Flathead Regs?

What are the flathead regulations in WI and MN if any? We really don’t have any state wide regs at all, and very few site specific regulation.

I believe there is NO Flatheads specific regs. Flats and Channels just fall under Catfish regs.

Which really doesnt matter to most of us dont keep flats anyhow.

Phil is right, although you can only possess 2 flatheads out of whatever the limit is in MN, I believe. That’s about the only restriction. I may be wrong though, because like Phil said, I return mine so I don’t really pay attention to the regs on catfish.

MN/WI border waters…10 MN Regs

MN/WI border waters…25 WI Regs.

They taste like chicken. the bigger the fish the better they taste.

Quote:

---

They taste like chicken. the bigger the fish the better they taste.

---

That’s what a fella from MO told me…’cept they taste better than chicken.

And make sure you don’t smash your neighbor’s fence with one… You don’t want to unleash Grouse or get groused at…

Let the Flats go and let them grow!! Keep Channels, they taste better IMO.

The belly meat is the best, especially off the big ones, the rest is pretty good too. I’ve got about 30 lbs of flatheads in my freezer right now that I’m saving for mid winter plus about 50 lbs of nice channels, anybody want to join me then, its delecious at that time. Fried potatoes, cole slaw and deep fried catfish with homemade tartar sauce when its cold and snowing out, mmm mmmm mmmm.

I have to disagree with Joe, A properly cleaned flathead in the 3-7lb range is one of the best eating fish in the river. You have to bleed them before cleaning and keeping a few for the pan is fine. Eat bigger ones at your own risk, they have high mercury levels around here.

What you just said reminds me of the smaller rivers around here Kevin. Fish were tested for mercury and catfish had less in them then the walleyes, smallies and bluegills that were also tested, got that off the DNR’s wbsite, it totally surprised me, I thought it would be the other way around. Testing was done sometime mid summer.

Mossy,

I’m not calling you out or anything but if the cats eat the gills, the mercury from them accumulates in the predator. One cat might have the mercury of a thousand gills in it’s belly depending on how old they are. My buddy Jake is a mercury testing scientist here with the Feds. I’ll see if he will comment.

All I know is I eat enough damn chicken that I don’t need to eat something else that tastes like a Fn chicken!

I know what your saying Kevin and it didn’t sound like you were calling me out lol and its hard to believe but I read it twice because I also thought it would be the other way around. I couldn’t believe it eigther and this was from some smaller colder N.E. Iowa streams that are spring fed. I know that throws a rock into the gears of most thinking but thats the way I read it. Sounds crazy I know, maybe I read it wrong but I read it twice, maybe read it wrong both times,,,lol

I’ve eaten smaller 5-8 pounders during the spring. Didn’t taste too bad, tasted better than channels. I am a strong conservationist and I believe strongly in taking a few smaller fish for dinner when you need them and letting the bigger ones go, same for walleye/sauger and crappie.

Could happen that flats from a small stream would have less mercury than bluegills from an entirely different body of water.

In general though, bigger predator = more mercury. The small cats will have less than the bigs.

Also – on keeping them: large cats have 100% chance of carrying the genes to make large cats. Throw ’em back! Small cats may or may not.

LOL!! Pug, what kind of chicken did you say, funny!

Quote:

---

All I know is I eat enough damn chicken

---

Great! Now WI is going to want to build “chicken” passage ways.

Lol Brian!

Quote:

---

And make sure you don’t smash your neighbor’s fence with one… You don’t want to unleash Grouse or get groused at…

---

That’s it? I was hoping to hear that the regulations were a little tighter. I’m not trying to stir the pot or anything just wondering.

I catch and release every flathead and channel I catch. I don’t fear them going extinct or anything, however I would love to catch more big fish. The only way to do that is by letting more of them get that big by releasing them. Keeping a smaller flathead here or there is ok, but when it is unregulated a small minority of people can take out more fish than the larger majority and hurt the fishery overall. This is more evident in a smaller fishery like mine as opposed to a larger one where commercial fishing makes a larger impact, however I wish there was a larger interest in preserving some larger fish.

moosemj,

We’ve started the MN Catfish and Sturgeon Alliance totally 78 members at this time.

The goal of the Alliance is to improve cat fishing and sturgeon fishing in MN.

