|
|
Member
Posts: 874
Location: Neenah, WI | I haven't been able to get out since Otter Street (wife had surgery). What's happening out there? Looks like I'll be able to get out this week. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 192
| Dale,
A friend of mine has been catching fish way up on the North end in the mud. Nothing fancy, just pulling cranks. Mainly deep diving reef runners. I did pretty good last weekend on the reefs off Garlic Island. Mainly trolling up on the reef on the side that had the wind blowing into it. No particular crank seemed to work better than the other. As far as I know, they are still catching fish in the mud pretty consistently. I'm willing to bet that any spots that produced for you last year, should work again this year. The reefs are going good when you have the right wind as well. I haven't been catching anything real big though, just nice eating size fish. Good Luck! |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 874
Location: Neenah, WI | Thanks Mark. Good to hear from you. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 885
| Dale,
I have a good bite going the last 3 days on Bago, pm me if you are looking for details. I was out the last 3 days with guests and we found a pretty good consistant bite on Cranks.
Dominic |
|
| |
|
| You cant go wrong with Dom and mark. You know both know this lake very well.
With the FLW Tour event a week away or so, big things are expected. Should be fun. What the water temp and hows the bloom looking? |
|
| |
|
| Decent bit still going on south end of lake trolling like it has been all spring and summer..... Picked up about a dozen eyes over 2 days all 16-24" eaters way south of oshkosh near long point area and straight across the lake on east shore has also been producing. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 6
| Like Dale, it's been awhile since I've been on Bago, (Ok 2 years for me). Has anyone been having any luck with the big Reef Runners or are 600 and 200 still the way to go? (the boat can only hold so much tackle)
How is the Crawler bite?
We are going to be out there Thur-Sun, I'm not fishing the FLW, It's just a good week for Kim and I to get out.
Thanks
Ed
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1314
Location: Menasha, WI | I just got home from a two week fishing vacation in northern MN and was thinking about heading out tomorrow. If anybody has some info they want to share, I'd appreciate a PM. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 885
| Bob... check your pm
Edited by Purple Skeeter 7/7/2009 7:43 PM
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1314
Location: Menasha, WI | Got it, thanks Dom. |
|
| |
|
| What a Lake, 200's for hot for us, Couldn't keep Six lines in, OK most time didn't have more the 3 in, Most were 18-22 One over 10lbs (OK it was a sheephead)
I would have to say the bite is on.
Ed
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 378
Location: Omro,Wi. | xtackle - 7/9/2009 9:23 PM
What a Lake, 200's for hot for us, Couldn't keep Six lines in, OK most time didn't have more the 3 in, Most were 18-22 One over 10lbs (OK it was a sheephead)
I would have to say the bite is on.
Ed
ED
You forgot to give the LOCATION of the fish. Just an oversight on your part I'm shure...lol
Thanks for the bait tip! |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 5
| hey everyone i am finnally one of the few.... or not. i bought a boat, not much but something. it came with trolling rigs and i was hopefully going to try this weekend. i have tolled cranks often with a friend but never harnessess. any info on trolling harnesses like how far back the boards from the weight should be or how far back the weight should be from the spinner, any tips would be greatly appreciated. i live south end of the lake and will soon post on my results. if anyone was willing to give a suggestion on where to try pm me. as for the report i had some luck early in the week casting cranks along shore near weeds but only ended with 2. tried tolling cranks in 16-17 fow in the mud straight out from pipe up to brothertown on wed. with only sheeps to show for it. baits were 80- 120 feet behind the boards. hope this helps. jay |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 885
| Al right Jay..... here we go...
In my experience... #5 Colorado Blades (Northland Tackle is a great choice) run anywhere from 1.0-1.5 mph and anywhere from using an 1/8 oz inline weight and runnning 25 feet back to using a 1 oz weight and running 65 back. I will use a bottom bouncer on a sunny flat calm day during the mid afternoon and crawl with a rod with fireline in my hand. I've had 23 inch Walleyes hit a harness so light you would swear they were Perch.
The key for me is to stager 6 lines and figure out where the fish are. If you are catching too many Whitebass, go lower, if you're catching Sheephead and catfish... you're in the zone. Weather does not seem to mater, water temp does as does wind. I always start in the top 7 feet of the water column regardless of the weather and work my way up or down.
My first choice is a Crank bait, and if I can't seem to get them to go, I'll switch over to harnesses.
I attached a pick of my fav harness for bago and a few other colors I use.
