Proposed limit restrictions for Lake Zumbro

Over the past ten years I and others have noted a decrease in size and numbers in the crappie s at Lake Zumbro. Some theories have been spun but in the end the only real way to step on this decline is to set special regulations on the crappies and sunfish for the lake before this problem gets out of hand. I made a trip to Lake City on Weds the 4th to speak with Dan Spence, the lake’s DNR specialist and Kevin Stuaffer, the regional director [?] for the fisheries division of the DNR. During this dicussion some charts showing a defined decline in these species, especially the crappies, supported my observations and we discussed what I ansd a friend Ron Weltzin thought should happen. Ron and I actuaaly told them that restrictions place on Rochster’s reservoir system should have been implimented on the lake when the reservoirs got them, but that is water over the dam. We are talking about now and what Ron and I suggested was this:

Impose a special restrictions on the lake, not a study. Studies cost tons of time and money on the dnr’s part because they have to be re-visited after 10 years and a whole set of studies done again….it was agreed that this proposal this should be kept simple by just asking for static special restrictions. The restrictions should be a 10 fish panfish limit of any combination of crappies and sunfish and perch with no more than five crappies being in possession nor more than 5 sunfish being in possession.
Both Kevin amd Dan applauded this kind of limit suggestion and have indicated that they will begin the papperwork to intitiate the procedings that will follow. They did say that a 5 sunfish limit might be a tough sell to the powers that be and Ron and I know where they are coming from. They suggested bartering for a 10 sunfish clause….keep the 5 crappie cap, but if people can’r catch crappies allow the ten sunfish or a legal combination up to the 10 fish limit. I am hoping for the 5 and 5 but 10 is still 1/2 of the inland limit and a huge step in the right direction for this lake.

As more information becomes available this post will get up-dated. Expect some public input meeting to be announced in the future where everyone can voice thier opinion. Several of the lake residents have already voiced in favor of some sort of special regulation.

I dont think any new regs will help much! You wanted walleyes in the lake! that was the end of a great panfish lake!

Just look at red lake! no walleyes = great panfish

good population of walleyes = no panfish!

I would have to diagree with the walleye comment I have fished lake zumbro an aweful lot and have caught A LOT of big northern and have seen some pretty dandy skis get pulled out of there too. I would think the crappies and gills would have been gone lone ago if the walleye theory is what ur trying to blame. There is also a great abundance of baitfish in there also so I’m pretty sure the walleyes are not the end of all panfish on lake zumbro.

And the crappie boom on Red was the result of a freaky favorable spawn, not absence of predators.

I would have to diagree with the walleye comment I have fished lake zumbro an aweful lot and have caught A LOT of big northern and have seen some pretty dandy skis get pulled out of there too. I would think the crappies and gills would have been gone lone ago if the walleye theory is what ur trying to blame. There is also a great abundance of baitfish in there also so I’m pretty sure the walleyes are not the end of all panfish on lake zumbro.

And the crappie boom on Red was the result of a freaky favorable spawn, not absence of predators.

X2

the regs will be good.

The walleyes are not the cause of the decline in the crappies, people are the cause. An interesting paralell exists between the installation of the Rochster Reservoir restrictions and the big jump in the numbers of people harvesting large numbers of crappies from Lake Zumbro. Had this lake been included with the reservoirs around Rochester when their limits were reined in, this would not be at issue today. Anglers simply shifted their point of focus from the reservoirs to Lake Zumbro, especially during the winter season.

When we spoke with the dnr officials on Weds,we asked about two other ideas. One was to consider closing the panfishing on the lake for 6 weeks with the average date for spawning falling smack in the middle of that spread of time. They didn’t think that such a proposal would fly with the powers that be but also said that there are waters within the state that have suck restrictions only those limit areas where panfishing can take place and that does not include areas where spawning activity occurs. The other question was whether electronics could be banned during winter fishing on the lake. Again, they didn’t think that that would wash, but yet again mentioned a lake inside the stae that has a no electronics, no power auger restriction on it for winter fishing.

In spite of the upper lake suffering from extreme siltation and being in need of dredging and the fact that walleyes and muskis have been planted in the lake, neither of these are affecting the crappie decline. This is purely a people thing and since its apparent that people will not adjust their fishing practices, what they are allowed to possess is the only way to keep these fish from becoming a has-been species like so many other over-exploited crappie waters have today.

While a 10 sunfish clause might have to be attached to this even if the 5 crappie cap is in effect, 10 is still 50% of the state’s inland limit on sunnies. We’d like to see the cap on sunfish at 5 like the crappies because just as sure as heck if people can’t have crappies those nice plump 9 and 10 inch sunfish that exist will be the next best thing to target. Those big sunfish are darned hard to get back once they’re gone. Actually we asked the dnr personel about asking for a size rule to allow only one crappie over 12″ be included in a limit and one sunfish over 9 inches be included in a limit. That got some favorable commentary but then the coversation went back to the need to keep the changes asked for simple.

I knew my post would get a few to jump in and disagree with me! Heck I hope Im wrong. But I strongly beleive and it only my opinion that the walleyes are not a good thing for the lake!

I said it when they first reintroduced thm to the lake! The panfish will suffer~!!

If they keep a aggresive stocking program for walleyes going the panfish will decline more and more, I hope in five years I will be proven wrong!

as far as pike and musky! there are very low numbers of each in tha lake! but yes there are some nice ones in there! for the guy that jumps in and says there are great numbers of pike and musky! You dont know what good numbers are! just saying!

dont hate me for saying it but it is definatly something you got to look at. Tom I do agree with you that at this point the main problem is people! but you aint going to change much! I know many people that live on the lake that take way more than they should! these are the people that should be the most conservitive and protective of there lake, you just dont see that!

good fishing to all!

TheguN

One thing I have learned in the 50 years of fishing this lake is that there are some real law breakers using the lake. This is not a assumption nor is it very well hidden. Quite a few of the lake residents are in favor of curtailing the take and supportthis endeavor. My feelings are that any help will be beneficial.

Well done Tom. Those regs would really help out the lake.

Unfortunately regs like this are needed. Some people just can’t help but take and take and take. I had hoped this fill the freezer mentality would have diminished with the “save/stock up generation” passing on. However it seems to be pervasive even today.

Thanks for the pat Wade.

It is unfortunate that we see people tearing the heart out of our fishing by keeping so many fish simply because the license justifies it to them. Its ironic that I think those who do their darndest to ruin the fishing will cry the loudest on the regs issue. And to those who do snivel….. ….this has been a long time in coming.