erie perch limits

[knk]

i was wondering what some of you erie perch fisherman think of this ridiclously low perch limit?you guys know the scene you work hard all week finally get to go fishing (wife lets ya)and tour on um in the hole double after double spreader to the bottom and just lift ah another one until oh oh i gotta check how many i got geuss what you already limited you spent all that money on gas minnows ETC and now you gotta go in i think 30 is way to low a more libral limit should be set like 100 per person there are plenty of perch out their we aint gonna overharvest them you wanna know why the dnr wont raise the limit?because this is thir personal atm machine and all they care about is getting fine money!im not advocating poaching but these guys need to raise the limit what you guys think?

[kingfish]

after cleaning a couple of limits i.m glad its only 30 i still remember going to the cleaning station and seeing clothes baskets of 4 to 5 in perch being cleaned i felt sorry for those guys too.. 30 is plenty

[Popeye91]

I've been fishing Lake Erie for a long time and perch fishing is'nt what it has been in the past. 20 yrs. ago you could drift fish and get as many as you wanted anywhere in the western basin,or punch a hole in the ice 100 yrds. off cooly canal and fill the trunk of your car.Gotta say those guys at the d.n.r. know what they're doing, about the perch situation anyways. Might want to try walleye fishing when you get your limit of perch!

[Buckeye]

Kingfish I'm with you. No matter how many on the boat 60-90 fish is MY filleting limit.

[Al]

The perching is real good for the commercial guys. Ever stop in the fish cleaning houses and see them cleaning the owner boat catches? Jumbos, and more than 30 per man too.

[rh]

Man if 30 perch can't feed any ONE person for at least a week, then man you eat to much and you might notice gills starting to form!!!!!

[Grebs]

If you guys think that is bad you should fish in Lake Michigan in Illinois and Indiana. You can only keep 15 perch per person and in Illinois stopping this April you could only keep perch between 8 and 10 inches. The DNR does know what they are doing though.

Good fishin,
Grebs

[jim c]

When you drive 100 miles (1 way) buy licence,meals,bait ice,pop,lunch meat lures,hooks spreaders,gas oil,sun glasses,kite *for the kids)so on and so one.then look at 60 perch (you and the kid) that produces what 15 lbs of fish ( it usually takes $100 for a trip) 100/15= about $7 per lbs. thats if all goes well..it could be better...jim c,?does it cost the netters that much,do they plow that much $ back in to the economy?? Who is paying the most,who is recieving the most ????now im really mad grrrrrrrrr..

[rob799]

i dont have a problem with a limt of thirty perch ,the problem i have are the ones i seen at the fish cleaning place that these people had ,some were barley 5 inches little dinks you know that a person could never catch enough fish to out weigh the cost, any how its like deer hunting lic. permit , supplies guns ammo ,four wheelers,processing fees ect. i enjoy the sport and if iam really in need of some meat id rather buy it at the store than to shoot bambi or pay somone to fillet some 5 inch dinky perch id rather catch a dozen 10 inchers than 30 little 5 inchers

[Buckeye]

Bambi is a cartoon and I wouldn't shoot him either. I do however enjoy eating venison I shoot, properly field dress, properly age, then process myself. I do agree those 5" perch would compare to deep frying the shiners in the bucket but that's just my opinion. Some people like them. In their defense, past experience on this board proves over and over that you WILL get your chops busted for keeping bigger breeding sized fish. Maybe this doesn't apply to perch?

[Airwave(OH)]

I think 30 is enough. I can say that I may not have always felt that way but after going to a few siminars and hearing what is happening out there. How many hours are spent studying the different things that effect the limits induced. I believe I'll leave it up to the experts. I know this is a cheap reply but for the lack of a better way to put it. You know what the limits are before you drive all the way here, if you don't like em ,well you know the answer. Do you belong to ANY organization to help fight the netters? or just complaining. Believe it or not guys(gals) there are a whole bunch of people out there working there butts off to make Erie the great fishery that it is.
If your not part of the solution you must be part of the problem.

