Senate File 2570 (which includes 2 lines on MN and P2 Miss) has been introduced and will be heard by the Environment, Climate, and Legacy Committee tomorrow 3/9/23. Anyone can sign up and testify if they wish. I think you can even do it remotely if you like. It’s buried in a snowmobile registration bill down at line 14.24
Also worth noting and a very positive sign is that we already have a companion file in the House (HF2564).
Good luck to all it effects!
PS Making it this far was done without the help of MN-Fish.
Thanks for the update Brian.
Wait. So this does not include any inland lakes, correct?
This one might have a chance of passing then.
I’m hoping it’s a good start to getting 2 lines passed for the entire state. Maybe next step is 2 lines for all the rivers in MN. Then lakes.
At least it is a step in the right direction.
So this does not include any inland lakes, correct?
That is correct Bucky. The MN DNR Leadership does not support 2 lines state wide.
A by product of this bill will be to allow two lines when fishing from Prescot to Lock and Dam #2 which many people violated “accidentally” including me.
Wait. So this does not include any inland lakes, correct?
This one might have a chance of passing then.
I’m sure not counting my chickens yet. An identical version failed at the last minute last year and some form of it has made it to the Gov’s desk no less than 2 other times in the past. The MNDNR has built a very large brick wall in front of us in regards to anything more inland, so it would be a major undertaking to gain any more traction with them on that issue (under current leadership).
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>buckybadger wrote:</div>
Wait. So this does not include any inland lakes, correct?This one might have a chance of passing then.
I’m sure not counting my chickens yet. An identical version failed at the last minute last year and some form of it has made it to the Gov’s desk no less than 2 other times in the past. The MNDNR has built a very large brick wall in front of us in regards to anything more inland, so it would be a major undertaking to gain any more traction with them on that issue (under current leadership).
Oh I fully admit the inland 2 line proposal will never pass in my lifetime. That’s a guarantee. Every year up to this when it’s been “likely to pass” I’ve said there’s no way.
The river only option has to be the best chance yet though…depending on what other garbage they pair it with
I hope it goes through. I’ve said a number of times while on Pool 2 that I wished I could run a Dubuque rig.
PS Making it this far was done without the help of MN-Fish.
I know FOR A FACT that some of the board leadership supports 2 lines. It will be interesting to see if they/their lobbyist is involved at all with this bill.
What’s different this year?
The Governor’s office said they would sign it. (if it made it to his desk)
Brad Parson’s was the person that brought it up to us (a few Covid and a political years ago.
Bob Meir “The two line language is a priority for me personally to get passed!”
AND the big dogette has signed off on it.
There’s always that if… but if it doesn’t pass this year, it won’t.
Damn, I hope I don’t read this post 3 months from now and wonder what I was thinking. 
I hope it goes through. I’ve said a number of times while on Pool 2 that I wished I could run a Dubuque rig.
This won’t apply to pool 2 unfortunately
This won’t apply to pool 2 unfortunately
Why not?
14.24(3) two lines may be used in the Minnesota River downstream of the Granite Falls Dam 14.25and in the Mississippi River downstream of St. Anthony Falls
I don’t see anything that excludes p2. That would be a huge mistake making things once again more complicated than they need to be.
A by product of this bill will be to allow two lines when fishing from Prescot to Lock and Dam #2 which many people violated “accidentally” including me.
I read that to be the only area of change.
Thanks for the clarification.
14.24(3) two lines may be used in the Minnesota River downstream of the Granite Falls Dam 14.25and in the Mississippi River downstream of St. Anthony Falls
Whew, I thought you heard something I hadn’t yet!
Although I haven’t heard if the House bill made it out of committee, the Senate moved theirs on to the floor.
Once on the Floor and passed, then it’s just the nod from the Governor.
Assistant Commissioner Meir was a little nervous while talking about the whole DNR package. When it came to the two line verbiage, he said this wasn’t for walleyes…catfish only. It is for all fish in the rivers effected. I think I’ve just been in his ear so much…
Either way, it passed and I’m grateful to Bob, Brad and Sarah for supporting it!
What is the latest on this? I don’t see any mention of this in the regulations book anywhere. Am I dense and missing it somewhere?
I don’t see any mention of this in the regulations book anywhere.
You won’t until next year likely.
It’s so close to being finished up in the legislature, then the governor needs to sign it. Expect to hear more within the next month of it’s passing ….or not. (But all indications are for it’s passing)
The bill finally has passed through the conference committee today and will go back to the House and Senate for final vote today or tomorrow. As Brian mentioned, just need to move on to the Gov for signature and then most likely implemented next March.
Here’s the final version of the bill with 205.28 being the language of interest.
…included earlier in the bill is the part where the boat registration fee doubles or triples from current rates depending on size 
Before I click on a link from the revisor, I always pop 4 Advil and even then find my glasses either on my desk or falling off. Sometimes I see colors too…
All of that for this:
(3) two lines may be used in the Minnesota River downstream of the Granite Falls Dam
and in the Mississippi River downstream of St. Anthony Falls.
…included earlier in the bill is the part where the boat registration fee doubles or triples from current rates depending on size
oh…don’t get me wrong, there are a LOT of things in that bill that is debatable for sure. Lot of fees will be increasing, crossbows legal during regular archery, no wolf season allowed, etc etc. That’s how the horrible system of omnibus bills work… So do I support the bill? Yes and No, No and Yes.
After looking at the bill for ~20 minutes as proposed…screw 2 lines. I hope this bill is voted down.
After looking at the bill for ~20 minutes as proposed…screw 2 lines. I hope this bill is voted down.
All for it. Boat registration is way too cheap as it is.
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>buckybadger wrote:</div>
After looking at the bill for ~20 minutes as proposed…screw 2 lines. I hope this bill is voted down.All for it. Boat registration is way too cheap as it is.
My calculator broke trying to keep up with the 10s of millions being spent on various trails.
This bill is a spending nightmare.
Trails are great. Fishing is great. Nothing is free.
After looking at the bill for ~20 minutes as proposed…screw 2 lines. I hope this bill is voted down.
What’s kind of funny about that is the last time it passed, there was a bunch of stuff that people on the other side of the aisle were saying the same thing about. Their response was, “Screw that, I hope the bill gets voted down”.
Meanwhile, everything else in the bill fails…
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
