# Ohio inland walleye waters



## HookEmUp (Apr 14, 2012)

I just want to get straight to the point here. Why are our inland lakes less productive for walleye compared to western states, and Canada? Dont get me wrong, ive had my good days here, but it just doesnt compare to other places imo.

You always hear of how great the fishing is in canada (one after the other), and then you have western lakes hosting events for national tours and stuff, because they are such good lakes. Why cant we have an INLAND fishery like this here at home? Whats the problem here?!! People keeping too many fish? Odnr not stocking enough to keep up with demand? Both?!


----------



## partlyable (Mar 2, 2005)

Not speaking from experience but I would say lack of quality spawning and the amount of fishing pressure in Ohio. Ohio has something like 282 people per square mile across the state and the 10th biggest population in the nation. We are a smaller state that in relation to other states does not have as many lakes as most states especially northern states and Canada. That pushes our large population the the relatively few inland reservoirs we do have. 

Just my thoughts. 


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## Ozdog (Jul 30, 2007)

Most of our lakes lack the spawning habitat needed.


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

Actually we work directly with the "Gator Queen" from the ODNR...and have asked this!
So far you are all correct, population/fishing pressure, lack of $$, lack of habitat, etc, are all reasons.
Gators are actually a river breeding fish, or they can breed on sandbars or reefs but the same conditions must happen...most Inland Lakes and Reservoirs don't have proper river systems to provide spawning habitat...eggs must be laid on a shallow, gravel/rocky substrate, with the proper current so they turn, get oxygen, and do not get covered by silt...the eggs are very sensitive to temps and conditions to hatch.
The are also expensive to raise...they are very susceptible to temps as fry, tanks must be controlled or you face losses (Ohio has outdoor hatcheries), they are voracious eaters, once they reach fingerling size they will cannibalize each other unless massive amounts of food are available.
Ohio releases fingerlings due to lack of storage space and money to feed....their research shows only ABOUT 3% reach legal size to catch.
Normally each Walleye lake will get a thousand fingerlings per acre....in years where fish production is poor they may get less....if it's good they may get more. Lakes normally must not overheat since Gators are cool water fish....they need constant oxygen levels ABOVE 3 ppm to survive....And plenty of food. 
The State also has Inland brood lakes that they care for in case they need eggs etc for the fisheries...saugeye cannot be stocked and great care is taken to keep Walleye as viable as possible, so bloodlines and populations remain pure and strong, in case something happens and they need added production or to restore THE BIG LAKE!


----------



## bountyhunter (Apr 28, 2004)

I feel your all right in your answers, but mostly OVER HARVEST is a huge problem. every year I see stringers with under sized fish. are lakes here in ohio are small. compared to out west. the lake I fish in arizona is 28mile long over a mile wide 300ft deep. crappie run in the one # or better all day long ,a 4#bass is a dink. seen meny times berlin salt fork parking lots full on week days. alum creek wait in line a hour to launch. THE FIX .more rangers and stiff fines would help. the rangers we have are doing a great job but spread across the lakes to thin.


----------



## Lowell H Turner (Feb 22, 2011)

Unfortunately, fish and wildlife don`t get to vote and can`t dial 911...I CAN and DO both at the `appropriate` moments...you ALL need to too


----------



## HookEmUp (Apr 14, 2012)

Thanks for the replies. Its nice to see what others have to say. 

If spawning is such an issue, why not just bring in a bunch of rocks or something and make spawning beds?! Rivers arent a necessity for walleye to spawn. These fish spawn all over reefs in lake erie. For example, the mid lake humps at berlin. They are all sand... Add some rocks and you have a perfect spawning area. They are right next to the main river channel so current shouldnt be an issue. Thats just one example.

I also agree with steeper fines and rangers being around more. Maybe they could have a program where you call in and report your catch and details after each trip. Kind of like they do for deer. That way they would know for sure how many fish are being taken from our lakes. That information would be priceless. $10,000 fine, long term fishing license suspension, and presumption of prison for not reporting your catch! That ought to clean things up a bit!!! And help pay for the raising of fingerlings.

If raising fish is so expensive, then dont rely on that fully. We have lake Erie, the walleye capital of the world in our backyard. Go net up some of those fish and introduce them into our lakes, theres more than PLENTY to spare! The amount that would need to be taken to stock our SMALL inland lakes would be insignificant compared to the overall population in Erie. And i bet the survival rate would be much, much, much higher than a fingerling. 

Im guessing a lot of the solutions to these problems everyone has mentioned can be solved with money. That what everything always boils down to. I would have no problem paying 100 bucks a year for a fishing license. So long as i know i could take a bunch of friends and family out to catch walleye, and actually catch enough to make it fun and not a sluggish waiting game. 2 fish per day with 4 guys doesnt cut it!!! I just feel that ODNR underestimates the popularity of this sport fish. If they are being overfished, stock more, or at least help them populate themselves! More and more people fish for them every year, yet the stocking numbers stay relatively the same. I dont get it.. West branch would be an amazing walleye lake, but they let it go to hell with the eyes a long time ago. I know they stock em again now, but its not a very aggressive stocking. There should be more focus on this lake imo. 

All in all. 10-20 surviving fish per acre is not cutting it and its obvious. Halfway thru the season lots of fish are taken, so by fall time your looking at maybe 5-10 fish per acre if that? Something needs to be done here!

Anyone have other suggestions on how to fix this situation we have?


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

HookEmUp said:


> Thanks for the replies. Its nice to see what others have to say.
> 
> If spawning is such an issue, why not just bring in a bunch of rocks or something and make spawning beds?! Rivers arent a necessity for walleye to spawn. These fish spawn all over reefs in lake erie. For example, the mid lake humps at berlin. They are all sand... Add some rocks and you have a perfect spawning area. They are right next to the main river channel so current shouldnt be an issue. Thats just one example.
> 
> ...


Walleye can spawn on the reefs of Erie because of the current.....they can't in Inland reservoirs or lakes due to field run-off, sediment erosion, etc...there IS some spawning that occurs but it is Not enough to sustain the population. 
You cannot stock Erie Walleye in other lakes because of the diseases they have....All brood lakes must be free of VHS and other diseases....you also do not want to introduce other organisms to inland lakes.
You're right, it's all about money!


----------



## I Fish (Sep 24, 2008)

One reason is Bass LOVE walleye/suager/saugeye. Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Iowa did a joint study trying to figure out why 2 seemingly identical lakes would have such different survival rates. Their conclusion was bass population. Any lake with a lot of bass, survival rates plummeted. 

I agree on one thing, though. ODNR doesn't seem to do anything to enrich spawning areas. Also, they seem to let the higher money area dictate where they spend their time. If you don't think so, go fish some of the lakes in the S.E. part of the state, then see how they compare with lakes in the rest of the state. Case in point, stripers. They tried them in a little tiny shallow lake called Kiser, but, never tried them in a lake called Burr Oak. Burr Oak would be a ten times better candidate, but, they tried in Kiser instead. Look at the population density difference. 

They always claim the Saugeye can withstand warmer temps, (turbid water, I believe they say) due to the sauger genes in them. Well, what's wrong with stocking sauger?


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

I Fish said:


> One reason is Bass LOVE walleye/suager/saugeye. Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Iowa did a joint study trying to figure out why 2 seemingly identical lakes would have such different survival rates. Their conclusion was bass population. Any lake with a lot of bass, survival rates plummeted.
> 
> I agree on one thing, though. ODNR doesn't seem to do anything to enrich spawning areas. Also, they seem to let the higher money area dictate where they spend their time. If you don't think so, go fish some of the lakes in the S.E. part of the state, then see how they compare with lakes in the rest of the state. Case in point, stripers. They tried them in a little tiny shallow lake called Kiser, but, never tried them in a lake called Burr Oak. Burr Oak would be a ten times better candidate, but, they tried in Kiser instead. Look at the population density difference.
> 
> They always claim the Saugeye can withstand warmer temps, (turbid water, I believe they say) due to the sauger genes in them. Well, what's wrong with stocking sauger?


If you look into the studies it also points out that the lakes also favor one of the other species.
Bass lakes are normally not typical Walleye lakes and vice versa....Smallies and Walleye do good together because they are both considered cold water fish.

Burr Oak is consistently in the 10 ten Bass lakes in Ohio....you cannot add another Alpha Predator without upsetting the balance....this is a very clear 600 acre lake that does not provide the needed nutrients to have a HUGE shad population to feed everything.

Sauger and Walleye have different habitat and requirements....they will also cross....they State gets BIG $$ from Erie Walleye fishing...they need the brood lakes Pure, in case ANYTHING happens to The Big Lake.


----------



## partlyable (Mar 2, 2005)

HookEmUp said:


> Thanks for the replies. Its nice to see what others have to say.
> 
> If spawning is such an issue, why not just bring in a bunch of rocks or something and make spawning beds?! Rivers arent a necessity for walleye to spawn. These fish spawn all over reefs in lake erie. For example, the mid lake humps at berlin. They are all sand... Add some rocks and you have a perfect spawning area. They are right next to the main river channel so current shouldnt be an issue. Thats just one example.
> 
> ...


It's not that we can really stock more in the same area. The same
Amount is what will probably survive if you want more walleye we need more water (surface acres) or less people fishing for them. You could make the limit less per outing to try to make them last longer but outside of that we need natural lakes and we just do not have them. Either go to Erie or make a trip up to Ontario. Heck they have slot limits in place everywhere up there to protect the breeding population. And they have good habitat but they were seeing over harvest also which is why they use slot limits. 


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## Lowell H Turner (Feb 22, 2011)

A MAJOR factor at least in CJ is while there is no manufacturing pollution coming into CJ, there is EXTENSIVE agricultural "run off" (sediments, phosphate fertilizers, livestock waste ect ) that affects the water quality. Believe that walleyes HAVE successfully spawned there several times in 40 yrs but not enough times to replenish a viable SELF SUSTAINING population; those several times was due to unusually weather patterns which are not `normal` early spring time inland Ohio weather...thus the need for stocking. Actually, Lake Erie is starting to show the same types of problems as GLSM, thankfully though, NOT (yet) at the same degree...


----------



## HookEmUp (Apr 14, 2012)

Well it seems like the introducing of lake erie walleye is a no go. And its obvious now that we dont have many lakes that promote spawning due to agricultural runoff and other factors. 
So now were down to stocking numbers. I understand that you release twice as many fingerlings per acre and still have the same survival rate. So how how about growing the fish larger and stocking the same amount? Surely that would increase the chances. Probably cost more money tho. Im serious about the fishing license. 20 something dollars for the year is CHEAP!! The amount of fishing i do in one year is worth wayyyy more than that. I know a lot of people will hate me for saying that! Dont be cheap people!
Think about it, would you pay extra every year for a fishing license if we had lakes that produced consistent numbers? And more rangers on patrol?

