young walleye

I have been fishing the lake for over 25 years and I don't remember seeing this many short walleye since the monster 2003 class. I don't think they predicted the 2011 hatch to be this strong but everyone I talk to said they are tossing back nearly as many shorts as they are keeping. How do you guys think the number of small walleye compares to the 2003 hatch? At any rate it looks like we will have some decent fish in the next couple of years. :)

1+ year old walleyes caught= 10 1/2"
2+ year old walleyes caught= 14 1/4"
3+ year old walleyes caught= 17 1/4"
4+ year old walleyes caught= 18 7/8"
5+ year old walleyes caught= 20 1/4"
6+ year old walleyes caught= 21 1/4"
7+ year old walleyes caught= 22 3/4"
8+ year old walleyes caught= 24 1/4"
9+ year old walleyes caught= 26 1/4"
10+ year old walleyes caught=27 1/2"

Let's hope... we caught maybe 2 dozen or so shorts and many right at 15 the last several weeks

Greg

Yes, today was about 40% shorts, some 9-10" some 13-14".
Glad to see that.

A concern that I have is that the small ones get dragged along if caught trolling and end up drowning if the tackle is not set properly. Has anyone been seeing that occur?

When we were up we only caught one short out of twenty fish, and that one was probably legal but it was so close I didn't want to take the chance. Of course, if they aren't as aggressive as all the trash fish we were pulling that could be why we didn't get as many as others.

the last 2 times out i have handled 2 short fish for every keeper. Most in the 10-15 inch range. It is great to see. GOes to show you the experts don't have all the facts with their trawl surveys. I think 2011 was a big class. lets hope 2013 was too!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eyezcrazy

I have been fishing the lake for over 25 years and I don't remember seeing this many short walleye since the monster 2003 class. I don't think they predicted the 2011 hatch to be this strong but everyone I talk to said they are tossing back nearly as many shorts as they are keeping. How do you guys think the number of small walleye compares to the 2003 hatch? At any rate it looks like we will have some decent fish in the next couple of years. :)

1+ year old walleyes caught= 10 1/2"
2+ year old walleyes caught= 14 1/4"
3+ year old walleyes caught= 17 1/4"
4+ year old walleyes caught= 18 7/8"
5+ year old walleyes caught= 20 1/4"
6+ year old walleyes caught= 21 1/4"
7+ year old walleyes caught= 22 3/4"
8+ year old walleyes caught= 24 1/4"
9+ year old walleyes caught= 26 1/4"
10+ year old walleyes caught=27 1/2"

---

The number of shorts in late 2004 and into 2005 was at a ratio of at least 10 to 1 in the western basin (maybe higher). The walleye population of adult breeders was very low and keepers were hard to come by. So it would be very hard for a good comparison of the ratio shorts that are being caught now to what was caught back then.

I do know that shorts no matter what year they are hatched are very aggressive and are always hungry in there 2nd and 3rd summers.

Here is a thread from 01/01/2012 that has the opinions of a few of us older lake Erie guys and our thoughts on the 2011 hatch at the end of 2011. I sure hope these guys thoughts and observations are/were correct.

http://community.walleye.com/showthr...8215#post18215

There will be no fishing reports from me this year as my boats 5.7L engine went south forever and its replacement looks like a winter project at this point.

Wakina, sorry to hear about your boat. Keep an eye on the your private messages. Most times that I am up to the lake, I have an extra spot or two on the boat and you are more than welcome to come along any time. I will send you a message the day before I am planning a trip up to the lake, or if you want, add my cellphone to your contacts and send me a text or give me a call and I will add yours. I run a very democratic boat and you would have input on where we go and what we fish.

If you plan to pull the motor and replace it yourself and want a hand, give me a shout as well. I am by no means an expert on boats, but I have managed to pull an engine and drive before. I am no stranger to tools/motor work.

I am sending you my cell phone number by PM.

Vern

Here is some more info on the 2011 hatch and the discussion that took place early last year. Please note that the Editor did not answer my email inquiring about where they got the information they alluded to in their article.

http://community.walleye.com/showthread.php?t=3782

Thanks Wakina for posting the link to those threads.

