Fish with more than one line? Not everyone is hooked

Rick Stange says Minnesota anglers should be allowed to fish with more than one line.

"It gives you a better chance of catching fish and opens up new methods of fishing," said Stange, 54, of Blaine. "It's also a good way to keep kids interested. And it would help tourism and the tackle industry."

Al Juhnke agrees.

"Every one of our neighboring states allows multiple lines, and we already allow two lines on the ice in the winter," said Juhnke, DFL-Willmar, author of a bill in the Legislature that would allow two lines year-round in Minnesota.

It's the third time in the past eight years that such a bill has been introduced. Twice it has passed the House, only to stumble in the Senate.

Juhnke hopes the third time is the charm.

But not everyone is hooked.

The agency recently has been trying to improve fishing, through slot limits and reduced bag limits. That's in response to anglers who complain of poor fishing or too many small fish.

But if more fish are caught -- even if they're not kept -- hooking mortality likely would increase, Payer said. He said the issue affects the quality of fishing.

"I keep hearing it will deplete the fishery, but if that were the case, Wisconsin wouldn't have any fish left," said Stange, an avid angler and former tournament fisherman. Wisconsin allows up to three lines, summer and winter, as long as anglers have only one bait, lure or hook on each line. Stange, who fishes in Wisconsin often, recently fired off a letter to Juhnke supporting the use of two lines.

"Over the years, it's been extremely popular with the calls, letters and petitions that have come to my office," Juhnke said. "It's easily 10- or 20-to-1 in favor."

He said the change would give anglers more options.

Juhnke said the DNR hasn't brought any quantifiable evidence showing that fishing with two lines will affect harvest or damage the fishery. "If that were the case, you'd expect fishing to be a lot worse in Wisconsin, and that just simply isn't the case," he said.

"Frankly, if conservation is really the concern, we ought to pull [underwater video] cameras out of water and get the fish finders off the boats and take the electronics away -- then we'd be addressing conservation."

Does it stand a chance?

Juhnke said he believes he can get the bill (HF 22) passed in the House. But it appears to be a long shot in the Senate.

"I oppose it," said Sen. Satveer Chaudhary, DFL-Fridley, chair of the Environment and Natural Resources Committee. "I don't feel it's in the spirit of conservation."

Chaudhary said he has several problems with the idea.

"I don't feel it's appropriate to cherry-pick the most convenient regulations from other states without first considering what other conservation methods other states have," Chaudhary said. "Wisconsin has a minimum size requirement, they don't allow trolling in most areas, in the northern zone they have a catch-and-release requirement, and they have a lower bag limit.

"So even though they allow three lines, they have a whole host of other restrictions that allow that luxury."

Juhnke said the two-line rule could be bypassed on lakes with special circumstances, such as Lake Mille Lacs and Upper Red Lake, where walleye harvest quotas exists.

And he said the two-line proposal could be used to raise more money for fisheries management. "I think people would be willing to pay to use two lines," Juhnke said.

Minnesota has a long tradition of allowing only one fishing line. But in 1975, the state decided to allow two lines while ice fishing. "It was felt that since there's not as much mobility, two lines probably would be OK," Payer said.

Juhnke said he doubts allowing two lines even in open water ultimately would have much impact on Minnesota fisheries.

"Any angler will tell you this: When the fish are biting, you'll only be using one rod and one reel," he said. "You can't handle more than one if they're biting."