So for those of you who know what your talking about. Whats the possible solution(s) here? Despite the cost. Obviously it would be nice if all the farmers and city's would stop contributing to the problem, but thats not going to happen any time soon. So what else?


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

HookEmUp said:


> Well it seems like the introducing of lake erie walleye is a no go. And its obvious now that we dont have many lakes that promote spawning due to agricultural runoff and other factors.
> So now were down to stocking numbers. I understand that you release twice as many fingerlings per acre and still have the same survival rate. So how how about growing the fish larger and stocking the same amount? Surely that would increase the chances. Probably cost more money tho. Im serious about the fishing license. 20 something dollars for the year is CHEAP!! The amount of fishing i do in one year is worth wayyyy more than that. I know a lot of people will hate me for saying that! Dont be cheap people!
> Think about it, would you pay extra every year for a fishing license if we had lakes that produced consistent numbers? And more rangers on patrol?
> 
> So for those of you who know what your talking about. Whats the possible solution(s) here? Despite the cost. Obviously it would be nice if all the farmers and city's would stop contributing to the problem, but thats not going to happen any time soon. So what else?


Most of our Inland Lakes were for water control or drinking water and fishing was a second thought or a by-product. Businesses built along water to ship or use water, people want to be near water and live there. Farmers are planting as much as possible, and using the cheapest methods possible and planting as close to streams, creeks, and rivers as possible. Wetlands are gone, all the natural filtration is GONE, Septic systems, lawn fertilizer, home, industrial and farm run-off, have all caused the problem.....you can see the huge expense going in to GLSM and MAYBE they are breaking even...no one knows yet!
Shallow waters are just full of nutrients and algae waiting for heat to bloom....deeper waters have the benefit of not yet reaching the tipping point but the issue is there.
I really don't think we have the money to do anything except band-aid the problem....we are at a "catch 22" problem and there are more non fishermen voting.


----------



## c. j. stone (Sep 24, 2006)

I think our inland lakes have plenty of fish. I just don't think "I"(and the rest of the 90% ) KNOW HOW to catch them!! If you don't believe they're there, go and watch the ODNR pull the nets in the Spring at say Mosquito and Berlin!(your jaw will drop when you see those hogs!) Fishing impoundments is in no waysimilar to fishing natural lakes. Even I can(and have) go troll Erie and catch nice walleye. Thàt's why a large majority of our readers usually only fish Erie-it just easier to find(and catch) numbers of nice walleye! Even the pro walleye anglers seem to have trouble catching the bigger fish during inland tourneys. They catch the same mediocre fish that we "average" guys get(though admittedly in higher numbers since they work harder at it)!JMTCW!!


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

c. j. stone said:


> I think our inland lakes have plenty of fish. I just don't think "I"(and the rest of the 90% ) KNOW HOW to catch them!! If you don't believe they're there, go and watch the ODNR pull the nets in the Spring at say Mosquito and Berlin!(your jaw will drop when you see those hogs!) Fishing impoundments is in no waysimilar to fishing natural lakes. Even I can(and have) go troll Erie and catch nice walleye. Thàt's why a large majority of our readers usually only fish Erie-it just easier to find(and catch) numbers of nice walleye! Even the pro walleye anglers seem to have trouble catching the bigger fish during inland tourneys. They catch the same mediocre fish that we "average" guys get(though admittedly in higher numbers since they work harder at it)!JMTCW!!


I can speak best about our home lake CJ....when CJ began being stocked with Gators, she was receiving 500,000 to 600,000 fingerlings, heck a few years she got 750,000....I think since early 2000, she has only received around 225,000.....that's a big decline in the number of available fish.
And yes, for most they are difficult to find and catch....CJ Gators key mainly on Shad.


----------



## jshbuckeye (Feb 27, 2005)

Yrs ago 60s and into the late 70s there were walleye and musky in Hoover always wondered what happened to them. Were they from a stocking program back then? some of the eyes were absolute slobs.


----------



## c. j. stone (Sep 24, 2006)

The predominant forage baitfish for Ohio walleye(even at Erie!) is shad. One exception might be West Branch that really does not have a large majority of shad as the predominant bait species. Shad are what makes Ohio walleye fat and sassy-and contribute the most to acceptable growth rates.


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

c. j. stone said:


> The predominant forage baitfish for Ohio walleye(even at Erie!) is shad. One exception might be West Branch that really does not have a large majority of shad as the predominant bait species. Shad are what makes Ohio walleye fat and sassy-and contribute the most to acceptable growth rates.


 An Erie Walleye also enjoys it's cousin in great numbers...lakes like CJ have seen a serious drop of the Perch Population also....most Inland Lakes also are not good for perch spawning either.
Erie Walleyes are also eating gobies and are being found stuffed with them....gobies are expanding in even greater numbers and alot easier meals....again, they don't know yet at what cost.
Lakes that have a huge shad population have an overabundance of nutrients....another catch 22.


----------



## Lowell H Turner (Feb 22, 2011)

As far as being difficult to catch, KNOW that in 2009 a 10+ pd walleye was taken at GLSM; and the last netting at CJ myself and perhaps 15 others SAW a 13 pd 6 ounce wallygator, several 12s and who KNOWS how many 10+ pders...the ARE in there, but as has been said, obviously we are NOT actually CATCHING any of theses bruisers...my `best guess` is the baits we are currently using just aren`t large enough to interest a fish THAT big...!


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

Lowell H Turner said:


> As far as being difficult to catch, KNOW that in 2009 a 10+ pd walleye was taken at GLSM; and the last netting at CJ myself and perhaps 15 others SAW a 13 pd 6 ounce wallygator, several 12s and who KNOWS how many 10+ pders...the ARE in there, but as has been said, obviously we are NOT actually CATCHING any of theses bruisers...my `best guess` is the baits we are currently using just aren`t large enough to interest a fish THAT big...!


That's what my 6 inch Fluorescent Orange and Hot Pink Keitechs are for!


----------



## fishslim (Apr 28, 2005)

I would not say bait size as much as time frames fished. Those big girls are more prone to be active when most people are not fishing for them. Night time seems to produce more large fish then any other time for large Gators and Saugeyes. Have caught most of my larger fish on mid size baits be cranks,jerks or as called swimmers. 4" has done well at times with swimmers but the 3" have been more consistent. Have some larger swim baits as well and have put alot of hours casting them and on average less fish and size not bigger then what i catch by matching size of majority of bait in lake at that time.


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

fishslim said:


> I would not say bait size as much as time frames fished. Those big girls are more prone to be active when most people are not fishing for them. Night time seems to produce more large fish then any other time for large Gators and Saugeyes. Have caught most of my larger fish on mid size baits be cranks,jerks or as called swimmers. 4" has done well at times with swimmers but the 3" have been more consistent. Have some larger swim baits as well and have put alot of hours casting them and on average less fish and size not bigger then what i catch by matching size of majority of bait in lake at that time.


Agreed....I normally fish for Gators from 4am till dawn and dusk til about 10 or 11 pm....or very cloudy days.....alot of the larger Gators from CJ this year have had larger prey in their bellies....I'm BIG Gator huntin' this year!


----------



## HookEmUp (Apr 14, 2012)

Bigger fish have a little bit of a different pattern vs. smaller ones. The big girls like to be in heavy cover when weather permits, especially timber. And go to deeper water in the heat of summer. They are lazy and like to set up in spots where food comes them, instead of having to roam up onto a flat or something. Thats not always an option for them, but it is a big preference. Night time or low light periods def increase odds of landing a big one.
Most people are fishing locations that attract eater size walleye, and occasionally hook a big one by chance. This probably why dnr get some bigger fish in the nets, because not many people target them. The bigger fish are forced to come in shallow in the spring to spawn, and fall to feed. 

I actually watched the guys pull nets from berlin this year. People were saying good things based on the surveys. I disagree based on the fishing results. The nets i saw were on 224 rip rap. The shorelines are lined with ppl every night in the spring over there, and i never heard of a single limit being taken. Most nights theres less than a handful of eyes caught between how many fishermen? 30? 50? I think i saw 2 or 3 fish roll each trip and thats it. Occasionally you get that one good night, now and again where you catch a fish or two.
Ive had my 30 fish days at berlin, but thats when all the fish are concentrated in the shallows. Its easy pickins. But once they spread out, you see how small the population actually is compared to the size of the lake.


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

HookEmUp said:


> Bigger fish have a little bit of a different pattern vs. smaller ones. The big girls like to be in heavy cover when weather permits, especially timber. And go to deeper water in the heat of summer. They are lazy and like to set up in spots where food comes them, instead of having to roam up onto a flat or something. Thats not always an option for them, but it is a big preference. Night time or low light periods def increase odds of landing a big one.
> Most people are fishing locations that attract eater size walleye, and occasionally hook a big one by chance. This probably why dnr get some bigger fish in the nets, because not many people target them. The bigger fish are forced to come in shallow in the spring to spawn, and fall to feed.
> 
> I actually watched the guys pull nets from berlin this year. People were saying good things based on the surveys. I disagree based on the fishing results. The nets i saw were on 224 rip rap. The shorelines are lined with ppl every night in the spring over there, and i never heard of a single limit being taken. Most nights theres less than a handful of eyes caught between how many fishermen? 30? 50? I think i saw 2 or 3 fish roll each trip and thats it. Occasionally you get that one good night, now and again where you catch a fish or two.
> Ive had my 30 fish days at berlin, but thats when all the fish are concentrated in the shallows. Its easy pickins. But once they spread out, you see how small the population actually is compared to the size of the lake.


It's nice to talk with others with knowledge of their lake...we are pretty much seeing the same patterns at our different lakes.


----------



## bountyhunter (Apr 28, 2004)

hook I,ve said for a few years now berlin mostly is lacking FISH PER ACRE, compared to other lakes. I,m twenty min away from berlin and I,ll drive to mosquito any day. all that draw down couple yrs back hurt. it even more.I,ve seen the net test at berlin , dnr guys said its a wait of time.