[John]

I also think 30 perch per day is plenty.

[cmb]

DOn't stop fishing when you get your limit! switch gears an hit the bronz backs, or try for a few eyes, or (depending on your boat, find a backwater area and hit the LM bass, crappie, and gills. Or try other techniques like using small jigs or blade baits to make it more of a chalange to catch your limit. Or, if numbers of fish kept is that important, find an active school of white bass.

I go out for perch about every other week in the late summer- fall. I can't remember the last time I came home with a limit. We only keep 8"+ fish (some days the cut off is even higher). Try a selective harvest aproach, you can fish all morning (or afternoon-evening) and boat hundreds of fish to keep the select quality limit.

deal with the fact that you will spend more $ to catch your fish than you would if you went to the market. value the quality time with your kid(s)! it is much more important.

[bio]

as the credit card commercial says, you are forgeting asbout the priceless time with your kid, time away from work-home-life-stress....

try to figure these into the equasion, the sportfisherman comes out WAY ahead!

[bob oh]

Airwave, I agree to a point. 30 perch is not enough, but it is until we have drastically cut the commercial quota and our perch stocks have rebounded. That said, I think the 30 perch limit is also doing some harm because most people are trying to catch 30 of the biggest perch they can. So they catch and catch and sort an sort and a lot of the smaller perch they throw back die. Many times these fish are coming up from 25 to 30 foot (in West Basin) and their bladders are in the mouths, but if they're small they go back for the gulls. I'll bet the average guy keeps and kills 60 perch or better to get their 30 limit.
I don't know what the answer is, but drastically cutting the commercial take is a BIG step in the right direction. And, yes, I have paid my LECBA dues and written letters and made phone calls to try and change things.
Bob

[bio]

there is a little common sense involved here. early in the season, what you said is true, but if you keep 90% and only toss the aperantly healthy (no bleeding and no exposed air bladder) the waste is minimized. later in the season though, selective harvest works well. Another "trick" is to up size your hooks so you have better chances of hooking the jumbos and only feeding the runts. also, switching to "circle" hooks can greatly reduce the deep hookups that result in mortality. (worked great for me last year)

your point is valid though; what good is a 30 fish limit if the 100 fish released are popping back up for the gulls?

[wlb]

Lets keep the perch limit @ 30 so the poor canadian netters can still eak out a living, since they wiped out most of the walleye, they can go for those 5 inchers we have been saving for them. BTW anyone that has to keep 5in. perch on L. Erie shouldn't be fishing! JMO
Yes I have wrote the letters and made phone calls to, stop the nets,and there will be plenty of fish for all sportsman!

[timm]

bio, what size circle hooks do you use for perch?
where can I get some? Thanks

[GEORGE]

without the limits, we wouldn't have to worry about cleaning 30 perch. I have in the past seen 30 gallon thrash cans full of perch, the same people who complain about limits fill these thrash cans. Lets leave some fish for our kids.

[bio]

I got mine from cabellas
VMC if I remember rite, I belive they were size 2, or maby 4
the problem with ordering them is that each company seems to size them quite differently. Unfortunatly, I have never seen them at Dicks, K-mart, Wallmart...
But they made a big difference reducing(eliminate) deep hooking

prety sure they were size 2 VMC's
I got some size 10 & 12 (Eagle Claw) to try when baiting for gills and other small fish (I am hoping not to kill any when I take my little niece fishing for the first time this year)

[BMT]

Ok here is my feeling on Perch limits:

First off, My boat is in Pt Clinton and as soon as the walleye action dies off I get perch. I fish every weekend (almost) and if I fish lets say, every Saturday a month that would be about 120 perch just for my ticket multiply that by about 3 for the months of good fishing and thats 360 perch or 720 fillets, when in the world would I eat those let alone more without giving them away or letting them get freezer burn. Thats not counting the number of fish from limits that my wife gets. Did anyone hear of the guy and his kid that got several hundred perch over their limit and got caught last year, what in the world do people need that many fish for? GREED. Also I understand the costs in fishing and so on and when you figure it out I think that $7 a lb is cheaper than you would find it in a market. If I get a perch with a bladder coming up or bleeding gills it goes into my cooler even if it is 5 inches and I think others should practicet the same. Just my thoughts

