MyFishFinder Forum
MFF US Midwest => Indiana => Topic started by: indianahooker on Jun 08, 2018, 05:35 AM
-
how bad do you think fishing hurts our smaller lakes? some are just 200-400acres. what damage do you think fishermen can do to its population? how long do you think it would keep giving up limits of 13"crappie after word got out? we all know pan fish are numerous, what about predators like bass pike and eyes? what would happen to a small walleye lake after word got out?
-
I strongly believe even panfish can be fished down in smaller lakes especially if there is no bag limit as in bluegills. Sure you won't get them all but you sure can decimate the larger males on the beds. I've seen people come through and pull every last male off the beds. A busy colony ends up fishless. Same goes for crappies. I fish a lake that is rimed with bullrushes the crappies spawn in. I've seen pontoon boats scour every little opening all the way around the lake and with 10 people aboard they can keep up to 250 fish. They obviously don't get them all but the sizes seem to go down over the years.
I fish an area of the country where bluegills are considered trash fish. Unbelievable how plentiful the bluegills are and the large sizes. Contrary to what the INDNR says the low harvest doesn't hurt the fishing at all. (They maintain the bigger the harvest the more food there is to go around). And the largemouth bass run larger in size than ours even though it's farther north in latitude. My theory is to grow really big bass you need to have fish slightly smaller than mouth gape as the fish get larger to increase feeding efficiency. Bluegill are hammered so hard here in Indiana we don't have that. The large bass has to work harder to find the forage size for his mouth gape.
One thing I don't think our INDNR realizes is how much harvest is easier due to the technology we are now using. Heck you don't even have to anchor your boat anymore with GPS activated electric motors and with GPS you can find your best spots a lot faster. And then there are the fish finders.
-
I'm sure it can hurt, some on here would say it can kill a lake and they've witnessed it first hand. I'm not sure it's very easy to fish out a lake. It's much easier to ruin access by a bunch of dirtbags leaving their trash on the ground. For God's sake, don't throw your crap on the ground! Sorry I digress.
I've witnessed a large (around 3ac) pond ruined by over fishing so I assume it's possible, but I don't think it's probable.
Doubt your going to hurt a crappie or walleye lake. But these dudes hammering these gills that do it summer and winter, day after day, taking bags full of fish every time, that is going to leave a mark!
I fished a small Noble Co lake last week that I've been told gets molested by Amish. I did see one boat of Amish there but the lot wasn't full of vans or buggies. Four of us took a few over 100 gills and redear from it. They must not be hurting it too bad. Fished it once last year with the same results.
PS, I'm getting ready to leave for Erie and hammer the walleye but it won't matter!
-
I think we need to stipulate there is a difference between fishing out a lake and effecting the numbers. I don't believe you can completely fish out a lake or even a pond, but you sure can effect the numbers of quality fish.
I've done and seen creel surveys. It's amazing how many fish anglers can harvest over a season.
-
I think we need to stipulate there is a difference between fishing out a lake and effecting the numbers. I don't believe you can completely fish out a lake or even a pond, but you sure can effect the numbers of quality fish.
I've done and seen creel surveys. It's amazing how many fish anglers can harvest over a season.
Yes, I agree! Not sure about your statement about bluegill being considered a trash fish. Most places a trash fish is rarely sought out or caught.
By far my family enjoys eating bluegill above all fish, even walleye and perch. I know, bring on the haters.
I for one am very greatful for our abundance of good gills lakes in NE IN. The lake I was on last week is in your "backyard" taxi and is one you visit. The good thing is there are 10 others within minutes of there too!!!
-
Roeboat I think you misunderstood me. I didn't mean I or others in our area consider bluegill trashfish. I was referring to another part of the country where most anglers thumb their noses at them. They'd rather catch a 10 inch stocked trout over a 10 inch bluegill. But hey that's good for me as I have a ball catching them with vertually no competition. One angler that was surprised I bothered with them said there's no meat on them. Another person was afraid they were full of grubs.
Their fish and game department doesn't help telling people the only fish safe from mercury contamination are the stocked trout. I'm well aware of the mercury but due to my aquaculture and chemistry background know you have to eat a lot of fish on a regular basis for it to be a concern.
It all depends on what your region considers a species worth pursuing or eating I guess. Was once told by a taxidermist in Idaho that big walleye are thrown up on the bank to rot in his area as they look too much like a native species called squawfish, which is not held in high regard.
