State wide slot limits on walleyes?

Jesse? The Favorite Wife says you’re wrong.

Brian Klawitter wrote:

Jesse? The Favorite Wife says you’re wrong.

If I end up winning this thing your FW can have the Rapala! RR

Still waiting for responses from DNR and researching

Timmy wrote:

There ARE some reasons that somebody may want/need 6 walleyes. Believe it or not – there are a lot of people that really like and appreciate a fresh fish meal and do NOT like to (or are unable to) fish themselves.

Ever hear of a grocery store? Should be illegal to give game fish away

I like the limit the way the state is already. The one over 20 works just fine. I have no problem giving some fish away. My mom is not going to be out fishing ever again and her favorite meal is fresh fish so I get her some fish when ever I can drop some off. She likes that more than anything that I bring over so don’t think I will agree with giving away fish being illegal.

roosterrouster wrote:

If I end up winning this thing your FW can have the Rapala! RR

I’ll just take her out for a drink then. She’d care less about the Rap thanks to B.K. and his catfish corruption

Jesse you may come up with something from the DNR but I saw a CO at our access this weekend and asked him about special walleye reg’s. To his knowledge all the lakes that have special walleye reg’s are listed in the book and he knows of no lakes not listed in the book that have signs at the access’s (with special walleye reg’s…) in his governing area. This is the area South of Leech lake…

That’s fine and I’ll agree with you however I’m not throwing in the towel yet. A lot of the law men/women and law enforcers don’t know all the laws nor obey them, thus the reason for lawyers…..my point is he may not know the law of all the land, just his little section. I have minions on the case. Still researching.

So at this point I am looking up crow recipes, any one have a good recipe?

RR Feel free to PM me your address

#stillhavehope

Jesse Krook wrote:

So at this point I am looking up crow recipes, any one have a good recipe?

RR Feel free to PM me your address

#stillhavehope

All in good fun and we both learned something! Buy that cocktail for Brian’s bride and we’ll call it good. I am still in shock thinking that Mn has over 14,000 lakes and only 1,700 of them have walleyes (or is it that 1,700 are MANAGED for walleyes and a lot more do have walleyes present in them but are not MANAGED for walleyes???). I really thought that over 1/2 of the lakes in Minny had walleyes in them. Maybe not…RR

Jesse, For what it’s worth I don’t think you’re totally hallucinogenic. I have seen at a several boat landings what appears to be “official looking signs” stating “Release all Walleyes over 20” for example. At first look, one would interpret that as a special regs lake. Upon closer inspection they were placed by the local lake or lakes area associations “recommending” the release of such fish for the future health of the fishery. They are kind of misleading if you don’t read the fine print, you would think there is special regulation for that particular water body. Just thought I’d share that.

wicathunter11 wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Timmy wrote:</div>
There ARE some reasons that somebody may want/need 6 walleyes. Believe it or not – there are a lot of people that really like and appreciate a fresh fish meal and do NOT like to (or are unable to) fish themselves.

Ever hear of a grocery store? Should be illegal to give game fish away

And then there are some that think it should be illegal to sell game fish. I have heard compelling arguments from all sides, but myself not really being “that good” at catching the walleye have many fishless days. I at times have to resort to “purchased” walleye for my traditional fish dinners. I once got ripped on another forum for posting that I did order walleye at restaurants!

Walleyestudent Andy Cox wrote:

For what it’s worth I don’t think you’re totally hallucinogenic.

You obviously have not met my buddy Jesse.

Joe Scegura wrote:

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

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Phil Bauerly wrote:</div>
4 fish with 1 over 20″ statewide would be my suggestion.

x2 with a 14″ minimum

X3

IMO There’s no way this can have a negative effect on any fishery. It’s almost the same as it is now it just protects some of the smaller fish.

Also there’s NO reason anyone needs 6 walleye. If you need more than 4 walleye to feed your family. Bring them along! Believe it or not kids and wives like to fish too.

X4 along with the possession limit reduced to Four, guide fees will also be reduced accordingly.

Right?

IMO – Limit 4/day, 8 possession, with one over 20″/day, with 5 years of population monitoring and DNR analysis of reasons for population variables, followed by a re-discussion of the findings and satisfaction of the regulations (including resort owners and guides)

Brian Klawitter wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>walleyestudent wrote:</div>
For what it’s worth I don’t think you’re totally hallucinogenic.

