# 10 HP limit on small lakes



## Buckeye1955 (Jan 30, 2007)

What's everyone's feelings on the 10HP limit on the smaller lakes? I run a 225merc on my Triton and end up on the trolling motor all day on a lake like Burr Oak. It has been my arguement for years that instead of a HP limit, there should be a requirement that you have to run at idle speed on anything over a 10HP motor. I make less wake at idle then a 10HP on plane. It would make fishing the smaller lakes so much easier for a vast majority of us. I understand some of the WV lakes even require you to take your prop off to fish if you have a large motor on your boat. That makes it real handy if the wind comes up and you run out of trolling motor battery! I would love to see a group like OGF take the lead on this issue and see if we could get the rule
changed in Ohio to something that makes more sense but still achieves the same desired results. How do we get this done?


----------



## ohiou_98 (Mar 19, 2007)

I agree with you about "idle speed", and apparantly so does the State of Kentucky. Greenbo Lake, an 181 acre lake in KY, has been set by the state to be idle speed only. It would be nice if Ohio would follow suit, but until then I'm still looking for a 9.9 for my boat.

As to how its to be changed? Perhaps we should start with the OGG legislative liasons/lobbyists.


----------



## Buckeye1955 (Jan 30, 2007)

That sounds like a terrific idea! And with evidence that it works in other states, maybe we can get someone to listen! I've kicked around buying a second boat for a couple years, but the more I think about it, the less it makes any sense to have this rule at all.


----------



## Guest (Jan 13, 2008)

The problem with the idle speed rule, is they don't have enough watercraft people to enforce it. I know they have a large no wake zone on West Branch & I've seen plenty of boats running through there at full throttle.


----------



## MadMac (May 2, 2005)

I want a speed limit (10mph) instead of a hp limit. I can only afford one boat and my kids like to go tubing sometimes so I have a 135hp I/O. That eliminates me from fishing most of the muskie lakes in Ohio. I can't put a kicker on due to a built in swim platform. Does this mean I'm not allowed to fish?


----------



## Marshall (Apr 11, 2004)

I agree with you, i would like to see most horsepower restricted lakes have a speed limit and enforce it like clear fork. It seems to work at clear fork with the 8mph speed limit. But in all honesty i don't see this happening, and also this topic has been beat to death. I'm sure the guys with the smaller boats would have a different opinion and i don't blame them. I was there at one time. Most guys i know who like to fish these lakes have a stripped out mod-v boat with a 10hp for these situations along with their bigger hp boat. So unfortunately as of now if you want to fish these lakes you have to get another boat or use your tm. I don't have the room to keep a 2nd boat so i don't fish these lakes much. I feel your pain though.


----------



## Buckeye1955 (Jan 30, 2007)

So they don't have enough people to enforce the idle speed rule, but they do to enforce the 10HP limit? We have a large no wake/idle speed zone on the Muskingum at Marietta and it is only patrolled a few times a year by DNR or Coast Guard, yet there are very few problems. I would think especially with the fishing community you would have very little problems even with no enforcement.


----------



## bigguy (Nov 13, 2007)

I've heard thru the grapevine that at least at Knox Lake they're going to lift the size restriction and make it idle only...

Just what I've heard, don't know for sure tho...


----------



## Rockfish41 (Sep 28, 2007)

im not trying to be controversial,but if they make 9.9 lakes no wake.i would have bought a bigger motor for my pontoon.i have paid a lot of money as it is.i set my pontoon because of the law. i have a problem with boats that are fishing these lakes that fire up there big motors and go blasting across the lake.


----------



## buzzedredneck (Jun 26, 2007)

I Rather Enjoy Going To Peidmont Or Leeseville And Not Hearing A 350 I/o Starting Up Or Trying My Best To Slowly Troll In The Shallows To Catch A Wary Musky Without Having A 25 Ft Bayliner Trying Their Best Not To Make A Large Wake As They Pass. Besides From My Experience, Why Would Anybody Want To Idle Their Motor So Low To Keep A Slow Speed Encouraging Plug Fouling And A Hard And Loud Restart If It Stalls.


----------



## Buckeye1955 (Jan 30, 2007)

So because I purchased a boat with a bigger motor to allow me to cover a geater area in a day, I'm limited to the Ohio river, Seneca and Saltfork in my area. Yet my tax dollars and license fees also go to support Burr Oak, Wolf run, etc, which I can't fish without buying a 2nd boat. If other states are able to enforce this and open up more fishing areas for the people that are paying the taxes and fishing license fees to support them, why can't Ohio?


