# Electro shock boat at Pike Island



## MY EYES (Mar 23, 2010)

Fellow anglers, ODNR, & WVDNR!!!!! Tonight I, (MY EYES) got to witness what I wish all anglers,that fish the Ohio River at Pike Island could witness with their own eyes! An electro shock boat was close enough to the pier for myself and one other person on the pier,.to talk to the guys on the boat! They were shocking the water and we set our poles down to watch! Man,what a true up close and personal experience of seeing what the true condition/population of fish,that are present, as they did their thing! We saw literally hundreds of fish that were stunned by the shock,floating to the surface! With our headlights aimed at the water,we saw eyeballs everywhere! We were personally asked by the 3 guys on the boat if we caught any walleye and ,.we did not! The bite was as storng as I've seen it for the year and lots of decent saugers,but no walleye! When talking to the guys,.I expressed that the laws of Ohio should be changed to meet WVDNR rules and the guys on boat agreed! They said they were finding very few walleye compared to the massive numbers of sauger! This is and has been my personal view all year! I've seen a bunch of walleye caught since October,but they all seem to be larger,.couple year old fish and not the generations that we used to see! Don't know if it due to spoiled spawn, over harvest, or some other factor but ,my personal belief is that the Walleye species, in this pool at this location are in trouble! Compared to the past few years and from my point of view,.there are less walleye in general and definately very few smaller walleye being caught! Like I said,.when I asked the guys on the boat if they were finding any walleye,.they seemed to express the same concern and I am very curious of their report! I will be doing some calling to see if that information is or will be available. Sauger on the other hand,seemed to me,. to be very plentiful and in sizes representing generations. We got to witness sizes from 5 or 6 inches to absolute, Fish Ohio sized and a few that were monsters! Man,...if netting was allowed at that point,.I could have got limits with one scoop! So,..to conclude this experience,. I am: 1) calling out all anglers to be very selective in your harvest 2) calling out WVDNR,.since they control the river to do more to repopulate the species and 3) calling out ODNR to get on the same page with WVDNR and change the harvest limit to meet WVDNR specs as they are the ones testing and putting up the effort to keep the species viable! Also for Ohio,.to start putting forth a little more effort into the Ohio River on this side! One game warden for each county is ridiculious to say the least! $19 for each licence and it is spent where? I live in Ohio,.less than 10 minutes from Pike Island and have personally witnessed a game warden at Pike Island only a couple times in just the past few weeks,over the couarse of 6 years! A deputy sheriff used to come once in a while several years ago,but nothing for the last several years! Management and enforcement is in great demand from my stand point! Like I said,.I am curious to see what the results will be in the shock boats report,if that can be made available for all to see,.as the concern was their for the guys doing the testing! Everyone needs to step up and do the right thing and protect the species and the sport! Greed,. is a killer and I think it is showing!! No one needs to kill 10 walleye at a time everyday and considering the publicity of the internet and the shear presence of so many anglers,.it seems to be having an effect! This is the view of someone who has fished this location for several years! Everyone wants to catch a monster,.but once you have got it,.what does another one equal or smaller do for you? A trophy is a trophy and meat on the table is just that,.but to continue to enjoy this,.we must all contribute! ALL OF US!!! Egg Layers should be put back to preserve and protect!!! If not,.don't bitch when they are depleted!!! MY EYES,.on the pike!!!!


----------



## multi species angler (Feb 20, 2006)

I couldn't agree more. Why keep those above average fish to eat when there are so many more average and below that are caught. Myself and the guys I fish with release 90 percent of the fish we catch. Most all of the fish that are FISH OHIO size and larger regardless of species are released, even if we are wanting to keep some to be eaten.


----------



## Agitation Free (Jul 11, 2010)

Good reminder of how we need to protect our resources and our sport! :good: OGF member I-SHOCK-EM is one of those lucky guys that perform the electro-shocking and data recording. A valuable service for sure!


----------



## mastercatman (Jan 30, 2005)

Trust me when I say, the river is doing fine with the current regulations. WVDNR is the one whom needs to get on board with Ohio. The goals of Ohio and West Virginia are a little different when it comes to walleyes in the river. WV wants to promote a species of walleye which is loosely supported to be endemic to the upper Ohio river watershed while also trying to produce a trophy fishery. Ohio is trying to provide opportunity to both catch and harvest these fish. Angler harvest has not been shown to have a negative impact on the Ohio river fisheries thus far. This is due to shear numbers of fish and size of the water containing fish, of which only a small percentage of that is accessible to most anglers. Walleyes and sauger are similar in many ways, however they are not always on the same pattern of movements, location, and feeding.When considering that, the same water could be shocked in another day or two and produce an entirely different ratio of walleye to sauger. It has always been my experience that sauger will outnumber walleye in the daily catch with few exceptions in my history on the river. Depending on the year, you'll possibly see more or less of either species. Also, keep in mind that this is a river system with high year to year variability in conditions and because of that, fish populations are more likely to be affected by weather and water conditions in any given year, more so than effects of angler harvest. 
This is not meant to offend anyone, but just trying to keep things in perspective. 
MY EYES, ODNR is very open about where the money goes. After seeing it all on paper, I think you might agree that the ODNR is doing the best they can with what money is available. Trust me, if there is a real problem with a fishery, it will be addressed.


----------



## Hatchetman (Apr 13, 2004)

What mastercatman said X2


----------



## lil goose (Oct 16, 2009)

My Eyes what you are saying is the truth. It has been a while since i caught several 10"-15" walleye,which used to be a common occurance, at either pike or new cumberland. I have brought this to the odnr a few years ago several time all i ever got back we will look into it!! It took years of complaining just to get ohio to make the river regulations somewhat understandable for the common angler!! I have talked to wvdnr they seemed concerned but not to the point of doing anything!! You would think the two divisions of wildlife could sit down and come up with one set of regulations that would be best for the river or at least wvdnr should take the ball after all they are the one's who stock the river!! I personally would like to see it a two walleye limit of 15" to me thats fair but i have witnessed in the past guys with buckets of 10"-15" walleye,which is perfectly legal, but if want to conserve our walleye fishery this will need to be addressed! That's just my two cents worth!


----------



## fishmeister (Jul 29, 2004)

mastercatman said:


> WV wants to promote a species of walleye which is loosely supported to be endemic to the upper Ohio river watershed while also trying to produce a trophy fishery.


Just so ya know, it is not loosely supported to be endemic, it is very certain to be endemic. Non-native walleye from the great lakes have been introduced for years into the Ohio river and its tributaries (by all states that border the river), and the native strain has been diluted significantly. WV (and KY for that matter) currently support stocking walleye that are native strain into tribs of the Ohio River.


