Changes to motorized decoy regs unlikely for now

[h2ofwlr]

Minnesota Waterfowl Association's Blog
https://minnesotawaterfowlassociation.w ... y-for-now/

Changes to motorized decoy regs unlikely for now May 24, 2016

Whenever the Legislature considers a game and fish bill, it seems like there are a great number of items that are non-controversial. And then there’s a piece or two that draw a lot of attention to the bill and, like what apparently happened this year, sink the whole thing.

Sunday, May 22 was the last day for lawmakers to vote on bills during the regular session. It was a chaotic weekend, but one of the positives is the Legislature agreed to a bill that appropriates money from the Outdoor Heritage Fund and sent it to Gov. Mark Dayton. He hasn’t signed it yet, but likely will in coming days.

Back to the game and fish bill. Much of the rancor regarding the bill concerned muskies, lead shot, and allowing hunters to wear blaze pink or blaze orange. Still, it seemed there was a sliver of hope as late as 11:20 on Sunday night, when, with 40 minutes left in the 2016 session, a conference committee was appointed for the game and fish bill.
Alas, it didn’t happen and there is no bill this year. (It could be part of a special session.)

When the bill died, so, too, did a provision within it that would have allowed waterfowl hunters to use motorized decoys throughout the duck season. The exception would have been on wildlife management areas. It was a totally noncontroversial aspect of the bill, but it likely won’t be in place this fall unless the Legislature takes up the bill in a special session.

The motorized decoy language is in state statute, so legislative action is needed to change it. Stay tuned, but don’t make plans to use your motorized decoys on opening day of this year’s duck season in Minnesota.

[Big Doe Hunter]

This one is still a head scratcher for me. Why not allow motorized decoys all season? IMO it would lead to: better kill shots, makes it easier to identify birds, etc etc

[h2ofwlr]

Because young of the year are very vulnerable to spinners.

[h2ofwlr]

No blaze pink, but lead ammo ban, muskie stocking are a go

By Dave Orrick | dorrick@pioneerpress.com
May 25, 2016 | UPDATED: 6 hours ago

Blaze pink is dead. Minnesota’s lead-ammo ban and muskie stocking plans are alive. A wholesale makeover of northern pike fishing regulations is on the slow track. And a plan to expand the elk herd has been dealt a major setback.

Those are among the biggest upshots for outdoors enthusiasts in the aftermath of the Minnesota legislative session, which adjourned this week with arguably more left undone than done.

Blaze pink | Lead ammo ban | Muskie stocking | Northern pike regulations | Elk expansion

Among things left undone: a so-called “game and fish bill.” That’s a package of fishing and hunting policy initiatives. It’s usually an annual affair that passes with bipartisan support after lawmakers compromise on its most controversial aspects. The House and Senate failed to reconcile their differences to stymie Department of Natural Resources plans to restrict lead ammunition and expand muskie stocking. Gov. Mark Dayton has no game and fish bill to act on.

The resulting status quo — the DNR can now move forward with the lead ammo restriction and the muskie stocking expansion — is a victory for the agency. But the DNR is the loser on its long-term plan to revamp northern pike regulations, which has widespread support and would have moved along a fast track had the game and fish bill passed.

DNR Assistant Commissioner Bob Meier, the agency’s lead lobbyist at the Capitol, said he’s satisfied with the result. “Northern pike would have been nice, but is it worth the Legislature usurping our authority on regulating ammunition on state lands or stocking fish? Probably not.”

In addition to the items listed below, other initiatives that failed during the legislative session include Dayton’s hopes for increased penalties for poachers and a push by some hunters to allow night-vision goggles to be used while hunting coyotes.
BLAZE PINK
During a recess after discussion of a bill modifying to allow blaze pink for hunting, Rep. Tom Hackbarth, an author of the bill, dons a pink cap in the State Capitol in St. Paul Wednesday, May 18, 2016. To his left is Rep. Cindy Pugh. (Pioneer Press: Jean Pieri)
Rep. Tom Hackbarth, an author of the blaze pink bill, dons a cap earlier this month. To his left is Rep. Cindy Pugh. (Pioneer Press: Jean Pieri)

What: A plan to allow fluorescent pink to be worn by hunters in addition to blaze orange failed to pass.

So what? Fluorescent pink has become a hot trend for hunters, particularly women and girls. The color is highly visible and according to studies can catch the human eye better than blaze orange, the standard — and required in many states — color for hunters to wear for safety so they see each other. A number of states, including Wisconsin, have legalized blaze pink for hunting. However, some shades of fluorescent pink can’t be seen by people with some forms of color blindness, and Minnesota’s proposal didn’t contain a technical definition of the color.

