Hotspotoutdoors

Does anyone know if this passed and was also signed by T-Paw?

No need to debate, there was plenty done a while back in the forum. I just never heard the outcome.

Thanks much.

I don't think it passed. If it did I did not hear or read anything about it. It sure would have been nice. I could be wrong.

i was just thinking about that the other day and hadnt heard anything

I'm pretty sure it was squashed at the same level that it was last year or whenever it was last proposed.

Shot down according to the outdoor news, I think it was in the paper from 4 weeks ago if I am not mistaken.

Yep, dead in the water. It made it all the way to the last day of the legislative session but was removed by the Senate at the last minute. It's made it that far the last couple of years and it's just a matter of time before it passes as it has enough support except from a select few.

Yep, a limit is a limit. They just want you to stay longer to get one

Maybe next year

I subscribe to the outdoor news and about 4 weeks ago I didn't get my issue! Figures! I think our mail was stolen that day, we received nothing that day. Scary...

Thanks for the updates guys.

im sure they will bring it back next year again

I believe there is far, far more people against this than there is for it! (except for a select few on this site)

doubt it.

Most people I've talked to are against it. A few people on here writing for it over and over again does not constitute a majority. The everyday family fisherman who never sees this site sees no need for it. You do not get a very good idea of how the general public feels about an issue by only reading here.

Sure would be great for Catfishing!

i know im not popular but im happy it didnt pass. with all the fishing pressure on our lakes i think 1 line works just fine. I'll continue to be opposed to this.

So will all the people who do oppose this bill still only use one line if the change is ever made to make two legal?

Polls have been taken in various publications and the ability to use 2-lines in MN is overwhelmingly supported by those who participated in the surveys.

If the everyday fisherman doesn't see the need for it nobody is holding a gun to his head requiring him to use two lines if it becomes law.

This is such a sky-is-falling, non-issue that it's laughable. People were screaming the lakes were going to be fished out when electronic fish finders were brought to the market and they even tried to pass laws to restrict them too. Apparently those chicken littles are still around today working on their next crusade for no logical reason once again.

I suppose we'll be doing this again next year so there isn't much reason to beat this dead horse even more then it has already.

Keep your powder dry boys!

I agree with LMITOUT. From what I can tell the 2-line proposal is supported by the general public and for sure by the fishing public. Very few if any of the people I've talked oppose the idea. Minnesota allows 2 lines through the ice, the majority of other states allow 2 or 3 lines in open water ---- this truly is a "sky is falling" issue IMO.

The aforementioned surveys are biased, as is discussing the issue on a forum such as this.

The sky is not falling now, truly some believe it is.

I'm very much opposed to the use of 2 lines in the open water season. And the majority of my friends and accomplished anglers are also opposed to 2 lines. I agree that it is the same people who keep posting on this topic how they are so right and everyone else who doesn't follow suit is wrong. This forum is biased indeed.

Why are the surveys or this forum biased katoguy and DHanson?

There is a good mix of anglers of all skill levels and fishing types on here.

Everyone I have talked to in person supports the passing of a bill to use two lines, if you don't want to that is your choice to only use 1, but don't knock others who think it would add more enjoyment to their fishing experience.

This has been hashed out over and over.

I don't understand what can be biased about asking 2 lines

Yes?

No?


This is the biggest online community in the state, so I would bet it covers a broad spectrum of opinions.


I ran one short term poll here and it turned out 48-17 in favor.


At least we have another full year to argue about it some more.

The surveys on here are not valid because they are not a random sampling. Asking people to "click" for or against is inherently biased, because those with strong feeling either way respond. Selecting a group of people from the general public randomly and asking them for or against would be a good survey.

statistics 101... incredibly biased if you're gonna ask that question on this website

Ok, so that begs the question. Don't we want to ask the question to the people it would affect the most?

Or the opinion of some random urban troubadour should decide this?

Seriously, I bet if you asked this question to Sportsmen and women across the state, I bet you would find a majority of them would support an additional line. Similar to the results I got here.

[quote=Wish-I-Were-Fishn]Yep, a limit is a limit. They just want you to stay longer to get one

So what you're saying is that since there is a limit it doesn't matter if you use two lines. With that reasoning, then why not let everyone use ten lines? In fact, why not let people use seine nets? A limit is a limit. The reason you can't is because more fish would be caught, harming the resource. DNR studies have shown that less then 7% of fishermen catch a limit. If you allow two lines, ten lines, or seine nets more people would catch limits, thereby threatening the fish populations. If the % of people catching a limit rose from less than 7% to say 15 or 20%, two or three times as many fish would be harvested. That would be a big problem. The DNR opposes the use of two lines, and for good reason. Remember, just this last year they were proposing lowering the limit on walleyes to four, and even two fish. Why would you now want to allow fishing with two lines when the resource is already threatened? Makes no sense.