And we all know that the common carp is THE sport fish in parts of Europe while many here despise them although there are exceptions.
-
Taxid- it sounds like your talking about us up here in the NE ;D ;D no one else I fish with go for panfish, and they don’t regulate any of them. I’ve yet to hit a true 10” bluegill or pumpkinseed but got a couple 9.5”. Inch per inch They fighter harder than the little stocked trout for sure. Pumpkinseeds and brookies are my two favorite fish for their beauty. oh and gills and crappie are an invasive here but people do enjoy crappies, take all you want type thing.
As far as the topic goes, it’s been seen time and time again how over fishing or improper harvesting can be detrimental to a pond/lake. Both numbers and average size suffer if selective harvest isn’t practiced. Almost saying they should have a slot for what one would consider keeper size. Depending on species and conditions, harvesting from the medium/average year class usually promotes a healthier fishery.
-
Taxid- it sounds like your talking about us up here in the NE ;D ;D no one else I fish with go for panfish, and they don’t regulate any of them. I’ve yet to hit a true 10” bluegill or pumpkinseed but got a couple 9.5”. Inch per inch They fighter harder than the little stocked trout for sure. Pumpkinseeds and brookies are my two favorite fish for their beauty. oh and gills and crappie are an invasive here but people do enjoy crappies, take all you want type thing.
As far as the topic goes, it’s been seen time and time again how over fishing or improper harvesting can be detrimental to a pond/lake. Both numbers and average size suffer if selective harvest isn’t practiced. Almost saying they should have a slot for what one would consider keeper size. Depending on species and conditions, harvesting from the medium/average year class usually promotes a healthier fishery.
Yup the northeast. ;D I have caught gills to 11 inches in my favorite little lake in Mass but most average 8 1/2 to 9 inches. A lake not far from there produced a very large pumpkinseed for me.
They aren't even listed as as species in Quabbin but I've caught them so big and scrappy I could hardly reel them in. And you haven't enjoyed fishing until you get large bluegill on a flyrod.
I also fish a lake in Mass at night where crappies average 13 inches.
-
I could remember that there were very few fishermen who even fished for fresh water fish. Living on the coast most people either fished for trout of saltwater species. I sure miss New England states. One of these days, I will go back I hope...
-
Shucks folks...roun' hyar bluegills and yellow perch make for a downright decent feed.
fish on, crackermeal/little Old Bay,,,, fish off
rivereddy
-
I could remember that there were very few fishermen who even fished for fresh water fish. Living on the coast most people either fished for trout of saltwater species. I sure miss New England states. One of these days, I will go back I hope...
You should Al. You'll never get any younger. The wife and I flew out there last summer and rented a car for a song. Then rented an airbnb on a private lake for a song too.
Sure beat driving and if you shop around you can get some great air fares.
She just retired so we will probably go out together to see the fall colors.
-
oh no! leaf peepers!
-
oh no! leaf peepers!
Well if the wife wasn't along I'd be fishing.
-
Well if the wife wasn't along I'd be fishing.
just messing with ya. I had a friend that lived out that way and always talked about the fall migration of leaf peepers.
-
just messing with ya. I had a friend that lived out that way and always talked about the fall migration of leaf peepers.
No worries.
I will draw the ire of my fellow hoosiers her but here goes:
After having lived in New England and seeing the intense colors of the trees in the fall I moved to Indiana. I heard people bragging about the fall colors in Nashville, Indiana. Having gone to college in Bloomington, Indiana not from there, and seeing them, I couldn't stop laughing. No comparison. Not even close!
-
After having lived in New England and seeing the intense colors of the trees in the fall I moved to Indiana. I heard people bragging about the fall colors in Nashville, Indiana. Having gone to college in Bloomington, Indiana not from there, and seeing them, I couldn't stop laughing. No comparison. Not even close!
Fall is a beautiful time out here. I love being outdoors, both hunting and fishing.
(https://s22.postimg.cc/3otn2i89p/87_D676_C8-_C571-423_D-_A2_BC-5_F44_BA581_B4_A.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/3otn2i89p/)
(https://s22.postimg.cc/bubp0rbz1/9_BC8_F069-_FDD8-4_EBC-87_C8-_CDCAED879_A33.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/bubp0rbz1/)
-
Amazing how the male brook trout's spawning colors in the fall seem to mimic the colors of the trees isn't it?