----------



## SteelEyes (Jul 1, 2013)

JC heir said:


> Im from Pa, and the only inland lake I fish is Pymatuning which we share with Ohio. IMO the fishing has decreased proportionally the last few years with the number of boats full of straw hats! Now they are even going h-itech togo along with their fish grinders! I have a favorite sunken island in the middle of the lake I like to fish, and its very small(basketball court size). Normally I run in with the gps and anchor up on it. Last year old Noah saw me pounding the fish, and jerked out his handy dandy cell phone. within 15 minutes I had so many straw hats drifting by me that I had to pull out. Sorry for the little rant LOL.


We've been very consistent the last few years at Pyma, can't really think of a down year in recent memory, but all lakes have highs and lows. We do well enough at Pyma that we haven't bothered to go down to Mosquito in at least 5 years.

If memory serves the only real stocking efforts ODNR does with inland walleye are in NE Ohio at places like Berlin, Milton, Pymatuning, & Mosquito. Mainly due to habitat & survivability/stocking success reasons.


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

SteelEyes said:


> If memory serves the only real stocking efforts ODNR does with inland walleye are in NE Ohio at places like Berlin, Milton, Pymatuning, & Mosquito. Mainly due to habitat & survivability/stocking success reasons.




Last year at our cover drop meeting, we were told the ODNR stocks Walleye in 16 lakes across the State...the 4 brood lakes are Salt Fork, CJ Brown, Berlin, and Mosquito!
Recently, PA has been supplying the State of Ohio with eggs from Pymatuning in return for them to be able to correct eggs also....last year all of the egg supply came from Mosquito and The Maumee due to abnormally warm water and early spawns.


----------



## HookEmUp (Apr 14, 2012)

So they will take eggs from fish in the maumee, but are worried about taking fish out of erie to stock? The maumee fish are Erie fish... Im not sure if virus is can be passed on to the eggs, but i would think so. And then those fish go into our brood lakes, which we are trying to keep pure right? Also, i read that it can transferred by boats, bildges, fishing gear ect... Just like a lot of other bad stuff which is already in these lakes. Zebras for one.


----------



## Rabbeye (Oct 28, 2013)

Who cares about walleye fishing on inland lakes in Ohio considering Lake Erie is the best in the world?????


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

HookEmUp said:


> So they will take eggs from fish in the maumee, but are worried about taking fish out of erie to stock? The maumee fish are Erie fish... Im not sure if virus is can be passed on to the eggs, but i would think so. And then those fish go into our brood lakes, which we are trying to keep pure right? Also, i read that it can transferred by boats, bildges, fishing gear ect... Just like a lot of other bad stuff which is already in these lakes. Zebras for one.


They do test for VHS in every batch and the brood lakes....I know they at least take that very seriously!
You guys should get together and call your local ODNR office and set up a meeting with the fish biologists...VERY VERY INTERESTING!


----------



## ldrjay (Apr 2, 2009)

Rabbeye said:


> Who cares about walleye fishing on inland lakes in Ohio considering Lake Erie is the best in the world?????


Are you being serious? Before I go nuts

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

Rabbeye said:


> Who cares about walleye fishing on inland lakes in Ohio considering Lake Erie is the best in the world?????


Trust me....people are very worried with some of the things that are happening to ERIE!
I hope for all our sakes that it stays the best in the World.

I look at it this way, I'm 4 hrs from Erie...by the time I drive up and back, get a room, food, charter, etc, I've spent several hundred dollars....for a limit or 2...every time I go.
My house is 10 minutes from CJ, it costs me a few bucks to get there, I can catch Walleye whenever I want, that's why I care about Inland Lakes!


----------



## T-180 (Oct 18, 2005)

Looks like Rabbeye stirring the pot again !! 
If he's serious, he needs to get a grip .... we should care about all the waters in the state, not just our home or favorite one.


----------



## ldrjay (Apr 2, 2009)

Stirring the pot I hope. I have yet to see much intelligence or actual help come from most posts. Screw this I'm done with this post too. 

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## Rabbeye (Oct 28, 2013)

Intimidator I hope you practice catch and release in order to help sustain the walleye fishery you enjoy on cj (assuming that is a lake in Ohio). My point being is that in the vast majority of lakes in Ohio, a naturally reproducing, sustainable walleye population is not possible due to habitat. Stocking walleye becomes a put and take fishery at that point. Why stock walleye in a lake that they can't live in, most dying before reach keeping size when the state can stock fish such as a wiper that can? Why take eggs and or fish from Erie at that point, not even mentioning cost of doing this? Stocking a wiper, bluegill, or a trout is a whole lot cheaper, more successful, and more pleasing to the average fisher person since they can catch these fish and take home to eat if they choose. Or to put it another way, Would it make sense to stock moose in Ohio??? I think many of you would say yes........


----------



## buckzye11 (Jul 16, 2009)

Walleye/Saugeye are some of the best eatin fish there are... thats one reason why people like to have them accessible near by... and they are much more popular among anglers then lots of other gamefish. Bluegill will never need to be stocked anywhere since in most lakes they are already the most populated type of fish.... Trout... taste like crap IMO. Wipers are LM on roids, but pry don't taste as good as eyes.
Id like to see the ODNR stop the effot of stocking Channel Cats in every dang lake and use the extra cash flow on eyes even if it does come down to being put and take. Its not always about the fight, sometimes it's about the freezer.


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

Rabbeye said:


> Intimidator I hope you practice catch and release in order to help sustain the walleye fishery you enjoy on cj (assuming that is a lake in Ohio). My point being is that in the vast majority of lakes in Ohio, a naturally reproducing, sustainable walleye population is not possible due to habitat. Stocking walleye becomes a put and take fishery at that point. Why stock walleye in a lake that they can't live in, most dying before reach keeping size when the state can stock fish such as a wiper that can? Why take eggs and or fish from Erie at that point, not even mentioning cost of doing this? Stocking a wiper, bluegill, or a trout is a whole lot cheaper, more successful, and more pleasing to the average fisher person since they can catch these fish and take home to eat if they choose. Or to put it another way, Would it make sense to stock moose in Ohio??? I think many of you would say yes........




I Eat alot of fish....I catch and freeze Walleye until the Water Temps reach 70 degrees or I have my freezer full and then I catch and release until late fall and will replenish my freezer for Winter!

Now, before you think I'm a typical "taker"....since 2008, I have been part of a group of CJ fishermen that have built cover and dropped it in CJ for the fish....we have added cover for baitfish, small and medium fish, built reefs, added permanent cover that may never decay, started vegetation regrowth projects, held trash pickups, and helped with kids fishing days and donated rods, reels, and tackle.....all with the blessing of Park Management, ODNR Fish Biologists, and the Army Corp of Engineers. I not only take...but I give back also....just like ALOT of the CJ fishermen. 
We take CJ being a Brood Lake very seriously and we do everything possible to make it a perfect fishery for our beloved Gators.


----------



## senoy (Feb 3, 2013)

Walleye fishermen have never taken to the catch and release philosophy of other fishermen. Ontario deals with the problem by having very strict size and creel regulations. Ohio hasn't quite figured that out (and my state, West Virginia is an embarrassment.) Walleye spawns are sporadic and one overharvested season can set a population back for years. I'm sure you all have noticed this, you get a good year where it seems like everyone's catching on every cast and after that year it's all gone. What happens is that walleye will have a good breeding class and they become catchable, fishermen wipe them out before they have a chance to breed and recovery becomes a very long climb.

Walleye also have an extremely difficult time competing with largemouth. Largemouth decimate walleye fry and the propensity of bass fishermen to catch and release while walleye fishermen do not exacerbates the problem immensely. There's also a climate issue. The cold in northern climates keeps the largemouth feeding seasons shorter and helps walleye populations (global warming is actually starting to turn some of the classic walleye fisheries in Minnesota and Wisconsin into largemouth waters.) Ohio has a much warmer climate which means largemouth exert more pressure on walleye.

Anyway, my two cents for what it's worth.


----------



## HookEmUp (Apr 14, 2012)

Intimidator said:


> They do test for VHS in every batch and the brood lakes....I know they at least take that very seriously!"
> 
> 
> Well thats good too know. So that means they could test every batch of lake erie fish if they decided to stock them! Ok im done beating that theory now!
> ...


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

HookEmUp said:


> Intimidator said:
> 
> 
> > They do test for VHS in every batch and the brood lakes....I know they at least take that very seriously!"
> ...


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

senoy said:


> Walleye fishermen have never taken to the catch and release philosophy of other fishermen. Ontario deals with the problem by having very strict size and creel regulations. Ohio hasn't quite figured that out (and my state, West Virginia is an embarrassment.) Walleye spawns are sporadic and one overharvested season can set a population back for years. I'm sure you all have noticed this, you get a good year where it seems like everyone's catching on every cast and after that year it's all gone. What happens is that walleye will have a good breeding class and they become catchable, fishermen wipe them out before they have a chance to breed and recovery becomes a very long climb.
> 
> Walleye also have an extremely difficult time competing with largemouth. Largemouth decimate walleye fry and the propensity of bass fishermen to catch and release while walleye fishermen do not exacerbates the problem immensely. There's also a climate issue. The cold in northern climates keeps the largemouth feeding seasons shorter and helps walleye populations (global warming is actually starting to turn some of the classic walleye fisheries in Minnesota and Wisconsin into largemouth waters.) Ohio has a much warmer climate which means largemouth exert more pressure on walleye.
> 
> Anyway, my two cents for what it's worth.


All I know is CJ has a 15 inch size limit and 6 per day.....they are very difficult for most to catch at CJ also.
MOST Big Largemouth lakes are stocked with saugeye....exactly because what you mentioned. 
Walleye do extremely well with Smallies though!


----------



## senoy (Feb 3, 2013)

Intimidator said:


> All I know is CJ has a 15 inch size limit and 6 per day.....they are very difficult for most to catch at CJ also.
> MOST Big Largemouth lakes are stocked with saugeye....exactly because what you mentioned.
> Walleye do extremely well with Smallies though!


Those are ridiculous limits. Ontario has a closed season until the last week of May with a 4 fish limit for the most expensive license and only one fish over 18 inches

Minnesota has a six fish limit, but only one over 20 and closed season until the second week of May. When you close the spawn, it really cuts down on the take.


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

senoy said:


> Those are ridiculous limits. Ontario has a closed season until the last week of May with a 4 fish limit for the most expensive license and only one fish over 18 inches
> 
> Minnesota has a six fish limit, but only one over 20 and closed season until the second week of May. When you close the spawn, it really cuts down on the take.


