Upcoming MN/WI Border Water Regulation Review Meetings

1hl&sinker wrote:

But how about the guy that travels from along ways away to get 3 fish.

Doesn’t seem to be a problem for URL…

In the surrounding area, including Canada, the only location with higher limits (to my knowledge) is the Dakotas…Suddenly 6 sounds relatively high, doesn’t it?…

I have only been to URL ounce and that was years ago and I have no idea of the regs or the system up there.
6 Does not sound high to me when a system can sustain itself. I don’t do things because of the guy next to me does it(anymore ) with out considering other factors, I sure hope the MNDNR would do the same thing. Show me the system can not handle it then I will change my tune. I may even go to five. but you have to give me something in return. No really 5 would be good along with 2 during the slaughter times with only 4 released..

1hl&sinker wrote:

I have only been to URL ounce and that was years ago

So since you don’t, no one else does? Just because some areas are lower, doesn’t mean they would do it just to follow suit…I was pointing out how many people still, in fact travel a long distance for much lower limits.

Notice I have not given a SINGLE hint to my views on the limits, as apparently the viewpoint of “excessive” needs to backed by research and science around here…

When you complete your research, then you can tell me what you think the limits should be…

I support not adding a ton of special regs. Since it seems like most people aren’t swayed by biology comments anyway, just make it 4 eyes statewide (including Mille Lacs) with a 14″ minimum, 20-26″ protected slot and one over.

99 flathead limit seems about right.

404 ERROR wrote:

When you complete your research, then you can tell me what you think the limits should be…

Someone need a nap? I had mine.

Just a beer.

Well, a beer is better than a nap. I spew words so I can see what I think in my head. For me lot of times its nice to read them not jumbled up to make sense to me.

more regulation and government involvement is always the solution! The way everyone talks on this forum no one keeps fish anymore anyway and if they do its 1 or 2 because they were hooked deep. Not sure what the problem with over harvesting could be.

I’m mainly a C&R guy so I’m always in favor of lower limits but I understand arguments on both sides. However, asking people to self police when it comes to CR for walleye and panfish will never happen. When I fish P4, even in Dec/Jan when hardly anyone else is on the water, most guys are taking their limits. Nothing wrong with that as they are within their rights.

I don’t think lowering to 3 or 4 walleyes is going to discourage anyone, nor is a panfish limit of 10. These are all reasonable and should protect the fishery long term.

When I fish(Lotw and vnp lakes mostly), I rarely(a handful of times in 25-30 yrs?) see boats throwing keeper walleyes back. The percentage of 15-17” walleyes I have ever seen released over the yrs is minuscule (and when witnessed, it is most often because the limit in the box has been reached!). Lots of people post that they release all the fish they catch, but I sure haven’t seen that where I have been…..a 15” eye that crosses the gunnels is in big trouble. My boat is no exception, as we kill fish to eat.

From my barstool observations, fisheries like the river and LOTW have limits that have sustained the test of time and are sustainable(I am talking walleye limits, not the ridiculous 25 cat limit). Changing them is a feel-good move that will have no biological effect. I am still waiting to witness the C&R boats anchored next to me on LOTW…..not saying they don’t exist, just saying I haven’t personally seen one yet. From my viewpoint, 16” walleyes get killed when they get caught.

^ i practice catch and release a lot almost constantly and i fish a lot and i catch a lot of keeper walleyes on the river and most of them get tossed back especially when fishing alone if I’m with my dad we may keep them but more often not ..my point is we go up north to fish walleyes once a year in the fall and that’s when everything changes for us when we are up north we keep the walleyes we get i cant say for sure why this is but partially because we drove so far north in order to camp and fish and whence camping cleaning walleyes is just a part of the enjoyment of the experience .anyways as some one who fishes a lot and throws back a lot i still don’t see the need to change the regulations if it ain’t broke don’t fix it . Not everyone goes out and limits out every trip but if they do more power to them ..IMHO leave the limits alone … if some one can catch 25 flatheads and wants to keep 25 flathead well .. I’m more concerned with all the trash people keep leaving behind at all my local fishing spots and ruining the landscape .

Timmy wrote:

When I fish(Lotw and vnp lakes mostly), I rarely(a handful of times in 25-30 yrs?) see boats throwing keeper <strong class=”ido-tag-strong”>walleyes back. The percentage of 15-17” <em class=”ido-tag-em”>walleyes I have ever seen released over the yrs is minuscule (and when witnessed, it is most often because the limit in the box has been reached!). Lots of people post that they release all the fish they catch, but I sure haven’t seen that where I have been…..a 15” eye that crosses the gunnels is in big trouble. My boat is no exception, as we kill fish to eat.

From my barstool observations, fisheries like the river and LOTW have limits that have sustained the test of time and are sustainable(I am talking <strong class=”ido-tag-strong”>walleye limits, not the ridiculous 25 cat limit). Changing them is a feel-good move that will have no biological effect. I am still waiting to witness the C&R boats anchored next to me on LOTW…..not saying they don’t exist, just saying I haven’t personally seen one yet. From my viewpoint, 16” walleyes get killed when they get caught.

Here on the river it’s the same. I myself, and friends fish to eat fish. We practice catch and release as we see fit. When we go fishing odds are we are coming home with some fish, more often than not, way less than a limit. Be it any species.

Now we also see the people that day in and day out when the bite is good take home their limits. Ya I know, there are possession limits. People know that and adjust for that.

Fish species become easy too pattern and overtime people know when and where the bite will happen. They also will take advantage of that. We see it all the time ice fishing. The folks that are out there in the backwaters of the Mississippi river are not out there enjoying catch and release. They are out there taking home what the daily limit is and doing it day in and day out. They are also the ones who pipe up and ask where the fish went when the bite slowed or the fish got small.

