Have you ever been made to feel like a criminal for keeping your catch?

[Earl W Story]

 There are a number of fishing forums and Facebook pages that I read and participate in. Today I've dropped all of them except this one and one other.

I've noticed a growing trend on vilifying those of us that eat fish. I don't keep many the last few years, mainly 'cause I'm just too lazy to want to clean 'em after all day or night on the water.

I read a posting this morning on a catfishing Facebook page labeling keeping fish for the table as 'disrespectful' , 'outdated', 'ruining the fishery', and several other negative labels.

Am I just getting old? Or does this give ammo to the Anti-fishing crowd? It looks to me to be causing divisions among fishermen in general when we should be united in our sport.

What are your opinions and/or experiences in this?  

[DAVID L EITUTIS]

HOW RIGHT YOU ARE LOFR !!!!!!!! I SAY IF YA DON'T LIKE WHAT I'M DOING CHANGE THE LAW , UNTIL THAT HAPPENS THOUGH SHUT UP AND MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS AND LEAVE BE ALONE.... NEVER HAD TO TELL ANYONE THAT CAUSE IN THE PAST THEY WERE ALL DOING WHAT WHOEVER I WAS FISHING WITH AND ME WERE DOING, CATCHING FISH TO EAT.... INCLUDING GREEN CARP , WIFE AND I LOVE EM.....

[Allen Morgan]

The State of Oklahoma changed several laws regarding fish this year, and I'm not really happy with some of them.

- No more "Possession Limit".  Like LOFR, mentioned, we used to be able to keep twice a daily limit in the fridge.  This has always been a way for law enforcement to police game hoarders.  Now, we can kiss that goodbye.  This would have been a good way to try and manage the folks that are blocking access in my local river.  Since they aren't doing anything "illegal", but what is considered by many to be "immoral", there really isn't anything I can do.

- Spoonbill (Paddlefish) limit has been changed from one fish / person, to one fish / person 2 / year total.  These are really freaking big fish, and the State feels they are being overharvested like there is no tomorrow.  Each year, we have more restrictive laws passed concerning the harvest of Spoonies.  Personally, I have no real interest in them, as the only place I usually encounter them is a restricted zone for snagging, so I can't legally target them.  When I do connect with one, it usually breaks off within seconds.

- You cannot possess more than 25 non-game baitfish that have been caught from a stream, except for Shad, which is 200.  I'm really upset over this one.  I like to catch wild minnows in the river, and take them home, keep them alive, and use them as I can.  Now, I basically have to toss my wild-caught bait back into the river when I leave.  This is because some folks in "scenic" rivers in the north-east part of the state are using nets, seines, and traps to deplete the population.  They keep EVERYTHING that gets caught.  Instead of trying to pass the law that limited this in those particular rivers, it's now State-wide.  Heck, if I go BUY minnows, I'll have to keep the receipt to prove it.  And, of course, the laws reads, "caught from streams".  I can catch all the minnows I want out of a lake.  But, how do I prove it?

There's been a few others, but I can't recall them off the top of my head.

[Bruce Tomaselli]

I personally see nothing wrong with eating a few fish. Pan fish are prolific spawners anyway, and I doubt keeping a few will hurt the population.

[Tony Livingston]

There's an old saying amongst savvy Bluegill anglers..."You may not be able to fish down the quantity of Bluegills, but it is certainly possible to fish down the quality"

Of course, it all comes back again to what a BOW can support, harvest wise. If every angler is following the law, and they are content with the sizes of BG that they are catching, then I don't see any reason to change. Enjoy the fish, and harvest as you see fit. Here at BBG, we encourage everyone to both enjoy the resource, and continue to educate themselves as to its sustainability and continued viability. Few things remain a constant, and doing something simply because it's always been done that way might lead to eventual problems, or it might not.

Just like my state.....everything has been fine for many years with a no-limit Bluegill harvest, now they are considering a 25 fish per day regulation....something has changed, question is, what??

