Things might be looking up for the Big Pond this year! Ater a meeting of the minds,someone finally is figuring things out! We as anglers cannot continue to beat up the same slot year after year. As a result of last years poor harvest "less the 70,000 pounds) EVEN the DNR say we might need to harvest some of the over abundent larger fish ie; all those 22-24" fish!

This still has to get through the BAND members! I hope they don't step to hard on the DNR. I have said it from the start that they have no clue whats going on out there. They can't sit up on the ramps by the sand on opener and assess the whole lakes catch rates! I for one am hoping, for a fishin as well as a business stand point that they open the harvest. This being said it will be hard to get it past the Band members because the more business that it generates for the Resort owners the higher the prices will get when the Bands try buying them out!

Lets just hope that they give US a break and let us keep some fish again this year.

I really do not understand the diff in slots compared to other lakes LOTW, Rainy, Winnie, and multitude of other slot lakes.

Most other lakes allow 1 fish over a certain size which will account for a trophy but Mille Lacs is at 28" which is pretty big. Other lakes have a trophy slot that is smaller than most people will take for a trophy and that thins out the fish that are 25" to 28" I beleive the DNR should lower the trophy length limit and some of those 24" fish will be kept and slowly the lake will come back into balance.

Just my .02



Pitts

Getting the lake into balance and true fishery management is NOT the ONLY thing Mn. DNR. has to be concerned about. The court mandated "harvest cap" is a law that DNR has to comply with. Opening the slot wider or allowing more of those 20" plus fish could put the angler harvest too high if the bite is good. Unfortunately, because of having to accomodate the band harvest, MN DNR sometimes has to forget simple biology based fsihery management. It's sad....I pulled the fishhouse in today as I have caught one "keeper" since Dec. 16th!

Steve
I do understand the system that they must work in. The problem is the amounts taken from the lake. 70,000 pounds is a joke! I would have no problem with them letting people keep a fish from 22- 24". The whole guessing game that they were running in 2001-2002 was a joke. Fish were biting so put a kill % rate to every catch. The water was cold, I caught tons of fish with 4 & 5 hooks in there mouths. Last year I never even went up after the Wacker,not because the fishing was so bad nor because you cant keep any fish, Because I hate listening to everyone not getting to keep any fish. Plus Resorts crying that no one is showing up. This still will boil down to the bands! I'm hoping for a Casino at the Track in Shakoppe this will slow some train of thought.

Actually the angler hook and line harvest for 2003 was less that 35,000 pounds. The other 30-35,000 pounds was added on as assumed C&R mortality.

That's why when ever I was asked if I caught any while on the lake by a CO, or at the launch by a fish counter, I always said nope, didn't have a bite. NO BITES=NO MORTALITY..........what a crock!! I wonder who's second grade class came up with that formula for the DNR.

The DNR study about hooking mortality last year showed them they were pretty far off base the year before when the used 10% as a factor. They found out that it is much closer to 6% or less, depending on the time of year and water temp. They are going to continue the study this year.

Also, as for finding fish to keep, you have to adjust your fishing approach. All of us have for years gone to the flats, or deep gravels for fish, and caught many nice fish. And they have always been 20 plus inchers most the time. So, why is it that with the new restrictions we continue to do the same? We didn't catch those size fish there in the past, why would we think we will find them there now? I went into last season with my mind set on staying on top of the "slots". With a few changes in my approach, namely where and how I fished I was able to maintain a much higher slot rate than the year before, and cash a few checks in some tournaments along the way. By the first part of July, I was catching the same numbers of fish as the guides trolling the flats, but my fish were slots where as those other guys were playing catch and release all day.

I think you have hit the nail on the head. Most of us that fish the lake a lot, have come to realize that the fish size depends on where and how you fish them. Personally, I don't keep many fish, nor do I really care what slots are in effect. I like to catch big fish, so I target big fish. My complaint about the lake is that if I catch 20 fish a day, take care of them properly, release a healthy fish, and tell the DNR that I caught 20 fish that day, they count 10 of them as "dead" fish, and it goes against the total pounds alloted to the sportsfisherman. I see a problem there...

