Thread: Would you support this ?

If you want a good example of how these proposed regs would work, go the the gulf side of FL. They have done nothing but change the season, size and qantity of all game fish. It has gotten to the point that I quit salt water fishing and went back to the love of my childhood - crappie fishing. Been doing great this year, thanks to my friends on Lake Talquin. If some idiots start messing with crappie, I'll go to catfishing. At least I will not be bothered by the large bass boat or idiots who see you catach a fish and feel that that is the only spot that fish are biting.

As to the people who catch and keep small fish, there are laws against this and the reason they are not caught, is because the state. Your personal comments will only start a fight and also the camp owners will not enforce it because they are a customer and they want them to come back as long as the crappie population holds out. Reminds me of standing in the 20 item or less line at WalMart and a lady walks up with a full basket. Her comment to those of us behind her was "I'm in a hurry." The check out person can not send her to the proper line.

Pretty soon the sport of crappie fishing will be over taxed and over regulated. Thank God I should be in heaven before that.

I have not kept a limit not once this year. My policy is no fish in my boat under 12" and when I have enough for two meals, I quit for the day and feel great. I also enjoy seeing a family fishing and find that they did not do so good and you should see their smiles when I give them a 5 gallon bucket full.

Just my part.

Chuck

Some good discussion on regulations so far, but let me throw in some angler attitude facts and biology. As for bass, the trend we see is actually too much catch and release. Now don't throw tomatoes at me for that comment. But here is the problem. A typical creel survey on KY Lake shows that only 23% of the harvestable size bass (> 15 inches) are harvested. So right now, 77% of the legal bass caught, are released. The bass fishery can withstand greater harvest than that. By removing a few more bass, allows the others to grow bigger. The smaller the body of water the truer that statement is. Think of the fishery like the economy; supply and demand. The supply of shad (forage) versus the demand (bass wanting to eat). We have a great abundance of shad in the lake, which supports an excellent bass fishery. Could it be better if we released more bass? Probably not. You also have to factor in growth season and genetics. The lakes have the potential to produce the occasional 10 pounds, and periodically an 11 pounder. With the data we collect, when there are large year classes their average growth will be a little slower, as compared to a year class with less fish. So, it is ok to harvest a bass. But that is not to say catch and release has not helped. It has. I might sound like a politician on that issue; going both ways. But, anglers should not be scared that keeping a limit of bass on an occasion is going to crash the population.

As for crappie in comparison, creel survey data indicates only 4% of the harvestable (>10 inches) crappie that are caught, are released. The exploitation study (tagging study, 2003) that we did indicated that harvest mortality was around 41%. So for every 100 crappie we tagged, 41 were caught. But then you have to factor in that some anglers did not send in their tags (reporting error), some tagged fish lost their tag (tag loss) and a few tagged crappie might have died (tagging mortality); so then harvest mortality could be as high as 74%. Similar results were seen in a study conducted in 1988, before the 10 inch size limit. This is high for fishing mortality, but the opposite of this, which would be bad, is to have high natural mortality. High natural mortality would suggest that regulations are too protective and therefore the crappie are just dying of old age. Like at Lake Weiss, fishing mortality in 1991 was estimated at 34%, while total annual mortality was 73%. Fishing mortality accounted for only 20% of the annual mortality. Therefore at that time, their study suggested that harvest restrictions were not warranted. Now that is a 20 year old study I reference, so things may have changed since then at Lake Weiss. That just happen to be a research paper I had read. At KY Lake, we have high harvest mortality and good growth, which indicates we need harvest restrictions, which we have. If we went with a higher size limit, our harvest mortality would go down, and natural mortality would go up. Crappie are short lived fish. Old age for a crappie would be around 5 or 6, though we see some up to age 10. However, in last years sample, crappie 12 inches in length ranged between 3 and 9 years old (average is age 5). So you can see genetics also plays a role in fish growth. We have aged some 15 inch crappie, and they were 8 years old. The crappie are sexually mature at age 2, and the 10 inch size limit is protecting crappie to age 3 and 4. So, most will get off 1, if not 2, spawns before being harvestable size. Yes, protecting them a few more years might make sense, but the biology does not support it. Reducing the limit during March –May, also makes sense, but makes enforcement and regulations more difficult. I wish regulations were a simple process, but to change a regulation due to governmental bureaucracy, takes almost 2 fishing season. If we felt a reduction in creel was needed, we would do it across the board for the whole year. But we are not to that point yet. Should we reduce the limit to 10? It might help. But this process of fishing regulation sometimes seems to be 10% biology and 90% angler attitude. It is a balancing act. We have to manage the population for sustainable yield, while keeping the angler happy and buying a license. You have to think, at what point does the limit have to be reduce, for you to say the limited number of fish is no longer worth the cost of a license. So then you give up fishing, or at least buying a license.

Here is another study to supports my theory about crappie at KY and Barkley lakes. Every few years there could potentially be a good year class due to population densities; however you then have to factor in environmental conditions that affect spawns. In other words, just because you have a lot of spawning potential (lots of adult fish in population) does not mean you will have strong year classes. Actually, having moderate spawning potential should produce stronger year classes, if spawning conditions are favorable (water level not fluctuating and no cold fronts).

Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 58(3): 594–601 (2001) | doi:10.1139/cjfas-58-3-594 | © 2001 NRC Canada
Quasi-cycles in crappie populations are forced by interactions among population characteristics and environment
Micheal S. Allen and Leandro E. Miranda

Abstract: Crappie (Pomoxis spp.) populations have been characterized as cyclic, with strong year-classes recurring at 2- to 4-year intervals. We evaluated the potential for cyclic trends in crappie populations using a population model that included a density-dependent stock recruitment function and random environmental variation. Slow, medium, and fast growth were simulated over 100 years. The model predicted highly variable recruitment that was strongly influenced by environmental fluctuation at low and intermediate stock densities. At high stock density, recruitment was low, even if environmental conditions were favorable. Significant quasi-cycles occurred, but they were not sustained throughout the time series due to random environmental fluctuation. Quasi-cycles occurred because intermediate stock density and favorable environmental conditions occasionally combined to produce a very strong year-class that greatly increased stock density in the following 1–3 years and produced low recruitment, even if environmental conditions were favorable. Empirical data from 32 years of sampling age-0 crappies at Ross Barnett Reservoir showed trends similar to the simulated fluctuations. We conclude that crappie populations likely do not exhibit true cycles but may show quasi-cycles as a result of the interaction between random fluctuations in environment and density-dependent mechanisms. The frequency of such quasi-cycles may be enhanced by rapid growth and high exploitation.

And the man with all the letters after his name has spoken.

And the man with all the letters after his name has spoken.

Yeah, what he said!

In all seriousness, thanks Paul for sharing that information with us. I'm sure we all want to do whatever is best for the fishery. Good to know we got guys like you are are both knowledgable and dedicated. Keep up the good work!

I live near cedar creek lake which is set up as a trophy lake.Because of the restrictions put on crappie when the lake was built, they are all very small.The kdfw had to remove all size limits to try to get them under control. If you let the fish over populate they become smaller not larger, just like deer or any other wildlife. We make one trip a year to Ky lake to catch decent numbers of nice size fish,not to catch monster crappie. If I can only catch a few fish then I will stay home and save the $100's of dollars I spend to come to Ky lake. Or take my money and go to Tenn. or Ala. type in trophy crappie lakes in google and you will find ky lake on the list. Also ky lake is know as one of the top bass lakes in the country.WHY MAKE A CHANGE IF IT'S NOT BROKEN DON'T FIX IT.

I've never fished Kentucky Lake but have friends who go down on a regular basis. They mainly fish for redear/bluegill and love the lake. I plan on going later this summer for some quality redear action as I hear the lake houses some huge crackers.

Now to your idea, I simply don't think more regulations is the answer. From what I understand, Kentucky Lake isn't broken...it's a great fishery with huge populations of each species. As someone else mentioned, the weather is the biggest factor in whether crappie/bluegill etc, have a successful spawn. I do believe in having a limit of some sort, 25 fish a day is a good starting point IMO.

My dad and his buddies just got back from Sardis in Mississippi, and the fish down there have to be 12in. or bigger. They fished hard for five days and kept 250 fish or so, but there were 10 guys on the trip. Breaking those numbers down, that's only 25 keeper fish per man for the entire week. I think that sucks, so IMO, their fancy regulations aren't really helping the fish or the angler. I told dad they need to start going to Ky Lake, it's closer and there are plenty of big fish to be had. They did catch lots of 1.5 lb fish, with a big one weighing almost 3 lbs. But I wouldn't want to drive from Louisville to Sardis and only get to catch and keep 25 total fish for the entire trip.

Originally Posted by BIGBADDAD

I WOULD NOT support it AT ALL. We need less government not more rules and regs. Yes everyone should follow the rules, as I do, but they don't. Hiring more CO's seems a lost cause with Kentucky over budget by what a billion and a half dollars. I am for your first amendment right to free speech and I know that I didn't have to read this thread, but I don't care for rebel rousers and the affect that some ideas start to have on a whole area of our lives? Hasn't the liberal agenda and obama proven that to you yet, Mr. kentucky lake? Coming on here and continually pushing ideas that you know will get others upset, ie; this absurd notion of not keeping any fish, or just a few, for a three month span, is annoying at the least. Some people actually are poor enough that they supplement their family food budget by keeping fish (legally) and feeding their families.I have more to say but I am already late for fishing today and I do not want to say anything that will get me banned! That is all! PSYou said...."A lot of fish are caught this time of year and they are full of eggs, so when fisherman keep those pregnant females they don't get to lay their eggs." Fish are not pregnant....just a FYI!

When have I ever pushed an idea on anyone? This is the 1st poll question I have ever asked on this forum. In fact I always am polite and I always try to give people helpful information.

Have a good fishing season.

I am rather surprised that a lot of you seem to think fisherman don't have an impact on fish populations.

That's like saying Deer hunters don't have an impact on deer populations.


Why do you think Illinois starts it's firearm season after the rut?


Limiting the number of fish people can catch during the spawn and pre spawn would clearly allow more females to lay their eggs.

It would also allow more fish to breed before they are caught. (If fish are caught and removed from the water, they can't breed, or lay eggs).


Here is another idea: How about allowing fisherman to keep 20 crappie per day, but in order to keep the crappie, they would have to be 12 inches long.

Is that too much to ask? Doing this would easily save and add a lot of crappie to the lake for future generations to enjoy.