I took the time to read the entire post from start to finish and, although I have never fished this lake, I have some insite to share based on observations from several sites on the internet as well as people on the lake.

First, I'll share this story: I was ice fishing a local blue gill lake a couple years ago with a buddy of mine that lives on it. The lake is private with the exception of a small access from a state parking lot. I was talking to my buddy about the total numbers and size of fish being down when an onlooker chimed in to the conversation. I made the following comment: "I think part of the problem is the constant number of fish people continue to take. If the state sets a limit of 25, people feel they need to catch and keep 25 to be successful. As a result, this over fishing might have caused a problem in this particular lake". This guy said (and I quote): "we have been taking limits out of this lake for years and never had a problem".... I wish I was Bill Engval as I would have said "heres your sign"!

One thing I notice on many sites and forums is that people always seem to associate success with catching (and keeping) their allowed state limit. I have some friends of mine that texted me the other day while Walleye fishing saying "got our 5 fish by 8:45 am". This is the same guy that will fish all day to try and make sure he catches his limit. On forums, I read the same information..... I got my limit... I punched a ticket..... was done by 8am..... etc...

Part of the problem MIGHT be that it is engrained in peoples heads that success actually means catching a limit set in place by the state or local government. Success to them is not measured in being able to catch a specific number of fish, a specific way, in a specific area. Fishing, after all implies that we are "fishing" for a location, "fishing" for the depth, "fishing" for the right structure, cover, bait and so on.

The forum starter (and his friends) should probably be listened to more than others that chime in on their once a year trip to a specific location. He brings up valuable insite based on years of observation and experiences on this body of water. The main problem is always going to be the number of fish taken out of an area coupled with the number of fish that spawn, reach maturity, and the rate to which they do. State biologists get paid big money to look at all this stuff and it might be a good idea to bring this observation up to one of them.

States have ways to help. Those include reducing the kreel limits, to putting slot limits on sizes. I've seen all of the above mentioned in other bodies of water. Charter captains are the first to compain about the lack of Salmon yet are also the first to ensure their clients catch their alloted number of fish. I understand their reasons, but if the fisherman don't do something to support the fish, the resource will be depleated. The state might have to step in to assist for a couple of years.

I think Northern Michigan and Ontario to some extent have it right. Unlike some places (Mississippi's Granada, Enid, and Sardis to name a few) have a size limit on Crappies that seem to bolster the "let them go so they can grow" mentality by allowing you to keep bigger fish, Michigan and Ontario allow you to keep any fish within a certain slot limit and only one fish over a specific limit. They are protecting the breeding class fish in a specific size and age class for the future. Again, I'm not a biologist.

Thats my two cents.