Minnesota open water 2 lines proposed

It is proposed again, who knows if it will ever happen, but their is a bill right now proposing a law to allow to lines on the inland waters of minnesota.

I have heard th views of quite a few people, many people are for it, some are against, some have mixed feelings and are undecided if it would be a good change. Even one of the local game wardens here had *mixed feelings* about the proposed law.. but he readily admitted he would love the use of another line while targeting flatheads on his home stretch of water.

Without starting a huge debate, what are some of your views on the legal use of a 2nd line in Minnesota? I am not opposed to it. It would come in handy fishing flatheads, sturgeon, trolling applications, float fishing.. the list goes on and on. I regularly fish bodies of water here(border) where 2 lines are already legal, and their is no difference in suspected mortality rates(fish swallowing hooks) than their is with one line. The same goes for many other states I do fish with multiple lines allowed(up to 10 in some cases). I am sure that some lakes will require special regs to keep them at one line.. but that is not what I am pointing out here. I am pointing out the average body of water in Minnesota.

The question comes down to will it affect the fisheries with te extra line down due to increased harvest and mortality from catch and release.

The way I look at it, there are *prime* seasons where fish are very easy to come by.. 1 line or 6. Off peak timesof the year it can be dificult to catch any fish, or very low numbers caught of potential *harvestable* fish… that extra line might account for 1 fish for dinner, or an extra fish for dinner on a tough walleye bite in July when the bite isnt favorable on lakes A-Z. I think the increased harvest will be minimal overall, and the average fishery can sustain a slight increase in potential harvest. Our limits and slots are set for a reason, to protect the fisheries. Its rare that a limit is caught in the non-prime seasons, let alone harvested. More trips produce 0-2 fish than produce a limit much of the year.

My views lean towards its not going to have negative impact on the fishery.

This is just my opinion. What is yours? Are you for, or against 2 lines in Minnesota?

The way that technology is making finding fish easier with graphs and cameras I think that the one line rule is a fair rule. Some of our fisheries have taken a huge hit in the last decade making stocking fish to meet fishermans expectaitions vary hard. Allowing another line in the water on some of these smaller less productive bodies of water will no doubt increase the ability of the average fisherman to get more fish than he would with one line. Many of the people on this website are people who have respect for the resource but I am afraid that many of the people on the lakes do not feel the same way that we do. People who get out once in a great while tend to take most everything that they catch and with many people comming from out of state with a few days or a week to catch and keep as many fish as they can. Yes I would like to catch more fish everytime that I am on the water but I would rather have fish to be able to catch. Seems to me that the DNR is already loosing the battle in stocking efforts and this would just add to it. I would love to be able to put down an extra line in the winter though! My .02

Brandon

2 lines works for me. I dont keep many fish anyways. Not sure how letting everyone use 2 would effect some fisheries.

My thoughts go to some of the small resorts on some of the lakes off the beaten path. Lakes where allowing an extra line each may increase an anglers success and thus increase the odds the angler and their family will return to some of those areas that could use the economic shot in the arm.

Our running joke is that it is almost illegal to fish in Minnesota with some of the laws not really based on fish biology or sound management principles. There is little reason I can see to limit the angler to one line – in most other states I fish the limit is higher than that.

Sure would love to be able to troll with two cranks to dial things in better and learn more about trolling with cranks – the learning curve for trolling is steep – and steeper when one cannot really experiment much with just one line each. (Of course James makes fishing new methods easier with his videos!) My 2 cents – your results may vary… Chuckles

two lines would work you still cant take any more fish then one limit

Quote:

---

two lines would work you still cant take any more fish then one limit

---

Plus most people will still only use one rod. Look at all the people that fish down at Red Wing. You can use two rods but there are a lot of people that still only use one rod.
Jamie

2 lines get’s my vote!

Just because you can fish 2 lines does not mean you catch twice as many fish! I’m living proof time after time on the St. Croix.

There is only 1 limit so people who take more are poaching and there’s already a law against that.

The DNR already takes into account angler impact and sets special limits on many lakes if needed to improve fishery.

I like to believe most people are law abiding instead of the other way around.

Ferny

I would have to agree with everyone that favors 2 lines. Regardless of 1 line or 20 lines, you can only take one limit. If you are a law breaker, do you really care about how many lines or how many limits one can take? There are good days and bad days on the water; a “limit” is a “limit”. Just my 2 cents.