Now what? Blaze orange remains the law of the land for hunter safety, and blaze pink is merely a fashion statement.
LEAD AMMO BAN
The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources has proposed banning lead shot on state-owned wildlife management areas in the "farmland zone" as soon as 2018.
The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources has proposed banning lead shot on state-owned wildlife management areas in the “farmland zone” as soon as 2018.

What: The Department of Natural Resources can move forward with its plan to ban certain lead hunting ammunition from 400,000 acres of state lands in the farming portion of the state. An attempt by a number of lawmakers to stymie the DNR’s efforts failed.

So what? With overtones of gun control, this controversy split the hunting community and has forced groups like Pheasants Forever to side with the NRA against groups like the Audubon Society. Lead is toxic, and spent lead ammunition kills wildlife, studies have shown. However, no scientific studies have concluded that such deaths have a population-level effect on any wildlife. Lead has been banned continent-wide for waterfowl hunting for decades, but that ban — supported by many duck hunters — followed documentation of widespread bird die-offs from lead poisoning.

Now what? The DNR’s proposed restriction of fine shot, which would most directly affect pheasant hunters but not deer hunters, still needs to move through the state’s bureaucratic rulemaking process. It could take effect as soon as the fall 2018 hunting season.
MUSKIE STOCKING
Part of the attraction of muskie fishing for the fanatics who pursue them is the fish's imposing presence. Anglers who land a muskie would do well to keep their fingers away from the razor sharp teeth.
Part of the attraction of muskie fishing for the fanatics who pursue them is the fish’s imposing presence. (Pioneer Press file photo)

What: A plan to halt the DNR from stocking muskies into new waters failed.

So what? The DNR’s planned expansion of the popular sport fish drew fervent opposition from a number of lakeshore homeowner associations. That led several lawmakers to try to prohibit the DNR from stocking muskies (aka muskellunge, a larger cousin of the northern pike) into any new waters. The moratorium passed the House but failed to garner enough support in the Senate, a victory for muskie fishing groups like the Minnesota Pike and Muskie Alliance.
Related Articles

Minnesota bowfishing tournament grows – and carp shrink
Blaze pink and lead ammo get backing in Minnesota Legislature
Tough wild turkey breast? Pound it into a tender schnitzel
I had to get angry to shoot my first wild turkey
Turkey hunting poem: The Tyrkey

Ecologically, there is no scientific evidence that muskies hurt fish populations — as feared by some opponents — but there is no evidence they help either. So the battle showcased the cultural differences between groups with equal rights to share the state’s public waters.

Now what? The state will move ahead with its process that appears likely to result in stocking muskies into new waters. However, Meier said that final decisions haven’t been made, and the DNR plans to meet with concerned local officials before moving forward.
NORTHERN PIKE FISHING
Four northern pike swim along on a stringer on Lake Mille Lacs Thursday, July 30, 2015. The lake's pike population is increasing and Minnesota officials have increased the daily limit to 10 pike fish under 30 inches, providing new opportunities for anglers to catch and keep the aggressive, hard-fighting fish. (Pioneer Press: Dave Orrick)
Four northern pike swim along on a stringer on Lake Mille Lacs in 2015. The statewide limit is three, but there are exceptions on some lakes, and the DNR want to change the statewide scheme. (Pioneer Press: Dave Orrick)

What: A widely supported DNR plan to change fishing regulations for the state’s second-most-sought fish, northern pike, moved from the fast track to the slow track.

So what? The plan to divide the state into three zones with different regulations in each sought to address a number of pike “problems.” In the south, too few “keeper” fish are present; in a swath of central and north central Minnesota, a growing number of lakes appear to be choked with small fish, possibly hurting walleye populations; in the northeast, trophy pike continue to disappear.

Now what? The Department of Natural Resources plans to still plow ahead with the plan via a bureaucratic rulemaking process, but that means the soonest it can become official is 2018. Officials had hoped to have the new regs take effect by next year’s fishing opener.
ELK EXPANSION
(Marshal Deters/Minnesota Department of Natural Resources)
Wild elk near Grygla, Minn. (Marshal Deters/Minnesota Department of Natural Resources via AP, File)

What: A plan by state wildlife officials to expand the wild elk population in northwestern Minnesota was dealt a potentially lethal blow. An overarching agricultural bill heading to Gov. Dayton contains a section that forces the DNR to first prove that it can protect ranchers and farmers from damage to property and crops for two years before the agency moves ahead with its plan.

