Food for thought on Big Crappies

[DTro]

I was reading a little blurb in the March issue of In-Fisherman.

In Indiana the DNR had captured and tagged an 11 1/2" Crappie.

The Crappie was re-caught and at that time measured 17".....10 Years Later!

Think about that the next time you're lippin a 12"er and wishing it was a 18"er instead

[buddha]

That's a great comment. But what is a good size to keep. There is no need to keep 10 crappies 12" and over, that's all about bragging then. I'm curious about the feelings on 9 and 10" fish, they too become 12 and beyond. Is there a happy medium?

[thedeadsea]

Thats incredible.

Stands to reason that most lakes don't produce fish that big very often.

[mainbutter]

Interesting.. I don't suppose anyone has compiled growth charts on crappies?

I've seen plenty of growth charts for other species of fish. Female muskies take about 10 years to reach trophy potential (50''+) from one chart I saw somewhere. I don't know how old state records must be, but muskies aren't as long lived as some other giant freshwater fish, and generally will die of natural causes before they hit 25 from what I understand.

Giant largemouth bass seem to have a pretty strong correlation between 1 lb per year, just looking at how old 10lbers are and the estimated ages of fish like dotty.

I believe I read a place that commercially raised bluegills claimed that year-olds averaged 1/2lb and two year olds broke one lb in captive raising and feeding situations. I don't regularly weigh my bluegills, but 1lb puts them in the 10''+ cagegory, right?

I personally feel that for lakes that receive regular fishing pressure but also receive regular stocking, it probably makes sense to target fish in the 2-4 year old category for keepers for any species. I think that's a long enough time for a fish to put some meat on its bones but a short enough time that you're not removing lots of fish that took FOREVER to grow to that size. Keeping a mess of fish that took 10 years to grow is pretty difficult for a lake to recover from if it continues to get that kind of fishing pressure.

I also just had a thought, does the MN DNR do any kind of research that involves C&R fishermen tagging the fish they catch? An acquaintance of mine tags sharks that he catches. I love data like this, and think it would be pretty cool if more of it were collected.

[Fredd]

Caught that article as well. They were trying to stress the longevity of the fish which they thought to be seven years average/10 years max. I think they have had fish, like this one highlighted, to 15 years of age, however.

[DTro]

That's a great comment. But what is a good size to keep. There is no need to keep 10 crappies 12" and over, that's all about bragging then. I'm curious about the feelings on 9 and 10" fish, they too become 12 and beyond. Is there a happy medium?

Yeah, I sure don't have an answer for that. I think it's more about being selective what you take and releasing some of the bigger ones.

[mainbutter]

yup. If all 12''ers are taken, there won't be any bigger ones.

If some 12''ers are released, some will grow bigger.

[Jim Uran]

yup. If all 12''ers are taken, there won't be any bigger ones.

If some 12''ers are released, some will grow bigger.

The same goes for 10"ers as well

I catch a lot of 12"ers every year. I bring quite a few home also. That seems to be the avg size on some of the lakes I fish. I also catch a few every year that are 15" or better.

I think finally crappies are starting to get some respect outside the panfish realm, rather than just strictly seen as table fare, people are realizing that they do have some "trophy" potential.

But lakes with a good crappie bite usually don't last once word gets out. We've seen the complaining about the hoards of people spread out across the lake on a good bite taking pails of fish home. How long do you think it would take to decimate that population with pressure like that? Not very long at all.

I think that the DNR should think about putting tighter regs on panfish, they deserve more respect than they get right now.

[fishuhalik]

There are some lakes that can stand to loose a few 12"+ fish, and those lakes I will take a limit home of bigger fish. The key is to not go back to that lake every weekend and do it over and over. Lakes that get more pressure, I'll keep one 12-13" fish a day, everything else bigger than about 11-12" goes back. I guess that's my rule of thumb.

[JimBuck]

I think that the DNR should think about putting tighter regs on panfish, they deserve more respect than they get right now.

I agree with you on the tighter regs. There are so many lakes that have some potential for big crappies and gills but once the word get's out....all you will find is the 6" clones. Many of these lakes are under 500 acres so it doesn't take much to impact the population. Selective harvest and tighter regs would be a nice change.

[Acemac]

exactly why we need a slot on crappies

[Zelmsdawg]

Do crappies grow quicker per year further south in the country like bass and pike because of the longer summer season as well? I thinking that ten yrs to 17" is long but is it even longer further up north?

Zelmsdawg

[ole matty]

In Minnesota it's take a avgerage crappie to grow 3/4"-1" per year depend on forage base. In southern redneck state like ms,ark,ala,ga their crappie grow 1- 1 1/2" per year but they are short lived compare to here. Again it's all depend on forage base, genetics, and oveharvested of crappie with good genetics which caused stunted size fish.

[fishuhalik]

I know I've heard of several lakes in the Grand Rapids area that have had 10" in 4 years called average by the mn dnr.