[Airwave(OH)]

Yes Bob I know your a member:)LECBA- it's one of the best if not the best organizations out there. Everyone thinks these things can be fixed overnight(Wrong) it sometimes and most times takes years. but were trying not whining. By the way IF and I mean IF everything that these guys have been working for works out and Canada is on the up and up then I think we'll see some real progress soon. Not this year and maybe not next but until then we have to think they are doing the right things and hang onto what we have. I also agree Bob on the catch 22 of releasing some Perch ,especially ones caught from deeper water,it's a fine line and I guess it's up to us to manage our resource until we acomplish our ultimate goal.

[bob oh]

LAST EDITED ON Mar-15-01 AT 03:53PM (CST)[p]I agree 100% with you and bio. Problem is the packs of boats fishing perch on Erie don't read this board and I have watched enough perch die (I know sea gulls have to make a living too :-)) and listened to them at the cleaning stations to know that about as many small perch are dying from culling as are going in the cooler because they want "big" perch if they can only have 30. I don't think the average percher on Erie is going to switch to a circle hook or worry about survival rate....
I am not disagreeing with anyone, just telling you what I have observed over the years. I would like to see a 50 fish limit - I'll go out twice (two days) and be done for the year ;-)
Yes, if we get a 40 or 50% reduction on Erie walleye quota, like they are talking, we should really see some improvement in next few years.
Bob

[knk]

man i didnt think this post would be such a hot topic.alot of good answers.you guys are right about spending time with the kids they love it and i do too not fishing for 5 months made me forget about the cleaning prosess see what winter does to you.have a great and safe season on the lake this year

[ripper]

It's only a 5/day limit here in wisconsin on lake Michigan, so it can get worse that's for sure. I would say if 30 a day helps keep it from going lower in the future, it's good!

[Buckeye]

Bob I'm having touble understanding your logic. Given your estimated 60 kills per 30 fish limit kept (and I don't think that's too far fetched) Joe Average fisherman would then kill 100 fish to keep a limit of 50. Are you suggesting people would keep the 5 inch fish if they could legally take 50? If so I'd have to disagree.

The round or larger hook idea is a good one and for those that use them it will certainly cut down on the mortalities of throwbacks. Like Bob said getting people to use them may be tough though with the spreader/snelled #6 to #10 hooks standard having been used for so long.

Also just a note on commercial fishing taking small fish. I think they have a minimum size limit on perch they have to follow. Not sure exactly what it is but I think it's over 8".

[bob oh]

LAST EDITED ON Mar-16-01 AT 12:27PM (CST)[p]Buckeye maybe I am wrong, but just relating what I've observed and heard over the last 3 or 4 years. You are right, nets are suppose to take 8" and above perch that is why you ocassionally see a netter hauled into court and fined a piddling amount for "undersized" perch. But, that is also the reason you have such an abundance of dinks in the Western Basin -- netters only take the big fish. Average guy is not going to use a larger hook to keep from catching the smaller fish because they are "bait robbers" and he wants to catch them to stop them from robbing !!!!!! Fisherman after fisherman, including the ones who go out on my boat for perch, have said they would keep smaller fish if allowed to keep a few more - say 50 or 60 - and would only go once or twice a season for winter supply. But, they won't when they are limited to 30. The they want the big ones. You gotta remember, these guys are not going out for the sport - perch really aren't a sporting catch are they?? - they are going to get the fish to eat!!! I personally don't care what the limit is, I catch a certain number and then I'm done for the year. Think if you take a look at the money the area and state take in and the jobs created by commercial fishing interests vs. sport fishing, you will help burn the nets !!!! Also take a look at what they pay for the right to use our resources for commercial gain???
Bob
PS ask a fish biologist if people with rods can hurt Lake Erie; the ask him if netters can???

