Hooisers need to read his article in sundays paper about what the head fish biologist for the dnr said that putting habitat out would no help the fishing any.........100 dollars for a permit to do so
Printable View
Hooisers need to read his article in sundays paper about what the head fish biologist for the dnr said that putting habitat out would no help the fishing any.........100 dollars for a permit to do so
Has anyone got a link to this article. I went to the newspapers web site, but you have to subscribe to read the article.
By stating that he sounds like a GRADE SCHOOL drop out.brush trees>>>>>>>>fish
INDIANAPOLIS — Indiana wildlife officials say Hoosiers should think twice before they toss their discarded Christmas tree into a nearby lake as a way of creating create habitat for fish.
Chief fisheries biologist Brian Schoenung of the Indiana Department of Natural Resources says Christmas trees placed into lakes "provide cover but don't necessarily grow more fish."
The DNR says discarding of a Christmas tree on a private pond is at the owner's discretion, but state laws require a license from the DNR to construct or place a fish attractor in a public freshwater lake.
The DNR says a better use for a discarded Christmas tree is taking its to local recycling site, putting it in your backyard to provide winter shelter for birds and other wildlife, or chopping it up for firewood.
I think this is absolutely ridiculous. How can our head fisheries biologist argue the fact that more cover in our lakes would do anything but help the fishery? Yes we know more cover won't "grow" more fish but it will provide the larger fish a place to hide, ambush prey and spawn and great places for their fry to escape predation and feed on the algae that grows on the cover and later on the organisms that feed on the algae. As our lakes get older there is less and less natural cover as it deteriorates over time. We have to do our part to replenish our fisheries, whether that's placing structure or practicing catch and release. How do we get the state to work with rather than against us???
Thanks for posting this filetfetish!
Amen brother.Quote:
Originally Posted by ptowncrappe
Don't hang me for this, but Xmas trees don't do much... The pine sap is not favored by fish, and by the time they start holding they're already decaying. Now I'm all for other types of trees! Lol
the same thing i have found
High Tide is probably correct on that. I can't believe they would recommend it for firewood.
Ridiculous is right. Not sure where Brian Schoenung got his education I have to wonder about his credentials, or perhaps he is just a yes man for someone else. Sounds to me like all Indiana really cares about is the 100 dollars they can collect.
How do we get the state to work with rather than against us???
Very good question! The DNR just doesn't seem to care about how to make our lakes better. Have the DNR and biologist ever offered up what we can do to make it better?
After doing a little research on the permit process I found out the process isn't that hard and there is no fee. I decided to try to do the right thing and get a permit to put in some structure on Patoka. I did exactly what I was told to do and was denied. I got a list of excuses: the fish can't use it all year, there is enough cover in Patoka, they don't have the personnel to go check it. We all know that not every piece of cover is the same and some will never hold fish. If structures are made correctly and placed correctly they will hold fish. Does anyone believe that fish stay in the same spot all year? They need habitat at various depths and locations to move with the season right? Does the state really think we believe they will go check on these anyway. Sounds like a bunch of excuses to me! If someone is willing to spend their money, effort and time to improve our resources why are they so dead set against it!
DEM FOLKS DON FISH:banghead
Not much different about fish habitat than game habitat. Not all is the best none is bad. Provide a home and they will come. I wonder if our DNR just thinks its a coincidence other states have better fisheries.
I asked a dnr person why fishing was better in other states sunday ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,he gave the best, rude smart axx answer he could and then said I need to move there.................I see why the fishery is this way
Here is a reply by T9 that was on the forum 9/25/13, that may help put some additional light on the fish structur and size limits in Indiana.
Being a biologist isn't easy, especially when it comes to crappie anglers. One subject that constantly gets brought up is why we don't have a size limit on crappie. Seems like crappie anglers are always wanting bigger and better crappie fishing in their lakes. The simple answer is because it largely wouldn't work on most of our waters. Research and modeling suggest you need a population with good to above average growth combined with low natural mortality and heavy exploitation (people keeping fish) for them to work well. This is the exact criteria that both Ohio and Pennsylvania have adopted for their crappie programs. Indiana biologists have looked at the stats for a lot of our reservoirs, and to the best of my knowledge, only a few bodies of water have been identified that fit the above scenario. For certain, a statewide blanket regulation wouldn't work. Anglers think that you can simply slap a 9" or 10" size limit on a lake full of 6"-8" crappie and in a year or two, all those fish will have grown to 10" - WRONG. In many if not most cases, they'll stunt out and the population will be worse off than when you started.
Back on the original point. Biologists over in Illinois (Rend Lake) came up with a creative idea to improve crappie fishing for larger fish while stabilizing the cyclical nature of the population. They took their existing 25 fish limit and applied a tiered bag limit, such that you could only keep 5 of your 25 crappie >10", and the other 20 had to be <10". They later (2004) revised the over 10" component to 10 > 10", with the remaining 15 having to be under 10". This forced harvest of smaller fish while protecting for overharvest of larger fish. From a recent presentation on the results;
"The size structure of the crappie population improved noticeably following implementation of the regulation. Data from the fall 2002 trapnet survey showed a sharp rise in the percentage of the crappie population > 10 in and this increase has remained relatively stable for eight years post-implementation. Creel data also showed a dramatic increase in catch rates and harvest of crappie > 10 in."
Sounds like a win for crappie anglers. Some posters on fishing forums even pointed out that it is, at times, difficult to even get your 15 fish under 10". However, the majority of the posters complained that they didn't like the new tiered system, instead arguing that they would just prefer a simple 25 over 10" limit, which as was already mentioned, won't work on a majority of crappie lakes in our region. Some went so far as to call the regulation "stupid".
It just goes to show that there are many facets involved with setting regulations, not the least of which is angler opinion. In this case, even though the fishery probably wouldn't have improved, and maybe even gotten worse, anglers would rather have a simplified creel limit instead of a specialized regulation. Part of this likely stems from the nature of crappie fishermen, that being primarily a catch and harvest type endeavor. Surveys show that not many edible sized crappie get released by anglers. Unlike bass or muskie fishermen who have a very strong catch and release ethic, crappie anglers, along with bluegill and walleye anglers, are more geared toward harvest. As such, any regulations that negatively impact that ability to harvest are frequently met with criticism. In several instances, this has resulted in crappie size regs in other states having actually been rescinded. While many conservation minded folks follow and post on these boards, they make up but a tiny fraction of all the crappie anglers in the state, the majority of which don't have that same mindset.
-T9