I learned something fascinating about the fall colors of the leaves a while back some of you may not know. Those colors you see are always there but are covered by the green of choryphyll caused by photosynthesis during the spring and summer.
-
I'm not a trout fisherman but d**n they are beautiful!!!
-
I'm not a trout fisherman but d**n they are beautiful!!!
As a taxidermist when I paint a male brookie in spawning colors what really makes them pop are the blue halos with the red dot in the center. I paint the halo a silvery blue and then put the dot in the center with a red sharpie.
-
As a taxidermist when I paint a male brookie in spawning colors what really makes them pop are the blue halos with the red dot in the center. I paint the halo a silvery blue and then put the dot in the center with a red sharpie.
I love the fine details in their coloring
(https://s33.postimg.cc/uj4iu5crv/0623_FA66-04_CB-40_EA-_B88_B-9_E0_AAE6078_B7.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/uj4iu5crv/)
-
I love the fine details in their coloring
(https://s33.postimg.cc/uj4iu5crv/0623_FA66-04_CB-40_EA-_B88_B-9_E0_AAE6078_B7.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/image/uj4iu5crv/)
Me too! Repainting the vermiculations (worm like markings) on the back will separate the men from the boys. Interestingly a Mass biologist told me there is a native strain of brookies in the Berkshires that have no vermiculations on the back. And if you really want to stand out one can repaint the tiny silver scales in the midsection with a hand brush!
-
you taxidermist guys are definitely artists!!!!!!!
-
It can be learned if you have an intimate knowledge of fish as how they should look, which comes with being a fanatic angler, and if you have basic artistic ability. I've won blue ribbons and best painted fish trophies given out by the paint companies, but I don't consider myself especially gifted at art. Another attribute you need is to want to constantly improve and soak up anything you can that will make you a better taxidermist. A willingness to swallow your pride and take constructive criticism at state, national, and world competitions really hones our craft. OTOH some people take the competition thing too far.
I did get A's in basic art classes in grade school and my mom being the stern practical German she is, said, "Dat's art. Dat doesn't count. You need to do vell in something dat will make moooooney!
O.K. back to the topic of the thread: Fishing down a lake.
-
I strongly believe even panfish can be fished down in smaller lakes especially if there is no bag limit as in bluegills. Sure you won't get them all but you sure can decimate the larger males on the beds. I've seen people come through and pull every last male off the beds. A busy colony ends up fishless. Same goes for crappies. I fish a lake that is rimed with bullrushes the crappies spawn in. I've seen pontoon boats scour every little opening all the way around the lake and with 10 people aboard they can keep up to 250 fish. They obviously don't get them all but the sizes seem to go down over the years.
i have seen two older guys on three different lakes this spring. thats all they were doing. searched the entire lake shore for bedding fish. then they loaded up the boat and headed to another lake im sure. that kind of fishing can surly put a huge dent in the population. i would be in favor of some law prohibiting that. maybe closed season for a month or 6 weeks? im not convinced about a gill limit though, especially if they are allowed to spawn unmolested.
i dont walleye fish much but i know they get fished hard on some lakes. how much better could that be with lower takes? i read a lot about hurshtown on here. that isnt very big at all but supposed to be good fishing? how could it be such a great walleye water with people working it over so much? unless its just a ruse? lots of restrictions there though, maybe not many fish it? a place like monroe would be hard to hurt but not so with the tiny waters of the northern half of the state. IMO
ironic that fishing sites hurt the fishing
-
We've discussed this topic many times on here and we hear the same opinions, that's ok with me so here is my opinion. I've been fishing all my 58 yrs. Most of those yrs very hard, harder than most. From what I've seen over the yrs the fishing pressure is nothing compared to yrs ago when people fished for food and everyone fished. There were good lakes and bad even back then and there was even less harvest laws than there is now. I never saw a lake fished down or even size changed from large to small but can say when the fishing pressure remand high on a giving lake the size tended to grow with numbers dropping. The really BIG change I've seen that I'm convinced has change the fishing is water quality. We no longer have many lakes that stay free of crap vegetation, alga blooms, stained water. Some of the lakes I still fish today used to have wild rice, clean growing weed edges, bull rushes and other things. The fishing in my opinion now is just as good as ever if not better than long ago. The people fishing with all the tech that is out there are relying on the equipment and aren't working at adjusting to the changes in the lake they fish or the species they fish for. Time on the water is the key and most don't have time or wiliness to commit. I know Indiana has some very good waters for pan fish, you just have to find them just like many yrs ago. We may not have as many good lakes as some of the other states that we get compared too, but I like to think percentage wise we are right with them. The Short of this is in my opinion is the there is no need for closed seasons or limits, a lake can't be fished out or even down anymore because of fishing pressure. Quality will only return to giving lake if water quality changes or learning how to find the quality fish. fish
-
i have seen two older guys on three different lakes this spring. thats all they were doing. searched the entire lake shore for bedding fish. then they loaded up the boat and headed to another lake im sure. that kind of fishing can surly put a huge dent in the population. i would be in favor of some law prohibiting that. maybe closed season for a month or 6 weeks? im not convinced about a gill limit though, especially if they are allowed to spawn unmolested.
