Here’s the bill. It’s out I guess. (I edited the language since the Site doesn’t seem to have a strikethrough feature)
H.F. No. 16, as introduced – 87th Legislative Session (2011-2012) Posted on Jan 10, 2011
1.1A bill for an act
1.2relating to game and fish; permitting use of two angling lines;amending
Section 1. Minnesota Statutes 2010, section 97C.315, subdivision 1, is amended to read:
An angler may use two lines
I just can’t see why there are so many people against the use of 2 lines. Growing up in WI, we got 3 lines and it was never a problem.
I’ll explain it in 3 words Greg…
From what I’m told…”WI fishing sucks”.
BK’s post made me laugh. Even though I fish in Wisconsin a lot i’ll have two lines usually going. I still can’t manage to limit out. Maybe I need to pick up a new hobby….
I’m thinking trot lines, jug fishing and limb lines. If that doesn’t work submarine nets
Quote:
BK’s post made me laugh. Even though I fish in Wisconsin a lot i’ll have two lines usually going. I still can’t manage to limit out. Maybe I need to pick up a new hobby….
See? Just goes to show how bad it is over there. 
Although it sounds funny, this was some of the reasons given about why we should stick to 1 line. I’m imagining all the folks that have only fished the Mississippi River are really having a hard time understanding why so many are against this.
It’s been talked about here a lot.
I’ll say two things and then I’m done.
1)We all need to think about the entire State and not just our bodies of water and species that we fish.
2)Contact your House Representative if you are in support of this.
If you don’t…it’s dead. Count on it.
Funny when I contacted my reps in the past, they replied with “The DNR doesn’t support this, so I can’t vote for it.”
I sat and wondered, who is being represented??
(so I posted again…don’t hold it against me)
And I’ll write again. Thanks for posting! 
Inaddition to contacting your legislator, most things are first discussed by the Committee Members. So, dropping them a e-mail or phone call pays big.
http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/comm/committeemembers.asp?comm=87007
I read a post on here yesterday from a member stating the best fishing he has seen was the last couple of years. Made me think and fishing has been good for me too. I dont understand why so many fisherman want to mess with that by doubling the number of lines. 
I know most people are against this for the fact of CPR people.
BUT, for the people that do keep fish, two lines or one line there is still a limit. If you are going to reach your limit with an extra line faster than a single line, that depends on the day, and the fish you are targeting.
I dont have any strong feelings one way or another. If 2 lines are allowed, I will use two and still release most of my fish.
What I dont want to see is lakes getting filled with boats with 3 fishermen trolling 6 lines spread out across 50′ or more getting angry because you want to fish in the 2-3 acres of “their” spot.
I’m more of a solo fisherman at this point in my life sure would be nice to put two rapala’s on when trolling by myself. I don’t care I’d buy two licenses if that’s what it took, second license’s fee’s to hatcheries. I’m with Dave, I’d still release pretty much everything.
I usually try to steer clear from some of the more political discussions and while I am not stating a position, I do have a question.
Does anyone know if there have been any studies on fish mortality from various fishing methods factoring into this discussion here in MN? It may not be a big issue with trolling cranks but there could be other methods that could increase this factor.
I just have not felt strongly one way or the other on this nor have I read through the stated pros and cons either.
I know my wife personally likes using only one line. SHe gets quite a kick out of my dad and I running back and forth trying to set the hooks when we see our bobbers go down. All the time she has her one rod and is jigging catching just as many as we are. Someone made a good poing. More lines doesn’t increase the harvest. I guess I’m ok either way.
Quote:
I dont have any strong feelings one way or another. If 2 lines are allowed, I will use two and still release most of my fish.
What I dont want to see is lakes getting filled with boats with 3 fishermen trolling 6 lines spread out across 50′ or more getting angry because you want to fish in the 2-3 acres of “their” spot.
That happens no matter how many lines are out, rude people are rude, no matter how many lines they have.
I also see a booming business in lower unit seal replacement with the additional lines.. 
Unlike the guru’s who catch a limit in 3 or 4 minutes, most of my friends and my self rarely fill out as quick, if we fill out.
Two lines may be more than what I want to deal with, but it does give us amateurs a chance optimize our time on the water and to try different baits so we may at least catch a few decent fish.
Al
Quote:
I’ll explain it in 3 words Greg…
From what I’m told…”WI fishing sucks”.
The only time I would like two lines is pulling cranks. I fish in WI a few times a year and on Pool#4 a lot, and I almost always fish one line. I will agree with Brian that at least on Western WI lakes that the walleye fishing blows compared to what you find in MN.
I think the most likely impact that 2 lines could produce would be increased mortality in small bass and panfish with live bait use – Otherwise it may really be a non-factor. I fished in Texas a couple of years ago where you could fish as many lines as you want. Much like the last post I about broke my ankle running back and forth and ultimately and happily went down to one line and simply enjoyed my fishing.
Dang! Sucked me in to posting agian!
You aren’t agreeing with me! I don’t fish anyplace (much) besides the river to have an opinion of WI’s fishing.
My comment came from the back porch meeting at the roundtable. Seems the MN Guide(s) are getting more and more WI residents (because of the poor WI fishing).
