Public Input Requested and Needed

We’ve all complained on line about the differing regulations between state on the border waters.

Now is the time to click and start this rock moving.

“The DNR wants to hear from anglers about how they feel about the three-pool regulation and seeking common regulations on the entire river in the three states, Stauffer said.”

Just send and email to the address here with your comments for or against and let the DNR’s know.

Your email can be as simple as “I would like to see common boarder water regulations” or as in-depth and specific as you like.

Now is your time Joe Fisherman.

[email protected]

Does it matter if we are from WI and send the message? I’m all for it.
Shawn

If a person is from NY and fish these waters they want to hear from you.

I have opinions on several things but will the Wisconsin DNR take into consideration anything that is brought up on this.

I’ve talked to several wardens on the ten fish limit, which I think is good, on the three pools and I was told WDNR would never go along with it.

Jim I wish I had a crystal ball to answer that with.

I can say that both MN and WI have been directed to make their laws easier to understand. This wasn’t aimed directly at the border water rules, just a general directive.

I can say from personal experience if we do nothing, that is exactly what the DNR(S) will do.

We can’t give up before making the first cast or in this case, before sending the email.

Quote:

---

I have opinions on several things but will the Wisconsin DNR take into consideration anything that is brought up on this.

I’ve talked to several wardens on the ten fish limit, which I think is good, on the three pools and I was told WDNR would never go along with it.

---

Ten fish Limit? Interstesting please explain your thoughts

I believe what Jim is referring too is the bluegill limit on the MN side of the river on the pools down here. WI still has a 25 fish limit and on the MN side of the river the limit is 10 bluegills. It’s amazing the number of MN residents you see on this side of the river fishing bluegills. Not sure if there are no fish over on the MN side or they just want 25 fish instead of only 10 fish?

Mn doesn’t want any fish to be kept who wants to drive any distance to keep 10 gils what a joke

Mr. Outdraft (sorry I forgot your first name)

That is the reason for the need to send an email to the DNR…Exactly the reason!

Below is a link to a Rochester Post-Bulletin article that speaks to your exact thoughts… Here’s the first paragraph of the article:

Quote:

---

Tighter sunfish regulations on Mississippi River pools 5, 5A and 8 have shown no sign they have helped increase the size of fish, but it’s still quite possible they will be made permanent. Anglers like the new rules.

---

In speaking with the DNR over a year ago, they were saying at that time, their findings didn’t show any improvement in the populations or size.

Now I’ll back up here. There was improvement in the populations but they couldn’t say it was the lower limits on the MN side (only) or the longer then normal flooding that allowed fish that do well around weeds to take off in their populations. In a nutshell, they couldn’t point to the regulations (10 fish limit) that where pointing to the crazy numbers of panfish populations being recorded.

But there were plenty of anglers that are telling them they like the lower limits.

Hence the quote in the article, “It’s your river” (tell us what you want).

Link<<

I’ll be sending my note to the link when I get home, but a quick note here is that I love the idea of common regs on ANY border water. Not just limits, but all regs. Bait used, size limits, number of lines, etc.. Regs SHOULD be by body of water, not an imaginary line that runs through it.

Thanks for staying on top of this BK!

I’m guessing this should be in the General Mississippi Forum and NOT the walleye forum.

Quote:

---

but a quick note here is that I love the idea of common regs on ANY border water.

---

We kinda got off track here, but that is the big picture.

All Regulations are the same on border waters.

It will hit the General River forum at some point.

* MN regulations allow for 6 walleye in possession.
* WI regulations allow for 12 walleyes in possession.

Walleye Post.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

but a quick note here is that I love the idea of common regs on ANY border water.

---

We kinda got off track here, but that is the big picture.

All Regulations are the same on border waters.

It will hit the General River forum at some point.

* MN regulations allow for 6 walleye in possession.
* WI regulations allow for 12 walleyes in possession.

Walleye Post.

---

Brian,
I read the DNR memo. It seems to talk more about the bluegill limits on our pools down here and the effects more than the walleye limits? Why not through this in the general forum before it’s lost here?
Shawn

This effects ALL border water regulation and this includes the St Croix as well. It will end up in the Mississippi General forum though.

I would really like the catfish regs the same no matter what shore of the river you are on. I want the Wisconsin regs though by using sunfish. Or as I call them…super bait!

Now is a good time to be heard!

[email protected]

Also starting up said talks in WI. Judging from this article, and other news I had heard or read, my guess is the initial focus is salmon/trout in the great lakes. That being said, here is a link for some additional reading.

DNR and Wisconsin Conservation Congress to form Wisconsin Fisheries Advisory Council

I like being able to fish 3 lines….doesn’t always work super hot when I’m by myself but it’s fishable