i dont walleye fish much but i know they get fished hard on some lakes. how much better could that be with lower takes? i read a lot about hurshtown on here. that isnt very big at all but supposed to be good fishing? how could it be such a great walleye water with people working it over so much? unless its just a ruse? lots of restrictions there though, maybe not many fish it? a place like monroe would be hard to hurt but not so with the tiny waters of the northern half of the state. IMO
ironic that fishing sites hurt the fishing
I was once fishing Clear Lake in the fall when the big bluegills stack up in the hole on the other side of the bay the Marina is on. It doesn't happen every year but when it does they are very vulnerable. Whenever I showed up there was a retired guy anchored their pulling in fish. Didn't matter what time or day -- he was there. Once got there before first light and he was already there! Anyway we got to talking and he said he drove all the way over from Mishawaka. Said he had taken a couple thousand bluegill and crappie out in the last three weeks. Bragged about giving them away to the neighbors as he hated cleaning and eating fish. I had to bite my tongue as that rubbed me the wrong way.
As far as fishing sites hurting fish please don't take this the wrong way. Why are we here then? Seems people like to brag about their catch but won't give out too much details as in where and how, but that seems kind of shallow don't you think?
-
We've discussed this topic many times on here and we hear the same opinions, that's ok with me so here is my opinion. I've been fishing all my 58 yrs. Most of those yrs very hard, harder than most. From what I've seen over the yrs the fishing pressure is nothing compared to yrs ago when people fished for food and everyone fished. There were good lakes and bad even back then and there was even less harvest laws than there is now. I never saw a lake fished down or even size changed from large to small but can say when the fishing pressure remand high on a giving lake the size tended to grow with numbers dropping. The really BIG change I've seen that I'm convinced has change the fishing is water quality. We no longer have many lakes that stay free of crap vegetation, alga blooms, stained water. Some of the lakes I still fish today used to have wild rice, clean growing weed edges, bull rushes and other things. The fishing in my opinion now is just as good as ever if not better than long ago. The people fishing with all the tech that is out there are relying on the equipment and aren't working at adjusting to the changes in the lake they fish or the species they fish for. Time on the water is the key and most don't have time or wiliness to commit. I know Indiana has some very good waters for pan fish, you just have to find them just like many yrs ago. We may not have as many good lakes as some of the other states that we get compared too, but I like to think percentage wise we are right with them. The Short of this is in my opinion is the there is no need for closed seasons or limits, a lake can't be fished out or even down anymore because of fishing pressure. Quality will only return to giving lake if water quality changes or learning how to find the quality fish. fish
BigR,
There once was a bag limit on bluegills, speed limits on all the lakes, closed season for bass, and even bluegill beds were roped off. You just have to go back far enough.
-
I far back as I can recall a limit on crappie which I think was 50 later changed to 25 and a limit created during my time on red ear. I may very well be mistaken on both and yes there could have been many different bag limits before my time. Back then I would say limits may have been needed because of the fishing pressure. You mentioned your experience on clear. I would bet 30 yrs ago you would have seen 5 or more old guys working it over. I say that from experience on the lakes I fished many yrs ago. Same lakes hardly get fished anymore and the fishing is no better or no worse. Location and techniques and equipment used has changed due to water condition changing. Here's an example of what I think proves my thinking. Bass Lake, when there was/are weeds then fishing is much better for the majority. It's just easier to find and figure them out. When the weeds are gone because the water quality changes the fishing drops off for most. A few can say it's as good as ever because they now how to change to the conditions. The DNR still stocks nearly as many, fish are in there. Requires the time and effort.
