Walleye Discussion Forums
| ||
| View previous thread :: View next thread | |
| Jump to page : 1 Now viewing page 1 [25 messages per page] Regional Walleye Fishing -> Mississippi River -> Response from DNR on bag/size limits |
| Message Subject: Response from DNR on bag/size limits | |||
Beaver |
| ||
Member Posts: 145 | Hey dudes, who says it doesn't pay to fire off a few e-mails and make some noise when it comes to speaking your mind about rules and regulations that are changed or some that we river rats would like to see implemented. Here's a reply that I received after contacting the DNR and thanking them for the new regs and asking for more. The explanations are superb, and I'll be send them a thank-you note as soon as I'm done posting this. There are still people out there that would like to leave things on the river as is. Those of us that spend the majority of our time on the river need to continue to speak up. This is very interesting and informative reading. Beaver Thank you for your response on this issue. To fully address the statements in your email I will need to provide some background information on problem and the rule making process. As with most problems, this one did not occur overnight and in the accompanying paragraphs I've tried to provide a general overview of the problem and solutions. I apologize if this response is a little lengthy. The waters that are affected by this regulation cross four state lines, Iowa, Illinois, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. Moreover, because the Mississippi River encompasses such a large area and its backwater complexes are so vast, state and federal agencies often work together to collect data, share information, and develop regulations that are standardized between bordering states. In addition, developing regulations between states is lengthy process, in part because each state has a different set of procedures and a statutory rule process that must be followed to promulgate regulations. Iowa took the lead on promulgating these new regulations because the majority of the waters are within Iowa's state boundary (the middle if the navigational channel is often the state line). Until recently, Iowa has always had more liberal daily bag and possession limits than Wisconsin and other states. However, faced with a collapsing walleye and sauger fishery, Iowa's resource managers only recourse was to pursue more restrictive regulations to resolve this issue. This population decline is a result of several problems that I will try to explain. First, walleye and sauger have slightly different over-winter strategies. In general, walleye over-winter throughout a pool near wingdams, flowing sloughs, and deep-waters holes. Whereas sauger, migrate to deep-water areas located in the tailwaters of the Lock and Dams to over-winter. This migration usually occurs in late fall once water temperature begin to drop below 50oF. Iowa's pool-wide electrofishing surveys and long term creel census data collected in the tailwaters at Lock and Dam 11-13 show declining walleye and sauger populations for the past decade. Much of this mortality is the result of milder winters which, allows boat access to the tailwaters which, would normally be covered by ice as they are in the upper pools. The majority of the boaters fishing a milder winter would not risk venturing out on the ice below the lock and dams to fish during a normal winter. It has been estimated that for every sauger harvested in the in the winter tailwater fishery during a mild winter (December to about Mid March) that approximately thirty sauger die due to expelled air bladders as a result of being brought out of deep water. The only way to effectively address the tailwater fishing mortality was to limit access to the affected tailwaters. The creation of fish refuges below Lock and Dams 11-13 effectively eliminated the mortality concerns associated with these deepwater over-wintering areas and also makes it easy to enforce from a law enforcement perspective. Walleyes on the other hand, which do not over-winter in significant numbers below the lock and dams were declining because of problem with recruitment. Over the past decade fish were being removed from the fishery faster than could be replaced. To address this problem, a closed slot limit from 20-27 inches with one fish allowed over 27 inches would effectively increase productivity. The hypothesis being (and models predict) that if you start out with a greater spawning fish, a greater number of eggs and young will survive to recruitment into the fishery and reproduce. The reduction in daily bag is a standardization in regulations that is long over due and helps to address concerns for both species; 1) it reduces exploitation on walleye and sauger populations (more fish to reproduce) and 2) it standardizes and simplifies regulations between MN, WI, IA, and IL. As a Mississippi River Fisheries Biologist, one of the biggest complaints that I hear is that regulations between states are to confusing. Lowering the bag and possession limits will help to simplify regulations and resolve this issue. The walleye fishery in Pools 10, 9, 8 and up are very healthy. There is a tremendous number of 15-18 inch walleye available to fishermen and many can not remember when fishing has been better. As you had mentioned, some anglers do not have your foresight and keep every fish they catch, the larger the fish