Browsky, you sound like you are a member of the MN Darkhouse Angling Association
I agree with you blank with the message behind this bill. I would add one thing, I think it is also to get rid of muskies all together because it would drop the size limit down to 20” or larger state wide. The southern zone for pike is 24” min. It would also stop stocking muskies anywhere in Otter Tail County for 5 year.
Not a muskie guy at all. Have caught a few, biggest is 44″. Have never really had to much of an opinion on them. But it seems like in the lake’s I’ve fished over the years the panfish population really can benefit from their presence. No scientific data. I don’t target them, but don’t think they have a negative affect in general.
Further proof to the goals and roots of this legislation… take a quick look at the individual testifiers and the organization they represent either supporting or opposing SF3319. Note the individual property owners do not represent the beliefs of anyone but themselves. Also of note, if you have the time and are looking for a good laugh – watch the testimonials of the supporters, some of them are hilarious!
Opposition:
Co-Chair – Minnesota Muskie & Pike Alliance
Vice President – Anglers for Habitat
Member – Minnesota Muskie & Pike Alliance
President – Fish & Wildlife Alliance
President – Minnesota Conservation Federation
President – Anglers for Habitat
Assistant Commissioner – MN Department of Natural Resources
Supporters:
Lobbyist – Minnesota for Family Fishing (anti-muskie stocking group)
Lobbyist – Minnesota Darkhouse Association
Director – Minnesota Lakes and Rivers (formerly called Minnesota Seasonal Recreational Property Owners Coalition)
Property Owner – Lake Vermilion
Property Owner – Gull Lake
Property Owner – West Battle Lake
Property Owner – Gull Lake
Vice President – Waterville Lakes Association
Property Owner – Gull Lake
Property Owner – Otter Tail Lake
sf3319.jpg
I was curious as to what “Minnesota for Family Fishing (anti-muskie stocking group)” is so I tried Googling it. The only thing I found was this address, but didn’t work. Funny that the little description says they want the DNR to use science, yet they are supporting this bill.
Minnesotans for family fishing & HEALTHY LAKES Dedicated to …
minnesotansforfamilyfishing.weebly.com/
Minnesota residents want the DNR to use science when determining fisheries policy.
Can someone link to the DNR studies related to this issue? Particularly 3 studies on the DNR website in regards to Mille Lacs.
You know know there is video of these groups testifying available to watch.
Anyone really interested in what was said? /
You know know there is video of these groups testifying available to watch.
Anyone really interested in what was said? /
I watched the video but can’t find the link to it now. It’s over an hour long but worth watching if you have any interest in this bill. Personally I think all MN fishermen should be taking notice.
I was curious as to what “Minnesota for Family Fishing (anti-muskie stocking group)” is so I tried Googling it. The only thing I found was this address, but didn’t work. Funny that the little description says they want the DNR to use science, yet they are supporting this bill.
Minnesotans for family fishing & HEALTHY LAKES Dedicated to …
minnesotansforfamilyfishing.weebly.com/
Minnesota residents want the DNR to use science when determining fisheries policy.
Yeah the MFFHL was created in the last couple years and if you look at their website the mission statements all revolve around reducing muskie lakes in MN.
I just looked at the bill quickly I think all Minnesotans should read it. A moratorium till 2023 to do studies to see the effect on stocking. Seems like someone is not satisfied with the information being given to them from the DNR.
Seems like someone is not satisfied with the information being given to them from the DNR.
Ha…now doesn’t that sound all too familiar. 
They claim that no research has returned data proving that muskies ‘do no harm’ to other sport fish. Well the DNR also doesn’t have research that walleyes, bluegills, crappies, perch, bass, trout…do no harm to other sport fish. Bazinga
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>1hl&sinker wrote:</div>
Seems like someone is not satisfied with the information being given to them from the DNR.Ha…now doesn’t that sound all too familiar.
Darn tootin 
You just hate it when someone does not fall in line with you, don’t ya 
All this fuss still after 1-6 sections were deleted.
Sure glad I did not fall in line with the MNDNR several years back with that AIS law debacle.