----------



## buzzedredneck (Jun 26, 2007)

Buckeye1955 said:


> So because I purchased a boat with a bigger motor to allow me to cover a geater area in a day, I'm limited to the Ohio river, Seneca and Saltfork in my area. Yet my tax dollars and license fees also go to support Burr Oak, Wolf run, etc, which I can't fish without buying a 2nd boat. If other states are able to enforce this and open up more fishing areas for the people that are paying the taxes and fishing license fees to support them, why can't Ohio?


WE'D ALL LIKE TO HAVE OUR CAKE AND EAT IT TOO BUT UNFORTUNATELY ITS A DECISION PEOPLE HAVE TO MAKE, JUST LIKE IF THEY WANT TO DEER HUNT WITH A RIFLE, THEY HAVE TO LEAVE OHIO, AND IF PEOPLE IN WV GET TIRED OF INSPECTION STICKERS, MOVE TO OHIO.


----------



## Buckeye1955 (Jan 30, 2007)

Not partial to cake, but what I would like is something more progressive where I can idle out to the fishing area I've picked out, fish for the day on the trolling motor and be able to idle back at the end of the day. And yes, I do take my boat and money elsewhere in other states such as WV and Stonewall. But it would seem to make more sense to try and accomodate more Ohio fishermen in Ohio.


----------



## buzzedredneck (Jun 26, 2007)

I Actually Spend More Money In Ohio Than Here In Wv. Theres Just So Many Things That We Could Argue About With Each Other Like Size Limits On Skeeter, The Amish Overkill, The Tuck Rule Which Gave The Pats Another Controversial Win, But The Decisions Made Of The Higher Ups In Our Population Says It Has To Be This Way And Us The Fodder Of The Ponies Has To Live With It. God I Cant Wait Till Spring.


----------



## misfit (Apr 5, 2004)

ah,it is winter afterall


----------



## chaunc (Apr 11, 2004)

I got tired of argueing about this same topic back in 2006. Came to the conclusion that rather than wait til they passed a law to accomodate the lesser amount of people, that i'd join the majority. I bought a used 9.9 motor and added it as a kicker to my 50. Now i can fish any lake i choose. Solved all MY problems about low speed, no wake, restricted HP lakes. Now i just go fishing. Join the majority or stay in the minority and wait til they pass that law. As for electric only lakes, i bought an extra optima for that.


----------



## PapawSmith (Feb 13, 2007)

Gilligan was right about the lack of enforcement officers. I used to fish Wisconsin alot and they had speed limits not motor restrictions. The difference there is there was ALWAYS a Fish and Game or County Sheriff boat on the lakes. I was always on the waters at sunup and they were always already there enforcing either 10 mph or no wake. What was also nice there was that most waters that had unlimited speed also had restricted hours ie; "No wake before 10am or after 7pm". That was nice because it kept out the jet skiers. They're the worst.


----------



## GO FISH (Aug 13, 2004)

It would be taken advantadge of just like everything else, the majority would follow the rules. A friend saw a guy this summer fire up his bass boat and run down Nimisila resivior, which is an electric motor only lake.


----------



## ohiou_98 (Mar 19, 2007)

chaunc said:


> I bought a used 9.9 motor and added it as a kicker to my 50. Now i can fish any lake i choose. Solved all MY problems about low speed, no wake, restricted HP lakes. Now i just go fishing.



I'll second that....


----------



## H2O Mellon (Apr 5, 2004)

misfit said:


> ah,it is winter afterall


Yeap Rick, your right! Finally... some signs that spring is around the corner; It's Winter Time @ OGF! 

Ahh Wintertime @ OGF: People bitching about HP restricted lakes, next the "C&Rs" vs "Meathunters" and finally just when things begin to settle down: The Almighty Paylake thread will appear! 




PapawSmith said:


> That was nice because it kept out the jet skiers. They're the worst.


Can't argue w/ that. I know that all jet skiers are not bad, but the ones that choose to use the GMR in SW Ohio have left a bad taste in my mouth for all jet skiers.


----------



## H2O Mellon (Apr 5, 2004)

Buckeye1955 said:


> I would think especially with the fishing community you would have very little problems even with no enforcement.