----------



## MY EYES (Mar 23, 2010)

Mastercat, Maybe what your saying is true,.maybe not! No offence taken,.it is just my point of view and supported by my own experience at this location! I've been saying all year to every angler that I talk to that I would like to see the states perspective on the subject,.in writing for all of us to read and digest! WVDNR,however is the governing factor of the river! They spend the money to do the testing and the stocking! They have their rules set to accomidate their findings and I personally think it is wrong of ODNR to ignore this! Why anywhere else in the state of Ohio is the limit 6,.with a size limit of 15". It is because they care about their own bodies of water enough to see a need to set limits! I personally feel a 10 limit with no size restriction is a slap right in WVDNR's face!!! I am not trying to pin the current condition on fisherman, as it may be just a few years of spoiled spawn,.but the facts are facts and we just have not been seeing the generations of walleye this year as opposed to the past several years! If someone would have posted what I did a few years ago,.I would have told them that they were nutz!! On the other hand,.this year has been unreal for seeing perch being caught! I haven't seen perch like the ones being caught this year ever! Also the few Muskies that were caught,were the first I've seen or heard of in at least 20 years! Something changed and it is very evident! I can't wait to see WVDNR results! I hope this stirs the governing bodies of the states to put their heads together as lil goose said,.and come up with a uniform set of rules! It simply does not make sense to have two completely different set of laws ,governing the same body of water! That is a fact and something has to give!


----------



## MY EYES (Mar 23, 2010)

Hey Agitation Free, Was he one of the guys on the boat that I talked to,I wonder? Sure would like to see his opinion on here!! That would be straight from the horses mouth and supported by his professional opinion,.which I admit mine is merely my own opinion! Any way someone could contact him and see if he would possibly share with all of us the real deal? I would personally take his word for it,.but still think WVDNR and ODNR need to set a uniform law for the Ohio River!


----------



## mastercatman (Jan 30, 2005)

Okay, so I chose my wording a little poorly on them being endemic because, I agree, there has been a genetic haplotype which has been identified. However, there has been significant genetic dilution and saving a sub-species is a noble cause, though it will be virtually impossible to reverse the damage. As it currently stands, there will always be an influx of non-native genetics from various sources. It is still no reason to limit anglers to two walleyes over 18" in a system that can withstand more liberal restrictions and produce fish numbers and size similar to what you see now. Look at the bigger picture. This is a very large body of water with an equally large fish population. Angler harvest is not a significant source of mortality with our current regulations. Being a river, it is very dynamic and fish populations from year to year are a result of conditions each species is exposed to in each year which will determine reproduction and survival. Fluctuations in Ohio river walleye and sauger populations are not directly linked to angler harvest from year to year. Ohio would like to cooperate with West Virginia, however their (WV) restrictions do not make biological sense and are too restrictive which reduces opportunity. The Ohio river is a VERY productive system without much help from either agency. Ohio cares about the river system as much as any other water it manages. There have been creel surveys, electro-fishing surveys, and a multitude of other data collected from the river to determine best management practices. So far, things have been good, if it's not broke don't fix it.

You want to talk about real problems in the world of fisheries, look at commercial catfishing in the Western reaches of the river and several other rivers within Ohio to feed an industry with fish our license dollars pay for.
Or how about the upstream migration of Asian carp?
Our sauger and walleye are doing well enough.


----------



## jastew (Nov 18, 2011)

I don't fish at Pike island, but I still like to read all the threads.

Guys for real, I'm not trying to be an ass...but... it's really hard to read long run on sentences with no paragraphs. Please remember when you write, someone is reading. If you want them to read it all...then split up your thoughts. It's really hard to read when you write a page of text and don't split it up.

Just saying, thanks for your thoughts, but please take a minute to make it easier to follow. Don't expect anyone to be a professional author, but if you want your thoughts to be read, take a bit of effort to make it more readable.


----------



## fishmeister (Jul 29, 2004)

mastercatman said:


> However, there has been significant genetic dilution and saving a sub-species is a noble cause, though it will be virtually impossible to reverse the damage. As it currently stands, there will always be an influx of non-native genetics from various sources.


Not true. Native subspecies tend to have higher breeding success than introduced great lakes subspecies in rivers. In addition, they tend to segregate on different breeding grounds. WV has seen a significant increase in natives in the Upper Kanawha due to stocking, and endemics segregate (do not breed with) from introduced great lakes walleye in the upper New River and in the upper Cumberland River. 

You are correct to state that there will always be an influx of non-native genetics from various sources.... as long as agencies continue to make poorly informed stocking decisions. WV and KY are on board, if other states would do the same then the damage would be reversed. The real problem is Ohio's production and stocking of saugeye (derived from sauger and great lakes walleye) into tributaries of the Ohio River. Downstream dispersal and backcrossing to walleye in the Ohio River will continue to introduce great lakes walleye genes into the native population.


----------



## jastew (Nov 18, 2011)

fishmeister said:


> Not true. Native subspecies tend to have higher breeding success than introduced great lakes subspecies in rivers. In addition, they tend to segregate on different breeding grounds. WV has seen a significant increase in natives in the Upper Kanawha due to stocking, and endemics segregate (do not breed with) from introduced great lakes walleye in the upper New River and in the upper Cumberland River.
> 
> You are correct to state that there will always be an influx of non-native genetics from various sources.... as long as agencies continue to make poorly informed stocking decisions. WV and KY are on board, if other states would do the same then the damage would be reversed. The real problem is Ohio's production and stocking of saugeye (derived from sauger and great lakes walleye) into tributaries of the Ohio River. Downstream dispersal and backcrossing to walleye in the Ohio River will continue to introduce great lakes walleye genes into the native population.


I totally agree that it's best to stock native strains and totally support that. 

However, the introduction of Saugeye, IMO is negligible since few (<10%) are able to breed. Stocking Saugeye may not be the best use of resources, but due to their low reproduction rate, don't have a big impact. 

But, saugeyes are easier to raise in hatcheries, so I think that some short sighted fisheries employees see them as the best option. I'm thinking it might be better to spend more money to stock native species.

Bottom line: is it better to go with easy Saugeye or look long term and stock native Walleye even if it's tougher?


----------



## fishmeister (Jul 29, 2004)

jastew said:


> Bottom line: is it better to go with easy Saugeye or look long term and stock native Walleye even if it's tougher?


In a pure sense, natives are the way to go. Former world record walleye from Lake Cumberland was undoubtedly an endemic walleye. 
But from the angles of stocking and sport fishing, I don't think Ohio will ever stray away from saugeye production. They are so economical to raise, have higher environmental tolerances, and provide sport fishing opportunities for so many more individuals than a walleye ever would.