If it can happen here, it can happen anywhere. That doesn't mean that it will, or that it should. Only that planning for the future is seldom a bad idea, and we as anglers are in a good position to help ensure that BG fishing in our respective states continues to provide enjoyment for everyone, for decades to come.

[Lord of the Fly , Rods]

   Tony, your savvy Bluegill anglers may be right when  they are harvesting bluegill beyond the carrying capacity of the BOW such as a pond, and I know that Trophy fisherman want to catch  a trophy every time they  wet a hook, this just means that they need to emulate Richmond Mills  and control every aspect of  bluegill management and feeding , and they will find success in catching a trophy every  trip.  Here at BBG we must realize that all BOW's are not like Richmond Mills, we fish in State and Federal waters that are open to the public and thus different results are expected.  I too am a Trophy Fisherman as suspect most are here on BBG but we do it in public waters,which make it harder  and a Bigger Trophy than from a fish farm. As for the decline in size there are other factors involved beside " people keeping to many big ones" ,  The decline in the apex predator  Bass"  that eat the young of the year bluegill carries  a much bigger threat to stunting the bluegill than harvesting mature adults, Let me ask you , How many medium size bluegill that are harvested to eat ever make it to trophy size ?   Answer :  NONE !,  and they carry DNA too  and they are the ones that will be trophy size next !  I practice catch and keep and by doing so you can look in the cooler and look at the different size fish and can determine what the difference in the population is , kind of a " Central Limits Theory "  from stat class thing ,another advantage is no need to worry about fish mortality from catch and release . Like you said "only by looking at all sides can we learn something from BBG to preserve the sustainability and continue the viability in all bodies of water" .LOFR

[Tony Livingston]

All DNA is not created equal. If a medium sized BG carries the genetic predisposition to grow into a trophy, and that fish is harvested at a medium size, then yes.....no trophy there. BUT.....how do you know that a medium sized fish carries such DNA? You don't. That's why harvesting medium sized may Bluegills is usually better than harvesting large male Bluegills. With a large BG, there's no guesswork....you can see that the fish carries the genetic code to grow large, that's why we advocate releasing those.

And harvesting the largest male Bluegills in a BOW could certainly affect the quality of the remaining population. As you stated, it depends on the size of the lake as to how much harvest it can support without suffering any ill effects. Many larger BOW can support such harvest quite readily. Some can't.

And as far as a decline in bass doing greater damage to a BG fishery than anglers harvesting the largest males, what type of bass decline are you inferring? Size of the bass, or quantity of the bass? It's very common to have a pond/lake that turns out large Bluegills also have a shortage of large bass.....but high numbers of smaller, stunted bass.

"Bigger trophy than a fish farm?"........ My stance on that hasn't changed. Kinda' like buying your produce at a public grocery store vs. raising everything yourself in your own garden. Wonder which one requires more effort, time, money, and skill?

I'm not attacking anyone for their harvest practices, and have said so many times. Here at BBG we encourage all of our members to harvest as they see fit, share their knowledge with everyone, and continue to learn and observe. Being good stewards of the land and water can only pay great dividends forward, by way of continuing opportunites for excellent BG fishing for generations to come.

 

 

ss

[jim cosgrove]

tony ,from what i have read,from reputable sources over the years is simply this.if large male BG are present ,smaller male bluegill will not mature to spawn until they reach a certain size.if the large males are removed the next year class will mature and build nests although smaller in size on average.i know of some ponds that have 4-5' male BGs that build nests.they go into spawning colors and some have developed the bumps on their heads..i do not see this occur with the other sunfish ,crappies and bass where the female is the larger fish.granted these smaller fish maybe old enough to spawn and are incapable of getting bigger due to overpopulation but these waters used to hold much bigger BGs along with the stunted ones.not a biologist but what i see makes sense to what the biologists have written.i think the big males must be protected for the fishery to have a future in small BOWs

[Leo Nguyen]

You've touched base on biological selection for breeding Jim. Very well said. This is why I've do my hardest to find every unique characteristics that the pondmeisters share to identify females vs males, so I don't accidentally remove the top tier males out of the water, so the new generations of excellent genetics will be past on. Those males who have survived so far in the game, to be as large as they are, are rare in numbers, with certain genetic markers that allow them to be vigilant and adaptive to survive the onslaughts during the growing phases.

