Tim Jong Walz yields to Trump

At least partially. Walz was meeting with religious leaders in Minnesota to dictate when and how they should open their doors. At the same time our Chief Executive said he would over ride any governor's decision to keep churches, etc. closed.

Evidently Tim Jong went from 10 worshippers per building to 25-50% occupancy, along with other restrictions. At least he backed off a little.

I'm not sure when he plans to nationalize all the bars/restaurants that he has forced out of business.

State owned bars/restaurants ??? Hey we can call it a "Wet Market"

Do they have to get a State License to do business?

We have city owned liquor stores with exclusive rights, so why not.

City owned liquor stores also have either a county (Health Dept) license or a state health depart. license depending on if county has a delegation agreement with the state. OLmsted County has a delegation agreement. Most others in southern MN don’t. If they open in conflict with governors recommendation/decree to close, they risk losing their license to be open later on.

And speaking of Dept of Health... Ours is led by Jan Malcolm. She has a BS in Philosophy, and Psychology.. Not even a Masters, that I could find, let alone an MD. She is nothing but a political administrator.

I need to renew my license. Small License place near has opened can have 5 people in building. Was going to take care of Friday 10 am and there were at least 40 people waiting outside, probably waiting to do the same thing as there was a drop box for registrations. This pandemic is asinine. My time is worth something and this da is wasting it.

We'll see, I think a whole bunch of cities will just open up on constitutional grounds. We might have to form a militia to enforce it, lol. You know, to lend our Sherriffs a hand.
As an elected official, now seeing the light better, I cannot support the governors ideas, especially since I have taken an oath of office to uphold the constitution.

Stay armed my friends.

Quite the turn around Les, can I come to your lake now? Good to see you on the dark side.

Well Steve, we still need to address that. I use to have a 14 fish limit. It wont be long and I'll have a 2 fish limit, and I live here. You can help me. You know what we have to do.

When I was a kid we even had a 20 fish limit on the big lake.

There are too many people in the world, we need something to thin the population. Hmmmm...........................

A bullit comes to mind!

That limit was just for a year of two, right after commercial fishing ended, so that down rigging could storm the lake. Me and another fella took several coolers full of walleyes off the lake in that limit, by down rigging, which should be illegal btw, because it's not really angling, it's just a method by which a resort launch can guarantee a catch limit to non anglers.

We are sort of off topic, but the problem on the lake I see is the goldrush. Resorts , resort owners come in for the goldrush, help comes in also, folks with no ties to the land, transients, temporary people, rape the lake, cause the general take limit to plummet, and leave after the gold rush is gone, leaving a ghost town area, where the locals who were there all along and had nothing to do with the plunder, now, cant legally have enough fish to just fish once a week as they live close by.

If you live here, you should be a llittle more important than the lake rapers. Also, it's a haven up here for folks to work under the radar, with a dubious rap sheet. We need to make the area somehow unattractive to outsiders, for instance, give them a two fish limit and locals residents a 10.

The further you travel the more fish you should get to keep.

So the Chinese would get all of them, nice.

Commies not allowed.

You'd have to up the ante more than that Les. I like that country up there enough I'd still come with a two fish limit!

Probably start with a $400 dollar out of state fishing license fee, and if you live south of Highway 2, $200, and half the money should go to residents of my county for putting up with extra traffic.

Could always go with No nonresident fishing allowed

Wouldn't matter how what the limit is considering how poor a fishermen the southeastern horde are.

If we're that bad it doesn't matter if we come or not so why the complaints.

There's a saying about burning bridges and it coming back to bite ya in the ....

It just seems logical that the folks that live right here shouldn't have to put up with the devestation of the lake they live next to, by folks that come from so far away to do it, so that implants can reap the reward. This inequity needs to be addressed.

I would further add, that if you aren't a 5th generation local like me, you aren't invited to discuss it.

Over a 100 years of Huerds, you and your's should have bought up all the land around the lake, problem solved.

We have some in several places.

Good thing water is public in MN!!!

Ya'all should give Les a break and stop short at lower red lake! Two hundred plus walleye days and no fussin'

I don't care if anyone comes. I don't like what is happening to the lake but you won't see me trying to legislate people out.

Things change, back in the day Mille lacs would have 10,000 boats opening weekend. That fishery is ruined, people have to go somewhere. LOW is going to get busier and limits will get smaller, might as well accept it.

Indeed, if we could learn a lesson from Mille Lacs, we could limit the outsiders from LOW. Best thing would be some sort of economic disaster where nobody could afford to come up here.

You are one hundred percent right, I accepted it long before you probably realized it. The writing has been on the wall for some time doesn't mean I have to like it.

What I see likely happening some day is we lose our March and April fishing.

but can i walk on your lawn.

river was full a kayaks yesterday and the vehicles said it was more ny-ers than pa-ers.

Indeed, if we could learn a lesson from Mille Lacs, we could limit the outsiders from LOW

Maybe we should limit the locals who might fish it everyday-makes about as much sense!

Locals don't hardly fish, and it's a sparsely populated county, We live so close we can fish anytime, say once a week, Non stop idiot traffic 24/7 from the south is the pressure.

Time to get rid of this clown sign the Walz recall and share the heck out of it. http://www.action4liberty.com/recall_walz?recruiter_id

So how close to LOW does one have to live to fish it, 10 miles, 50? Does the same proximity rules apply to trapping as well?

I hear whining, just go ahead and run the lake down to nothing, then leave. Be another one of those gold rush types.

Strictly day fishing, no overnight, and no wheeled houses would help.

