# ODNR Survey on Horsepower Restriction/Hybrid Striped Bass stocking



## zack pahl (Mar 8, 2009)

Everyone should take a minute and fill out this survey by ODNR.. Possible big changes coming soon to a handful of lakes around Ohio. The survey ends on Tuesday July 31st, so make sure you put your two cents in soon! I'm curious to see what everyones thoughts are!

www.ohiodnr.com/creel


----------



## acklac7 (May 31, 2004)

Everyone PLEASE fill this out! It includes proposed bag limit limitations on Hybrids and White Bass along with questions pertaining to the continuation of the Hybrid stocking program. I have begun to run into these little frieght-trains quite frequently on the Scioto and they are an ABSOLUTE BLAST! They need to stay!


----------



## acklac7 (May 31, 2004)

Hopefully mods can move this to the lounge, im going to plug it in the Hybrids section.


----------



## acklac7 (May 31, 2004)

Also if you central Ohio guys vote for Oshay as your destination of Choice when it comes to Wipers I would appreciate it! (dont know why Griggs isn't on there)


----------



## Saugeyefisher (Jul 19, 2010)

Thanks for posting this. I didnt vote any on the hp restrictions, but voted yeas on the wipers being stocked in more lakes and limits on them! there a very fun fish to catch and as long as they dont mess things up i welcome them with sharp hooks


----------



## acklac7 (May 31, 2004)

Saugeyefisher said:


> Thanks for posting this. I didnt vote any on the hp restrictions, but voted yeas on the wipers being stocked in more lakes and limits on them! there a very fun fish to catch and as long as they dont mess things up i welcome them with sharp hooks


You probably voted for buckeye didnt you 

If you guys wanna vote for buckeye thats cool too, but I'd just hate to loose them in the Scioto


----------



## acklac7 (May 31, 2004)

And not only are they a blast to catch but they fill a much needed void. Like during the summer months they seem to actively feed during the day, even when the sun is high in the sky and everything else has shut down they are still out there munching on shad.


----------



## Saugeyefisher (Jul 19, 2010)

aclak I agree,bring em. A very fun fish to chase and catch!


----------



## zack pahl (Mar 8, 2009)

I agree, I'm all for more Wipers. Such a fun fish to catch! Just in the past few years, I've caught more and more out of the Olentangy and Scioto, to the point where I will actually go out and target them early in the year. I couldn't give many answers to the Lakes proposed for horsepower changes, because I have not fished or been to the vast majority, but a few on the there seemed awfully small to be changed to unlimited. I understand the whole 'idle/no wake' speed deal, but how are they going to regulate/monitor this? A couple of those lakes that I AM familiar with on the list, are so far out there that you probably wont see another boater on it during the day, let alone a Ranger..


----------



## Saugeyefisher (Jul 19, 2010)

zack pahl said:


> I agree, I'm all for more Wipers. Such a fun fish to catch! Just in the past few years, I've caught more and more out of the Olentangy and Scioto, to the point where I will actually go out and target them early in the year. I couldn't give many answers to the Lakes proposed for horsepower changes, because I have not fished or been to the vast majority, but a few on the there seemed awfully small to be changed to unlimited. I understand the whole 'idle/no wake' speed deal, but how are they going to regulate/monitor this? A couple of those lakes that I AM familiar with on the list, are so far out there that you probably wont see another boater on it during the day, let alone a Ranger..


Good pionts on the smaller lakes. I was thinking why not,until i read your post. I didnt participate in the hp surveys just the wiper and white bass surveys


----------



## zack pahl (Mar 8, 2009)

What's really interesting is, that they are considering opening up current Trolling Motor Only lakes to unlimited HP motors...


----------



## avantifishski (Apr 8, 2012)

no you can use any HP but only at idle speed,its not like you can go up on plane..it would really take some pressure off of the current lakes. and would get us a few more places without ski/tube boats rocking us all day long..


----------



## Bad Bub (Jan 17, 2006)

zack pahl said:


> I agree, I'm all for more Wipers. Such a fun fish to catch! Just in the past few years, I've caught more and more out of the Olentangy and Scioto, to the point where I will actually go out and target them early in the year. I couldn't give many answers to the Lakes proposed for horsepower changes, because I have not fished or been to the vast majority, but a few on the there seemed awfully small to be changed to unlimited. I understand the whole 'idle/no wake' speed deal, but how are they going to regulate/monitor this? A couple of those lakes that I AM familiar with on the list, are so far out there that you probably wont see another boater on it during the day, let alone a Ranger..


They monitor it the same way they monitor no wake zones and speed restricted areas now. Same with electric only lakes. Most allow you to have a gas motor, but you just can't use it. And on the lakes i've been to, those laws have been followed pretty well regardless of law enforcement presence. 

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


----------



## Mushijobah (May 4, 2004)

Vote YES on Scioto (O'Shaughnessy) hybrids


----------



## Burks (Jun 22, 2011)

I wasn't very useful for that survey but I did it anyways.

Wouldn't mind seeing some stocked in my area. Wonder if they have ever tried at Clear Fork? Wouldn't oppose some hybrids or larger catfish species (flatheads?).


----------



## Bigfisherman (Sep 10, 2011)

I did my part-----------now lets see what happens,sometimes DNR is deaf and blind


----------



## USMC_Galloway (May 13, 2011)

Took the test. I did not answer on the HP to unimited lakes, I havent been to most of the lakes named , but I do not think it should change. I did respond on the electric to unlimited , and voted no . Those are very very small lakes and could not take the increased pressure a change like that would make. 

