Mille Lacs Management Plan

The DNR is taking a survey from anglers about their management plan from 2021-2026. You can find the plan and the survey at the link below. My personal opinion and comments were primarily around keeping the lake open all season, even if only for Catch and Release. Transparency among DNR/GLIFWC negotiations (open them to media or silent 3rd party spectators), DNR monitoring of tribal netting harvest, and to stop using Hooking Mortality as a management tool as it is based on bad science (why the DNR continual has to alter their %’s) and is not used in management elsewhere. I believe these are all reasonable requests that should be the goal of the DNR that we fund and trust to manage our lake.

https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/millelacslake/community-conversations.html

Except they don’t manage Mille Lacs.
Thanks for posting Bigwerm.

You are correct. However if they don’t listen to their own Mille Lacs advisory committee what makes anybody think a survey will make any difference. This is just to show the legislators that they are listening. I don’t think it would make a bit of difference if it came back 100% on a question.

Just my opinion.

Ripjiggen wrote:

Except they don’t manage Mille Lacs.

Dutchboy wrote:

owever if they don’t listen to their own Mille Lacs advisory committee what makes anybody think a survey will make any difference. This is just to show the legislators that they are listening.

I don’t disagree at all, but I’d rather speak my piece and have it fall on deaf ears than not say anything at all and just complain online.

BigWerm wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Ripjiggen wrote:</div>
Except they don’t manage Mille Lacs.

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Dutchboy wrote:</div>
owever if they don’t listen to their own Mille Lacs advisory committee what makes anybody think a survey will make any difference. This is just to show the legislators that they are listening.

I don’t disagree at all, but I’d rather speak my piece and have it fall on deaf ears than not say anything at all and just complain online.

Good on you Werm. I was more poking a little fun than straight out complaining and not at you per say. Maybe a little complaint. Maybe I will voice my opinion to them in sign language.

I filled it out and voiced my opinion. It gave me a warm fuzzy feeling of satisfaction inside.

The DNR has not listened to any input, it is just a huge slap in the face to sportsmen to even ask anymore.

BigWerm wrote:

I don’t disagree at all, but I’d rather speak my piece and have it fall on deaf ears than not say anything at all and just complain online.

I won’t be fishing Mille Lacs anytime soon, hell likely never again. However that won’t keep me from complaining online. My voice will be heard just as much as those doing a online survey nobody will ever see.

Dutchboy wrote:

However that won’t keep me from complaining online. My voice will be heard just as much as those doing a online survey nobody will ever see.

Fill out the survey then, and continue to complain as I will . Theoretically the results will be looked at, even if ignored, but then there’s a record of it and a media member could request the results via FOIA request and challenge the DNR on why they didn’t heed their employers (us) request.

mark-bruzek wrote:

The DNR has not listened to any input, it is just a huge slap in the face to sportsmen to even ask anymore.

X2… Sadly. At the Advisory Committee the DNR said the Bands (GLIFWC) wanted an even lower quota.. At least the DNR held their ground.. Or so we’re told..

But I will fill out the Survey just in case it might actually go somewhere.

Ripjiggen wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>BigWerm wrote:</div>

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Ripjiggen wrote:</div>
Except they don’t manage Mille Lacs.

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Dutchboy wrote:</div>
owever if they don’t listen to their own Mille Lacs advisory committee what makes anybody think a survey will make any difference. This is just to show the legislators that they are listening.

I don’t disagree at all, but I’d rather speak my piece and have it fall on deaf ears than not say anything at all and just complain online.

Good on you Werm. I was more poking a little fun than straight out complaining and not at you per say. Maybe a little complaint. Maybe I will voice my opinion to them in sign language.

LOL I think they will get the message loud and clear.

IceNEyes1986 wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>mark-bruzek wrote:</div>
The DNR has not listened to any input, it is just a huge slap in the face to sportsmen to even ask anymore.

X2… Sadly. At the Advisory Committee the DNR said the Bands (GLIFWC) wanted an even lower quota.. At least the DNR held their ground.. Or so we’re told..

