Same 2020 harvest quota on Mille Lacs as 2019

Right there with ya man, but I’m not holding your hand.

We’ll make it thru together, just hold me tight big fella, I’ll wear a blonde wig for ya

tbro16 wrote:

The main issue seems to continue to be the death of walleyes before they reach 11-13 inches.

Yes, the lake is skewed with a population of bigger fish and they are eating the smaller ones. Plus throw in smallmouth, an increasing pike population, and a minimal amount of muskies all trying to eat as well. But ya, the primary eating machine is the population of large walleyes.

What I think is stupid is how winter anglers get to keep a fish all season long whereas the open water anglers only get a couple weeks to harvest a fish, followed by C & R, followed by a closure. If they think the quota could get reached by Labor Day, NO ONE should be allowed to be keeping fish.

It’s be what, nearly 30 years since the treaty rights were upheld. 30 years of restrictive limits. 30 years of instability. 30 years of fighting. Seems like the last 5 or so years have been the most stable of them all. This is during the most restrictive period. Seems like fewer business are closing or selling.

It’s clear, the DNR doesn’t really know what’s its doing. We all know that. They’ve been throwing darts at a wall for 30 years and I’m defeated. I give up. I’m done theorizing what’s going to magically “fix” the problem. Just make it a C&R lake already and quit trying so hard. They just look uncompetitive in the process.

I’m also so tired of the diversion that netting is the main reason for the walleye decline. Go out there and look around this weekend. Does this resemble what it looked like in the 1980s or even the 1990s?

I think we are missing the boat on a few things. One: the lake, prior to the 1999 Supreme Court case, produced 200k pounds of actually harvested walleye at a MINIMUM every year. Now we are down to a 150k split harvest, most of which is mythical harvest on the angler side by hooking mortality.

Two: Per the court case the DNR supposedly still has control of the lake for conservation reasons, if 7 years of basically no harvest for MN anglers isn’t enough for the DNR to lay down the law, what will be?

Three: Both the DNR and GLIFWC are supposedly concerned with conserving the walleye, why isn’t removing commercial harvest by gillnet on the chopping block? I’m not saying that is solely to blame, but if a lake is in trouble shouldn’t that be the first one to go??

Four: Lake shouldn’t be shut down, ever imo. If the survey #’s are so bad that it can’t sustain ANY harvest, fine stop any actual harvest. If C&R hooking mortality make it worse, so be it, people will stop going if they aren’t catching anything. Obviously this is not even close to the case here, and these shut downs (which WILL happen again this year) are purely politically motivated.

I agree biggill. I have thought this same thing for a few years now too. Make it catch and release all season. How about an artificial only catch and release on soft water? That would help the “issue”.

Charlie W wrote:

How about an artificial only catch and release on soft water? That would help the “issue”.

This would greatly reduce hooking mortality and I’d be for it but too many people complained about it when they were going to do it one year so they scrapped it.

biggill wrote:

It’s be what, nearly 30 years since the treaty rights were upheld. 30 years of restrictive limits. 30 years of instability. 30 years of fighting. Seems like the last 5 or so years have been the most stable of them all. This is during the most restrictive period. Seems like fewer business are closing or selling.

It’s clear, the DNR doesn’t really know what’s its doing. We all know that. They’ve been throwing darts at a wall for 30 years and I’m defeated. I give up. I’m done theorizing what’s going to magically “fix” the problem. Just make it a C&R lake already and quit trying so hard. They just look uncompetitive in the process.

I’m also so tired of the diversion that netting is the main reason for the <strong class=”ido-tag-strong”>walleye decline. Go out there and look around this weekend. Does this resemble what it looked like in the 1980s or even the 1990s?

X2!

gimruis wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Charlie W wrote:</div>
How about an artificial only catch and release on soft water? That would help the “issue”.

This would greatly reduce hooking mortality and I’d be for it but too many people complained about it when they were going to do it one year so they scrapped it.

Hooking mortality is BS. Period. There’s a reason it’s not used in fisheries management anywhere else, and the DNR’s own study(s) continually fail when they try to replicate it. This doesn’t mean no fish die from HM, but that the # is scientifically insignificant and dependent on too many variables for the HM ratio to stand up to scientific scrutiny. If anglers actually had a say, we should demand they remove that from our quota calculation immediately.

gimruis wrote:

What I think is stupid is how winter anglers get to keep a fish all season long whereas the open water anglers only get a couple weeks to harvest a fish, followed by C & R, followed by a closure. If they think the quota could get reached by Labor Day, NO ONE should be allowed to be keeping fish.