Huh? Man, I can tell your not from SW Ohio! Without enforcement I think the fishing community would go to heck.... quickly! (At least around here)



Buckeye1955 said:


> But it would seem to make more sense to try and accomodate more Ohio fishermen in Ohio.


By having restricted lakes, they are doing this.


----------



## JIG (Nov 2, 2004)

Wish more of them were like WB. No-wake on one end. I have three motors on the back of my 14v. 35-4 and elect. More than one reason for each!


----------



## Net (Apr 10, 2004)

HP is enforced at the dock. 

MPH enforcement requires a boat, equipment (radar gun?), dockage, boat maintenance, full time on the water babysitters (officers). I'm sure I'm missing a few others.

Which option looks more attractive to the state?


----------



## Zfish (Apr 5, 2004)

I really happen to like Hoover as being a 9.9 lake to be honest. I had a few boats that I've owned that I would have love to taken on Hoover but the more I think about it I really like the 9.9 restriction. It's quiet there and even though I havent owned a Hoover boat in several years I've been thinking of going back that route eventually just for the piece and quiet of not having all bigger boats around. There isnt a whole lot of lakes like this left and I personally would like to keep them around. Just my opinion though.


----------



## shroomhunter (Aug 6, 2004)

I know that part of the reason for the 10 HP limit on Piedmont and Clendening is to preserve the shoreline. This is posted somewhere but I'm unsure exactly where. I like it that way....no jetskies or other rule breakers to deal with. A guy can fish out of a canoe or small craft without fear of being run over.


----------



## Muskyman (Jan 30, 2005)

mushroomman said:


> I know that part of the reason for the 10 HP limit on Piedmont and Clendening is to preserve the shoreline. This is posted somewhere but I'm unsure exactly where. I like it that way....no jetskies or other rule breakers to deal with. A guy can fish out of a canoe or small craft without fear of being run over.


This is why I fish West Branch in the spring/fall. I have a 14' deep vee w/a 9.9 I can't even count how many times I have been tossed around by unsafe boaters,jet skiers, etc. I can't afford a bigger boat right now, pay my taxes, registration,etc just like everyone else. Yet I can't use some of the unlimited lakes. I could if I wanted to capsize! If a lake would be off limits to only fisherman it(speed limit) would work. I have had nothing but respect from other guys(fisherman) when going by me, some with much larger boats.


----------



## PapawSmith (Feb 13, 2007)

I think we're getting lost on the subject here. Unless I'm wrong (That never happens  ) most don't have any problem with speed limits or no wake restrictions we just don't understand prohibiting a boat with a 90 hp motor on a small, speed restricted lake, ie; 10 hp limit. You know alot of us can carry guns but we can't shoot anyone. If we can follow that law why can't we be trusted to follow a waterway speed limit. I acknowledge the seeming lack of state funds for enforcement but, as I read it, the complaint here is why a hp limit in lieu of a speed limit. No one thinks we should run 60 mph on a 45 acre lake.


----------



## shroomhunter (Aug 6, 2004)

Sorry but they would break the rules and that's why the HP limit.
Leave the 10 HP lakes alone!!
Done......Hurry up ice!!


----------



## MadMac (May 2, 2005)

mushroomman said:


> Sorry but they would break the rules and that's why the HP limit.
> Leave the 10 HP lakes alone!!
> Done......Hurry up ice!!


Yeah, and how many guys have 9.9 covers on 25hp motors?


----------



## Skarfer (Jan 27, 2006)

buzzedredneck said:


> I Rather Enjoy Going To Peidmont Or Leeseville And Not Hearing A 350 I/o Starting Up Or Trying My Best To Slowly Troll In The Shallows To Catch A Wary Musky Without Having A 25 Ft Bayliner Trying Their Best Not To Make A Large Wake As They Pass. Besides From My Experience, Why Would Anybody Want To Idle Their Motor So Low To Keep A Slow Speed Encouraging Plug Fouling And A Hard And Loud Restart If It Stalls.



Do you really think he meant big-azz speed boats would be going on these lakes when he posted this?? Seriously.......get a clue.

He meant that for us guys with Bass boats or whatever - with larger than 9.9 motors (I've got a 90hp on a 15' glass boat) that we should be able to fish these lakes and not have to rely on trolling motor alone..........