Why do people think they should have exclusive rights to resources that are publicly owned just because they live near them. What do you think drives the economy up there in those small towns? It's the tourists spending their money at the resorts, restaurants, marinas, hardware stores etc. Not many businesses would survive if it was just the locals and their 14 fish limit, there'd be a lot less locals too, could probably have a 30 fish limit.

They are harvesting agressively on LOW and Red and those fish populations are in great shape, thriving in fact. If there is a lesson to be learned concerning Mille Lacs is that harvesting fish is good for a walleye population. The only fishery that is in the crapper is the one where they are barely harvesting any walleye. Start some aggressive harvest on Mille Lacs and watch Walleye recruitment respond.

Are you nuts ? there wouldn't be a lot less locals, they are all transplants to begin with.

Mille lacs went in the crapper after netting started, Red Lake closed walleye fishing after being netted out. There is a reason fishing is closed during the spawn.

We all know that makes waaaay too much sense for the Minnesota DNR.

And that's where the similarities end.

Walleye fishing was closed on Red when there were too few mature females for successful reproduction. Fry stocking was needed to replace inadequate reproduction. Once spawning stock recovered to sustainable levels it was reopened, first moderate, and then gradually more aggressive harvest.

Walleye fishing was severely restricted on Mille Lacs while spawning stock was fine. There are litterally tons of mature female spawners in Mille Lacs, far more than needed for successful reproduction. Thin the adult population and reproduction and recruitment of young Walleye will improve.

So the effect of netting had no bearing on Mille lacs, just a coincidence.

Actually yes, since the population is currently underharvested. Believe it or not, harvest can be a very effective tool for managing Walleye populations.

Les you are starting to talk like the no freedom Dems. Take away the tourism then you wii be on the welfare train

Really, Flipper ? It sounds like you don't know much about tourism. Up here, and most places the folks that do the actual work, live in the back lots in the trailer houses in poverty most of the time, bar tabs, owing the resort bar, seasonally employed, low wage , unemployment comp types.

Some of your most touristy areas are the poorest counties in the state . A manufacturing base is a better deal.

Quota for 2020 combined is about 150,000 lbs, back in the day of 10,000 boats that quota would have been met in the first few days of the season. Say what you want, netting has ruined the lake.

If you insist, I suppose it has, indirectly because shared management has led to the rediculous low quotas from "safe harvest estimates". The amount of Walleye harvested by netting plus angler harvest is a pittance of what this lake could support, and be much better off for it.

Joint management has ruined the fishery. The lake and Walleye population is fine.

Buggs Bunny might have said of this thread..... "Shoulda toined left at Alba-koikee"

All depends on what Town and who is being paid off!

City owned liquor stores should be abolished or at least let private companies compete on a level playing field. I don't believe Government should compete with private business let alone have an exclusive business with no competition.

We sold our municipal to a private party. That party is afraid to open because they are licensed by the state.

True, but to listen to her, you'd think she was an expert in the field of contagious diseases when nothing could be farther from the truth. I think Walz relies and acts on her information.

The netting has a tremendous negative effect on the lake. I've had a place on the lake for more than 20 years. The Indians net and spear during the spawn in the spawning beds. If that doesn't have any effect on fish, then why do so many lakes in MN have posted signs on them restricting boats from some areas that are spawning beds?

There are a lot of walleyes in MilleLacs, but the majority of them are large females. Not that many of the smaller males. The DNR even attests to that.

The problem with MilleLacs is two fold. The netting in the spawning beds during the spawn by the Indians. And poor management practices by the MN Fisheries Division.

The problem with MilleLacs is two fold. The netting in the spawning beds during the spawn by the Indians.


How many pounds do they take on an average year?

Trapper 7 and gman,
I am not condoning netting walleye on the spawning beds, and understand your frustration observing that activity while open water anglers cannot even harvest a fish. Netting during the spawn is a social/ethical issue but is not the biological problem on Mille Lacs. It would be a problem is spawning stock was low and fry production was limited, but that is not the case. Wild fry production is through the roof on Mill Lacs and has been for multiple fry estimates spanning a number of recent years. These estimates are not slightly high, but 20-30 times the fry densities needed for good walleye production, yet these year classes consistently fail. Those extremely high fry densities are a clear indication that spawning stock is much higher than needed.This method of quantifying spawner abundance and spawning success is completely independent from other estimates of abundance such as gill net catch rates or population modeling, and is consistent with angler observations of high abundance of large fish. So, given the current spawner abundance, the Band harvesting their fish during the spawning period is not significantly reducing egg or fry production.

So why do these year classes consistently fail in spite of high fry production? Density suppression and carrying capacity. High densities of large fish will suppress recruitment of new young fish.

I don't know why people have such a hard time understanding and accepting the basic biological principle of density suppression.
Why do ranchers only graze so many cattle on a given tract of land? Why not just double the number and make more money? Carrying capacity.
Why don't farmers just plant 2-3 times more corn per acre and double or tripple their profits? Carrying capacity.
What happens when fur bearer abundance gets to high, above carrying capacity? Density suppression, disease, starvaion, reduced litter size, etc.
The priciples of carrying capacity and density suppression apply to fish populations as well.

walleye 101 I think you are spot on on all of your comments concerning ML. Band harvest is meaningless on ML. The regs. are what have screwed the lake up so bad. They went way to far. Also the lake is getting very clear-that will be a problem someday-wait and see.

What would be causing the lake to get clear?

Zebra mussels

Zebra mussels

Ah. Didn't think of that. Thank you.