Quote:
I think we should cap the number of licenses sold like deer tags. After all, more fishermen, more catches, more mortality.
OK, if we start being funny I’m going to say that with $5 gas it will all be a wash anyway 
Suzuki, the technology argument was my point last week. I know without a doubt the combination of better sonar+GPS+lakemaps+Record-A-Track has helped me increase my catch many times over.
Chris
Quote:
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!
+1
Quote:
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!
Yea but everyone’s odds of catching their limit increase. Joe Fishhog (JoFishHog) goes out for 3 hours one night. Instead of catching just 3 keepers with one line he gets 5 with 2 lines out. Multiply that by a gazillion times and tell me it wont negatively impact a fishery.
Mike, are you just upset you can’t vertical jig two rods at a time and don’t want the other kids to poke fun at you?? 
Quote:
Quote:
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!
Yea but everyone’s odds of catching their limit increase. Joe Fishhog (JoFishHog) goes out for 3 hours one night. Instead of catching just 3 keepers with one line he gets 5 with 2 lines out. Multiply that by a gazillion times and tell me it wont negatively impact a fishery.
then why do we have a rule about using a certain number of lines if we can only catch so many?? If I were to go out and catch my limit of sunnies, what’s the difference if I use 2 or 10 lines? I can only catch 25. If your worried about a negative impact on the fishery, Then lower the limit!
Quote:
I’ll explain it in 3 words Greg…
From what I’m told…”WI fishing sucks”.
i live on the mn/wi border so i fish both and only use one line 99.9% of time on open water. wi fishing doesnt suck tho, what sucks is when u r ice fishing on your mn license and can only have one tip up when using a jig pole.
Quote:
I’ll explain it in 3 words Greg…
From what I’m told…”WI fishing sucks”.
i live on the mn/wi border so i fish both and only use one line 99.9% of time on open water. wi fishing doesnt suck tho, what sucks is when u r ice fishing on your mn license and can only have one tip up when using a jig pole.
Here’s where the proposed amendment to Minnesota Statutes 2010, section 97C.315, subdivision 1 lies now..
http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/ccodoc/commrep.htm
under; Peppin from the Committee on Government Operations and Elections to which was referred:
H. F. No. 984
I believe it is proposed in this manner:
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Journal of the House
EIGHTY-SEVENTH SESSION – 2011
THIRTY-NINTH DAY
SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA, THURSDAY, APRIL 7, 2011
Sec. 59. Minnesota Statutes 2010, section 97C.315, subdivision 1, is
amended to read:
Subdivision 1. Lines. An angler may not use more than one line, except:
(1) two lines may be used to take fish:
(1) through the ice; and
(2) from the shore, a dock, or a pier; and
(3) from an anchored watercraft.
You can listen to opponents here:
http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/comm/minutes1.asp?comm=87007&id=159
see them here:
http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/comm/minutes1.asp?comm=87007&id=159
http://www.startribune.com/sports/outdoors/119523819.html
Thank Tom Hackbarth for keeping it going here:
http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/members/members.asp?id=10229
and I’ve heard that (hear say) it’s Muskie groups that’s keeping it hung up from the basic “fish two lines” from searching Google and viewing their opposition as well as some info I will not disclose here.
Thank you Tom Hackbarth for not giving up!!
P.S> To date no one has been able to show me a fact based study that 2 lines increases mortality. I’ve asked the DNR and the have not replied.
Thanks for bringing this back up Mr. Tale.
…and welcome to In-Depth Outdoors!
After sitting in on the Roundtable last spring, I think this proposed law above is very very….comical.
BUT since I would like to see two lines in all of MN (and really don’t want to have to drive to IA to fish catfish with two lines), I’m keeping quiet and hopeful. 
Quote:
After sitting in on the Roundtable last spring, I think this proposed law above is very very….comical.
+1. What a joke. 
It’s all very frustrating to me. I don’t think the committee members understand the two-line issue one iota.
When the head of the MN DNR, who professes to be an avid fisherman, is afraid of two lines and it’s impact on fish mortality / harvest, it doesn’t look good for a meaningful two line change is in the making.
The above proposal is, yes, “very, very… comical”!
Fact: Fish will die from time to time, especially in warm water, when you release them.
However, no one can convince me this will adversely affect the fishery. IMO, fish mortality, 1 or 2 lines, does not impact the fishery much if at all.
Fact: Musky guys can kiss my sweet 
Quote:
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??
Most of my responses from Reps that were “canned” responses that led me to believe they really didn’t understand my message. The couple that were somewhat personalized, and seemed they actually read my message, stated that they had to focus on creating jobs and getting the economy turned arounda and in no way could support any kind of new taxes (possible two-line fee). Ya right.