Erie is really the only self sustaining population in Ohio, this is why they stock other lakes beside their brood lakes, so all fishermen can have a chance at Walleye....if the State ever tried to set limits like Ontario or Minnesota, you would think the World just Ended!
Even if recreational fishermen agreed...the commercial fishing industry would have no part of it...BIG $$$

MOST lakes and Reservoirs in our State, were never meant to be a specialized fishery, Again, I can speak about CJ because I, like others, watched it being built...They pretty much bulldozed a bowl (took everything out) and filled it with water and rocks along some of the shoreline and called it a fishing lake...that's how things were done in the 70's....VERY shortsighted! BANK fishermen at our lake, can MAYBE use 1/10th of the lake...if you can't walk on boulders or through the woods, or are physically challenged, you have about 200 to 300 yards (maybe alittle more) around the whole 2200 acres to fish.
We have a FULL, MULTI BOAT, Concrete ramp, Parking lot, completely built, in the North end of the Lake...they closed it because of lack of funds to build a small access road....it would have made it so much easier for people fishing in the Far North end which is all a No Wake Zone...so it has sat, for years, completely finished, and never used...Heck even a gravel road would have been ok for most!
Like others, We watch people taking baskets of undersized fish....I gave out numbers to call, to all the fishermen and members on OGF...we call, no one answers or are busy elsewhere...we finallly started going up to people and taking pictures and talking with them...someday one of the group will get injured for doing this! 
I can't imagine trying to get meat off a 3" bluegill or 5" Crappie, or a 10 inch Walleye or Bass, it just amazes me...at CJ a Walleye can grow from a fingerling to legal sized in a year and a half, due to the outstanding shad population...so that's why we decided to build and add cover to areas of no access....that way maybe they'll get a chance to grow!

You are dealing with Politicians that can only see $$ and votes...and there are are less of us fishermen out there!
Hey, I'm all for the State raising the license fee to help the fishing all-over the State...but I also know that the State will use that money for other things that I do not agree with! So we got a bunch of fishermen together to do what we can collectively for our home lake...we're trying!


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

Intimidator said:


> Erie is really the only self sustaining population in Ohio, this is why they stock other lakes beside their brood lakes, so all fishermen can have a chance at Walleye....if the State ever tried to set limits like Ontario or Minnesota, you would think the World just Ended!
> Even if recreational fishermen agreed...the commercial fishing industry would have no part of it...BIG $$$


There is no Lake Erie commercial walleye fishery in Ohio, The only commercial fishery for walleye in Lake Erie is in Ontario.

So the same province that gets praise, it seems, for it's walleye seasons and limits for the recreational fishery takes it's full quota of walleye from Lake Erie every year with nets.


----------



## senoy (Feb 3, 2013)

Lundy said:


> There is no Lake Erie commercial walleye fishery in Ohio, The only commercial fishery for walleye in Lake Erie is in Ontario.
> 
> So the same province that gets praise, it seems, for it's walleye seasons and limits for the recreational fishery takes it's full quota of walleye from Lake Erie every year with nets.


When was the last time you heard of Lake Ontario as a walleye fishery? Sure they are there, but it's not world class. When you talk of Ontario walleye fishing, you usually mean the shield lakes and to a lesser extent Nipissing and that area. Ontario divides its wildlife regulations into administrative areas (I think there are 20) with each having their own creels and limits. Most of Ontario is 4 and 2 depending upon your license and the size limits vary depending upon where you are. They do have big limits and no size regs on Lake Erie that I think are a mistake and they have open season on L Ontario as well, but I believe L Ontario has size limits. I'm not setting Ontario up as some wonderful haven of regulation joy. I think they have their problems, but the question was why is the inland fishery so much better in Ontario and I think that regulations have a lot to do with it. Walleye are a priority there and they protect those fisheries. Ohio doesn't do enough to protect its walleye fishery. (And I'm not just pointing fingers at Ohio, Kentucky and West Virginia are miserable as well. In WV, bass and trout are the priority, so walleye get a lot less attention from the DNR.)


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

Lundy said:


> There is no Lake Erie commercial walleye fishery in Ohio, The only commercial fishery for walleye in Lake Erie is in Ontario.
> 
> So the same province that gets praise, it seems, for it's walleye seasons and limits for the recreational fishery takes it's full quota of walleye from Lake Erie every year with nets.


Allowable walleye and yellow perch harvest to increase in 2012

WINDSOR, ON &#150; The Lake Erie Committee, a binational board of fishery managers from Michigan, New York, Ohio, Ontario, and Pennsylvania, recommended a 2012 total allowable catch (TAC) of 3.487 million walleye and 13.637 million pounds of yellow perch1. These recommended harvest levels represent an increase in allowable walleye and yellow perch catch for 2012 over last year, reflecting updated stock assessment results. Extensive biological assessments and analyses&#151;conducted and analyzed jointly by Canadian and American fishery agencies&#151;inform these TAC recommendations. The committee also engaged commercial and recreational stakeholders in a new and enhanced committee structure&#151;called the Lake Erie Percid Management Advisory Group (LEPMAG)&#151;to heighten awareness of stakeholder fishery objectives, to gain consensus about decisions, and to improve the process for binational dialogue among all interested parties.

The committee sought to maintain TACs at levels consistent with Lake Erie&#146;s biological conditions while providing commercial and recreational fishers with some level of stability, as indicated in LEPMAG discussions. However, the committee is concerned about environmental conditions in Lake Erie and potential impacts on fisheries in future years. The heightened stakeholder engagement reflects the committee&#146;s interest in involving the fishing community in discussions related to management of the lake&#146;s percid fisheries.

WALLEYE

The Lake Erie Committee recommended a binational TAC for walleye in 2012 of 3.487 million fish, compared to the TAC of 2.919 million fish in 2011. Actual walleye harvest in 2011 was approximately 1.69 million fish, or 58% of the TAC. Scientists and field biologists from Ontario and the Great Lakes states&#151;working together as the Walleye Task Group&#151;reported that walleye recruitment in recent years has not been strong. Fish from the strong 2007 and the exceptional 2003 year classes remain the major contributors to the fishery. This recommended TAC is based on updated walleye abundance estimates from the Walleye Task Group. The increased TAC recommendation for 2012 reflects the committee&#146;s consensus that walleye harvest is being managed at a sustainable rate for fisheries lakewide.

The TAC is recommended by the Lake Erie Committee and is allocated to Ohio, Michigan and Ontario by an area-based sharing formula of walleye habitat within each jurisdiction in the western and central basins of the lake. Under a 2012 TAC of 3.487 million fish, Ohio will be entitled to 1.782 million fish, Ontario 1.502 million fish, and Michigan 0.203 million fish. The walleye fisheries of eastern Lake Erie remain outside the quota management area and harvest limits in that area are established separately by Ontario, Pennsylvania, and New York

YELLOW PERCH

Based on the estimated abundance of yellow perch stocks in the lake, the Lake Erie Committee recommended a 2012 TAC of 13.637 million pounds, an increase from last year&#146;s allocation of 12.651 million pounds. As the committee considered the yellow perch TAC, it noted that stocks generally appear to be healthier as one moves west to east across Lake Erie, consistent with environmental conditions (such as nutrient loads) of recent years. Fisheries were afforded the highest allowable catches where stocks were the healthiest. The committee also noted that continued weak year classes will likely result in lower-than-average yellow perch allocations in the future. 

The five jurisdictions on the lake divide the lakewide allocation of yellow perch based on allocation formulas by management unit. For 2012, Ontario&#146;s allocation is 6.701 million pounds, Ohio&#146;s allocation is 5.349 million pounds, and Michigan&#146;s allocation is 0.164 million pounds. New York and Pennsylvania will receive 0.259 million pounds and 1.163 million pounds, respectively. In 2011, actual lakewide yellow perch harvest was 9.620 million pounds or 76% of the TAC.

A NEW LAKE ERIE PERCID MANAGEMENT PROCESS (LEPMAG)

The Lake Erie Committee and the Lake Erie basin stakeholders marked the success of the first round of the Lake Erie Percid Management Advisory Group (LEPMAG), a new, ongoing process that represents a major change in how walleye and yellow perch management decisions are made on Lake Erie. LEPMAG was established by the Lake Erie Committee in late 2010 as a new approach to pursue cooperative and structured decision making; the process informs TAC recommendations.

LEPMAG is designed to improve decision making by creating a process to facilitate discussions among state and provincial management agencies on Lake Erie and stakeholders. LEPMAG participants include Lake Erie Committee members, biologists, recreational and commercial fishers, and facilitators/modelers from the Quantitative Fisheries Center at Michigan State University. Through this process, participants work together to identify objectives, consider management options, recognize uncertainty, evaluate trade-offs, and reach consensus on desired actions. 

LAKE ERIE COMMITTEE

The Lake Erie Committee comprises fishery managers from Michigan, New York, Ohio, Ontario and Pennsylvania. The committee&#146;s work is facilitated by the Great Lakes Fishery Commission, a Canadian and U.S. agency on the Great Lakes. Each year the committee recommends a total allowable catch for walleye and yellow perch. Total allowable catch represents the number or weight of fish that can be caught by sport and commercial fishers without putting the stocks and fisheries at risk. The individual agencies implement the recommended total allowable catch. For more information, visit the Lake Erie Committee online at www.glfc.org/lec.

Efforts by government agencies around Lake Erie to conserve and boost the lake's walleye stocks via three years of very strict sport and commercial catch-rules, plus a big smile from Mother Nature in 2003, are paying off with the brightest fishery status since 1990.
That, in a nutshell, is the proverbial rest-of-the-story behind this month's announcement of substantially larger Erie walleye catch-allotments for 2005 by the Lake Erie Committee of the Great Lakes Fishery Commission.
The LEC, using a new modeling approach and harvest policy developed in response to once-falling walleye stocks, has boosted the lakewide walleye fishery's total allowable catch or TAC to 5.8 million fish for 2005.

Ohio receives a lion's share of that at about 3 million fish and Ontario receives about 2.5 million. Michigan, Pennsylvania, and New York receive relatively small allocations based on their limited ownership of the lake.

"It's not a political thing," stressed Ohio's Roger Knight. "It's a scientific estimate of what the TAC ought to be." The new TAC, he explained, still is below the 6.6 million average compiled since 1979 though it is more than double the TAC of the 2.4 million that was in place during the lean years of 2001 to 2004.

The magnitude of changes in the TAC from here on likely will not be so dramatic, especially under an LEC harvest policy aimed at trying to keep harvests at sustainable levels.

