gimruis wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>BrianF wrote:</div>
Gimruis, you nailed the issue which isn’t just ‘your $.02’ but are the facts as told to me directly by the house majority leader when I was communicating with him about sponsoring a bill to allow a year round C&R season a few years back.

Didn’t they do the first step already last year which was a public comment period? I seem to remember that. If they’re taking the first step towards it, one has to assume they’re eventually going to follow through with the rest of the steps. Or maybe that’s just a disguise to say they did their due diligence on the matter. Who the heck knows.

Actually, pretty much everything hinges on the complexity of needing both statute and rule change. The intent is to have the next available round of both to have the early C&R season for bass. There is a complete issue brief that summarizes the biology, sociology (91% support overall), tribal support and needed legislation. It’s not a fast process unfortunately. I have personally been working to get this changed since 1999. Needless to say, it certainly wouldn’t hurt if there is a grass roots email campaign to select individuals in the DNR.

Attachments:

1. inbound5435201763456376396.pdf

Hey folks, the survey of anglers on the year-round catch and release for bass here in MN is still available and your input is needed.
https://engage.dnr.state.mn.us/fisheries-public-input-wildlife-public-input/survey_tools/proposed-bass-catch-and-release-season
Please take the survey and share with others.
So far over 2,500 responses with 93% in favor of the extension. Even among anglers that say they are not bass anglers, there is over 73% support/strong support.

Attachments:

1. 

   All_response_5-25-23.jpg
   

Try looking up some articles in google scholar. That will lead you to a bunch of peer reviewed research topics. There have also been a host of reports done by state, tribal, federal and even private firms, that tried to understand behavior, movement, habitat use, spawning, recruitment, age, survival and mortality. If you need some help, give me a shout.

OK Folks tomorrow night Long Prairie City Hall, 7 PM. If you can make it, great, if not please take some time to fill out the electronic comment sheet we have put together. If you want changes in the area, this is your opportunity to help us decide which lakes might be good options.

I will close the sheet by Friday. Thanks in advance for your comments.

Little Falls Panfish Comment Form 2014

Quote:

---

I have worked hard to get some special regs applied to a lake that seriously need something to happen and can tell you first hand that while you are sitting with the fisheries people in person they think you are a saint for bringing the concerns forward and they tell you that they’ll do everything under the sun to work up a proposal that can be submitted to yet another dnr entity. They’ll tell you of all the public hearings they’ll schedule and ask if you can attend those personally to help move “their” ideas and agenda forward. They’ll tell you that they’ll keep you in the loop. You’ll wait and wait, weeks turn to months, months to now two years and nothing. I have finally relented to the idea that the dnr’s “too little too late” philosophy is the only way they will change anything on a troubled water. People need to police themselves in what they are going to keep and then realize that their actions probably speak louder than any outcry here or with the dnr.

---

Tom,
Just as an aside, in areas of the state where the potential has been documented, we have tried to get regs in place, but we often run into the “anti gov’t” “anti-Regs” crowds often… We did a postacard survey to find out what “average Joes” thought about regulations on panfish…1000 mailed, randomly selected within 35 miles of Grey Eagle. Surprisingly many respondents were very willing to consider special regs. Our options included a 10 fish bag limit, 20 fish limit with only 5 over 8″ and a combined bag limit of 15 with no more than 10 of either crappie or sunfish. Most preferred a 10 fish bag. Now, we have the meeting I mentioned earlier above to gather other input. We’ll see what comes out.

To your point on the online community, you are absolutely correct! We posted the same questions on the forums last winter as our postcard survey, an overwhelming majority favored special regs to help improve size structure in bluegill.

In many of the lakes in Central MN, up to 75% of the annual harvest can occur in the winter, by simply reducing the bag limit, we can have a positive impact on the population (especially smaller lakes). Don’t lose the faith man!!!

Great posts folks. Adalinde, I commend your effort in trying to educate folks on the sex of bluegill.. IT truly can make a difference in some if not, most populations in MN.

To that note, we are having a public meeting in Long Prairie Jan 8th 7pm about more conservative regs on a few lakes that have the ability to produce larger bluegill, but we feel are limited by harvest. We need folks interested in bluegill conservation to tell those that think it’s all hogwash to show up. Information can be found on the Little Falls DNR Fisheries page here: Little Falls DNR Events Page

Please let me know if you have questions.

Hey guys… I also posted this in another forum… FYI

Basically this has gone through all the internal hurdles already and has been “christened” by the Bass Tech Committee. The only part we need to wait for is the legalese… Public comment period.

To address some of the concerns and part of the reason the proposal was even brought forth was due to the DNR’s sampling of bass by electrofishing over the years (mostly since 1993). We have ample data to evaluate whether bass populations are increasing or decreasing. We know that with some exceptions, recruitment (production of young to adulthood) is not a problem, in fact many lakes in central MN have too much recruitment! We have lakes that have abundant year classes of largemouth bass, rivers that have year class successes during low water (which is typical) and have yet to see major impacts from bass anglers or even incidental anglers due to the small amount of harvest that occurs.

Keep in mind that instant C&R has the least effect on the bedding fish (next to no angling at all), the harvest of bass is very low (most bass anglers C&R) and even other anglers claim less than 10% harvest. Currently people do use the excuse “I am fishing for crappie, walleye, pike, dogfish”… Name any other species and yet are catching bass. This also can simplify enforcement.