----------



## MY EYES (Mar 23, 2010)

Mastercat,. You are pretty quick to the trigger to post that there is nothing wrong with the river and that angler harvest has no effect! You post about creel surveys,shock surveys,and other studies and state that Ohio cares about the river and would like to cooperate with WV ,but their laws make no biological sense! Are you a marine biologist? Do you even realise that Ohio has nothing to do with studies of the river? WV controls the river,.does the studies,.does the stocking,.and sets the laws,at least what they can control from their side! Ohio on the other hand, set a completely different set of laws for the same body of water,.which they don't have a dime in!! Hence,.my slap in WV's face statement! Why anywhere else in Ohio is the limit six with size limit 15 in stated locations! Why when you talk to anyone from WVDNR,do they express the same concern? I'd just like to know what your credentials are to make the statements you make,.for anyone to trust your opinion? I admit I am not a marine biologist,.I simply state my opinion as I see it from fishing this location! Maybe the river is fine where your at? They have it split into sections or divisions,.maybe the harvest limits only need changed in some areas to help the species out! I also don't agree with angler harvest not having any effect! When you see how many people line the banks in a small location where the fish tend to stack this time of year and everyone keeps taking ten and comes back daily,.not to mention harvesting the egglayers before they drop them,. it most certainly has to have some type of effect! Like I said,. I would like to see a professionals stand point,.not some one who is looking through harvest eyes!!!!


----------



## t.stuller (Feb 25, 2010)

Just my 2-cents. I am a fan of the WV regs and their stocking program. With that said, I've been fishing Pike Island for over 20 years and who ever says the walleye fishing isnt better now, didnt fish it back then. I remember my uncle talking about there being nothing but carp in there 40 years ago and how polluted the river was. Either way people can keep what the law allows. If someone chooses to keep smaller fish then so be it, as long as its legal. The economy around there down right sucks and some of those people fish to feed their families. Nothing pees me off more to hear someone whine about what people keep, just because they dont keep any.


----------



## Doboy (Oct 13, 2008)

t.stuller said:


> Just my 2-cents. I am a fan of the WV regs and their stocking program. With that said, I've been fishing Pike Island for over 20 years and who ever says the walleye fishing isnt better now, didnt fish it back then. I remember my uncle talking about there being nothing but carp in there 40 years ago and how polluted the river was. *Either way people can keep what the law allows. If someone chooses to keep smaller fish then so be it, as long as its legal. The economy around there down right sucks and some of those people fish to feed their families. Nothing pees me off more to hear someone whine about what people keep, just because they dont keep any*.


AH YES! Ditto that! TOUCHE'.
And I've met so Many River fisherman that were so thankfull for the New bag limits.
Most Trying to Feed their families, AND with the price of gas,,, I'm so glad when they get to take a decent meal home,,, wether it be sauger or walleyes.
And when we see the 'Newbie'/ first-timer catch his limit,,, ALL IS WELL.

I'm VERY INTERESTED in seeing the TALLY from the "SHOCK TREATMENT",
AND where the tests were taken. Then MAYBE I'll listen to all the 'HYPE'.

'Cause I still wonder,,, Below NC, fishing 3 different spots, I'll catch 20 sauger & maybe 1 walleye.
My favorite spot ABOVE the dam,,, last fall I probably caught 15 walleyes with 7 over 4# and NOT ONE SAUGER! ????
I need more stats!


----------



## MY EYES (Mar 23, 2010)

You've missed the point completely! The post is about the condition of the walleye now and how the ones being caught are all older fish! Comparing to 40 years ago is not even a comparision at all! 25 years ago,.there were still tar balls on the banks and the water stunk! Now that it is better,.means more people from all over are pounding it! Lake Erie is a huge body of water and it has a limit of 6. The post is intended more in respect to get Ohio and WV, on the same page and set uniform regulations for the River! The 2 completely different sets of laws make no sense when governing the same body of water and the tipped scale is easy to understand when you consider who is maintaining it and who is benefiting from it! Oh,.and I do like to take my share of fish as well,.just would like to see it survive for the years to come!


----------



## t.stuller (Feb 25, 2010)

MY EYES said:


> You've missed the point completely! The post is about the condition of the walleye now and how the ones being caught are all older fish! Comparing to 40 years ago is not even a comparision at all!


I didnt miss the point, I started by stating, "Just my 2 cents." Alot of people who just started fishing the river have no idea what its been through and how far its came. Plus, you mentioned about the bag limits and I replied with my opinion. Ohio does there part with the river too. I'm not spending all day online searching info to pacify you, but I have read articles in Ohio Valley outdoors regarding the stocking efforts by both states. While I favor WV's stocking efforts, there size and bag limits are extreme. Only 2 walleye over 18"! I "personally" would be happy if both states pushed for all female walleye to be released from march-may, but left the limit at 10. I feel this would help WV reestablish a healthy reproducing walleye population while still feeding the people. Ohio keeps putting saugeye in on a regular basis. Those saugeye will help feel stringers while the release would be in effect. And yes comparing it to 20 or 40 years ago is relevent. You cant expect that river to turn into a world class fishery in a couple years. It is a long term effort, which involves more than just regular stockings.


----------



## t.stuller (Feb 25, 2010)

MY EYES said:


> Lake Erie is a huge body of water and it has a limit of 6.


Erie has alot of commercial fishing boats on it also. I've never heard of "Fresh Ohio River Walleye" in the store.


----------



## MY EYES (Mar 23, 2010)

t.stuller said:


> I didnt miss the point, I started by stating, "Just my 2 cents." Alot of people who just started fishing the river have no idea what its been through and how far its came. Plus, you mentioned about the bag limits and I replied with my opinion. Ohio does there part with the river too. I'm not spending all day online searching info to pacify you, but I have read articles in Ohio Valley outdoors regarding the stocking efforts by both states. While I favor WV's stocking efforts, there size and bag limits are extreme. Only 2 walleye over 18"! I "personally" would be happy if both states pushed for all female walleye to be released from march-may, but left the limit at 10. I feel this would help WV reestablish a healthy reproducing walleye population while still feeding the people. Ohio keeps putting saugeye in on a regular basis. Those saugeye will help feel stringers while the release would be in effect. And yes comparing it to 20 or 40 years ago is relevent. You cant expect that river to turn into a world class fishery in a couple years. It is a long term effort, which involves more than just regular stockings.