The whole creel census is a joke if you ask me. I lost belief in it the year before last when we had such a bonanza going. The DNR said we harvested 90,000 lbs+/- opening week end, and added another 15,000lbs. for mortality! I couldn't figure why all the mortality when the water was mostly below 48*F and most the fish were coming out of shallow water. Why would they all be dying? Plus think about this,we had a 14-16" harvest slot that year. If the average slot weighed .75lb. that means that 90,000 is about 120,000 fish. 4 fish limit times 2 days figures out to be 15,000 fishermen filling out both days of the weekend???

Right now, the DNR puts 1 census person at each of maybe 4 landings around the lake and at the end of the day, figure out an average per person and matriculate that out for as many people they think were on the lake that day. They don't take in to account that maybe the sand bite is good where they are taking the census, but the rock bite at the other end of the lake could be shut off tighter than a can of beans. Yet they credit each person with catching X number of pounds. I understand this is all an inexact science, but I think they should be able to get a little closer to the bullseye than that!

YUP!!!!

I know I wouldn't want to be the guy who has to make the decisions there!!! I have fished the lake a long time. Finding slots isn't as hard as you might think. Like Jack said you just have to change your tactics a bit. I do wish the slot was different though, I'd rather be able to keep 3 fish, and have the slot be one over 17" That way you could decide if you want a meal or a trophy fish.

A question I do have for any of you.

How does the slot that we have now affect the year classes of the fish in the lake???

Good one
Maybe your class would like to try Joe :)



Pitts

Pitts,

I teach 4th grade, they would blow the DNR out of the water with some of their ideas..............lol

The harvest slot we have now (-17") is a bit better for the lake than the 14-16" slot. The 14-16 put practically all the harvest pressure on 1 or 2 year classes. Now we can keep any size fish you are willing to clean that is under 17" thus spreading the pressure out over more year classes.

You have to keep in mind a few things here though. First off, the gill nets the indians use are designed to catch fish between 16-18" long. They do catch plenty of fish bigger than that also, but for the most part, 16-18". So the Native American harvest is also pretty much the same year classes as the sport angler harvest. Secondly, there are alot of fish in the "protected slot" that are older fish. They are spawners, and there are large males (up to 24"). They will mostly end up dying from hooking mortality or old age. When the die off starts, how many of these younger fish are going to be around to replace them? Remember, those smaller fish carry all the harvest pressure from the time they are what, 10-12" up until they make it over the 17" line. I'm affraid there will be more dying off from old age, than there are surviving the harvest, and replacing them, and we might end up with a lake out of balance.

Only "Mother Nature's Law" can correctly manage the lake, not "Man Made law".

Ok well at least I'm not the only one thinking that way then!!! I do agree that the slot has improved since the first go around.

Just wondering>> if your on the net at 2:00pm, who's teaching your 4th grade class?

....and we might end up with a lake out of balance.

JDL, The lake is already out of balance! That what we are all b-atching about! lol

What would the Casino at the track do?
You lost me.

For your information, I was not on the net at 2:00PM. If you check the times that you actually post and then the time that is listed on the post there are some great discrepancies. I am posting this at 3:53 pm, look at the time that is assigned to this post. By the way, I made the post in question at about 7:20 AM this morning from home. My students don't get to school until 8:55 AM. So, to answer your question about "who's teaching your 4th grade class?" I would guess it should be their parents.

Now now let's not get too testy, I was just messin with ya. Man that cold weather must really get you in a bind.

Maybe if I knew who you were, I could take it as poking fun. Register and make yourself known. I am pretty easy to get along with, as long as I know who I am playing with. It is cold, isn't it. Not sure that is an excuse. It's 5:30 PM now, what does this post read??

Quiz

If you want to have some leveredge and take the contol of the lake back you must hit the band where it hurts the most "THE POCKET BOOK". As long as they have the money and call all the shots they hold all the chips!
Add the slots and all to the track and this will cost them Millions, they will back off! This is how the MOB has worked for years! Drive by and look at the boats in the lot, take the only game in town and add another!

Steve,

Which points out the insanity of the mandated harvest levels. So the DNR and band are smart enough to understand the lake populations of walleyes, setting the harvest level, yet have absolutely no idea of the forage situation. 2002's bit was great because of this, unfortunately the assessment given to the mortality caused the harvest to exceed causing the next level of BS positioning by the band. By August that bite disappeared because of the explosion of forage, leading the 2003 harvest to be short by at least 250,000#. By all rights the 2002 should have almost limited angler hours and the 2003 should have allowed a significant increase in acceptable slots. In the 20 years I have seen the lake self adjust itself. It's obvious that the DNR and the band have a real long way to go to improve what the lake is capable of doing itself.