Voted yes on the Wipers, I did put down O'Shaughnessy, I just think so many more water systems see the benifits from putting them in there(Griggs, Scioto, Olentangy and all the waters below). The hard part would be to inform the public that the little power house on your line is a Wiper and not a beefed up white bass, and to let it go to because a monster! In line with that I said they should have stricter limits on Striped and Wipers ( lower than 30 a day) .


----------



## Saugeyefisher (Jul 19, 2010)

USMC_Galloway said:


> Took the test. I did not answer on the HP to unimited lakes, I havent been to most of the lakes named , but I do not think it should change. I did respond on the electric to unlimited , and voted no . Those are very very small lakes and could not take the increased pressure a change like that would make.
> 
> Voted yes on the Wipers, I did put down O'Shaughnessy, I just think so many more water systems see the benifits from putting them in there(Griggs, Scioto, Olentangy and all the waters below). The hard part would be to inform the public that the little power house on your line is a Wiper and not a beefed up white bass, and to let it go to because a monster! In line with that I said they should have stricter limits on Striped and Wipers ( lower than 30 a day) .


Know guys who have KILLED them in the resevoirs(oshay and griggs). and people eat wipers to, not just white bass. Now limits yea that would be good. but dont see anything wrong with people keeping them, spec since if they do puttem in they will be a put n take fish(like the saugeye). plenty of big saugeye around... 

Wonder witch one cost more to raise?


----------



## acklac7 (May 31, 2004)

Saugeyefisher said:


> Know guys who have KILLED them in the resevoirs(oshay and griggs). and people eat wipers to, not just white bass. Now limits yea that would be good. but dont see anything wrong with people keeping them, spec since if they do puttem in they will be a put n take fish(like the saugeye). plenty of big saugeye around...
> 
> Wonder witch one cost more to raise?


+1 No problem with people keeping fish they pay for, however as it stands now I believe there is no limit, so essentially people can string up literally Hundreds of em. Heard some horror stories from Buckeye about guys leaving with massive stringers. You can't just rape a fishery like that and expect it to churn out a quality bite year after year...


----------



## Saugeyefisher (Jul 19, 2010)

and dont really get people dogging the dnr. There are so many worst places to fish then central ohio. I can go to a couple places and catch fish at will, both fish they stock and fish that they rely on naturaly reproducing. I myself think the odnr and all involved do all they can possibly do to keep things going for us,that only have to pay 19 dollars a yr,plus the tax on lures that u may or may noy bye.

any ways hope everyone participates in the wiper survey! awesome the dnr is asking the publics input. a few yrs ago we got surveyed on the lake about saugeye length limits, we said heck ya bring em on we said, next two yrs we had limits


----------



## Saugeyefisher (Jul 19, 2010)

acklac7 said:


> +1 No problem with people keeping fish they pay for, however as it stands now I believe there is no limit, so essentially people can string up literally Hundreds of em. Heard some horror stories from Buckeye about guys leaving with massive stringers. You can't just rape a fishery like that and expect it to churn out a quality bite year after year...


Yea im all for limits trust me they make a difference for sure. And your right now there are no limits that i know off. And i have personly seen the 50-75 wipers leaving buckeye on stringers with 10 inch fish to boot. Imo thats not right. Id be perfectly happy with the same limits that they have on saugeye. but just make it more clear and a statewide limit. But if the dnr wants the limit to be 30 I feel they have it that way for a resean


----------



## avantifishski (Apr 8, 2012)

Burks said:


> I wasn't very useful for that survey but I did it anyways.
> 
> Wouldn't mind seeing some stocked in my area. Wonder if they have ever tried at Clear Fork? Wouldn't oppose some hybrids or larger catfish species (flatheads?).


How about stocking some liquid freaking round up in that lake first the fish cant even see each other much less a lure....


----------



## Burks (Jun 22, 2011)

avantifishski said:


> How about stocking some liquid freaking round up in that lake first the fish cant even see each other much less a lure....


Well.....I really can't argue that point!  The west side is basically useless for fishing. Even a 9.9 at full throttle gets bogged down. Forget your trolling motor!


----------



## bman (Apr 20, 2009)

avantifishski said:


> How about stocking some liquid freaking round up in that lake first the fish cant even see each other much less a lure....


That would be a great way to kill a GREAT bass fishery. Avant-I saw you have struggled on CF. do not give up on this lake if you want the possibility of a 20 bass day and or honest chance at a 5+ fish. Trust me!


----------



## avantifishski (Apr 8, 2012)

bman said:


> That would be a great way to kill a GREAT bass fishery. Avant-I saw you have struggled on CF. do not give up on this lake if you want the possibility of a 20 bass day and or honest chance at a 5+ fish. Trust me!


yes been there twice and 2 fish.my trolling motor just gets wrapped and kills my day.is there a clear area?


----------



## claytonhaske (Apr 16, 2010)

Mushijobah said:


> Vote YES on Scioto (O'Shaughnessy) hybrids


i just voted......everyone needs to do this survey!!!!!!!


----------



## lordofthepunks (Feb 24, 2009)

USMC_Galloway said:


> Took the test. I did not answer on the HP to unimited lakes, I havent been to most of the lakes named , but I do not think it should change. I did respond on the electric to unlimited , and voted no . *Those are very very small lakes and could not take the increased pressure a change like that would make. * .


did you do a study? what facts do you have to support this statement?


----------

