Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lower Panfish Limits?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #46
    WOW! A lot of people stayed at a "Holiday Inn Express" last night.

    Comment


      #47
      Originally posted by Deadhead Dave View Post
      I appreciate the relative civility of this discussion, and again, I like the limits just where they are.

      I would support a maximum length limit much more than lowering limits or a minimum length limit. Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that leaving all bluegill over nine inches and crappie over 12 (or whatever was decided upon) would be beneficial to the overall size structure of the population. 11 inch crappie and 8 inch bluegill are just fine for the table, and it leaves the best genetics in the lake.
      Yes - this is pretty much the philosophy behind selective harvest. Something that will probably be up to the anglers themselves as enforcing this would be very difficult with our lack of enough CO's. I know a few years back G&P was trying to simplify everything but I think they should revisit that thinking. I know it's hard, some anglers can't even read, and some anglers don't even speak English BUT - it needs to be done on certain lakes. Specific regulations for specific lakes will be important going forward especially the newly renovated sandhills lakes. Would love to see total C&R for bluegills over 9" and crappie over 13" on certain lakes. Crappie up to 18"s ( or even 19"s) definitely a possibility with selective harvest.

      As far as " genetics ' that has been debated. Genetics or not, you are still returning the less abundant larger fish that are very difficult to replace and gives others the chance at a fish of a lifetime.

      To add to the original post topic - I mean, 30 to 15 was a huge jump. It really is all relative. We need to start addressing the need for specific regulations for certain lakes. There still is a large percentage of anglers who like to keep fish and panfish are very popular - I am cool with 15. Now if you would couple the premise of selective harvest with this harvest regulation - we would have some pretty good sized panfish to tangle with.

      Comment


        #48
        Let's face it there is a certain group of "anglers" that keep every fish they catch legal or not. Enforcement is they key. I have to tell people all the time that the bass they just caught is not legal to keep. Then they pause for a min holding the fish looking at it. Then when I say I could have the game warden explain it they release the fish. One time at wagontrain an "angler" had his limit of crappie went to his car changed his shirt and hat grabbed a new bucket and went back fishing. I called game warden he came and waited till he had his second limit then busted him.

        Comment


        • Harold
          Harold commented
          Editing a comment
          THANK YOU... for doing YOUR PART as a LICENSED NEBRASKA FISHER in protecting OUR resource.

        #49
        Just start charging $25 to get into every lake to offset the cost of stocking lakes....

        Comment


        • Harold
          Harold commented
          Editing a comment
          Since ALL NEBRASKAN's own OUR public waters, it would be a "lesser problem" if ALL NEBRASKAN's contributed to those public waters.

        #50
        As many of you know, I am a certified panfish nut. I love them! I love them all! So this will probably come as a shock to many of you, but I think that the 15/30 bag/possession limit is just fine.

        However, I do believe that there are many bodies of water in our state that could produce much higher quality of panfish (all species really) if they were NOT managed by the "blanket" limits that are currently in place.

        I personally would love to see more bodies of water managed specifically for certain species they are best suited to produce high quality fish. Whether that species be bass, catfish, panfish, whatever, get the most out of every fishery that we can.

        We have so many different types of water bodies in this state, ranging from half acre city park ponds to 30,000 acre Lake Mac, and everything in between, and with very few exceptions they are all managed with the same limits.

        I see things happening within the G&P that give me hope that this is something that will happen (at least somewhat) in the future and I am excited by that.

        The folks at the G&P are good people and they do want what is best for us, our state and its resources. All you have to do is talk to them to see that they are passionate about their jobs and the outdoors in general.

        Comment


          #51
          Originally posted by Deadhead Dave View Post
          I'm going to say again, I catch and release 95%

          This may be an unpopular opinion. At this point it seems to me that the greedy ones are the people trying to lower the limits again. They already cut it in half. Now people want it lowered again, so they can catch a few more fish. Who cares about people who like to eat fish. If that is the way you like to enjoy the outdoors, that's fine, but why tell someone else they can't have a meal?

          Let me ask you, who sounds like the greedy "pig"?
          So whitetips , if you had a magic wand, what would you set the limit at?
          I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person. -Sam Redfern

          Comment


            #52
            Originally posted by swoab47 View Post
            As many of you know, I am a certified panfish nut. I love them! I love them all! So this will probably come as a shock to many of you, but I think that the 15/30 bag/possession limit is just fine.

            However, I do believe that there are many bodies of water in our state that could produce much higher quality of panfish (all species really) if they were NOT managed by the "blanket" limits that are currently in place.

            I personally would love to see more bodies of water managed specifically for certain species they are best suited to produce high quality fish. Whether that species be bass, catfish, panfish, whatever, get the most out of every fishery that we can.

            We have so many different types of water bodies in this state, ranging from half acre city park ponds to 30,000 acre Lake Mac, and everything in between, and with very few exceptions they are all managed with the same limits.

            I see things happening within the G&P that give me hope that this is something that will happen (at least somewhat) in the future and I am excited by that.

            The folks at the G&P are good people and they do want what is best for us, our state and its resources. All you have to do is talk to them to see that they are passionate about their jobs and the outdoors in general.

            Agree completely, but difficult to implement. People walk right past the G&P signs, and violate the local regulations. We see people at Holmes Lake using live bait, keeping small bass, discarding fishing line, etc.

            Comment


            • swoab47
              swoab47 commented
              Editing a comment
              Call the SNAP hotline!

            #53
            Harold, keeper to me is about a 9 or 10 inch crappie that has some width to it. I agree with you that you can destroy a fishery keeping all the top fish. After i watched that video daryl posted i tried implementing it and it was not too painful throwin some of the larger ones back. Its hard to look past the frame of mind that if i dont keep it the next guy will but you hope for the best.

