# Walleye Spawn



## zogman (Mar 20, 2002)

Why does the NDG&F allow fishing during the spawn :eyeroll: :******:


----------



## Invector (Jan 13, 2006)

Here in ND its a long story. But they feel that most areas people dont catch enough fish to affect spawning. That 50 degree range is when eyes spawn and the ND weather can still be nasty at that time (look outside right now and you'll know what I mean). Not alot of people are willing to get out and look for fish in rain snow and wind at this time of year...only when its nice or the wind lets up. Also not alot of fish feed druing spawning. Its the before that they have to worry about. The Dakota Country magazine had an article on the pros and cons about spring fishing. I beleave it was in the 2004 april issue. If I find it at home I will post some of the reasons they give for allowing it. But as for me I know not many of the fish taken are female. Most are young males or inmature fish. But someone out there must have felt we have enough fish to allow for it over the states that close the season. But there is always the option to catch and release those fish allowing them the chance to spawn.


----------



## dosch (May 20, 2003)

I agree 100 %. Pretty pathetic if you ask me, last week after seeing stringerful after stringerful of 3-7lb eyes going home for table fare it makes you lose faith in the G&F Dept.


----------



## duckslayer (Oct 30, 2003)

dosch said:


> I agree 100 %. Pretty pathetic if you ask me, last week after seeing stringerful after stringerful of 3-7lb eyes going home for table fare it makes you lose faith in the G&F Dept.


I must agree with dosch, it gets old in a hurry. No idea what you need a stringer of 5+ lbers for when you could just as well take out some of the ever thriving pike!! I think a lot of the guys that do this just need something to brag about. CPR in the spring for me no matter what sex it is.


----------



## Invector (Jan 13, 2006)

The other thing is how many of those 5-7lb fish do not even make it to the table. How many get thrown away due to bad tast or the fact they are not going to be eaten but are kept just for show and ego boosting? That is what ****** me off the most. I do know most people if ealy C&R would be manditory on a lake live DL or the M River alot of people would still go to just catch the fish. I say IMHO and alot of you would agree that a C&R only or a size limit on the fish would be great. We dont have to shut down the fishing but we could protect those fish that are putting the most viable eggs back into the lake. There is no reason to keep a 5lb eye at anytime of the year...its like this guys what would you rather eat a nice 2 year old cow or the one that has been around for many years and have had many offspring? It is fact that the fish in the 20" range to about 25" (give or take) are the best breaders out there. They produce lots of eggs and those eggs are healthy enough to hatch. An older fish dont have the healthy overies like the younger fish do. So I say put those fish back but keep fishing...just put the fish back.


----------



## boondocks (Jan 27, 2006)

IMO the G&F needs to take a more hands on approach.Instead of state wide limits have stricter possession and slot limits on heavily fished waters like Devils,Sak and the Missouri River.I think a limit of 3 would be plenty.Right now the whole state is managed for numbers.Why not manage a few for trophy potential.Then everyone would be happy(if that were at all possible).50inch minimum on musky at New Johns-NOW THATS WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.


----------



## Invector (Jan 13, 2006)

LOL :beer: to you boondocks. The only prob with sak is its too big. You could not manage that lake unless you had coast gaurd cutters out there running down people that take the wrong fish. And with DL...well lets look at what happend to Mile Lacs in MN. They put a restiction on that only small fish less then 16 inches could be kept. They had huge walleyes all over and could get them easily. The only bad part was to find a small eye was next to impossible and with such big fish there small fish populaitons like perch were all but exhosted. If you walked the shore line of the lake you often encounterd dead eyes on shore. The fact they were coming up form the deep and not making it had alot to do with that. They since have lifted that band from what I have hurd. To limit what fish are taken out you have to protect the small fish and protect those that are best left for breeding. You need a good small fish bace to have a healthy large fish bace. And from what I hear DL right now has a low feed population and the larger fish are coming up on the skinny side. It is easier to limit small fish since their population is most often largest. It is a lot harder to grow a large fish population and only allow the smaller fish to be kept...you end up with too many large mouths to feed and no feed for them. Fishing would be great but you could not keep them...that is the prob they had with that lake MN. It would easily happen on a lake like DL without a better feed bace or a sustainable feed bace for the larger fish.


