Bills in MN to reduce walleye limits

Bills in the Senate and House seek to limit walleye limit and possession. With no science or biological imperatives MNDNR wants legislators to reduce the limit and do an end run on the DNR Rules for changing limits. Saying that it is a preventative measure( with no problem currently needing a solution). Anglers for Habitat, Outdoor News ( this week’s edition), fishing experts and past DNR walleye managers are questioning the need. This change doesn’t have a majority of support in the DNRs angler surveys. Here our AFH take

The issue of walleye possession limit is always a lively discussion. Is it a social issue or a biological issue? Do we have enough? Or are we taking too many? What does the science say? What does the angler say who goes home skunked?
Anglers for Habitat always prefers to follow what our professionals say, usually indicating individual lake management; lakes in the north are different than those in the southern Minnesota. And are managed differently.
Some lakes can easily handle a possession limit of 6 walleyes; other lakes maybe should have a smaller limit.
We should look more closely at this issue, and recommend it for further input by anglers, conservationist’s fisheries managers, and the public in general, for a recommendation.
Anglers For Habitat neither supports or opposes We suggest a lively discussion

Just stop people from keeping all those 8-10 inch fish. such a waste

I have no objections to lowering the limit to 4. I don’t freeze fish for myself. I’m fishing 3+ times a week so if I want to eat fish I’ll keep some the day I want to eat them.

That being said, I heard they tacked on banning lead weights to the same bill. That would make me upset if it passed. Tungsten is expensive, and I’ve spent years amassing thousands of dollars worth of tackle that is lead.

Buzz wrote:

Some lakes can easily handle a possession limit of 6 walleyes

I’d like a list of the non stocked natural breeding walleye lakes in Minnesota that can handle a 6 walleye limit.

Border waters are a different scenario.

I think a statewide slot limit would make sense. 13-18″ is what I personally do.
As for limits, it really depends on the lake. It would be best to regulate each lake differently, but obviously, that’s a lot more effort and research to follow those regulations and hard to enforce them as well.

grizzly wrote:

Just stop people from keeping all those 8-10 inch fish. such a waste

People keep 8 inch walleyes?

My thoughts are that some lakes in Minnesota can probably handle a six walleye limit..many others likely cannot. Many lakes in the southern part of the state have very limited if any natural reproduction. I don’t think these types of lakes would be able to outproduce the pressure they receive.
The well known walleye lakes in the northern part of the state pretty much all have special regs and slots and are managed as part of an individual plan. I think that it would make a lot of sense to manage lake by lake but I don’t think the DNR has the resources to do it. A lot of people also wouldn’t like it.
You already read a fair number of complaints about too many laws, I think the same would go for too many lakes with special regulations. I think MN could benefit overall from a reduced statewide limit. I think six fish for each angler is a lot of fish. I’d rather be able to consistently catch quality fish then eat fish every time I catch them.

Ahren Wagner wrote:

I think a statewide slot limit would make sense. 13-18″ is what I personally do.
As for limits, it really depends on the lake. It would be best to regulate each lake differently, but obviously, that’s a lot more effort and research to follow those regulations and hard to enforce them as well.

When you look at the survey data for a lot of the lakes in MN the data is old. I don’t think the DNR can keep up with the concept of managing beach lake in MN so they have to revert to an acceptable limit based off of the average.

Like others say, state wide regulations don’t make sense.

Personally don’t don’t remember last time I actually caught 4 walleyes in a single outing

Deuces wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Buzz wrote:</div>
Some lakes can easily handle a possession limit of 6 walleyes

I’d like a list of the non stocked natural breeding walleye lakes in Minnesota that can handle a 6 walleye limit.

Border waters are a different scenario.

I can think of 2 within 40 minutes of downtown Minneapolis.

Deuces wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Buzz wrote:</div>
Some lakes can easily handle a possession limit of 6 walleyes

I’d like a list of the non stocked natural breeding walleye lakes in Minnesota that can handle a 6 walleye limit.

Border waters are a different scenario.

Border waters are a different scenario. They also already have more restrictive bag limits (Mississippi River).

I am pretty neutral on the statewide legislation. Some changes that are proactive are a good idea but need to be more specific to different ecosystems. Does something have to be done right now in most places? Probably not. Will something have to be done at some point to actually manage fish populations more closely? Yes. Technology isn’t going anywhere. Biology isn’t ever going to close that gap. I don’t necessarily see how/why a 4 fish limit is a big issue for people. Food or fish fry? 4 fish is a lot. Take a buddy, kid, neighbor out to add to the harvest if you think it’s necessary.

6 fish is glutton. Go to 4 fish with a twice daily possession limit.

gimruis wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>grizzly wrote:</div>
Just stop people from keeping all those 8-10 inch fish. such a waste

People keep 8 inch walleyes?

see it all the time at LOTW

Don’t know how many follow Jeff Sundins Fish Rapper?
http://www.fishrapper.com/ice-fishing-report-minnesota-february-2021.html#sundinWalleyeBagLimitBillFebruary11

Buzz wrote:

Don’t know how many follow Jeff Sundins Fish Rapper?
http://www.fishrapper.com/ice-fishing-report-minnesota-february-2021.html#sundinWalleyeBagLimitBillFebruary11

great read…and it even makes alot of sense!!!!!!!