Purple Skeeter
Attachments
----------------
 DSC00300.JPG (49KB - 107 downloads)
DSC00305.JPG (26KB - 113 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 5
| thanks for the tips skeeter really appreciated. i havent tried yet but after i make a few i sure will try. as for the bite i got out yesterday and only found 1 18"er running thundersticks 60feet back north of the third reef. saw fish but not many takers. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 538
| As usual PS is spot on. Also, do not be afraid to run smaller baits like 4 and 5 shad raps, flicker shads and tots. Run them from 3 foot down and thru the water column. For some reason, I have had better luck with the smaller baits this season.
Colors may vary, but as usual the firetiger, perch and golds have been good.
I hope the fish cooperate with your outings.
Take care,
Jim O |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 885
| Fished the upper lakes today. Caught 3 Walleyes on Winneconnie and 4 on Big Butte along with a mixed bag of Crappies, Northerns, Whitebass and Sheephead. My best bait the last couple of days has been the #5 Flickershad in Citrus. It's funny how you can have a color in your box that you never use and all of a sudden over a 2 week period, that's the hot bait. I've been hitting 8 feet of water and trolling 1.6-1.7 mph running 30 feet behind the board. I've been hitting the water after 5pm, which is a first for me in several years.... but it's working.
I sure have a new appreciation to everyone who has ever tried to set up a Walleye boat on a budget... my new 2.5 HP Merc runs like you would expect a 1 cylinder motor.... 80% of the time fine, 20% of the time, I swear at it.... It's no T-8, but it works. By tying the motors together, I fixed the abrupt turning of the big motor when you let go.... I have to keep reminding myself that this is only a temporary rig that my brother has let me use.... he will be getting it back with all new rodholders, a new color Lowrance GPS/Depth Finder and a new kicker motor... and a new bilge pump... that died on me today.
How in the world can you rate a 16 foot Sylvan Aluminum boat for a 115 HP motor... the boat goes 41 MPH with a 2 stroke 70, I can't imagine how fast this boat would be if you hung a 115 on the back. That would just plain scary!
Sorry to the person that called me early on Saturday looking for eaters, I only got a portion of the message and could not tell who called me. After trying a half dozen of my friends at 6 in the morning.... I gave up due to the unpleasant greeting I was receiving.... and I thought my friends got out of bed every morning to fish... guess I was wrong!
Purple Skeeter |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 5
| got out tuesday and trolled east shore near fishermans road up to pipe and brothertown up to quinney and got 4 in the 17in range. all fish were 8-10 fow with cranks 30ft back. slightly slow since i was out for 4hrs in the morning. good luck to all, vacations over time to get back to evening fishing, seems better for me anyway. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 6
| May have missed that part,(now that the FLW is over here it is). Fished again last Sat (Same results lots of fish), Ok Here is what we did, East side of the lake Stockbridge and South to windmills, Worked the 10 to 14 Foot break. It didn't seem to matter there were fish everywhere we would run in to big groups of fish every mile or so. Some bigger fish here and there. Biggest Walleye on Sat was 6lbs. Only fished for a few hours, didn't get out until after 11. The wind was blowing just a bit, Kim didn't puke but she was threatening too (may have been an excuse , but she did look a little green).
200 Series Ripshad is all we pulled on Saturday 65 to 85 feet back, mainly 75 feet back. XT Gold Banana was our go to bait, and no I'm not trying to sell the color, I have had good luck on this color for years on Winnebago (we had 3 out). Other colors that worked were Paralyzer, Gold Fish, Shrimp, Barenaked Fire Perch, Fruit loops. We had no luck on White based baits, and I tried, with all the white bass one would think that white would work. Kept 10 on Sat to have a fish fry.
Ed
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 150
Location: mille lacs, mn. | I rarely read any "Bago reports" etc. but just saw this posting by Dale
today about Ginny having surgery? What's up? Not bad we hope......we pray!
Sending a PM wouldn't go through for some reason.
Steve Fellegy (and Joan)
651-270-3383
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1314
Location: Menasha, WI | Ginny is in a neck brace, but she is about and around. She served as the secretary today for the tourney Dale runs and seemed in good spirits. thank goodness Dale had somebody watching over him 
Edited by Viking 7/18/2009 4:33 PM
|
|
| |
|
| My son and I fished Bago from 8am-1pm today. Nice walleye chop with cloudy skies. We kept 10 walleye's jigging shallow water on the east side. All fish were 16-23 inches. Then we went to one of our sauger spots and got our 2 sauger 17 and 19 inches pulling cranks in rather short order. Also hooked many bonus goats. Never had another boat by us until we got back to the landing. One fella at the dock tried to tell me the waves were 3 to 4 foot. I'd say 1-2 foot at best.
