Quote:
I’m willing to have two sets of rules to keep them. They can have 4 weeks of 1 fish over 60 inches and I’ll take my 6 or even 8 weeks of catch and release.
yep, me too
thanks for the update Brian
Your welcome Mr. Dtro…and with all those PIG flatheads you wrestled into the camera view this year…your avatar is of a scaly fish? 
Prepare for lots of quiet nights on the MN river next year. 
Thanks for the report, BK.
Quote:
There seemed to be some confusion on where the $5. LKS tag fee was being used for. To clarify, it goes to the General Fund. It was never meant to be used for the study of LKS…
Well thats a frickin’ bummer. General Fund… Yuck!
yes, of course they keep them to eat.
I’ve heard prepared right they actually taste pretty darn good.
But between eating them and catching them, it’s no comparison. Plenty other species to eat.
Quote:
Well thats a frickin’ bummer. General Fund… Yuck!
I’ve had a number of folk tell me they bought a tag just to help the DNR with sturgeon studies…ect. I’m guessing most of the $5. is getting chewed up in the administering of the tags anyway. The only reason for the tags is to determine how many fish are being harvested (and the data that comes along with it).
I’ve also heard there are some that feel they have to have a sturgeon tag to fish for sturgeon. Not true. The LKS tag is needed only if one is going to be harvested.
Ryan, WI has a strong sturgeon harvesting heritage. Google Sturgeon and Lake Winnebago. Spearing happens every winter and it’s hard to release a speared fish 
.
Those fish are likely the most studied and managed in the world.
There are some that just take the LKS for the roe and discard the fish and other cultures that will travel for hundreds of miles to be able to harvest one to eat.
Hence the more restrictive regulations on the Croix. The boys at the WI DNR feel that if they don’t make the regs the same as the rest of the WI waters, the harvesters will travel to the Croix and increase the pressure here.
I would have to agree that this makes sense. But then again, a 6 or even 8 week long catch and release season would eliminate that threat.
To the rest of the folks that took time out of there schedules to attend the meeting, please…if I’ve missed anything…chime in. 
The past 2 years there have been 12 sturgeon harvested. Of those 12, 6 have been harvested by one family.
SO with that info that is very few people it would effect if it were catch and release only! Also the part that is scaring the DNR and pushing them to be more restrictive is the number of new sturgeon anglers every year and in some of the other states they are cracking down on poaching sturgeon and paddlefish. By those states cracking down the fear is they will travel up here and harvest legally or illegally. They are trying to be proactive so that would be 2 big thumbs up on that and the fact that they are asking our opinion on this!
Quote:
The past 2 years there have been 12 sturgeon harvested. Of those 12, 6 have been harvested by one family.
I wonder if they have an idea how many people bought a tag, then didn’t register the fish they harvested. I could see that happening more often than not.
Quote:
Not only did the MN DNR’s own data support moving toward catch and release, (I don’t remember presenting any data that could be interpreted this way) in my opinion,
I wanted to respond to the above.
First off, I want to be clear..that this is my opinion and here’s the data that supports my opinion.
Research Literature indicates that Females are about 24 years old before they spawn.
Females only spawn every 4 to 6 years
Males are thought to be 3 to 5 years.
LKS are very sensitive to changes in their environment such as destruction to spawning areas and degraded water quality.
Information received from recaptured fish shows that St Croix River LKS grow about 6/10ths to 9/10ths per year.
The MN DNR estimates less than 4000 LKS in the Lower St Croix River.
East Metro staff are of the opinion that females in the less productive Lower St. Croix River System are closer to 55″ before spawning takes place.
LOTW/Rainy River data shows that hooking mortality (in the cooler months) is little to non existent. ( OPINION: although HANDLING of the fish may have more to do with mortality than hooking)
Keeping all of the above in mine, I think most would agree that we would like to see the spawning numbers of sturgeon improve. That leaves us with C&R or a total closure of the season. Since hooking mortality isn’t a factor…my thought process leads me to a total catch and release season (on the St Croix).
If the WI’s DNR’s sole reason is to keep the pressure off the St Croix… a C&R season only- would sure fit into their goals.
I’m not a Catch and Release purest. But the Lake Sturgeon on the St Croix need special protection until we know for a fact that we have a population that can be sustained by their environment…meaning the less fertile Lower St Croix.
