I really don’t mean to start a controversial topic but I am really curious what other people want to see as a vision for Mille Lacs. Nothing else. We have enough threads for pot stirring.
I really am curious how many different categories there are. Try to be realistic. You can’t have a lake where you can harvest 6 18″ walleyes and catch 20 25″+ fish sustainably.
Please assume that netting and quotas are still part of the picture. I also want to hear from musky, bass and pike guys.
What I want is simple… Get rid of the small “kill” slots and replace it with a larger slot that protects the most productive spawning size of walleyes yet still allows the harvest of larger fish.
My wish would be something like a protected slot for all fish 18-23″ with a limit of 2 fish but only one over 23″.
Will
What do I want?
After realizing how much I look forward to the rainy river trip each year, I’d like to see a trophy fishery. I don’t need to catch rainy river type numbers at that size, but something that you can’t do just anywhere. I’d like to see a harvest implemented to create a sustainable trophy fishery.
I can see some challenges of course. They’ll need a food source that can support it. Eel pout and tullibees need to be maintained.
My wish would be something like a protected slot for all fish 18-23″ with a limit of 2 fish but only one over 23″.
Totally agree. Does this mean you’d like to see a fishery managed more for fish to eat rather than focusing on a trophy fishery?
I really am curious how many different categories there are. Try to be realistic. You can’t have a lake where you can harvest 6 18″ walleyes and catch 20 25″+ fish sustainably.
You say what can’t be had…the sad part is, that is what Mille Lacs was…. I was there. I would think the lake could be managed so it wouldn’t have to be closed or have a total catch & release situation that only allows for mortality harvest. 
Do you think it’s possible with nets?
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Will Roseberg wrote:</div>
My wish would be something like a protected slot for all fish 18-23″ with a limit of 2 fish but only one over 23″.Totally agree. Does this mean you’d like to see a fishery managed more for fish to eat rather than focusing on a trophy fishery?
I honestly think that thinning the larger fish will result in a better trophy fishery. 20 years ago there were many more 30″ fish in Mille Lacs than there are now, but with all of 24-27″ it has reduced the baitfish and reduced the maximum size of fish.
Will
Do you think it’s possible with nets?
I do… I believe that the method of how the slots have been imposed is actually the largest factor.
Do you think it’s possible with nets?
Properly managed, the nets, the spears and anglers, I believe it is. But is it something that some people want…nope. They are getting what they wanted all along I am afraid.
How about 2- 14″-16″ per day and 1 over 23″ per day?
Totally agree again Will. It’s probably the most sustainable way to do it too. A trophy fishery would be fun, but there’s probably too many variables that would lead to instability. The food source would probably get severely strained.
Like you said, the kill slot should be utilized to protect against over abundance. I’d rather see 1 30″ than 20 25″ fish.
And my guess as to why we don’t see the 30″ fish anymore is because the 25-27″ fish have lived a stressful life and more would be 30″ if it weren’t for heavy competition for food.
1 fish, any size.
Some people will keep the first 15″ fish they catch (tastes best in my opinion), while others will focus on trying to catch trophy fish or harvesting larger fish.
This would cut the regulation list by about 90%, not target specific year classes, and allow people to harvest enough fish for themselves to eat. 2 walleyes feed 2 people with ease for dinner at my house.
Keep it simple, without slots to debate. Everyone has tried and debated dozens of complex solutions. In my opinion the pressure of nets, anglers, AIS, rising water temps, fragile forage, more predators of different species, etc. in total are going to keep this as a ecosystem that cannot handle intensive harvest. I’d love to be able to go catch 30-40 fish of varying size for the next decade in a successful outing, even if it means only keeping one a day to eat fresh.
I am sure this will go over like a lead balloon,three fish limit of any size,once you reach your limit you are done fishing for eyes for the day,and no sorting.
I as much as anyone enjoy fishing but there has to be a point when you call it enough for one species and move onto the next.
I also manage our family farm pond,I know thats no comparison by any stretch of the imagination to mille lacs,but,I have found the biggest fish may produce the most eggs but that does not mean they are the ‘best eggs’.
in other words a smaller healthier female fish produces eggs with a better survival rate per thousand than an older female fish does.
and no,I am no scientist,nor did I sleep at a days inn last night but I can see whats going on with my own eyes as far as our pond goes,your mileage may differ in your area.