----------



## njsimonson (Sep 24, 2002)

There's a good article here at the GNF website.

I believe in C&R, I believe in a year-round season. Impossible to have the two co-exist? Not in my mind. The key is more in educating your fellow angler, and less in government regulation. I for one will refrain from entering this debate any further, for fear of being called a self-righteous hypocrite 

Arguing with anonymous people on the internet is like wrestling a pig in the mud. You both get dirty, but only the pig enjoys it.


----------



## dosch (May 20, 2003)

NJ,

"Arguing with anonymous people on the internet is like wrestling a pig in the mud. You both get dirty, but only the pig enjoys it."

Funny stuff nick


----------



## Powder (Sep 9, 2003)

Sometimes shutting it down creates another problem. Look at Minnesota. Their season closes and when it opens up there are TONS of people out that only fish that one weekend a year. It's possible to add more pressure to the resource by making it a 'special event' rather than just leaving it open all year.

MN will never change due to the pressure put on by tourism. But that doesn't mean it's the best thing for the resource.


----------



## swift (Jun 4, 2004)

every year there is the same post about fishing during the spawn. Every year there is the same complaint that too many big fish are being kept. And every year there are people that come to ND to fish from Minnesota because the fishing is better over here. That in itself should tell you the current system is working. Minnesota has a closed season during the spawn and the anglers keep coming to ND to catch quality and quantity of fish they don't get in their home state. When there are not people catching fish then you may have an arguement but over the last 15 years no season has worked. It's just plain and simple, history speaks for the soundness of the G&F policy. Give them some credit once in awhile.


----------



## Flick (Aug 21, 2002)

A simple slot would go a long ways. For example, MN has a 1 over 20" rule for the whole state. With more specific regs for different bodies of water. This would automatically reduce so much harvest of big walleyes in ND. And if people are keeping eyes over id say 22" I think its totally ridiculous, those fish need to stay in the water.


----------



## Ryan_Todd (Apr 11, 2004)

> Arguing with anonymous people on the internet is like wrestling a pig in the mud. You both get dirty, but only the pig enjoys it.


Isn't that the truth!


----------



## Invector (Jan 13, 2006)

You last 2 posts got a lot of wisdom there. The fact we have open fishing year round does give NR a chance to come in and fish and they do so since they can and dont have to worry about if a fish is over or under a sertain size that much. But I still feel a short time of no keeping or providing protection of the 20-25" range fish would help this state out several fold with very little problems with trying to find fish that are smaller or larger then the slot.


----------



## NDJ (Jun 11, 2002)

but a slot would hurt tournament fishing on DL... :wink:


----------



## HayShotBB (Mar 1, 2006)

slayed em today at devils


----------



## Fossilman (Mar 12, 2006)

I usually put all my walleye back,big or small,don't like the taste of them............. :wink: Rather eat a pike........ :beer:


----------



## Techhead (Oct 18, 2005)

I for one believe in the year round season, i enjoy spring fishing, and only keep smaller walleyes 17" and under during this time, and if i can identify it as a female, it goes back in the drink. I do feel slot limits, in specailty places would have a great effect on several fisheries, Missouri river, Sakakawea, and Devils Lake. First most concious anglers on Sakakawea, and misssouri river will already follow the regulations. Make the regulations on Devils, subject to the most heavily fished sections in April and early May, Channel A, and the coulee bridges. regular limit, with only one over 20, from April 1st through the second week of May. Doesn't hurt the tourism of the 2 places, people still have the chance of catching a wallhanger, simple yes, but could be quite effective in preserving the fishery in the future. this will help with the G&F as they can restrict their efforts to those locations. Plus make the fines heavy, minimum $250 for taking to many over the slot. Summer and fall, normal regs.

PS i caught an 8 pounder fishing on the Mauvais bridge on the Pelican side, took a pic and through her back, total time out of the water, about 15 seconds. Caught 3 nice eaters, biggest 16" little ones on cranks, big girl on lindy rig and a minnow.


----------