For Lake Erie sport fishermen, the new TAC does not mean that the fish will be jumping into the boat this summer. That depends on favorable weather for fishing, especially on weekends when most anglers have time to get out, and on the fish staying where anglers can get to them.

Nor does the new, larger TAC mean that conservative fishing rules suddenly will evaporate. But state fisheries managers are not ruling out easing at least some restrictions for 2006.

"Any changes will hinge on the forecast [for the walleye stocks] and early signs of the status of the '05 hatch," said Knight, who is Lake Erie programs coordinator for the Ohio Division of Wildlife.

Because of the time-consuming path built into changing fishing regulations, wildlife division managers will have to decide roughly by late summer whether to make changes for 2006, and that allows only a preliminary assessment of the 2005 hatch. Spawning is under way now, and, as Knight so well notes, "weather trumps everything."

Last week's unrelenting northeast winds did nothing to buoy up enthusiasm for 2005, given that such prolonged blows push cold central-basin waters into the western-basin spawning reefs and fish-nursery areas. Such blows also stir up spawn-choking silt from the shallow western-basin bottom. Still, the spring of 2003 witnessed some questionable weather and yet that year-class of walleye was the best in 20-plus years and it forms the bulk for the renewed stocks today followed by 2001 and 1999 fish. The 2000, 2002, and 2004 year-classes were rated poor, or worse.
Knight declared it "a possibility" that Ohio will return to a daily creel limit of four walleye in March and April, up from the severe limit of three implemented last year for those months along with a 15-inch year-round minimum length. The cut from four to three was met with strong protests especially from the charter- sportfishing community, guides contending that they could attract early-season customers with a four-fish limit but not with three.

The daily creel limit in Ohio waters is six walleye May through February. In Michigan waters it is five fish June through March, but the fishery is closed altogether in April and May. In Ontario the sport fishery is closed March 15 to May 13, with the daily limit otherwise being six walleye, no size minimum.

It is less likely that Ohio will give up the 15-inch minimum as it continues to aim at protecting younger fish in its waters.

Most male walleye are not mature enough to spawn until age three and females at age four. Moreover, managers are not prone to making annual changes given the vagaries of hatch success from year to year. So doing could create a roller-coaster effect in which rules rarely seem in synch with stock size.

For instance, the pool of catchable walleye this year is 42 million fish, including about 30 million 2003 fish, most of which will be legal size in Ohio and Michigan waters by mid to late summer and some of which already are legal. It is the biggest pool of walleye since 1990 and stands in stark contrast to the mere 16.3 million fish in 2000, the lowest stock noted since 1978.

But next year's walleye pool is forecast at just 31 million because of a poor hatch in 2004, and thus relatively few two-year-olds will be entering the fishery. Knight said that the LEC's model forecasts that about 2.7 million of the 30 million 2003 fish available this year will be caught lakewide. That will leave a sizable pool of '03s for 2006 and beyond, natural attrition aside.

The whole TAC system and quotas for each governmental jurisdiction has evolved essentially because of Ontario's commercial gillnet fishery, which has tremendous catching power.

Rest assured that Ontario gillnetters will get their 2.5 million fish this year. Large, toughly-built gillnet tugs run in all weather. Northeasters and even monstrous 15 to 18-foot seas do not stop them from "pulling twine," unlike sport- fishing boats that typically are pinned down for safety's sake by four to six-foot or larger seas.

"We won't even come close to the quota," acknowledged Knight of Ohio's allotment of nearly 3 million walleye. Last year Ohio sport anglers took just 859,000 walleye when the state quota was 1.23 million. But if the fishing this year is good, especially with lots of 2003 fish available, and word get around and interest surges, that catch possibly could double this year. "It's a cap," Knight said of the annual TAC. It does not mean that the total should be met every year. Commercial walleye fishing in Ohio waters has been banned by law for more than 20 years. "Quality fishing is the goal," Knight added about Ohio's strategy in regard to its quota and regulations. For instance, the 15-inch length minimum is expected to eventually help boost the number of larger walleye in the overall stocks, and larger walleye in turn are known to prefer the central- basin haunts in summertime. The central-basin walleye fishery, it is noted, has suffered for lack of fish in recent summers.

Knight noted that during the last several years of conservative catch restrictions and a very low TAC, about 15 percent of the lake's walleye stock was taken each year. Under the new TAC policy and models developed by the LEC, about 14 per cent of the lake's walleye stock will be taken in 2005, "if we hit it." So while the TAC seems so much higher, the percentage of the stock targeted to be taken is essentially the same. And even low stocks can produce bumper crops of fish, as witnessed by the super 2003 year-class.

The newly developed LEC approach, moreover, will react quickly to "droughts" or series of poor hatches, Knight said. "Hopefully with this [harvest] policy we'll avoid getting as low as we did."

In related news, the LEC set the yellow perch quota for Ohio at 5.4 million pounds out of a lakewide total TAC of 11.8 million pounds. That is a slight increase of the state's 2004 quota of 5.1 million pounds. Ohio's daily sport-creel limit of 30 perch remains in place.

The lake's perch stocks continue to show improvement, this after declines in the early to mid 1990s led to conservation restrictions for that species. Those measures, too, have worked.

A serious threat to our Great Lakes-"Asian Carp"-Please read.


----------



## EnonEye (Apr 13, 2011)

Hmmm, ya'll makin me hungry, think I'll pull out some CJ eyes from the freezer tonight. In case any of you thinkin of doin the same save yourself some frustration, go to Lake Erie, the ones from CJ tast horrible but I just put ketchup on em LOL


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

Intimidator,

What is you point with all of that? That is all very common knowledge.

You talked about the Ohio Commercial walleye fishery being big dollars and it's (big money) effect how Lake Erie walleye are managed by the ODNR. I just pointed out that there is no commercial walleye fishery in Lake Erie on the US side of the border


----------



## Lowell H Turner (Feb 22, 2011)

That we should immediately go to WAR with Ontario and make them STOP taking ALL "our" walleye ? (Do we stand a reasonable chance of actually "winning"?)


----------



## Lewzer (Apr 5, 2004)

> That we should immediately go to WAR with Ontario and make them STOP taking ALL "our" walleye ? (Do we stand a reasonable chance of actually "winning"?)


Made me think of the Pennsylvania guys on Pymatuning. Us Ohio guys are always taking "their" walleye.


----------



## carp (Oct 31, 2011)

I personally think the inland lakes in Ohio are very productive, or at least the ones I fish. ODNR has done an outstandiing job at Indian lake with the saugeyes!

I'm mostly a bank fisherman at Indian, and GLSM, and few other resevoirs.

I dont fish summer months and dont really seem to have a problem catching 50 to 100 saugeye a year in the spring, fall, and winter. Most of them in the winter threw the ice.

So I guess I'm an outcast because I think the fishing is average to above average in my area.

God bless all the walleye / saugeye men, and women, may the fish find your lure!

Carp.


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

Lundy said:


> Intimidator,
> 
> What is you point with all of that? That is all very common knowledge.
> 
> You talked about the Ohio Commercial walleye fishery being big dollars and it's (big money) effect how Lake Erie walleye are managed by the ODNR. I just pointed out that there is no commercial walleye fishery in Lake Erie on the US side of the border


Sorry, had to go back to work and got busy....but I didn't want to lose the page.
Ohio does have commercial fishing for perch with TRAP nets.

I READ that article and my understanding is that even though there is no commercial fishing on the US side, we are part of the Erie Committee and we get to take 1.8 million Walleye and 3.4 million pounds of perch however we see fit???
Am I reading this correct?????
So even though we don't "Commercial" fish like Canada...our "Commercial" Charter fleet or Anglers still get to take this amount of fish.....so what is the big difference if they are caught by a trawler or 500 Charter boats???....It's still big $$$....Man, that's Alot of freakin perch and Gators!!!


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

The difference is that the walleye in Ohio and MI are allocated to recreational fishing and it Canada it is to trawlers.

Ohio does not take, or even come close to, it's allocation in the agreed TAC every year. Canada takes their full quota every year.

I know there is a commercial perch fishery on Erie but we were talking walleye.


----------



## crg (Dec 7, 2006)

I am a walleye fishermen first and foremost. Im 30 and have been fishing for eyes since I was 3 yrs old 20 miles out on erie. Dipsys, boards, downriggers, leadcore - do it all. If you see a blue bayliner trophy bass boat pulling big boards on inland neo walleye lakes, that me. *This past year was the best year my fishing group has ever had on inland lakes.* I stopped posting info on this site long time ago because of said straw hats and issues with, going to sound very bad, but asians in metroparks keeping 5in smallmouth decimating some of my childhood fisheries. But after reading all the posts in this thread I felt compelled to add my 2 cents. Alot of what people are whinning about can be fixed by becoming a better walleye fishermen, putting the time in to learn each individual lake you fish. Yes similar patterns can be used on similar lakes, but to truly be successful each time out, you really need to know those lakes. The first inland walleye lake (IWL) i started learning over ten yrs ago, i started off just as frustrated as majority of the people here are. Then as my frustration turned into persistence and determination, I went from catching only a few small fish, then it became I could catch 3 dozen fish easy but only 2-3 keeps, then it turned into catching 10-12 fish with 7-9 barely keeps, then it became 5-8 fish with all but 1 or 2 short fish with a few at 20in, to limits with a mix a barely keeps to solid fish into limits of solid fish with 24in thrown in. Last year after I had the pattern figured out and was pounding eyes on my boat, 2 of my buddies fishing on their boat only managed 2 fish all day while me and my co-pilot are telling them what to baits the fish have been keying on, how far back, what speed, where to troll. My boat 2 people 10 keeps, their boat 2 people 1 keep and an accidental musky. Again it goes back to me knowing how to fish for eyes and them not knowing how. Im even more excited to get out on the IWLs this year cuz I recently got the hummingbird side imaging sonar. Eyes dont have a chance against me this year. As far as keeping fish, Im all for creel limits and have no problem keeping fish put and take fishery that is only viable and didnt exist until we started stocking(inland walleye and lake erie steelhead) why the bitching if someone wants dinner. Ill end with an old adage that fits perfectly with all the frustrated inland walleye fishermen out there *90% of the fish live in 10% of the water and 10% of the fishermen catch 90% of the fish. I am the 10%. *


----------



## buckeyebowman (Feb 24, 2012)

senoy said:


> When was the last time you heard of Lake Ontario as a walleye fishery?
> Sure they are there, but it's not world class. When you talk of Ontario walleye fishing, you usually mean the shield lakes and to a lesser extent Nipissing and that area. Ontario divides its wildlife regulations into administrative areas (I think there are 20) with each having their own creels and limits. Most of Ontario is 4 and 2 depending upon your license and the size limits vary depending upon where you are. They do have big limits and no size regs on Lake Erie that I think are a mistake and they have open season on L Ontario as well, but I believe L Ontario has size limits. I'm not setting Ontario up as some wonderful haven of regulation joy. I think they have their problems, but the question was why is the inland fishery so much better in Ontario and I think that regulations have a lot to do with it. Walleye are a priority there and they protect those fisheries. Ohio doesn't do enough to protect its walleye fishery. (And I'm not just pointing fingers at Ohio, Kentucky and West Virginia are miserable as well. In WV, bass and trout are the priority, so walleye get a lot less attention from the DNR.)


