My take is it sounds like a step in the right direction. It's intended to greatly simplify the rules for most lakes and all but eliminate the 1 or 2 fish limits we see every year.
Ceded territory walleye limit proposal
Seems to me the changes are to the daily bag limits, not the possession limits. It's for the entire ceded territory.. in fact this also creates a "Ceded Territory walleye management zone". If your going to hop from lake to lake, your going to have to travel outside the zone to get out from under the 3 fish daily bag. Possession is twice the daily bag, so if your staying in the Ceded Territory, I read that as a 6 fish possession limit.
I understand the spawning issue, but I agree with backwards. The 1 over 14 seems like a let-down. It seems the slots used in all the other regulations identify larger fish as the most prolific and successful spawning size.
3 fish daily bag, no minimum size, 16-24 protected slot, one over 24? Gives you a little better eater size but still protects a large spawning class.
And yes, this is in the public comment period. Here is the procedure for accepting public comment to the NRB:
there's no shortage of walleyes in either the Chip or the TFF, so simply keeping the 3 fish limit, which is the norm after the month of May's false limit created by the false declarations, should NOT impact these bodies of water
my dislike of the 1 over 14" on NS lakes is that harvesting 12-13" cigars is not something I am in favor of. My opinion would be to make it 3 with a size limit of 14-15" and 1 over 20-21" ... not a fisheries biologist, that is simply my thoughts
to me, the 1 over 14" rule essentially put a 1 fish limit on these lake... imo
not a fan of the 1 over 14" on the "no size limit" lakes like the Chip and the TFF. Have posted info on the TFF fishing reports thread on how to contact the DNR before they vote in a couple weeks. They are taking public opinion...
overall, a couple nice things coming out of the DNR recently... this effort to stop the declaration and subsequent temporary limits for essentially the first month of the walleye season... and the "fix" to the trolling rule that allows musky fishermen to drag a sucker whilst casting a shoreline or structure..
...I'm enthused and a little optimistic
1) Elimination of reduced bag limits every spring. Other than lakes already requiring special restrictions, you won't get 2,1, or zero limits until further notice. Upon further notice when spearing is done and DNR calculates safe harvest you won't receive the disappointment that your target lake has a limit of only 1 or 2 fish. It's 3 legal walleye per day. You might go there rather than go somewhere else.
2) It's good for business like resorts, bait, motels, and every other business near the affected lakes.
3) It eliminates the tribes' ability to submit quotas that are sure to cause reduced limits to 2, 1 or even zero. Where they have total quota of 60,000-70,000 fish and only spear 20,000-30,000, my take is there's already something wrong. Remember, the tribes have the right to 100% of safe harvest. This also eliminates the tribes' ability to set quotas on lakes causing reduced limits and then never even spear that lake, my home lake is like that.
A) On lakes that receive heavy spearing and would have otherwise be reduced to 1 or 2 fish for anglers, wouldn't there still be some risk of overharvest if the limit were 3 fish?
B) You may no longer be able to hop from lake-to-lake until you fill your statewide limit of 5 walleye. It may be 3 for your daily limit even if caught on multiple lakes (not sure on this one).
Please keep it civil folks, let's not lose the whole thread. Can anyone add more pros, cons?