Good luck to all |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 2393
Location: Waukesha Wisconsin | Gman:
If your account is accurate you were over limit? |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1314
Location: Menasha, WI | No he wasn't. As of now the limit is 5 walleyes plus one sauger. The rule will be changed to 5 including one sauger.
Nevertheless, WFT and the folks that are working hard to bring the saugers back encourage everyone to continue to release saugers.
Edited by Viking 7/18/2009 6:56 PM
|
|
| |
|
| Sunshine - 7/18/2009 5:48 PM
Gman:
If your account is accurate you were over limit?
Sunshine, please explain? |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 874
Location: Neenah, WI | Steve, I had a PM from you but something didn't work right. I sent one to you. Ginny is fine now. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 5
| fished on sat morning and trolled long point and found a lot of boats there as the day progressed. we did find a shool of fish going over the northeastern tip but only picked up a few sow whities. we were running cranks about 50ft back and the depth was 13ft i think, we were just off the reef. everybody else was anchored not sure what they were producing. not sure if we did something wrong or not. maybe we werent deep enough but i dont have a presicion tolling book and usually end up loosing my sh*t. then the wind picked up and we were done. hope someone found something good:) |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1314
Location: Menasha, WI |
TAG NUMBER - W114519
SPECIES - Walleye
TAGGED IN - Wolf River
TAGGED AT - Ruedens Marsh (1 mile above New London)
TAG DATE - 04/09/2009
TAG LENGTH - 16.60
SEX - Male
TAGGING GEAR - Boomshocker
AGE WHEN TAGGED - 6 (Estimated Age)
CAUGHT IN - L. Winnebago
CAUGHT AT - 1/3 mi E of Blackbird Reef
CATCH DATE - 07/18/2009
DAYS ELAPSED - 100
MILES TRAVELED - 90.66 |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1195
Location: Orland Park, IL | Wow, 90 miles in 100 days. And only 16.6 inches for being 6years old. Seem kinda slow growing no? Or did I read it wrong. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 141
Location: Oshkosh, WI | I just got data back on 3 tagged walleyes from early summer. All males between 16-18.5". Estimated age 5-8 years. That seemed like slow growth to me too. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 2393
Location: Waukesha Wisconsin | Mark Komo - 7/25/2009 9:30 PM
Wow, 90 miles in 100 days. And only 16.6 inches for being 6years old. Seem kinda slow growing no? Or did I read it wrong.
The assumption that it took 100 days is not true. That fish could have been there several days later BUT it took you over 90 days to find and catch it. 
I agree with the two posts, seems like these fish are slow growing fish. anyone have data on normal growth rates?
here is what I found with a little searching.................
Their aging and growing stages...
How fast walleyes grow depends on the availability of food and the length of the growing season. In southern reservoirs, where shad are super-abundant and the growing season is 8 to 9 months long, walleyes can reach weights exceeding 15 pounds in only 7 years. But in the deep, cold, wonderful lakes of the Canadian Shield, where baitfish are less abundant and the growing season lasts only 3 to 4 months, a walleye reaches a weight of just 2 pounds in the same amount of time.
Despite this great difference in growth rate, walleyes in northern waters can reach sizes rivaling those in the south. This phenomenon can be explained by a factor that could be called warmwater burnout. Fish in cold northern water grow more slowly, but have a much longer life span than fish in warmer southern waters. Walleyes in the North have been known to live as long as 26 years, although walleyes older than 15 years of age are rare; in the South, a life span of 10 years would be uncommon. So even though walleyes in the North do not grow as fast, their longevity results in an average size not much smaller than that in the South.
There is evidence to support the theory that a fast growing strain of walleyes exists in rivers and reservoirs in the south-eastern United States. Apparently, this strain spawns exclusively in rivers. When dams were built to create the reservoirs, long stretches of river habitat were lost. In most cases, the walleyes eventually disappeared from the reservoirs.
Many of these reservoirs were then stocked with northern-strain walleyes. This strain can spawn in rivers or lakes, but evidentally does not grow as fast as the southern strain. In Center Hill Reservoir, Tennessee, souther-strain walleyes sampled in 1964 averaged 30.6 inches (about 10 1/2 pounds) at age seven. They eventually disappeared from the reservoir, so it was stocked with northern-strain walleyes. When the northern fish were sampled in 1976, they averaged only 23.3 inches (about 4 1/2 pounds) at the age of seven.