The annaul “Round Table” conference just got over and this two line thing was NOT on the agenda and was NOT discussed.

The “Round Table” is DNR/ “expert” citizens/ some lawmakers at times. They discuss/decide how the DNR should proceed on various proposals and or how to solve problem issues relative to fishing and hunting.

IF this 2 line thing has “momentum”, I would think it would have been on the agenda.

There is no outcry from the general public in big numbers for DNR to make a change. The key proponent of this bill called me yesterday to get my feelings and see if I would endorse it.

Bascially, I see no need for change but wouldn’t argue against it. In an age where conservation is a directive, I doubt anyone with any clout will get this historical change passed.

Steve Fellegy
218-678-3103

I don’t see any need for a 2 line change. 1 line suites me just fine. I’m out there to ‘FISH’ not to See how fast I can fill the box. …….BB

I am for it. However I would like to see a 3 lines go into effect for ice fishing. It more than likely will never happen but it would be nice to have a dead stick, jig stick and a tip up out!

steve fellegy.. It got printed in the outdoor news, and the game warden here knew of it. so it does currently exist. Its not an imaginary proposal.

I doubt it would pass for even next year(08 season), but getting it out in the open and possibly getting some hard facts down on the overall effects from waters with 2 lines allowed.. it just may produce some useful data on whether this could or couldnt be allowed.. what *real* affect on the fishery.

Of course I know the bill officially has been drawn up and will be pursued.

As I said, it was NOT on the Round Table agenda, even though , of course, they knew of this and many past proposals such as the latest, and didn’t see it’s merit for discussion. Therefore, most likely, not being endorsed by the DNR, the bill “most likely” will not be of high priority for the lawmakers to consider/pass in ’07 or in the near future. (just MY opinion–I could be wrong)

I don’t care either way! I rarely wish I had another line per person in the water. The above is just my take on how the subject is most likely gonna play out.

Steve Fellegy
218-678-3103

Anyone who didn’t read fellegy’s article in Outdoor News on the idea of 2 lines in MN really should, he brings up some excellent points and thoughts on the subject.

As to catching more or less fish I dont know if two lines would make a difference.However!!! As to only keeping one limit of fish is a LAW we see broken alot, we need the DNR to apply the laws already on the books and enforce those.
Then maybe a “limit” would be easier to obtain. I understand this is a little of subject, read in the back of outdoor news cuffs and collars there are plenty of people fishing more than two lines ice fishing and open water.

I say this is one law or privledge we dont need.just my $.02 worth.

Thank You eyedoctor2

Personally.. I dont really care if I catch a *limit* or not.. I dont aways keep fish, even more rare that I would keep a limit of anything except for crappies a couple times a winter. I do however keep a walleye(or northern) or 2 here and there.. at the rate my family eats fish. Our fish limits are the way they are for a reason. We are only allowed to have one limit of fish in possession(water and home combined), and that includes 1 fish over X size of gamfish species. Freezer stackers, they will do it if they can, one line or 10. I really dont see what those acting illegally should have to do with the mass majority acting within the laws.

I dont see where the geeral public’s fishing practices should be resticted by what another *might do*… Odds are the other is already doing it, and probably usig more than one line every chance they get to do it.

In the long run, more education on conservation to up and coming and existing fishermen is going to do more good than having an entire fleet of CO’s.

I am keeping away from hypothetical situations completely… Hypothetically(sp?), I could get run over and killed by a drunk driver when I go to the store in a few minutes, the odds are higher because its a weekend night, and its not as safe to be on the road… realisticly, the cigarettes I am going to buy are probably going to kill me before a drunk driver ever does(unless its myself drinking and driving).

Well I would like to see two lines, for trolling it’s nice to be able to run two lines when I’m out by myself, I think it’s a stupid rule too in a state that lets you fish two lines in winter, I think Ice fishing is the hardest on lakes, rarely do I see people catch and release in winter, magnify that where there are times that there are thousands of people on a lake, lakes around me see atleast 10x’s the fishing pressure in winter.

Opening two lines for summer too? why the heck not?

I’m primarly a catch and release guy myself.

Dave, you know my thoughts on this and I’m not getting into another heated discussion.

However, if anyone would like to add themselves to a collection of signatures that I will sending to the appropriate person at the appropriate time please feel free.

My Petition

It’s somewhere around 100 right now and I would love to see it much higher.