I know there are lakes I'd love to fish - like Piedmont or Clendening - but can't or WON'T because I don't want to rely on my trolling motor to last a whole day. i would be more than happy to idle to a spot and use the trolling motor from there............and I also agree that i've seen guys with a 9.9 throwing a bigger wake than I would be making just at idle. 

This is a great idea and I know it would make me happy if it were the case.........


----------



## Toxic (May 13, 2006)

Skarfer said:


> 1: Do you really think he meant big-azz speed boats would be going on these lakes when he posted this?? Seriously.......get a clue.
> 
> 2: He meant that for us guys with Bass boats or whatever - with larger than 9.9 motors ........


Not harping on you brother but I think I have to agree with Buzzardreddneck........
1: You know darn good and well people with bigger boats would take their "big azz" speed boats out if they "*could*". 

2: Are bass boaters the only boaters out there? Now we are back to square one, just looking out for ourselves and screwing boaters with bigger boats? 

Look if someone wants to fish a 10hp lake, go buy a cheap 2,000 dollar boat instead of a 2,000 dollar 9.9 kicker. Problem solved. 

Can't we all just get along?????? I love cabin fever


----------



## esoxhunter (Apr 7, 2004)

Piedmont, Leesville, and Clendenning are a slice of heaven.
...so peaceful....

I grew up on these lakes and still fish there when I need to 'get away'.


----------



## Skarfer (Jan 27, 2006)

Toxic - I really don't think the guys with those bigazz motor boats would bother hitting these smaller lakes just to tool around..........course there's always that one guy............

I was going to buy a smaller boat so I could fish piedmont/clendening/leesville - but decided on the boat I've got now mainly because we have a camper at Salt Fork and I can "run" on that big lake and not take 3 hours to get to where I want to fish........and don't get swamped on busy days.

I can see your point - but still...........I'd sure like to fish these limit lakes if I could!!!!!


----------



## Toxic (May 13, 2006)

Skarfer said:


> I can see your point - but still...........I'd sure like to fish these limit lakes if I could!!!!!


Skarfer, I have a second boat w/a 9.9. If you know the lake I have a boat. Meet you at Leesville?


----------



## SwollenGoat (Apr 13, 2005)

LOL, yup as was already said "It's winter here at OGF!"

Seriously though this issue *has* been beat to death. You can't make everyone happy - but I feel in this instance what is in place now is the best compromise.

_If you want to fish HP restricted lakes either buy a kicker for your big boat, or a boat dedicated for those lakes...period._


----------



## Rockfish41 (Sep 28, 2007)

my pontoon was docked at acton lake 2 years ago,i dont no how many times people would fire up there big motor and go cruising down the lake.im sorry i think there should be a 9.9 limit on some lakes.most people dont take advantage but theres that few that dont care.i have a 9.9 on my pontoon because of this law so if im on a non restricted lake ,well i will be the one thats last, but hey at least i will be out there.


----------



## Skarfer (Jan 27, 2006)

Toxic said:


> Skarfer, I have a second boat w/a 9.9. If you know the lake I have a boat. Meet you at Leesville?


It's been YEARS since I've fished there! I can tell you that mornings and evenings around the rip rap near the dam at Peidmont is awesome for smallies!!!!!

use a small (2 hook) rapala - fire tiger!!!


----------



## Toxic (May 13, 2006)

Not wanting to hijack the thread but it has been almost twenty years too long since I fished Leesvile. I should take the kids camping and hit the lake this summer.


----------



## V-MAX200 (Oct 16, 2007)

MadMac said:


> Yeah, and how many guys have 9.9 covers on 25hp motors?


none because they wont fit.


----------



## Toxic (May 13, 2006)

V-MAX200 said:


> none because they wont fit.



I believe he means 9.9 stickers on the engine cover. They do that a lot on Pymatuning with 15hp motors.


----------



## 1st shirt (Jan 11, 2008)

Im' new to this site but guess I'll get my feet wet on this subject. I have a 50hp Merc on my boat so I can't use it on these HP limit lakes, but that's fine with me. I'll use my electric if I have to when I'm there. My wife goes with me a lot so my complaint is when we are trying to load the boat. That's when I miss using my bigger motor. Wish they would pass a law that allowed you to use your big motor just to load the boat.


----------



## Net (Apr 10, 2004)

The City of Columbus allows power loading on Hoover but I'm not real clear on the power loading regs for state run 10 HP lakes.


----------

