Thread: Stocking corps lakes

I would leave them alone and let them cycle. If you could count on catching fish on all of them every year there would
not be room for all the boats.

Just my personal opinion, I would let the biologist make the decisions on what these lakes need. I also believe that the original genetic line of fish that were native to the rivers should not be interfered with unless it becomes an absolute necessity. We had a thread here awhile back and canebreaker sent the MDWFP an email inquiring about the stocking numbers on the big 4, there has only been one lake that has had a need for stocked crappie in all the history of the flood lakes and that was Enid in 2004 I believe it was.

I honestly don't see a need for this but it would fall on deaf ears I think. Not to say they wouldn't listen but they already have pretty strong mindset on this. Problem is not the bad years as far as spawn but the really good years. Right now the way things cycle around most of these lakes are good and most years one is really good with big fish being caught. If you added fingerlings each year then you take the balance out. Between the spillways releasing fish, some years a lot of fish, and a bad spawn from time to time the numbers stay in check.
For most Sardis had a tuff spring but I know of a lot of really good fish that were caught up there, prefishing the ACT we caught some studs. Part of the problem is that a lot of people measure their day by the number of fish they caught wanting limits. I've seem a lot of days this past spring that 10 was a good number with 2 folks fishing, it's all relative to the conditions of the day your fishing, to me anyways. If I'm fishing alone 5 is my goal, that's enough fish for Ms. Tammy and I to have supper.
The Big 4 have their own biologist managing them and they are managed to produce big crappie, that's the goal. Never in fish management have I ever heard of increasing numbers to increase size. The thought pattern has been to manage by size limit, length, and creel limit with pole limit thrown in the mix and I feel they will continue along these lines.
My 2 pennies for what they are worth.

Originally Posted by Rees Guide

I honestly don't see a need for this but it would fall on deaf ears I think. Not to say they wouldn't listen but they already have pretty strong mindset on this. Problem is not the bad years as far as spawn but the really good years. Right now the way things cycle around most of these lakes are good and most years one is really good with big fish being caught. If you added fingerlings each year then you take the balance out. Between the spillways releasing fish, some years a lot of fish, and a bad spawn from time to time the numbers stay in check.
For most Sardis had a tuff spring but I know of a lot of really good fish that were caught up there, prefishing the ACT we caught some studs. Part of the problem is that a lot of people measure their day by the number of fish they caught wanting limits. I've seem a lot of days this past spring that 10 was a good number with 2 folks fishing, it's all relative to the conditions of the day your fishing, to me anyways. If I'm fishing alone 5 is my goal, that's enough fish for Ms. Tammy and I to have supper.
The Big 4 have their own biologist managing them and they are managed to produce big crappie, that's the goal. Never in fish management have I ever heard of increasing numbers to increase size. The thought pattern has been to manage by size limit, length, and creel limit with pole limit thrown in the mix and I feel they will continue along these lines.
My 2 pennies for what they are worth.

Rees, you are spot on, over here at Weiss lake it used to be a big fish lake, back about 15 or 20 years ago they started stocking the lake, now we have a 10 inch size limit and a 30 fish creel limit. it has become a numbers lake. Most would like to see the size limit increased to 12 inches and creel numbers cut back to 15, to move back in the direction of a big fish lake, but the different groups don't want to do this. as they thing it would hurt their pocket book. Most ever one that you talk to had rather catch 10 big fish than 30 10 inch fish. So you have a big fish lake or a numbers lake.It is just how you manage it.

Originally Posted by CrappieFlopper

Rees, you are spot on, over here at Weiss lake it used to be a big fish lake, back about 15 or 20 years ago they started stocking the lake, now we have a 10 inch size limit and a 30 fish creel limit. it has become a numbers lake. Most would like to see the size limit increased to 12 inches and creel numbers cut back to 15, to move back in the direction of a big fish lake, but the different groups don't want to do this. as they thing it would hurt their pocket book. Most ever one that you talk to had rather catch 10 big fish than 30 10 inch fish. So you have a big fish lake or a numbers lake.It is just how you manage it.

I guide several days a year and I always guide with the attitude I want the client to catch the biggest fish of their life, I bet at least 50 percent of the time, most likely higher than that, we pull that off. I don't look at a limit as a successful day, on the water sharing my rig, laughing it up and catching good fish, what it's all about. Watching someone's eyes bug out cause they've never seen a crappie that big is a lot of fun.
We are truly blessed here, no doubt about that.

Go to Sardis and tell me it needs stocking. There are literally TONS of short fish there in every spot on the lake. In a year or less, these fish will be harvestable. To many would stunt their growth. All of the Big 4 have healthy populations of smaller fish in them. "If it ain't broke, Don't fix it"!!!


BRM

I'm good with leaving it to mdwfp. Like John said, these lakes do cycle and actually some of us are close enough to have 6 go to lakes if you count Barnett and Washington.

Barnett is not a nice lake to me !!!!!