It is pretty clear that the 2012 Walleye Guide was correct in it's prediction that the 2011 hatch was a banner year. I can remember reading those now that you have refreshed my memory. I can also remember the bait netters that year talking about the abundance of yearling walleye they were getting when they were catching shiners. So much for those trawl results! It appears we were correct back then when some of us were questioning the results and many indicators are saying we did indeed have a good 2011 hatch. :D

Geographically the ODNR makes their yearly survey trawls in the same area's and water depth's year after year. In 2011 the algae blooms were extremely bad from the wet spring! Those little eyes are no different than any other life form on earth. What would you do if you could breath but not get enough oxygen to maintain a quality life not to mention the smell that must be in the water from that nasty stuff affecting their ability to locate prey. You along with any other creatures who have survived and multiplied over centuries of time would move to a more friendly environment. To me that is why the state missed the hatch survival rate in both 2010 and 2011, those year class eyes moved to a more environmentally friendly area of the lake where the ODNR does not do their survey trawls.

With all of the rain at this time and earlier this year I feel that everyone who fishes and or uses the lake for other forms of recreation should be prepared for a major algae bloom or blooms later this year. At this time we have the Maumee, Portage, Sandusky and Huron River spewing all of that farm runoff into the Lake, not to mention every minor watershed such as the Toussaint and any other small creeks feeding directly into the lake. On top of that some of the sewage treatment plants located along those rivers and streams feeding into the lake have most likely already overflowed into the drainage system compounding the problem even further. So I think the State ODNR will most likely miss the hatch again this year. The perch fishermen and the minnow boats will start to see those 2013 YOY walleye in mid to late August if they exist.
These are just my thoughts on the subject and not based on anything the scientific community would support but they are based on past experiences over my many years of fishing Lake Erie.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wakina

Geographically the ODNR makes their yearly survey trawls in the same area's and water depth's year after year. In 2011 the algae blooms were extremely bad from the wet spring! Those little eyes are no different than any other life form on earth. What would you do if you could breath but not get enough oxygen to maintain a quality life not to mention the smell that must be in the water from that nasty stuff affecting their ability to locate prey. You along with any other creatures who have survived and multiplied over centuries of time would move to a more friendly environment. To me that is why the state missed the hatch survival rate in both 2010 and 2011, those year class eyes moved to a more environmentally friendly area of the lake where the ODNR does not do their survey trawls.

With all of the rain at this time and earlier this year I feel that everyone who fishes and or uses the lake for other forms of recreation should be prepared for a major algae bloom or blooms later this year. At this time we have the Maumee, Portage, Sandusky and Huron River spewing all of that farm runoff into the Lake, not to mention every minor watershed such as the Toussaint and any other small creeks feeding directly into the lake. On top of that some of the sewage treatment plants located along those rivers and streams feeding into the lake have most likely already overflowed into the drainage system compounding the problem even further. So I think the State ODNR will most likely miss the hatch again this year. The perch fishermen and the minnow boats will start to see those 2013 YOY walleye in mid to late August if they exist.
These are just my thoughts on the subject and not based on anything the scientific community would support but they are based on past experiences over my many years of fishing Lake Erie.

---

No disclaimer needed. Everything you said makes perfect sense. I was already mentally preparing for a record algae bloom this year as the same thought occurred to me the other day.

I hope the signs are right and we get to enjoy some phenominal walleye fishing in the coming years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wakina

Geographically the ODNR makes their yearly survey trawls in the same area's and water depth's year after year. In 2011 the algae blooms were extremely bad from the wet spring! Those little eyes are no different than any other life form on earth. What would you do if you could breath but not get enough oxygen to maintain a quality life not to mention the smell that must be in the water from that nasty stuff affecting their ability to locate prey. You along with any other creatures who have survived and multiplied over centuries of time would move to a more friendly environment. To me that is why the state missed the hatch survival rate in both 2010 and 2011, those year class eyes moved to a more environmentally friendly area of the lake where the ODNR does not do their survey trawls.

With all of the rain at this time and earlier this year I feel that everyone who fishes and or uses the lake for other forms of recreation should be prepared for a major algae bloom or blooms later this year. At this time we have the Maumee, Portage, Sandusky and Huron River spewing all of that farm runoff into the Lake, not to mention every minor watershed such as the Toussaint and any other small creeks feeding directly into the lake. On top of that some of the sewage treatment plants located along those rivers and streams feeding into the lake have most likely already overflowed into the drainage system compounding the problem even further. So I think the State ODNR will most likely miss the hatch again this year. The perch fishermen and the minnow boats will start to see those 2013 YOY walleye in mid to late August if they exist.
These are just my thoughts on the subject and not based on anything the scientific community would support but they are based on past experiences over my many years of fishing Lake Erie.

