So MN DNR is looking for input on Mille Lac Smallmouth

Looking to hear from Bass anglers on the Mille Lacs Fisheries Management plan.

Meeting tomorrow at Agate Bay 3pm. If you have a constructive comment let me know.

Serious question here. When the DNR ignores advice from the walleye group why would you or anyone else think they care what we think?

BTW, i have heard as much about the smallmouth alliance as MN Fish or whatever their name is.

Dutchboy wrote:

Serious question here. When the DNR ignores advice from the walleye group why would you or anyone else think they care what we think?

I really have to agree with Dutch on this one. Why bother?

-J.

I think the smallmouth are the one thing in that lake that the dnr doesn’t need to be too concerned about.
How about a perch management plan?
Eelpout management plan?
Let’s talk about the species in mille lacs that are actually suffering.

Hmmm, not to cause a rift in the universe but beyond the Treaty being overturned or modified, just what is it about walleye situation that DNR is unresponsive to? They can’t magically increase the harvest quota? We all would like to see bigger walleyes harvested but it would max out the quota in about one month?

What is a smallmouth?

It is that magical fish that puts a huge smile on my face. Don’t get me wrong I love walleyes also. I’ll be there with a whole list of questions provided I can get a chance to talk.

Dutch is spot on. Doing anything with the MNDNR is an absolute waste of time. This is just their dog and pony show to act like they are caring but they already have their plan mapped out. The last several years have proven that.
You bass boys better catch them while you can because this is a sure sign its it’s going to go down the $hitter.

I am interested in seeing what comes out of this…I have very little faith in much of anything they do at this point because of my perspective on the walleye. They said there wouldn’t be a need to enact quotas this year…then they enacted quotas and banned live bait fishing for them. Its funny how negative i am about the tribes involvement in this stuff. Maybe i just feel like nobody anywhere should have privileges over anyone else creating unfair advantages towards any group. But what do i know.

Bachelor just to be clear they did not ban live bait this year. You can use live bait just like we have been all through the season.

If you don’t want the DNR to consider your input, don’t participate. If you do want them to consider your input, you must participate. The question of whether they give it due consideration is completely separate. Refusing to participate because you didn’t like previous outcomes is a great way to be left in the dust.

Look at the way this state has fallen over ther last 25 years. To think that the mn dnr has a grip on what’s going on with anything in this state is laugh worthy..

Vigilant Management ie:
Increase (Double) population surveys

Test for LMBV Annually.

Monitor tournament catches more diligently

Require all launches to report catch release and catch and kill results

Artificial lures only during Spring and Fall C&R seasons.

Close the season on 10/1 , (quit pounding Smallmouth as they begin moving toward wintering locations)

Two under 15 or one over 20

craig s wrote:

Look at the way this state has fallen over ther last 25 years. To think that the mn dnr has a grip on what’s going on with anything in this state is laugh worthy..

Seriously? Has fishing in Minnesota ever been better? We have incredible options for a lot of different species. And the fishing on Mille Lacs is unreal. The gripe is that anglers can’t keep enough of them.

john23 wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>craig s wrote:</div>
Look at the way this state has fallen over ther last 25 years. To think that the mn dnr has a grip on what’s going on with anything in this state is laugh worthy..

Seriously? Has fishing in Minnesota ever been better? We have incredible options for a lot of different species. And the fishing on Mille Lacs is unreal. The gripe is that anglers can’t keep enough of them.

In regards to Mille Lacs the gripe is two fold……..

1) the DNR is not transparent. Their public meetings are designed to comply with open meeting laws but not to seek input.

2) the taxpayers are tired of the DNR (who the taxpayers fund) having no backbone and being led around by their nose by GLIFWC.

Now, if the DNR cleans those issues up concerning Mille Lacs their life would be easier.

Hey Buzz, what was discussed?

From the meeting.

There were about 20 in attendance, guides, resort owners, professional fisherman, and few just concernedSMB fisherman.

