May 2, 2025 "Minnesota Walleye: Is Limiting the Limit-Able, Needed and Reasonable?"

Word on the street is that a Minnesota DNR rule to cut walleye possession limits is soon to be released. Ahead of the supposedly pending announcement, folks on both sides of the issue have been active, debating the pros and cons.  For me, and many FishRapper readers, most of the discussion is “old news”. That’s because the debate has already been going on for about 8 years, in fact my first article on the subject appeared in 2017.

In search of folks who can offer a fresh perspective on the topic, I’ve reached out to writers, angler associations, fisheries biologists and to the public. One of the more successful efforts came in the form of “reader response” to the poll offering FishRapper readers who support the proposal. Early Monday morning, I shared the results of that poll aimed at gauging expectations among those supporters of that proposal. If you haven’t read the results yet, you can find the full story here >> Reader Poll Invitation April 22, 2025 "Walleye Limit Reduction: Supporters Poll"

At the time I offered the poll, I asked for input from scientists, biologists and fisheries manager who support the rule change. My hope was to provide you with some “scientific evidence” that dropping the walleye limit would produce the desired results. While the response to my reader poll offer was good, the offer to provide a platform to “pro rule change” scientists fell on deaf ears. The response to that plea for information was zero, 0%.

On the other hand, there was plenty of response from scientists who do not favor the rule change. Some of those researchers plan to come out with their own response to the rules proposal when it’s announced. Others shared their thoughts but preferred not to go on record and still others have offered opinions which will appear in articles as I get their stories written.

Today, I’ll share the thoughts of one such expert, Paul Radomski, author of the book “Walleye: A Beautiful Fish of the Dark.” In case you don’t already know him, listen to this KAXE radio interview. “Minnesota writer Paul Radomski Book Unspools Mysteries of the Walleye”, you’ll find a link to the interview just below the story title on the station’s web page.

Q) Sundin, “Attempting to make sense of the debate about the MN DNR effort to reduce the walleye possession limit. I’ve reached out to and received replies from several DNR biologists. Most of them are presenting data in opposition to the walleye limit reduction. Are you aware of any recent papers that offer fact-based information in support of reducing walleye limits?”

A) Radomski, “Recently, a lot of anglers have asked my opinion on this matter. Here is my common response.
There are no recent papers supporting reducing the MN statewide walleye creel limit. There remain a few unanswered questions about the walleye creel limits; however, creel statistics for walleye angling have shown a consistent pattern — only about 1% of walleye angling trips result in a limit of 6 fish.

Q) Sundin, “Over the years, fisheries biologists have suggested that a 4-walleye limit will not impact the overall walleye harvest. They’ve reported consistently that to have an impact on the overall walleye harvest, a 2 fish limit would be required, is that right?

A) Radomski, “It is interesting that many people don't understand creel limits. How effective any creel limit reduction for conservation depends on the species, harvest rates, magnitude of the existing limit, and magnitude of the limit change.”
“Often, anglers make the case for creel limit reduction based on “common sense”, but they don't do the math, and they make incorrect assumptions. However, fiddling with creel limits gives commissioners and angling leaders “bragging rights” that they did something. But was the change meaningful?”

Radomski offers that in certain cases, a creel limit reduction can be a reasonable solution to address overfishing. In 2000 for example, Radomski worked with a small team to change the creel limits for yellow perch. At the time, the previous limit of 100 fish in possession was lowered to 20 fish daily, with a 40 fish possession limit.

“I supported that change by showing the need (On Winnie) where large perch, over 9 inches, had declined since 1977, while growth and survival of small perch increased.” Radomski says. “Overfishing Recruitment Response” is the term Radomski used to describe the trouble; he also reported that condition of large perch had decreased as well.

Radomski’s team made predictions to estimate the probability that various perch creel limits would achieve necessary harvest reductions. The team concluded that there was a need, and that the proposed perch creel limit reduction was reasonable. Radomski recalls that the DNR Commissioner at the time took some criticism for that change.

Fisheries biologist and lake ecology scientist Radomski was also involved in the statewide review of fish creel limits and suggested reductions in the lake trout creel limit, and more recently, the reduced burbot creel limit of 4 fish aimed at reducing wanton waste. He recalls these changes, based on need and reasonableness being easier to achieve.