More lines would absolutely increase the harvest.
The limits would likely stay the same, but we all know bodies of water that have a hot bite for an hour or two and those are the only times when most fisherman can catch a fish. If you have double the lines in the water at those times, you will harvest more fish.
This might be surprising to most here, but the vast majority of fisherman in MN catch one walleye every 5-6 hours. I believe that most of these fish are harvested and these fishermen are more likely to increase their harvest if 2 lines are allowed.
While these people arent likely on the water every day, there is 20 of them for every more serious fisherman.
For avid anglers, one or two lines wont make a difference. They will still keep whatever they want.
Quote:
Dang! Sucked me in to posting agian!
You aren’t agreeing with me! I don’t fish anyplace (much) besides the river to have an opinion of WI’s fishing.
My comment came from the back porch meeting at the roundtable. Seems the MN Guide(s) are getting more and more WI residents (because of the poor WI fishing).
Sorry Brian for my confusion. That is nothing new. Then I will say flat out from what I have found that compared to MN lakes I have fished. The western WI lakes I have fished dulled in comparision for quality of walleyes. The pan fish on the other hand is a different story.
I’m not disagreeing with what you said, but how do we know the walleye fishing is poor because you can use 3 lines? Maybe WI doesn’t waste tons of money stocking lakes that can’t sustain natural reproduction? Maybe the food sources in those lakes are poor for walleyes?
As I’ve asked for since day one, I just wish someone could provide some factual studies that show multiple lines are the culprit of all evils for our fisheries.
Sure, Mn has lots of tourists who come to take in the great fishing every year. Think SD or ND don’t get a ton of Mn fisherman each year? Why would they leave such great fishing to go to these wind blown cruddy fisheries? How is it those fisheries are able to be maintained even with using multiple lines?
Common sense tells me yes, more fish have the chance of dieing from hooking mortality. How much, well it’s pretty tough for anyone to know. The doom and gloom crowd would have us believe there won’t be a walleye left in the state in 5 years.
I know one thing for sure. As much as we want to argue this here, there is very little chance this bill ever passes. I’m talking a 1% chance. And to be honest, I’m not sure our legislators shouldn’t be focusing on more important issues right now.
This is a well respected study on Walleye C/R Tournament mortality
I guess that I’m ambivalent to the whole multi line thing. To be clear I wasn’t saying I thought MN had better walleye opportunities vs. WI for any specific reason, only that I feel if you compare the two, IMO MN is a better overall fishery. Keep in mind that I have only fished in Western WI. As I said even when I am able to fish with more than one line, I don’t. Not because I feel against it, just because I don’t feel I need too. I do fish with multiple lines when pulling cranks on Lake Superior, and I plan to this spring as well on Green Bay.
Quote:
I’m not disagreeing with what you said, but how do we know the walleye fishing is poor because you can use 3 lines? Maybe WI doesn’t waste tons of money stocking lakes that can’t sustain natural reproduction? Maybe the food sources in those lakes are poor for walleyes?
As I’ve asked for since day one, I just wish someone could provide some factual studies that show multiple lines are the culprit of all evils for our fisheries.
Sure, Mn has lots of tourists who come to take in the great fishing every year. Think SD or ND don’t get a ton of Mn fisherman each year? Why would they leave such great fishing to go to these wind blown cruddy fisheries? How is it those fisheries are able to be maintained even with using multiple lines?
Common sense tells me yes, more fish have the chance of dieing from hooking mortality. How much, well it’s pretty tough for anyone to know. The doom and gloom crowd would have us believe there won’t be a walleye left in the state in 5 years.
I know one thing for sure. As much as we want to argue this here, there is very little chance this bill ever passes. I’m talking a 1% chance. And to be honest, I’m not sure our legislators shouldn’t be focusing on more important issues right now.
Quote:
I know one thing for sure. As much as we want to argue this here, there is very little chance this bill ever passes. I’m talking a 1% chance.
I’d be willing to take that bet 
Let’s not forget that this has been introduced for the past 5 years now I think. It always has passed the house, but gets held up in the Senate. Except for last year which of course it acually was passed as a bill, but then Pawlenty nixed it with his Veto.
Now with some new faces in the Senate, and specifically Sen Chaudary not being there, I think this bill has a better chance at passing as not.
Mojo, I was just using your example to beat my own drum. You still got the best avatar ever! 
D, I hope you are right. I’m pessimistic at best on this. If the DNR gets in the gov’s ear again, we lose.
Everybody keeps comparing this issue to other states like Wi. Maybe they have it wrong? Maybe they should be backing it down to our standards? With ever increasing technology perhaps the masses should not be allowed so many lines in the water. Nobody is putting a cap on technology. After imaging sonars will come something even more hideous (effective) Adding more hooks to the mix can only lead in one direction. I love to fish and do it every week of the year. I dont want to see more pressure put on the resource.
I think we should cap the number of licenses sold like deer tags. After all, more fishermen, more catches, more mortality.
either way you can only catch YOUR limit! i dont see whats the difference with 2 or 3lines. more than 3 lines would be hard to run anyways without riggers. but still, you can only catch so many anyways!
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
