Crappie Spawn Info

So all the the crowds have got me wondering, can a lake such as Blue Mtn. handle all the fish being taken out of there and its possibly actually good for the lake to take fish from it since it does have a 9 in length limit? I've been told it has always been crowded and alot of crappie get taken from it every year. I remember as a kid going there and fishing with minnows during the spawn and catching all kinds of fish and seeing boats all over the place. So I did a little research and say on average 7,000 eggs are dropped and only 100 fish actually make the spawn with a 30% fry survival rate that's 210,000 fish. I'm sure there are more that actually do spawn but I am just curious about the actual numbers of fish that actually make it per spawn in this area? Maybe someone more educated on this matter than me will chime in?

I'm no biologist or so called expert , but I have heard they almost never recommend putting crappie in stock ponds because the populate so fast. Unless you plan to fish hard for them to keep the numbers down. My point is you can fish them real hard and they just make more

Crappie are.prolifoc spawners. Without harvest, almost all crappie populations would be stunted. If a lake has too many good spawns in a row, the majority of the fish will be smaller (Nimrod). Research has shown that optimal crappie populations get off a good spawn once every 3 years. Biologist can examine this by looking st the residuals of a catch curve or by looking at the number of Age-1 crappie produced each year. Unfortuanlty it is almost imposible to the this kind of data and estimate the number of spawning fish there were in a given year. There are too many variables that affect the success of a spawning fish. A few variables are: correct water temperature, prey density, sunfish density, harvest rate removing males off of nests, etc...

The short answer to your original question is yes, most lakes can handle the pressure. Some lakes have a little too much pressure during certain times of the year. These lakes generally have very high exploitation rates, such as Lake Conway. If the lake also has good fast growth, it would be a good candidate for a minimum length limit. If not enough crappie were removed from these systems, we would not have optimal growth. Let's all hope that the catch-and-release mentality doesn't completely infiltrate the crappie crowd. A little doesn't hurt anything, but if too many people threw back their crappie, things would go south in a hurry. Crappie are NOT bass!

Thanks D10! I'm a gluten for knowledge.

Any time! I like sharing the knowledge when asked.

Matt, if it is best to take crappie out so they will grow more, then why length limits? that seems to be counter to what you are saying. I thought it somewhat intriguing when the length limit was raised on Conway and then the catch limit was raised to 30. seems if you wanted more out, you would lower the length limit, not increase it. just curious, can't catch my limit at either number ��

Good question, but in a situation like Conway, a minimum length limit will boost the number of larger fish by allowing the crappie to reach at least 10-in before harvest. This only works when you have good growth (Conway has excellent growth) and mortality is high. We estimated Lake Conway's total annual mortality to be around 75%, with 68% coming from harvest alone! Creel limits have very little impact on the population structure compared to length limits. It was raised to 30 state wide in an attempt to simplifiy the regulations a little. It made no sense that some of the best crappie lakes had lower creel limits than poor crappie lakes. There was no biological justification. Some new data analysis techniques are being developed that will allow us to evaluate the impact of increasing or decreasing creel limits on a population. I will be reexamining our creel limit's once I figure it all out. But think of it this way, What percentage of Lake Conway's crappie anglers harvest 20 or more crappie per trip. Not a very big percentage at all. This is the case on most lakes. You have a few CrappiePros that can flat wear them out, but the majority of us don't regularly catch 20 keepers in a trip. So raising the creel limit to 30 wont make much of an impact because very few anglers could catch 20 keepers. Does this make sense?

As a manufacturing engineer I am constantly looking at data to improve processes. D10 is any of this data or research public and if so how would someone find it? Some people refuse to trust data but I have seen it work before and know the AGFC will use it correctly to continuously improve our fisheries.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rzrbakhunter

As a manufacturing engineer I am constantly looking at data to improve processes. D10 is any of this data or research public and if so how would someone find it? Some people refuse to trust data but I have seen it work before and know the AGFC will use it correctly to continuously improve our fisheries.

---

It is all public. Send me an email (found on my signature below) and I will send you the Crappie Exploitation Study Report. Thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by D10

It is all public. Send me an email (found on my signature below) and I will send you the Crappie Exploitation Study Report. Thanks.