But I will fill out the Survey just in case it might actually go somewhere.

From what I have heard the quota number is the exact same as last year. With talks of one fish early and a closure in July. I guess maybe the point of the survey is to find out when people want the closure.

Ripjiggen wrote:

From what I have heard the quota number is the exact same as last year. With talks of one fish early and a closure in July. I guess maybe the point of the survey is to find out when people want the closure.

You are correct. They are looking at 150,000lbs of harvest. Leaving the average Joe with about 87,000lbs. They are saying the winter harvest was about 15,000lbs. They are expecting to have the first 2 weeks from opener a one fish limit between 21″-23″. Also, looking for a “planned” shutdown for the first 3 weeks in July. This is all tentative & hasn’t been made final. Just what I saw in a video from Steve Johnson (Johnson’s Portside). That is what they were told at the MILFAC Meeting last week.

IceNEyes1986 wrote:

You are correct. They are looking at 150,000lbs of harvest. Leaving the average Joe with about 87,000lbs. They are saying the winter harvest was about 15,000lbs. They are expecting to have the first 2 weeks from opener a one fish limit between 21″-23″. Also, looking for a “planned” shutdown for the first 3 weeks in July. This is all tentative & hasn’t been made final. Just what I saw in a video from Steve Johnson (Johnson’s Portside). That is what they were told at the MILFAC Meeting last week.

And I assume another season long night ban?

That is a safe assumption.

Thanks for the link Werm.

@gimruis Most likely…

BigWerm wrote:

I don’t disagree at all, but I’d rather speak my piece and have it fall on deaf ears than not say anything at all and just complain online.

X2 – Its better to have tried and Failed, than to have never tried at all !!!

fishthumper wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>BigWerm wrote:</div>
I don’t disagree at all, but I’d rather speak my piece and have it fall on deaf ears than not say anything at all and just complain online.

X2 – Its better to have tried and Failed, than to have never tried at all !!!

I agree, a few minutes of your time is easy to give if it could possibly matter or it’s something you care about.

To the other comments about the DNR Management, or not managing the lake…I agree. I truly don’t think the DNR has much more say in the lake’s management or quota system than any average Joe. The Bands have the power and until the MNDNR calls a spade a spade and ditches the “co-management” phrase, nothing will change. If I’m the MNDNR, I would publicize that this is dictated by the bands and take the blame off your own shoulders. There are plenty of conservative lawmakers who do not require a ton of effort to rally or fire up about this topic.

I do personally agree that the lake could sustain more harvest. I do not think the lake will ever be quite what it was decades ago before the boom of bass, some forage shortages, introduction of zebra mussels and clearer water, etc. A body of water can only handle so much biomass, and a lesser percentage of it today is walleyes than decades before.

While driving off Mille Lacs last weekend, I looked out and saw enough traffic and wheelhouses to populate a large city. The pressure alone that this lake sees from people and technology are going to be tough to overcome in the eyes of those making decisions. I think the absolute ceiling for this lake with regulated, legal harvest might…MIGHT be 1 fish for an entire season. I’d bet a pile of money there will never be a year again where the average angler can legally harvest 3 or 4 walleyes from Mille Lacs.

Maybe the DNR should sell a 1 day license for $150 for a 4 walleye limit. Keep the other license as is for limit of 1. Hell, they could grease GLIFWC a percentage.

buckybadger wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>fishthumper wrote:</div>

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>BigWerm wrote:</div>
I don’t disagree at all, but I’d rather speak my piece and have it fall on deaf ears than not say anything at all and just complain online.

X2 – Its better to have tried and Failed, than to have never tried at all !!!

I agree, a few minutes of your time is easy to give if it could possibly matter or it’s something you care about.

To the other comments about the DNR Management, or not managing the lake…I agree. I truly don’t think the DNR has much more say in the lake’s management or quota system than any average Joe. The Bands have the power and until the MNDNR calls a spade a spade and ditches the “co-management” phrase, nothing will change. If I’m the MNDNR, I would publicize that this is dictated by the bands and take the blame off your own shoulders. There are plenty of conservative lawmakers who do not require a ton of effort to rally or fire up about this topic.