-
Many times people are complaining about fewer fish around, but many times it’s more of an imbalance in the population of their target species compared to the total fish mass in the water. There could be just much more competition for their preferred species but there’s a ton of “junk” fish.
-
there is no need for closed seasons or limits, a lake can't be fished out or even down anymore because of fishing pressure. Quality will only return to giving lake if water quality changes or learning how to find the quality fish. fish
there are only so many fish in the keeper size range in a given lake arent there? thousands get taken out, by hordes of fishermen chasing the grapevine, but they dont get fished down? that defies logic. with the new electronics, it can only get worse. i dont understand how you can think that way. maybe people dont fish as much where you fish, but they sure do around this part of the state. everyone has their opinion though.
taxid,
what are we doing here? good question really.
i started reading fishing sites on the internet around 99. i found a load of good reading with piles of pictures and info. friendly people willing to share and i did the same. seems there were a lot more posts back then. what is there now about 3 doz that posters on here anymore? some sites are still big but not as big as they were. i didnt see the internet as shallow back then. i seen it as anglers sharing knowledge and of course bragging along with it. lol but now with just a few pics and no details it kinda does. i try to say how i caught them, but not where i caught them. for the most part though, i just dont report too often anymore. fishing sites and i believe the internet in general has changed a lot since then. i have a few friends that dont even get on fishing sites anymore.
-
The people fishing with all the tech that is out there are relying on the equipment and aren't working at adjusting to the changes in the lake they fish or the species they fish for.
I don’t agree.
Just because people are using the tools available, doesn’t mean they aren’t adjusting.
I feel your statement has no validity. It’s purely conjecture. And states that if you use technology, you really aren’t “fishing”. That is pure hogwash.
However, most of the rest of your post I agree with and enjoyed.
Mac
-
On the flip side... there are some lakes in Maine that they have removed limits on smaller salmon and lake trout, or even no limit on bass for the whole northern half of the state, and people are still mostly catching and releasing :o :rotflol:
It seems some places/cultures just have greedy fishermen that keep everything, while other places have a problem of stunting due to overpopulation and competition from the catch and release mentality. Can’t believe I’m saying this, but Maybe some of those out for meat should take a trip up here to “vacation land” and help thin some of our selected lakes lol.
-
Every time I go fishing my goal is to "fish a lake down". I go to catch fish. If I do well I go back there again to catch fish. I have no fish finder, thermometer, depth finder or a gas motor. I work hard to find them and when I do( this long bearded old man)( since these types have been singled out as the culprits) I fish them down. I dont cheat, bend or break the law in any way. I carry a baseball counter and click off each fish I catch until I have got my legal limit and quit with a smile on my face. If my family depended on my ability to catch fish to eat this would take place every day until there were no more fish to be caught. Next lake. I dont and wont judge what someone else is doing since its unknown to me why they are keeping ALL those fish. Old, young, beard or no beard its not my concern, I dont know why they are doing it but if they are not breaking the law catch those fish, its their right.
Where I fish I know some people I see fishing the bank need to catch fish to eat. I always catch some cats which is a fish that I dont want but I keep for those who need them for a meal. No cats caught, they get some white bass or crappie.
When I first got on this forum I caught some crap for the photo I posted showing how we fished down a lake. Every fish was eaten and enjoyed by many who cant go get them because they are to old or dont have the ability to go fishing. No more photos.
Brag, we all brag. Whats wrong with showing your catch. If its 2 or 59 fish Ill take the 59 every time.
I have caught over 600 what I think are keeper size gills this year ( 8 inch or bigger) and I am bragging and being honest. The more I take out the bigger the next batch gets. I have done this on this lake for 4 years and it gets better every year. Now before you hate me I only have kept 275 of them of which 125 have been eaten and 150 given away. No waste and many happy faces for the old guys that once that could go get there own. Church social on sunday so tomorrow ix a fish down day. If the day comes that I decide to keep all 600 I will do it so long as I know none will go to waste.
I dont think we will have to worry to much about a lake being fished down much in the future, at least around where I live. I will be dead( being the bearded old man that I am) and All the kids in my area have no idea a fish lives in a lake and can be caught on a hook. Their dads are to busy making money to pay for their 5 million dollar houses and all the stuff that goes with it, which is ok by me. Whats important to one is not the same as the next. But what scares me is dad has been replaced by a new babysitter or nanny, its called a cell phone. Soon if not already there will be an app on how to fish a lake down. Oh by the way, happy fathers day guys. Take your son or grandson or nephew or daughter or granddaughter or wife or friend or neighbor out to fish and teach them you skills. They may need to know it in the future when that phone no longer will work.
