Fish-Hawk.Net

Hi all. I’m looking to get some feedback on something I heard today.

I was speaking to a lake neighbour this morning who recently attended a local lake association meeting (Big Rideau, I think?).
He knows I’m a big advocate of releasing larger fish (we were talking walleye in particular today) as studies have shown the big ones lay larger eggs and produce more robust fry with higher survivability. Anyway, he mentioned that the Kemptville office MNRF biologist spoke at the lake meeting and claimed that those bigger fish really aren’t all that valuable — and claimed the middle-sized fish are of more value. This goes against the studies I’ve read, that stress the importance of protecting big fish, especially females. Furthermore, citing an OFAH report from 7-8 years ago, some FMZ 18 Lakes (including my own, Wolfe) was considered a “collapsed” walleye fishery. Netting studies were failing to produce any large females.

According to my neighbour, the biologist also said that walleye fry were not surviving because BASS eat them all.

Anyway, wondering what people’s educated thoughts are on this, as this info conflicts with what I’ve learned.

W.

I’ve read countless articles that suggest that the 20-26” walleye are the prime breeders. Apparently while these smaller fish carry considerably less eggs, they are supposed to be more fertile. I personally don’t keep anything over 22” where legal to do so, I like to release the big hens to help out the gene pool.

Great post Margie
This is a debate that has proponents on both sides.

Dr Bruce Tufts, our local expert (Queens University) weighs in within this article...
http://www.outdoorcanada.ca/Why-you-sho ... e-big-fish

I enjoy a good feed of fish once in a while, but the "Big Fish Matter" side of the debate just makes the most sense to me.

Even if he were wrong... I still think that it is the safer approach, because, based on quantity, if a person eats a few 3lb walleye, there are way more of them in any system than big hens, so the system can sustain more harvest of that class than the big 6-9lbers. And, there is the health aspect, the big old hens are more laden with mercury etc.

All documents aside......

I would release those big walleyes regardless---just Because I believe the 3-5 lb fish taste better

The fish in the 8-10 lb range are a little too coarse for me

Now if I fished all day and only caught one bigger one--I'm sure keeping it would not have much impact on the fishery

Hey guys...thanks for your insight and thoughts on this topic. I know where I stand based on science and my own understanding of the research (and, in my opinion, common sense)... but am also not so smug to realize we can all continue to learn new things. Just interested in what others believe and appreciate the data supporting the arguments.

W.

Out4trout wrote:Great post Margie
This is a debate that has proponents on both sides.

Dr Bruce Tufts, our local expert (Queens University) weighs in within this article...
http://www.outdoorcanada.ca/Why-you-sho ... e-big-fish

I enjoy a good feed of fish once in a while, but the "Big Fish Matter" side of the debate just makes the most sense to me.

Even if he were wrong... I still think that it is the safer approach, because, based on quantity, if a person eats a few 3lb walleye, there are way more of them in any system than big hens, so the system can sustain more harvest of that class than the big 6-9lbers. And, there is the health aspect, the big old hens are more laden with mercury etc.

Thanks very much for sharing this. I had read it a while back but will definitely re-read it prior to our lake association’s annual general meeting next Saturday. Appreciate it!

I think it really depends on where the research is done. Research from Lake Erie where the fish grow fast and have abundant food source isn't really applicable to our local waters, to a point. I bet those big girls are still very viable spawners out in the big water. Locally I do think the larger fish (who are much older than say a Lake Erie fish) lose their fecundity as I've been told, likely by the same biologist. They do know the big old girls don't spawn every year yet the younger just matured or the 3 to 5 year old fish are eager to do their part.

I've always struggled with the thinking of folks would rather you let go say an 8 lber and keep 2 4 lbers as the 8 lber is more important genetically to the system. My argument to that is how do we know the genetic makeup of the 2 4's? Maybe they are the 8s offspring and now you've done double the damage. I've ran that by a few bios and their answer is simply that I'm not wrong but all they do know in the equation is the bigger fishes genetics (to grow large) and the smaller ones is unknown.

I have pretty strict rules when it comes to fish being kept in my boat whether I'm guiding or not. I value larger fish not only for reproduction but for allowing someone else the opportunity to catch that great fish again. Don't even get me started on the nonsense going on with Lake Trout on Big Rideau, a 10 lb fish out there is 15 to 20 years old but people don't blink an eye at keeping them. Like I said don't get me started!

The Walleye slot within FMZ18 is in place and followed by most. I think it'll take 2 generations of fish to see the results. The larger fish I've had caught in my boat that cannot be kept is reassuring that the fish are still there and hopefully doing their thing to replenish the damaged stocks.

RJ

CedArt wrote:All documents aside......

I would release those big walleyes regardless---just Because I believe the 3-5 lb fish taste better

The fish in the 8-10 lb range are a little too coarse for me

Now if I fished all day and only caught one bigger one--I'm sure keeping it would not have much impact on the fishery

if you were the only one on that day... then you are right it would not have much impact. But if you were one of a hundred who did it, that would one hundred big ones kept and if that happened every day for a hundred days 10,000 large fish kept. Would that have an impact?

CN wrote:

CedArt wrote:All documents aside......

I would release those big walleyes regardless---just Because I believe the 3-5 lb fish taste better

The fish in the 8-10 lb range are a little too coarse for me

Now if I fished all day and only caught one bigger one--I'm sure keeping it would not have much impact on the fishery

if you were the only one on that day... then you are right it would not have much impact. But if you were one of a hundred who did it, that would one hundred big ones kept and if that happened every day for a hundred days 10,000 large fish kept. Would that have an impact?