            Comment


              #54
              I'm in favor of reducing the pan fish limit on smaller waters, especially during the ice season.

              But, who in the heck eats more than 2 or 3 pan fish per person for 1 meal? Seriously....

              And we wonder why Americans have self caused obesity, heart disease, diabetes, etc.

              Disgusting and embarrassing.

              Comment


                #55
                Originally posted by KD View Post
                I'm in favor of reducing the pan fish limit on smaller waters, especially during the ice season.

                But, who in the heck eats more than 2 or 3 pan fish per person for 1 meal? Seriously....

                And we wonder why Americans have self caused obesity, heart disease, diabetes, etc.

                Disgusting and embarrassing.
                Lots of people. They come, again and again, wielding buckets. The quality of a bluegill/crappie fishery is usually inversely proportional to the number of buckets that visit it on an annual basis. Especially when said bucket patrol takes out the wrong size of panfish. Carry on and keep it civil.
                Eyes by day, Eyes by night.
                Lund 1875 Impact Sport
                Mercury 150 4-Stroke/9.9 ProKicker
                Humminbird/Minn Kota Terrova

                Comment


                  #56
                  Boy howdy! Just don’t set the limit at ten! The few times I keep fish the feliets Need to feed my wife myself and my stinking sister in-law. So ten would mean one of us will be one short! Five won’t work, six would but might need to start keeping larger fish? Done plenty of research to back this up! Sadly I am usually the one who comes up short! If y’all are cooking tatters don’t forget the onions! Take care in all you wish for!
                  Keep it safe! JDL

                  Comment


                    #57
                    Originally posted by Deadhead Dave View Post

                    So whitetips , if you had a magic wand, what would you set the limit at?
                    Depends on the waterbody, but let me say this: Bag limits also put a value on the fish, and when they are high, everyone thinks they can just whack as many as they want, don't make any difference.

                    But it does.

                    Unfortunately, for bag limits to provide any benefit, for bag limits to actually reduce harvest, they have to be low, lower than what many anglers would like.

                    "If I had a magic wand"? Well, in a way I do. . . . I have not kept a panfish all winter.

                    Daryl B.
                    Daryl Bauer
                    Fisheries Outreach Program Manager
                    Nebraska Game & Parks Commission
                    [email protected]
                    http://ourdoornebraska.ne.gov/blogs/category/barbs-and-backlashes/

                    Comment


                      #58
                      I only keep panfish through the ice a couple times a year and then out of only one lake. Mostly crappies. I C&R everything at all other times. The way I do it is to fish for a bit on any given day and see what size the middle of the road fish are before throwing fish in the bucket.
                      Where I fish, 50% of the crappies caught are usually 8 to 10 inches, every year. Maybe 40% are under that size and very few are larger. So guess what? Up to my limit, every 8-9 inch fish is going in the bucket. All others are returned. But this way, most of the 8-9 inch fish are still there when I leave, to get bigger. Couldn't begin to put a dent in them anyway. And the really little ones get to grow up and and every last one of the big ones that were there when I arrived are still there, to be caught just for fun, when I leave. Scientific? No. Logical? Probably not. But it's what we do. This is a very small, private lake. Every few years the middle of the road fish are 12-14 inches, seems we can't catch a smaller one, some years. Some years there are gobs of really big ones, which we never keep, regardless. All I know is we've been doing this for 20+ years and we never fail to be able to come up with a few meals of nice fish and have yet to see a year where there are just few fish or all small ones. We catch mountains of fish there every summer, but we put every last one of the fish caught in the summer back in the lake. I bet we probably should be keeping a mess of those too, but we like save them for our winter fun.

                      What I'm getting at, I guess is to say, if you could really, scientifically target the right size of crappie for harvest in any given lake, it would be hard to catch too many them, I would guess, but it would probably involve fishing for and keeping way smaller fish than guys would like to take home.

                      Bluegills? Yeah, there's a whole science behind that. Someone that knows what they are talking about can explain that one for us.
                      We catch nice bluegills regularly, but really, we don't keep more than a handful. Crappies are so much easier to clean. But I'd guess a fella should be targeting a whole pile of bluegills, too. Maybe we can work that out over the next 20 years?
                      Last edited by Catfishsteve; 03-12-2019, 08:53 PM.
                      Become the change in the world that you seek.

                      Comment


                        #59
                        Originally posted by whitetips View Post

                        Depends on the waterbody, but let me say this: Bag limits also put a value on the fish, and when they are high, everyone thinks they can just whack as many as they want, don't make any difference.

                        But it does.

                        Unfortunately, for bag limits to provide any benefit, for bag limits to actually reduce harvest, they have to be low, lower than what many anglers would like.

                        "If I had a magic wand"? Well, in a way I do. . . . I have not kept a panfish all winter.

                        Daryl B.
                        So does that mean that you are in favor of individual lake regulation instead of the current blanket system?
                        I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person. -Sam Redfern

                        Comment


                          #60
                          Originally posted by Deadhead Dave View Post

                          So does that mean that you are in favor of individual lake regulation instead of the current blanket system?
                          Most any fisheries biologist would tell you that they are in favor of managing waterbodies individually, you bet.

                          However, most any fisheries biologist who has worked in the real world for any length of time realizes that fishing regulations are a combination of not just fisheries biology but also sociology and yes, politics.

                          So, I will not be doing any waving of "magic wands" and some of you will be glad that I am not.



                          Daryl B.
                          Daryl Bauer
                          Fisheries Outreach Program Manager
                          Nebraska Game & Parks Commission
                          [email protected]
                          http://ourdoornebraska.ne.gov/blogs/category/barbs-and-backlashes/

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X