Today's paper (Minneapolis Tribune) quotes Ron Payer "It looks like conditions that caused last year's lower harvest (67,000 lbs) will continue throughout the 2004 fishing season. In light of that, we will potentially liberalize our harvest regulation to provide the greatest angling opportunities while staying within the allocation"

We shall see what the band has to say in the end! All this news comes after the meeting with the bands. They are still calling all the shots, what a joke! The bands have their own DNR, that studies the lake and tells our DNR whats best for the lake. So how someone needs to get a hold of the lake so that it has a future. To many big fish is a very bad thing at Mille Lacs, they are eating machines and can eat years worth of future eyes as well as perch. I hope last year opened their eyes to the fact that these fish are doing well eating the future of the fishery. The lake needs some balance, abundant small fish as well as the larger ones.

" Figures don't lie, if liars don't figure "

Why should we trust the band or the DNR?

Remember, this is only the begining of the process. All that has happened is deciding how much walleye can safely be taken from the lake. The next step begins in a couple weeks when the Lake Mille Lacs Advisory Board, the state DNR, and local and state representatives sit down and discuss this. The state will come with an idea or two for possible restrictions, and the floor will be opened for other ideas. Everything will be discussed and a general concensus will come from it all. Usually within a week or two the state, the native American Indians, and their fisheries people will all sit down and a solution will be decided upon based on shared fisheries studies and scientific input from both sides. No one side is calling the shots any more than the other.

I anticipate the new regulations will be 4 fish/day/person. 18-22" harvest slot. Nothing below 18, or between 22-28", 1 fish over 28" allowed in your 4 fish daily limit. The only question is if both sides can agree that we won't harvest too many spawning age females in that 18-22" slot. I am looking forward to that meeting, and will gladly report what I can after it is over. Till then, keep an open mind. The regs will be more liberal than they were the last 2 years.

Remember, this is only the begining of the process. All that has happened is deciding how much walleye can safely be taken from the lake. The next step begins in a couple weeks when the Lake Mille Lacs Advisory Board, the state DNR, and local and state representatives sit down and discuss this. The state will come with an idea or two for possible restrictions, and the floor will be opened for other ideas. Everything will be discussed and a general concensus will come from it all. Usually within a week or two the state, the native American Indians, and their fisheries people will all sit down and a solution will be decided upon based on shared fisheries studies and scientific input from both sides. No one side is calling the shots any more than the other.

I anticipate the new regulations will be 4 fish/day/person. 18-22" harvest slot. Nothing below 18, or between 22-28", 1 fish over 28" allowed in your 4 fish daily limit. The only question is if both sides can agree that we won't harvest too many spawning age females in that 18-22" slot. I am looking forward to that meeting, and will gladly report what I can after it is over. Till then, keep an open mind. The regs will be more liberal than they were the last 2 years.

Great topic fellas, but can you guys clear something up for me? The way I understand it is last year's quota was 550,000 lbs with 100,000 lbs alloted to the band. Which allowed 450,000 lbs to anglers. This year the quota is set at 480,000 lbs total with 100,000 lbs alloted to the band. Which allows 380,000 lbs for anglers. They said the crucial spawning class fish are 14-18 inches. Will they narrow the slot to protect those year classes? Another question is will they let you keep some larger fish? If that is the case they may reach the quota sooner than they think. I'd hate for them to reach the quota and need to close the season before ice fishing. Just a thought. I'm not sure if that would be the course of action.

Jason

jack when is that meeting???

OK, but, the "them" you refer to isn't the tribe. Their partners have plenty of money to put up. It won't cost the tribe a dime.

What are you talking about? I'm lost, take the money out of there partners hands?

A date has not been set yet. But it should be soon, probably in the next two weeks.

I apologise, I am lost too.
Sorry. You lost me back at the first mention of the track. Then, I thought I understood you explanation. It looks like I didn't understand that either.
What I am trying to say is, the band doesn't get hurt in the pocket book, by expansion of casinos. Their partners put up all the money, do the construction and provide all the expertise and training. They pay the band a commission off the profits. The band could get hurt financially, if one of "their" Casinos were to close or go broke, as that would cause the pipeline would dry up.
Maybe you are saying the same thing and I didn't understand?
Anyway, the slot looks better than last year, but is still muddy.