[Hit-N-Run]

Hit-N-Run

I am in full agreement with "BMT" and also support the limit of 30 pearch per person. I was fortunate enought to get out approximately ten times perch fishing last year. I limited out each of those times. That produces a total of 300 perch for my freezer. We eat plenty of fish over the winter and still have some to give to my friends. We do not keep any perch under 8 inches in length. We also reel up very slow to help prevent swim bladders from coming up. As sportsman we need to be concerned with preservation as well as conservation of our natural resources and wildlife. Even though we may have a relatively aboundant perch population at the current time in Lake Erie, the legal perch limit will make sure we have aboundant populations of perch to enjoy fishing for many years to come! If there would be a poll taken of fisherman who are in favor of a higher perch limit or illegally take more then their limit currently, these are the people who have perch in there freezer that are two to five years old and end up throwing them out because they din't get eaten! For the people who drive 60 or more miles to fish in Lake Erie like myself, if you do not agree with the limits stay close to home and fish in lake or resoirvor near you. Good luck in producing the catches that Lake Erie will give you even with these limits. We need to appreciate what we have in Lake Erie being quite possibly the best freshwater fishery in North America.

[Buckeye]

Bob

Don't try to tell my kids that perch aren't sporting. :-) I agree most people are "freezer filling" when they are perchin'.

[Wild Bill]

Seagulls and Canadian gillnetters sure like our 30 fish Perch limit.

[Airwave(OH)]

So how are you helping in our fight to stop it. Just curious.

[Wild Bill]

Airwave,I keep any deep hooked fish,regardless of size.If I think a perch is going to die,I give him a number between one and thirty.And yes,I do quit at thirty.I would hope you do the same.

[Airwave(OH)]

That,s not what I meant by helping . Although what your doing is respectable I was refering to the battle against the netters you were complaining about. That battle is much tougher and will reguire alittle more action. I didn't mean for it to sound personal against you. I just wondered if you belonged to an organization that is fighting the battle for us or have you at least written your congressman or anything other than gripe about it. This is not said in a attacking nature, Just can't think of a better way to put it. Sorry if offended you in any way it's just alot of people complain and sit back and wait for somebody(anybody )other than themself to do something about it. I suppose that s just human nature... Good fishin !!!

[Wild Bill]

Airwave,no offense taken.We as fishermen should take a more active role in things we believe in.I occasionly write my congressman about things I believe in,but to tell you the truth,I don`t think it does any good.This Canadian gillnetting situation seems to be a hot potato that 0ur elected officials won`t or can`t do much about.

[Airwave(OH)]

Bill I know what you mean about the Gill netting situation but don't give up yet. I just sat through about 9 hrs. of conferencing with some of the top dogs in the field and it sounds like we MAY be getting ahead of the game.I know we can't see it but theirs alot of people out there working to make this happen. I see post here all the time, people bickering about the limits and the nets and the big fish we catch and keep. When you talk to these people who have been working on this project for so long it sorta makes you feel kinda stupid. These guys are on top of it. (My opinion anyhow) I'm sure it won't be quick but it did sound like someday we may win this one. Or at least a satisfactory compromise. C-Ya on the water!!

[cmb]

1) Perch can be a sporting fish (try a light rod with 4-6 lb line- it makes drum an absolute blast)

2)Both sport and commercial fishermen can (and historicaly have)"hurt lake erie"

Do you belive that the extinction of the blue pike was the solely the result of commercial over harvest? Or, will you concede that the boatloads of fish taken by hook and line fisherman had a role also?

X-thousand sport fishermen can and do impact the population of fish within a given body of water. Furthermore, if hook and line fishermen could not "hurt lake erie", why are their limits on the quantity of fish we can take?

[cmb]

the gulls have more right to them than we do!
They catch and eat fish to live, while we do it for entertainment and culinary variety. I do not need the perch dinner I had last night, but it sure was good :)

[Howard]

I have time and again gone through packs of boats catching 6" perch. A great many of these people have children catching and keeping these fish. What are these ignorant idiots teaching their children? These fish are barely big enough for bait. There needs to be a size limit on perch. The current 30 limit is plenty. These kids will never know what it's like to catch a limit of 10-12" perch in Lake Erie with all the fools we have fishing. Their are too many morons and money hungry - so called charters - for this lake to survive.

