Thread: Walleye initiative?

Originally Posted by crappie_hunter15

Craig is there a list of the lakes and what limits will be placed on them?...

Changes pending approval of the walleye initiative. You can find this info and more on Page 28 at http://ksoutdoors.com/content/download/47138/481598/version/1/file/Briefing+Book+21April16.pdf

• Kanopolis Reservoir -- change to an 18-inch minimum length limit on saugeye and walleye.
• Milford Reservoir -- change to a 21-inch minimum length limit and a 2/day creel limit on walleye.
• McPherson State Fishing Lake -- change to a 21-inch minimum length limit and a 2/day creel limit on saugeye.
• Graham County - Antelope Lake -- change to a 5/day creel limit on saugeye.
• Sabetha - Pony Creek Lake -- change to a 21-inch minimum length limit on walleye.
• Washington State Fishing Lake -- change to a 21-inch minimum length limit and a 2/day creel limit on saugeye.
• Shawnee County - Lake Shawnee -- change to an 18-inch minimum length limit on walleye.
• Lyon State Fishing Lake -- change to an 18-inch minimum length limit on saugeye.
• Mined Land Wildlife Area -- change to a 2/day creel limit on walleye.
• Shawnee State Fishing Lake -- change to an 18-inch minimum length limit and a 2/day creel limit on walleye.
• Howard - Polk Daniels Lake -- change to an 18-inch minimum length limit on saugeye.
• Madison City Lake -- change to an 18-inch minimum length limit on saugeye.
• Moline New City Lake -- change to an 18-inch minimum length limit on saugeye.
• Olpe City Lake -- change to an 18-inch minimum length limit on saugeye.
• Douglas State Fishing Lake -- change to an 18-inch minimum length limit on saugeye.
• Atchison State Fishing Lake -- remove the 18-inch minimum length limit and 2/day creel limit on walleye.
• Brown State Fishing Lake -- remove the 18-inch minimum length limit and 2/day creel limit on walleye.
• Leavenworth State Fishing Lake -- remove the 2/day creel limit on walleye.

Originally Posted by crappie_hunter15

...He talked some about the use of walleye in these smaller lakes as broadfish to control populations. Why the use of walleye vs wiper for that?...

Walleye/saugeye are much more efficient predators of crappie than are the wipers so in order to reduce crappie density walleye/saugeye are the better choice. Wipers are the more efficient predator on gizzard shad and are used to decrease shad densities. Sometimes wipers and walleye/saugeye are used in conjunction to reduce crappie density AND gizzard shad density. Reduction in adult gizzard shad population density usually results in a very productive shad spawn during the next spawning cycle. This produces abundant forage for smaller crappie and other gamefish in the form of young of the year gizzard shad. Reduced crappie population density coupled with abundant forage usually equates to improved growth rates of crappie.

Originally Posted by crappie_hunter15

I'd like to see the majority of the reservoirs go to the 21" or 24" seasonal limits with the smaller impoundments being at 15". Most of the time when I'm out for walleye I'm looking to catch trophies. There are times however when I'd like to be able to bring a few eaters home and I don't consider a 24" fish an eater. That's why I say I'd be nice to have the smaller impoundments with the lower limits.

Thank you very much for providing your input!! This is the kind of info that is great to hear!

Originally Posted by Ozark88

I'm to lazy to read, so can someone tell me in a nutshell what they are trying to accomplish here? How often do you guys limit out on Walleye when fishing?????

Jeeze Ozark88!!! I posted a VIDEO so you could WATCH instead of READ about the Kansas Walleye Initiative!!!

In a nutshell? Improve the walleye program in Kansas!

Originally Posted by crappieslinger

Very good information Craig. I fully support the longer length limits.
Thank you for sharing the link!

Thanks for your input crappieslinger!!

Originally Posted by PTShad

Here is my simple question. If the problem is over harvest as eluded to in the original Glen Elder discussion, why not reduce the creel limits from 5ea to 4ea or even 3ea?

PTShad, creel limits only delay harvest for a short period of time. A legal length walleye that is protected by the creel limit on Monday and returned to the lake can be harvested on Tuesday. A sub-legal length fish protected by a length limit is protected until it grows over the limit. In order to change the length frequency distribution of Kansas walleye populations, length limits must be changed not creel limits. Kansas walleye are highly harvestable and most of the legal length fish are taken home. This is why most anglers often report catching many walleye just under the posted minimum length limit at a given lake. As soon as a fish reaches legal length it is harvested which leaves few fish to grow in to the sizes that most anglers want to catch. Exploitation rates for Kansas walleye populations are as high as 60 to 70+%. This doesn't leave much carry over of legal length fish from year to year.