Not a geography major, eh? He never said a word about Lake Ontario! What he was referring to was the PROVINCE of Ontario which owns the northern half of Lake Erie! And, yes, they do commercially fish the crap out of walleye! As far the Canadian Shield inland lakes go, the reason they have closed seasons is because those lakes support natural reproduction, i.e. spawning! At one lake we fished, Lake Oba, the camp owner had pictures he took in a little, rocky bay off the main lake that had a small river draining into it. The walleye were stacked in that bay like cordwood! Of course they don't want you fishing for them when they're like that. In fact, you weren't even allowed in the bay until June 15, and if the Fisheries guys caught you in there, your butt got busted hard whether you were fishing or not!

This info isn't current, but when we were going up there they had "slot limits" for walleye, and it seemed like every lake in the region had a different slot length! And, they quoted them in centimeters which didn't make it easy for us decimal challenged Yanks. Fortunately the camp owner had slot boxes in every boat, with the "slot" painted red. Put the walleye in the box, and if the tail was "in the red" back it went. The last year we went up the slot had gotten so big that you could go out and catch 50,60,70 walleye and be lucky if you had a couple to eat. It got so you either had to keep a wall hanger or some dinks if you wanted to fry up some fish. 

I think the 15", 6 fish limit is fine as long as it is enforced. I've seen plenty of instances where it really needed to be!


----------



## HookEmUp (Apr 14, 2012)

crg said:


> I am a walleye fishermen first and foremost. Im 30 and have been fishing for eyes since I was 3 yrs old 20 miles out on erie. Dipsys, boards, downriggers, leadcore - do it all. If you see a blue bayliner trophy bass boat pulling big boards on inland neo walleye lakes, that me. *This past year was the best year my fishing group has ever had on inland lakes.* I stopped posting info on this site long time ago because of said straw hats and issues with, going to sound very bad, but asians in metroparks keeping 5in smallmouth decimating some of my childhood fisheries. But after reading all the posts in this thread I felt compelled to add my 2 cents. Alot of what people are whinning about can be fixed by becoming a better walleye fishermen, putting the time in to learn each individual lake you fish. Yes similar patterns can be used on similar lakes, but to truly be successful each time out, you really need to know those lakes. The first inland walleye lake (IWL) i started learning over ten yrs ago, i started off just as frustrated as majority of the people here are. Then as my frustration turned into persistence and determination, I went from catching only a few small fish, then it became I could catch 3 dozen fish easy but only 2-3 keeps, then it turned into catching 10-12 fish with 7-9 barely keeps, then it became 5-8 fish with all but 1 or 2 short fish with a few at 20in, to limits with a mix a barely keeps to solid fish into limits of solid fish with 24in thrown in. Last year after I had the pattern figured out and was pounding eyes on my boat, 2 of my buddies fishing on their boat only managed 2 fish all day while me and my co-pilot are telling them what to baits the fish have been keying on, how far back, what speed, where to troll. My boat 2 people 10 keeps, their boat 2 people 1 keep and an accidental musky. Again it goes back to me knowing how to fish for eyes and them not knowing how. Im even more excited to get out on the IWLs this year cuz I recently got the hummingbird side imaging sonar. Eyes dont have a chance against me this year. As far as keeping fish, Im all for creel limits and have no problem keeping fish put and take fishery that is only viable and didnt exist until we started stocking(inland walleye and lake erie steelhead) why the bitching if someone wants dinner. Ill end with an old adage that fits perfectly with all the frustrated inland walleye fishermen out there *90% of the fish live in 10% of the water and 10% of the fishermen catch 90% of the fish. I am the 10%. *



Nice story, and glad you consider yourself in the ten percent. When you say "learn how to fish for eyes" i assume most of that is directed toward me, the original poster. I assure you, i know what im doing. Im not going to turn this into a pissing contest. Thanks for your input though.


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

I would really like everyone's opinions on 3 things....I read ALOT during the Winter and read/hear conflicting storys on 3 Lake Erie topics. Since I don't live close I'm curious and concerned.
1. Gobies- good or bad, food or egg/fry destroyer???
2. Zebra mussels- good or bad, water purifier or taking all the nutrients for small fish/fry???
3. Are Asian Carp actually in Erie and just starting to expand?


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

HookEmUp said:


> Nice story, and glad you consider yourself in the ten percent. When you say "learn how to fish for eyes" i assume most of that is directed toward me, the original poster. I assure you, i know what im doing. Im not going to turn this into a pissing contest. Thanks for your input though.


We already know that from the 1990's to 2000's, the number of Gator fingerlings has been cut in half or more....so yes, numbers have decreased....last year was a Banner year and lakes got a nice bump.....by this coming summer, they should be legal size.


----------



## Saugeyefisher (Jul 19, 2010)

Intimidator said:


> All I know is CJ has a 15 inch size limit and 6 per day.....they are very difficult for most to catch at CJ also.
> MOST Big Largemouth lakes are stocked with saugeye....exactly because what you mentioned.
> Walleye do extremely well with Smallies though!


Really? I though saugeyes were stocked because they are a hardier fish? And in ohio(central) what is a "big bass lake"? Yea theres decent bass lakes,but most are just as good smallie lakes as lm... just saying i dont think the reason big lm lakes are stocked with saugeye,is because lm and walleye dont do well. Most of the time they dont even share the same habitat.


----------



## fishslim (Apr 28, 2005)

Saugeyes are stocked because they are easier to produce,cheaper to produce and yes survival rate way higher due to there acceptance to turbid conditions which are found basically in all Ohio lakes and rivers.


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

Saugeyefisher said:


> Really? I though saugeyes were stocked because they are a hardier fish? And in ohio(central) what is a "big bass lake"? Yea theres decent bass lakes,but most are just as good smallie lakes as lm... just saying i dont think the reason big lm lakes are stocked with saugeye,is because lm and walleye dont do well. Most of the time they dont even share the same habitat.


When you think of LM Bass Lakes, you think of shallow, turbid, water that warms in summer and has plenty of vegetation, or lakes with large areas of shallows, LM like heat, they ARE considered a WARM water fish! Saugeye thrive in this also!
Where Walleye and SM tend to go the opposite way, they need deeper cooler, oxygenated water in summer, they are considered COLD water fish! 
It is well documented that LM and SM do not get along and stay away from each other...or the SM loses...plus they prefer different enviroments. 
Walleye and LM ADULTS can live in the same areas IN SOME LAKES, BUT the problem lies with Walleye fry/fingerlings, they move shallow to hide and grow, they make an easy EXPENSIVE meal for a LM Bass and LM LOVE the easy pickin's. Since most inland lakes are stocked you sure don't want your survival rate, to legal size, to drop below the already pathetic 3% or so!


----------



## carp (Oct 31, 2011)

I agree with everything this man says, my friends and i are always on a few fish, somewhere, when others are complaining there are no fish. 20 years on the same body of water should make you a better fisherman, or you should hang it up, or go to a pay lake! Find a good local fisherman, get to be friends with them! I've helped many fisdherman and woman out! It's our job to pass this information along, and help others! Do unto other fisherman, as they should do unto you! God bless the walleye men, and woman, and may your bobber always be under!
Carp!




crg said:


> I am a walleye fishermen first and foremost. Im 30 and have been fishing for eyes since I was 3 yrs old 20 miles out on erie. Dipsys, boards, downriggers, leadcore - do it all. If you see a blue bayliner trophy bass boat pulling big boards on inland neo walleye lakes, that me. *This past year was the best year my fishing group has ever had on inland lakes.* I stopped posting info on this site long time ago because of said straw hats and issues with, going to sound very bad, but asians in metroparks keeping 5in smallmouth decimating some of my childhood fisheries. But after reading all the posts in this thread I felt compelled to add my 2 cents. Alot of what people are whinning about can be fixed by becoming a better walleye fishermen, putting the time in to learn each individual lake you fish. Yes similar patterns can be used on similar lakes, but to truly be successful each time out, you really need to know those lakes. The first inland walleye lake (IWL) i started learning over ten yrs ago, i started off just as frustrated as majority of the people here are. Then as my frustration turned into persistence and determination, I went from catching only a few small fish, then it became I could catch 3 dozen fish easy but only 2-3 keeps, then it turned into catching 10-12 fish with 7-9 barely keeps, then it became 5-8 fish with all but 1 or 2 short fish with a few at 20in, to limits with a mix a barely keeps to solid fish into limits of solid fish with 24in thrown in. Last year after I had the pattern figured out and was pounding eyes on my boat, 2 of my buddies fishing on their boat only managed 2 fish all day while me and my co-pilot are telling them what to baits the fish have been keying on, how far back, what speed, where to troll. My boat 2 people 10 keeps, their boat 2 people 1 keep and an accidental musky. Again it goes back to me knowing how to fish for eyes and them not knowing how. Im even more excited to get out on the IWLs this year cuz I recently got the hummingbird side imaging sonar. Eyes dont have a chance against me this year. As far as keeping fish, Im all for creel limits and have no problem keeping fish put and take fishery that is only viable and didnt exist until we started stocking(inland walleye and lake erie steelhead) why the bitching if someone wants dinner. Ill end with an old adage that fits perfectly with all the frustrated inland walleye fishermen out there *90% of the fish live in 10% of the water and 10% of the fishermen catch 90% of the fish. I am the 10%. *


----------



## Saugeyefisher (Jul 19, 2010)

Intimidator said:


> When you think of LM Bass Lakes, you think of shallow, turbid, water that warms in summer and has plenty of vegetation, or lakes with large areas of shallows, LM like heat, they ARE considered a WARM water fish! Saugeye thrive in this also!
> Where Walleye and SM tend to go the opposite way, they need deeper cooler, oxygenated water in summer, they are considered COLD water fish!
> It is well documented that LM and SM do not get along and stay away from each other...or the SM loses...plus they prefer different enviroments.
> Walleye and LM ADULTS can live in the same areas IN SOME LAKES, BUT the problem lies with Walleye fry/fingerlings, they move shallow to hide and grow, they make an easy EXPENSIVE meal for a LM Bass and LM LOVE the easy pickin's. Since most inland lakes are stocked you sure don't want your survival rate, to legal size, to drop below the already pathetic 3% or so!