Female walleyes grow much faster, live longer and attain much larger sizes than males. In most waters, male walleyes exceeding 4 pounds are unusual. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1314
Location: Menasha, WI | I'm not sure what method the DNR is using to age the fish during shocking. Here's an interesting article on the application of a new aging technique for walleyes - it's the same technique they use for sturgeon and preliminary study shows that the eyes on Bago grow slower and live longer than previously thought.
http://www.postcrescent.com/article/20090625/APC0902/90625039/1541/... |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 538
| viking,
Just me or is the link not working?
Jim |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1314
Location: Menasha, WI | Jim,
The link seems to work fine for me. Nevertheless, I've copy-and-pasted the article below:
Graduate student studies walleye mortality
By Doug Zellmer • Gannett Wisconsin Media • June 25, 2009
OSHKOSH — A study is under way to validate the mortality rates of the walleye, one of the most popular game fish in the Winnebago System.
The study is a master’s thesis project by Ryan Koenigs, a fisheries technician for the state Department of Natural Resources in Oshkosh and a graduate student in biology at the University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh.
Koenigs said knowing the mortality rate of the walleye — from those caught by anglers to those dying of natural causes — will allow for the effective, long-term management of walleye in the Winnebago System fishery, which includes Lake Winnebago and the upriver lakes of Poygan, Butte des Morts and Winneconne.
“Right now, we have a healthy and robust walleye fishery and we want to take every action to sustain that,” said Koenigs, who has a degree in fisheries and aquatic resources from UW-Stevens Point.
There are more than 1 million walleye in the Winnebago System, according to the DNR.
Koenigs said in the past 20 years the standard way to age the walleye population was through the extraction of the dorsal spine of the fish. He said recent studies have shown that dorsal spines may be underestimating the true age of the fish, in particular the older fish.
“We’ve been experimenting with extracting the ear bones (of walleyes) and we’ve been comparing the age estimated from the ear bones to the age estimates from the dorsal spines,” said Koenigs, who added the study is funded by Walleyes for Tomorrow and the Sheboygan Walleye Club.
He said preliminary information is that examining the ear bones in walleye has revealed the fish in the Winnebago System are older than previously thought. Koenigs said he’s studied several walleye that are up to 17 years old.
The ear bones are used by Ron Bruch, sturgeon |biologist for the DNR in Oshkosh, to validate the age of the sturgeon population in the Winnebago System.
Bruch said there has been some work done on walleye ear bones, but nothing as comprehensive as the current study by Koenigs.
“The bottom line is we’ll be able to accurately estimate the mortality rates on how fast walleye are dying from fishing and natural causes,” Bruch said. “One of the big questions we have is how many of the fish are being removed from the population and is it too many? The study will help us answer that question more accurately.” |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1195
Location: Orland Park, IL | Just as a comparison, the saugers on the illinois grow about 7 inches per year. Now thats fast growing. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 625
Location: LaCrosse, WI | Mark,
I believe the Saugers do grow fast on the Illinois, but 7 inches per year means they either all die before they hit 4 years old or they stop growing around 3. I haven't seen any 35" Saugers if you know what I mean. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1195
Location: Orland Park, IL | Or head down to peoria... |
|
| |
|
| One factor that hasnt been metioned on slower growth of walleyes in the bago system maybe there is a over population of fish! They way they hammered the fatheads on tip ups this past winter i personally never witnessed before so may fish caught during that time of year . There might be a growth stunt going on but sure is hard to see it when you catching alot of fish and they all seem healthy and fat! |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 2567
Location: Manitowoc, WI | I think the biggest factor in the smaller than usual size of these walleyes is the lack of their best protein source as forage, the gizzard shad. The fish I've seen from Winnebago over the last 5-10 years were always fat and loaded with shad. The fish I've witnessed this year are not nearly as fat. I recall Rich telling me the gizzard shad population was way down. Maybe this is the reason for the slower growth and skinnier fish. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 2393
Location: Waukesha Wisconsin | Jerry and eye lunker:
Correct me if I am wrong but both of you are talking about possible causes that are only recent developments (low gizzard shad count and over population). I believe that the data showing slower growth rates have been collected over a greater period of time. Your ideas could be part of the overall problem now but not the real cause.