Originally Posted by PTShad

Instead, we are talking about jacking the minimum length limits to 21", why? The constant line has been there is no natural reproduction so there is no need to protect our large fish. If our waters are truly 'put and take' waters, then this initiative is a waste of time and money.

Like I said above, length limits are used to increase average size of fish within a population, not creel limits. Kansas walleye populations are recruitment limited. Kansas walleye populations would be better described as "put, GROW, and take" as most of our supplementally stocked walleye are stocked as either fry or fingerling. Some of our Kansas anglers are requesting more/better/bigger walleye populations to fish. It's a tall order to fill when most anglers want to eat every 15" walleye they catch, while preferring to catch 9 lb'ers! Everything in this initiative has been going on in Kansas for years, so it would be difficult to say that it is a big waste of money. What the KWI has done is to organize and refocus the Kansas walleye program while re-examining all facets from egg collection through putting the fish on the table. The Kansas Walleye Initiative is actually SAVING money as programs and protocols are tested and updated to ensure the highest possible efficiency and effectiveness of the Kansas walleye program.

Originally Posted by PTShad

And for the love of all things fishing, someone PLEASE offer an explanation as to WHY slot limits wont work in KS? Nebraska has them, and at last check all of their lakes are man made reservoirs just like ours....Harlan County is a tremendous fishery, and is very similar to Glen. It gets hammered just as hard or harder...and yet with a 4 fish 1 over 22" slot limit....it keeps on keepin on. This posturing and stating "it wont work" only gets you so far, provide some evidence as to why it wont work. I agree that if you are not worried about large fish, it had no place. But now that we are evidently worried about trophy fish... the evidence is merely across the border to the north that slots should at least be visited.

One problem when discussing "slots" is that everyone is usually not on the same page when discussing the variable term "slot"...There are three kinds of slots that are usually discussed: protective slots, harvest slots, and a harvest slot (or minimum length limit) with a "one over" rule.

Protective slots are not good candidate regulations for Kansas walleye populations because we are not "blessed" with overly abundant walleye populations like our neighbors to the north where the population actually needs to be thinned down through harvest, usually of smaller sized fish. A 15 to 20 inch protective slot (fish between 15 and 20 inches are PROTECTED and must be returned to the water, whereas fish UNDER 15 and OVER 20 inches are harvestable) in Kansas would be devastating to our walleye. While it sounds good that those 15 to 20 inch fish are protected, the "short" fish are vulnerable to harvest. Again, being recruitment limited with few fish coming in to the system annually coupled with highly harvestable walleye of sizes down to 12 inches, most young walleye would be harvested before ever reaching the protection offered by the slot.

Harvest slots can be thought of as the reverse of the protective slot. A harvest slot of 18 to 22 inches, for example, only allows harvest of fish between 18 and 22 inches while protecting small fish and the larger fish. Concerns with the use of this type in Kansas are that it may be too limiting to anglers, especially with our sporadic year class production which may not provide very many harvestable sized fish within the slot for extended periods which leads to unhappy anglers. A harvest slot would require very close monitoring of the particular walleye population to ensure that the harvest slot range remains appropriate. Too narrow of a slot would result in an underharvested population while too wide of a slot would result in overharvest. Also if the slot is too wide, this type of slot will function the same as a minimum length limit (MLL).

A harvest slot, or MLL, with a "one over" rule could be something like the above 18 to 22 harvest slot with a one over 26 inches rule. This allows harvest within the set slot while also allowing the harvest of that "once in a lifetime" fish. Again, this harvest strategy encounters the same complications as the harvest slot above. It is very effective in protecting the larger fish and smaller fish, but limited/sporadic recruitment may result in few fish within the slot for harvest. If not accurately set, over harvest may occur within the slot leaving too few fish to exit the slot to grow in to the protected length range and at this point the harvest slot is acting more like a minimum length limit instead of a slot. Both this type of slot and the harvest slot above would need large amounts of support from the anglers at a lake as the limits may produce periods of few fish of legal harvest length.