---

Email sent, thanks again!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by D10

Good question, but in a situation like Conway, a minimum length limit will boost the number of larger fish by allowing the crappie to reach at least 10-in before harvest. This only works when you have good growth (Conway has excellent growth) and mortality is high. We estimated Lake Conway's total annual mortality to be around 75%, with 68% coming from harvest alone! Creel limits have very little impact on the population structure compared to length limits. It was raised to 30 state wide in an attempt to simplifiy the regulations a little. It made no sense that some of the best crappie lakes had lower creel limits than poor crappie lakes. There was no biological justification. Some new data analysis techniques are being developed that will allow us to evaluate the impact of increasing or decreasing creel limits on a population. I will be reexamining our creel limit's once I figure it all out. But think of it this way, What percentage of Lake Conway's crappie anglers harvest 20 or more crappie per trip. Not a very big percentage at all. This is the case on most lakes. You have a few CrappiePros that can flat wear them out, but the majority of us don't regularly catch 20 keepers in a trip. So raising the creel limit to 30 wont make much of an impact because very few anglers could catch 20 keepers. Does this make sense?

---

makes sense to me. the creel limit could be 10 and I still wouldn't hit my limit most of the time cept maybe in the pool in November. thanks for the info.

Are there any other lakes in Arkansas that have similar mortality rates to Lake Conway at around 75% or higher?

I don't know off the top of my head but I imagine there are some others close to that. I'll see what data I can find tomorrow when I get back to the office.

I am all for lake specific regulations in an attempt to manage ALL species as effectively as possible. It takes some doing to keep up with it. But then it makes it simpler to just follow biologist recommendations. You tell me keep some small crappie...then I keep some small crappie....you tell me to keep some small bass...then I keep some small bass....you tell me to throw these back...then I throw those back.

My home lake right now the biologist are saying (we encourage anglers to keep their limit of 5 bass under 14")... sooooo...everytime I go I keep 5 bass under 14".

Next year they tell me not to I won't....it's that simple.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doggone

I am all for lake specific regulations in an attempt to manage ALL species as effectively as possible. It takes some doing to keep up with it. But then it makes it simpler to just follow biologist recommendations. You tell me keep some small crappie...then I keep some small crappie....you tell me to keep some small bass...then I keep some small bass....you tell me to throw these back...then I throw those back.

My home lake right now the biologist are saying (we encourage anglers to keep their limit of 5 bass under 14")... sooooo...everytime I go I keep 5 bass under 14".

Next year they tell me not to I won't....it's that simple.

---

Way to be a team player doggone! The truth is just about every lake could use a good thining of small bass. Unfortunately most bass fisherman refuse to do this and would talk down to a fellow angler if they saw them doing this. We need more anglers like you. Keep up the good work and feel free to come down to Central Arkansas and harvest some small bass!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by D10

Way to be a team player doggone! The truth is just about every lake could use a good thining of small bass. Unfortunately most bass fisherman refuse to do this and would talk down to a fellow angler if they saw them doing this. We need more anglers like you. Keep up the good work and feel free to come down to Central Arkansas and harvest some small bass!

---

I am planning on it....hope to make at least two trips.

if we need to harvest some small bass, why is there a 14" length limit on the Arkansas River in the Little Rock area? Is the river situation different?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by D10

Way to be a team player doggone! The truth is just about every lake could use a good thining of small bass. Unfortunately most bass fisherman refuse to do this and would talk down to a fellow angler if they saw them doing this. We need more anglers like you. Keep up the good work and feel free to come down to Central Arkansas and harvest some small bass!

---

why would anyone give a flip what bass fisherman think :Rofl

Wonderful Thread!!!! Very informative! Was actually talking about this exact subject while fishing yesterday!

Are there any other lakes in Arkansas that have similar mortality rates to Lake Conway at around 75% or higher?[/QUOTE]

Here you go! Have at it! Let me know if you have any questions.
Attachment 232415

Good looking stuff D10! Do you mind to explain what the columns mean on the second sheet? Only thing I see is wish more of these studies were published so everyone can see the great work our biologist do!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rzrbakhunter

Good looking stuff D10! Do you mind to explain what the columns mean on the second sheet? Only thing I see is wish more of these studies were published so everyone can see the great work our biologist do!

---

I totally agree. this gives you factual information based on realities vs opinions from those with zero professional training in the field.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rzrbakhunter

Good looking stuff D10! Do you mind to explain what the columns mean on the second sheet? Only thing I see is wish more of these studies were published so everyone can see the great work our biologist do!

---

Sure thing. That table is a summary of the current crappie assessment that we perform on lakes. This method of evaluation will probably be changing in the years to come due to improved data analysis techniques. I accidentally attached the wrong table the first time but since you asked, here is what it is:

-Density, the number of crappie captured per trapnet, excluding young-of-year (age-0.5) crappie
-Growth Rate, the mean length of crappie at Age-2.5
-Age Structure, the % of Age-3.5 and older crappie, excluding young-of year
-Size Structure, the % of crappie in a sample that is greater than 254-mm (10-in), excluding young-of-year
Recruitment, the number of Age-0.5 crappie per trapnet
-Assessment Score, the assessment score is a weighted value that is assigned to each of the above metrics and totaled up.