 OK,. Lets clear the air here and get back on point, with why I posted to begin with!!!! The limit of 10 fish doesn't need to change, as walleye ,sauger,and saugeye in aggregate, as per WV and OH law allows, will still work,. so that these die hard fisherman can still,. "feed their families"! But allowing 10 walleye with no size limt, as Ohio law states,. seems to be a problem,. as per what "I" have been witnessing all year and seemed to be a concern as well, among the guys on the shock boat! Maybe not at dams above or below,but to me it shows at the Pike! I agree the WV, 18" size law may be a stretch and could probably be 15" with no problem,.but allowing a harvest of 10 "walleye", with no size limit, may be doing harm! As for stocking Saugeye,.Find one shread or bit of proof,. that ODNR has stocked even one Saugeye in the Ohio River!!!! For that matter,.I'd like to see one bit of evidece that Ohio has even stocked one fish!! Not saying they haven't,.but I am under the undestanding that this is all done by WV and have been unable to find anything to the contrary! I'm open minded ,so would like to definately see some evidence or info on Ohios program for the "OHIO RIVER". You guys are confusing the River with the Muskingum Watershed and other land locked bodies of water in Ohio,.I believe! I think I've seen 4 or 5 saugeye caught in the Ohio River in my life!! My post is not about stocking to begin with,.it is about the harvest laws and the fact that maybe the walleye species could be in trouble, in this pool,. if Ohio law continues to allow a no size limit and bag limit of 10! Whats wrong with taking 2 and maybe a size limit of 15" instead of WV's 18" law,.and then filling the creel with Sauger, which have always seemed to thrive in the River! I did not state that I didn't want to see anglers not taking them,.just that something is a miss and maybe it needs addressed! Maybe not!! Like I said,.I would like to see the professionals take on this and definately would like to spark the states to get together and make a uniform law,so that it makes sense to the preservation and that there is no confusion among anglers! Also would like to see alot more enforcement,..after all what use is a law if no one enforces it!!!


----------



## t.stuller (Feb 25, 2010)

OK,..but allowing a harvest of 10 "walleye", with no size limit, may be doing harm! 
-I've never in over 20 years of fishing Pike seen someone take 10 walleye at a time. It has always been a mixed bag. Up till this year it was 6 walleye or 10 in combination bag limit. Check your old regulations.

As for stocking Saugeye,.Find one shread or bit of proof,. that ODNR has stocked even one Saugeye in the Ohio River!!!!
-Search some older issues of Ohio Valley Outdoors, its in there (as I already stated and stated that I'm not spending my time searching it to pacify you.)


I think I've seen 4 or 5 saugeye caught in the Ohio River in my life!! 
-I ,many people I know, and people on here have taken many limits of Saugeye from the river. This comment here shows me that either u dont really fish as much as you claim, or you dont know how to correctly identify a saugeye. I will no longer be posting in this thread, I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed man.


----------



## Daveo76 (Apr 14, 2004)

I have caught a FEW, very few Saugeyes from the river, mostly around tribs from where they have "escaped" impoundments and moved downriver. I would like to see them stocked. C'mon, if they can shock truckloads of Saugers from the river for breeding purposes, they can put something back.


----------



## lil goose (Oct 16, 2009)

I get the magazine ohio outdoor news and i read an artical in there about ohio river saugeye's and how the are abundant and easy to catch well i don't want to call them a liar but think they are confusing a saugeye with a sauger!! I have caught a few saugeye out of the river but they are few and far between!! Actually the ohio river is one of the few places saugeye happen naturally,not man made. So if someone is catching many limits of saugeye out of the ohio river i would have to see them to believe it!! Even through the years on ogf and the numerous pictures i have seen on this site not 1 saugeye i can remember!! Yet i go to buckeye lake or piedmont and see them all the time. I truly believe that quite a few people just don't know the difference!! Kinda like the white bass and small hybrids you almost need a dna test to figure it out!!


----------



## MY EYES (Mar 23, 2010)

t.stuller said:


> OK,..but allowing a harvest of 10 "walleye", with no size limit, may be doing harm!
> -I've never in over 20 years of fishing Pike seen someone take 10 walleye at a time. It has always been a mixed bag. Up till this year it was 6 walleye or 10 in combination bag limit. Check your old regulations.
> 
> As for stocking Saugeye,.Find one shread or bit of proof,. that ODNR has stocked even one Saugeye in the Ohio River!!!!
> ...


Are you talking about the Hannible pool or another part of the river? I talked to an ODNR representative, on the phone and was told West Virginia controlled the river and did the stocking,.in the location that I have indicated, in the beginning of this thread (PIKE ISLAND-HANNIBLE POOL)! I also stated that maybe nothing was wrong in other parts of the river, above and below,as I rarely fish them! I get my information from talking to the DNR's,.so I really wouldn't consider that unarmed! And,..Yes,. I do fish,..probably more than I say I do and know very well how to identify the difference between these fish! I see you are from North Benton-Berlin Lake,.just how often do you fish at the Pike? I live 10 minutes from the pier and fish everyday I can,..at least from October through April and a good bit here and there during the summer! As for taking 10 walleye,. I've done it myself several times and seen many others do it as well several times! That is why I made the statement, that if a few years ago,.I seen someone post what I did,.I would say they were nutz! But now that the internet has drawn so many to fish there and possibly some spoiled spawns or angler pressure,.something is off and they just are not there like they were! Maybe read the original post first,..just saying!! As for your statement "up til this year it was a limit of six walleye",. I think maybe you need to read the old regulations, because I believe it has been 10 walleye,sauger,saugeye in aggregate for several years now, in the Ohio River fishing from the Ohio side!


----------



## I Fish (Sep 24, 2008)

First, I like W.Va's 2-18" Walleye rule. Second, I know the ODNR has been doing angler surveys at most of the dams on Ohio side of the river, probably yours too. The March/April edition of InFisherman has the fish ID portion of the survey on page 10. Interesting statistics from the ID surveys were the accuracy of anglers to identify Walleye-60.9%, Sauger-67%, and Saugeye, drum roll please, a whopping 19.7%. That means not quite 2 people out of 10 can ID a Saugeye. IMO, that probably has a lot to do with ODNR not placing a seperate limit on walleye alone.

I don't know if you guys know the difference or not, and you'll probably think I can't either, after I tell you that, in the fall, we used to catch limit after limit after limit of Saugeye at Racine. That all stopped a couple of years ago, and now we catch mostly Sauger and the occasional Walleye. The Saugeye used to be so good there, I never took a Sauger home, and I'd always put the Walleye back. I still put the Walleye back and just keep Sauger, but there for quite a few years it was Saugeye heaven. 

Back in the Saugeye days, I'd have people mad because I was keeping all the "Walleye". I'd pick up the dorsal fin and show them the spots, but it made no difference, to them, I was killing all those big Walleye.


----------



## senoy (Feb 3, 2013)

Stocking saugeye would be a mistake. Saugeye stocking should take place in smaller impoundments where you want a stricter control over the population and less of a chance of corrupting nearby waterways. The Ohio they want to be a self-sustaining fishery. Introducing saugeye simply places a competing predator in the watershed and a predator of young sauger and walleye with them only adding a marginal amount of reproductive capacity to the breeding pool. Saugeye are better suited for a put and take fishery. It would be a mistake to stock them in the Ohio and I think that WVDNR and ODNR agree with my assessment. WVDNR has completely stopped stocking them at all state impoundments and wants to create more self-sustaining walleye fisheries instead, a wise move if you ask me.