You obviously have not met my buddy Jesse.

Looks like I owe yer wife a drink thank’s to RR. I’m coming up empty handed in my searches and apparently this was far too tough of a question for the DNR to even respond to my email

Order a long island iced tea…More alcohol and more expensive! …RR

I know I am a little late on this topic due to not being able to get on in a while. I think that 5 fish 15 to 18 with one over 28 would be perfect. I would hope people already let anything under 15 go and don’t keep anything more than let’s say 22 but it’s not a perfect world. It’s just like the St. Louis river they have one over 20 and just a min size of 15 with 2 fish and you should see all the 22-28 inch fish that people take out of there. I think they could even add a fish to make it 3 fish and put 15 to 18 keepable. There are a lot more walleyes in there now and they don’t have to protect the numbers as much but they should focus more on protecting the size now.

roosterrouster wrote:

Order a long island iced tea…More alcohol and more expensive! …RR

RR she’s a $7 a drink girl already, eats cheap though.

From today forward if you want a pair of Red Wing shoes, you’ll have to buy a size 9 or size 13. They have stopped making all other sizes. If you do want another size, you’ll have to buy a different brand of shoe. Those are all made out of state.

My FW thanks you Rooster.

Change sucks keep as is. Let each person choose whether they take a full limit or not. I rarely take 6 fish many never even get six. Still only allowed 6 in possession. Keep government out of this!!!!!!

Mike Klein wrote:

Change sucks keep as is. Let each person choose whether they take a full limit or not. I rarely take 6 fish many never even get six. Still only allowed 6 in possession. Keep government out of this!!!!!!

Ultimately I think this is the best reply and suggestion.

Now, if we could just get rid of the freezer filler mentality. Or the ” my license says I can have this many” line of thought. Then too there’s the “the bigger the better” crowd. All of these go into every kind of fish we fish for and sadly it takes a government action to try and reign in these people. Until a way to get the aforementioned to change their ways on their own, changes in how things are done will have to be utilized especially in the walleye and panfish/crappie markets. I honestly think blanket parties and knuckles would be faster in getting the point across.

Bet paid in full.

The Fw thinks there should be more disagreements like this!

Attachments:

1. 

   image-8.jpeg
   

All in good fun BK. We all learned a little something. I still believe what I say and stand behind it. I paid the bet ONLY because I cannot find viable evidence (online nor thru DNR) to back up my theory.

Have a great day y’all

Joe Scegura wrote:

You got me there! I’ll have to change it to me holding 4 walleye

That said I would love to see a 4 fish limit. People in general need to “limit” to feel success. I think it would save fish and make people feel successful more often!

Joe Scegura wrote:

You got me there! I’ll have to change it to me holding 4 walleye

That said I would love to see a 4 fish limit. People in general need to “limit” to feel success. I think it would save fish and make people feel successful more often!

Hard to really take you serious when you have a 6 fish limit with a huge poop eating grin on your face…..Some lakes up north produce mainly smaller fish. I know a lake where a 16″ is a big one, we keep 13-15″ fish in that lake and nothing bigger. No need for more slots, look at Mille Lacs. And putting slots on stocked lakes makes no sense at all.

Oldstar, sorry you disagree with my opinion. I don’t think I ever said I don’t enjoy keeping 6 walleye… clearly I do! I just don’t believe it’s necessary with the technology we have today. The OP asked what we’d like to see as a limit/slot. I think 4 fish 14″-20″ with one over would be perfect that’s all. That’s almost the same regs as we have now only a couple less fish.

I see a lot of people filling fish baskets with 12″ walleye that were just stocked months earlier. I’d love to see the sportsman of MN get some walleye for their money and wait a couple years before they harvest them. It just feels like the write thing to do. Again this is my opinion.

FYI it’s hard to take you serious when you hide behind your fake computer name! Have a great day!

LOL! If you want the limit to be 4, then you should only keep 4 yourself. The word hypocrite comes to mind…..

Oldstar wrote:

LOL! If you want the limit to be 4, then you should only keep 4 yourself. The word hypocrite comes to mind…..

Your earlier post said you keep only 13″-15″ fish. I doubt those two big females in your avatar were released since you’re in a bait shop. Hypocrite can go both ways on pictures…Just sayin’…RR

5 fish.