Dtro Thanks for putting that link up. I am sure you will get a lot more to sign. I just did!

The tough thing to accept is that we CAN’T all take our limits. If everyone took their legal limit then the lakes and rivers would be emptied out pretty quickly. There’s too much information, to many tools, and frankly we’re too good at this now. The only justification for using two lines is that you “can only keep one limit”. I submit that we really can’t keep limits on a regular basis and expect high quality fishing.

Quote:

---

Dave, you know my thoughts on this and I’m not getting into another heated discussion.

However, if anyone would like to add themselves to a collection of signatures that I will sending to the appropriate person at the appropriate time please feel free.

My Petition

It’s somewhere around 100 right now and I would love to see it much higher.

---

Got it signed dtro! No heated discussions around here If people choose to start fighting over the subject, I would hope the post gets removed. As it is now, I think its very respectful.

I think its an impotant thing to discuss if the majority(seems to be by poll) ever wants to see it happen. And its just as important to those who are opposed to it. People views can be shared.. and some peoples minds may be changed about the subject either way. The only hard facts we have now are the border waters fisheries are not destroyed which already allow 2 lines, and people do harvest fish. I dont think those fisheries would be any better if they only allowed 1 line. Some will say thats a lot of water.. and it is, but so is the 13,000+ lakes in the state of Minnesota. On the average, most of these lakes see very little fishing pressure.

Without a heated debate, I like to see what others think on the issue.

I would like the use of another line, we all know that. My harvest practices wouldnt change from what they are now if I could use 10 lines.. and I get enough to eat often enough now only using one line. The main reason I want to lines is to be able to make my fishing presentation more effective in many diferent situations.

I dont fish strictly to eat, most people dont. I fish for recreation and enjoyment. The more effective my presentation can become, the more enjoyable my outing is going to be.. so, I’m greedy, I like to catch as many fish as I can in the time that I am allowed on the water. If my catch rate is increased 50% by use of another line.. great! If I am sitting in a spot with no fish. it doesnt make a difference how many lines I have.. Im not catching squat!

I think 2 lines would be a great idea. Specially with the numbers going down for new young fisherman. It would hopefully provide more action to keep our kids interested longer… Also I wouln’dt mind paying a “2 line” user fee on my license to help stocking efforts.

My 2 cents.
I grew up fishing in Iowa where 2 lines are allowed. I dont think it helped catch anymore fish, but it did help catch differant fish. I could bottom fish for cats on one line and fish for what ever else on the other. Iowa has far fewer lakes, meaning far fewer fish and you can fish with 2 lines. Using just one line or 2 isnt going to change how many fish “legal” people keep.

My theory is that it is still 90% of the fish are caught by 10% of the fisherman. The rest of those on teh body of water are not going to catch that many fish. Granted, that is a huge assumption, but one that I feel is legitimate.

It would make more sense to me, to lower limits, set slot limits, or otherwise slow down harvest and allow two lines.

We are not going to change the “meat” fisherman. They will always keep every fish that they catch. Are these people going to harm a fishery? I don’t think so. But the vast majority of people reading this post or are members of this website are not “meat” guys. Granted, we all will take a few home for the table, but I would say the majority of fish caught, go right back to where they came from. Personally, I think I had one walleye dinner last year.

So with all that being said, (sorry for the ramble), it should be two lines IMHO. Will it ever happen in the state where nothing is allowed? Problably not. I think we can debate all we want, but the DNR does not really care what we think.

Same thing with deer hunting being in the middle of the rut. We are the only state that does this, but will it ever be changed? No.

Farmboy.. will it ever happen with 2 lines? I dont know. But I know it wont happen if people dont keep bringing it to their attention. They can ignore it forever, but dont think they will. The affect it will have on the fisheries is what they are concerned with. We already have slot limits on gamefish(1 fish over XX”) which is pretty conservative(20″ walleye, 30″ northern, 40″ musky). That in itself greatly reduces the number of mature spawners taken out of the system every given day.

Yes, there are meat hunters out there, and most of them eat a lot of fish, some of them depend on those fish for groceries,others are just greedy.. but if they are greedy, evntually the law could catch up with them with the increased number of people looking over conservation(tip, more CO’s, etc). Although we dont have as many CO’s as we need, the few we do have are more effective with the help of the tip program, and they are sneaking around in new ways these days to catch people(bikes, etc). They have changed a lot in time. 10 years ago I rarely seen a warden once a summer in the metro, last year I seen them more than 20 times. I guarantee they were watching me more often than that from a distance with binoc’s to see if I was violating laws. Some of the places I ran into them were very out of the way that nobody knew about. The CO’s we have these days are doing very good jobs.

