MN-FISH 2024

To MN-FISH members and supporters—

Want you to know… we’re off to a good start in the new year. We have set our legislative priorities for the new session and we wanted to learn where DNR landed with our list. We also wanted to hear about DNR’s fishing-related priorities.

As a result, we —Garry Leaf, Dave Osborne, Tom Neustrom, Mark Holsten, ex director, and yours truly met recently with DNR Commissioner Sarah Strommen and some of her staff—Bob Meier, assistant commissioner; Dave Olfelt, fish and wildlife director; Katie Smith, director of eco/waters division. Also attending were two of our lobbyist team, Ian Marsh and Molly Jansen.

Briefly, MN-FISH goals in the coming legislative session is to seeking bonding dollars:

——$12 million to continue the boat access repair and development efforts

——$14.8 million to continue fixing our state fish hatcheries

——$2 million to create a new metro fish hatchery (location, acquisition, engineering) replacing the old St. Paul hatchery. A new metro facility will raise gamefish, conduct fish research and provide educational opportunities for schools and general public.

——Continued MN-FISH support to control or halt the advance of invasive carp swimming up the Mississippi River.

——Continued MN-FISH support for the Keep It Clean campaign to reduce litter/human waste left behind by ice anglers.
The DNR response to our legislative goals was positive, including replacing the old St. Paul hatchery. DNR officials also provided an update on their plans to utilize last year’s $98 million appropriation, which MN-FISH worked hard to secure last year.

These include:

$24 million to upgrade Waterville hatchery; $19 million for Crystal Springs trout facility; $12 million spread across hatchery system. Total: $55 million.

$5 million to improve, expand shore fishing sites at ‘’good fishing locations $38 million to repair, expand public water accesses DNR also said they have completed plans for multi-step actions to stop the invasive carp in the Mississippi.

While DNR and MN-FISH have accomplished much in the past year, we need to remember that DNR’s bonding requests may be reduced or not included in the governor’s own bonding wish list. Hence, DNR’s public support of OUR bonding requests may not happen. That said, MN-FISH intends to charge ahead anyway as long as our goals will help shorten the time between bites.

Good fishing,

P.S. Ask a fishing buddy to join us. The more we are; the more we can do.

Ron Schara,

MN-FISH President

I wonder if MN-FISH knows that there is a Federal Lawsuit (with a decision coming up this year) to list the Lake Sturgeon as endangered species? You would think they would at least devote just a pinch of effort to lobby against it. Do they care? I really don’t know. But it’s something that should at least be on their radar. If the Sturgeon is listed as endangered here’s what we can expect: “Once a species is listed as endangered, it’s unlawful to “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect” a member of the species, or to even attempt any of those actions, without a “take” permit from the listing federal agency. ”

https://biologicaldiversity.org/w/news/press-releases/lake-sturgeon-will-get-endangered-species-decision-in-2024-2021-09-15/?_gl=1*1w601fn*_gcl_au*Nzg3ODk3NjE1LjE3MDYwNDI3NTU.

https://www.kare11.com/article/news/state/minnesota-dnr-announces-how-it-will-use-149-million-in-funding/89-c847db45-50b9-4762-ba56-eee5a9a16069#:~:text=The%20DNR%20is%20devoting%20a,hatcheries%20will%20get%20%2412%20million.
So the DNR just gave a huge chunk of money to hatcheries, the anglers are pissed about the new litter laws already in place, shore fishing and access repair are getting the extra funding from the DNR. Does MN-FISH actually know whats going on or do they find out what the DNR is going to do, and then charge members money to “lobby” to get those things done?

Riverrat wrote:

Does MN-FISH actually know whats going on or do they find out what the DNR is going to do, and then charge members money to “lobby” to get those things done?

Increasingly seems like this, more than anything “grassroots for MN anglers”.

3Rivers wrote:

I wonder if MN-FISH knows that there is a Federal Lawsuit (with a decision coming up this year) to list the Lake Sturgeon as endangered species? You would think they would at least devote just a pinch of effort to lobby against it. Do they care? I really don’t know. But it’s something that should at least be on their radar.