----------



## jastew (Nov 18, 2011)

senoy said:


> Stocking saugeye would be a mistake. Saugeye stocking should take place in smaller impoundments where you want a stricter control over the population and less of a chance of corrupting nearby waterways. The Ohio they want to be a self-sustaining fishery. Introducing saugeye simply places a competing predator in the watershed and a predator of young sauger and walleye with them only adding a marginal amount of reproductive capacity to the breeding pool. Saugeye are better suited for a put and take fishery. It would be a mistake to stock them in the Ohio and I think that WVDNR and ODNR agree with my assessment. WVDNR has completely stopped stocking them at all state impoundments and wants to create more self-sustaining walleye fisheries instead, a wise move if you ask me.


Totally agree. Stocking saugeye has to be done every year, sauger and walleye can be self sustaining if managed correctly.

We catch the occassional saugeye, but I'm sure they are naturally occuring. 

I'm all for stricter regulation on walleyes, but for many, if not most fishermen, a walleye is an eating fish more than it's a sport fish. You also have the issue of mis-identification as well to contend with. Add to that, the fact that most pools of the Ohio will probaly never have strong walleye populations.

Maybe a good way to go about this is to regulate by pool, with stricter regs on the upper Ohio where walleye have a better chance to develop a strong population.


----------



## MY EYES (Mar 23, 2010)

jastew said:


> Totally agree. Stocking saugeye has to be done every year, sauger and walleye can be self sustaining if managed correctly.
> 
> We catch the occassional saugeye, but I'm sure they are naturally occuring.
> 
> ...


Well said!! Getting ODNR and WVDNR and other state reciprical agreements in line, with a uniform plan, for each pool would be ideal for all! As for misidentifying these fish,.we are talking about 3 different fish,.which I find hard to misidentify myself,.but that is me and I have seen people have problems with it! It is safe to say,.if you are reading these posts,that you have a computer or other means of searching the internet! Simply google,"Identifying walleye ,saugeye, & sauger". You will also see the difference and how easy it is,...Maybe!!!!


----------



## Daveo76 (Apr 14, 2004)

All sounds good but a lot people misidentify which pool they are actually fishing.


----------



## driftfish101 (Jun 25, 2011)

Sauger only live an average of 3 years in the river and are very good spawners. There is no need to stock, that river is full of saugers. if anything an increase in the sauger bag limit wouldn t hurt most years. Sometimes the spawn isn t great because of weather and river fluctuations, but overall it is a great fishery. Wouldn't mind seeing ohio and WVA on the same page though. Slot limits are the way to build fisheries in my opinion.


----------



## driftfish101 (Jun 25, 2011)

soory guys, I misread, I think river strain walleye stocking not saugeye is the ticket.


----------



## lil goose (Oct 16, 2009)

driftfish101 said:


> Sauger only live an average of 3 years in the river and are very good spawners. There is no need to stock, that river is full of saugers. if anything an increase in the sauger bag limit wouldn t hurt most years. Sometimes the spawn isn t great because of weather and river fluctuations, but overall it is a great fishery. Wouldn't mind seeing ohio and WVA on the same page though. Slot limits are the way to build fisheries in my opinion.


I agree!! Slot limits may be a good idea!!Anything but the present 10 fish limit would help!! I agree the saugers are doing well but the walleye numbers do seem to fluctuate more and maybe that's just the way it is even if we get some better restrictions but i for one am game to see if tighter regulations help the walleye population on the river. If it does't well maybe we just have to accept that is just the way it is now is the way it is going to be!! Goose


----------



## t.stuller (Feb 25, 2010)

http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/Home/species_a_to_z/SpeciesGuideIndex/saugeye/tabid/6750/Default.aspx
-to end alot of arguing read the part regarding about how tell identify a saugeye. It's not that hard.
- I do live 1 1/2 hrs from Pike Island dam (which I know is hannibal pool, as below New Cumberland dam is Pike Island pool), but i have family in Toronto whom I fish with alot. I have a landscape company so my work allows me plenty of time to drive down there during the winter months.
-I put in my previous post about how it was 6 WALLEYE OR 10 COMBINED. Take time to read what I wrote before commenting (MYEYES).
Regardless, I've been fishing there for over 20 years and am not going to argue about something I know. 

MYEYES- it seems to me that u look for arguments, hence why I said I wasnt going to post again under this thread. This will be my last comment on the issue. I enjoy this site and am not going to jepordize it arguing with u.


----------



## MY EYES (Mar 23, 2010)

t.stuller said:


> http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/Home/species_a_to_z/SpeciesGuideIndex/saugeye/tabid/6750/Default.aspx
> -to end alot of arguing read the part regarding about how tell identify a saugeye. It's not that hard.
> - I do live 1 1/2 hrs from Pike Island dam (which I know is hannibal pool, as below New Cumberland dam is Pike Island pool), but i have family in Toronto whom I fish with alot. I have a landscape company so my work allows me plenty of time to drive down there during the winter months.
> -I put in my previous post about how it was 6 WALLEYE OR 10 COMBINED. Take time to read what I wrote before commenting (MYEYES).
> ...


There is no arguement!!! And, I am not looking for one!! JUST STATING FACT!!!! You need to read the first post,. that I started this thread with,..PERIOD!! Nothing to do with stocking Saugeye or which strain is misidentified or what the limit used to be! I'm solely talking about the Hannible pool ( From Pike Island Dam to Hannible Dam). The limit of walleye is 10,.with no size limit! It is not 6 walleye,.with 10 in aggregate of sauger,.IT IS 10 WITH NO SIZE LIMIT!! I feel it is a problem and when I got to talk to guys on the Electro boat,.I got the impression that they felt the same!! That is what this thread is about! I'm sure it will piss some people off,.but I don't shoot pregnant does,..don't shoot button bucks,.don't shoot bucks that shed their horns,.just as I don't want to see the Walleye disappear from this pool!! I don't care how much gas one spends or how far one travels,..the regulations need to be set according to what the pool is doing! I travel 2 1/2 hours to fish Erie and can only take 6!!!! I stated that maybe it is different in other pools,.but this is the one, that I posted on!! Sounds to me,. like you are looking for the arguement and are way off point of what I posted! But,.Fact is,..Your entitled to what the law says,. because you pay for a license like most everyone else and the sign at the parking lot says "Public Fishing Pier",.so no arguement,..take what you want! I,. on the other hand, will fight and push both states to get to the table and find common ground of governing this body of water before it reverts back to what it used to be! If nothing is wrong according to their survey,..then game on!! If so,.then I'll do my part and not knock a guy for giving a crap about something they have passion for!!! I know what this place was like years ago and there is no comparison to now,.but there is also no comparison this past couple years to the years before that!! Just stating facts dude,..and I for one love to harvest and eat what I catch!! Also,.You posted to end argueing and posted a link for identifying saugeye,..this has absolutely nothing to do with what "I" posted! NOTHING!!!! Other guys got off track from my post! Sounds like you are looking for the arguement!! AGAIN,..Read the first post,starting this thread!


