Lake of the Woods anglers caught with 72 walleyes, saugers

A group of anglers that spent a couple of days on Lake of the Woods and the Rainy River was caught with 72 walleyes and saugers — a whopping 48 fish over the limit.

Sad!

https://bringmethenews.com/minnesota-news/lake-of-the-woods-anglers-caught-with-72-walleyes-saugers-48-fish-over-their-limit

Makes you wonder how often that sort of poaching goes on without anybody getting caught.

In illegal nets all the time.

I bet this happens all over way more than I want to actually know about because this stuff just drives me nuts!

Enforcement of existing rules would do just as much to protect resources as reducing bag limits.

I know everyone hates “paying more”, but I’d still gladly pay another $10 a year on my fishing license if I knew it went 100% towards CO’s in the field enforcing bag limits.

buckybadger wrote:

I know everyone hates “paying more”, but I’d still gladly pay another $10 a year on my fishing license if I knew it went 100% towards CO’s in the field enforcing bag limits.

Agreed. There is another thread I think BK shared where they are talking about reducing not adding too. All the money that is funneled into the DNR and yet they are cutting costs?

CaptainMusky wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>buckybadger wrote:</div>
I know everyone hates “paying more”, but I’d still gladly pay another $10 a year on my fishing license if I knew it went 100% towards CO’s in the field enforcing bag limits.

Agreed. There is another thread I think BK shared where they are talking about reducing not adding too. All the money that is funneled into the DNR and yet they are cutting costs?

Verified, viable stocking efforts and enforcement of limits are where I’d love to see more money spent versus cut. I’ll gladly pay for it too…but the bureaucratic hurdles shown in BK’s post are the issue. I’d love to see the MNDNR streamline their funds with more transparency. They’d have a far greater support group among anglers.

I’d love nothing more than to have a quick chat and be checked by local CO’s on a more regular basis. Unfortunately I wasn’t checked once this year or last…and I put in a lot of time on the water from April-Mid July compared to most.

Enforcement is a disappointingly small portion of the DNR budget. The DNR has a huge scope of responsibility in additional to hunting and fishing management – forestry management, land management (state parks, SNAs, WMAs and more), mineral rights oversight, non-game fish and wildlife management, environmental impact statement vetting and more. The idiots in the legislature continually add scope, add administrative overhead and cut funding. The Legislature is still pissed that the voters took control of money for the outdoors out of their control with the Legacy Amendment and do all in their power to claw back funds. The DNR isn’t perfect but they get a bad rap. It’s the Legislature that is largely at fault for the weaknesses of the DNR.

Anyone ever read the “Cuffs & Collars” section of Outdoor News? Amazing/depressing how on a daily basis there are plenty of blatant violations, some due to ignorance and others just because they don’t care and don’t think they’ll get caught.

**Good CO’s don’t get enough credit, and credit is due to the CO’s from that article who rather quickly and efficiently addressed that problem.

buckybadger wrote:

I know everyone hates “paying more”, but I’d still gladly pay another $10 a year on my fishing license if I knew it went 100% towards CO’s in the field enforcing bag limits.

This. I really believe poaching is rampant. And I think we are ignorant to think it isn’t a problem. I’ve seen it more than I wish to see it just fishing around my area. Can’t imagine how often it happens on big walleye lakes or great panfishing lakes. There just no one out there to stop people right now. Really need more.

Brad Dimond wrote:

Enforcement is a disappointingly small portion of the DNR budget. The DNR has a huge scope of responsibility in additional to hunting and fishing management – forestry management, land management (state parks, SNAs, WMAs and more), mineral rights oversight, non-game fish and wildlife management, environmental impact statement vetting and more. The idiots in the legislature continually add scope, add administrative overhead and cut funding. The Legislature is still pissed that the voters took control of money for the outdoors out of their control with the Legacy Amendment and do all in their power to claw back funds. The DNR isn’t perfect but they get a bad rap. It’s the Legislature that is largely at fault for the weaknesses of the DNR.

Great post. I completely agree.

This is a daily occurrence all over the states. Sad reality

I wonder where they are from. They must not be from out of state, since articles like this usually mention that if they are.

What’s really scary is all of the smaller lakes where it’s much easier to poach. How many lakes have we all been to where you never see a CO.

Sad, just sad.

I often wonder if stricter penalties wouldn’t be a good tool to deter poaching too. In a case such as this, the punishment should be not only fines and confiscation but taking away hunting and fishing privileges for 5 years, 10 years or even life.

Karry Kyllo wrote:

I often wonder if stricter penalties wouldn’t be a good tool to deter poaching too. In a case such as this, the punishment should be not only fines and confiscation but taking away hunting and fishing privileges for 5 years, 10 years or even life.

Agree

Karry Kyllo wrote:

I often wonder if stricter penalties wouldn’t be a good tool to deter poaching too. In a case such as this, the punishment should be not only fines and confiscation but taking away hunting and fishing privileges for 5 years, 10 years or even life.