Could not agree more with this. Still have not received any kind of a scientific rationale for this policy. Why not make it every other year where the harvest opportunity switches between ice and open water, or the shut-down (if deemed “necessary”) happens in winter vs summer? Why does the ice angler seem to be the priority when it comes to access to this lake? It seems like they want to shut it down late summer/fall just to preserve the ice angler’s opportunities. Why?

Catch and release is not the solution; in fact, it is the opposite of the solution!!!! THERE ARE TOO MANY WALLEYES IN THE LAKE AND THEY ARE EATING EACH OTHER. I realize catch and release only could extend the summer season, but it will also promote more bigger walleyes which are part of what is eating the small walleyes. Ideally the quota should be raised due to the population of walleyes in the lake and the keep slot should be concentrated on large walleyes. The walleye population as a whole is in great shape, ask anyone who fishes the lake, it’s the proportion of year classes that is out of whack.

And for what it’s worth BigWerm, I agree with 100% of what you said!!

Ripjiggen wrote:

Does any lake look like the 80’s and 90’s?
Does any other lake use a quota system?

Nope. Doesn’t it make you wonder why there is a proposal to lower the statewide limit on walleyes?

Trying to pickup a turd by the clean end.

Give it to the tribe and let them have complete control of the lake.

It’d be amazing how quickly the lake would magically rebound and the tribe was charging $ and allowing harvest.

It’s not a fishery managed off facts or science, that’s why it’ll never work. Make it c & r and get out of the political drama round about nobody wants to touch.

tbro16 wrote:

What made that 2013 year class so great? I read that there was a late ice out that year with generally stable weather that helped the spawn substantially. That cant be the only reason, so what else was different about that year and the few years following? All classes have been down since then too, correct? The main issue seems to continue to be the death of walleyes before they reach 11-13 inches. Arent all these adult walleyes from the 2013 year class going to do nothing but feed on the young walleyes? Shouldn’t we be protecting the young by keeping this 21-23 inch slot year round? And encouraging people to keep at least a partial limit of pike and smb? (doesn’t seem particularly realistic though)

What was different that year? Very late ice out and virtually no netting at all.

#elephantintheroom

Tangler, you obviously didn’t tie your belt tight enough on the well pipe bc you got sucked in buddy

sticker wrote:

Catch and release is not the solution; in fact, it is the opposite of the solution!!!! THERE ARE TOO MANY WALLEYES IN THE LAKE AND THEY ARE EATING EACH OTHER. I realize catch and release only could extend the summer season, but it will also promote more bigger walleyes which are part of what is eating the small walleyes. Ideally the quota should be raised due to the population of walleyes in the lake and the keep slot should be concentrated on large walleyes. The walleye population as a whole is in great shape, ask anyone who fishes the lake, it’s the proportion of year classes that is out of whack.

And for what it’s worth BigWerm, I agree with 100% of what you said!!

BigWerm wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>gimruis wrote:</div>

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Charlie W wrote:</div>
How about an artificial only catch and release on soft water? That would help the “issue”.

This would greatly reduce hooking mortality and I’d be for it but too many people complained about it when they were going to do it one year so they scrapped it.

Hooking mortality is BS. Period. There’s a reason it’s not used in fisheries management anywhere else, and the DNR’s own study(s) continually fail when they try to replicate it. This doesn’t mean no fish die from HM, but that the # is scientifically insignificant and dependent on too many variables for the HM ratio to stand up to scientific scrutiny. If anglers actually had a say, we should demand they remove that from our quota calculation immediately.

I wouldn’t say that its BS, period. There is obviously a higher mortality rate among all kinds of fish when live bait is used so there is at least something to it. The way the DNR uses it in a model for Mille Lacs I think is what you’re getting at, which may be true. What I’m saying is if the DNR says the hooking mortality accounts for such a high part of the quota, why not eliminate that all together and make people use artificial lures, which would thereby eliminate that portion of the quota completely. Why not at least try it one season and see if it makes a difference? They claim the hooking mortality is at its highest in the warm summer months so at least ban it in July/August to keep it open in the fall.

gimruis wrote:

Why not at least try it one season and see if it makes a difference? They claim the hooking mortality is at its highest in the warm summer months so at least ban it in July/August to keep it open in the fall.

I say do it for 5. 1 year isn’t long enough.

gimruis wrote:

Why not at least try it one season and see if it makes a difference?

Because HM as it is now is a fart in the wind, it’s a guesstimate based off of bad metrics and inaccurate creel #’s, so they have no idea what the actual #’s are currently, so implementing that would not enable the DNR to realize a measurable difference, whether for 1 year or 5 years. And again the problem is not a lack of walleye in the lake, if it were they should be looking at eliminating the commercial netting during the spawn first before C&R fishing with any lure/bait.