[Polski]

Whine, whine, whine... here in Wisconsin we serve cheese with our whine. I think all you Erie fishermen should wake up and start listening to your DNR. We have a 5 perch limit here in Wisconsin on Lake Michigan. About 8 years ago we were in the same boat you were. When I first read in the paper that the limit was being cut to 5, it was the same day me and my son caught 100, 50 each was the limit. I didn't believe a lake that big and deep could be fished out. Well right now you have a hard time catching 5. Also Greenbay, which has been very good and the limit has been 25, is now talking about closing perch fishing completely. I think you should support the DNR, and stop pointing fingers at charters, commercial and Canada and really think about the future of Erie. Just enjoy your Friday nite fish fry, you don't need to fill the freezer and feed the whole neighborhood. Just my thoughts and comments from a state that been there, and unfortunately done that.

[bob oh]

LAST EDITED ON Mar-20-01 AT 11:30AM (CST)[p]I got blasted the last time I quoted a fish biologist but I'm gonna do it again anyway. You are right, I don't believe that rod and reel fishermen can overfish Erie if there are reasonable limits. We have lower limits on Lake Erie BECAUSE the Depts. of Natural resources in the lake states are finding that the only way to get Canada to lower their commercial limits. Ohio gets 51% of the guota of fish on Erie and sport fishermen have NOT taken their eye limit for the past 4 or 5 years, BUT the Canadian commerical fishermen take their ENTIRE limt EVERY year. So we have cut the limit for sportfishermen who NEVER take the yearly quota so that Canada will cut their limit for commercial fishermen who ALWAYS get their quota. IT is a political reduction ... but I support it if it will get the commercial quotas lower. As for the perch, Canada and Ohio both allow commercial harvest - tons and tons and tons of them. The other states stopped this rape years ago. Why don't you guys who don't think the commercial interests are raping the lake look up the facts - they are available.... And, look up how much the commerical guys are paying for their right to your natural resources. Then take a look at what you pay -- fees, taxes etc.
Bob

[cmb]

I have done plenty of research and even given presentations on the past practices of comercial fishing, in the ocean as well as the great lakes. No one can argue that they have not impacted (even completly destroyed) fish populations. I can't argue for the recent harvests of "canadians" or for their questionable practices. but I still feal there can be a hapy medium betwene the special interests of sport and comercial fishing. sport fishermen can and have cuased the same types of problems! I think the solution to our"problems"(erie still has some of the best fishing anywhere)needs to come from fair compromise, not at the total cost of some involved parties. the curent regulations may be political, but they are a step in the right direction.

the argument of sportfishing bringing in more $ may work here in the states, but the roles are reversed "up north".

I can proudly say that I have never kept a limit of 10 eyes, 5-6 are plenty for me. moderation and compromise from all involved parties is the only reasonable solution I can see.

I understand your position, but this does not need to be an us-v-them battle resulting in a negative outcome. with some diplomacy and yes politics, Lake Erie could be the winner.

[Wild Bill]

CMB:since you have such vast research experience on past practices of commercial versus sport fishing,what is YOUR definition of fair compromise between sport and commercial harvests?

[cmb]

I did not say that I had a "vast" knowledge but meant to imply that I have a solid understanding of the histoy, and impacts.
I do not know any numbers but belive that we all(all parties interested in the future of lake erie's fisheries)need to cut back and suport the conservation measures deemed nessesary to promote the continued well being of the fish populations. This could include the baning of gill nets, reduced limits for both sport and commercial harvest, and the use of protected seasons. in other words a compromise by all partys, not a "win or loose deal".

we need to realize that in the grander scheme of things sportfishermen are no different than those lobbying for cleaner air, cheaper fule, tax cuts, program funding, or whatever.

we need to seek what is best for all parties interested not just ourselves.