Since we are all just guessing here, I'll go with the educated guesses of those in the field.
Our growing seasons are shorter than others used for comparison. And I believe that the walleyes in Bago are still primarily a river strain and I believe that this river strain is just a slower growing walleye compared to others around the country. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 625
Location: LaCrosse, WI | I see both sides of this argument as valid. For example, the Wisconsin River strain of Walleyes doesn’t seem to grow nearly as fast as the Mississippi River strain. On the other hand, the fish in the northern pools 2, 3 & 4 seem to grow at a much higher rate than those on pools 6-10.
I think this is due in part to the forage base on those up river pools. The fish on pool 4 grow at a much higher rate than those on pool 8 for example. They don't really have a warmer climate (with the exception of warm water discharge). When I fish these two pools, I mark many more pods of bait fish on pool 4 than I ever do on pool 8.
So, in this case I believe forage has more to do with it than anything else. On the Winnebago system I truly believe that there is just so much competition for food that these fish can't grow at the same rate as more forage rich systems. I also believe that there has been an evolution to the fish in that system. I think those fish have evolved somewhat to not grow to huge sizes.
While there are some big fish in the Winnebago system, there doesn't seem to be as many "trophy fish" which I classify as 28"+ fish. This leads me to believe that those fish are genetically programmed to slow down in growth more than other strains after about 23-24 inches. I truly feel that a system can only sustain so many pounds of fish, and higher numbers of fish will result in a smaller average size. |
|
| |
|
| Can you all please take this to a different forum and leave this to fishing reports?? |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1406
| Great conversation but the recent opinion of slow growth rates is different than We have previously thought and I am not sure I buy into it just yet. I would like to see the report in more detail. The fact that the gizzard shad is (slightly) lower this year is purely insignificant as they are not the primary source of protien for walleyes. The meal of choice is the trout perch a small minnow that is abundant in the system. There continues to be a change year after year on what species of forage is stronger than the other. Ma nature does funny things in the spring. but over all there has always been an abundance of bait fish. The fish are healthy as heck this year and getting healthier as the summer wears on as these forage fish mature. which is often why the bite tends to die off in August every year. Just too much food to hit fake baits! Granted the population of Walleyes is going to explode in the coming couple of years and quite frankly a higher bag limit might be the only way to curtail it if the baitfish are delt a blow from Ma nature.
Good Luck
Tyee |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 2393
Location: Waukesha Wisconsin | Tyee:
Isn't it true that over 80% of the fish population on bago is rough fish? It would be interesting to see what would happen to the walleye population and their size if the rough fish population was reduced. food for thought.
Walleyes adapt to the forage in the system. If one is low they change to another. It wasn't that long ago when some thought walleyes would not eat gobies. Now we know better. Another thought/question ........ why are white shad raps so productive on bago, is it because they are eating young of year sheepshead? |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 617
Location: Oshkosh, Wisconsin | "On the Winnebago system I truly believe that there is just so much competition for food that these fish can't grow at the same rate as more forage rich systems."
Winnebago isn't a forage rich system??? There are GOBS of trout perch, shiners, young sheephead and whitebass, perch, and shad swimming in 'bago as I type this. The fishing on bago traditionally gets very difficult in late July and August because there is simply too many baitfish in the system to compete with the anglers for hungry fish. There is no lack of forage on 'bago. That I am confident of.
"I also believe that there has been an evolution to the fish in that system. I think those fish have evolved somewhat to not grow to huge sizes."
The 'bago fish are pretty much the same fish swimming in Green Bay. Until the locks were installed, they were only separated by a 50 mile stretch of river. In my humble, uneducated and uninformed view, the reason 'bago fish don't get as big as Green Bay fish is because most of them get harvested before they get old enough to grow that big and/or because they grow too fast and burn out.
"While there are some big fish in the Winnebago system, there doesn't seem to be as many "trophy fish" which I classify as 28"+ fish. This leads me to believe that those fish are genetically programmed to slow down in growth more than other strains after about 23-24 inches."
I don't buy that. The age data that I have seen on winnebago walleye does not support such a statement either. Those fish either burn out and die of fat induced heart attacks or are harvested by guys like Tyee . Personally, I believe it is a combination of both. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1406
| Great points Brad! I have had many discussions with the fisheries managers about the management of the system and what the ideal situation would be for giving the quality hunters a better shot at the resource than the quantity hunters and until there is a stronger push from the public for Quality they will continue to manage based on what they know and economic reasons! Until the people speak loud enough that Quality is important we will never get to do a test to see if this river system can sustain a population of 30" or better fish! Slots protect year classes......size limits protect quality! Dennis you are certainly correct that the rough fish make up a majority of the population but I don't know that percentage!
