Posted: 11/2/04
Winnebago Creek nixed from fishing proposals
Winnebago Creek has been dropped from a proposal by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources for new trout fishing regulations.
The DNR had proposed making a 12.4 mile stretch of Winnebago Creek catch-and-release only. It would also ban the use of live bait. The goal was to produce larger trout.
The news about Winnebago Creek came in a press release that explained changes to trout regulations for 22 streams in six southeast counties.
Jason Moeckel, a DNR regional fisheries manager in Rochester, told The Argus on November 1 that Winnebago Creek was removed for a couple reasons.
In the public input process, it became apparent that some of the areas, such as Winnebago Creek, were places that were important to people who fish with bait , or who had concerns about family fishing outings, Moeckel said.
He said the DNR was also concerned that other recreational opportunities could be jeopardized by landowners who opposed the plan.
ìThe bottom line is it just didnít seem like a good fit for that area and the people there,î Moeckel said.
DNR officials had considered putting in a slot limit like one imposed on East Beaver Creek State Park for trout 12-16 inches, with bait allowed.
ìFrankly, we want to be able to work more collaboratively and cooperatively with the landowners,î Moeckel said in explanation of why slot limits werenít imposed.
DNR planners felt that some people would not want to talk to the DNR if slot limits were imposed, Moeckel said, and that new regulations would not be worth that consequence.
The DNR will now try to work with local people to improve the fishing through things watershed wide, like habitat improvement on places where the DNR has easements, Moeckel said. He also hoped that more landowners would want to provide easements.
Moeckel said he had received several e-mails from people thanking the DNR for not changing Winnebago Creekís fishing rules.
Citizens seem pleased
The proposal first came to the surface at a public meeting in Caledonia on March 25.
Adjoining landowners were invited to hear about the proposal and give their opinions.
Nearly all of those opinions opposed the idea, and some opinions were expressed angrily. They said it was an infringement of rights, that it denied children the chance to catch and keep fish, and that there were better ways to grow larger trout, such as improve habitat.
Those people who objected then should be pleased with the final outcome, said Norlin Hein. Hein had spoken at the meeting in opposition of the idea.
Hein said on October 29 that the 12.4 mile long proposal was too long a stretch of the creek to make fly fishing only, and the catch-and-release. He said he wouldnít have objected to it on certain parts, especially on the easement. ìIt would have made sense to do it on a small part and experiment with it.î
ìI think the people in general in this area are pretty pleased,î he added.
ì[Iím] Pleased that the DNR actually listened to the voice of the local people. That isnít always the case. But it was a very positive action on their part.î
Loren Lapham, another person who spoke out at the first meeting, echoed that sentiment. ìIf citizens do have a concern, that the DNR will listen somewhat,î he said. ìI think a lot of people were worried it wasnít going to happen that way.î
Lapham has a farm two miles north of Eitzen, with drainage into Winnebago Creek. He said farmers work hard on erosion control, in part to preserve the water quality of creeks like Winnebago.
Working on the farm during the day and going fishing in the evening is the American way, he said. ìBeing able to fish was one of the perks of living where we do.î
He felt that the strong and vocal public reaction against the proposal, and the landowners expressing their concerns, played a big part in having the proposal removed on Winnebago.
Winnebago Creek has 3.2 miles of easement. Its overall length is 19.3 miles, with an average of 1,791 adult brown trout per mile, which is 586 above the regional average.
Other streams dropped from original proposal include Bee Creek, Cold Spring Brook, and Money Creek.
Hoping for larger trout
The proposals that did pass are intended to improve fishing quality for larger trout while maintaining diverse fishing opportunities for anglers. The regulations take effect April 16, opening day of the 2005 stream trout season.
ìTrout anglers want a variety of experiences. Some want larger fish. Others want more fish. For others, its taking a few fish home to eat,î said Moeckel in an October 26 press release. ìThe new regulations represent a reasonable balance of these wants. As a result, anglers will have the ability to find an experience that suits their preference.î
The DNRs original proposal, which was announced last winter, included special regulations on 181 miles of stream and prohibited the use of bait on 136 miles. Based on public input, Moeckel said the package was reduced to 128.7 miles with special regulations. Of those, 68.7 miles will allow only artificial lures and 60 miles will allow bait to be used. ìWe learned during the public input process that some of those streams were very important to bait anglers and heavily used by families,îMoeckel said.
Ninety-seven of the 128.7 stream miles are designated and actively managed trout water. About 31.7 miles are waters that hold large trout, but are not designated as trout water. The new package includes about 50 miles that were already under special regulations.
There are 680 miles of designated fishable trout water in southeast Minnesota. According to more than 2,400 DNR fish population surveys, the trout population in southeastern Minnesota has tripled since 1970.
Bait fishing will be allowed on 10 of the 22 streams. Anglers will be required to release all trout 12 to 16 inches on 14 streams while seven streams will be catch-and-release fishing where no trout could be kept. On one stream, anglers will be required to release all brook trout under 12 inches, with a one-fish limit.
Based on DNR population data for brown trout, about one-third of southeast Minnesota's top 330 miles of trout water will be affected by the new regulations with catch-and-release regulations on just six percent, Moeckel said.
Initial reaction from anglers was mixed but generally positive.
Jeff Hanson, a member of a citizen's group that advises the DNR on trout issues, was pleased that four streams slated for special regulations in the original proposal were dropped. However, he would have preferred further reductions in the special regulations package.
ìThe DNR is to be credited for proceeding with compromises to the expansive coverage of the initially proposed special regulations, and in making changes to allow bait fishing on seven of the streams which were initially designated for artificial only,îHanson said in written remarks provided to the DNR. ìIn my opinion, however, the DNR did not go far enough in reducing the mileage of streams covered by special regulations, particularly those located in Minnesota state parks.î
Jeff Broberg, a St. Charles trout angler and member of the Minnesota Trout Association, said although the new regulations affect just 14 percent of actively managed trout water, they should improve fishing for anglers who are interested in pursuing larger fish.
ìI'm delighted. The proposal allows most of our stream regulations to stay the same and also generates a more diverse sport fishery that takes advantage of the opportunity to manage some of our streams for populations of larger trout,î he said.
Gary Sobotta, vice president of the Hiawatha chapter of Trout Unlimited, said heís also pleased with the decision. ìOur endorsement of the new regulation changes was supported by our belief if you have good angling opportunities more anglers and citizens will be willing to protect those cold water resources,î Sobotta said. ìWe truly have some of the finest trout water in the entire country. While we did not get everything we wanted, we all must look beyond our personal wants and consider what is best for our kids and grandkids trout angling.î
Special regulations, such as catch-and-release with artificial lures only, can be helpful in the right situation but are not a cure-all, Moeckel stressed. The long-range plan recently adopted by the DNR includes efforts to monitor trout populations, conduct angler surveys, improve trout habitat, and work with partners to improve watersheds and water quality. The DNR will report annually on progress implementing the long-range plan. It may take several years before anglersí notice significant changes in the number or size of trout they catch, Moeckel said.
Caledonia Argus
314 West Lincoln St.
P.O. Box 227
Caledonia, MN 55921-0227
507/724-3475
E-Mail: editor.argus@ecm-inc.com