And that is why it should be, at least for walleyes, 4 fish and 2 lines.

I think there are alot of good opinions being exchanged around here, I tend to agree with TO as far as 4 fish,(walleyes) and 2 lines. I wouldn't use my second line much, but sometimes it would be nice, like said, pulling cranks, also spinners on bottom bouncers, cat'n or any other time when I'm just dunking a crawler on the river.

I also don't see it as a negetive to the population that much, most of the guys who could pull off fishing two lines sucessfully are pretty conservation minded and realease a good share of the fish they catch. Hooking mortality could possibly be a problem, but I see hooking mortality as something that happens most often when live bait fishing. Especially lindy rigging and slip bobbers, where the fish are allowed to take the bait for a long period of time. While pulling cranks or even spinner rigs, the hook is set as soon as the fish bite, and they are usually not hooked deep.

The fee bothers me somewhat, more in principle than anything. I think it opens the door to charging for other changes, and we all know that once someone in government sees a way to make some more money....But as far as complaining about paying it, 5 bucks will barly get you a gallon of gas when this change (if) it takes place, so I won't have a problem coughing up 5 more bucks.

In Bass tournaments you can't use two lines and can't troll.

In Walleye tournaments you can use two line and can troll.

Would you call this a Walleye fishing state or Bass fishing state? (Dumb Q eh.)

I think it is just a lead up to increasing the fishing fee and adding a line. I can hear it now, Why do I have to pay extra to use two line when all I do is Ice fish (Or something like that).

How would you enforce the law when some can use two and some can't? Stop every one using two line?

Pretty easy to enforce. If the CO rolls up on a boater with two lines, then they check their stamp (which they're probably going to do anyway whether they have one rod or two hanging out).

It's estimated that 25% of all anglers will purchase the $5 two-line stamp and will add over $1 Million in revenue.

As mentioned above in various posts, not everyone is going to be out there with two lines slinging in walleyes left and right. It'll probably hurt more people's chances than help because they can't handle two rods at at time. There are only certain instances when two lines are a bonus, and if the fish are biting that well, you can't handle two lines at the same time and be productive anyway.

The statistics say that most fisherman in MN only catch two walleyes on any given day. Far from six. They've also said that reducing the bag limit to four will only slightly reduce the overall harvest because of the statistic in the previous sentence. The fact is the fishing isn't that great here that two lines is going to wipe out the population of walleye any time soon, so there is no need to get fired up about it. I say it's about time we get up to speed with the surrounding states who arguably have better fishing than here anyway, no closed season and multiple lines to boot!

Multiple lining rules. 5 dollers aint nothin anyway. It cost ya 5 dollers to drive around the block these days anyway so who cares. Although pawlenty should employ rules that matter wether we like em or not. Hes revenue hungary folks

Laws should not be drafted as a means to increase revenue.

When will people figure out that every time you give a nickle to the state they will take a dollar.

For those who would argue that a tax or fee should be paid for the use of two lines due to increasing the odds of catching a limit I would suggest they consider paying an additional five dollars for every barbed hook on their Rapala or crank bait. Whats another thirty bucks ? Hey the DNR really needs the money cause as it turns out all that money they were supposed to get from the Lottery is being sucked up by the general fund.

Personally I dont like treble hooks, they snag gills and extend the release time. Would it be fair of me to demand that those that choose to use treble hooks pay per barb ?

When is another five bucks too much ? Should we charge fees based on what pound test line you use or a five dollar fee for those who use leaders ?

Hunters who use a single shot should pay less than those who use a pump and those game hogs who insist on using a auto should really pay. Right ? Fair is fair...

By the year 2010 when you hit the lakes you may have to hire a lawyer instead of a Guide in order to follow all of the special rules and regulations.

How's that for a rant !

(all in good fun)

Good points.

I have been seeing more CO's lately, and even got checked on opener for the first time. It would be nice to use an extra line catfishing or trolling. As far as 4 walleyes that would be nice too. I see alot of buckets with 6 or more baby eyes every spring, and 6 or more big eyes leaving the river in the fall.

Someone posted elsewhere that in MO you can use 33 lines LOL!

I can see why.... there must not be an fish left there.

There's been some good points on the pros and cons of all this. I don't think it's something to get too pumped up about though as people will either use two or use one line. If the DNR needs additional money and raises prices or tacks on fees, that's fine with me as long as it's within reason. I for one contribute when I can by donating, having habitat plates for me and my wife's vehicles, etc.

As for 4 or 6 walleyes, that too doesn't matter to me. It's hard enough catching 4 if you fish with me. And if people have a large family where they want to feed them fish, then by all means take the wife and kids out and have at it so you can get a good meal of fish.

I personally think a 4 walleye limit would be a good thing. Would certainly help to some degree in those situations where people keep those cigar 12"ers and would also help in situations where a guy goes out, catches his limit, then goes and gets the wife, the kid, the grandkid, the buddy, etc and limits out for all of them within a day or two.

But in the end, I'll pay whatever fees or license costs there are, fish with 1 line 99% of the time and keep the couple or few walleyes I get that are eating sized for me and the kids.

I'm all for it. The only time I would use a second line is trolling. If I can get one more line down while trolling the sooner I can figure out what color and depth is working best that day. Whats five bucks? heck I got that in just change on my dresser, big friggin' deal!

I will not pay $5 for this because of the reasons cited by Hookey earlier in this thread.

That's Why I think they should do away with live bait rigs. To many fish gut hooked. Then again, I don't think I ever see live bait fiserman throw fish back.

I would have no problem with the $5 fee if it went to stocking more fish and hopefully not Walleyes. You just don't know what it's like to be on the water with a crowed of obsessive compulsives spazzing out over Walleyes. Come on! No one cares, only the people making MONEY off of you.

If you don't want to pay $5 for an extra line, DON'T.

After my last time out fishing I do not think it would be possible to troll two line in this area. Every one seams to have a spot to fish and to protect at all cost. You wouldn't believe how many people intentionally got in my way when I was trolling by. Trying to push me out to deeper water. I know this is what they were doing because there were certain waypoints I could not get close to.

There is not much common courtesy on the water and it's not getting better.

So you see a $5 fee is not tops in things on my mind.

Do you mind if I play through?

Hookey, you do make some good points, about the relationship between paying for two lines and other things we don't need to pay for. I agree that it is kind of a joke that we would need to pay to use two lines, but that being said, if it is an option I will take it, it could make some situations more enjoyable and let me try new tactics, if it's not for you, then you don't need to pay the fee. It would be nice just to give the option to everyone and not charge for it though....

Some good points have been made.

Here is my take and I know many will not agree. So we reduce daily limits and set possession limits equal to daily limits (good for conservation). There are discussions on reducing the walleye limits to 4 and we continue to look at special slots, etc. Now there is talk about allowing 2 lines for open water and charging additional fees. Is it just me or are we getting mixed signals here?

I recall reading that the 4 walleye limit would be better because it would allow more people to catch their limit and/or would not take as long (some politician talking). Wow, with 2 lines it will make it even easier for people to catch their reduced limits. Isn't this the best thing ever? Many times I just feel like our resources are for sale. Policies and the way the "stewards" of the resources manage them is not in the best interest of the resource. To make matters worse, many people embrace this short sighted management style. I would not spend the $5.00, but I probably would on a voluntary walleye stamp if I was assured the money went to stocking efforts. Quicker limits - that's what I am talking about .

That's my 2 cents and it is probably not even worth that much.