Radomski, “To summarize what is known, creel limits do not directly control or limit the total harvest. Creel limits regulate the individual or the party, not the collective. I also stated that creel limit reductions were likely insufficient to reduce harvest and at best only provide temporary fisheries results.”

To learn more about the impact of creel limits, Randomski encourages read the chapter on walleye management in his aforementioned book >> Walleye: A Beautiful Fish of the Dark .

In it, Radomski quoted other biologists that state it is rare that creel limits reductions make a difference. While creel limits do not directly control total harvest, fisheries managers often reduce limits for some waters to shift angling effort to other waters, as some anglers will avoid waters with low creel limits.

Radomski, “Anglers view the reduced walleye creel limits for Minnesota's important large walleye lakes and conclude that other walleye lakes would benefit with lower creel limits. However, the purpose for those lower walleye creel limits (excluding Mille Lacs and Red Lake) was a result of angler and community conversations, and the need and reasonableness of those changes generally were not supported with biological data. Rather, walleye creel limits for these waters were based an ethical argument or for the purpose of distributing the harvest (social issues).”

“I've heard state of MN officials argue for a creel limit reduction to conserve walleye. Yet, I've not heard about any recent estimates of how Minnesota's proposed creel limit change from 6 to 4 is going to provide meaningful conservation results, nor have I seen estimates of how many walleye will be conserved or saved with such a change.”  Radomski said.

He acknowledges that it is commonly understood that walleyes are being impacted by a changing climate, angling technology, and habitat loss. But believes that the reasons stated for the Minnesota's walleye creel limit change have lacked specifics. He argues that a statewide walleye creel limit reduction from 6 to 4 will not address nor mitigate these impacts. What is needed most, he believes, is agency and legislative action that is commensurate with the seriousness of these large and growing threats to Minnesota walleye.

Radomski speculates, “What would be a reasonable alternative to a statewide creel limit reduction?”

Answering his own question, Radomski offers, “A protected slot limit is a zero-creel limit for the protected sizes that can regulate the collective for a range of fish sizes in a fishery. For example, in Minnesota one could replace the 1 walleye over 20 inches creel limit. This 1-over regulation is indeed a creel limit – it is a creel limit on big fish. So, an alternative solution might be to replace an existing 1-over regulation with a creel limit of 0 for walleye between 20 to 24 inches (or the most suitable length range).” Replace the existing 1-over regulation with a big fish protected slot limit. If such a protected slot limit regulation would work for most walleye fisheries, then it seems reasonable to consider it as a potential alternative conservation solution.”

In some lakes, stockpiling large walleye creates other problems, and again Radomski suggests reading “walleye fisheries dynamics” chapter of his book to understand why. So, the question is whether a reduction from 1-fish over 20 inches to 0-fish between 20-24 inches would conserve enough fish to make a difference, yet not stockpile too many large fish?

Radomski, “I don't know the answer to the question I pose; however, I suspect that a statewide 20-24 protected slot limit would be more effective than the statewide 1-over 20 inches regulation and a statewide 6 to 4 creel limit reduction.”
“I don't know how many walleye waters would benefit from such a change, but fisheries biologists could simulate the change to assess its potential merits, or better yet they could apply such a regulation and see if it produces meaningful results.”

Radomski does not necessarily object to reducing the statewide walleye creel limit. But if he were able to advocate for the limit reduction, would only do so provided acceptance by a clear majority of the angling community.

In his opinion, the prime purpose of walleye creel limits these days is to regulate social issues. Fisheries managers reduce limits to send a message that the walleye are finite and to reduce greed when existing creel limits are perceived as too large. He would only make the case based on social acceptance.

Radomski concludes, “I believe fisheries managers must provide a honest assessment about the function and purpose of walleye creel limit reductions.” Paul J. Radomski, Author of Walleye: A Beautiful Fish of the Dark

In the coming days, I'll share more commentary from fisheries experts, and walleye fishing enthusiasts. As always, your comments and questions are both welcome and helpful, so don't be a shy! — Jeff Sundin, The Early Bird Fishing Guide Office Cell Call or Text 218-245-9858 or Email on Facebook on X

---

May 1, 2025 "Don't Land A Citation! Avoid These Embarrasing and Sometimes Costly Fishing-Boating Violations"

KAXE Radio: With the ice out, walleye spawning is underway in Minnesota

"In spring, eggs have been collected at Cut Foot Sioux walleye spawning site in Deer River, MN, since the 1920s. Fertilized eggs are transported throughout the state.
The fishing opener is fast approaching and Minnesota’s state fish — the walleye — no doubt will be a coveted catch for any angler.