That is wild. Sturgeon seem to be a huge success story, in MN at least, and certainly nowhere near endangered.

Would have been a lot cooler to dump all of that money into land buys for more public hunting land

Youbetcha wrote:

Would have been a lot cooler to dump all of that money into land buys for more public hunting land

There’s not enough already? According to the dnr there is 5.6 million acres of public land in mn.

Youbetcha wrote:

Would have been a lot cooler to dump all of that money into land buys for more public hunting land

It’s call MN-Fish….

Not called Ducks Unlimited, Pheasants Unlimited, Minnesota Deer Hunters Association, etc, etc.

B-man wrote:

It’s call MN-Fish….

Not called Ducks Unlimited, Pheasants Unlimited, Minnesota Deer Hunters Association, etc, etc.

I get that but its the DNRs dollars not MNFish…

I think I lost my bet. I had MN Fish as defunct and extinct by now…not still issuing generic objectives with no specifics that people can really latch on to whatsoever and feel good about.

I’m not trying to be a pessimist, but you have to give people specifics to get them excited and engaged.

What specific launches are getting upgraded/repaired?

How will Asian carp be combatted not just studied and documented? When will it start?

Where are all the fish from these hatcheries going to be stocked? Will the hatchery updates come with associated stocking increases or are the repairs just to hold things steady?

Where are the specific shoreline angling improvements located?

Not a mention of Minnesota Legacy program. Seems like millions of dollars going some where.

BigWerm wrote:

That is wild. Sturgeon seem to be a huge success story, in MN at least, and certainly nowhere near endangered.

They are taking it pretty seriously over in WI

https://www.jsonline.com/story/sports/outdoors/2024/01/22/bill-would-keep-lake-sturgeon-in-wisconsin-off-endangered-species-list/72312705007/

Sturgeon are as endangered as pigeons in the upper Midwest

If it’s a problem in other regions let the local regulations address it.

https://www.wearegreenbay.com/top-stories/hundreds-gather-in-stockbridge-to-try-to-save-sturgeon-spearing/?fbclid=IwAR3mB_dercO85ACM5CWfEQHiAaaASiajZAkV1fm7rdKOM-jI8BVq85AXNSY

There’s some fantastic points being made in the article I linked.

I’m concerned about the Sturgeon thing. I love our periodic sturgeon trips and I know there are good people on here and businesses like The Royal Dutchman in Baudette that depend on Stugeon fishing for a big part of their living. It absolutely needs to be a state-managed resource – down to the local level. I guess I’ve never understood the spearing thing, but that should be Wisconsin’s issue. They’re doing really well in MN watersheds where they’re actively managed and we even allow some keeping. Talk about going backwards.

buckybadger wrote:

not still issuing generic objectives with no specifics that people can really latch on to whatsoever and feel good about.

I think this is spot on. Stopped at the MN fish booth at the ice show and voiced my displeasure at the organization never once reaching out to members to see how we feel about what issues MN fish should pursue. Just got a blank look back and handed me a flyer touting success’s that the DNR was probably going to get with the budget surplus regardless if MN fish was there or not. Not impressed with MN fish.

ThunderLund78 wrote:

I guess I’ve never understood the spearing thing

I haven’t either. Sturgeon take many, many years to reach reproductive maturity so why are we spearing them. If the goal is to re-establish their population to a self-sustaining level, we should be releasing all of them. Not putting barbs in their back.

I believe here in MN you can keep one that is a designated size during the limited open season on the Rainy but you have to register it just like you do with a deer, bear, or turkey so they can keep close track. Honestly I’m not sure how many people actually do that either. Seems like everyone who is actively targeting them releases them.

Completely off topic, but there were x1405 sturgeon speared in the 2 week long season on the Winnebago system last year, ranging from a 177# fish, down to the smallest at 9#.

I’m originally from WI and a transplant to MN and I don’t really understand the logic behind the spearing either. Yes, it’s a cultural and economic thing for that specific area…but hook and line angling for a world class sturgeon fishery that is sustainable for generations could be even more lucrative in my estimation.

gimruis wrote:

Sturgeon take many, many years to reach reproductive maturity so why are we spearing them. If the goal is to re-establish their population to a self-sustaining level, we should be releasing all of them. Not putting barbs in their back.