Originally Posted by PTShad

I'll go further. 3 lakes have natural reproduction: Wilson, Marion and Milford. Wilson and Marion have not been stocked for quite some time.

I'll agree with you on Wilson and Marion. Milford is regularly stocked with walleye. Cedar Bluff is the other Kansas reservoir that has consistent year classes resulting from natural recruitment.

Originally Posted by PTShad

...Wilson and Marion have not been stocked for quite some time.

True. Wilson has not been stocked recently. However, Marion was stocked with 4.5 million fry this year for the first time since 1993. While this population is capable of natural recruitment, the population density had been on a slow and steady decline since the last stocking 23 years ago.

Originally Posted by PTShad

Those 3 waters would seem to benefit the most from a slot limit that would protect the spawning fish. I personally would propose a 4 fish limit 18"min , 1 over 22-23" (whatever the biologist would decide). Your 18" fish would potentially give you 1 spawn cycle, you would get multiple cycles out of the larger fish. In turn by limiting the harvest of the larger fish, you get presumably would get greater results from the spawn. Better spawn in theory means more fish, more fish in theory means better fishery, better fishery generates more excitement. All while allowing 'meat anglers' their opportunity and giving potential trophy opportunities to trophy hunters.

You mention that the three waters would seem to benefit the most from a slot limit and then you propose a 4 fish daily creel with an 18" minimum length limit and one over 22" limit? So this would be the same as an 18" to 22" HARVEST SLOT with one fish over 22" rule?? Not trying to be snotty here, just trying to clarify the use of words "slot limit"!! This is how conversations can get a bit confusing when discussing slot limits!! A small percentage of Kansas walleye anglers regularly catch limits of fish with the 5/day creel. This is why the Cheney and El Dorado daily creels were dropped to 2 when it was imperative to protect walleye needed to provide increased predation pressure on invasive white perch. A walleye creel limit reduction to 4 down from 5 would do very little to further protect fish as few anglers regularly catch 4 walleye a day on a 5/day creel lake. While your proposal would provide some additional protection for larger fish, with the 4/day and 18" MLL there wouldn't be any noticeable changes from an 18" MLL and 5/day creel. You are correct in that more spawners should result in more naturally produced fish which would lead to increased densities and higher catch rates. However, our data shows that harvest regulations must be more protective than what you have proposed to produce measurable results.

Originally Posted by PTShad

I do a lot of fishing North of KS. There is a reason slots in some form are used on some of the best walleye waters in the country. Big Mac.....slot. Harlan County....slot. Little Bay de Noc.....slot. Lake Oahe.......slot. At least take 1 lake and give it a shot. Prove to us avid walleye anglers that it wont work over a 3-5 year period.

Thank you very much for taking the time to provide your thoughts and input! I've enjoyed the exchange of information and I hope I have answered your questions! Remember, while many on this board will read your comments/input/suggestions, the real meat and potatoes decisions will be occurring at the KDWPT Commission meetings. Anglers are reminded that they are welcome to attend and participate in the Commission meetings or to contact KDWPT Commissioners. Contact info for the seven commissioners can be found on Page 3 of the 2016 Kansas Fishing Regulations Summary available at http://ksoutdoors.com/content/download/905/4565 . The agenda for the April 21 Commission Meeting in Wichita Kansas can be found at http://ksoutdoors.com/content/downlo...il+21-2016.pdf .

Craig, Thank you for your response to my comments. I appreciate and respect your opinion.

Wow, Thanks Craig for taking the time to share!

A small percentage of Kansas walleye anglers regularly catch limits of fish with the 5/day creel. This is why the Cheney and El Dorado daily creels were dropped to 2 when it was imperative to protect walleye needed to provide increased predation pressure on invasive white perch. A walleye creel limit reduction to 4 down from 5 would do very little to further protect fish as few anglers regularly catch 4 walleye a day on a 5/day creel lake

I am pretty sure Craig was talking about me when he typed this!!!

Craig- You took up the whole page with your response! lol. I cannot express enough the gratitude for you coming on here and taking the time to fully answer EVERY question that is posed. A huge thank you for that. I may disagree with some of the stuff, but at least you went a step further and explained things. Doug's opening statement of the March meeting of "slots, just don't go there, they don't apply to KS" was terribly off putting and comes across poorly.