We dont!!! Throw them back and let them get bigger.steelfish said:
IMO
-Jay
horsetooth on 6/5
Caught 40+ walleye from 7:45 am - 5:45. One 20", 10 of em 13-14" and the rest were between 15"-17.5". All on bottom bouncers from 15-22ft, color didn't matter. Lots of boat traffic of course, but you get used to it. Other fisherman were reporting about the same as far as no keepers
In the end, I don't know if I am to excited on going back. All that work and only one keeper. I am all for selective harvest but I would like to come back with some for the pan. The 13-14" size class were skinny as snakes, the 15-17 ers were healthly for the most part. 18 inch minimum doesn't make any sense at this lake, how do we get it changed?
Matt at Loveland
In the end, I don't know if I am to excited on going back. All that work and only one keeper. I am all for selective harvest but I would like to come back with some for the pan. The 13-14" size class were skinny as snakes, the 15-17 ers were healthly for the most part. 18 inch minimum doesn't make any sense at this lake, how do we get it changed?
Matt at Loveland
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
IMO
-Jay
I'm with you Matt! 16-17inchers are perfect eating size. I guess we'll just have to wait till next year, for those to grow alittle bigger. I see your from Loveland. We've been pounding them the past couple of weeks @ Lake Loveland. Getting some real good smallies as well.
JohnnyO19 said:16-17inchers are perfect eating size.
See, thats the problem! If all the fish are a round 16-17in and people keep all those fish than.....WELL DO THE MATH
IMO
-JAY
If they lower the minimum length to 15", then all the fish will be right at about 14". Minimum length limits don't work very well, the only way they work is to get a population of fish established. They should be reviewed after the population is established and a slot should be put in place, or another sort of limit like a maximum length limit say at 18".
If people keep all the fish they catch, you're right, there is a problem. It won't matter what the size limit is. I know there are anglers out there that measure how successful their day was by the number of fish they bring home. This isn't the case with me, but there is absoultley nothing wrong with bringing a couple of fish home, especially if you've released 40 plus fish like steelfish did.
My comment wasn't aimed to you per say.
My point is if you have a bunch of fish right at 17in and you lower the size to that, than not just you but alot of other people will start keeping this size fish thus killing the fishery.
IMO
-Jay
My point is if you have a bunch of fish right at 17in and you lower the size to that, than not just you but alot of other people will start keeping this size fish thus killing the fishery.
IMO
-Jay
;D
Just evaluate the fishery is all I am saying.
Johnny O,
Where and when at Loveland are you getting em ? I need someplace I can keep some panfryers. Boyd is the same story as Horsetooth, everything just under the limit, not one keeper there.
Matt
Just evaluate the fishery is all I am saying.
Johnny O,
Where and when at Loveland are you getting em ? I need someplace I can keep some panfryers. Boyd is the same story as Horsetooth, everything just under the limit, not one keeper there.
Matt
Hey Matt, I pm'ed you, I hope ya got it .
.The fish will grow. For example last two years at Union Res. We were cathing nothing but 8 - 12 inchers ( wipers ) . This year . Boy did the size increase. Looking forward to next year because a lot of 18 inchers were realeased and set back. Imagine all the ones that werent caught. Well Im glad that you did release em STEELFISH and thanks for the great report. Maybe i'll go hit up the lake next week. Thanks..!
steve
steve
Minimum length limits do not work except the first couple years to get a fish population established.
What minimum length limits for bass and walleye do is this: It selectively breeds out larger fish. Whenever a fish above the length limit is caught, it gets harvested.
The solution is to play hardball with the CDOW and demand the end to minimum length limits. Most states have maximum length limits or slot limits. We have to demand that the regulations be fixed, or start kicking people out of office.
What minimum length limits for bass and walleye do is this: It selectively breeds out larger fish. Whenever a fish above the length limit is caught, it gets harvested.
The solution is to play hardball with the CDOW and demand the end to minimum length limits. Most states have maximum length limits or slot limits. We have to demand that the regulations be fixed, or start kicking people out of office.
I agree with you completely Ice any minimum size limit after the first couple years only serves once purpose and that is to reduce size of fish. Any basic high school or college class will show just this.
You assume that all the fish are caught, which is probably true in many of our small lakes/reservoirs. If a few of the 16-17in fish are kept in a densely populated lake, growth rates should improve. It's a delicate balance. Too much competition can slow growth to a crawl and can result in a smaller maximum fish size. So - do you want lots of good-sized fish, or a lots of small fish, some good-sized, and a few monsters?Jay_In_Parker said:JohnnyO19 said:16-17inchers are perfect eating size.
See, thats the problem! If all the fish are a round 16-17in and people keep all those fish than.....WELL DO THE MATH
IMO
-JAY
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Colorado Fisherman Forum
A forum community dedicated to fishers, anglers, and enthusiasts in the Colorado area. Come join the discussion about safety, gear, tackle, tips, tricks, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Recommended Communities