4 walleyes is plenty of fish for a family to eat. Double bag limit would be nice for when fish frys are planned but if not, then no big deal. Luckily I have kids to come with and catch a few.
I might be able to limit out far more often lol. Nit that I always keep fish. But I do enjoy eating fish once a week at the very least.

4 eyes with 1 over 20. 8 eye possession limit.
Simple and effective.

TC this is exactly what I’m talking about. The current bills, have possession at four, no slot or size max. This is why we need more discussion and input. Anglers such as yourself and others who have commented have something to offer.

ganderpike wrote:

6 fish is glutton

Please explain your logic. One could a argue that 4 is being a glutton if you compare it to 2. Or 2 compared to 1. Or 1 compared to 0, etc.

Recently Gary Barnard Retired DNR Fisheries wrote me. His point isn’t about the bag limit per say but the fishery

MNDNR Fisheries projects minimal harvest reduction from the proposed change, but suggests some localized effects may be achieved on certain lakes or during hot bite periods. What has been missing from the discussion is any evidence that Walleye fisheries are currently being over harvested, or any anticipated biological improvements if some reduction in harvest were achieved. Is the proposed regulation change intended improve Walleye size, increase Walleye abundance, protect spawning stock or some other objective? Without a clearly defined objective there can be no rational discussion about the biological implications of the rule change.
While it may seem intuitive that reduced limits and reduced harvest would be good for Minnesota’s Walleye fisheries that is not necessarily true. There is an abundance of good biological information showing that walleye populations are resilient and respond quite favorably to walleye harvest. Specifically, aggressive harvest can actually stimulate the production of new strong year-classes that are the drivers of robust Walleye fisheries. There are some Walleye populations in Minnesota that would likely benefit from more harvest.
Requiring Minnesota anglers to give up harvest opportunity should not be taken lightly. Minnesota anglers deserve to know what the need is for this rule change and what potential gain might be expected that would offset the loss of harvest opportunity.
I respectfully ask that any process to change the statewide Walleye limit would include specific objectives and an open honest discussion about the biological implications of harvest on the sustainability of our Walleye fisheries.

15″ minimum.

I can tell you if it is reduced to four the possession will also be four. They are not going to increase the possession limit.

I can almost guarantee that no 15 minimum will be considered by legislators, doubt they know what your asking.

Buzz wrote:

…considered by legislators, doubt they know what your asking.

I wonder if legislators have ever considered developing a group of biologists and trained fisheries experts to make decisions like this and others pertaining to Minnesota’s natural resources. I bet this group of trained personnel would be pretty good at making these sorts of rules and regulations. The group might even end up being big enough to be considered a department… they could call it the Department of Natural Resources.

tswoboda wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Buzz wrote:</div>
…considered by legislators, doubt they know what your asking.

I wonder if legislators have ever considered developing a group of biologists and trained fisheries experts to make decisions like this and others pertaining to Minnesota’s natural resources. I bet this group of trained personnel would be pretty good at making these sorts of rules and regulations. The group might even end up being big enough to be considered a department… they could call it the Department of Natural Resources.

In this state we don’t hire qualified people to do a job that uneducated biased people can do. What fun would that be? You are correct, we spend millions of taxpayer dollars for these guys to do an important job and then let unqualified people make the call on laws. Plain stupidity. Does NASA have somebody from Podunk Minnesota tell them how much rocket fuel to load for a trip around the moon?

suzuki wrote:

15″ minimum.

15″ minimums create lakes full of 14.5″ fish.
Look at LQP & Big Stone when they had minimums. Bitter & Poinsett in SD when they had minimums. The walleye fishing in all of those lakes is multitudes better now than at the peak of the “minimum” regs.

I feel like this has been talked about before and most people were in favor of 4 walleye and 8 for possession limit. I would be in support of that. Disclaimer: I don’t speak for everyone and this was just my take on what I remember from the past discussions. I do feel it should be based on the body of water but understand that we don’t have the resources for that.

Rodwork wrote:

I feel like this has been talked about before and most people were in favor of 4 walleye and 8 for possession limit. I would be in support of that. Disclaimer: I don’t speak for everyone and this was just my take on what I remember from the past discussions. I do feel it should be based on the body of water but understand that we don’t have the resources for that.

I’m not saying I disagree, but I’d bet my life that we don’t see MN go with anything other than a day’s bag limit matching the possession limit.

HF100 which hasn’t had a hearing yet. Contact your Representative if you want to see changes. Authors (3)
Ecklund ; Sundin ; Lislegard

Section 1. new text beginWALLEYE LIMIT; RULE AMENDMENT.new text end
new text begin (a) The commissioner of natural resources must amend Minnesota Rules, part 6262.0200,
subpart 1, item F, to reduce the aggregate walleye limit from six to four.
new text end
new text begin (b) The commissioner may use the good cause exemption under Minnesota Statutes,
section 14.388, subdivision 1, clause (3), to adopt rules under this section, and Minnesota
Statutes, section 14.386, does not apply except as provided under Minnesota Statutes, section
14.388.
new text end
new text begin EFFECTIVE DATE. new text end new text beginThis section is effective the day following final enactment.

Can someone please explain the logic of having your daily and possession limit the same. I think 6 is generous but never have understood that one and even lived in MN for 12 years.