Other points of veiw welcome!
With the turn out the other night and only a few comments sent in until yesterday…
The folks at the DNR certainly could have moved on and thought no one cares…let’s take the easy road and just adopt the rule.
Big Kudo’s goes to Gerry for taking the time to solicited responses and respond to them. 
Just saw the announcement on WCCO. DNR is claiming the MN moose numbers have declined 52% and fingering warmer temps and parasites as the most likely cause. 
10 years ago we would see moose all the time during the deer season in NW MN. I haven’t seen one in 5 or 6 years now. We did have a very nice bull elk on trail cam the night before the deer season though.
DT
Wouldn’t that be a Moosedemeanor?
Sounds like the right thing to do. I doubt it will stop the decline based on why they think it is happening but every little bit helps.
It’s a shame. I’ve never seen one in the wild. Looks like my chances are getting slimmer and slimmer (in MN, at least). 
I hate to see it, but I think it’s the right thing to do.
Years ago I really thought it would be great to apply for the hunt, but that was when we were seeing moose as far south as the southern end of the Namadji Forest in NE MN.
I hope they figure out the issue, but as with any decilne like this, it’s probably multiple factors, none of which will be easy to reverse. It’s sad, but I suppose the only constant is change. Most don’t know it, but Minnesota once had a thriving Caribou populationa and very few whitetailed deer.
Grouse
Hardly a surprise to me at this point, and is a wise move. I am a hunter, but I am also a firm believer in caring for the animals and maintaining a stable population that is able to successfully reproduce. MN Moose are doing neither and according to research, we have lost almost 5,000 animals in the last 6 years. MN has actually spent a great deal of time, and money, on monitoring the moose situation in the north as evidenced here:
http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/aboutdnr/reports/legislative/moose_mgmt_research.pdf
There has also been a new research project that was just released, and is geared towards collaring about 30 moose, which is the largest study of its kind.
I’ve applied for Moose hunting since I turned 18 and had never gotten drawn. I stopped applying about 3 years ago when I realized that this was becoming pretty serious. I actually majored in Biology in college, along with another related degree, and the MN moose issue came up in a couple of the classes in the last decade.
I’ve given up on hunting moose in our state, and from the looks of it no one else will have that opportunity for years to come..if ever.
Yup, no doubt a sad day for the moose in Minnesota. I fully support the closure hoping they can find the root cause of this problem soon. Unfortunately I feel the moose are past the point of saving them now. Very sad to see!!
Quote:
There has also been a new research project that was just released, and is geared towards collaring about 30 moose, which is the largest study of its kind.
They are actually collaring 100 moose for this study. I read just the other day that they had 91 collared. They also had to euthanize a young bull shortly after they collared it because it was in such rough shape.
I was very lucky as we have drawn 3 tags over the years and were able to harvest bulls all 3 times. I drew my tag on about the 7th try (48″) My cousin drew on his first try (51″) and a friend drew on his second attempt (32″).
My thoughts on why they are disappearing? Some disease they are catching from whitetail deer and predation from wolves is way higher than they will admit. We hunted moose up the Gunflint 2 years ago and saw more wolves than moose.
brain worms might be a part of it! here is a video of a moose we watched drown! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9rfFT68v_0&feature=youtu.be
Quote:
brain worms might be a part of it! here is a video of a moose we watched drown! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9rfFT68v_0&feature=youtu.be
That’s tragic, hard to watch any animal struggle like that.
I wonder how long it will take to move past the denial phase when it comes to the massive wolf population in northern MN?
I’m not saying wolves are the single reason why the moose are in decline, but they certainly are a contributing factor and given that wolf populations are healthy and growing fast, the DNR needs to be much more assertive in managing wolves.
When coyote hunting these days, I can’t recall a day when I have NOT seen fresh wolf tracks. It was less than 10 years ago when we had the first verifiable trail cam pics of wolves in the area, and now the wolves are seen by ranchers on a weekly basis. When you look at the numbers of tracks in a 1 square mile area, it is impossible to believe that there are any less than a dozen wolves moving in that small area alone.
I applaud the DNR for taking an aggressive approach toward research. Hopefully something can be identified as a factor that can be controlled, but I don’t have high hopes.
Grouse
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
