Unfortunately I can’t be more specific, but the DNR has indeed budged a little bit on this.
Didn’t it come up at some point in the last couple years? I swear that it was in a bill along with a total ban on all lead fishing tackle/ammo but it didn’t pass.
There was an issue with loons ingesting lead sinkers or weights and dying from lead poisoning that started it.
My biggest concern is enforcement. We can pass laws and changes until we are blue in the face…without enforcement it doesn’t mean anything. It’s already illegal to operate a boat while intoxicated, stuff freezers, not control your wake, etc. Those issues are still a major concern though.
Enforcement is so difficult. Random checks generally don’t uncover anything because the majority of people follow the rules, at least to the best of their understanding. Enforcement is more likely to “catch” a guy who is keeping a slot limit northern out of ignorance than they are to catch the “freezer stuffers” who know what they are doing and take care to not get caught.
I’d love to see reduced limits nearly across the board, apart from those concerning hammer-handle northerns. Keep those limits large! Walleyes and panfish could both use some help.
I bet they get this done. If not this year, sometime in the near future. It’s long overdue, and the pressure is immense already and only increasing.
I’d also be in support of two lines. I would only use it for musky fishing in late fall, when 14-18″ suckers become available at the bait shops. It would be great to drag a sucker behind the boat under a bobber while still casting.
Barbless and panfish limits. Trophies get released. Artificial mounts look better and last longer.
IMO
Artificial mounts look better and last longer.
I think most would agree that a graphite replica is a better alternative to killing a large fish and doing a skin mount, even if it does cost more.
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>john23 wrote:</div>
I am generally very fond of lower bag limits, but I sure wish the state legislature would stay out of specific fish and game issues. I believe it should be left to the DNR.Well sorry, any changes such as this require state legislature approval. It’s the laws.
That’s only true because the legislature made it the law in the first place! The legislature could give the DNR the authority to manage limits and anything else just as easily as they could legislate new limits.
While not a walleye guy, my concern is timing. There is a difference between testifying in person as a citizen at a legislative hearing as opposed to doing it on Zoom . I’ve heard that some in the fishing industry like this because customers can say they got their limit? Can’t say I ever did lol , might never if it’s four! Fixing hatcheries, reframing walleye stocking plans, fixing panfish issues esp. in metro lakes might also be more worthwhile legislation?
But another comment: Fishing Groups that spend a lot of time soliciting funds need wins, so I suspect they back done deals and take all the credit.
I would like to see on limits instead of daily limit like 6 walleyes how about 3 fish daily limit and 6 fish possession limit it would be like the dakotas do
I would like to see on limits instead of daily limit like 6 <strong class=”ido-tag-strong”>walleyes how about 3 fish daily limit and 6 fish possession limit it would be like the dakotas do
I’ve often wondered how possession limits could be enforced. Will the DNR come to my home and check my fridge and freezer?
That said, I’m almost exclusively “catch and release”. I kept one bass and one northern this season for eating.
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Matt Waste wrote:</div>
Artificial mounts look better and last longer.I think most would agree that a graphite replica is a better alternative to killing a large fish and doing a skin mount, even if it does cost more.
i dont agree..i’m mounting the real thing.
i dont agree..i’m mounting the real thing.
That’s why I said “most”
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>glenn57 wrote:</div>
i dont agree..i’m mounting the real thing.That’s why I said “most”
I dunno Glen. That’s what I thought also until I had a 30″er in my hands. Then the only thing I could think of is take a picture, get it measured and get er back in the soup.
For me it was very exciting to have caught a 30″er. It felt even better to see her swim away. that’s my $.02
I dunno Glen. That’s what I thought also until I had a 30″er in my hands. Then the only thing I could think of is take a picture, get it measured and get er back in the soup.
For me it was very exciting to have caught a 30″er. It felt even better to see her swim away. that’s my $.02
i got me a 15 lb pike mounted.
dat 30 inch eye is yet elusive!!!!!! 
I dunno Glen. That’s what I thought also until I had a 30″er in my hands. Then the only thing I could think of is take a picture, get it measured and get er back in the soup.
For me it was very exciting to have caught a 30″er. It felt even better to see her swim away. that’s my $.02
My last fish of last ice season was a 30”+ walleye from LOW. It was stone dead coming out of the hole. Never flopped once. I’m thinking old age plus barotrauma from coming up from 30’ deep.
I took a pile of pics for a replica mount and brought the fish home and filleted it! I would have rather released it alive.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