Been a walleye fisherman for many years in some of Canada's best waters----fished walleye tourneys forever

Gonna say that 100 big fish in the 8-10 range on inland lakes is unlikely in a single day--and hundred days and 10,000 big ones is possible but not a realistic scenario

Seen many tournaments with 150 field teams---very often half the field catches 4 fish for 8-10 lbs/day---many catch under 5---and these are good anglers

CedArt wrote:All documents aside......

I would release those big walleyes regardless---just Because I believe the 3-5 lb fish taste better

The fish in the 8-10 lb range are a little too coarse for me

Now if I fished all day and only caught one bigger one--I'm sure keeping it would not have much impact on the fishery

There is also a lot less bio accumulation of chemicals in toxins in the medium sized fish.

zippyfx wrote:

CedArt wrote:All documents aside......

I would release those big walleyes regardless---just Because I believe the 3-5 lb fish taste better

The fish in the 8-10 lb range are a little too coarse for me

Now if I fished all day and only caught one bigger one--I'm sure keeping it would not have much impact on the fishery

There is also a lot less bio accumulation of chemicals in toxins in the medium sized fish.

Bingo---Spawners or not---I toss those big ones back---just not good eaters--and as you say---accumulated toxins

RJ wrote:I think it really depends on where the research is done. Research from Lake Erie where the fish grow fast and have abundant food source isn't really applicable to our local waters, to a point. I bet those big girls are still very viable spawners out in the big water. Locally I do think the larger fish (who are much older than say a Lake Erie fish) lose their fecundity as I've been told, likely by the same biologist. They do know the big old girls don't spawn every year yet the younger just matured or the 3 to 5 year old fish are eager to do their part.

I've always struggled with the thinking of folks would rather you let go say an 8 lber and keep 2 4 lbers as the 8 lber is more important genetically to the system. My argument to that is how do we know the genetic makeup of the 2 4's? Maybe they are the 8s offspring and now you've done double the damage. I've ran that by a few bios and their answer is simply that I'm not wrong but all they do know in the equation is the bigger fishes genetics (to grow large) and the smaller ones is unknown.

I have pretty strict rules when it comes to fish being kept in my boat whether I'm guiding or not. I value larger fish not only for reproduction but for allowing someone else the opportunity to catch that great fish again. Don't even get me started on the nonsense going on with Lake Trout on Big Rideau, a 10 lb fish out there is 15 to 20 years old but people don't blink an eye at keeping them. Like I said don't get me started!

The Walleye slot within FMZ18 is in place and followed by most. I think it'll take 2 generations of fish to see the results. The larger fish I've had caught in my boat that cannot be kept is reassuring that the fish are still there and hopefully doing their thing to replenish the damaged stocks.

RJ

Thanks for your input and this food for thought, RJ. Some really good points that merit consideration and maybe even some future study by the Ministry’s biologists. Also, comparing Great Lakes to smaller bodies of water may indeed be comparing apples to oranges. I can see the logic there for sure.

I’m going to continue to advocate for those big, older fish, because most of the science — at least for now — points to their superior genetics. Remove enough of the larger fish and the smaller ones are left to carry the population and over time those inferior genetics might actually decrease the size potential of the offspring.

And as you pointed out, i also like to think that by releasing those larger fish, they may make someone else’s future outing a memorable one.

Kudos on having some discerning rules about clients keeping bigger fish.

And to the folks mentioning the concentration of mercury and other toxins in bigger fish...absolutely true. Learned this in my ecology class!

Thanks again to everyone weighing in. No pun intended!

CedArt wrote:

CN wrote:

CedArt wrote:All documents aside......

I would release those big walleyes regardless---just Because I believe the 3-5 lb fish taste better

The fish in the 8-10 lb range are a little too coarse for me

Now if I fished all day and only caught one bigger one--I'm sure keeping it would not have much impact on the fishery

if you were the only one on that day... then you are right it would not have much impact. But if you were one of a hundred who did it, that would one hundred big ones kept and if that happened every day for a hundred days 10,000 large fish kept. Would that have an impact?

Been a walleye fisherman for many years in some of Canada's best waters----fished walleye tourneys forever

Gonna say that 100 big fish in the 8-10 range on inland lakes is unlikely in a single day--and hundred days and 10,000 big ones is possible but not a realistic scenario

Seen many tournaments with 150 field teams---very often half the field catches 4 fish for 8-10 lbs/day---many catch under 5---and these are good anglers

CedArt

My point was not is it possible or realistic for there to be100 8-10lb fish , but more to think that all our actions have an impact.

And I agree I would never harvest a large fish.

I dont catch enough big walleye to make this discussion worth while but on big water like BOQ I let anything over 5lbs go. Not basing that on any kind of science just what feels right. Slots take the guess work out of it.
I like the slot in zone 18. Z 17 put in a similar slot a while back and I have noticed first hand the positive impact it has had, lets hope its the same for 18. Lets face it the Walleye fishery in Z 18 is not great but we have more bass than you could catch in a life time so how about we all let the odd slot walleye go and keep a couple 1.5-2lb smallies instead!

I realize that you aren't talking about this type of "Value", however in the case of monetary value... it appears that one out of slot harvested walleye is about $500 + $1000 for not stopping for the conservation officers!

Inside Ottawa Valley