[Buckeye]

cmb I'm with you on this one. We had this same discussion a while back about the commercial harvest vs. sport harvest and I still firmly believe it comes down to cooperative management for perch or walleyes. Canada has hammered them with the gill nets under the premise that "if the U.S. sportfishing intrest can't catch their quota then give it to us." That's wrong and hopefully the powers that be are on the right track with the proposed reductions in the limits. Time will tell.

Quite frankly I am tired of hearing the argument that commercial fleets don't pay to harvest the lake's fish. They are licensed just like sport fishermen are (I don't think it's a $15 tag though)but regulated much more strictly. What do we pay for our harvest fee? How about the charter fishing industry? They had the chance to take 160 fish a day (at the 10 fish limit)if they run a double on 6 pack charters. What do the charter proprieters pay? How about the multi million dollar industry of hauling people back and forth from the mainland to the islands to party?

What do the freighters pay to haul oil on a barge in the wintertime when the Coast Guard has to bust the path open for them and creating a dangerous situation for people fishing on the ice? I can remember some of the same people that are chanting "ban all commercial fishing" saying get over it......it's the economy rolling and we can't stop it. Guess what boys and girls? The netting of walleye and perch in Canadian waters is huge to their economy. You guys seem to think it would be easier to ban them from the lake than it would be to try to convince them that there is a way to harvest and keep a sustainable fishery going for all of us. Wake up!

A great step would be to convince the Canadian netters to abandon the gill nets and go to a selective harvest with trap nets. Sport fishing has some impact on the fishery otherwise there would be no limits but I find it hard to believe it could devistate the populations beyond the point of no return. The majority of people sport fishing are conservation minded and don't mind doing what it takes to keep quality fishing in the lake.

[Western Basin Bob]

Deep hooked perch??? What are you guys falling asleep at the wheel or using 2 pound sinkers?? If you're paying attention, there should be no "deep hooking" going on! Like the other guy said, hook 'em fast, reel 'em slow. That way, they live longer in the cooler, making them fresher when you fillet 'em, which makes 'em fresher when you eat 'em. As for the topic, 60-90 is all I ever want to skin!

[Rick]

Howard, You must fish in the western basin if all the boats are catching 6" perch. Did you ever stop to wonder why all the perch in the western basin are only 6" long. It's because the Ohio trap netters can only take 81/2 " or longer perch. All that is left for the sportfishermen are 6" perch. The rest goes to the commercials. Don't blame the charter guys for trying to catch fish for their clients. Blame the stupid state of Ohio for not buying these guys out. It only took Pennsylvania 3 years and a 3 dollar Lake Erie stamp to do it over there. Wake up OHIO ODNR!

[Rick]

Polski, If the Wisconsin DNR would have woke up years ago, you wouldn't have a ridiculous 5 perch limit. Ohio's ODNR is just as blind as Wisconsin's. Stop commercial fishing in the Great Lakes period. Sportfishing didn't wipe out the perch in Lake Michigan. COMMERCIAL FISHING DID !

[Rick]

CMB and Buckeye, How are you supposed to compromise with a fisheries department and government that are run by the commercial fishing industry that are doing the damage ? You guys are looking for a Lake Erie utopia that will never exist. The government up north doesn't give a crap about this fishery. The commercial fishermen have demonstrated this time and again with their constant violations of the law. They will take everything they can until there is nothing left. Buckeye, I know that as a farmer who cares about his land and animals that you find this hard to understand. Buckeye you said that you find it hard to believe that commercial fishing can destroy a fishery beyond no return. I give you the Blue Pike, Lake Herring, Great Lakes Muskellunge and sturgeon. Before you say that pollution wiped these fish out, look at the commercial fishing stats for the years just preceding for instance the blue pike. In 1958 over 10 million pounds were taken . In just three years time they were gone. Look what happened to the walleye population when commercial fishing was banned because of the mercury scare in 1971.The population exploded even though the lake was at its most polluted state in history. I said it before and I'll say it again. The advanced technology and liberal quotas for the commercial industry have nearly destroyed fish populations in the ocean. Lake Erie is too small and fragile to withstand such pressure. I listed four species above that were wiped out by commercial fishing. Don't you believe for one second that it can't happen to the walleyes. There is no room for compromise on this issue.