Yea i agree with most of that, i guess im just saying,here in ohio saugeyes are stocked for the reasons fishslim posted,and not because of the lm bass populations. If that was the method to there(dnr) madness the lakes around me would be stocked differently. Like indian and buckeye receiving saugeye and alum and hoover would get walleyes... 

And as forvthe original topic,lol glad i live in central ohio. Some great saugeye fishing!


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

Saugeyefisher said:


> Yea i agree with most of that, i guess im just saying,here in ohio saugeyes are stocked for the reasons fishslim posted,and not because of the lm bass populations. If that was the method to there(dnr) madness the lakes around me would be stocked differently. Like indian and buckeye receiving saugeye and alum and hoover would get walleyes...
> 
> And as forvthe original topic,lol glad i live in central ohio. Some great saugeye fishing!


When We have our next cover drop meeting for CJ in the Spring you will have to come...The "Gator Queen" will be there from the ODNR....VERY VERY INTERESTING...she will sit and talk about Walleye all day!


----------



## Saugeyefisher (Jul 19, 2010)

Thanks man appreciate the invite! If not doing any thing would love to. As much as you I LOVE learning about anyything fishing and enjoy all of your knowledgable info! And kudos for what you guys are doing at cj. Didnt realize how pretty of an area that was until this last year i finaly took some time while working to drive around it!

And realize there are exveptions to most every rule. But it seems there actually are ALOT of lakes out there were lm bass,walleye,and sm bass co-exhist successfully. Lake st.clair is a bad example in this case but is one of them. The lm fishery is just as good,sometimes better then the sm fishery. And in the last few yrs walleye catches have been good. But this may be because most of the eyes here go to the rivers to spawn were there are not as many lm to eat the fry. But there also tons of lakes in minnesota that hold all three species and muskie/pike to boot.....

Lol sorry been off work sick since friday. Rofl im BOARD!


----------



## Saugeyefisher (Jul 19, 2010)

I also agree with alot of what crg says,butt just because you can out fish a couple guys that dont fish your home lake nearly as much as you,does not make you a better walleye fisherman then them. There slower bite could have been as simple as lc's not as accurate as yours,thicker line,different vibrations from boat-rod-lure.... lol and trust me side imaging doesnt make those fish jump in the boat,though will help,awesome feature to have..
Good discussion guys!


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

I can speak to what I know best....CJ Walleye fishing has changed....and those not willing to change with it are struggling. 
Prior to "The Projects", Walleye mainly inhabited the humps and old creek beds during the day and trollers did well....then after dusk and until dawn, or on dark days, Walleye fed in the Shallows. 
Now the Shad population has exploded, cover is present, and the Gators have spread out over the entire lake...BIG Gators are now being caught at high noon, Bluebird sky's, in 3 ft of water, laying in the shade.
Some of the places they are now being caught, goes against all old ideas.
Now, don't get me wrong, a few fish still get caught with the old patterns...but NOT EVEN CLOSE to years in the past. MOST Guys catching Walleye at CJ have adjusted their techniques.


----------



## Saugeyefisher (Jul 19, 2010)

Seems like there acting alot like saugeye. I see so many people trolling for saugeye like they would lake erie walleyes and winder why there not pulling consistant fish if any at all. Theres time when the bass guys out catch the saugeye guys... the things adapt so well! The last few yrs i have learned saugeye love to break rules and go were they want when they want. Boat traffic in most cases attract them rather then spook them,catching them literly in a few inches of water after relly hot spell in augest. We had one bring its body half way out the water to try and eat a stickbait fouled up on rocks. In one day finding a hot bite in 25 fow,10 fow and 5 fow. Such a fun fish to chase! And forgot to mention the last one,saugeyes vioently striking a lipless crank ripped through the 33/34° water....


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

Saugeyefisher said:


> Seems like there acting alot like saugeye. I see so many people trolling for saugeye like they would lake erie walleyes and winder why there not pulling consistant fish if any at all. Theres time when the bass guys out catch the saugeye guys... the things adapt so well! The last few yrs i have learned saugeye love to break rules and go were they want when they want. Boat traffic in most cases attract them rather then spook them,catching them literly in a few inches of water after relly hot spell in augest. We had one bring its body half way out the water to try and eat a stickbait fouled up on rocks. In one day finding a hot bite in 25 fow,10 fow and 5 fow. Such a fun fish to chase!


Yep...they are definitely adapting.....and becoming very proficient at hunting and conserving energy, they allow WB to mess up a school of shad and they move in to clean up....also alot of the cover has spread and enhanced the crawdad population and brought back and stabilized the natural minnow and baitfish populations...it's amazing what you can learn by opening up their belly.
It seems they are bolder hunting and now it seems they are looking for very large prey....once they feed they'll sit by a rock on a barren bottom and wait, until they get hungry again.
I have found some HUGE shad, craws, and perch in their guts....Huge ones!
They are amazing fish.


----------



## HookEmUp (Apr 14, 2012)

Ok ok fellas, back to walleye. 
So instead of charging everyone extra $ for licenses, maybe they could have like a walleye specific fishing license that costs extra. It would only be in effect for inland waters. If your not a cardholder, you can still fish for walleye, but you cannot keep them! If you have the card, you can keep them. Would you pay extra for a better fishery?! I sure would! This way, with the funding, they could get more walleye in our lakes, and only people that are funding it (us) would be allowed to keep fish. Seems fair to me! Would be a nice boost on top of the funding they already get for walleye.

Ill say it again, West Branch would be a fun walleye lake, and they do semi decent in there all by themselves. Better than in most lakes imo. Its got crappie,musky, pike, smallmouth, the only thing missing is a good pop of walleye, and you got yourself a real canadian lake! Minus the lakers...

I know someone else said this before, but one thing is for sure....Stop wasting money stocking so many dang catfish all over the place! Weve got plenty!


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

HookEmUp said:


> Ok ok fellas, back to walleye.
> So instead of charging everyone extra $ for licenses, maybe they could have like a walleye specific fishing license that costs extra. It would only be in effect for inland waters. If your not a cardholder, you can still fish for walleye, but you cannot keep them! If you have the card, you can keep them. Would you pay extra for a better fishery?! I sure would! This way, with the funding, they could get more walleye in our lakes, and only people that are funding it (us) would be allowed to keep fish. Seems fair to me! Would be a nice boost on top of the funding they already get for walleye.
> 
> Ill say it again, West Branch would be a fun walleye lake, and they do semi decent in there all by themselves. Better than in most lakes imo. Its got crappie,musky, pike, smallmouth, the only thing missing is a good pop of walleye, and you got yourself a real canadian lake! Minus the lakers...
> ...


And most "Cat Guys" won't eat them either!


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

HookEmUp said:


> Ok ok fellas, back to walleye.
> So instead of charging everyone extra $ for licenses, maybe they could have like a walleye specific fishing license that costs extra. It would only be in effect for inland waters. If your not a cardholder, you can still fish for walleye, but you cannot keep them! If you have the card, you can keep them. Would you pay extra for a better fishery?! I sure would! This way, with the funding, they could get more walleye in our lakes, and only people that are funding it (us) would be allowed to keep fish. Seems fair to me! Would be a nice boost on top of the funding they already get for walleye.
> 
> Ill say it again, West Branch would be a fun walleye lake, and they do semi decent in there all by themselves. Better than in most lakes imo. Its got crappie,musky, pike, smallmouth, the only thing missing is a good pop of walleye, and you got yourself a real canadian lake! Minus the lakers...
> ...


The only problem goes back to part of the original issue.....we would pay extra money but others wouldn't and they still would take all they can, and the State still won't have enough money for enforcement to stop it!


----------



## Lowell H Turner (Feb 22, 2011)

Well Sir Intimidator, if those wallygators will sit in the shade of an isolated boulder alone on a mud/gravel flat, then we need to create more isolated `boulders` on those flats...


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

Lowell H Turner said:


> Well Sir Intimidator, if those wallygators will sit in the shade of an isolated boulder alone on a mud/gravel flat, then we need to create more isolated `boulders` on those flats...


Where do you think all those Milk Crate boulders have been going....shady, gravel, shallow areas!


----------



## Papascott (Apr 22, 2004)

I have been blessed to be able to fish for walleye in many states and Canada the last few years. Some places like the Mississippi river, green bay illinois rocer are world known walleye fisheries. IMO there is not a place in the world that holds a candle to Erie. Ohioans get spoiled and compare inland to Erie and are sorely disappointed. 

I will say that I have no experience on the central Ohio reservoirs but mosquito, Milton and Berlin in n.e. Ohio are all very good walleye lakes that turn out lots of fish and some with extreme pressure. 

One of the best walleye/sauger fisheries in this part of the country is the Ohio river and many of its tribs. The key to a solid walleye sauger fishery is natural reproduction. If there is no natural reproduction, IMO, it is a put take fishery and never will sustain the numbers needed to make people happy. Not every lake will be a good eye/saucer/saugeye fishery, we as does the state needs to pick and choose wisely. I would love to be able to fish a king salmon run on Milton but that ain't gonna happen either.

As for one poster saying lake Ontario wasn't a walleye fishery? Bay id quinte is probably a top 10 walleye destination in the world, Niagara river has good eye fishing as does a few other areas of lake O.


I am not going say much about the "straw hat" or "Asian" Gestapo and the comments. If you could understand dutch they aren't happy when the English move in on them either. BTW their talking about everyone none dutch when they refer to English. If their following the laws deal with it, if not call the DNR.


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

Papascott said:


> I have been blessed to be able to fish for walleye in many states and Canada the last few years. Some places like the Mississippi river, green bay illinois rocer are world known walleye fisheries. IMO there is not a place in the world that holds a candle to Erie. Ohioans get spoiled and compare inland to Erie and are sorely disappointed.
> 
> I will say that I have no experience on the central Ohio reservoirs but mosquito, Milton and Berlin in n.e. Ohio are all very good walleye lakes that turn out lots of fish and some with extreme pressure.
> 
> ...