It's time to start a movement for QFM (quality fish management) to see if it will really work, it will have to come from the DNR and won't start until enough organizations speak loud and clear that that is what they want! I am all for no fish over a 26" size limit, for 5 years to see if it would work!
Good Luck
Tyee |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 625
Location: LaCrosse, WI | Brad,
If there are tons of 28"+ fish in the Winnebago system, why do we not see more of them? You can tell me how hard they are to catch, but with the amount of events on Winnebago each year, and the relatively low number of fish above the 28" mark, I have to believe that the 28" mark is harder to reach on that system.
Are 28” fish easier to catch on Green Bay? I say yes because there are more of them per capita. I also agree that Winnebago and Green Bay fish were from the same strain; however that’s where the word “evolved” came into play. I don’t believe that the Winnebago fish grow as big as fast in general. Green Bay fish have more area to cover, and in turn less competition for the food they’re chasing.
I also never said that Winnebago wasn’t rich in forage, but I think that per fish there is less baitfish than say on Green Bay. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 141
Location: Oshkosh, WI | This is an interesting conversation. I think there is clearly a different ceiling for winnebago system walleyes that is lower than eyes in the Bay. If walleyes in the system were capable of growing to 30" people would be catching them. They don't all magically get caught at 28".
I found a dead 28" eye floating down the river in Oshkosh a couple of weeks ago. I would guess that someone tried to cpr it, but I bet that fish was ready to die of old age. btw, the current flows the wrong way to blame it on the tournament |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 2393
Location: Waukesha Wisconsin | Tyee says:
It's time to start a movement for QFM (quality fish management) to see if it will really work, it will have to come from the DNR and won't start until enough organizations speak loud and clear that that is what they want! I am all for no fish over a 26" size limit, for 5 years to see if it would work!
Dennis says:
Although I have enjoyed the discussion here. I'm not sure that I am ready to join the band wagon for attempting to produce 30" fish through a slot limit of 26". IMHO Winnebago is healthy with a million walleye population and I'm satisfied with that. If I want 30" fish I go elsewhere. I believe that there is data that supports that those larger fish are nothing more than eating machines giving back little in reproduction as they get old(er).
It's getting more difficult to identify whose thoughts are being described on this thread. But I agree with the statement that there is plenty of forage in the system for the current population. I have not seen skinny or sickly walleyes from bago. Some lakes (especially in Minnesota) are showing signs of big fish that are extremely skinny. These lakes have slot limits on them that I believe are part of the cause.
My final thought.................. if it ain't broke do not fix it. I like bago as it is. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1314
Location: Menasha, WI | Sunshine - 7/28/2009 11:49 AM... if it ain't broke do not fix it. I like bago as it is.
Amen. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 625
Location: LaCrosse, WI | Dennis,
I couldn’t agree more. There are trophy waters about 40 minutes away from Winnebago. Enjoy the numbers you guys get to catch all year long, and the fact that you can eat a 14” Walleye if you want. A million strong would be good enough for me. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1656
| Comon, Brad, surely you don't believe Tyee harvests all the big fish? Perhpas I need to remind you of Easter Weekend?
"Those ?*&%@'s!!!" I'll bet a keg of Sam Adams on how many big fish are in the system.
"There are trophy waters about 40 minutes away from Winnebago. " There was.......
Edited by Jayman 7/28/2009 12:49 PM
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 2445
Location: Fremont, Wisconsin | I think what winnebago is to the area economics more than out weighs its importance of being a trophy fisheree. Start restricting what maybe kept and you will start restricting the amount of vacation dollars that flow into our area. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1406
| Boy have I got you fooled....easter weekend..Jayman? refresh my memory???? Did I get spooled? We both know it wouldn't have been the first time! Stacker you too hit the nail on the head!
Dennis, I agree if it ain't broke don't fix it! but there are many that believe quality is more important than qty and the double dippers continue to put unnecessary pressure on the system. If there is ANYTHING wrong in my mind it is the lack of very large fish which is evidenced by this threads existance and the concerns some have for this. I too would like to see more 28-30" fish as would many others what harm would there be in only allowing 1 fish over 26" or no fish over 26"???? Seriously the spring harvest must account for the majority of these fish to be taken. If AIM is successful and others follow the CRR example...the only people catching these big fish will be meat hunters anyway. Why not protect them, so the CRR fishermen (like me) can enjoy them also?