DNR presented data that showed that the size structure in the lake has not changed since the reqs were opened in 2013. This data based on electro shocking results and the data collected by SMA members and tournaments in 2017. So while many in attendance commented on the decline in big fish, the DNR data does not reflect this.

Some of my takeaways the DNR will bring forward for internal discussions.

Reduce limit to 2 under 15″ and no overage. Comment from DNR that very few fish are being kept from their creel surveys. Comment from those in attendance then why any limit at all.

Consider closing SMB season during spawn. I commented that in Sunset Bay where I am located, there are spots that this spring were hammered non stop, all day, every day during the spawn. It was suggested to close SMB the first two weeks in June to protect spawning.

Request to not allow live bait for SMB. Comment from DNR, tried before did not work. Agreed no further action from DNR on this.

Review special regulations given out to tournaments. I recommended all tournaments need to be catch, measure, release. Will be considered.

All in all a good meeting, many in attendance have somewhat different viewpoints depending on being guide, resort owner, etc.

Oh and I asked the DNR if opening the slot in 2013 was based on any actual science, you guessed, no just political as walleye crashed. So with no science behind opening the slot and with very few being kept, why the hesitancy to go to catch and release only. Comment back again related to DNR data not showing decline.

Thanks for the update.

One more request… Might as well officially re-name the Walleye capital of the world the Smallmouth capital of the world?

I really don’t see any reason to harvest bass from Mille lacs. They should go back to the rule that they had for so many years: allow 1 trophy over 21 inches. That structure helped make it what it is today.

They could at least put up a bass statue in Garrison next to the walleye.

gonefishin wrote:

From the meeting.

There were about 20 in attendance, guides, resort owners, professional fisherman, and few just concernedSMB fisherman.

DNR presented data that showed that the size structure in the lake has not changed since the reqs were opened in 2013. This data based on electro shocking results and the data collected by SMA members and tournaments in 2017. So while many in attendance commented on the decline in big fish, the DNR data does not reflect this.

Some of my takeaways the DNR will bring forward for internal discussions.

Reduce limit to 2 under 15″ and no overage. Comment from DNR that very few fish are being kept from their creel surveys. Comment from those in attendance then why any limit at all.

Consider closing SMB season during spawn. I commented that in Sunset Bay where I am located, there are spots that this spring were hammered non stop, all day, every day during the spawn. It was suggested to close SMB the first two weeks in June to protect spawning.

Request to not allow live bait for SMB. Comment from DNR, tried before did not work. Agreed no further action from DNR on this.

Review special regulations given out to tournaments. I recommended all tournaments need to be catch, measure, release. Will be considered.

All in all a good meeting, many in attendance have somewhat different viewpoints depending on being guide, resort owner, etc.

Oh and I asked the DNR if opening the slot in 2013 was based on any actual science, you guessed, no just political as walleye crashed. So with no science behind opening the slot and with very few being kept, why the hesitancy to go to catch and release only. Comment back again related to DNR data not showing decline.

I was disappointed that Tom really wasn’t that interested in any suggestions or input. The meeting wasn’t really to get input into the plan, rather a presentation on how they saw Smallmouth in Mille Lac. It’s unfortunate that the only way to give input means getting confrontational. Many of the best Smallie anglers were in the room and all remarked that the size, quality weren’t what they were. No Response, their confidence is based on electo shocking and gill nets. When asked directly what were the steps they would take to protect the Trophy Fishery dead silence. Their plan is not add any additional measures to monitor, and couldn’t even say how often they would electro shock. Definitively not yearly. Our recommendation to repeat the 2017 population tagging study in 5 years was deemed not necessary and would be costly. The next time you hear me saying they want input, please kick me in the rear end.

Buzz wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>gonefishin wrote:</div>
From the meeting.

There were about 20 in attendance, guides, resort owners, professional fisherman, and few just concernedSMB fisherman.

