Mille Lacs Openor' Slot thoughts…

Not looking to get into a back n forth here but what are everyone’s thoughts on what the slot will be (or should…) on this gem of a lake this Spring? We (and the DNR…) now know that based on the incredible Winter fishing we are having this season that the lake is loaded with fish and there are different classes of fish being caught. With 29 of 30 fish being released (creel survey data…) the biomass of walleye is incredible going into the Spring. I think we will see a very conservative approach (welcome to Minnesota!) but would love to see a 2 fish limit with only 1 fish able to be above 17″ (similar to what Red is doing now)…RR

I would be shocked after coming off of two summer seasons that closed early. I’m sticking with my earlier prediction of another C&R season but with a much bigger quota that will avoid a closure.

I would think the allotment would need to be back to the old days of multiple hundreds of thousands of pounds for them to allow anyone to keep fish during the summer.

If they do let folks keep 1 or 2.. I would like to see them move the “harvest able” slot moved a little bit one way or another.. most likely down a little bit or open it up larger to avoid having a giant hole in the year classes after repeated harvesting of 19-21. Even if they made it 1 fish 17″-21 or 1 over 28″ it might spread things out a little.

I dunno.. would be fine with C & R also. I dont keep fish , so just as long as they let me FISH.. I am good. I enjoy catching the BIG fish.. that’s why I come up.

I would like to see it change some what. All though, we are going in the right decision it seems for now…. Between the DNR, native American tribes, and the sports men/women, we need to reach a happy medium… I don’t think that will ever happen. But now lake of the woods is on a fast decline to what mlicas has become. For lake of the woods I would like to see 4 fish. A combination of 4 fish. No more then two walleye. Slot size I don’t know. But something needs to be done soon. Also would like to see a law for how many houses/ permanent, resorts can put out. A limit of some kind. Also would like to see all resorts that are taking from the big lakes help with stocking. You know try putting fish back in the lake for a better long term future of the Fisheries. My family live all around lake of the woods and they are starting to see the effects. It’s scary they say.

While many see promising signs of a comeback, I still see more of the same. Decimating one year class only to preserve another. The epic 2013 year class is being protected far too much. Once those fish reach 20″ the DNR is going to protect them into another crash in 5-10 years.

Too many 20″+ fish results in a biomass imbalance that causes an unstable fishery.

If the DNR doesn’t start to harvest that year class in the next two years, history will repeat itself for the 3rd or 4th time.

The DNR is fully aware of this but the political influence is too great to make a good science based decision.

Yep exactly what biggill said! I think It should go to a 2 fish limit of 16-20″

1 fish – any size!

This would be simple, effective, and spread out the limited harvest while protecting most fish of all sizes. Some anglers would choose to practice C & R mainly, others may look for one larger 3-4lb fish to get the most out of their “limit”, while others may take home a smaller 14-16″ fish that is the best table fare.

The idea of protecting certain classes of fish is one of the many factors that hurt Mille Lacs the most. Unfortunately any limit, slot, etc. imaginable cannot fix everything. Walleye populations will continue to slowly fluctuate (likely decline) due to increased pressure/hook mortality, higher water temps each summer, invasive species, growing biomass competition from bass and other predators, etc. etc.

I’d like to see either a 2 fish limit, 1 over 23″ and 1 under 18″, or a 1 fish limit with 18-23″ protected slot. And a fully closed season until the spawn is completed or opener arrives….

1 or 2 15-22 keep it simple.

slipbob_nick wrote:

1 or 2 15-22 keep it simple.

I Like it…

Why does everyone want to “protect” certain fish with a slot? Slots are not replicated naturally and have proven to be a failure on Mille Lacs. When humans intervene, Mille Lacs has showcased the issues that occur. A 1 fish limit, with absolutely no size restrictions would spread the limited harvest. Any slot on this lake will throw off the balance. A 5 year commitment to a 1 fish limit with no restrictions would yield the best results, with options for anglers and a balanced walleye population.

Does anyone really go up even this year thinking they’re gonna bring home a fish? Not anyone I know.

Word is finally getting around that catching fish can just be a fun activity to enjoy with friends and family and not a meat haul.