---

Actually the ODNR did adjust their trawl data for 2010 due to oxygen conditions. See http://www.toledoblade.com/StevePoll...ooks-good.html (At the time they were criticized by some for doing that and "cooking the books")

And they ended up rating 2010 as one of the two best years since 2006. So it is no surprise lots of smaller fish are showing up. The process ain't perfect, but best we have, and I put my faith in the scientists.

Where is everyone finding these shorts? The smallest I've caught this year is 17" I fished Green and Rattle early and have been at Kellys the rest of the time. Just wondering.

Yesterday thru 7 shorts back that were 8"-14" in just under 4 hours!

LEfriend:
You are exactly right they did change their assessment in late 2010 based on further trawls and information provided by some of the other jurisdictions! I did not mean to make it sound like I do not put my faith in the ODNR, I feel they have a thankless job that is hard enough to get done properly without me or anyone else bashing them. In order to have something to compare the new YOY class to~~ they have to do the trawls in the same geographic locations and water depth's every year or the comparison would be like apples to oranges so to me if there is a flaw in their assessments it would be Mother Nature's fault through her changing conditions and not the ODNR's.

Unlike 2010 there was no official follow up in 2011 to the August Trawls by the ODNR, there were no ODNR news release's confirming their findings once all of the data was in from the other jurisdictions and processed. The only news that I have found beyond the release in early Sept came from Ohio Sea Grant. Link provided.
http://ohioseagrant.osu.edu/discuss/...5f471393148016.
Even the ODNR's website leads one to believe that the August trawls are only a portion of the information the ODNR uses to assess the quality of the current years hatch I believe they even stated that they were also using a 2nd series of trawls in October(later in the fall) to better assess the current hatch, I cannot find the webpage for that info at this time but I am still looking. At this time their assessment of the 2011 and 2012 hatches are not supported by the number of short walleyes in the 7 to 10 inch size(2012 hatch) or the number 13 to 15 inch shorts(2011 hatch). One only needs to ask this question! Where did these shorts come from if not from the 2011 and 2012 spawns?

As to cooking the books that would not serve anyone's purpose especially their(ODNR's)own. The vast majority of the fisheries division relies heavily on the Lake Erie Walleye and Yellow Perch fisheries so to cook the books would only produce a very short life expectancy for those officials and their lucrative budgets.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bggeary

Where is everyone finding these shorts? The smallest I've caught this year is 17" I fished Green and Rattle early and have been at Kellys the rest of the time. Just wondering.

---

I've had to throw quite a few back from American Eagle shoal, but there is a large school of fish North of B and C can extending to East of West Sister and over to the Kidney where many of the short fish are being caught. They were also getting them shallow out in front of Crane Creek and down the shoreline to Bessie...but I haven't heard anything about that bite for awhile.

Greg

Thanks Greg, not that i want to catch some, just wondering where they were all hanging out. That sounds to me like the 80's when the limit was ten.

I had my boat docked at Tibbles Marina on East Harbor in 04,05,06,07 and 08 fished both east of Kelly's and straight out of and west of East Harbor and the Bass Islands. I cannot remember catching a great many shorts east of Kelly's but did catch quite a few straight out between Kelly's and the Bass Islands but once you went west of the Bass Islands and got out around the reef complex the bite was on for those shorts in late 2004 and all of 2005. It was nothing to catch 40 to 50 a day in the area of the reefs.

Like I said before the adult population was really low and keepers were hard to come by once the water temp. got into the mid 70's, it seems that most of the adults went east those years. Once those 03 fish got to keeper size they would hang around on the western end of the lake in numbers great enough to give you some very excellent fishing even though the were not the trophy sized fish. They still made for fun and some very good eating.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wakina

LEfriend:
You are exactly right they did change their assessment in late 2010 based on further trawls and information provided by some of the other jurisdictions! I did not mean to make it sound like I do not put my faith in the ODNR, I feel they have a thankless job that is hard enough to get done properly without me or anyone else bashing them. In order to have something to compare the new YOY class to~~ they have to do the trawls in the same geographic locations and water depth's every year or the comparison would be like apples to oranges so to me if there is a flaw in their assessments it would be Mother Nature's fault through her changing conditions and not the ODNR's.