So what? Elk once roamed much of Minnesota but have been beaten back to three small herd in the far northwestern corner of the state. There, they exist amid an uneasy relationship with ranchers and farmers, whose fences, storage bins and crops suffer damage from the large ungulates. A long-term plan by the DNR to increase the elk herd also seeks to study elk and create habitat that will allow them to grow without causing problems with property owners. Eventually, officials hope to expand hunting opportunities for elk.

Now what? DNR Assistant Commissioner Bob Meier said that burden might doom the expansion, which is supported by groups like the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation. Meier said the DNR needs to examine its options.

[h2ofwlr]

Attempt to stop muskie stocking fizzles; northern pike plan goes nowhere
DNR won that Capitol battle, but proposal on northern pike failed.
By Tony Kennedy Star Tribune
May 24, 2016 — 8:53pm


State legislators failed to block the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) from stocking muskies in new waters, but the agency lost on a separate fishing issue regarding a new northern pike management plan.

“Everything just kind of died at the end,” said Bob Meier, assistant DNR commissioner. “It was just kind of a draw.”

The anti-muskie stocking movement was largely fed by local opposition to DNR plans to introduce muskies in Otter Tail County, Gull Lake and Big Marine Lake. In the House and Senate, Republican lawmakers sought to undermine an active, science-based plan to expand muskie fishing opportunities across the state by 2020.

Three lakes — Pokegama, Roosevelt and the Sauk River Chain — already have been stocked under the management plan. But lake associations and local governments who opposed muskie stocking in the next set of designated sites circumvented the DNR with maneuvering in the Legislature to halt muskie introductions. They argue that muskies are a threat to walleyes and other fish populations.

The Senate passed a bill that included a four-year moratorium on stocking muskies in new water. The House, in its Game and Fish Bill, wanted to prohibit the DNR from stocking muskies in any of the lakes identified for muskie introduction this year.

John Underhill of Minnesota Muskie and Pike Alliance took little solace in the outcome when the legislative session ended Sunday in a collapse. Even as scientific evidence mounts in favor of the axiom that muskies co-exist in balance with walleyes, panfish, northern pike and other species, anti-muskie zealots churn out misinformation to the contrary, Underhill said.

“They will never give up,” he said.

Meier said the DNR’s strategy is to keep discussions going with local groups before deciding which new lakes to stock with muskies.

Regarding northern pike, the DNR has developed a plan to divide Minnesota into three zones of individualized regulations. Based on broad support for the idea, the agency introduced a stand-alone bill to gain instant legislative approval for the idea. It failed to pass. If the DNR now attempts to make the change administratively, the process could take two years. Each northern pike zone under the plan would have size limits and possession limits customized to meet specific management objectives for that zone.

In north-central Minnesota, for instance, “hammer-handle” northerns are overabundant and are killing walleye fry and forage fish needed for walleye to thrive. The DNR wants to increase the harvest of those smaller pike by greatly loosening the bag limit for them.

In northeastern Minnesota, harvest restrictions would be customized to grow more trophy northerns. And in southern Minnesota, regulations would be customized for an area where pike are less abundant and fishing pressure is high.

Mille Lacs station

One other fishing proposal also fell flat at the Legislature — a $3.5 million provision to build a fisheries facility on the Mille Lacs lakefront in Garrison included in the bonding bill that died. DNR fisheries chief Don Pereira said in February the new station would include a modest cool-water hatchery and be commanded by a manager hired to fill the newly created position of Mille Lacs project leader.

Supported by Gov. Mark Dayton, the DNR said a new station was justified because Mille Lacs is so important to the state and undergoing such a complex array of changes. The big lake is having trouble sustaining the lives of baby walleyes and the DNR this year took the unprecedented step of stopping anglers from keeping any walleyes. On Mille Lacs this season, it’s catch-and-release only.

[Nershi]

Politicians shouldn't be allowed to get involved in fish and game laws or management decisions. Everyone likes to complain about the dnr but they are a hell of a lot better at managing our resources than our state representatives.

[Big Doe Hunter]

Because young of the year are very vulnerable to spinners.

Exactly, I believe this would lead to less cripples & less mistake birds.

[Fish Felon]

Because young of the year are very vulnerable to spinners.

Exactly, I believe this would lead to less cripples & less mistake birds.

Plus if that theory is correct, which I can't confirm or deny, wouldn't it mean a lower percentage of adult hens shot? Helping to protect MN's all important "local ducks?"

Very, very, very few local duck populations in NA. You have FL mottled ducks, Mexican ducks, some species of tree ducks, and the ducks that nest in the entire state of MN.