-
Believe it or not I ran into one of those "bearded folk" the other day and he was all for the 25 fish limit. He even brought it up first. The conversation got started when I told him where I was gong fishing in the Northeast the bluegills are not highly regarded and rarely targeted.
-
When people talk of fishing down a lake, most think of overall numbers. But there is a huge difference in quantity, vs. quality. I doubt I could put a dent in the overall quantity of bluegills in my ponds, but I can absolutely impact the quality, just by targeting the biggest, bedding males. We know so much more about big bluegill hierarchy these days, that it has become accepted knowledge that the big males contribute the most to the size structure.
So if it’s true in a private pond, it’s also true in a public lake....the bluegills don’t care. The difference of course is the size of the water, and the dynamics of the existing population. If a bow continues to churn out sustainable numbers of 8” bluegills year after year, and the DNR as well as the angling public is satisfied with that size, then great. But if we’re just using length as our benchmark, I want to see at least 10” bluegills. Why do you suppose it is, that most folks acknowledge that their best chance to catch an 11” or 12” bluegill here in Indiana is from private water??
A lot of guys will instantly point out that the reason is due to those private fish being on feed. And that absolutely is a cornerstone.... but there are other corners in that foundation also, and equally important is the inescapable truth that an 8” bluegill will never become a 10” bluegill if it goes into the frying pan....on private water we restrict the harvest accordingly.
-
Well said Tony. I've even had the retired director of the northern region iNDNR fish my trophy pond. He's caught bluegills in there he will never see in public waters. And I am not talking hybrids.
-
then again im not sure i want too many over 9" anyhow. they can get kinda gray and "mealy" when they get that huge.
That’s what I’ve always figured, the biggest are the oldest fish, with the most buildup of contaminants too. How much more meat is on a 10” vs a 9” gill? On the occasion that I keep anything, I throw the biggest ones back and keep the much more numerous average to upper end of average sized ones. People don’t target panfish much here, but since we have shorter summers, the fish don’t grow as large. I’ve yet to catch a 10” gill, came close with two that were 9.5”, so whenever I catch one bigger than 8” I tend to throw them back. I don’t know if I’d really bother with the process, but I thought about submitting one for a state record since we don’t even have one listed yet :o, that’s how little people here care for them. It was only a few years ago that the first pumpkinseed was submitted for a record, and that was by someone from out of state.
-
In all honesty, I'm not looking for 10" gills when I'm fishing. Prefer to eat the 7-8.5" ones. Don't get me wrong, I get some big ones through the ice and in the boat but I'm not looking to fill a bucket or basket with 10" gills.
If the greatest issue is taking large males off the beds then maybe a season closure would help. It seems like the bedding has been pretty spread out the last couple of years. I remember seeing gills on beds in Noble Co last year in mid July.
As far as a state wide limit goes, I'm just not sure. I guess I would be for it rather than against it.
-
so to have 10" gills you have to restrict the harvest of the 8"ers? if so, then what use would the 10"ers have? general angling public is harvest minded when it comes to pan fish. i read a post where someone suggested a 12 a day limit on 9"+ gills and redears. would that help matters any and still allow mass harvest of eater size fish for the majority? then again im not sure i want too many over 9" anyhow. they can get kinda gray and "mealy" when they get that huge.
To help wrap our heads around the thing, a few key points: First, once a male BG becomes sexually mature, his rate of growth slows way down. Energy and resources that were once devoted to growth, get switched to reproduction. Second, BG are capable of delaying their own sexual maturity. Finally, nature's goal is procreation, and the bigger the male the greater his chances with the ladies.