Unlike 2010 there was no official follow up in 2011 to the August Trawls by the ODNR, there were no ODNR news release's confirming their findings once all of the data was in from the other jurisdictions and processed. The only news that I have found beyond the release in early Sept came from Ohio Sea Grant. Link provided.
http://ohioseagrant.osu.edu/discuss/...5f471393148016.
Even the ODNR's website leads one to believe that the August trawls are only a portion of the information the ODNR uses to assess the quality of the current years hatch I believe they even stated that they were also using a 2nd series of trawls in October(later in the fall) to better assess the current hatch, I cannot find the webpage for that info at this time but I am still looking. At this time their assessment of the 2011 and 2012 hatches are not supported by the number of short walleyes in the 7 to 10 inch size(2012 hatch) or the number 13 to 15 inch shorts(2011 hatch). One only needs to ask this question! Where did these shorts come from if not from the 2011 and 2012 spawns?

As to cooking the books that would not serve anyone's purpose especially their(ODNR's)own. The vast majority of the fisheries division relies heavily on the Lake Erie Walleye and Yellow Perch fisheries so to cook the books would only produce a very short life expectancy for those officials and their lucrative budgets.

---

Wakina - Thanks, no problem, we're on the same page. If you go to the home page of Lake Erie Fisheries Unit and click on the latest "Lake Erie Status Link" you can get the 2012 report that was prepared Mar 2013. The 2011 might be archived at the bottom. Here is link to their page:

http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/Home/Fish...3/Default.aspx

The number of shorts is an interesting question. I am acquainted with a couple of those guys and may email them that one. Course catching shorts in one area and translating that to an accurate population estimate for whole lake are two different things. Nevertheless, it is a good sign and one certainly would rather see them than not, and hope they are a sign things are better than was thought. Good luck!

Could not agree more with wakina, just wanna touch on one subject he brought up about the field runoff. When are they gonna start regulating what and how much farmers are putting onto fields? With most fields now having been tiled, the "filtering out" of at least some that crap being is dramatically decreased and running directly into ditches, creeks, streams, and main,rivers, which everyone knows ends up in our lake. Im no expert on this subject, just wondering if anyone has given this any thought, looking forward to some responses.

No expert here either, but as I understand it, at least some of the reason for tiling is because of people wanting to put up houses right next to farm land. Perhaps a bit is to try to improve the land for farming as well?

Anyways, I am always skeptical about putting mandates on any consumer driven industry as that very often translates into increased cost to the consumer. Have you seen the prices of groceries lately?! With four kids and a six person household, I can tell you that I feel every little increase multiplied by six.

That said, I understand the problem, but how to reduce run-off without a great cost is very perplexing.

Most farms are tiled to help drainage improve so they can plant timely, and in times of weather events like the past 3 weeks, tile also help dramatically dry the fields off so that the crops do not suffer as badly. Conservation management practices such as filter strips, buffer zones, and waterways help to hold nutrients, and soil in place.
In todays fertilizer market farmers are not overapplying nutrients. They cannot afford to waste materials that cost in excess of $700 to $950 a ton. Farmers are stewards of their land. Their family makes their living from generation to generation by keeping their farms in the best condition that they can. Adding things like tile, filter strips, GPS soil sampling, Variable Rate Application of fertilizers, all help insure healthy farms are passed down to the next generation.
When we experience rain like we have had there is nothing that can be done to prevent runoff. There is considerably less nutrients moving out of fields today versus 20 years ago thanks to efforts by farmers, and Natural Resource Conservation Offices.
A bigger problem with prolonged heavy rains is runoff out of outdated storm and sewer systems in cities like Toledo and Detroit. There is a big push to update these systems, and that will make a huge impact on the quality of Lake Erie in years to come.
If you can't tell, I farm, work for a fertilizer company, and I love to fish in erie. Trust me when I say most of my neighbors, and customers do everything they can to hold their soil, and nutrients on their farms.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by troy1976

Most farms are tiled to help drainage improve so they can plant timely, and in times of weather events like the past 3 weeks, tile also help dramatically dry the fields off so that the crops do not suffer as badly. Conservation management practices such as filter strips, buffer zones, and waterways help to hold nutrients, and soil in place.
In todays fertilizer market farmers are not overapplying nutrients. They cannot afford to waste materials that cost in excess of $700 to $950 a ton. Farmers are stewards of their land. Their family makes their living from generation to generation by keeping their farms in the best condition that they can. Adding things like tile, filter strips, GPS soil sampling, Variable Rate Application of fertilizers, all help insure healthy farms are passed down to the next generation.
When we experience rain like we have had there is nothing that can be done to prevent runoff. There is considerably less nutrients moving out of fields today versus 20 years ago thanks to efforts by farmers, and Natural Resource Conservation Offices.
A bigger problem with prolonged heavy rains is runoff out of outdated storm and sewer systems in cities like Toledo and Detroit. There is a big push to update these systems, and that will make a huge impact on the quality of Lake Erie in years to come.
If you can't tell, I farm, work for a fertilizer company, and I love to fish in erie. Trust me when I say most of my neighbors, and customers do everything they can to hold their soil, and nutrients on their farms.