+1 mplspug!
Ya, two lines will end fishing as we know it…uh huh..sure it will.
Will it effect the catch ratio, ya probably but those that catch fish regularly, don’t need more than one rod, the rest of us will still struggle catching those we do.
btw anybody know which musky group is supposedly against this??
If our DNR is against this, if I wasn’t already for it, I would be after hearing that, the management in the MN DNR has has it’s head up it’s backside for many years.
Whether it passes or not, won’t make or break most of us, and people may keep what they can legally keep either way, those that don’t will keep over the limit whether they use one line or 20, enforcement is the answer for that, not line restriction…imho
Al
Quote:
…in no way could support any kind of new taxes (possible two-line fee).
Should ask them if it is voluntary, why do they consider it a new tax?
I’d love a voluntary fee. I’m afraid to admit how much I’d pay for it.
Sad to say, but in today’s world, I’m guessing some group(s) or politicians would say that they / certain folks weren’t treated fairly / don’t have the same resources as some others, and thus having a “pay for” system would be unconstitutional, or unfair (not fairly accessable to all).
I should point out that I would support two-lines across the board and would rather not have a “pay-for” system, but if that would be an option, I’d take it. It’s better than the backwards direction we’re going in with the “anchored boat two-line” proposal. Simultaneously LMAO and crying over that one.
Once again we need to unite and write, call our state oficals and express your opinion to them. I know that there was a list of our state officials posted before, who ever posted that please post again.
Quote:
Once again we need to unite and write, call our state oficals and express your opinion to them. I know that there was a list of our state officials posted before, who ever posted that please post again.
If you are for two lines and would like lawmakers to know, go ahead and copy/paste anything here you want. I sent it to all including:
Thomas J Landwehr
Commissioner-Natural Resources
Natural Resources Dept
500 Lafayette Rd
Box 37
St Paul, MN 551554037
Email: [email protected]
Phone: 651/259-5022
Here are the e-mails of everyone on the committee:
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected]
Dear Governor Dayton;
How do we get it through to the lawmakers that two line fishing should be acceptable in our state while trolling?
I think we both know it is the stationary lines that deep hook fish and increase mortality rather then the trolling lines.
I’ve had Musky groups confess that they are responsible for stopping the bill (now in HF 984) 97c.315. subdiv 1., because they don’t like it.
I’ve asked the DNR to show studies to their claim that two lines trolled will increase mortality but they ignore me. Is there such a study?
Is their someone regulating the DNR’s budget that is opposed?
Thank you for your time. I’m sure bait shop and resort owners will thank you as well for increasing their revenue with a law passed allowing “two line fishing period!“.
Sincerely,
Quote:
I think we both know it is the stationary lines that deep hook fish and increase mortality rather then the trolling lines.
The above scares me. It could lead to no action again. As a catfisher looking out for the best interests of the catfishing community, I would be VERY happy if the law passes as anchor/bank only.
Quote:
Quote:
I think we both know it is the stationary lines that deep hook fish and increase mortality rather then the trolling lines.
The above scares me. It could lead to no action again. As a catfisher looking out for the best interests of the catfishing community, I would be VERY happy if the law passes as anchor/bank only.
I agree with you. The main thing is to send them something until they get so swamped they will want to pass it all and get us off their backs. 
Quote:
Quote:
I think we both know it is the stationary lines that deep hook fish and increase mortality rather then the trolling lines.
The above scares me. It could lead to no action again. As a catfisher looking out for the best interests of the catfishing community, I would be VERY happy if the law passes as anchor/bank only.
Yup, divide and conquer…
Al
I would be all for it if they include trolling.
If they are worried about fish mortality, they should let the trolling be and be more concerned about the fishing from an anchored boat.
I see more deep hooked fish with 2 line bobber fishing than I do trolling.
If they simply want to pass anything, then this bill would be that. Not the best but good for the catfish guys.
I would like a bill that works for the majority and not a selct group. I catfish also but this bill is hoey.
this is the response that I got from my representative:
Jim, Thanks for your thoughts on 2 line fishing. I don’t think there is support in the legislature for 2 line fishing while trolling. Would you prefer it stay 1 line or would 2 without trolling be better? Thanks for your thoughts. If you’d like to discuss this or any issue further feel free to call or email. My home phone # is 651-437-2597. I am usually home weekends and week day evenings after 8:30 PM. Keep in touch, Denny
Representative Denny McNamara
Dist.57B
Chair of the Committee on Environment, Energy
and Natural Resources Policy and Finance
375 State Office Building
100 Rev.Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
St. Paul, Mn. 55155-1298
Phone (651) 296-3135
I would prefer only politicians that had common sense voting on it.
Denny’s working late tonight. He’s not home yet. 
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