You know know there is video of these groups testifying available to watch.
Anyone really interested in what was said? /
Warning: Hard to watch, you may lose a few brain cells in the process
The video shows the amount of personal interest associated with lakeshore ownership in the state. It will always be non-ownership vs those who own lakeshore when it comes to managing the resource.
There will be another bill next year and the year after and the year after that. It’s like the stadium and school funding people. They keep coming after you until you quit paying attention.
Thanks ANDY for the clarification I apologize for the confusion I was a bit sleep deprived but no drinky drink. 
Uninc thanks for the post I will watch it a bit later and I’m sure it will be interesting. Interested with what MN lakes and Rivers has to say. They were for the AIS law in 2015 that required a 30 mn test to operate a boat in Mn.
Dutchboy you hit it on the head. We have to be vigilant in watching whats going on. They are small cells of them but for reason they seem to get some power behind them.
Walleyestudent thank you for the thread, these are what we need.
Lots of loose rambling from Senator Ingebrightsen in the beginning of that video. To me, that shows that he’s reaching for straws to come up with solid reasoning to support his own bill. All of those who spoke after him at least spoke their opinions in a clear and organized manner.
Also cool to see that 
supports muskies 
All this fuss still after 1-6 sections were deleted.
If you want the moon, ask for the stars. Sections 1-6 were nothing more than political BS in an attempt to make section 7 look like a “compromise”. Section 7-Subdivision 1 was the only intended goal all along, and it has been for 3+ years now.
Section 7: Stop stocking muskies in Otter Tail County lakes, and then study how stocking muskies affects said lakes.
So the variable of the study is muskie stocking, but before doing the study we first need to remove that variable. In what world is that good science?
Also we should note the headline of this thread is miss-leading. It was one individual leading the charge with the bill. The “Minnesota Legislature” as a whole had nothing to do with this. In fact several were very opposed.
This should be the final embarrassment for Ingebrightsen. 
Time for him to collect his cash and ride into the sun-set.
tswobada, I think you’re absolutely right. Sections 1-6 were so ridiculous and even Ingebrightsen didn’t even address them during that hearing. He was only about stop stocking and doing more studies, and his reasoning for needing more studies because the minimum size limit was changed to 54″ is a weak reasoning.
Warning: Hard to watch, you may lose a few brain cells in the process
<div class=”oembed-wrap”><div class=”fluid-width-video-wrapper” style=”padding-top: 56.2353%;”><iframe src=”https://www.youtube.com/embed/cd-yravvKqY?feature=oembed” frameborder=”0″ allow=”autoplay; encrypted-media” allowfullscreen=”” id=”fitvid141979″></iframe></div></div>
MN Tax Payers just paid this committee for an hour of their time to listen to stories about children being attacked and 7 lb walleyes getting half eaten.
Can we send that bill to Senator Ingebrigtsen? How many taxpayer dollars is he going to waste?
And now for the serious question… How big were these 26″ walleyes BEFORE the muskies ate half of them?!?! 52″ by my math
Also we should note the headline of this thread is miss-leading. It was one individual leading the charge with the bill. The “Minnesota Legislature” as a whole had nothing to do with this. In fact several were very opposed.
Sadly the title of this thread was taken from the original STRIB headline. Journalism or Sensationalism?
I have read several threads like this on several different web sites. The thing they all share is no postings on the position Muskie Inc. takes on things of this nature.
When there is any discussions on guns in this country the NRA is front and center leading the charge. Where is Muskie Inc.?
Next time you guys are scratching out a check to MI you might want to ask yourselves that question. Seems the national boys are leaving it to the local chapters to fight the fights. 
When there is any discussions on guns in this country the NRA is front and center leading the charge. Where is Muskie Inc.?