I believe here in MN you can keep one that is a designated size during the limited open season on the Rainy

Because they always have, and the Lake Winnebago population has been stable and increasing for 50+ years with the spearing harvest. My understanding is they were never decimated there, like other sturgeon watersheds. Meateater and The Hunting Public both have great videos on the tradition, and show how big a part of their culture it is. Along with driving millions of dollars to the local community as well as the WI DNR for management. In MN we are quickly approaching that level as well. And putting them on the endangered species list would likely eliminate even CnR fishing.

https://biologicaldiversity.org/w/news/press-releases/lake-sturgeon-will-get-endangered-species-decision-in-2024-2021-09-15/#:~:text=CHICAGO%E2%80%94%20A%20federal%20court%20has,under%20the%20Endangered%20Species%20Act.

So the US Fish and Wildlife Service has until June of 2024 to submit the status of Lake Sturgeon. They can call it endangered, or threatened or whatever. This link is to the people who brought the lawsuit. Apparently they are stupid. I’m not in the great lakes, or the Mississippi watersheds and we have native and introduced sturgeon. They are reproducing now. One big push has been to remove all the knee wall dams and old dams for mills to open the whole river up.

I am an admitted Sturgeon lover. I spend a big chunk of the year guiding for them and they have my undivided attention most of the year, whether I’m out on the water or not. I can’t even imagine how many have been caught in my presence. Thousands for sure. They are important to me and I want to protect them any way that I can.

Having said that…

Fishing and the harvest of fish, go hand in hand. Finding that sustainable balance is a tricky one and comes with many opinions and traditions. While I personally don’t see a “need” to be spearing or eating these big old fish, I’m quite certain at the same time, there are other groups questioning my “need” to catch them at all, and this lawsuit is a great example of that. I respect a well managed fishery and clearly that is what is happening in places like Winnebago. I mean, if the intention is harvesting a fish, then spearing is a pretty effective and humane way to do it. What I really hate to see though, is it turning into a circus with fish hanging from poles and across tailgates and stuck into snowbanks, with blood trails strewn about. I’m not a fan of that at all.

While they state overfishing as one of the reasons for the population decline, they fail to mention that was unregulated commercial fishing a century ago. Aside from the strict 1-per-year limit they allow on the Rainy, I venture to say that there’s virtually ZERO hooking mortality. They’re an incredibly resilient fish if their environment is good. Making them endangered and banning fishing takes the spotlight away from the miraculous local conservation successes, in fact it creates a perception of failure when we’re clearly moving on a positive direction. I don’t hear them proposing to remove dams, which is really what limits their expansion into historically native watersheds–not a few guys who mainly C&R fish them. Agree that while the numbers are still increasing in WI, and the spearing season contributes to conservation, it’s a bad aesthetic.

I’m sure the “Center for Biological Diversity” based in Tucson, AZ is science based and very plugged into the Lake Sturgeon fisheries of the great lakes and Mississippi watersheds. Their FB page doesn’t really have much about it. They do have some posts about the pearlshell sturgeon of Louisianna. All this stuff is exhausting, it’s too bad we don’t have a fisheries group representing MN anglers to take this stuff on…..

I was hoping 3Rivers would comment on this as he is the one person who has real world experience here in the realm of sturgeon fishing.

Thanks

ThunderLund78 wrote:

While they state overfishing as one of the reasons for the population decline, they fail to mention that was unregulated commercial fishing a century ago. Aside from the strict 1-per-year limit they allow on the Rainy, I venture to say that there’s virtually ZERO hooking mortality. They’re an incredibly resilient fish if their environment is good. Making them endangered and banning fishing takes the spotlight away from the miraculous local conservation successes, in fact it creates a perception of failure when we’re clearly moving on a positive direction. I don’t hear them proposing to remove dams, which is really what limits their expansion into historically native watersheds–not a few guys who mainly C&R fish them. Agree that while the numbers are still increasing in WI, and the spearing season contributes to conservation, it’s a bad aesthetic.