We shouldn’t even be discussing hooking mortality and slot limits. The lake has no shortage of fish. Harvest is needed.

Everyone talks about how good the fishing is now…apparently you never fished the lake before slot limits, netting and the big “crash”.

You guys arguing for C&R… what is your explanation that it has effectively been C&R for the past 7 years????

Your only explanation is that it would benefit you personally so that you wouldn’t have to take a month off or change tactics. It doesn’t solve anything.

And this is coming from a C&R guy who has been there for the past 7 years!

I grew up fishing Mille lacs. I like many others here miss the good old Mille Lacs lake. But it’s just one of many lakes to fish for walleyes. All the idea’s of how to fix the problem out there are like A-holes – There are a lot of them and most of them stink. A lot of people think there is 1 or 2 easy things to do to fix the situation and that the DNR should know what that is and do it. Even if the DNR knew the Magic fix I doubt they have the power to do it. The truth is there are probably several factors that have caused the current situation and there are probably at least several things that are needed to fix it. Until ( If ever ) the situation is fixed – Why not simply find one of the many other great walleye lakes to learn to fish. To me that’s the most fun part of fishing. Learning a new lake and how to catch fish on it. Some people need to get over not being able to fish the same lake over and over – The same ways as they always have – and getting their enjoyment over keeping a limit of fish each time out. If fishermen believe that they themselves didn’t as least play a part in the decline in walleyes in Mille Lacs then they are kidding themselves or have their head buried in the sand. Technology and equipment has made it easier and easier for the average fishermen to catch fish than ever. The price we have to pay for that is changes to the ways it use to be. There is going to need to be more and more lake by lake management and continuing of the lowering of fish limits. We all just need to keep enjoying the sport while living with the rules put into place.

lindyrig79 wrote:

You guys arguing for C&R… what is your explanation that it has effectively been C&R for the past 7 years????

Your only explanation is that it would benefit you personally so that you wouldn’t have to take a month off or change tactics. It doesn’t solve anything.

And this is coming from a C&R guy who has been there for the past 7 years!

Lindyrig79
Are you saying that you don’t think the fish population is better in the lake now than it was 7 years ago? Are you also saying that there was nothing going wrong with the lake and therefor there was no reason for any changes to be made at all?

Ripjiggen wrote:

Try it for a season and see if it makes a difference in what?

The DNR claims that hooking mortality goes up 55% in the warm summer months as opposed to the cooler months and/or in the winter. So if they banned live bait in July and August, that would theoretically reduce mortality by a significant measureable quantity. If that portion of the quota is reduced, then the lake can remain open past Labor Day, right? That’s all I was saying.

The DNR’s most recent walleye population study completed in 2018 estimates that there are 727,000 in the lake. In 2002, there was 1.1 million. The low point was in 2014 when they estimated to only be 249,000. These are numbers cited by the Brainerd Dispatch directly from the DNR’s population estimates.

Deuces wrote:

Tangler, you obviously didn’t tie your belt tight enough on the well pipe bc you got sucked in buddy

Totally did. I justified it by saying “I’m asking questions, not making statements claiming to have any knowledge.” Because those are usually met with ridicule by the “experts.”

fishthumper wrote:

The truth is there are probably several factors that have caused the current situation and there are probably at least several things that are needed to fix it.

What is “it”? What is the problem with Mille Lacs in your opinion Thumper? I’m prone to agree w/ BobCC from the first page that there has never been a better time to fish the lake for a variety of species. The problem, imo, is the DNR closing the lake, the DNR’s blatant lies and the negative publicity that comes with it. Seems like we have a variety of problems people are proposing fixes for, when the main one, fish populations are very healthy.

tangler wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>gimruis wrote:</div>
What I think is stupid is how winter anglers get to keep a fish all season long whereas the open water anglers only get a couple weeks to harvest a fish, followed by C & R, followed by a closure. If they think the quota could get reached by Labor Day, NO ONE should be allowed to be keeping fish.

Could not agree more with this. Still have not received any kind of a scientific rationale for this policy. Why not make it every other year where the harvest opportunity switches between ice and open water, or the shut-down (if deemed “necessary”) happens in winter vs summer? Why does the ice angler seem to be the priority when it comes to access to this lake? It seems like they want to shut it down late summer/fall just to preserve the ice angler’s opportunities. Why?