I do personally agree that the lake could sustain more harvest. I do not think the lake will ever be quite what it was decades ago before the boom of bass, some forage shortages, introduction of zebra mussels and clearer water, etc. A body of water can only handle so much biomass, and a lesser percentage of it today is walleyes than decades before.

While driving off Mille Lacs last weekend, I looked out and saw enough traffic and wheelhouses to populate a large city. The pressure alone that this lake sees from people and technology are going to be tough to overcome in the eyes of those making decisions. I think the absolute ceiling for this lake with regulated, legal harvest might…MIGHT be 1 fish for an entire season. I’d bet a pile of money there will never be a year again where the average angler can legally harvest 3 or 4 <strong class=”ido-tag-strong”>walleyes from Mille Lacs.

Agree 100% with this. Also, I cant remember the last time I was checked or surveyed on how many fish I caught or kept on a particular day on the water, not sure if others see the same but their data is highly inaccurate IMO.

weedis wrote:

Also, I cant remember the last time I was checked or surveyed on how many fish I caught or kept on a particular day on the water, not sure if others see the same but their data is highly inaccurate IMO

I don’t know if you’re specifically referring to ice fishing, but the last 8-10 times I’ve been on Mille Lacs I’ve been surveyed. I fish the lake about 2-3 times every season which I don’t think is a lot. I actually can’t remember the last time I wasn’t asked questions by a surveyor. Several years at least. So based on my own experience, 100% of the time I fish, I’m interviewed which would make the data accurate.

If you use a public assess you have a pretty good chance of getting a creel survey or invasive inspection. Resorts and private harbors, rare.

I’ll add it is very rare to get checked by an actual CO. Both on the water or at any access.

-J.

buckybadger wrote:

If I’m the MNDNR, I would publicize that this is dictated by the bands and take the blame off your own shoulders.

Except the DNR leadership is appointed by the Governor, and the Governor (along with state politicians from both party’s) are owned by the tribe. Which is why we need public involvement, interest, and accountability as there is no one else working in our interest.

gimruis wrote:

I don’t know if you’re specifically referring to ice fishing, but the last 8-10 times I’ve been on Mille Lacs I’ve been surveyed. I fish the lake about 3-4 times every season which I don’t think is a lot.

This is really surprising, as I, like Weedis, haven’t been surveyed or checked on Mille Lacs in at least 10 years. That would be dozens of trips for me without a survey, both summer and winter. Usually starting super early or leaving at last call tho, so that may be why. Not that it really matters as Hooking Mortality is what they have been using to justify shutting it down.

BigWerm wrote:

This is really surprising

I primarily fish the east side of the lake, launching at Isle Bay, Cedar Creek, or Liberty Beach public access.

Jon Jordan wrote:

If you use a public assess you have a pretty good chance of getting a creel survey or invasive inspection. Resorts and private harbors, rare.

I’ll add it is very rare to get checked by an actual CO. Both on the water or at any access.

-J.

This is my experience as well. Been survey multiple times a year. I probably fish it more than most. See them at public access most weekends. There is anew CO that lives in the Garrison area. I have yet to meet this individual.

gimruis wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>weedis wrote:</div>
Also, I cant remember the last time I was checked or surveyed on how many fish I caught or kept on a particular day on the water, not sure if others see the same but their data is highly inaccurate IMO

I don’t know if you’re specifically referring to ice fishing, but the last 8-10 times I’ve been on Mille Lacs I’ve been surveyed. I fish the lake about 2-3 times every season which I don’t think is a lot. I actually can’t remember the last time I wasn’t asked questions by a surveyor. Several years at least. So based on my own experience, 100% of the time I fish, I’m interviewed which would make the data accurate.

Both, Its been at least 5 years since the last time I’ve been surveyed and that would include the public access’s. I guess we all have experienced differently.

I get checked and surveyed a couple times a year at cove bay access. I always fill they I didn’t even get a bite?🤔