DNR presented data that showed that the size structure in the lake has not changed since the reqs were opened in 2013. This data based on electro shocking results and the data collected by SMA members and tournaments in 2017. So while many in attendance commented on the decline in big fish, the DNR data does not reflect this.

Some of my takeaways the DNR will bring forward for internal discussions.

Reduce limit to 2 under 15″ and no overage. Comment from DNR that very few fish are being kept from their creel surveys. Comment from those in attendance then why any limit at all.

Consider closing SMB season during spawn. I commented that in Sunset Bay where I am located, there are spots that this spring were hammered non stop, all day, every day during the spawn. It was suggested to close SMB the first two weeks in June to protect spawning.

Request to not allow live bait for SMB. Comment from DNR, tried before did not work. Agreed no further action from DNR on this.

Review special regulations given out to tournaments. I recommended all tournaments need to be catch, measure, release. Will be considered.

All in all a good meeting, many in attendance have somewhat different viewpoints depending on being guide, resort owner, etc.

Oh and I asked the DNR if opening the slot in 2013 was based on any actual science, you guessed, no just political as walleye crashed. So with no science behind opening the slot and with very few being kept, why the hesitancy to go to catch and release only. Comment back again related to DNR data not showing decline.

I was disappointed that Tom really wasn’t that interested in any suggestions or input. The meeting wasn’t really to get input into the plan, rather a presentation on how they saw Smallmouth in Mille Lac. It’s unfortunate that the only way to give input means getting confrontational. Many of the best Smallie anglers were in the room and all remarked that the size, quality weren’t what they were. No Response, their confidence is based on electo shocking and gill nets. When asked directly what were the steps they would take to protect the Trophy Fishery dead silence. Their plan is not add any additional measures to monitor, and couldn’t even say how often they would electro shock. Definitively not yearly. Our recommendation to repeat the 2017 population tagging study in 5 years was deemed not necessary and would be costly. The next time you hear me saying they want input, please kick me in the rear end.

From what I’ve gathered over the handful of years that I’ve been really paying attention the how the DNR does it’s business, this is a pretty typical response by the organization…..If they don’t take industry/area leaders’ input for the almighty walleye, they sure as hell aren’t going to care what people want to do about the bass.

Did MNFISH make it there?

gimruis wrote:

I really don’t see any reason to harvest <em class=”ido-tag-em”>bass from Mille lacs. They should go back to the rule that they had for so many years: allow 1 trophy over 21 inches. That structure helped make it what it is today.

They could at least put up a bass statue in Garrison next to the walleye.

I disagree with this 100%!! Keeping a few smallies will do nothing to hurt the exploding population. There is already too much competition for food between smallie and walleyes and apparently the DNR can’t do anything to control the increase in walleyes. Now you want the smallies to continue to over populate? Ridiculous!

sticker wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>gimruis wrote:</div>
I really don’t see any reason to harvest <em class=”ido-tag-em”>bass from Mille lacs. They should go back to the rule that they had for so many years: allow 1 trophy over 21 inches. That structure helped make it what it is today.

They could at least put up a bass statue in Garrison next to the walleye.

I disagree with this 100%!! Keeping a few smallies will do nothing to hurt the exploding population. There is already too much competition for food between smallie and <em class=”ido-tag-em”>walleyes and apparently the DNR can’t do anything to control the increase in walleyes. Now you want the smallies to continue to over populate? Ridiculous!

When speaking in-terms of biomass and what a lake or ecosystem can support, if people want to continue to have the pond be a great bass and walleye destination, some SMB harvest will not hurt anything. As waters warm and the lake has cleared, it has definitely helped SMB populations far more than walleye.

I’m all for leaving bass regulations as they are. Some harvest is a good thing for the lake.

Curious where you guys are getting your information that harvesting is not hurting the SMB population and a good thing.

Can you share some data to back up this claim?