----------



## louisvillefisherman (Jun 9, 2012)

I for one would not complain if the cost of a fishing license were raised if I thought that the money would not be wasted as it is with most govt programs. 

I know I get my monies worth out of my license but I fish several times a week when in season. The casual 2-3 times a year fisherman/woman (my wife) would disagree with the increase I suspect.

Slot limits are a good way of controlling over harvesting. Policing those limits is another story. We can't even keep the no wake zones under control.

Not real crazy about the idea (brought up on the first page of this thread) of having to report every fish I catch to some bureaucrat with the threat of a $10,000 fine for failing to do so. Seriously? That would make fishing about as fun as doing my taxes. Please do not make our bloated government any more powerful in the name of fishing. I fish to escape this mess of a society we live in, the last thing I want is for a State official sitting in my boat while I fish. (figuratively speaking of course)

Great thread!


----------



## Lucky Touch Charters (Jun 19, 2011)

I fish a few in lakes in Ontario Canada on a regular basis. I target more than walleye though. the biggest differences are

1. fishing pressure: I fish lakes tha are simliar to a berlin or WB. The pressure is so minimal that these lakes do not even have parking lots at the boat launches. many launches are private or were put in by a local sportsman club.

2. regulations: These lakes have slot limits and they protect the large fish. No one has ever solved the argument of what fish spawns more large fish or medium fish however it doesn't matter in Ontario because fish are better protected.

3. Enforcement: There is less abuse of the reosurce in ontario because if you get caught breaking the law it is serious and so are fines and repercussions.

4. Habitat preservation: The OMNR does alot to maintain and improve the habitat but so does the sportsmans. For example a lake that i fish has a creek that the walleye spawn is over the years it got washed out. So volunteers from a local sportsman club went in and clean it out and created a spawning ground that increased walleye spawning. It worked so well that they also go in and milk the fish to get eggs for other lakes in the area.

5. Respect for the resource: the locals respect their recsources more than we do as a whole.


----------



## Lucky Touch Charters (Jun 19, 2011)

Papascott said:


> I have been blessed to be able to fish for walleye in many states and Canada the last few years. Some places like the Mississippi river, green bay illinois rocer are world known walleye fisheries. IMO there is not a place in the world that holds a candle to Erie. Ohioans get spoiled and compare inland to Erie and are sorely disappointed.
> 
> I will say that I have no experience on the central Ohio reservoirs but mosquito, Milton and Berlin in n.e. Ohio are all very good walleye lakes that turn out lots of fish and some with extreme pressure.
> 
> ...



I agree nothing compares to Erie. I can catch a limit of 4-6 walleye in Canada and the total weight of my combined Canada catch is close to the weight of my largest fish from Erie. I have seen Canadians about have a heart attack over a walleye that is 26" or bigger. that fish is on their wall!!!

i show them lake Erie photos and they immediately become my best friend. Then I offer to take them fishing in Erie and in return they give me all of their secrets on thier local lake. it is a great trade off!!!


----------



## Papascott (Apr 22, 2004)

louisvillefisherman said:


> I for one would not complain if the cost of a fishing license were raised if I thought that the money would not be wasted as it is with most govt programs.
> 
> I know I get my monies worth out of my license but I fish several times a week when in season. The casual 2-3 times a year fisherman/woman (my wife) would disagree with the increase I suspect.
> 
> ...



Slot limits are great at protecting breeders for a lake with natural reproduction. It doesn't help with anything on a put take fishery.


----------



## I Fish (Sep 24, 2008)

louisvillefisherman said:


> I for one would not complain if the cost of a fishing license were raised if I thought that the money would not be wasted as it is with most govt programs.
> 
> I know I get my monies worth out of my license but I fish several times a week when in season. The casual 2-3 times a year fisherman/woman (my wife) would disagree with the increase I suspect.
> 
> ...


X2! I seem to get blasted on this forum every time I mention the waste that is the Division of Natural Resources. Do your own rithmatic from their budget. Start asking yourself things like Should the ODNR own a golf course? There are 88 counties in Ohio, and in 2007, ODNR had 2893 employees, or, almost 33 employees per county. Is this necessary? In 2013, the ODNR budget is about $325,500,000. Does it seem reasonable the ODNR spends $3,698,863 per county? Almost 50% of that money goes toward salary and benefits, or, about $56,000 per employee. Does that seem reasonable? Nobody ever seems to ask these questions. It just kills me when ODNR just can't afford things.

Sorry, rant over.
http://www.lsc.state.oh.us/fiscal/redbooks130/dnr.pdf


----------



## louisvillefisherman (Jun 9, 2012)

Papascott said:


> Slot limits are great at protecting breeders for a lake with natural reproduction. It doesn't help with anything on a put take fishery.


You are correct. Slot limits (versus simple minimum length limits) purposely support natural reproductive systems as a primary function.

At the same time I see benefits outside of natural reproduction for both slot and minimum limits. Especially for me who releases 99% of my catch because it saves the biguns' from being harvested as well as the undersized. That 22" incher is always going back for the next angler to wrangle.

If a fish makes it past the max slot size, then hopefully its survives a full natural life growing as large as its environment will allow.

More obvious is the benefit of the minimum length limit that gives the fish time to grow. If you are keeping a fish, then you are eating the fish. Not much meat on a 10" inland eye. 

No science to my words, just my thoughts.


----------



## rickerd (Jul 16, 2008)

Ifish,
Thank you for your information. Sure puts the budget of ODNR into perspective. When are Americans going to learn to stop giving our governments more money. I know the politicians sell it to us by saying, we are taxing the rich, but it is always the middle class that pays the taxes. We pay for it in a loss of opportunity in the economy. Our country is choking on government debt and waste. These are the true causes of every recession great or small. Keep the government out of my tackle box. 

Rickerd



I Fish said:


> X2! I seem to get blasted on this forum every time I mention the waste that is the Division of Natural Resources. Do your own rithmatic from their budget. Start asking yourself things like Should the ODNR own a golf course? There are 88 counties in Ohio, and in 2007, ODNR had 2893 employees, or, almost 33 employees per county. Is this necessary? In 2013, the ODNR budget is about $325,500,000. Does it seem reasonable the ODNR spends $3,698,863 per county? Almost 50% of that money goes toward salary and benefits, or, about $56,000 per employee. Does that seem reasonable? Nobody ever seems to ask these questions. It just kills me when ODNR just can't afford things.
> 
> Sorry, rant over.
> http://www.lsc.state.oh.us/fiscal/redbooks130/dnr.pdf


----------



## HookEmUp (Apr 14, 2012)

Thanks for the input guys. Im just throwing ideas out there. And thanks louiville for bringing that last one into perspective. Probably not the best idea after all. 

Papa, you sure are right man. The big lake sure spoils the hell outta ya. But i do enjoy an inland trip every now and again. Its just feels better when you catch fish that you really had to work for, even if they are small. Its the figuring them out part that makes it worth while. Especially when you figure correctly!

With over a 325 million dollar budget, you would think that we would see more of them patrolling. Three hundred-twenty five MILLION DOLLARS!!!! Thats insane!! I feel like theres a lot of lolly gaggin goin on! Do they just drive in circles all day and waste gas? Because thats what it feels like sometimes. Again, that is a ridiculous amount of money!!


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

HookEmUp said:


> Thanks for the input guys. Im just throwing ideas out there. And thanks louiville for bringing that last one into perspective. Probably not the best idea after all.
> 
> Papa, you sure are right man. The big lake sure spoils the hell outta ya. But i do enjoy an inland trip every now and again. Its just feels better when you catch fish that you really had to work for, even if they are small. Its the figuring them out part that makes it worth while. Especially when you figure correctly!
> 
> With over a 325 million dollar budget, you would think that we would see more of them patrolling. Three hundred-twenty five MILLION DOLLARS!!!! Thats insane!! I feel like theres a lot of lolly gaggin goin on! Do they just drive in circles all day and waste gas? Because thats what it feels like sometimes. Again, that is a ridiculous amount of money!!


I need to ask a question.....I've now heard several people comment about "small" fish in inland lakes....now granted, we don't have the numbers of BIG fish like THE BIG LAKE but we have some BIG fish....are other Inland Walleye lakes different???


----------



## Walleye 3 (Jul 2, 2005)

I fish, are you trying to compare the total amount of money spent by the ODNR to the money that is spent with your hunting and fishing monies. The Division of wildlife has about 300 employees in those 88 counties. I also know most of them are not making anywhere near 56,000 a year. They also don't use any of your tax dollars to fund themselves. Your hunting and fishing liecense money and the taxes you pay for hunting and fishing equipment is the source of their funding.


Sent from my HTCONE using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## HookEmUp (Apr 14, 2012)

@Intimidator- I should have said "smaller" as in comparing them to the lake erie fish. Actually, i think the size of our inland eyes are really good, when compared to canadian lakes or lakes out west. Those guys get excited with a 20incher. I get excited with a 24-26" or above. Maybe its just my standards tho. Its not uncommon to catch a 20" or above fish around here. Berlin, Mosquito ect... If you wanna hear stories about bigger walleye, talk to a bass fisherman. Im serious!!


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

HookEmUp said:


> @Intimidator- I should have said "smaller" as in comparing them to the lake erie fish. Actually, i think the size of our inland eyes are really good, when compared to canadian lakes or lakes out west. Those guys get excited with a 20incher. I get excited with a 24-26" or above. Maybe its just my standards tho. Its not uncommon to catch a 20" or above fish around here. Berlin, Mosquito ect... If you wanna hear stories about bigger walleye, talk to a bass fisherman. Im serious!!


I like smaller eaters, like 18 to 22inches..but I LOVE BIG GATORS for C&R....your size scale is good, especially the ABOVE part!


----------



## Lowell H Turner (Feb 22, 2011)

Intimidator, I now see the "bigger picture". And of course being milk crates with many small openings and yet hollow while being stuffed with various types of limbs and the odd 10 hole brick or 2...you are a VERY cunning individual...perhaps a few dozen more or so might be in order?


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

Lowell H Turner said:


> Intimidator, I now see the "bigger picture". And of course being milk crates with many small openings and yet hollow while being stuffed with various types of limbs and the odd 10 hole brick or 2...you are a VERY cunning individual...perhaps a few dozen more or so might be in order?


Yep...wondered how long it would take someone to figure it out!
You my friend have paid attention TOO well!
I have bricks for about 10 more!...

Those tubs with all the 6' tall, 3" round hardwood limbs, and 4" pvc with holes....that's where the babies go to grow!


----------

