want, (Highly unlikely). Making it allowable under the law does not make it manditory that the regulations be changed so you can use 2 lines. Thats still a decision for the Fisheries Director and the DNR Commissionor to make.

They have no choice right now about it because the law says 1 line per person on inland open waters. If the law is changed, and the use of 2 lines is allowed, then the DNR has the freedom to allow the use of 2 lines if it is thier decision that it will not be a danger to our resources. If they think it isn’t safe, they will not change the regulations.

Quote:

---

Science dictates his decisions,

---

WE DON’T KNOW THAT….

Quote:

---

Any input on how 2 lines has affected the fisheries of state that do allow this? I think a person from MN could argue all kinds of different points but how would they know if it has not been seen 1st hand.

---

Last time I checked, the river has had two lines for years and is open year round!! And that still seems to be a good fishery!! Even with people “over” harvesting. BK was right about a good bite and poles used. Good bite = one pole maximum for me. I only use one pole on a slow bite also. My reason…just too inexperienced to fish with 2 poles I guess. Don’t have trolling figured out yet…which plays into that for sure. Have to agree with Redneck also. A limit is a limit.

We all pay taxes and we all have rights. If the government allows people to keep a certain #, that is their right. I get angry when you read about 2 people getting caught with 144 pheasants when crossing the border of South Dakota. Or when you read about a guy getting caught with 250 walleye in his freezer. The only thing is…these people will do this whether you have a 3 bird limit or a 50 bird limit!!! Outlaws are outlaws regardless of the rules!!

I have seen Stoddard where there are 200 people out there and almost all are walking off the ice with 25 gills. Multiply that by days or weeks and it gets ugly. Do I agree with it…I don’t know. Is it the best for the fishery?? I wouldn’t think so, but I don’t know for sure. Years after, I have caught some amazing gills out of there still. But it is their right to do so. Can they keep 6 inch gills? Yes, if they clean them and eat them, it is their right to do so. Change the laws and the law abiding people will follow the rules.

Don’t know where I am going with this I guess… 2 lines won’t make that big of a difference in my mind. Worried about fisheries…change the limit… People pay taxes and the river is theirs just as much as it is ours. Your friend that fishes over a spawning area has the right to do so. Not saying it is okay in my eyes, but it is legally his right to do so. If they want to keep fish…that is their right also. Don’t want people fishing swawning beds, make a law against it. In Canada, you cannot fish certain areas on the English river system during the spawn.

Almost like people who get mad at their neighbors that don’t follow QDM rules during deer hunting. If they want to hunt for meat, that is their god given right. Don’t have to agree with it, but it is their right. jmo.

And I thought I was going to get some work done this morning…

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Science dictates his decisions,

---

WE DON’T KNOW THAT….

---

It’s in his job description!

Oh Brother.

Jack, I just fell off the wagon.

That is not directed at any one person at the DNR, just to be clear. However…even I am not gullible enough not to think that MANY other things come into play besides what “science dictates”.

Honorable thought though.

That is a topic of another thread.

Quote:

---

Oh Brother.

Jack, I just fell off the wagon.

That is not directed at any one person at the DNR, just to be clear. However…even I am not gullible enough not to think that MANY other things come into play besides what “science dictates”.

Honorable thought though.

That is a topic of another thread.

---

Brian, the man is a scientist. That is all he knows, and any and all recommendations he makes are based on what his science shows him. He knows and understands that the laws of science and mother nature will not give way to the laws of any man, for any reason.

That is not to say some people think they know better and try to still do things against his recommendations. The use of 2 lines is something that is optional, not something that has to be done for any scientific reasons, but if he can show us scientific reasons why it can be harmfull, why wouldn’t we listen.

Does everyone think they know more about his job than him?

I’m growing very tired of this. I’ve said all I’m going to.

Teddy Roosevelt once said many years ago, “Any man who is an outdoorsman and not also a conservationist, is nothing more than a fool..”

Maybe after we get 2 lines we can take the plugs out of shotguns during duck and goose season too. Why not just kill the whole flock so we can get done earlier. Since some of the states around Minnesota allow 5 roosters a day, we should do the same too. Then we can put scopes on all the mussel loaders and allow cross bows for everyone who wants one. Do away with all the laws restricting ATV use during hunting season, its easier to drive the deer and you can really get back in the woods for those grouse spots you can’t reach by foot. Don’t need to worry about tearing up the land, heck, it will grow back. We can use some of the dedicated tax dollars and put bountys back on all the wolves in the state too. We can’t have them running around eating “our” deer. ect. ect. ect……

In the end, humans are the cancer of this planet, we and all of our so called wisdom are killing it, so why not just enjoy and have fun while it lasts. No more rules or common sense needed.

Quote:

---

That is not directed at any one person at the DNR, just to be clear. However…even I am not gullible enough not to think that MANY other things come into play besides what “science dictates”.

---

I think you should read this part over again. There are many good biologist that work for the DNR. Unfortunately, as you just stated they only have recommendations.

…so anyone that doesn’t agree with you isn’t a conservationist…but a fool?

Thanks for your input into this conversation Jack. It like everyone that posted is appreciated.