Should the DNR manage catch and release lakes for all fish in some small lakes? A few lakes less than 500 acres? I say small lakes because they are more likely to be over harvested. How about a limited harvest? A program that would protect large fish of each species and provide fun and entertainment for anglers.
Small lakes can get fished out. I know of some and I’ll bet you do too. By fished out I mean the nice fish have literally been “fished out”. I know a formerly excellent walleye lake that no longer harbors a fishable population of walleye. I also know a formerly great bluegill lake that only inhabits runts. A few years back that lake gave up 9-10-inch bluegills with regularity. Today you’d be catching an incredible number of 4 and 5 inch fish and that’s the way it’s been for 10 plus years. The problem is when the word gets out on the bite anglers box up dinner left and right and soon that fishery is washed up, done caput. This is depressing news for a guy who likes to eat fish but likes catching them even more. To date neither of these lakes have rebounded and they probably won’t.
Big pike, a thing of the past. I can only assume that in the last decade or so big pike over 35 inches have been commonly consumed by anglers virtually eliminating them from Minnesota waters with the exception being the Canadian Shield Lakes along the Minnesota Ontario border, Mille Lacs Lake and Red Lake. Once upon a time when fishing muskie in the metro area it was common to nab pike over 35 inches. Not any more. Ron Schara said it a few weeks ago in the Star Trib…”where did all the big pike go?”
There has been some recent chatter about catch and release only on some small lakes. Lakes less than 500 acres. I just plain think if a lake is catch and release only…a lake for recreation…catch fish for fun type of lake and let them go… that lake would tend to harbor more and bigger fish. It’s been noted in the FishFever forum (http://www.fishfever.com/node/311) that Pleasant Lake a 585-acre lake in North Oaks Minnesota is not open to fishing of any kind. And upon review of the DNR reports (http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/showreport.html?downum=62004600) there does not seem to be a correlation between no fishing and more and bigger fish. But that lake looks like an experiment. According to the Minnesota DNR “The Lake has been used as a source of panfish for the children's fishing pond program. Occasionally the lake has also been used as a source of muskellunge eggs for both the pure strain and the hybrid muskellunge program.” The lake holds white bass….lots of them and muskies are stocked obviously for the muskie-stocking program. These two stats lower the panfish numbers. White bass are eating machines and they don’t appear in many of Minnesota’s lakes….reservoirs and rivers yes but lakes, not many. This lake just can’t be used as the example it’s a “fake lake.” Can someone give us a different example?
It’s my opinion that if we designate some lakes as recreational fishing lakes these lakes will ultimately be better angling opportunities. You’d need to rate a lake by its habitat and fish population to manage specific trophy/action lakes for specific species. Take a good lake for a particular species and make it better would be the idea. Since no fish or few fish get taken by anglers it just makes sense to me that there will be more fish to catch and that these fish would potentially be larger fish. If allowed, natural circumstances would dictate the survival of fish. The lake would have nice size fish in good numbers in relation to the habitat for a particular species. That is to say if the lake has good bluegill habitat and predation by large pike, large bass or muskie (it’s somewhat a fine line and not too many of these top predators) that lake would have a good number of bigger panfish. I’m talking the ultimate lake managed to be a big fish and in decent numbers in relation to what that lake can sustain. You’d need to start with a healthy lake to apply the catch and release or limited harvest program. A lake, that when measured by the DNR makes sense to be a fishery capable of sustaining itself as a big-fish-many-fish lake.
Allow me to inject a couple of examples.
Lake X a 450 acre lake in Northern Minnesota is a no motor lake allowing only specific fish, in limited numbers, to be harvested. This lake is an awesome fishery because of this: Canoes and rowboats require a certain physicality and expertise only had by few anglers. Combine that with a lengthy travel time from the Twin Cities and you have an awesome fishery because of limited pressure and restricted harvest.
Example 2 is a Twin Cities lake that allows no harvest of largemouth bass. The fishing for largemouth bass has gone from poor to outstanding in only 10 years. I often fish this lake with my kids because success is darn near guaranteed. The only downside of this 400-acre lake is on weekends it’s full of recreational boaters limiting fishing opportunities to early morning. If this lake were located in a more rural area it would be a dynamite attraction for that community too.
Example 3 is the muskie catch and release etiquette. I would guess 98-99% of all muskie caught in Minnesota are released. Most will agree that muskie fishing in Minnesota is the best it’s been in 40 years or more. The reason why is catch and release works.
Start the program with 8 or 10 lakes and if they seem to prosper over a period of 5-10 years add some more. We have 10,000 plus lakes here in Minnesota. Lakes with no harvest have improved fisheries. Lakes with slot limits on panfish have larger panfish. I’d be nice to run an outboard and trolling motor on a lake with good fish in good numbers. Isn’t it more fun to catch fish than eat them? Don’t we all think that private lakes, lakes with no public access often provide better fishing? And the reason is because of a more limited harvest? Do the people who live on these lakes want recreational fishing more than fish from “Their Lake” for dinner? Could be true? I hear about these so-called private lakes offer better fishing period. And the couple of times I’ve had the pleasure to fish a “private lake” we caught fish, big fish and many fish most of the time. Am I crazy? Or am I onto something that should be considered? You tell me.
Submitted by Pete on Wed, 02/14/2007 - 2:35pm.
Pete's blog | login or register to post comments | email this blog