the better. However, many anglers that fish the spring spawning run do put back egg-laden females except, for the occasional one to go on the wall. The Mississippi River is one of the most productive waters in the state and the walleye/sauger populations are very resilient. In a healthy fishery, removal of some of these larger fish that would have normally died because of natural mortality is an acceptable loss. There are many life history strategies within fish populations that help perpetuate the species. Some fish feed very little right before spawning, some more actively at night, others binge feed and then don't feed for several days, and other fish may feed with fluctuating water levels. As I mentioned earlier, the walleye and sauger populations in Pool 10 and up are healthy and our fall electrofishing surveys show fish in all size categories. Before more restrictive regulations can be passed, such as a sauger length limit or a walleye slot limit several things will need to change. Regrettably, walleye and sauger populations will have to drop to such a level that the majority of fishermen will want change. Trying to convince someone that a more conservative regulation is needed when fishing is as good as its ever been is difficult to say the least. In addition, attitudes at the individual and community level, near the affected resource, will have to change for a regulation of this magnitude to be considered. We regularly present information to rod and gun clubs and the public to keep them informed on walleye and sauger population trends. However, we can not change the minds of the many disgruntled local bar-room biologists who oppose more restrictive regulations. And even thought these individuals usually don't attend the annual spring hearings to voice their opinions, the rhetoric they spread is infectious. This brings me to your comment that we should "sit up and take notice". Even if good regulation package is presented to the public, by no means does this mean it will pass during the Spring Hearings. This new walleye and sauger regulation package passed statewide in the spring of 2003 and takes effect April 1, 2004. However, some conservation congress members (counties that border the Mississippi River) still want to rescind this regulation because a vocal minority are not satisfied with it. This is not the first time a new regulation has seen opposition. Individuals in this area of the state have been making their living off the river for generations and conservation in not always high priority. More sportsmen like yourself need to attend the Annual Spring Hearings to voice your opinion and pass regulations that you believe important. Otherwise, the whole process is failure. again, thank you for your comments Patrick Short Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Mississippi River Fisheries Biologist 1502 E. Lessard Street Prairie du Chien, WI 53821 Telephone: 608-326-8818 Fax: 608-326-7002 -----Original Message----- From: Brunner, Melissa A On Behalf Of FishHabitat Protection Sent: Monday, March 01, 2004 12:35 PM To: Brecka, Brian J.; Short, Patrick H.; Heath, David J Cc: FishHabitat Protection Subject: FW: Mississippi Boundary Waters Dear Brian, Patrick, and Dave, Could one of you please respond to this user's message and cc fishabit? Thanks, Fisheries Management & Habitat Protection WI DNR -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, March 01, 2004 12:29 PM To: FishHabitat Protection Cc: Webmaster Subject: DNR Website Information Request: Fish and Fishing Referring URL: http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/water/fhp/fish/regulations/2004/hook... To whom it may concern. THANK YOU to whomever is responsible for following Iowas lead and reducing the daily bag limit on saugers on The Mississippi River boundary waters. I am an avid Mississippi River fisherman and write articles for some river-related websites and give seminars about river fishing. People who fish the river regularly have been asking for a reduced bag limit for years. When fishermen ask for more restrictions, you should sit up and take notice. We spend much of our lives on the river and we know what's going on with the fishery. We were suprised to see Iowa take the first step, and even more pleased to see Wisconsin follow suit. Now, if we can just get you guys to listen to us and put a size limit on saugers as well, the future will look bright for us river rats. Also, we would also like to see a slot on walleyes, because so many egg-laden females are uncerimoniously yanked out and kept every year. Those of us who spend every spring out there, let anything that looks female go. We know that we are robbing from our kids every time we keep those 22-27 inch females. A slot where you could only keep fish from 15-20 inches and only 1 over 27 would be a great benefit for the prime spawners in the river. We police ourselves, and we think that we are making a difference. Imagine what good could be done if the slot were law? The Mississippi River is a food factory. There is an abundance of baitfish wherever you go. I think that it is time to impose a slot so our kids can enjoy the same fishing that we have today. One over 27" is there just for the "trophy issue". Most anglers that I know throw back anything over 20" anyway. The 15-18" fish are the eaters. We carry cameras and see no need to kill big females. We respect them. So BRAVO to the reduced bag limit! Now lets get a tri-state move to a slot limit going so I can die a happy man. Jim Slivinski Cudahy, WI | ||