First things first: walleye spawning season starts not long after ice out, when the waters begin warming into the mid-40s.

Recently, the Cut Foot Sioux walleye spawning site in Deer River, east of the Highway 46 bridge, was busy with walleyes, Grand Rapids Fish Hatchery workers and curious onlookers. The public is welcome to visit and watch the process. Instinct guides walleyes to ..." Learn More >> KAXE Radio: With the ice out, walleye spawning is underway in Minnesota

May 1, 2025 "Reader Poll Gauges Support For MN DNR Walleye Limit Reduction Plan"

Over the past week, supporters of the MN DNR proposal to reduce Minnesota’s walleye possession provided their input. The sample size is not huge, but it is meaningful because readers who wanted to participate in the survey were required to jump through a few hoops to opine.

Unlike most click and submit surveys, participants were required to request the poll via email, complete the survey and then return their answers, again via email. The reader participation poll, while not a scientific one, does qualify as an above-average effort to gather meaningful insight into why supporters of the rule change believe that it will help. The response, I believe, exceeded my expectations. Most participants provided well-reasoned and thoughtful comments.

Responding to question 1, “Assuming that if a proposed statewide limit reduction from 6 walleye, down to 4 walleyes in possession passes, do you anticipate an improvement to the quality of walleye fishing in Minnesota?” As the chart, "Angler Expects Improved Walleye Fishing" upper left shows, 57% of the respondents said ..." Read Full Story >> May 1, 2025 "Reader Poll Gauges Support For MN DNR Walleye Limit Reduction Plan"

---

Wired2Fish May 1, 2025 "The Biggest Bass Bags of All Time"

"They say that records are meant to be broken. But in professional bass fishing, there are a few that are considered almost untouchable.

You don’t hear Rip Nunnery, a California fisherman, mentioned in the same breath as Rick Clunn, Kevin VanDam or Roland Martin. Still, what he accomplished in July 1969 will probably never be matched.

Fishing in a B.A.S.S. tournament on Alabama’s Lake Eufaula, he brought in a stringer of bass so heavy that he needed help bringing it to the scales. In the days when a 15-bass daily limit was in place, he weighed in a first-round total of 98 pounds, 15 ounces. That set a B.A.S.S. record for largest one-day ..." Read Article and Learn More >> The Biggest Bass Bags of All Time

---

Wired2Fish April 29, 2025 "Power Fishing Walleyes With Moving Baits on Big Water"

"Pro bass angler and multi-species guide, Adam Rasmussen, heads out on sprawling Green Bay to target scatted spring walleyes using moving baits. Top spring walleye baits such as jerkbaits and paddle tail swimbaits allow you to cover water fast and trigger aggressive reaction bites.

Fishing Post-spawn Walleye In Cold Water: Following the spawn, walleyes often hang around warmer, shallow waters to recuperate and feed.

Rasmussen targets 6- to 8 feet of water, where the fish are most active. Despite the cold temperatures, these fish still respond aggressively to reaction baits like jerkbaits, blade baits, and paddle-tails. Rasmussen explains how aggressive presentations used in conjunction with fish finder tech such as ..." View Video and Learn More >> Power Fishing Walleyes With Moving Baits on Big Water

You Are Invited To Become A Duly Deputized Fishrapper Cub Reporter Too!

If you've been waiting for a gold engraved invitation to participate in the daily reports, then stop waiting and consider this your own personal invitation.

Helping your fellow fishermen and women stay abreast of fishing conditions in your area is good for everybody and it's easier than you think! You don't have to write a book, you don't have to share your secret fishing spots and you don't even have to mention your lake. But even a few words about general trends, seasonal patterns and local weather conditions can really help.

Be like me, become a duly deputized "Cub Reporter", it's good for fishing! Contact Us or if you prefer to be "social", Fishing Reports Minnesota, the Facebook counterpart to this page is open to the public, so you can post your own fishing update or just share a photo of a nice catch.

---