Not to sound like a dink, but you really think poachers wouldn’t hunt or fish if they didn’t have a license?

I disagree that poaching is a huge problem.

Irks the heck out of me but think it’s exaggerated on the actual numbers.

Ask me it’s the legal meat haulers who are pounding fish. Go home eat fish, go catch more, go home give away fish, go catch more, go home eat fish and give away fish, go catch more. Just my 2 cents

buckybadger wrote:

Enforcement of existing rules would do just as much to protect resources as reducing bag limits.

I know everyone hates “paying more”, but I’d still gladly pay another $10 a year on my fishing license if I knew it went 100% towards CO’s in the field enforcing bag limits.

I agree 110%.

stout93 wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Karry Kyllo wrote:</div>
I often wonder if stricter penalties wouldn’t be a good tool to deter poaching too. In a case such as this, the punishment should be not only fines and confiscation but taking away hunting and fishing privileges for 5 years, 10 years or even life.

Not to sound like a dink, but you really think poachers wouldn’t hunt or fish if they didn’t have a license?

I agree 100%. If they are poaching 99% won’t care if their hunting and fishing rights are taken away. It will just mean they won’t have to pay for a license. Confiscating fishing equipment, boat, truck, etc. That will get some poachers attention. Or give them the option to keep their equipment and spend time–30 days in jail.

A few years back WI CO’s caught a 72 year old guy fishing Lake Onalaska over the limit on panfish. Checked his freezer and had something like 2000 panfish. No license. Took his boat, motor, and equipment. Told the judge “this won’t stop me from fishing”. He was selling the fish in Chicago. It was the 7th TIME he had been caught in violation.????

I know they talk about “gross overlimit” sometimes. I believe fines get stiffer over a certain amount. At what point does a case like this become gross overlimit. Are we talking 50% over or double limit?

Another thing that hasn’t been mentioned that is very surprising. Is that THE BITE IS ON time to get up there.

Red Eye wrote:

I know they talk about “gross overlimit” sometimes. I believe fines get stiffer over a certain amount. At what point does a case like this become gross overlimit. Are we talking 50% over or double limit?

Another thing that hasn’t been mentioned that is very surprising. Is that THE BITE IS ON time to get up there.

Go hammer some 13 inch saugs

Agree with pretty much everyone above.

Sickening and all too common.

Would gladly spend more on a license etc. for extra enforcement. Increased enforcement and penalties, I believe, are THE most important tools for addressing this issue.

Imagine how much different your fishing experiences would be if these ahos weren’t out there… Unrealistic? Sure, but every one of them caught makes a difference —no pun intended— especially over an extended period of time.

How is this any different than the practice of guides gifting their catch to clients? Alot of the guides in the Green Bay, Lake of the Woods area not only do this every day, but twice a day at times. How many of you have used a guide and kept his fish. The guides are intentionally skirting the law, and actually breaking the law if they do two trips a day and gift their catch as they have actually caught and have not released any fish over their limit for the day. Who is the real problem in over fishing, the occasional fisherman who over catches his limit, and should be prosecuted by the way, or in fact your popular fishing guides who continue to every day not only catch their limit not only once, but at times twice per day. In fact if their freezers at home have a two days limit of walleyes in them, they legally should be releasing every fish they catch. Another situation, if you used a Green Bay guide, Lake of the Woods guide, or any guide for that matter, and say there were two of you plus the guide in the boat trolling for walleye. You have a good day of fishing and catch 15 walleye, 10 for the two of you, and 5 for the guide that he is going to gift to you, did the guide reel in any of those fish? If not, that means that you the clients actually broke the law and were catching over your limit. Who are the real abusers?

Who are the real abusers?

The poachers. Be it Joe Sixpack or Joe Guide.
I can’t talk about the lakes but in my neck of the woods on pool 4, it’s not the few guides.

In fact, I was with a walleye guide one day around 2003 and we came close to a guide with his clients. My guide flat out called him a poacher in front of me and HIS clients.

I guess my question is, why call out the guides when a poacher is a poacher?

buckybadger wrote:

I know everyone hates “paying more”, but I’d still gladly pay another $10 a year on my fishing license if I knew it went 100% towards CO’s in the field

I could not agree more. Only honest people follow the law when no one is around to enforce it.

stout93 wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Karry Kyllo wrote:</div>
I often wonder if stricter penalties wouldn’t be a good tool to deter poaching too. In a case such as this, the punishment should be not only fines and confiscation but taking away hunting and fishing privileges for 5 years, 10 years or even life.

Not to sound like a dink, but you really think poachers wouldn’t hunt or fish if they didn’t have a license?

You’re right about stricter penalties not stopping all poaching but stricter penalties will deter some from poaching.
There’s no way to stop all poaching but jail time with mandatory sentences if getting caught poaching after fishing and hunting rights have been revoked would be the next step.
Make the penalties so tough that no one wants to risk getting busted for poaching.

So very sad. If more money for a license would go to pay for more C.O.’s I would definitely be for it. Unfortunately the penalties are not stiffer.

MN Fish Value by Size