Protected slot as opposed to harvest slot would be an enormous step in the right direction. Others with more experience can debate the numbers.
I’d also like to see an outside entity establish a scientifically proven way to dramatically increase the accuracy of the models used to declare what the lake can sustain. But biologists don’t work for free and money = influence and pressure, so I honestly don’t have a clue how to get a truly unbiased group involved.
I am sure this will go over like a lead balloon,three fish limit of any size,once you reach your limit you are done fishing for eyes for the day,and no sorting.
I heard about this in Europe quite a few years ago. I’m opposed only because I like to catch a lot of fish. I’m selfish, and so is every human on this planet.
But I’d still go there if it happened.
Why? Because it works. Then again it’s also been proven that catch and release works too. They may not all survive but it is sustainable.
I’d like see GLIFWC and the DNR agree to a 5-10 year window of sustainable harvest and uniterupted fishing seasons.
Monitor and adjust catch limits and slots accordingly,yearly.
Any live bait rigging or bobber fishing should only be allowed with barbless hooks.Forever ban the term “hooking Mortality” as a management tool.
Set the seasons and bring stability to the tribes, the Resorts and Buisnesses,the sportsmen (even them Bass guys).
Two fish, one over 18″.
I’ll second that Bobby. But I have no problem throwing fish back. Especially if they are of trophy caliber. Catching big walleyes gets your heart pumping like no other! Most fun you can have with your clothes on. I guess what I want is all the negativity to go away AND be able to fish the lake everyday walleye season is open in MN. Being able to either eat a few, or catch trophies doesn’t really matter to me. I just want my boys and myself to have the same set of rules as every other ethnicity that fishes/hunts here in MN. We will sort it out from there.
BTW. My wife is out on Lake Michigan right now and I’m at home with the kids. So I AM a little crabby rite now.
0721D0C4-2894-4335-9C6E-33C81F98891B.jpg
Yes we should be barbless
Just like Manitoba
Would surely cut down on mortality
Please assume that netting and quotas are still part of the picture.
My house to sell at a decent price…
Nice Steele drifter. Looks delicious. I’d trade every walleye I’ve ever eaten for those right there. That makes me a little restless too. I’m itching really bad to get on Superior.
What I’m seeing so far is that at least 2/3 simply want a fishery that can sustain a harvest that can provide a meal. A few want anything sustainable as long as the fishing (catch rate) is good.
Bass and musky guys are in bed… or out fishing Mille Lacs right now. 
I’d be fine with C&R as long as I’m allowed to fish all season and 24 hours a day. I love eating fish, but fishing for and catching walleyes is far more important to me than eating walleyes.
If they allowed harvest, and I believe limited harvest would be the best thing for the lake right now. I like two fish, only one over 18″.
Id wish it to be filled with blue cats and flatheads.
Id wish it to be filled with blue cats and flatheads.
Now we are talking!
I just wrote a small research paper on this topic.
I agree with Will. There has to be some of the larger fish taken out of the system to help with the smaller fish to survive do to what I believe most of the younger year class is being eaten before they can get big enough.
What would you guys say to have a large amount of baitfish entered into the system. Something like they did with Lake Oahe and still combine that with a 2 fish limit with one over 18 inches.
With the bait fish entered into the system. The 3rd, 4th and 5th years after would tell the tale if that is indeed the issue of the lack of food in the system.
I want all these to be walleyes dammit!! 
My wish would be something like a protected slot for all fish 18-23″ with a limit of 2 fish but only one over 23″.
Agreed. And just move netting out of the spawn.
And just move netting out of the spawn.
Probably a non-starter for GLIFWC? Or do I misunderstand that their gill nets are basically designed for maximum effect in shallow spawning areas? This is a simple question, no intention of stirring the pot.
My wish would be something like a protected slot for all fish 18-23″ with a limit of 2 fish but only one over 23″.
Agreed. And just move netting out of the spawn.
This right here would be the best thing that can happen IMHO. Protect the 18-23″ fish as they are probably the strongest spawners. 2 fish limit, because, how many do you really need? If one of them is over 23, that’ll feed 2+ people. But so will 2 17″. Also, the nets.. If the fish weren’t harvested at their most vulnerable time of year, I think things would be a lot better.
No slot at all but 2-3 fish limit. IMHO
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
