To the editor:
One story I heard recently captures the tension. An angler asked another how the fishing had been. “Excellent — I kept six walleyes a few days ago,” came the reply.
The response was swift and harsh. He was called a “fish hog” and told no one should keep more than one or two. The conversation ended abruptly.
That moment, retold among a few of us, made me pause. How did we get here? Some prominent voices in the angling community have made emotional appeals to “save the resource,” often without clear data to support their claims. While well-intentioned, these narratives can mislead and shift public perception away from science-based policy.
We’re often encouraged to trust respected anglers and industry figures. But shouldn’t that same trust extend to Minnesota DNR fisheries biologists? These professionals bring years of training, data analysis, and field experience. Yet, it’s troubling when some seem to echo popular sentiment rather than advocate for what the science supports. That hesitation undermines the credibility of the process.
This moment calls for leadership rooted in facts. Both the DNR and influential voices in the fishing community owe Minnesotans a transparent, data-driven explanation for the proposed statewide four-walleye limit. Without it, skepticism will only grow — and so will division.
It’s especially important to recognize that many walleye lakes in the Alexandria area have been actively managed by the DNR for years. These lakes vary widely in size, productivity and angling pressure. One management plan does not fit all. Blanket regulations risk ignoring local biological realities and the success of existing strategies. Anglers deserve clarity, not confusion. We need open dialogue, not silence. And we need policy shaped by evidence, not emotion. The future of our fisheries depends on it.
Gary Korsgaden
Former member of the MN DNR Citizens Walleye Work Group
Park Rapids, MN