The public comment period on the Minnesota DNR Fisheries’ proposal to reduce the statewide walleye bag limit from 6 to 4 ended on March 5, and by late last week, the agency had tallied nearly 1,500 total comments.
Brad Parsons, DNR Fisheries chief, told me that 53% of the comments supported the limit change, 32% were opposed, and the remaining 15% were neutral or commenting on matters irrelevant to the statewide limit.
Those percentages are fairly consistent with past surveys of the fishing public.
From 2021 to 2023, more than 4,000 DNR on-the-water interviews with anglers showed that 67% supported a reduction in the walleye bag limit, 18% opposed it, and 15% were neutral.
The agency’s most recent statewide angler survey (in 2023) randomly selected fishing license buyers and found that 48% of respondents favored the change, 23% opposed it, and the remainder had no opinion. A 2025 online survey found that 61% approved changing the daily and possession limit to four.
Given those results, the DNR intends to move forward with the process of implementing a four-fish statewide limit (with exceptions for border water agreements, large lake management, treaty deals, etc.) effective March 1, 2027. Before that can happen, however, DNR Fisheries must still take the matter before an administrative law judge for a hearing.
For that hearing to occur, at least 50 folks during the public comment period had to request one, and Parsons said well north of 50 put in said request. Hearings before an administrative law judge don’t roll around often on fisheries matters, and Parsons admits this will be a new process for him.
Commentary: Walleye Alliance supports Minnesota DNR proposal to reduce walleye limit to four
Commentary: MN-Fish position statement on proposed walleye limit reduction in Minnesota
Minnesota DNR announces open water fishing regulations for Upper Red Lake
Changes in the yellow perch limit back in 2000 and some Canadian border waters issues a few years later were the most recent instances that he could find when such a hearing happened. The fisheries division will publish its notice of intent to proceed with the change along with a “sonar statement of need and reasonableness” making its legal case.
As for a timeline, Parsons wasn’t sure, though he’s confident the process will play out for the limit change to happen by next March 1 of next year.
Outdoor News will let readers know when the hearing is officially scheduled, and we’ll have someone there covering it.
VERTICAL BOWS FOR TURKEYS? A reader called me last week concerned about rules for turkey hunters using archery equipment.
He’d spoken with someone within the DNR who said a turkey hunter could only use a firearm or a crossbow with their regular turkey license (seasons A-F), and that so-called vertical bows could only be used with the regular turkey archery license.
Given that an archery license runs all season, it didn’t strike me as a huge deal, but the reader made a solid case that he might decide to switch from firearms to compound on the fly, and why couldn’t he use the more primitive tool under the regular license? He’s right that it did seem like an unnecessary complication, and we found a Q&A webpage on the DNR site that validated the above.
Surprised and seeking an explanation, I called Roy Churchwell, the DNR’s relatively new resident upland game bird consultant. He referred me to Page 45 of the latest hunting regulations booklet, which states: “Hunters who purchase a firearms license may also use crossbows or vertical bows but may only hunt during their selected time-period or the final time-period.”
OK, that makes sense, allowing hunters to use a more primitive weapon if they choose. Churchwell told me via email “the website is incorrect. The reg book is correct. I will put in a request to have the website changed. Thanks for bringing this to my attention.”
Bottom line, if you want to use a compound, recurve, longbow, or crossbow for turkey under your regular spring license, you’re legal.



3 thoughts on “Outdoor Insights: Proposal to lower Minnesota walleye limit will see administrative law judge hearing”
On the topic of lowering the walleye limit state wide I would even welcome a 3 fish limit!! Same as with northern pike…
Now in going along with that I always think there should be give and take!! Why can’t Minnesota do the same as Wisconsin and allow 2 during open water season and 3 lines in winter, that would be more than fair. Your managing the fish with limits anyway, more lines only allow us more opportunity to actually catch a limit expediently!!
What’s good for Wisconsin could be good for Minnesota don’t you think?
Born and raised here in Minnesota but I would love to see that happen even if I had to pay extra for my license to do it!! Come on man!!
L.O.L.!
Who is managing what…are you kidding me ?
I sure hope so. The ONLY thing the d n r is manaving is their paychevjs and theur pensions.
“Your managing the fish with limits anyway, more lines only allow us more opportunity to actually catch a limit expediently!”!
REALLY?
I think they should go from 6 down to 5 not 4