The Alliance has successfully arranged workshops with the MN DNR (2nd one is coming up in two weeks) to explore ways of improving the over all cat fishing experience. Keeping it what it is now, but also making it better for everyone.

The DNR selected stakeholders from across the state to bring their concerns to the table. There are anglers and bait shop owners from
the

Red River area (Channels)
St Louis River (Channels)
Pool 1 to Pool 4 of the Mississippi (Flats and Channels)
and a bunch from the MN River from St Paul to darn near Red Wood Falls. (Flats and Channels)
St Croix (Flats and Channels)

At the first meeting, there were many concerns brought up along with positive comments about the way the DNR is paying attention to the cat fishers of the State. More so now than ever before. There’s actually a DNR Biologist that is tagging cats and asking for our help by keeping and turning in a diary. (The posts are in this forum) Joel post here on Ido and I assume other sites as well.

To me, that alone is HUGE as we don’t hear a peep “directly” from the DNR for any other species of fish.

I can’t finish this thread as it’s my turn to cook tonight, but feel free to give me a ring if you would like to hear more.

I will add that the WI DNR (from my personal experience only) is not interested in looking at any of it’s policies/rules for catfish on the border waters…at least that was the message I walked away with from the conversations I’ve had with a Headquarters Supervisor.

25 cats of either species
Commercial Harvest of Flathead catfish (from the WI side of the river)

(all numbers rounded down in pounds)
99 38,000
00 21,000
01 20,000
02 21,000
03 31,000
04 26,000
05 27,000
06 42,000
07 45,000
08 36,000
09 40,000

Been working on the same thing down here with the IDNR. For the past few years we have been working on angler diaries and a flathead tagging program on two different pools on the Fox River. As a matter of fact they will be out in a few weeks running hoop nets to gather more data/tag more fish. If you ever get a chance to get out with the DNR for electro sampling or hoop netting take advantage of it, very interesting.

I would have to look up the data as to how many flatheads have been recaptured, but it has been quite a few indicating a smaller population.

I hope that with these efforts we can have some protection/improvement of our flathead fishery and beyond, but time will tell.

Quote:

---

Commercial Harvest of Flathead catfish (from the WI side of the river)

(all numbers rounded down in pounds)
99 38,000
00 21,000
01 20,000
02 21,000
03 31,000
04 26,000
05 27,000
06 42,000
07 45,000
08 36,000
09 40,000

---

This part makes me sick. I’m still convinced that the mercury content of large cats needs to be measured and made known. I’m not sure how meat from large fish can even be sold as a food product without warnings but I think aiming at the contaminant risk might be the only way to impact the price they get for it. Clearly no WI biologists care about flatheads as a sport fishery.

Quote:

---

Clearly no WI biologists care about flatheads as a sport fishery.

---

It’s going to have to be a WI resident that changes this. I might as well have been talking to my wife about the thought of improving the Mississippi River Flathead Fishery. Actually, my wife would at least listen.

BUT, someone over on the Fox was able to close the Flathead season in the winter months. I would really like to find out how that went down and who was responsible for pushing that law through.

Moose, good luck with your conservation work. Hopefully you will see the fruits of your labor.

Brian, I’m with you on closing the winter season too. Doesn’t seem like it should be that difficult to justify that.

The response I get from the MN DNR is that snagging is illegal already.

I “thought” closing the season would be a no brainer from Nov 1 – April 1 (here in MN/WI). It would help the CO’s because they wouldn’t have to examine fish to speculate if they were snagged. If someone was in possession it’s easier to prove right?

We do have support for this with some of the MN Biologists, but that’s where it ends.

It wouldn’t even effect the commercial guys because most all flats caught by them are caught in gill nights in the warmer waters.

Close it off, there’s a thin line between “jigging” up a flathead and snagging it in it’s giant head…

I’ve often wondered how cold the water gets down your way.

What city is closest to your area of fishing.(PM if you like)

Since I’ve been watching flatheads in less than 40 degree waters for the last four years, I’m a strong believer in those fish not taking bait…or eating at all. Others disagree. I have video proof while others have “jigged” fish in the boat.

It sure is possible that the waters are warmer and they will nab a lure.

Which is why I wouldn’t ever give an opinion on areas further South.

I’m not far enough south for that. St. Charles IL is due west of Chicago like 60 miles. Water gets plenty cold here.