| |||
| larry eaton |
| ||
Member Posts: 526 Location: blue mounds,wisc | beaver, i had a phone conversation with mr short and he was a very honest person and he to feels that we fishermen as a whole should start going to spring meetings and start voiceing our opinions about a size and bag limit. its the local fishermen that have to start realizing that its a resource that will be depleted before they start wondering where have the fish gone.then its to late. | ||
| |||
| Beaver |
| ||
Member Posts: 145 | "Every long journey starts with a first step." I know the locals aren't happy. That's because they aren't going to be able to fill their freezers with perch sized saugers quite as quickly as they used to. We've all seen it and I'm sure it makes us all want to puke. You know the scenario, the same three guys in the same place 5 days in a row keeping everything that they catch. I don't believe that they are having fish fries every night, but what are we to do? Call the tip line and tell the DNR to check their freezers? You know that isn't going to happen. We, as serious, concientious river rats need to educate them and get vocal at the hearings and on the water. I've done it at Lynxville in the fall. Guys in duckboats that limit out early on birds that come and tie up to the wall and "jig" sonars. Everything is kept no matter where it's hooked. All I had to do was pull out my camera and take some pictures of snagged fish in the air along with the registration number of the boat.....they get the hint and usually split in a hurry, even though the damage is already done. They might think that I'm an a$$hole, and I don't care. I've been called worse by better. Education is the key. The 15" limit on walleyes that was implemented and bitched about is paying dividends now. Catch and release is getting more prevelant. I've even taken pictures for guys who caught 5 pounders and mailed them the picture after I offered to do it if they put the fish back. We have to lead by example. We have to set the standard. But I'm afraid that we'll never change the minds of some of the locals and some of the visitors that come to the river every spring and fall just for the easy pickins. If every boatlanding was patrolled like the landings at Red Wing, we'd get better enforcement. When you fish three days in a row and get checked by the same 2 guys every day, they get a feel for who's doing what and who to watch. "Can I see your catch? How many did you catch that you released that were legal? How many fish total? Any big fish? Thank you". That's pretty common at Red Wing when the river is crowded in the spring. Perhaps the DNR is spread too thin in the 7,8,9,10 region because of the duck hunting that's going on too. My nephew spent 2 years at several Wisconsin boat landings doing duck creel censuses, but never was told to check the fishermen. In the response that I posted, the nail was hit on the head when it said that the walleye/sauger fishery has never been better. It's hard to ask for more regulations when the fishing is good. We must lead by example and remind our fellow anglers that all of those fat females that they are keeping are the fish that we would produce the fish of the future for us. You'll hear an occasional..."Up yours! Don't tell me what to do." "I bought a lisence, I can do what I want." All we can do is try. It'll still piss me off to see saugers being treated like perch, but at least the total harvest will be lower. We got help on this issue, lets use it as a springboard. Beav | ||
| |||
| larry eaton |
| ||
Member Posts: 526 Location: blue mounds,wisc | beav, your alot like me, your opinions and concerns are very to the point. as you said , i also have been an a-hole and told where to go. had my taillights kicked out, my truck keyed. and had rocks thrown at me by the guys that "own the river" . so i plan on doing the spring hearings and talk to alot of fishermen about size limits and hope that some of them come out of the stone age and think about the future... | ||
| |||
| Rick Larson |
| ||
| Good Job Beaver! Really liked that Short fella's description; "bar-room biologists"!:-) | |||
| |||
| Beaver |
| ||
Member Posts: 145 | I've been through similar battles with bar room biologists in muskie country that blame the decline of the walleye fishery up north on the muskies eating walleyes. It has nothing to do with the thousands of walleyes that get harpooned every spring before they even get a chance to spawn, it's the muskies eating them. Thank God for MN so I can have a place to go muskie fishing where I have a real chance of catching a fish. It's a good thing that I gave up drinking 15 years ago, because when I listen to drunken idiots telling me about what is wrong with the fishing up north, I don't waste my time, I just leave. So do they, generally to the nearest casino. There are some biologists on the river too. 2 years ago I watched 3 guys put 30 fat saugers on an anchor rope. All were nice fat females. It was November and it was obvious they were females. I asked the guys in the boat if they realized that they just wiped out a whole school of prime spawners. One of the geniuses in the boat said,"Why are you so worried? This is the best sauger fishing that we've had in years. We caught just as many yesterday." Those morons will be