So, here's a BOW where the largest size class of BG are averaging 9".Those fish are the dominant males, sexually mature and on the beds courting females. On Tuesday, The 8" non-sexually mature male fish swims up, looks the situation over, and recognizes that trying to compete against those larger males is pointless. His best chance of claiming a prime nesting spot and courting a female lies in growing larger than, or at least as large as, the 9" boys. So he delays sexual maturity, in order to continue growing. Later than same Tuesday, a boat comes along with a couple anglers, and they pull those 9" fish off the beds and take them home. maybe they ate them, maybe they gave them away to folks who couldn't fish themselves. Both are legal. Either way, those fish are gone from that BOW. On Wednesday, that same 8" BG swims back up to the nesting area, and lo and behold, the only fish around are fingerlings robbing the eggs of the recently departed guard males, AND a school of gravid female BG who have yet to lay. But now that 8" BG IS the king of the pond......so there's no longer any need for him to continue growing at such a fast rate. He is big enough to attract a female right now, since the larger competition has been removed. Again, removed legally, but still removed....the motive doesn't matter. So, our 8" male BG becomes sexually mature. And studies have shown that when advanced males are removed, this change can happen in a very short time. So, the smaller fish is now mature, and his growth slows down. He moves onto a nest.
Fast forward to Thursday. Those same anglers hit the beds again, and remove the 8" fish. Where does that leave the 7" BG that has wistfully been staring in from the edges of the dance floor? You got it, center stage. He becomes sexually mature, and his growth slows way down.
To be sure, I have taken liberties with this example. Most ponds or lakes have more than one size class of male bluegills on the nest at a given time. But the principle behind how a lake gets "fished down", is accurate and proven. No two lakes are the same, and no one harvest strategy will be appropriate for all of them. But I can find absolutely no reason to ever keep the largest male BG in any BOW. Their presence is helping suppress the maturity of smaller fish, which in turn keeps those same smaller fish ever growing larger.
-
I don’t agree.
Just because people are using the tools available, doesn’t mean they aren’t adjusting.
I feel your statement has no validity. It’s purely conjecture. And states that if you use technology, you really aren’t “fishing”. That is pure hogwash.
However, most of the rest of your post I agree with and enjoyed.
Mac
I'm with Mac to a point. I've seen and have had friends see smaller bodies of water become popular on the internet and subsequently are over harvested. Mac, Lance has seen this more than anyone I know.
Saltwater wise if you dont think the internet and advances in tech arent putting a hurt to the striped bass you are nuts. Even something as simple as braid, changed the game forever. Add in some facebook posting, which can be done live and hordes show up. I've watched it absolutely cause decimation to a number of stripers, all by anglers, and all from shore. Miles of canal lined with dead keepers. I was there and catching...someone from OTW that I know made a fb post. Granted, he was doing his job, I get it. But man what happened afterwards was ungodly.
Here's how it ties into something as simple as braid. It helped the average joe cast much further reaching stripers they'd never hit otherwise.
So anyways, it really depends and where it may be hogwash in some scenarios it most certainly isn't in others. Ones mileage will vary with experience and Ive seen the effects in a few different fishing venues.
-
All that being said sprkplug, are the majority of the large males harvested during the spawn on a given body of water or is it just a small percentage?
The reason I ask is I've fished the Maumee for walleye in the spring for decades. Always seemed like a very bad idea to keep those big females. In a podcast this spring the head of ODNR stated the females kept during the run had absolutely no affect on the spawn. This is due to the fact that it's such a small percentage of the total harvest, I think the number was less than 1 percent.
I know this is apples and oranges, I was just wondering if closing the spawing season was the best answer or if limiting the number of fish over 9" year round, bag limit state wide, or some combination of all the above would work best.
-
In my opinion, the spawn is the most vulnerable time for the biggest males. They are often in shallow water where sight fishing renders them vulnerable without any need for electronics, and to be honest, pretty much anyone can find and catch them. Sight and smell will often lead anglers right to em, and no real talent is needed to catch them in numbers. That being said, winter ice fishing can put the hurt on them also. Again, it doesn't matter the time of year, or the motives of the angler(s) who catch and disperse their catch...once gone, they're gone. Can they all be caught? I think it depends on the size of the water, the fishing pressure, the existing numbers of a given size present in the BOW, and the size structure already present. ( How many of the next couple size classes down are there?). I highly doubt they will all be caught, but does that mean damage hasn't been done? I don't know.
Regarding female bluegills, two or three females can produce enough eggs to populate a one acre pond. Very seldom do I release any female bluegills, unless their body dynamic is exceptional. Numbers of females just aren't as important as having numbers of large males.
-
I think so too. I like to keep more than 25 a few times a year. I fish more in my mind than I do on the water! I usually fry between 15 and 20 fish at a time for dinner, like to have a few pieces left over and it's nice to freeze a bag while I'm at it.
I also understand though, that with no limit some folks will be out there getting 30, 50, or 100 several days a week and that's not good either.