----------



## C J Hughes (Jan 24, 2006)

Driftfish I have read several articles that state saugers only live 3 years in the Ohio river. I never understood WHY I am sure they tried to explain it but it was never clear to me, Do you know if so please inform me. There are enough shad to walk across the river on so I don't think it is food.


----------



## senoy (Feb 3, 2013)

I've heard it elsewhere, but I don't buy the 'only live three years' number. Doesn't make sense to me. A 3 year old sauger is usually 12 inches or less. Sure, there are tons of those, but there are also much larger sauger in the Ohio as well. Plus, sexual maturity of sauger usually doesn't hit until 3. Surely it would take more than one breeding year to sustain the population? If the three year number is the mean age of usual harvest or largest cohort year of caught sauger, I would believe that. Saying that they only live until three doesn't make any sense and I know that big, old sauger have been caught, so it's not true in all cases. Anyway, I'd love to see some sources as well on that number.


----------



## Mushijobah (May 4, 2004)

He said an average....implying that there are some sauger that live much shorter lives (eaten by predator, sickness) and some sauger that live much longer lives. This shouldn't be surprising.

For example, the average lifespan of a human being is approx. 67 years. Plenty of people die in their 30's, plenty of people die in their 90's. It's statistics, folks.


----------



## Daveo76 (Apr 14, 2004)

Mushijobah said:


> He said an average....implying that there are some sauger that live much shorter lives (eaten by predator, sickness) and some sauger that live much longer lives. This shouldn't be surprising.
> 
> For example, the average lifespan of a human being is approx. 67 years. Plenty of people die in their 30's, plenty of people die in their 90's. It's statistics, folks.


Yeah , I guess it depends on where you are. I saw on fishn.com that some saugers can live to 13 yrs , avg 7 yrs and grow to about 7 lbs. Wow!!


----------



## lil goose (Oct 16, 2009)

I know a lake isn't the river but i know of a lake some saugers were put in years ago and they seem to have done well. It has been more than 6 years ago when they were put in and we still catch them occasionally. I suppose they could have reproduced in the lake but when we catch one it is always fish ohio and beautiful markings!! So i have my doubts about the three year mortality rate on saugers!!


----------



## saugerdaddy (Mar 30, 2011)

WOW..... Ive been following this post for a few days and I gotta say its good to know there are people so passionate about the sport we all grew to love. Just my 2 cents on the issue..... It burns me up when I see people take home everything they catch with no regard to numbers or size, and shame on the DNRs in the states that dont regulate them. I agree that there should be a 15" size limit and a 5-10 bag limit on walleye/sauger/saugeye. I just so happen to have my own personal regulations on what I will and wont keep that consists of no more than 10 fish at 15" unless otherwise specified. I will continue to fish past 10 fish, but will release them all. The truth is I rarely make my 10 fish limit anyway LOL. Either way, The arguement (or conversation that took place) was senseless. Lets grow up guys! I think the original point of this post was valid and its nice to know that there are people out here that care enough about the sport to want to preserve it for our children to enjoy for years to come. Here's hoping for better regulations throughout the river. Good fishing to all!


----------



## senoy (Feb 3, 2013)

I slot limit myself. Nothing over 20 or under 16. (I might consider a 30+ incher if it were a particularly pretty fish.) No obvious females during the spawn. No more than 2 fish a month. This year, I've caught about 50 fish and released 46 of them. One of those I only kept because he dropped off as I was landing him and beat himself up pretty badly flopping around so I figured he wouldn't have survived the release anyway. Safe eating amounts on the Ohio are 8 oz. of walleye, saugeye or sauger a month. A 20 inch fish gives about a pound of fillet and is enough for one person to eat for two months. So if you're only eating walleye, then you can safely only eat six good size fish a year per person. Why would you ever want to take more than that? You're either poisoning yourself or wasting it and neither particularly sits well with me. I fish 16 oz. waters, so I take one fish a month for me and my son (the wife won't eat fish) and one that I freeze for a walleye fry later in the year.


----------



## C J Hughes (Jan 24, 2006)

I understand what everyone is saying about average life span honest I do . BUT I have fished the Ohio River for over 40 years yea I am old and I have NEVER EVER seen a sauger bigger than 24inches and that one weighed 4lbs. The record sauger for Ohio was out of Lake Erie weighed 7 something I think and was 24 inches I think I doubt if it was really a sauger more like a saugeye . Saugers in the lakes out west get huge Fort Peck is one lake that has big saugers . So where are all of the big saugers in the Ohio River? I am not talking about 20 to 22 inches cause I catch them every year I am talking about 5 to 10lb saugers. 
Also not only am I old but I am fat from eating all of those saugers out of the Ohio River . I don't believe any of the do eat don't eat reports think about it the only fish you can eat more than once a month out of Erie is walleye and perch and you can eat them every week. YEA RIGHT everything but those two are once a month.I have NEVER caught a sauger out of the Ohio River that has tumors on it such as the walleye I catch every spring on the reefs on ERIE .
So WHERE ARE ALL OF THE BIG SAUGERS ? Someone please answer pictures would be nice I know how most guys seem to bull well you know .


----------



## senoy (Feb 3, 2013)

Well, you won't find 10 lb. sauger because they don't exist. The world record is 8 lb. 12 oz. The length record is somewhere around 28. The fact that you regularly catch 20-22 inch sauger speaks well of the fishery. Those are massive saugers. At their normal growth rate they are likely 10-12 years old.

As for the fish consumption advisories, they are for PCBS and mercury. Tumors on walleye are generally caused by a couple of different viruses and aren't particularly harmful to people. You see them more in Erie because there are more fish that confine themselves to relatively small areas during breeding seasons and transmit the virii between each other. Mercury on the other hand is invisible in the fish and incredibly toxic. Long term effects include a number of neurological issues, usually vision loss, hearing loss, numbness in your extremities and inability to coordinate your movements. Continued exposure can result in coma and death. In children, methylmercury exposure can be debilitating, so if you have grandkids, at least try to limit their exposure. It's your body, you can do what you want with it, but at least go in with your eyes open. You're gambling a heck of a lot on hoping that the government is lying to you. 

PCBs are the reason for the one a month on the Ohio (Mercury on the Ohio allows twice a month.) PCBs are a likely carcinogen, usually gastro-intestinal cancers. They also cause major developmental problems and mimic estrogen in your body. Overexposure means a lower sperm count, altered sex organs and in children can cause sex organs to be underdeveloped or in the case of children in the womb can even alter their sex completely. They also attack your immune system and lead to a greater susceptibility to viruses and infections. Like I said before, it's your body, do what you want with it, but you're gambling an awful lot just for a nice dinner.