the first ones to complain about the good ol' days. It's a shame that people don't realize that there is more pressure on the river now more than ever. More fish are harvested every year. Habitat is declining. It is not a perpetual motion machine that constantly pumps out fish without some working parts remaining in place. I'm reminded of an old guy sitting on a bucket whining about the ice fishing in one of my favorite backwater areas going to hell. "What the hell is going on around here? I remember taking double limits of big gills out of here for years. Now this place stinks." I bit my tongue so hard I think I drew blood. He didn't seem to notice that the good growth of coontail and the gin clear water that used to be there was gone. We can only hope that we can educate and outnumber the people that abuse the fishery that we enjoy now. My daughter's hockey season is winding down, so I'll see you guys on the river in a couple of weeks. We can't get a slot limit. We can't carry concealed weapons. But everybody is worried about same sex marriages. There's something screwed up somewhere! Keep spreading the word! Beav Edited by Beaver 3/11/2004 9:44 PM | ||
| |||
| Len |
| ||
Member Posts: 179 | Couldn't agree with you more Beav I here alot of it and the bussiness we do here depends on the fishing.When I first came to this area the fishing was great and now it has started to come back but all who fish have to remember to fish responsibly and let the spawners go.I make it a practice now to throw all females back and after spawn anything over 18" goes back.In most cases I probally only keep 5-6 fish in a week for the pan. Unlike most people I have the chance to fish almost everyday(as long as the wife agrees)and it is nice to see good fish caught,but we all must let the breeding stock go so that it remains good.If this becomes a practice among all of us it will be easy to get a 10 lber.This year the Falling Rock Walleye club made it a rule that before you can weigh in a walleye it must be a min of 26" and yes there was some oppsistion to this but it did pass.This alone will save some of the spawners.At least this is a small attempt at saving a few. | ||
| |||
| hougie |
| ||
Member Posts: 97 Location: Rochester, MN | This is a good post by all you guys. This is a tough issue because the average fisherman works hard and cherishes the little time they have to fish. They are just out there doing what they were taught as a youngster. Yep...that one will fry up good and toss it in the bucket. Those habits are tough to break for people that have been doing that for years especially when its become part of their family for generations to keep em for the pan no matter what size. To be honest...that is how I was taught. My folks kept everything and now it just burns to hear them complain when they go on vacation about that damn slot limit. Dang it we had to throw good eaters back. Well in my book a 22 inch eye isnt much of an eater. (I prefer 15-17 with an occasional 18 when I keep) What really concerns me is the guys that just work the hell out of the scour holes in 40 feet of water throwing 12 inch saugers in the bucket...man that is just not very sporting. And its really clear and obvious what they are up to. But those little saugies are the best tastin fish in the river! That is what you are likely to hear if you confront them. And what if they throw those fish back after reeling them in from that deep of water. They say a fish will die because of the bladder popping when brought in from that kind of depth. So what do you do...make the scour hole off limits? How? This is a real problem because even if they change size limits people will still fish that 40 foot hole and kill fish by throwing them back anyway wont they regardless of size? I think education is the key. Just keep getting the word out that its ok to not keep every fish and identify those fish that the dnr recommends putting back to ensure a healthy fishery. This is all about changing attitudes. You see alot of qdm stickers out there for people that manage deer. Maybe there needs to be a qfm or quality fish mgmt chapter too. Or perhaps a big billboard at all the ramps would do it!! Edited by hougie 3/12/2004 10:08 PM | ||
| |||
| Flounder |
| ||
| If only we all could remember that this great resource needs protected, for our children. As much as I hate the idea sometimes I know it is for the best. Most of the time it is overlooked by only us that we take,take, and not give.. Hey five years down the road will we feel the same way if nothing is done? I would have a hard time explaning that one to my two younger boys! I will see you all on the water, Goodfishing! | |||
| |||
| Beaver |
| ||
Member Posts: 145 | "If there must be trouble,let it be in my lifetime, so that my children may live in peace." Thomas Paine We don't own the river, we're just borrowing it from our kids. Let's all do our part and practice selective harvest without the DNR telling us to. Beav | ||
| |||
| Jump to page : 1 Now viewing page 1 [25 messages per page] |
| Search this forum Printer friendly version E-mail a link to this thread |
Copyright © 2025 OutdoorsFIRST Media | About Us | Contact Us | Advertise
News | Video | Audio | Chat | Forums | Rankings | Big Fish | Sponsors | Classified Boat Ads | Tournaments | FAQ's
News | Video | Audio | Chat | Forums | Rankings | Big Fish | Sponsors | Classified Boat Ads | Tournaments | FAQ's