A proposal for a new Lake Superior "fishing and angling endorsement" is drawing mixed reviews among anglers.
While it's favored by some Lake Superior trollers, it's opposed by other trollers and also by a local muskie fishing group and many St. Louis River walleye anglers.
The endorsement proposal originated with the Western Lake Superior Trolling Association in November 2005. The $15 endorsement would replace the $10 Minnesota Trout and Salmon Stamp for anglers fishing Lake Superior and its tributaries up to the first fish barriers. Anglers who fish inland trout streams and trout lakes would still be required to have the Minnesota Trout and Salmon Stamp.
The endorsement also would be required of anglers fishing any species on the St. Louis River, where only a regular fishing license is now required.
Money raised by the endorsement could be used to improve fish habitat, rear and stock fish, rear and stock forage species, upgrade enforcement and improve boating access.
"The funding for Lake Superior has always been on the back burner," said Duluth's Dave Koneczny, a charter fishing captain and president of the 1,800-member Lake Superior Trolling Association. "We want to shore it up, make it better and have the funds we need."
Koneczny estimates the endorsement could raise about $375,000 annually. The current Minnesota Trout and Salmon Stamp is required of most anglers ages 16 to 64 who fish inland trout streams and lakes as well as Lake Superior and its tributaries. It generates about $820,000 annually.
For the past five years, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources has spent an average of $150,000 per year of trout stamp money on Lake Superior management, said Tim Goeman, DNR regional fisheries manager at Grand Rapids.
The DNR, on average, has spent $1.2 million of its $28.5 million fisheries budget on Lake Superior management each year over the past five years, Goeman said. Those expenditures are reviewed annually by the Trout and Salmon Stamp Oversight Committee, a group of private citizens.
MIXED REACTION
Anglers have varying opinions about the endorsement idea as it has been proposed.
Jon Fiskness of Duluth, secretary of the Western Lake Superior Trolling Association and a charter fishing captain, likes the idea.
"The endorsement and the oversight committee that goes along with it will help manage the fishery better," Fiskness said.
But not all anglers agree.
"If I could see that the money would benefit us, I would maybe be for it," said Proctor charter fishing captain Peter Dahl. "I don't see where doing more studies or more law enforcement or whatever they want to do with the money will put more fish in the lake for us."
Dahl said his 10-member charter captains' group, the Duluth Charter Fishing Guides, opposes the endorsement.
Many walleye anglers on the St. Louis River also oppose the endorsement, which would require them to pay a fee in addition to their regular fishing license.
"Absolutely 100 percent opposed -- every single one I've talked to," said Cory LeeJoice, who fishes walleyes on the river. "They say, 'What do we have to do with Lake Superior?' and they're right."
Duluth's Charlie Nelson, another river angler, agrees.
"For small boaters, shore fishermen, kids who fish up and down the river, you'd force them into having to buy a Lake Superior endorsement. I'm not for it," Nelson said.
St. Louis River muskie anglers are in the same boat.
"The Lake Superior Chapter of Muskies Incorporated opposes such a fee, as it would add $15 to the licenses needed to fish muskies in that area with no monies dedicated to the improvement of muskie fishing," Terry DeMenge, president of the chapter, wrote in a March letter to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.
A citizens' oversight committee for the state's Trout and Salmon Stamp fund also opposes the endorsement, said Dave Bennett of Burnsville, Minn., chairman of the committee.
"The TSSC (Trout and Salmon Stamp Committee) does not favor the language of the Lake Superior Endorsement, as written, and does not feel any increase in Trout and Salmon stamp cost, or issuance of additional cold water angling stamps is appropriate at this time," the committee wrote in a prepared statement.
Koneczny said the trolling association has heard little opposition to the endorsement.
"Anglers came back and really liked it," he said. "A couple, three, four people didn't like it."
DECISION-MAKING PROCESS
The way the endorsement has been proposed, the money it generates would be allocated by a committee including two state legislators and five anglers. DNR officials would act as advisers to the committee. That has raised concerns among DNR fisheries officials about distribution of money raised by the endorsement.
"At what point do the (DNR) management experts have an opportunity to outline priorities and make those determinations?" asked Ron Payer, DNR fisheries management section chief.
"Where the money gets spent and how those decisions are made -- that's a concern I think all anglers would have," said Don Schreiner, DNR Lake Superior Area fisheries supervisor at French River.
Koneczny said management decisions would be made by "all three units" -- legislators, citizen anglers and the DNR.
"No one is trying to take authority away from another person," Koneczny said.
The DNR is in the final stages of updating its Lake Superior fisheries management plan, which has taken more than a year and has involved extensive angler input. A 21-member advisory group of anglers, conservation groups, American Indian bands and commercial fishermen has met monthly with DNR officials to offer comments on the big lake's management.
No bill addressing the endorsement idea has been introduced in the Minnesota Legislature. Koneczny hopes to meet with northern Minnesota legislators this summer or fall to get a bill introduced in the 2007 Legislature.
"You're talking about a two-year process," Koneczny said. "We're not trying to jam anything down anyone's throat."
Here's the proposal they made:
Here are the key features of the Lake Superior fishing and angling endorsement proposed by the Western Lake Superior Trolling Association:
Annual fee, $15
Would take the place of the current Minnesota Trout and Salmon Stamp for anglers fishing Lake Superior; would also be required of anyone fishing the St. Louis River estuary.
Money raised by the endorsement would be used to improve fish habitat, rear and stock trout and salmon, rear and stock forage species, improve boating access and upgrade enforcement.
Alright, I know I oppose it. Don't get me wrong, I buy the Trout and Salmon stamp every year anyway and would LOVE to see the fishing on Lake Superior and the St. Louis River get even better, but I don't believe that small boaters, kids on shore and anglers that never go to Lake Superior, should have to pay for it. If people not using the resource should pay for it, then all tax payers should be on that bill, not just other anglers.
That's my opinion. What's yours?
The whole point is to get more monies for funding a specific area of the state, that sounds good to me. They need to make it strictly Lake Superior fishing. NO Tribs or even the St. Louis Bay and River.
And it looks like I would have to get another stamp for fishing kamloops up the shore if I'm fishing upstream from the mouth, doesn't make sense.
I didn't see anything on how Wisconsin does theirs. Why try to re-invent and just use something another state has been using for years. Wisconsin requires a Lake Superior trout stamp if fishing in Lake Superior on the Wisconsin side. It also requires an inland trout stamp if your fishing anywhere else beside Lake Superior. It simple and clean. The border water St. Louis river should just stay the same.
I would not mind buying another stamp if it's just for Lake Superior fishing, I'm game for that and a seperate license for inland trout fishing. The whole thing just doesn't seem right and the Association just wants a bigger cut of the pie to help their own businesses which is fine, but fight it at the capitol and get the DNR to allocate more resources instead of trying to the find the easier way by making the anglers pay for it.
I agree. A Lake Superior stamp and an inland trout stamp would be fine. Then those using Lake Superior would pay for it. I think that would be fine, but not the proposed idea.
I'ld buy both each year, but a kid on the St. Louis River shouldn't have to buy either to go after a walleye, crappie, catfish, etc.