The fish limits we have now are pretty good with the exception of muskies(shoud be 48″). I wouldnt want to see them drop any further for possession. I fish the most in my family, and thats feeding 4 now. We like to have fish every couple weeks. 6 walleyes in the fridge/freezer isnt excessive considering a 15″ fish doesnt have a ton of meat, a limit of crappies is even less(ten 10″ fish). 6 walleyes 15″-18″ for 4 people I consider to be 2 meals… is that really too much for someone to be harvesting in a trip when they are lucky enough to catch them? I dont think so. It is a bit excessive for the person fishing for themselves.. but all the bachelors I know will keep 1 or 2 walleyes and let the rest go when fishing is good. Either way, the one who harvest a limit has what is legally allowed at home, and can not harvest more legally until some fish are consumed.

In the summer months, I see mexicans(not a racial statement) fishing the minnesota river keeping sheepshead by the 100’s per week.. I dont see anyone complaining, and the sheepshead population doest seem to be declining I am sure they eat every one of them with their kids I am gald its not walleyes, but I also know it would never happen because of the constant presence of enforcement in popular areas. If 2 lines were allowed on that same area for fishing, I dont think ANY more fish would be harvested because its already shoulder to shoulder fishermen in a limited area.. no room to throw in another line.

Dave,

I agree with you on the wardens doing a great job with what they have to work with (limited budgets).

I will say again, I don’t think people like you or I, who keep fish for an occasional meal, are a problem. The people who keep every fish they catch, every time they are out there, are a problem. Are the wardens helping the matter. Heck yes. Are the TIP lines helping the matter. Heck yes. Are we at the final solution yet. Heck no.

Now I would say that the limits are fair. But they are becoming more difficult to understand (Mille Lacs). I don’t see the musky change, as 90% of people who catch them will release them, and the rest, problably don’t know the size restriction anyways. The occasional musky kept is not going to harm the population.

I still think the MN DNR cares to change this. There are many more important items for them to worry about then changing this law. Maybe it is the “half empty” in me, but I don’t see it happening.

I have signed the petition, and would love to fish with 2 lines. I normally fish where it is legal (pool 4), and think its great, but there are too many other factors in play for them to allow this.

Brent

Quote:

---

In the long run, more education on conservation to up and coming and existing fishermen is going to do more good than having an entire fleet of CO’s.

---

My favorite quote of this thread.

You can never convince me that an extra line in the water will adversely effect Minnesota waters. The DNR makes special regs on lakes every year and you could impose a one pole limit if needed, although again, I would argue you aren’t doing anything to help. Special limits play more of a role there. Most people will use 2 poles when applicable. If you are into a mess of fish, people will put the extra pole away because it is like trying to fish in a boatload of kids. You get so frustrated trying to manage things, you’ll end up not fishing and just fishing “through” the kids by helping them.

DTRO, can you verify that I signed that petition. I think I did some time back. I will forward it to the family and boost your, er, our numbers.

Quote:

---

The tough thing to accept is that we CAN’T all take our limits. If everyone took their legal limit then the lakes and rivers would be emptied out pretty quickly. There’s too much information, to many tools, and frankly we’re too good at this now. The only justification for using two lines is that you “can only keep one limit”. I submit that we really can’t keep limits on a regular basis and expect high quality fishing.

---

Exactly what I was thinking. 2 lines means more fish caught and there’s already a problem with small and medium lakes getting fished too hard. There are still way to many fish hogs in the sport and they don’t need an extra edge.

I was under the impression that when the DNR set’s limits, they judge it off an “average” angler.

The “average” angler does not go out everytime, or even “some of the time” and catch their limits. But “once in a while” they hit the jackpot and score big.

The intent of the limits is to give an “overall” snapshot of what “could happen” and place restrictions.

Now, you add in 2 fishing lines, that increases the opportunity to harvest faster. With that said, the average angler may indeed catch their limits more often. All due to process elimination.

We have already seen limits reduced on all species.

Will having 2 lines possibly result in lower harvet limits?

If everyone else is catching a limit every time they go out, I need to retake up golf.