Good Luck
Tyee
Edited by tyee 7/28/2009 2:15 PM
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 2445
Location: Fremont, Wisconsin | You know what, when you are on GB you expect every fish to be over 26", when you are on Bago it is a thrill to catch fish over 26". That in itself is cool. The majorities care about catching fish way more than size. Remember one thing, in a good weekend, anyone of us may catch more walleyes than the regular guy will all season. We sometimes split hairs for what we want and not what is good for all 5million people of the state of wisconsin. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1656
| I'd personally rather see green bay "fixed" before Lake Winnebago touched. Change the harvest from 3 fish to 5 fish and look what a difference a few years have made. 'Bago on the other hand is doing as well now as it ever has in my short memory. I agree with Denny, you're not going to convince 5 million fisherpeople to change a "walleye factory" into a trophy fishery. On the other hand you can convince the majority to turn a trophy fishery into a meat market.
As for the Easter weekend comment, Brad and a few others know what I speak of, the numbers we had this spring were good. I'm not going to tout anymore than that, since I don't like braggers myself. But one really should wonder why they don't catch at least 1 fish over 23" every trip out. Then again, you can't believe most poeple's measurements.
So no, you weren't spooled.
In my humble opinion and looking at my arm chair biologist degree, the genetics and dynamics simply don't support many fish to grow over 28" on 'Bago. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 269
| here's a different look at this. I don't like to fish greenbay because of the bigger fish caught, ( they don't taste good).the size i catch in bago are just right.I keep the 14"- 17" and my friend likes the overs.plus they taste great.they also fit in my frydaddy just right. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 378
Location: Omro,Wi. | I have been fishing Bago for over 50 years (yup I'm old) and I've heard talk of slot limits, lived thru the 15 inch size limit..(the one where all the fish got so skinny all you had was head and no meat) because the forage was ate up. Walleyes on this lake bite better in years that the Shad population drops, because of the number of fish in the system, and they simply don't have enough food to grow fast during those periods without shad becase of the the numbers, and available forage. Having to release fish over 26 inches or keeping just 1 will not make a trophy fishery. The food base just isn't there for that. If you want to increase the population you protect the spawning fish in the 20 to 25 inch range, those big fish don't do you much good after they reach their peak at 25 inches. More fish due to slots or size limits in the lake will no doubt slow the groth rate down, due to not enough forage, this is why we have no slot limit, nor are likely to anytime soon. I trust that everything on this lake is doing fine, and would not want to see any new regulation, changes, or slot limits to effect a good fishery in a negative way. The VHS scare came and went, I have not seen the evidence in ANY fish I've caught this year, or floating fish for that fact,and only 1 last year, and that was after the spawn, it could have been from the shallao water.In all the years I've been busting waves out there I have caught 3 walleyes that hit 30 inches and that was 7 years ago, not before or since has it happened. Just a old year class that is sadly gone now. What I have seen this year is the missing 21 to 23 inch fish. lot's of 15 to 18, some 18 to 20 and plenty of 24 to 26 inch. Different year classes and this to shall chang. My point being... don't fix it..it's not broke. It's like me it just takes longer to get what you want...you just have to wait for it...lol |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1406
| Hafe, my perspective is a bit different than yours and I've only been fishing Bago for 40 some years so you have nearly a decades worth more experience than me. I'll bow to that knowledge but offer some biological info on the forage that I know. The trout perch is a small minnow that never gets bigger than 3-4 inches and is a year round source of food, the shad grow larger and are also foragers for the trout perch as are all the other game fish. The amount of trout perch is often 5-10 times that of all other YOY (year of young) in the system. This IS the primary source of food and it is and has not been threatened for the past 25 years. I too remember the 15" size limit that protected a few year classes but I never saw the skinny fish you speak of. As for the slots (no need to increase the population). I'll stick by my comment that I don't believe they would help in management of the system (dont fix IF it aint broke) for the majoity of people but the folks that WANT big fish and don't have the ability to fish the Bay would bennefit from a size restriction for a few years to see IF it could support a large population (economics aside). Just my opinion so don't hit me too hard. 40 years and I am still learnin!