If any lake in this nation could showcase the potential that a CPR lake has to offer it’s this one. Keep it catch and release forever IMO. Pretty much been that way for years anyways right:???:

Where u been? All my neighbors including myself luv to go out catch some walleye have a fish fry! We hail from the lake that’s your opinon,go to whitecap libertybeach talk to them about your opinon laugh you out of the bar dude.

buckybadger wrote:

1 fish – any size!

PERFECT!!!

Catch and release all day all time for me. I’m voting for another year of C&R. Incredible fishery.

An email I received from PERM. After the incredible fishing this Winter it looks like another Summer of C/R. The Indians have won…

Mille Lacs ‘catch and release’—again

Isle, February 15, 2017–Last night, while attending the Mille Lacs Fisheries Advisory Committee Meeting, I heard the head of DNR Fisheries Don Pereira announce to the committee and public in attendance that Mille Lacs again will be catch and release for the 2017 open water season.

He pointed out that negotiations with the tribes weren’t going very well because they are mad about non-tribal anglers going over our 2016 quota. We must remember that 2016 regulations were catch and release only, so quotas are made-up hooking mortality numbers. NOT ONE fish was allowed to be harvested by non-tribal anglers.

Pereira admitted that the issues are political and not being made with biology as the determining factor. My question would be “will 2017 regs be a kiss and make up year”?

The DNR pointed out that there is a spike in angler activity in the last few weeks of July, which boosts hooking mortality. But this is discounted by most people on the Committee as they are on the lake daily and don’t see enough boats. For example, one Committee member who sells live bait said that the day after the 4th of July weekend his sales of live bait dropped like a box of rocks. So where does the DNR get these numbers?

Governor Mark Dayton ordered stocking in Mille Lacs last year. But the DNR team last night admitted it is only being used for research data and not to add fish to the lake. I sit there representing PERM as an observer wondering how these resorters and other business people are going to make it. Their deep-rooted livelihoods are at stake. So many of these people have become good friends and it pains me to see this happening to them in the name of politics.

Is this the end of the story? NO. The 1855 Treaty is now being disputed in the Crow Wing County court. The 1855 Treaty ceded territory includes Mille Lacs Lake, the Brainerd Lakes area, Winni, Leech, Lake Bemidji, and everything in between. If history holds true, some federal judge will give the White Earth tribe the same harvest rights as Mille Lacs tribe has. The map of 1855 treaty area is at perm.org. Look it up.

Now is the time to stand up for the Mille Lacs area and the state of Minnesota. Tribal co-management is not working. The Governor and MN DNR are responsible for the natural resources being regulated for all citizens. But it looks like the tail is wagging the dog.

Please take the time to share this email. Then contact Governor Dayton, DNR Commissioner Landwehr ([email protected]), and your House and Senate members and ask them to take the action required to iron this mess out. (More info at perm.org)

Thanks,
Doug

Doug Meyenburg,
President, PERM

WOW… Catch and release I am fine if thats what is needed Biologically .. but to just come out and FINALLY admit that its not based on any Biology, and solely politically……..

I guess at least they quit the whole “its what the lake needs”, “population crash” BS they have been telling everyone for the last few years.

sktrwx2200 wrote:

WOW… Catch and release I am fine if thats what is needed Biologically .. but to just come out and FINALLY admit that its not based on any Biology, and solely politically……..

I guess at least they quit the whole “its what the lake needs”, “population crash” BS they have been telling everyone for the last few years.

Yep….bingo! I had to wonder, when the hooking mortality is at it’s lowest…through the ice, you can keep one. When hooking mortality is at it’s highest, warm open water season…gotta throw it back. Biologically then, wouldn’t it make more sense to release them all when they have the greatest chance of survival and allow the one “keeper” when they statistically have the greatest chance of hooking mortality??

Ya know…I’m just not surprised!

I wasn’t there so I don’t know specifically what was said; however the reasoning I have heard for the closure was that the female walleyes from the 2013 year class had not reaching spawning maturity yet. This means that they won’t be included in the spawning biomass until the Spring of 2018.

Will

What a freaking disaster!

This is exactly what many of us predicted last year when Govenor Goofy broke the law and allowed the season to remain open after hitting quota. I’m guessing this is only the beginning. The tribes will sue and win millions in damages. The Minnesota tax payers will be footing the bill.