[slurpie]

I talked to my local CO about a slot on crappies and sunfish. He laughed at me and said it's not going to happen. Said it would be hard to try and enforce or pass to law. Also asked about reduced limits on some lakes and he said no to that as well. Then he laughed and said yeah you could be home now (we had 17 craps). And i replyed that would be fine with me and he then left.

[hoppe56307]

I talked to my local CO about a slot on crappies and sunfish. He laughed at me and said it's not going to happen. Said it would be hard to try and enforce or pass to law. Also asked about reduced limits on some lakes and he said no to that as well. Then he laughed and said yeah you could be home now (we had 17 craps). And i replyed that would be fine with me and he then left.

There ar some lakes that have a minimum lenght in my area and a reduced limit and we are starting to see alot more of the bigger sunfish and crappies.

[Jim Uran]

I talked to my local CO about a slot on crappies and sunfish. He laughed at me and said it's not going to happen. Said it would be hard to try and enforce or pass to law. Also asked about reduced limits on some lakes and he said no to that as well. Then he laughed and said yeah you could be home now (we had 17 craps). And i replyed that would be fine with me and he then left.

He's an enforcer, not a law maker, or a biologist. Hell, you probably know just as much as him as to what's good for a lake. Times are changing, and the previous generations actions are screaming at us to change. Days of pails of sunnies and crappies are over, as they should be. We should be able to enjoy quality and not be so caught up in quantity.

[fisherdog19]

Amen my brother! A 5 fish crappie limit with a possible 10" minimum, and cutting the gill limit in half would be great.

[RiverRunner]

Should be a 5 Crappie Limit and 10 sunfish limit on the heavier fished lakes. Metro area should be 5 crappies and 5 sunfish. I've fished a couple lakes that have the experimental regs on them like this and the size of the crappies and sunfish was really good.

[PEATMOSS]

These threads are SO predictable.....someone starts talking big fish or big bucks, someone trots out the word "quality" and everyone falls all over themselves blurting out ideas for stricter laws, more rules,regulations, slots, restrictions...blah,blah blah!

Anyone ever heard of things like voluntary restraint and education? Yes, there are still game hogs out there, but their numbers are dwindling. The diehard greedy pigs are going to find a way around just about any reg imposed.

Does anyone EVER stop a minute and think about the consequences of all this silliness? Don't get me wrong, special regs have their place, but turning every fish that isn't a carp or bullhead into some kind of toy shouldn't be one of them.

[Tom7227]

In the book by Steve McComas (The Lake Doctor) he said that there are many lakes that have too many panfish and that in part is because everyone tosses back the small ones. The problem is that too many panfish have to compete for the available forage and the result is stunting at 5-7 inches. It can also have a negative impact on water clarity. The panfish eat the bugs in the water and the bugs in the water eat the algae. If too many bugs get eaten there ends up being too much algae. That reduces water quality and native aquatic plants, which in turn reduces the places where the bugs grow.

There are a lot of articles about this subject on the DNR HSOforum:

http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/publications/fisheries/investigational_reports.html

[st cloud fisher]

just remember that muture crappies over 10 inches eat there own fry, so that why on some lakes there are good year classses where there was no big crappies eatin fry up and now they grew up and eatin there own fry

[FutbolGuru]

I wonder what the mortality rate would be on cathing/releasing crappies (which are usually fished over deep water in the winter)? Makes it tough to put crappie reg's in place when every 4th or 5th fish you release through the ice dies anyways...

Although I would be in favor of this myself.

[Jim Uran]

These threads are SO predictable.....someone starts talking big fish or big bucks, someone trots out the word "quality" and everyone falls all over themselves blurting out ideas for stricter laws, more rules,regulations, slots, restrictions...blah,blah blah!

Anyone ever heard of things like voluntary restraint and education? Yes, there are still game hogs out there, but their numbers are dwindling. The diehard greedy pigs are going to find a way around just about any reg imposed.

Does anyone EVER stop a minute and think about the consequences of all this silliness? Don't get me wrong, special regs have their place, but turning every fish that isn't a carp or bullhead into some kind of toy shouldn't be one of them.

One thing predictable about it, is there is always someone like you who thinks they have to go against the grain to pad their ego Of course I thought about the consequences, there aren't many. But the outcome of tighter regs sure wouldn't hurt.

[boatfull]

The stunted panfish question is a tough one. Biologists used to think the problem was that too many panfish in a lake produced more and more stunted panfish. So to combat this, they left the limits high and introduced muskies to try to bring the panfish numbers down. After a number of years, they have found this is not working. More recent studies indicate the possibility that if a lake has a good number of quality sized crappies and sunnies, those fish will dominate the prime spawning areas and will pass on their genes, while the smaller fish are pushed out to poor quality spawning sites. Those smaller fish are then forced to wait longer to successfully spawn. This is why they are now considering smaller limits and minimum size restrictions.

The big thing to keep in mind is that with so many variables out there, it is very tough to determine what the causes and solutions are. In the mean time, anglers need to be selective about how many and what size fish they keep.