From staff reports

When the DNR released survey results saying 63 percent of a group of Minnesotans supported a ban on underwater video camera use for fishing, legislators supporting such a ban considered it a boost to their efforts.

Tuesday, August 17, 1999

When the DNR released survey results saying 63 percent of a group of Minnesotans supported a ban on underwater video camera use for fishing, legislators supporting such a ban considered it a boost to their efforts.

But before we in the land of 10,000 regulations go adding another one, there should be convincing evidence that such cameras pose a threat to fish populations, or at least trophy fish populations. So far, there is none.

The ban effort, led by Rep. Tom Bakk, DFL-Cook, posits the theory that banning the cameras while they still cost $600-$700 and hardly anybody uses them would be prudent, because by the time they are affordable and in widespread use it will be too late.

Of course, there is no evidence to support Bakk’s claim that rank amateurs will be hauling in trophy-size walleyes, northern and bass by the cartload because of these cameras.

But he wants a resolution anyway because as more people buy them, he believes &uot;it’ll get very, very hard to ban them.&uot;

Wrong. Even if the cameras increase anglers’ success rates, the DNR enforces limits on the number of fish individuals can catch. The agency expects to further refine those catch limits over the coming years to tailor them to the needs of individual lakes.

Second, the cameras serve a purpose, allowing anglers to precisely locate underwater vegetation and topography where fish congregate. This is especially useful in ice fishing, where trolling is not an option. The cameras are no more and no less useful a tool than depth finders, which are widely accepted.

Finally, as any angler knows, finding fish is not the same thing as catching fish. Cameras don’t make that lunker jump on the hook. Even the right bait, presented in the right way in the right place, is useless if the fish doesn’t feel like biting.

The DNR should be applauded for seeking public input on controversial fishing issues. It should not, however, make the mistake of constructing policy based on polling results.

Until there is evidence that the use of underwater cameras is hurting fish populations, this is one regulation we can live without.