Pure speculation on my part, but every time this type of legislation comes around MI because a spectacle in the spotlight as one of the contributing forces (like the NRA) in forcing muskies down the collective throats of folks who don’t want it. So, by that virtue I have a feeling they are trying to lay low on this a bit, but trust me they have their fingers in getting the word out about this bill and educate the musky supporters. FB, Twitter, other messageboards, etc all had recognized Musky Inc brethren alerting their “followers” and what to do, who to contact, etc. It would be my belief that they are letting their members do the talking and nothing officially from MI. Just my $.02 from that I have seen and I cannot say I blame them.
two quick thoughts…
most of that bill was intentionally outrageous, as fodder to be dropped through the amendment process and create the impression of being reasonable and compromising. don’t be fooled, this bill has always been about the portions that remain for “potential inclusion” in an omnibus environmental bill: 5-year moratorium in Otter Tail County and an under-funded “study” of vague purpose. and you can never overlook the political theatre involved to stir up support from potential donors, etc. for the next campaign.
i am a volunteer for Muskies Inc., (I do the photo sections in the magazine) but I do not speak on their behalf in any capacity whatsoever.
i am aware that non-profit organizations such as Muskies Inc need to proceed very carefully on political issues. they can advocate on issues, but cannot appear to campaign for/against any particular person or they risk loss of non-profit status. Muskies Inc. has been engaged in a long process to fix some issues with their IRS status, plus the organization’s President was out of so country on an extended vacation when this arose, things that may have impacted the speed or visibility of their involvement. the larger (and more important, imho) political fights are ahead, since this one was mostly “sturm und drang” anyway.
I just looked at the bill quickly I think all Minnesotans should read it. A moratorium till 2023 to do studies to see the effect on stocking. Seems like someone is not satisfied with the information being given to them from the DNR.
For those interested, Ingebrigtsen has apparently finally gotten his way. And no, its not to do an actual scientific study(anyone who actually believed that Ingebrigtsen was interested in science just hasn’t been paying attention), they’ve stolen $100,000 from the legacy fund to do a survey about how people feel about fish stocking. No actual science will be used because science doesn’t support Mr. Ingebrigtsen and Mr. Majkrzak’s stances so they refuse to use any actual scientific methods. Instead propaganda, lying, intimidation and they even went so far as to somehow tamper with the WBLLA’s website to help push their insane bill. Sadly it appears to actually be working.
No actual science will be used because science doesn’t support Mr. Ingebrigtsen and Mr. Majkrzak’s stances so they refuse to use any actual scientific methods. Instead propaganda, lying, intimidation and they even went so far as to somehow tamper with the WBLLA’s website to help push their insane bill. Sadly it appears to actually be working.
I have seen them lie to a group of people who didn’t care if muskies were stocked to hating muskies. They also asked if anyone who was in strong favor to stock muskies to leave. This is not good.
they’ve stolen $100,000 from the legacy fund to do a survey about how people feel about fish stocking.
These things are so frustrating. The Legislature has cut funding from the DNR because they get legacy money and now they are stealing it for a bogus survey. Hope they tell the people being survived they will not be stocking any walleyes.
My guess is that once the results of the survey come in to Mr. Ingebrigtsen, he’ll once again wallow in denial and claim that the survey was biased and that we should spend another couple hundred thousand doing a new survey. You know, the exact same way he rejects the scientific studies that don’t support his claim that muskies eat everything in a lake. It will be more wasted money and we’ll be right back to where we started. People like Ingebrigtsen and Majkrzak can’t be reasoned with, they will keep wasting time, money and resources until no one wants to argue with them any longer.
He is relentless and very calculating. This new bill not only robs the Legacy fund for a worthless survey, but also states that there be a ban on musky stocking in Ottertail County and “any money saved from stocking muskies shall be used to stock walleyes” within the county.
So… What do you suppose is his end game with that? Well, its easy to surmise that they will do DNR or other fisheries surveys on those lakes during and after the stocking ban and they may show variance in walleye abundance due to the dramatically increase stocking efforts so they would attribute that not to the increase in stocking, but rather the lack of musky stocking…
They are corrupt and using bullying tactics to get “their” agenda met.
Where can I find a copy of this bill that passed?
And what is this survey going to read. {would you rather stock only walleye or only muskies in lakes?}
Can we find a copy of this survey? Are they only going to do these surveys on lakes without muskies in them so they don’t ask the wrong person what they think?
THIS IS BS!
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