Ya the river is a stone through from my house and if I want fish it’s pretty easy.

Good years come and go. What ever happened too the large quantities of striped bass on the river. I also remember those being in schools so large. Now you don’t see or hear about them. I also remember those being taken out of the river by the limits that were allowed when they would congregate below the locks. I believe they took such a beating they were decimated?

Remember this is also barstool observation as now I got 300 nightcrawlers tonight.

The meeting format is being developed to capture information from attendees on their perceptions of the current status of a wide variety of species, and their opinions about bag and size limits for gamefish on the Mississippi River portion of the border waters between Minnesota and Wisconsin.

I can’t say this for all species, but make no doubt about it, this is all about public sentiment and pressure whether we’re talking about lowering limits OR MAKING LIMITS THE SAME ON BOTH SIDES OF THE RIVER.

I’m not yelling. Just pointing out that I believe the goal is to make limits the same on both sides of the river and now would be a good time to make adjustments if the public wants them.

and Wisconsin residents should be able to use 3 lines…

gregory wrote:

and Wisconsin residents should be able to use 3 lines…

and so should MN residents….

I HAVE A DREAM…

Brian Klawitter wrote:

I’m not yelling. )

A man with reason.
I don’t know , when the gubernet starts talking to us seems like its time to be afraid. Then again when they don’t talk to us….

I admit, my glass is always half full until someone points out it’s almost empty…but,

They “the gubernet” wants to hear our views. If it doesn’t change a thing, I’ve done my part by expressing them.

For the folks that don’t attend the meetings, it’s going to be very hard for you to complain even if the DNR does nothing. One more comment by a concerned citizen could make the difference in a change or not.

1hi&sinker, would you help me down from my soapbox please.

That will be hard for me to do standing on the back of this trailer. Someone hid the ladder so I cant get down.

For those in the Red Wing area, tonight’s your night! See you there!

“The public meetings will be held from 6 to 9 p.m. as follows:
 Monday, May 14, Twin Bluff Middle School, 2120 Twin Bluff Road, Red Wing,
Minn.”

Thanks to everyone that showed up for the Border Water Regulations Meeting in Red Wing last night.

We appreciate the information we were able to gather and all the questions.

Tonight the second meeting will be held in Wabasha, MN (info below)
(Tuesday, May 15, 6:00-9:00 PM at Wabasha-Kellogg High School, 2113 Hiawatha Drive, Wabasha, Minn.)

We look forward to hearing from everyone.

Thanks,

Nick

Any recap from the Red Wing meeting? How was attendance?

I’ll do everything possible to make down to Wabasha from Lake City for tonight’s meeting. It’s awfully hard to give up a night on the water though

Attendance was lower than we expected in Red Wing, but the conversation and information we collected was good.

I understand what you mean Bucky I have been working on this for months now and unfortunately have done very little fishing myself. Think about it this way. Most of these regulations have not been reviewed in 50 yrs or more, and the likelihood is this process won’t come around again for many years so it is a chance to get your opinion in on the management of the fishery for the next 20-30 yrs.

Thanks in advance to all who attend tonight. Pass the word and bring a friend.

I made it to the meeting and thought it went well, nice to have our opinions heard, The one thing i forgot to bring up on this topic at meeting was when these bag limits were put into place, there was no social media, i know it sounds funny but i firmly believe it affects fishing pressure, I have as well as others have been fishing a area only to have it posted some where on social media or paper print. so i hope that bag limits are taken into consideration as social media is only gonna grow as time moves on.

Thanks again to those who attended our meeting in Wabasha last night. The meetings have been going very well, but attendance is still lower than what we would like. Despite press releases that went out to hundreds of media contacts we have only seen a few newspaper stories run publicizing these meetings.

If you plan on attending any of the remaining meetings listed below consider bringing a friend, or contacting others you know who may be interested in the future of fisheries management on the river. We really do want to collect as much information from the public as possible, and have many questions we would like you opinions on addressing the full range of gamefish species on the river.

There are three meetings left for folks to attend. All meetings run from 6:00-9:00 pm and will have staff from both MN and WI DNRs in attendance to answer questions and collect input.

Wednesday, May 16, Prairie du Chien City Hall, 214 E. Blackhawk Drive, Prairie du Chien, Wis.

Thursday, May 17, WI DNR Service Center, 3550 Mormon Coulee Road, La
Crosse, Wis.

Tuesday, May 22, Winona Middle School, 1570 Homer Road, Winona, Minn

Thanks again to all who can participate,

Nick

I sent a copy of the meeting info to the Wabasha FB page. Apparently it wasn’t an item of interest.

whats interesting is that if there’s a change to bag limits, I’m willing to bet there will be a bunch of fisherman that have undies in bunch!

gregory wrote:

whats interesting is that if there’s a change to bag limits, I’m willing to bet there will be a bunch of fisherman that have undies in bunch!

^This

On average only slightly more than half of the legal voters in the U.S. bother to cast a ballot. It is sad, but not shocking to assume people will be argumentative versus proactive with changes to fishing regulations also.

“Why take initiative to discuss or fix something today that we could complain about or blame on someone else tomorrow?”

-America’s new slogan

I like it, always somebody elses fault.

Bucky, found the nail!

What will happen is the two DNR’s will get together, look at the results and come up with something that pleases the people that expressed their opinion and can be supported with the biology.

Then they will propose these (possibly) new bag limits, then announce public hearings. Which ever way it goes there will be a bunch of people showing up looking like they just received a snuggy.

I still don’t think folks understand how monumental it is to have both DNR’s in one room looking at bag limits together. This is huge! I can only hope this is a sign of things to come for our border waters.