The current bass opener in many parts of the state makes those fish available to HARVEST and has been that way for a long, long time, yet we have increasing and expanding bass populations all across the state. So as a resource manager why wouldn’t one offer up additional angling opportunity??? Especially if we have data to suggest that there is limited potential impact to the resource?

In any case if some would like to discuss it further, I would be glad to take your questions. Please look up the contact info on the Little Falls Fisheries Home Page . I will do my best to answer questions/concerns.

Thanks.

Well folks, you will have your chance… to let the DNR know what you think. The regulation proposal is a 12-20″ protected slot, 3 fish daily bag limit, with one fish over 20″. The regulation is intended to go from St. Cloud Dam to Coon Rapids dam and include the mouth of all tributaries to the first public road or dam. (Rum River would be to the dam).

The public meetings have been set

September 13, 2008, Clearwater City Hall, 605 Co Rd. 75, Clearwater, MN 320/558-2428 3-5 pm.

Anoka City Hall, Sept. 18, Anoka City Council Work Session Room, Upstairs, 2015 1st Avenue N, Anoka, MN 7-9 pm.

You will also be able to email or write, up until Oct 1, 2008.

Please do your best to come to the meetings no matter what your opinion is. These will be open house style meetings where you can come and talk it over with the biologists. The DNR needs to hear all sides of the issue, in spite of the fact that apparently most folks on this forum support the extension.

Thanks.

Quote:

---

Hawgin, Would you think this would eventually work it’s way north of St. Cloud. In my opinion it should’ve already. Just curious. Thanks, Randy

---

Copper,
Not all river segments are the same, neither is the pressure in certain areas…. There are a lot of unanswered questions regarding the level of harvest up north. If it is indeed that much lower than the regulation is probably not a needed component. Similarly, if the pressure increases and harvest levels do start affecting survival…… Then for sure….When the true need arises, I am sure it might be a legitimate option.

Quote:

---

SH,

Without a doubt, I am in favor of extending it to the dam. As coppertop mentioned, I would love to see these kinds of regs throughout our river systems here in Mn.

On a separate note, I would love to see a continuous season here in Mn with a catch and release restriction during the cold water months (Sept-May). Any thoughts or recent discussions about this?

---

Steve, I personally would love to see this go through. As I understand the issue though, the species specific groups met and there was some concern from both tournament organizers and some more conservative folks that were on the committee about having a C&R season. And understandably, there is some literature that suggests the temporary removal of guarding males may indeed reduce that individual nesting success.

My personal take, it would make more angling opportunity while doing some actual biological good IF….. a C & R regulation was in place statewide for all bass until mid June. Then opening up to whatever form of harvest the local area manager deems appropriate for that water (within statewide normals). This would protect the majority of the bass waters across the state and still offer an opportunity to manage through some level of harvest.

Thanks for the vote of confidence dude!!

Quote:

---

Aren’t there a few bass tournaments a year in that stretch? That would definately wipe those out.

---

Actually only one…… And there are ways that tourneys can work in spite of regs….

Quote:

---

This weekend the members of my bass club where fishing a non-permited club outing on sturgeon bay. Legaly because there was no money involved a permit was not needed.

They where told that they had to keep the fish and could not release them unless they had a permit.

---

I think before you bashing a DNR person or even a fellow club angler you best get the straight skinny directly from those in the issue…….

2nd hand bs is what gets stupid rumors started…..
If you have a question for the DNR guy ….. ask. it is that simple.

If there is a line that was crossed in the law he/she will tell you straight up. I have yet to meet one DNR person that has a vendetta against tournament fisherfolks like myself.

Living in MN, a permit is required if…..
* There are greater than 30 participants for open-water contests or 150 participants for ice-fishing contests
* The entry fee is greater than $25 per person
* The total prize value is greater than $25,000 or
* The contest is limited to trout species only.

On the culling issue…. not sure in WI….

Either way, before you spout….. check it out….. Otherwise some folks might think you are simply stirring the pot to generate business…. Brovarney baits….

Jeremy and others. The literature points out that the species spawns only once. Males set up a nest and females chose to drop eggs on not one, but several males nests. Extreme cold fronts or water level manipulations while on beds also can trigger nest abandonment. Generally the younger males will try to set up shop again. The temp range is more on the side of 58-65. In the Mississippi, there can be variable recruitment due mostly to flow regimes. In years when the river is lower than normal in spring the bass usually pull off a decent year class. The opposite is true when flows are higher than normal in spring. As you go farther up stream recuitment is more and more variable. Brainerd area might only see one year class out of seven actually make it. While St. Cloud are has reletively consistent recuitment. The telemetry work done in the Coon Rapids- St.Cloud reach has a lot of information y’all might find valuable… http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/areas/fisheries/montrose/smbtelem.html
Good luck.
Eric

I think you might want to decide what is more important…. Early tournaments or the general health of the fishery… statewide. An aweful lot of harvest of bass occurs even after the season opens by the “hook and cook it” crowd. Vulerability is high when the males are guarding. This option would allow C&R from “the opener” through the end of June. I would favor an option to recreational fish earlier and forgo the tourney angling till July. Definetely the way to go… Maybe we ought to think outside of “our own little selfish worlds” eh