----------



## C J Hughes (Jan 24, 2006)

http://www.ifishillinois.org/gofish/tips/Walleye_and_Sauger.pdf
You are right there isn't any none I doubt that there are many over 4lb in the Ohio River.From the study above it looks like those 13 inch fish are 5 years old could be the reason the locals are eating 10 inch fish . 
So where did all the mercury and pbc go that was in Erie in the 60's? I remeber when you shouldn't eat anything out of Erie.


----------



## senoy (Feb 3, 2013)

C J Hughes said:


> http://www.ifishillinois.org/gofish/tips/Walleye_and_Sauger.pdf
> You are right there isn't any none I doubt that there are many over 4lb in the Ohio River.From the study above it looks like those 13 inch fish are 5 years old could be the reason the locals are eating 10 inch fish .
> So where did all the mercury and pbc go that was in Erie in the 60's? I remeber when you shouldn't eat anything out of Erie.


Mercury is denser than water and naturally sinks to the bottom and over time is covered by sediment. That's why dredging operations can cause a spike in mercury contamination in small areas. Mercury is also removed from the system by fish dying and sinking or being consumed and the mercury moved to a different watershed. Mercury cycles are strange though and you can see spikes in fish even if overall mercury levels are decreasing if for instance, they shift their favored prey source to something that is more likely to be contaminated themselves. (For instance if they start feeding on bottom-feeding fish when they were previously feeding on top-feeders.) Once we started trying to control mercury emissions from power plants mercury levels have been gradually decreasing across the Great Lakes region. It takes a long time to get it out of the system though.


----------



## C J Hughes (Jan 24, 2006)

So the fact that I can't see anymore can't hear anymore and can't find my peter anymore and I fall down all the time and I am shooting blanks is not because I am getting old . It is from eating toooo many saugers. I am the poster child for the EPA on what not to eat . LOL Thanks for the info I will try to do better .


----------



## senoy (Feb 3, 2013)

C J Hughes said:


> So the fact that I can't see anymore can't hear anymore and can't find my peter anymore and I fall down all the time and I am shooting blanks is not because I am getting old . It is from eating toooo many saugers. I am the poster child for the EPA on what not to eat . LOL Thanks for the info I will try to do better .


Well, I won't tell you what it is and what it ain't, but I will tell you that eating too many sauger and walleye can mess you up pretty badly.


----------



## saugerdaddy (Mar 30, 2011)

The theory on size of river saugers is that they typically dont grow as big as lake saugers due to the fact that they spend alot of their life fighting swift current as the rivers constantly fluctuates. So where lake saugers have it fairly easy, they gain weigh (get fat) from less exercise than the river saugers get. Thus the lake saugers are the lazy, obese, strain of saugers vs the fit, trim, river strain.......but thats just theory.


----------



## driftfish101 (Jun 25, 2011)

They have a pretty fast metabolism also......as far as the 3 year average lifespan, that is in a ton of ohio and Wva wildlife studies. Every now and then you see a good sauger come from the river but one over 18inches is really pretty rare. Not that it doesn't happen. A ten pound largemouth is rare in Ohio but I caught one 12ilds 2 years ago. I posted the picture back then so don't ask. lol. People recognized the background in the picture and every Tom Dick and Harry have pounded for 2 years now.


----------



## ohiobuckhunter (Aug 30, 2012)

I have been watching this site and the Pike Island threads for a few weeks now and I just can't sit idle any longer. Like it or not people have different points of view and varied tolerances for right vs wrong. Catching fish, keeping fish, eating fish and releasing fish is personal preference and as long as the posted law is followed No One can or should impose his or her opinion onto others. You know what is said about opinions, we all have them and believe that they are the only correct solution. My experience has proven otherwise and I bet if everyone else objectively reflected on their past that would hold true 95+% of the time. 
I support individual views and respect those who post opinion and fact alike. We all need to be aware of what is going on in our environment and what the vibe is on the street. If you have a passion for fishing and want to fight for what you believe - that's freaking awesome. I support that right and encourage you to do that; but putting down others, posting negative comments or flat out being a jerk is not the correct path to success. If the last sentence offends you, then look in the mirror and ask yourself why...
Let's all get back to using this site as a tool it was designed to be. Fishing reports, success stories and meeting like minded individuals that enjoy similar activities. We all should celebrate the success of others enjoying what God has provided. Lets stop killing the messenger, trying to disprove every other point of view and trying to one-up the next guy. We all can smell BS when we see it. Pointing it out is not needed and calling it out to make another look bad really isn't necessary. This site is public domain and last I checked I didn't have to pay to register. It's open to all and is designed for everyone. Let those that need to brag, brag. Those that want to educate, educate. And those that want to post lies and opinions do so in peace. What I have seen over the past few weeks has really upset me on levels most of you probably understand. Enough is enough. Lets get back to fishing and accept everyone's views as those of our fellow sportsman. 
I have nothing more to add and really do appreciate the forum, opinion and passion witnessed about fishing. Lets all have a successful fishing season - whatever the term success means to you. 



Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## Daveo76 (Apr 14, 2004)

Not trying to kill the messenger or upstage anyone, but Mercury is a naturally occurring element. Been here all along and isn't going anywhere.


----------



## muskiehunter06 (Jun 9, 2012)

Never heard so much ruckus over a river hole

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## Daveo76 (Apr 14, 2004)

muskiehunter06 said:


> Never heard so much ruckus over a river hole
> 
> posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


 No different than someone wanting to protect a lake. It's important all the way down river. Just because I fish way down at Greenup doesn't mean it won't affect me. I take it you fish for muskies. You want to protect your fishery??? A little ruckus doesn't hurt. Always different ideas and different thoughts. You don't have to read the discussion.


----------



## I Fish (Sep 24, 2008)

senoy said:


> Well, I won't tell you what it is and what it ain't, but I will tell you that eating too many sauger and walleye can mess you up pretty badly.


I know that's what "they" say. I've never, not one time, heard of somebody who got sick eating these fish. Have you? I can tell you for fact, there's people out there that can't afford the luxury of a computer to be posting on this forum with. I can tell you too, if you ask them if they'd rather eat fish from the river or go hungry, their gonna eat those fish. Not once a month, more like 10+ times, when they can get them. If they can, then why can't I?

I ask again. Where's the proof? I don't mean some study, performed in a lab on rats. I mean, who here knows of anybody, in the last 10 years, that has been diagnosed with any malady relating to eating too many fish?


----------



## MY EYES (Mar 23, 2010)

saugerdaddy said:


> WOW..... Ive been following this post for a few days and I gotta say its good to know there are people so passionate about the sport we all grew to love. Just my 2 cents on the issue..... It burns me up when I see people take home everything they catch with no regard to numbers or size, and shame on the DNRs in the states that dont regulate them. I agree that there should be a 15" size limit and a 5-10 bag limit on walleye/sauger/saugeye. I just so happen to have my own personal regulations on what I will and wont keep that consists of no more than 10 fish at 15" unless otherwise specified. I will continue to fish past 10 fish, but will release them all. The truth is I rarely make my 10 fish limit anyway LOL. Either way, The arguement (or conversation that took place) was senseless. Lets grow up guys! I think the original point of this post was valid and its nice to know that there are people out here that care enough about the sport to want to preserve it for our children to enjoy for years to come. Here's hoping for better regulations throughout the river. Good fishing to all!