Good Luck
Tyee
Edited by tyee 7/29/2009 10:12 AM
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 378
Location: Omro,Wi. | Tyee
I agree with your biological info but-I think anyone who fishes Bago has the ability to fish Green Bay, if they want. I also wonder what a size restriction for a few years would amount to givin the growing rate of Bago's walleyes. Another thing that comes to mind is what would it do to the tournament fisherman during that period of time who look for,and count on that kicker fish? Beyond all that can anyone paint me a crank bait that looks like a trout perch?
Edited by Hafe 7/29/2009 6:51 PM
Attachments
----------------
trout perch.jpg (2KB - 128 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 885
| Steve,
If you can find either of these 2 hot n tots... they look real close. I was out on Monday and we did very well running 125 back with these on the East Shore.
Dominic
Attachments
----------------
Hot_n_Tot[1].jpg (42KB - 126 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1406
| Hafe, my thoughts on the size restriction are to protect all those 26" fish that might just make it for a few more years. It takes the DNR 2 years to implement a change therefore we wouldn't even see it go into effect untill 2012 or 2013 by the time people get organized. Add a 5 year rule to that and you would see a large amount of 26-28" fish.
As for the tourneys some have said that they don't adversly affect fishing although I beg to differ on a couple of simple issues, that I have been chastized for many times here and will again I am sure. The masses that will be learning more on how to catch these monsters in the coming years and public perception. IF the AIM philosophy were to be adopted by the other events out there it would not affect tourneys at all, unfortunately that will take a number of years and this type of rule may force them to adapt. In addition the system will get more and more attention and more tourneys will start to show up. I have often said that there are not enough fishermen to have an impact (currently) but fear that will change as more and more people catch limits of 20+" fish over the next 5 years. People will come crawling out of the woodwork, old boats will once again see water and the fishing industry will grow as the complacency people are accepting in this economy drags on and a relaxing day on the water becomes more enjoyable/affordable than the annual vacation to Mexico.
As for public perception! I have held off posting on the internet my dissatisfaction at the kill rate for 2 major events out there this year but am even more concerned that it doesn't concern all of us who are supposed to be the stewards of the resource. It was totally unacceptable in my mind to hear the numbers of fish that didn't survive these events (greater than years past) even if they were given to food pantries. If these 2 events are to continue they need toimprove their relase rates not decrease them. The Bass guys are laughing at us as we continue to KILL more and more of what we chase and cherish!
Good Luck
Tyee
Edited by tyee 7/30/2009 9:40 AM
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 2393
Location: Waukesha Wisconsin | Tyee:
Two things
1. It would be nice to keep this thread "pure" and only talk about one topic. Others have already complained about this not being a fishing report thread. You are starting a new argument that will distract from the current thread ( or maybe we are already talked out on slots?) Let's see if we can have 3 different threads going to appease everyone. I'll try by making 2 additional threads and see if it works. I'll call one "any major damage to bago with tournaments? and the second thread I'll call new bago fishing reports.
2. If you have information on the kill rates of "two major tournaments" please share on the other thread. I believe that you have information that many do not have.
Hope this helps. |
|
| |
|
| There really is no harm in people keeping fish over 26" on the Winnebago System. These fish are all very old females, and they will likely die of natural causes in the next few years. Walleye don't live for ever and die of causes other than fishing harvest. Due to the facts that Lake Winnebago is Eutrophic and fish put a great deal of energy into reproduction, swimming 80 miles up to Shiocton or 125 miles up to Shawano every year, they burn out fast and do not live to be real old. A really old fish in Lake Winnebago is 15-18 years of age, and generally correlates to an 18-22" male or a 26-29" female. This system will never really be a trophy fishery like the Bay of Green Bay, but is a better fishery for novice and beggining anglers to catch a lot of fish that they can safely eat. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 141
Location: Oshkosh, WI | The post just before this was by "guest" was from the graduate student who is doing the walleye aging study in the Winnebago system.
I wrote to him to let him know that his work was stimulating this conversation and asked him why the fish are bigger on the Bay. He provided the same answer in the e-mail.
His other comment was: Winnebago will likely never be a trophy fishery because the fish grow fast and die young due to the lake being Eutrophic.
Gotta love science. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1656
| Tyee, you must really hate the raft fishermen, considering what the tournament fishing kill is just a drop in the bucket compared to what the spring raft fishermen do.
but that is for a different thread... |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1406
| Jayman, you are correct although thats where I cut my teeth 40 years ago on this system.....I guess you could say those old mentors of mine spoiled my appetite although those mentors are now long gone! maybe it has changed since then but I doubt it!
Good Luck
Tyee |
|
| |