Most of these metrics are a good indicator of a good crappie population, except for recruitment. The problem with this indices is that the gear does not sample Age-0.5 in proportion to what is in the lake. They are, for the most part, too small for the gear. Another issue that we have, that I have pointed out before, is that this type of sampling gear doesn't work well in all lakes. They work very well in the central Arkansas Game and Fish lakes. They are terrible in steep shored/large reservoirs. A new type of sample gear is in the process of being evaluated to take the trapnets place. So, just because some lakes have bad Assessment Scores, keep in mind that this may be due to the bathymetry of the lake.

thanks for the info on what the columns mean. that is beneficial.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ibmack

thanks for the info on what the columns mean. that is beneficial.

---

I have posted that data some time ago with the explinations. Do a search on the Arkansas forum for "crappie data". I bet it pulls up several things that I have posted in years past about crappie data. Also data is public information and we gladly share it. The more the angler knows and understands, the easier our job is. Feel free to ask me anytime about crappie data. I'll tell you what I know.

Thank you Matt. You are a benefit to this site and to Arkansas fishermen. Getting people that know what is really going on to be a part of a public forum and share their knowledge is rare. I appreciate your time and effort to share.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slackline

Thank you Matt. You are a benefit to this site and to Arkansas fishermen. Getting people that know what is really going on to be a part of a public forum and share their knowledge is rare. I appreciate your time and effort to share.

---

Thank you sir!

Hey Matt, I've often thought, but never mentioned before, about how my perspective of the AGFC has changed immensely for the positive since I've been on c.com and have had the opportunity to read your posts regarding the work the Commission is doing for our fisheries. Reading about the survey's and cover placement in lakes across the state has been eye opening to me. So I hope they understand if and when you are on c.com during daytime business hours we'll say (I know your job isn't necessarily 8-5) as well as your contributions to the site while your on your own time reflects very positively for the Commission. So if they ever give you any grief about it you can tell them to call me. It probably wouldn't help any but I'll give them my $.02 worth anyway. Your contribution to this site has been better than any publication they've ever issued. So thanks again for everything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mac Daddy

Hey Matt, I've often thought, but never mentioned before, about how my perspective of the AGFC has changed immensely for the positive since I've been on c.com and have had the opportunity to read your posts regarding the work the Commission is doing for our fisheries. Reading about the survey's and cover placement in lakes across the state has been eye opening to me. So I hope they understand if and when you are on c.com during daytime business hours we'll say (I know your job isn't necessarily 8-5) as well as your contributions to the site while your on your own time reflects very positively for the Commission. So if they ever give you any grief about it you can tell them to call me. It probably wouldn't help any but I'll give them my $.02 worth anyway. Your contribution to this site has been better than any publication they've ever issued. So thanks again for everything.

---

Thank you very much for the kind words Bobby. I don't take a real lunch break at work, so I don't think twice about checking the forum and answering questions when needed. If I'm having a positive impact on the public's perception of AGFC, that makes me happy (and probably my bosses happy). My intent is to disciminate information to the public and hopefully represent the AGFC well. Being able to talk about fishing with like minded folks is a huge bonus for me. I never thought that I would have met so many great people on this forum that I now consider friends. Heck, I even met my best fishing buddy through cc.com (Cmj). I know full and well about how a lot of people think negatively about AGFC. It took a lot of work to prove myself to my father-in-law and his fishing buddies (years of work!). Now he is one of my greatest allies in squashing misinformation and getting the truth out. To me this is all just second nature because I absolutely love my job. I couldn't see myself doing anything else. It will be very hard to give it up one of these years when my body won't let me do it any more. Driving a desk will be a very tough adjustment one of these days. Fisheries is just simply my life (personally and professionally). Thank you again!

D10, I read all your post or as many as I can and you do a great job, what I read here and the knowledge you have instilled in the crappie fisherman's mind is outstanding, I would like to say thank you for such a outstanding job you do for everyone and for AGFC there should be more people like you, maybe someday I will meet you when in AR.

:ThumbsUp

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pesce

D10, I read all your post or as many as I can and you do a great job, what I read here and the knowledge you have instilled in the crappie fisherman's mind is outstanding, I would like to say thank you for such a outstanding job you do for everyone and for AGFC there should be more people like you, maybe someday I will meet you when in AR.

:ThumbsUp

---

Thank you sir! I hope to meet you too one day. Let me know when you are around central Arkansas. I stay pretty close to home, because I can normally find some fish biting within a 30 min drive. No need to go much further for me. Thanks.