An excellent article was posted on November 22 in the OHIO OUTDOOR NEWS about the 2012 Walleye & Yellow Perch hatch, growth rates mortality etc.......
contributing editor John Hageman, Ed
Printable View
An excellent article was posted on November 22 in the OHIO OUTDOOR NEWS about the 2012 Walleye & Yellow Perch hatch, growth rates mortality etc.......
contributing editor John Hageman, Ed
http://www.outdoornews.com/November-...than-expected/
I believe that is the article that eriepro is speaking of.
While the cold weather is making me long for an early spring and early walleye bite, I can see that it may be good for the future.
Rods are repaired, reels are re-strung, tackle is reorganized, new lifevests, drift sock and hook sharpener on the way. Ahhh! Is it late march yet?!
That is an interesting article. We need to have our own database and report what the guys and gals that fish the lake on a regular basis and who belong to this site can report there catch data in real time instead of averages and hectar mumbo jumbo, I know these reports are needed. but think of this we are the people who go out daily we fish in all types of weather we troll cast jig, we handle the big ones as well as the small ones we open there belly and see what there eating , we see the various health conditions and most important have fished the lake for decades that data I believe is quite valuable . and needs to be added to the data that decides for more or less comercial fishing activity and catch limits.
Excellent article I honestly hope they are under estimating the numbers, but most likely not. This makes me think about why Ohio doesn't incorporate a slot limit for walleyes. I Know its is the mid length fish the healthy ones that produce the healthy spawn not so much the big hogs, is this not a big enough issue for the state yet? Personally this is something I would not have problem with, let the population get stronger again. Any thoughts on this matter? Why or why not? Just ideas thanks
You just proposed something that I had rolling around in my head. I think that a 2-inch to 4-inch slot limit starting at 20 inches would be a great idea. Any walleye from 20-22 or 20-24 would be off-limits. Would be the smartest thing to do. Why wait til the whole thing (fishery) goes to hell and then do something about it? A small slot limit now could prevent a huge one later down the road.Quote:
Originally Posted by dreamcatcher
I would have to agree about the slot idea...every big successful walleye lake seems to have one
I wish there was a study to see if it is a breeding problem, hatch problem, or growth mortality problem. Basically impossible to do, but when you think about it more than just the stars have to line up to get all three of those areas to be great to produce great numbers, and they are not sure of the exact area that lacks year to year.
the subject of a slot limit has been beat to death. there are 20+ million walleye in lake erie currently which produces trillions of eggs to be fertilized. The lake has changed from years ago and may not be able to sustain 40+ milliion walleye. The reality is, it may require fewer walleye in the lake to produce a banner hatch. Fewer walleye = more available food = higher survival rate. I believe the survival rate of the fry is the real issue at hand. Everyone thinks immediately that if you have more walleye, you have more fry, and you have more survival when you can actually decrease the survival rate with more fry if there isn't available forage to sustain the fry. Many factors involved here with the least significant factor being the amount of walleye currently in the lake.
Excellent point, it is about the fry that survive, I apologize for beating it more. I suppose well let the biologist and wildlife management team do their job and stick to ours, catching the fish!
I believe this data and subject could be debated all day long and never get agreed upon. I don't have a problem with the slot limit but to me those r the best fish to eat. The 18-24" fish... I would have to agree with the idea of if u take out some of the fish the fish that are left have a better chance to find food and be healthier without the competition of that many more fish... I guess it's like deer hunting take out deer from the herd to keep the herd healthy... Either way I'm with dreamcatcher this issue is above my pay grade ill stick to catching fish and abiding to the rules.
You make a good point, but I have to respectfully disagree. The reason that you think that the slot limit issue has been beat to death is because it is the common sense approach. I have seen too many issues "muddied up" by political pressure. Like it or not, these issues are decided by those that likely have something to lose by instituting a slot limit.Quote:
Originally Posted by bocajemma
I have not seen any studies that suggest that there is not enough forage for the fry. In fact, proving that would be pretty much impossible. (If you have seen one, please point me in that direction and I am willing to change my opinion.) With that said, it becomes a math problem. 100 fry born with a 5% survival rate = 5 surviving, 200 fry born with the same survival rate = 10 surviving.
At the risk of sounding overly simplistic (really just a common sense type of guy), the lake had a healthy population of walleye prior to the huge explosion of sport and commercial fishing a several decades back. Sport fishing has declined since, but commercial fishing has not.
While I will accept in truth that run-off nutrients helps the fry to grow bigger and faster, I will not accept the idea that more walleye breeding will equate to less fry surviving.
Guys, check out ohio sea grants website, plenty of info there from fishery management people who are constantly studying the lake. Seems to be a lot more than just the number of eggs that are laid determining walleye population and yearly hatch success.
Jim
The following 2 quotes from the article sheds alot of light on why the survival rate of the newly hatched walleyes may be suffering.
QUOTE~
"Instead, the drought reduced lakewide productivity (algae and zooplankton production) and turbidity (muddiness), which are factors that offer the best feeding conditions for fry while minimizing predation from white perch, alewife, and (rainbow) smelt.
These invasive species have been shown to have higher survival rates during mild, ice-free winters, such as we had last year. When they are abundant, they take a higher toll on eggs and fry."
"Hartman pointed out that after the zebra mussel infestation in 1988, Lake Erie can no longer consistently support the higher numbers of fish possible prior to the invasion of this exotic species. Lake Erie frequently produced Ohio harvests in excess of 4 million walleyes per year from a population that may have been over 70-80 million strong." ~UNQUOTE
Slot limits would only benefit the Canadian Gill netting industry as they much prefer those fish in the 18" to 24" range as they bring premium prices vs. the larger 25+" fish and they take up much less space in the gill tugs storage lockers than those larger fish do. The lake Erie fisheries Management unit which determines the total allowable catch would never be able to convince the Canadians to only target those fish outside the slot bracket if that would even be a possiblity to target just the larger fish in the first place.
I had a fellow from the state fishery dept here in southern Ohio come in for some repairs to there trucks, he was telling us about there egg hatchery for restocking the reservoirs would a hatchery for walleye be of benefit with all the females loaded with eggs and males we see in the spring maybe a grant can be obtained to start a fish farm to increase the numbers of walleye that will spawn on there own next year I think like you better to do something now than wait till its to late