Wow!!! Another person,. actually read my post for what it was worth!! Your a dude I can fish with man!! I'm not trying to say people are taking to many,.just stating the fact that we are not seeing as many small walleye at the pike the last couple years! Everything seems to be older fish! Seems two different conversations got wrapped up here and strayed from my original post! I still have not seen a bit of professional evidence or proof that nothing is wrong,.so I personally will throw back the smaller walleyes and hound the DNR's to get together and put out a set of regulations to govern this pool,.that a kindergardener can understand!! Til then,.I'll pound the hell out of Tappan lake and other Muskingum lakes, as much as I can,.as they seem to be doing much better!!!!


----------



## MY EYES (Mar 23, 2010)

senoy said:


> I slot limit myself. Nothing over 20 or under 16. (I might consider a 30+ incher if it were a particularly pretty fish.) No obvious females during the spawn. No more than 2 fish a month. This year, I've caught about 50 fish and released 46 of them. One of those I only kept because he dropped off as I was landing him and beat himself up pretty badly flopping around so I figured he wouldn't have survived the release anyway. Safe eating amounts on the Ohio are 8 oz. of walleye, saugeye or sauger a month. A 20 inch fish gives about a pound of fillet and is enough for one person to eat for two months. So if you're only eating walleye, then you can safely only eat six good size fish a year per person. Why would you ever want to take more than that? You're either poisoning yourself or wasting it and neither particularly sits well with me. I fish 16 oz. waters, so I take one fish a month for me and my son (the wife won't eat fish) and one that I freeze for a walleye fry later in the year.


Restrictions are a little more relaxed than they used to be and for good reason,..because the river is much cleaner now!! I personally have been eating these fish since I was a wee lad and so far,..as far as doc says,.nothing wrong! Don't belive everything the government tells ya!! Look what is in Mt.Dew,..Brominated vegetable oil. Bromide is horrible,.but people been doin the dew since I was a kid too! Anymore ,.The cereal you eat for breakfast will cause ya cancer! People who don't smoke get lung cancer! When your time is up,..it's up and nothing you can do about it!


----------



## MY EYES (Mar 23, 2010)

C J Hughes said:


> So the fact that I can't see anymore can't hear anymore and can't find my peter anymore and I fall down all the time and I am shooting blanks is not because I am getting old . It is from eating toooo many saugers. I am the poster child for the EPA on what not to eat . LOL Thanks for the info I will try to do better .


Humor at it's best!! Mercury is in all waters and will continue to be,.probably as long as we all live!! Raw sewage is another problem and all waters have that too! Some worse than others! I prefer a steady flowing body of water verses a land locked pool!


----------



## saugerdaddy (Mar 30, 2011)

MY EYES said:


> Wow!!! Another person,. actually read my post for what it was worth!! Your a dude I can fish with man!! I'm not trying to say people are taking to many,.just stating the fact that we are not seeing as many small walleye at the pike the last couple years! Everything seems to be older fish! Seems two different conversations got wrapped up here and strayed from my original post! I still have not seen a bit of professional evidence or proof that nothing is wrong,.so I personally will throw back the smaller walleyes and hound the DNR's to get together and put out a set of regulations to govern this pool,.that a kindergardener can understand!! Til then,.I'll pound the hell out of Tappan lake and other Muskingum lakes, as much as I can,.as they seem to be doing much better!!!!


It wasnt really that hard to figure out what you intended with this post, but you sure did stir up a huge pot of mess LOL. You should run for congress


----------



## MY EYES (Mar 23, 2010)

saugerdaddy said:


> It wasnt really that hard to figure out what you intended with this post, but you sure did stir up a huge pot of mess LOL. You should run for congress


Yeah, They need someone that is not afraid to speak their mind and stand up for what is right for all,.even if it means slapping ones self in the face! Else,.. things will just continue on the "as usual" trail,...that it has been on! Some people just don't like to be told or called out on their crap and some don't like to see change! I've noticed that it it pretty easy to pick out the true users and the abusers of anything,.just from their words! It is simple psychology! My post was not intended to cause any stir,..it was intended to bring to light that something may be off with the walleye and maybe if everyone pulled together,.we could do something about it,.without having to depend on any government,.that takes their good ole'time and always seems to be a day late and a dollar short. But as stated before,.the laws are posted and the water is public,..DO WHAT YOU WANT!


----------



## Daveo76 (Apr 14, 2004)

You have to admit , your opening post was very long, and it doesn't take much for the mind to wander a little. So please don't be so hard on everyone who replied,,,,,,


----------



## switch56 (Apr 1, 2013)

No pro or con here guys. Just saying I see way more many sauger vs. walleye caught. Though I target the white or hybrid bass. All which I release


----------



## saugerdaddy (Mar 30, 2011)

I could be wrong but I was told years ago that walleyes are fish native to the great lakes and "like the yellow perch" are originally lake bound fish while the sauger is a native of streams and rivers. So although the three are relatives, the walleye and perch do better in lakes and the sauger survives better in the river. This might have something to do with the difference in the numbers. I was also told that the walleye have a harder time reproducing in the rivers and would not be there if not stocked, where the sauger do just fine.


----------



## senoy (Feb 3, 2013)

They're both native to river systems and can do quite well in them. My guess as to why the lower Ohio has so many more sauger than walleye is pretty simple. Walleye on average become sexually mature at 3 years old or about 16 inches in length. Sauger do so at about 12 inches. The lower Ohio gets hammered by anglers and they tend to target and keep anything over 12 inches or so. Since sauger are sexually mature at that age, they are able to have a year's worth of breeding. Walleye get taken out before they are sexually mature and never contribute to future classes. Walleye also 'back load' their breeding. As they get larger, they have many, many more eggs they are capable of releasing. Sauger do the same thing, but it's not as pronounced. A small sauger will lay 10 thousand eggs and a large sauger will lay 50 thousand. A small walleye on the other hand will lay 30 thousand eggs and a large walleye can lay five hundred thousand eggs. When you have more large females in the system, they are able to populate the system better. In the lower Ohio, very few walleye make it to those sizes. Essentially, the year over year class is being populated by the very few females that attain 18 inches and they rarely make it to their second year of breeding (or more accurately, it's being maintained by stocking since so few fish make it to breeding age. I think you are right in saying they wouldn't be there if not stocked, but not because they don't do well in rivers, but rather because of overharvest.) The sauger population is being maintained by a larger number of fish in the 12-15 inch range. In places with fewer anglers, walleye are going to do better.


----------