I agree mostly with the hooking mortality part, except in areas that see the higher water temperatures.

Down here on Pool 4, it’s not uncommon to see sturgeon die offs related to warm water in the summer. 6 or 7 years ago we contacted a local CO who came out and examined a huge number of sturgeon that washed ashore (I’m talking probably 50+ fish that were all good sized. The feedback we received was that it was likely due to the sudden spike in temps and that the summer temps on Pool 4 were hard on the I’d have to assume that some of the fish here that are caught and yanked from warmer water have a hooking mortality rate that’s higher than on the Rainy. The few I have caught have been completely by accident and resulted in a lengthy battle to get them to the boat.

The sturgeon issue is at the federal level. There’s nothing the state can do about it, and MN Fish only lobbies at the state level.

The Wisconsin article is about a member of Congress introducing a bill at the federal level.

The 2024 deadline on the sturgeon issue is for the USFWS to issue their determination. I don’t know anything about that process, but it’s clear that the matter is currently in the USFWS’s hands. Here’s the relevant court decision from 2021 (which relates to the advocacy group’s 2018 filing) that sets the 6/30/24 deadline: https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/lake-sturgeon.pdf

It would be terrible if sturgeon were listed as an endangered species in MN or WI at least. I 100% oppose it. If there’s an organized effort to oppose it out there, I’d donate to it. MN Fish ain’t it probably for a lot of reasons.

They’re taking down dams where I’m at Thunderlund. They took down one hydro dam that had a coal plant with it, They removed the knee wall at Ottertail Lake into the Ottertail River, Removed 2 dams from the Pelican River, and all future projects on the Hydro dams here will have to address fish movement. Probably not the end of the world since most of those electric dams produce relatively little power. The plant with the coal plant being removed will probably have the biggest impact just because it dropped the temps pretty far in the river. I’ve never really considered sturgeon to be an abundant fish so seeing them reproduce naturally here make me think they are doing well. Maybe they even eat the zebra mussels.

This whole MNFish thing seems like more of a money grab for those are work for them than actually trying to do anything regarding legislation or management. I mean, if they are literally asking for dollars toward things the DNR already has plans to do what in fact are they actually doing?

If the Feds somehow pull off a sturgeon shut down there’s going to be A LOT of people fishing “catfish and carp” instead…Myself included

And a lot of Wisconsinites heading to Washington with their spears B-man.

ThunderLund78 wrote:

I don’t hear them proposing to remove dams,

Maybe I’m just tuned in to dam removals.
The Crow River and the MN River are just a couple that have lost damS in the last ten years.
Not to mention someone’s great idea to make the Mpls/St Paul portion of the Mississippi back into a “wild river” by removing dams.

If a person looks nation wide, removing dams are happening all the time. (which I hear is good for the fish-jury is still out on that)

Yep, Drayton Dam on the Red River came out this year too.

MN-FISH certainly can influence things at a Federal level. I’m sure it’s just way down the list of priorities at this time. It would be nice to know that it’s at least on their radar though.

In related news…

New Partnership with Suzuki Marine

The night before the Minneapolis Boat show opened, Dan’s Southside Marine, utilizing Suzuki’s “4 for 2” motor recycling program, named MN-FISH as the program’s first-ever benefactor. At the Suzuki booth, Dan Chesky Jr. from Dan’s Southside Marine and executives from Suzuki presented MN-FISH with a donation to support our continued efforts to improve access to Minnesota’s lakes and rivers and expanding fishing opportunities.

On the same night, MN-FISH leadership attended the National Marine Manufacturer’s awards reception where Minnesota’s own Premier Pontoon received the Innovation award for their Premier Angler model.

Our own Tom Neustrom was a panelist the MNDNR Round table talking about the new DNR Minnow report. amd technology, specifically forward-facing sonar, and its potential impacts on our fishery.

Happy to be proven wrong on the dam removals! I think it’s a great thing. But again, seems like we’re moving in the right direction and we have more than sustainable fisheries in many places.