---

Very well stated. I also farm in the maumee river watershed area and everyone in my area does everything possible to keep the nutrients where they shoule be.

Thank you, farmers. There are two farms in the family and I have a buddy and his father that farm. It is a tough job and they are constantly struggling to protect their interests against those of the huge conglomerate farms. Farmers are often demonized, but without you fellas, city folk like me would find it really hard to get a bite to eat. So, thanks again!

Sorry guys didn't mean to ruffle feathers, but i do appreciate farmers and I'm not blaming them for the algae blooms, just stating a fact that something has to be done to prevent or decrease blooms. I encourage everyone to take a look at the link I have posted.
http://www.cleveland.com/science/ind...e_algae_b.html

no feathers ruffled here. I am just trying to educate the non farm community. THe finger always gets pointed our way when it comes to run off. There is no doubt that farmers contribute to the problem. In the article you just posted though it states that millions of dollars in fertilizer end up in the rivers. I am not sure how accurate that number would be. The phosphate fertilizers applied today for the most part are deficient applied. What I mean is farmers apply phosphorus at rates less than they should to maintain yields. When I first started working 16 years ago, farmers broadcast applied phosphourus on every acre they farmed. Not the case today. Most fields i work with are variable rate applied when it comes to phosphourus, and most fields do not call for any at all. Row starter is used on corn, but most commonly only about 35-40 lbs per acre of phosphourus are applied to the entire crop.
Now if you want me to ruffle feathers...how many of you guys live in the burbs or city and put fertilizer on your yards or pay someone to do it once twice or more times a year? I won't go thru the numbers but lets just say that on a per acre basis, homeowners put WAY more fertilizer(especially phosphourus) ;on their yards than a farmer does on his fields. Now when you have weather events like we have had lately what stands in the way of the storm sewer and the lake? Not miles upon miles of farmground, filter strips, and creeks. Water coming from farm country is filtered a lot before it hits the maumee or detroit river. Because of the sheer volume of acres that drain to these two rivers though, farmers will never be able to completely not be to blame. As I said earlier management practices are in place, and we are all looking for new practices to employ, with the goal of reducing our portion of the problem. We all want to be as efficient as possible while still making decisions that make economic sense as well.
I apologize if anyone is upset, and I will get off the soapbox now. good luck to all fishing and be safe everyone

I appreciate what farmers do (my mom's family farmed), and I do think the Ag community is working very hard to reduce their contribution; however, please don't try to minimize or point fingers. As of 2012 nearly all residential lawn fertilizer no longer contains phosphorous. In addition water samples show high phosphorous levels in the rivers upriver from any large cities; although, outdated sewer systems undoubtedly do contribute to the phosphorous as well.

Again, I do think that the Ag community has worked really hard to educate and reduce phosphorous runoff. I also know that farming is a business and no business wants to waste money putting more inputs into it's product. I just want to make sure that the problem isn't blurred where nothing gets solved. I saw an article in an Ag publication today doing just that. They were pointing the finger at residential residents and large city sewers.

John

thats funny i sell about 10 tons a year of 50 lb bags of residential fertilizer that is 15-15-15, 6-24-24, 16-8-8, 9-23-30. THe first number is nitrogen, the second is PHOSPHORUS, and the third is potassium. Go to wal mart and see what the analysis is on the bags of fertilizer. most of them contain phosphorus. Andersons fertilizer plant in Maumee bags thousands of tons of residential fertilizer a year and most of it contains phosphorus. Stop by their store and see for yourself.

Again I am not throwing stones. THe ag community definitely puts its share in the rivers, but come on...Every study is only as good as who is funding it. If the government is funding it, then it will point in one direction, if farmers fund it, it will point another direction, if the city funds it it will point in another direction still. It is almost impossible to get an unbiased opinion.

I can point you towards farmers that are very aware of their "footprints" and are very on the edge of technologies and practices that help reduce unwanted runoff. I can also point you to farmers that knowingly do things that are not good practice in relation to fertilizer runoff.