Females are on my plates most of the time. Some are males, in the 6" to 9" category, due to gut hooking or accidental non-survivable impaling.

[David, aka, "McScruff"]

I'm reminded of Herbert Hoover's quote at times like this...
"The freedom to speak your mind does not guarantee the right to be taken seriously."

Or words to that effect.

[Jim Gronaw]

I believe that keeping and eating fish is part of our heritage as anglers, and if you are within the bounds of the law, there is few complaints from me.

I eat fish...bluegills, catfish and the very occassional bass to round-out a few fish for an ice-fishing catch. Today I kept 4 small 12 to 13 inch bass and a 9 inch bluegill from a small lake that has seen little to no harvest in the past 10 years. We have released almost every bass we have ever caught from there, including two eight-pounders. We will sometimes keep a dozen 7 to 9 inch gills. We have released all 10 inch plus gills back. It just makes sense, and we still get to enjoy the delicious fillets from time to time!

[David, aka, "McScruff"]

Responsible angling, Jim. It takes knowledge and a sense of stewardship to do that.

[Jim Gronaw]

Vince put it simply...just use common sense as to what you keep and what you release. I actually prefer to harvest fish during winter because they, at least me, seem to taste better coming from the cold waters. Like him, I keep enough for a few meals and usually give some to my son and his wife cos Matt doesn't get to go as often as I do.

Some waters can tolerate more harvest than others, some can tolerate literally no harvest. And everything in between. I like to keep 7 inch class gills for winter fish frys. We have numerous lakes in our area that have an overpopulation of smaller gills, and I call these 'harvest' lakes. We have actually seen size structure improve with the keeping of many of these smaller, yet delicious bluegills.

Yet on other lakes, we know that the numbers just aren't there and the few panfish we might catch could be hawgs. These are what I call 'release' lakes, where the size structure has mostly large fish. To whittle down the population of big fish would basically decimate the fishery, perhaps for our remaining lifetimes. I, personally, cannot do this.

As a general rule, I would recommend that releasing the majority of the 'top-end' or larger panfish, to be a highly beneficial tool for maintaining quality fisheries, nationwide. If the top size slot of crappies in a particular lake are 12 to 14 inches, then I beleive the majority of these fish, 75%, should be released, and the 10 to 12 inchers could be the bulk of the eaters. Same for gills...if 9 to 10 inch fish are the top drawer, then the majority of those should be released and the 6 to 8 inchers should make up the bulk of the fish-fry material.

Additionally, the keeping of a hard-earned trophy fish is not to be considered criminal, but we should all be happy for the lucky angler that does so, and a hearty congratulations for him or her. What is considered 'trophy' size? That depends mostly on where you are from and what a trophy, in your eyes, actually is. In some areas of the mid south 15 inch crappies are by no means rare. But where I live, many would consider such a fish as a lifetime catch.

I have been blessed to have fished some of the premier panfish waters in the nation, with some of the best panfishermen on earth. I have yet to catch a crappie 16 inches or better. I would probably be hard-pressed to release a 17 incher...just me...but it would be a tough call.

Bottom line...just use common sense, and realize that fish are delicious and good for the body, but we have to do our part to help maintain quality fisheries. Every body of water is different, and smart and ethical harvest strategies apply. And that will vary from one lake to the next. Harvest wisely.

With that, I must now get back to my dinner of coconut crusted bluegill fillets...