1 over 13″

1 over 15″

1 over 17″

1 over 19″

1 over 21″

Unless;

If one over 28″es is kept it counts as two. If you hit five fish 19″es and under you can’t keep anything over 24″es. You can keep 4 under 17″ but then that’s your daily limit and then you can have a possession limit of 8 under 17″es but nothing over, unless on lakes with special regulations. And you need proof and verification on where you were fishing, so state wide regulations and lake specific regulations don’t overlap, get entwined or become confusing or muddled together.

You can’t keep anything right at exactly for example 12″, 13″, 14″, 15″, 16″, etc on going up to 29″es, at 30″es you can start keeping fish at exactly 30″, 31″, 32″, 33″, etc but nothing in between. It’s just better for the population because it’s my opinion that these fish represent the best breeders and we all know for fact fish over 18 3/4″es are the best spawner’s. And that especially matters even in lakes with absolutely nil, nada, zilch natural reproduction that are entirely dependent on stocking from the dnr and lake associations. And fish over 26″es should never, ever be kept because they are sanctified and holy according to fishing’s religious manifesto. Only 3 fish over your lifetime can be over 30″es or your boat will auspiciously remain unplugged no matter how many plugs you stick in your boats hole.

My word it’s fishing, regulations are heavy enough already. If someone wants to keep 6 walleyes under current regulations let it be, it’s within their legal rights to do so. Rarely do I keep a limit, but that’s my prerogative, not anyone else’s to tell me if I should or shouldn’t. If it’s a resource problem with not being sustainable, let the dnr manage it. There are lakes out there that can support the fishing pressure they are currently receiving and still handle a 6 fish limit. Between stocking, no natural reproduction and being monitored by lake associations, the dnr and fishermen, if there is an issue it can be handled with individual lake specific special regulations. Lakes will have up’s and down’s in the levels of fish a lake will be allowed to produce and/or sustain naturally. There will be fluctuations with many factors influencing the lake and its cycling. Many are heavily influenced by man, and a tremendous amount are not. We get tunnel vision looking at Mille lacs, Leech, Winnie, Upper Red, etc and think every lake out there receives that kind of pressure, but many don’t. That’s why the dnr has special regulations to manage these highly overly popular fishing destinations. I’ve found some real gems getting off the main walleye producers that get all the press. There’s some amazing lakes in this state that get no press and the locals keep their lips zipped.

I’ve only kept one bigger walleye in my life and it was 26″es, in the winter, in deep water, on 2lb line, with my dad. It was exhausted and I was pretty sure it was done. Kept it and thought it’d be disgusting to eat. It was by far one of the best tasting fish I’ve ever eaten. They are keeping bucket and cooler loads of huge fish out of Lake Erie, and that lake is thriving.

We are brain washed by catch and release zealots that believe fishing is a religion, only to be experienced using their doctrine alone, following a narrow path laid out by their fundamentalism, brought on by an overly purist ideal of extremism that is overly preachy and dogmatic. And I’m a catch and release guy.

Sorry for the rant, but fishing is supposed to be fun! Not getting hit on the hand by a coven of strict, legalistic, hipper active nuns wielding knuckle crushing rulers of shame for anything that doesn’t measure up to a misguided doctrine based off nothing other than opinions and personal preference’s lead by perceptions of pictures of big fish being released to live forever, over and over again.

Signed,

The guy that releases most of his fish, laughing my butt ox off at my own hypocrisy! Cause I’ve done my own fare share of shaming people for keeping fish, especially bass.

They are keeping bucket and cooler loads of huge fish out of Lake Erie, and that lake is thriving.

Only comment… can’t compare the Miss to Erie. Two completely different animals.

basseyes wrote:

I’ve only kept one bigger walleye in my life and it was 26″es, in the winter, in deep water, on 2lb line, with my dad. It was exhausted and I was pretty sure it was done. Kept it and thought it’d be disgusting to eat. It was by far one of the best tasting fish I’ve ever eaten.

Crap, the secret’s out. Small fish only taste like the breeding/batter they’re cooked in. If you don’t like thick pieces of fish, you don’t like the flavor of the meat.

Brian Klawitter wrote:

They are keeping bucket and cooler loads of huge fish out of Lake Erie, and that lake is thriving.

Only comment… can’t compare the Miss to Erie. Two completely different animals.

Exactly!

To claim everybody of water is the same is idiotic.