|
|
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. |
|
| |