To answer your questions Tangler, there is no science behind it or any of the decisions made up there anymore. They keep it open in the winter because the resorts make more money in the winter, and supposedly there is no hooking mortality. And they shut it down at the end of year, around Labor Day because that is a slower time of year for the resorts and their flawed #’s are at the peak. Think of ML Management like a hill, The Tribe/Governor/DNR Commish sit at the top and roll things off with no basis in science, the DNR takes it tries to polish it up, MLFAC gets it throws it back up hill with some ideas to help them, and then the anglers and property owners who support the area economically get whatever is left at the end with no say in anything.

fishthumper wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>lindyrig79 wrote:</div>
You guys arguing for C&R… what is your explanation that it has effectively been C&R for the past 7 years????

Your only explanation is that it would benefit you personally so that you wouldn’t have to take a month off or change tactics. It doesn’t solve anything.

And this is coming from a C&R guy who has been there for the past 7 years!

Lindyrig79
Are you saying that you don’t think the fish population is better in the lake now than it was 7 years ago? Are you also saying that there was nothing going wrong with the lake and therefor there was no reason for any changes to be made at all?

Not even close.. I’m saying that making the lake strictly C&R for the next 5 years will not change anything over the current situation that is such tight regulations it is basically C&R anyway. As others have stated, most of the quota is dedicated to C&R mortality, which would obviously not change by making it dedicated C&R.

If anything… some harvest is needed to avoid a forage crash.

Obviously we all know the lake is full of walleye right now.. probably hence some of the frustration of this endless and circular argument. It’s political and the DNR’s hands are tied.

BigWerm wrote:

Think of ML Management like a hill, roll things off with no basis in science, the DNR takes it tries to polish it up, MLFAC gets it throws it back up hill with some ideas to help them, and then the anglers and property owners who support the area economically get whatever is left at the end with no say in anything.

Think of ML Management like a hill full of trees, The Tribe/Governor/DNR Commish sit at the top and try to keep the hill forested. Along came many people, day after day summer or winter it did not matter; they lay to claim their six tree Limit, over and over again. local business owners rent out space on their trucks and will hall trees out for a fee to ride along. Others come with flatbed 18 wheel trucks stacked to their limit of carrying capacity of trees because it was their God given right to do so.
The new natural growth can not keep up with the demand, so our great leaders of the Hill try to replenish the hill with seedlings.
Despite the effort of all involved the hill is soon barren of trees…
Bark Beatles? Ash Borers? Moths? Caterpillars?
Everyone else!!
I had nothing to do with it.

All in jest

BigWerm wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>fishthumper wrote:</div>
The truth is there are probably several factors that have caused the current situation and there are probably at least several things that are needed to fix it.

What is “it”? What is the problem with Mille Lacs in your opinion Thumper? I’m prone to agree w/ BobCC from the first page that there has never been a better time to fish the lake for a variety of species. The problem, imo, is the DNR closing the lake, the DNR’s blatant lies and the negative publicity that comes with it. Seems like we have a variety of problems people are proposing fixes for, when the main one, fish populations are very healthy.

Bigwerm

I’m no expert here so my idea’s and guesses are probably no better than yours or others. The Three factors that I believe caused the decline in the population on Mille Lacs are:

1. When they started to manage the lake for a so called Trophy fishery – This by the way was meet with much approval by lots of Mille lacs fishermen. The creation of slot limits to try and increase the #’s of LARGE fish worked really well. What they didn’t count on ( Once again in my opinion ) is that those LARGE fish need to eat lots of food to grow and stay that size. Add in the timing of a increased Northern and Smallmouth population and there just wasn’t enough baitfish to feed them all. These Large walleyes started to Cannibalize lots of young walleye and thus created some really weak year classes. The slot limits also caused way over harvest of certain Year classes and over harvest of primarily male fish. What was left was lots of old big females, most of which was past their prime spawning age and to far few of male fish to do their part.
2. The change in the water itself on Mille Lacs. I believe ( Some data confirms ) that the average water temps has risen in recent years and the water clarity has also gotten better. They 2nd probably being the cause of the 1st.
3. Over Harvest and Hooking mortality by fishermen themselves. About the time of the start of the population decline several advancements in Technology and Equipment Happened. The improvements in electronics and the boom of the wheeled fish houses to name just 2. In the good old days you would hear things like I did well out on 3 mile in 26Ft of water. After the improvements in GPS it was I pounded the fish on GPS Cord. # so and so. Old green box days – Narrow cone angle and only seeing what was directly below the boat – No 360 and side scan – Quicker and easier finding of schools of fish. It use to be that a few times a year people would possibly rent a fish house for a few days and the houses did not get moved often – Now its people trailer wheeled fish houses up there weekend after weekend all winter long – They may move that wheeled fish house 5-6 times over the weekend. All this technology lead to more and more fish not only being caught but to more hooking mortality as well, I believe there is even more of this than the DNR’s Est’s.
Once again I’m no expert. My degree is in Business not Biology of fisheries management.