I’m not sure I understand your post. From reading these threads, it seems that most people that question the current slot think that it would be better for the walleye population if we took out more large fish (greater than 20 inches). I don’t hear too many people arguing for reducing the minimum size.

Proposals to allow keeping larger fish fall flat mostly because our safe harvest limit (measured in pounds) would be reached so quickly. That’s why I was wondering outloud earlier in this thread why we’re stuck with having “safe harvest” measured in pounds when something like “numbers of fish” might make more sense.

After reading the Sternberg article, my first reaction is that it sure seems like the method in which “safe harvest level” is defined and measured is a big part of the problem. Maybe total tons isn’t the only or best measure. Maybe it should be more based on number of fish. It seems to me that “Treaty Management” and biologically logical “safe harvest levels” would not necessarily be mutually exclusive if the measurement of “safe harvest level” was defined differently.

Maybe the negotiators could get creative and the tribal quota could be defined in terms of tons and the angler quota could be defined in terms of number of fish. Whatever the biologists say is the right mix based on biological science, common sense, and ease of measurement and enforcement.

I assume more sophisticated methods of defining and measuring “safe harvest level” have been proposed many times. I wonder why we’re stuck with the current definitions.

Quote:

---

Nah, you’re fishing for perch. Walleyes happen.

---

TacoTom, I wish they happened a little more often.

I’m going to be in Isle this weekend, but had forgotten this event was happening. I’ll try to make it by Muggs or the Wahkon Inn for sure. Thanks for reminding me.

I just bought a house this fall on the south side of the lake. I live in California, but have a son who lives in Minneapolis and my wife and I hope to retire (half the year) to Minnesota. So I just went through this thought process in a serious way.

I don’t think there is any question that bad press is affecting real estate prices. For example, a good friend of mine from Minneapolis told me I was crazy to be looking at a house on Mille Lacs. He had heard plenty about the wind, the “ice outs,” the “huge” numbers of people and most importantly the “fishing demise.”

Perhaps being somewhat of a contrarian, I decided to investigate further. I had a hunch the problems were being exaggerated and I figured maybe, because of these attitudes, we could find something we could actually afford.

Coming to Mille Lacs, I found lots of for sale signs and a real estate market not yet fully recovered from the last recession. Mille Lacs definitely was not making the “desirable lakes” lists.

But here’s what else I found:
A lake an hour and 45 minutes from Minneapolis.
A lake that is still considered a world class fishery by every knowledgable fisherman I could find.
A lake with almost unmatched fishing variety available.
A lake with unbelievable sunsets.
A lake with two state parks and the Rum River.
A lake with world class ATV and snowmobile trails.
A lake with easy access to grocery stores, hardware stores, bait and tackle shops, and even a few restaurants.

Contrary to the slow real estate market I was seeing, my son told me the real estate market in Minneapolis was really heating up. It seems like a pretty obvious theory that prosperity in the twin cities should usually be followed by rising demand for lake homes.

Of course, I could be dead wrong, but I don’t think anyone should pull out of Mille Lacs right now unless they have to. I think it’s an underappreciated diamond. Like most diamonds, it has some flaws, but that doesn’t change the fact that it’s a diamond.

OK, time for me to start forming an opinion. Everyone has to have one, right, even people new to Mille Lacs. Sometimes the outsider might have a new perspective. Of course, on the other hand, it would probably be a better use of your time to wait until I’ve been around for a while to bother reading my opinions. I apologize for this being so long.

After reading many of the threads on this subject, here’s what I’ve gotten so far:

1. Noone trusts the DNR (probably for good reason). Only time and a healthier walleye population will fix that.
2. I tend to believe the experts that say there is more than adequate walleye brood stock. This suggests that there doesn’t necessarily need to be a moratorium on 20″ to 28″ fish.
3. I tend to believe the theory that improved water clarity is significantly hurting the competitive position of walleye (witness the relative gains in northerns and bass). I’m certainly not a fan of zebra mussels but if clear water is the worst of our problems I’ve got to believe that Mille Lacs is going to survive. However, assuming we can’t figure out how to get rid of the invasive species, we might have to accept that walleyes may never return to quite what they once were.
4. Obviously, netting is extremely hard on a population and I wish it would stop, but maybe we should be aplauding the fact that the DNR and the tribes have agreed to the lowest safe harvest number ever. As a newcomer, I’m really surprised the tribes haven’t voluntarily temporarily halted netting. As owners of the casino, noone has as much to gain from addressing the walleye problem and getting the negative press behind us. Maybe they fear halting the netting because that might set a precedent keeping them from resuming netting in the future. Has anyone considered offering some type of guarantee to the tribes that their future netting rights will not be adversely affected by a temporary suspension?
5. I also tend to believe those that say that catch and release leads to the unintentional death of more walleye than we would like to think. Having to measure fish all the time leads to a delay in release and only adds to this problem.

Here’s my first cut at a proposal. The experts would have to argue about whether this would constitute a safe harvest, but it sure seems like it would make more sense than what we had this past year. If it’s not viable, then it seems like the only option would be to go to a zero bag limit.

1. IN 2014, ANGLERS SHOULD HAVE A BAG LIMIT OF 1 WALLEYE, ANY SIZE. This will go a long way to alleviate angler frustration. Pretty much everyone will go home with a walleye, probably a pretty nice one. No more worrying about the slot, no more delaying the release of fish to measure them. Removing larger walleye from the lake will reduce predation on and competition with small walleye. Obviously, next year we’ll have to look carefully to make sure the brood stock is still adequate. I’m betting it will be.
2. Limits and/or restrictions regarding northerns and bass should be relaxed and fishing (and eating) northerns and bass should be promoted.
3. DNR educational efforts should emphasize techniques for releasing caught walleyes so as to maximize their chances of survival.
4. DNR and the tribes should put some serious money into promoting Mille Lacs as a year-round gettaway. This would be in the best interest of the state and the tribes. I’m new to the area and I’m blown away by the array of recreational opportunities available. Have you seen the cross country skiing at Kathio State Park? the canoeing on the Rum River? the ATV and snowmobile trails? the world class bird watching? the world class fishing (multiple species)? And there’s a casino, too? Are you kidding me? If the tribes want people in the casino, they need to get people up here, they need to make sure people know how much there is to do here. It’s not all about the walleye.

There it is. If you decided to read it, please don’t rip me apart too much; I know I have a lot to learn. I just know I want to catch walleye and I would like to eat at least one of them. I want the businesses and communities around here to thrive. And I want all this negative press about Mille Lacs to go away.

Great tips. Thanks. I especially appreciate the safety tip. I understand that being at the novice stage means we’re at increased risk. Thanks for reminding me to leave large margins for error.

Quote:

---

I got just what you need. A gimbal mount,ice ducer, battery, and a case. Reasonable. PM me if interested.

---

MXSKEETER, I’m new to this forum thing so I’m not sure if this just goes to you or shows up to everyone. I would definitely be interested. Will just any ice ducer work or are there compatibility issues? Is the battery pretty decent? (Another responder said his 522 works well but battery life is an issue.) Of course, I could just get a back-up battery, probably a good idea anyway. If I put my email address here will it just be visible to you?