According to the DNR LL Surveys data from inshore and offshore netting, the SMB population peaked in 2015 and has declined the past three years and no scientific data to show why.

As I commented before, when the regs were relaxed in 2013, this appears to have been purely political. And with the DNR so far off on their estimate of how many SMB are actually in ML, my view is to error on the side of caution.

And as Buzz mentioned the DNR has no plans to get a better handle on the SMB population.

So the best those of us interested in protecting the SMB can do is give our input and hope the DNR will listen a little.

gonefishin wrote:

Curious where you guys are getting your information that harvesting is not hurting the SMB population and a good thing.

Can you share some data to back up this claim?

According to the DNR LL Surveys data from inshore and offshore netting, the SMB population peaked in 2015 and has declined the past three years and no scientific data to show why.

As I commented before, when the regs were relaxed in 2013, this appears to have been purely political. And with the DNR so far off on their estimate of how many SMB are actually in ML, my view is to error on the side of caution.

And as Buzz mentioned the DNR has no plans to get a better handle on the SMB population.

So the best those of us interested in protecting the SMB can do is give our input and hope the DNR will listen a little.

Whoa, whoa, whoa, no need to bring out the ‘D’ word. We don’t take kindly to ‘data’ and ‘facts’ around these here parts.

Let’s try to keep things to opinions and regurgitated, outdated, ill-informed rhetoric if possible.

And please, keep anglers out of this. It’s silly to suggest anglers could possibly impact the fish population on any lake, let alone Mille Lacs.

Thank you.

gonefishin wrote:

Curious where you guys are getting your information that harvesting is not hurting the SMB population and a good thing.

Can you share some data to back up this claim?

According to the DNR LL Surveys data from inshore and offshore netting, the SMB population peaked in 2015 and has declined the past three years and no scientific data to show why.

As I commented before, when the regs were relaxed in 2013, this appears to have been purely political. And with the DNR so far off on their estimate of how many SMB are actually in ML, my view is to error on the side of caution.

And as Buzz mentioned the DNR has no plans to get a better handle on the SMB population.

So the best those of us interested in protecting the SMB can do is give our input and hope the DNR will listen a little.

Earlier you said that the DNR’s data didn’t show a decline in the smallmouth size structure. But now you just said the population is has been declining since their peak in 2015. Are those conflicting reports? Or does that mean that while the size structure remains unchanged, the overall population has decreased, thus an equal proportional population decrease for all size fish?

Personally speaking, I really don’t think that there are a lot of smallmouth which are kept, but I could be wrong. The numbers of anglers targeting smallmouth has increased exponentially in the last handful of years. It’s crazy. That has to have had an effect on the fish. They may very well have been getting educated and are less likely to bite, which would be reason why anglers’ opinions of less fish doesn’t match the DNR’s survey of unchanged size structure.

This always reminds me of the comments from some bitter ML anglers, resorts, business owners regarding B.A.S.S. holding their A.O.Y. tournament there the first year. They said no one will come there to fish for smallmouth, and the few anglers that may come won’t be spending money because they already have their tackle and their own boats. It’s crazy how many out of state license plates I’ve seen at the accesses in the last few years.

Personally, I’d like to see the SMB population as it was circa 1990. A rare catch. The SMB have pushed walleye off their traditional areas, especially on the south end of the lake. And probably a significant reason walleye test net numbers have changed. Note I said changed, not declined since test nets are always in the same spot year to year. Now sitting in areas vacated by walleye. Not to mention the competition for the same food – perch. Which I can count on one hand the number I caught this year….

We certainly do not discourage the neighborhood kids from loading up a bucket full when they are in the harbor. Nothing wrong with the youngsters honing their catch and filet skills on the smallies.

I look at the situation a lot like the boom and bust of the crappie population on Red. Get the SMB population down and manage the walleyes for harvesting. The way it should be.

The DNR may be looking for input. Probably not along these lines…

-J.