THis is my last comment on this issue, again please don't take it the wrong way, but also don't say things that are not true. There are two sides to every situation, and usually when something is wrong it takes more than one problem to cause major blooms such as we saw two years ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by troy1976

thats funny i sell about 10 tons a year of 50 lb bags of residential fertilizer that is 15-15-15, 6-24-24, 16-8-8, 9-23-30. THe first number is nitrogen, the second is PHOSPHORUS, and the third is potassium. Go to wal mart and see what the analysis is on the bags of fertilizer. most of them contain phosphorus. Andersons fertilizer plant in Maumee bags thousands of tons of residential fertilizer a year and most of it contains phosphorus. Stop by their store and see for yourself.

Again I am not throwing stones. THe ag community definitely puts its share in the rivers, but come on...Every study is only as good as who is funding it. If the government is funding it, then it will point in one direction, if farmers fund it, it will point another direction, if the city funds it it will point in another direction still. It is almost impossible to get an unbiased opinion.

I can point you towards farmers that are very aware of their "footprints" and are very on the edge of technologies and practices that help reduce unwanted runoff. I can also point you to farmers that knowingly do things that are not good practice in relation to fertilizer runoff.

THis is my last comment on this issue, again please don't take it the wrong way, but also don't say things that are not true. There are two sides to every situation, and usually when something is wrong it takes more than one problem to cause major blooms such as we saw two years ago.

---

Troy, you are right on many counts. Certainly the ag community is stepping up and you are 100% correct...there are many many farmers that are on the cutting edge doing the very best and looking for even better new practices and technology. And there are some others that knowingly do things that are not good practices. Same as in every profession or walk of life...mechanics, salesmen, you name the profession. So Ag has no corner on that. And at times many external factors and our economic system push people to do things they don't want to do if there was a better option.

But it is true that for every acre of urban or suburban land that drains into Western Erie, there is roughly 6 aces of ag land. Farmers are not losing much per acre, the challenge is there are so many acres into such a small shallow western end and most of those acres are ag compared to other uses. That's why the farm commodity groups recently put $1million of their own dollars out of their pockets into research to help solve the problem, through a partnership with the Federal Government and the University.

It is also true though that the phosphorus has come out of a majority of lawn fertilizers, including the custom lawn services. Scotts has the lions share of the lawn care market in Ohio, and they have removed it from theirs. Andersons actually has done likewise for their lawn blend, there is a whole pallet of their name brand at my local elevator, because I looked at it out of curiosity. It's phos free. And I bought phosphorus free fertilizer at Walmart about a month ago. Sure there is triple 15 blends out there...but it is getting harder to find and is now being marketed as garden fertilizer and that is intended use.

It is also true that cities are stepping up and spending billions on waste treatment plants over next several years. My own sewer bills have doubled because our small town separated our sewers.

I agree...bottom line is that it is up to all of us....farmers, homeowners, cities.... to do our own part instead of pointing our fingers at others.

I would disagree though on one thing....it is possible to find lots of unbiased studies. Most good research is subject to rigorous peer review by other scientists. And in August, State of Ohio will come out with it's second report of the Phos Study Task Force II with findings and recommendations. That has been a year long process and has involved many ag organizations, environmental groups, scientists and government officials meeting together. Study that when it is released and you will find a lot of what we know, and need to do, is becoming clearer. We just need the will for all of us to roll up our sleeves and go to work putting those things into practice.

Good fishing... always enjoy your reports!

Sorry I opened this can of worms with my poorly thought out and written response in reply #11 of this thread. I in no way wanted to make it sound like it was the Family Farms that were the culprits, but I still managed to do so just the same.

By farm runoff I was thinking about the Mega animal Farms located within the Maumee and Sandusky river drainages right here in Ohio that constantly ignore the rules when it comes to handling the animal waste and the dead bodies their operations generate. Most if not all are foreign owned and operated, those people and corporations could care less about our environment, both air quality and water quality. Their first concern is the almighty dollar at our expense, after all they just pack up and go home after destroying our air and water quality. Chicken/egg mega farms are some of the worst ones for leaving the dead chickens to rot in piles and the manure to accumulate without being properly treated, thus allowing the effluent those waste piles produce to run off into the local waterways and eventually finding its way into Lake Erie, a simple search will verify what I have just stated.

I therefore apologize to all of the Family Farmers out there who were offended by my reply. Be it known that I do stand by my assessment of the Mega Farms referred to in this reply.