#IMPEACH DAYTON NOW

-J

I’m glad this came out in time for us to make plans, somewhere else.

Wish the Gov’s opener was on ML. Would love to see the Gov and entourage on ML C&R’ing all by themselves.

The lake itself has a nice biomass of walleye right now. Based on last Summers fishing and this past Winters fishing the lake is healthy. The part that none of us should forget is that decisions concerning this lake are being made to appease (and not urine-off…) the Indian Nation. Sound fact and hard data have nothing to do with the fact that it will be a C/R situation again this Summer. It is strictly political in nature thus some heads should roll but will not. Sad really…RR

Thinking about this a little more, if the tribes are using this as a bargaining chip to get something else, the gov’t agree to whatever the tribe asks but give it to the local businesses instead.

Kyhl wrote:

I’m glad this came out in time for us to make plans, somewhere else.

Wish the Gov’s opener was on ML. Would love to see the Gov and entourage on ML C&R’ing all by themselves.

Honestly these rules are encouraging me to go to ML. I’ve been up there 3 times this winter, spent plenty of money in the area, and won’t hesitate when I get a chance to get back up there again. I can count on one hand the number of times in the last twenty years I’ve been up there before this year.

We’re never going to change the treaties, but this lake and the politics that go with it may be the start to hopefully changing the mindset of walleye anglers. Not every person needs to take home a cooler full of fish to have a successful trip and have fun.

What percentage of fish caught in the last year were in the slot to keep? 10%, 20%, 2%?

If people are to keep one let’s say, what size is there to take from that’s a healthy class size that wouldn’t hurt the future of the walleye population?

nhamm wrote:

What percentage of fish caught in the last year were in the slot to keep? 10%, 20%, 2%?

I’ve heard 1:20 or 5%, but I’ve not caught one all winter and I’ve caught a few more than 20 fish. I’ve probably gotten 6 that we’re within a 1/4″ of 18″.

nhamm wrote:

If people are to keep one let’s say, what size is there to take from that’s a healthy class size that wouldn’t hurt the future of the walleye population?

I’d be happy with a 1 fish 17-17.75″

nhamm wrote:

What percentage of fish caught in the last year were in the slot to keep? 10%, 20%, 2%?

If people are to keep one let’s say, what size is there to take from that’s a healthy class size that wouldn’t hurt the future of the walleye population?

Last year from Jan 1, 2016 until December 31, 2016 my buddies and I probably caught 150 walleye’s roughly, and 1 was keeper in the lower slot. I would say 80% of those were 13-17″, 10% were less than 13″ and 10% were over 17″. In my opinion there are huge year classes from 2013-14 in that 13-17″ range, and there will need to be a significant harvest of those year classes in the next year or two if we want to prevent another huge bubble.

munchy wrote:

Honestly these rules are encouraging me to go to ML. I’ve been up there 3 times this winter, spent plenty of money in the area, and won’t hesitate when I get a chance to get back up there again. I can count on one hand the number of times in the last twenty years I’ve been up there before this year.

We’re never going to change the treaties, but this lake and the politics that go with it may be the start to hopefully changing the mindset of walleye anglers. Not every person needs to take home a cooler full of fish to have a successful trip and have fun.

That’s great, except anglers weren’t the problem on ML. Management was the problem, and continues to be the problem. I suggest reading some on the recent crash. The problem was young of year fry not surviving to year 1. Anglers weren’t the ones taking year one fish. Bigger fish were eating the year one fish.

If they are not careful, they are on a direct path to repeat that problem. That is the definition of insanity.

Werm and Kyle hit the nail on the head… We need to find a way to work within the treaty management system to avoid the population imbalances that out extreme pressure on the baitfish. The reason fishing has been so good is these fish, especially 2013 year class, are hungry. My belief is that a limited ammount of harvest of those fish would actually be best for the long term health of the fishery.

Will

Werm and Kyle hit the nail on the head… We need to find a way to work within the treaty management system to avoid the population imbalances that out extreme pressure on the baitfish. The reason fishing has been so good is these fish, especially 2013 year class, are hungry. My belief is that a limited ammount of harvest of those fish would actually be best for the long term health of the fishery.

Will