[Buckeye]

Rick 2 things. For the record I said SPORT fishing will never wipe out a fishery because of the mostly conservation minded people that participate in it. Fishermen and hunters have always stepped up to the plate when it comes to conserving the resources.

Also I agree with you 100% on your statement that the industry is running the show in Canada. What does that tell you about the kind of economic and political clout they have? Do you really think us sport fishermen that are an economically small group compared to them are going to force them to quit? I would like to know what exactly can the U.S. do short of going to war to force the Canadians to stop the carnage?

Sign all the petitions you want to ban commercial fishing in Canadian waters of Lake Erie. When you have a zillion signatures on a truckload of paper who are you going to submit them to? Send them to Canada and they will laugh in your face while they count their loonies. They have a market for fish mostly in the U.S. and they will continue to fill it. Then one of 2 things will happen. Either they wipe out the fishery or they start managing it for sustainability. Nobody can argue that Lake Erie can't support sport and commercial fishing if managed right.

No doubt there are those that will violate and not give a rat's a$$ about tomorrow. We have sport fishermen that have the same attitude. We have a chance to save the fishery if we can convince Ontario to take steps toward eliminating that bad element out of the Canadian fleet and we do the same here. Trying to pitch a management plan that includes their commercial fishing industry is a whole lot easier to swallow than demanding it be banned.

[Perchin']

Didn't know the Ohio commercial quota was set at "all the fish bigger than 8 1/2 inches". Don't they have to stop when they get to the quota? They must have missed some. I had a couple days of perch fishing in the western basin this fall where my son and I kept only 9" to 11" fish for our limits.

[cmb]

nit picking, but G.L. Muskelung and the Sturgeon are NOT extinct or even extripated from lake erie. true they are threatened or endangered, but not gone. Furthermore, sport fishing or non-commercial harvesting had a great impact on the populations of sturgon and Blue pike. Is my view idealistic, perhaps, but I just think we all need to see the bigger picture on this issue.
We are not the only ones with an interest in this, and we are certanly no more important than the other partys.

with your 70's ban on walleye harvest example, you only pointed out one of the factors in the rebounded eye populations
you left out
1)ideal and improving habitat coditions
2)Improving water quality as a result of the clean water act. and reduced phosphorus imputs, higher disolved oxygen levels.
3)a recovery of many other aquatic communities within the lake ecosystem (most of which were impacted by polution-not commercial fishing)

now we are dealing with changes cuased, in part, by invasive exotic species. 1)Increasing water CLARITY (not nessesarily quality) 2)increasing predation on eggs by the round goby

For some reason we blame or scapegoat the commercial fishermen for our "problems" The lake is changing, we need to change with it. allong with these changes we are seing the results of a managment mistake allowing for to large a harvest by all. while sport fishermen have not met their quotas, do not tell me that we have had no impact! perhaps not as large as the commercials, but we need to share the reponsibility and share in the solution.

[bob oh]

You know, I was going to offer more argument on this topic, but why bother - you and buckeye have made up your minds and that is fine with me. I have made up mine also and will do everything I can to squeeze and hopefully eliminate commercial fishing on Lake Erie.
Bob

[cmb]

fair enough!
lets just hope that a good "soultion" is mediated betwene all.

there are infinite possibilities here, maby we can find a combination that works in the interest of Lake Erie.

Tight lines, and good luck with all you do.

[off duty]

I didnt read all replies.Did anyone say it was Canadas falt there netting all the perch.

[Hey BobOH]

Bob. One question.

Give me a realistic plan on how you think U.S. sport fishermen can get an industry that contributes a significant portion of southern Ontario's economy to cease operations? I think you'll have about as much chance as Canada does in getting the U.S. industry that contributes to their acid rain problem to shut down completely. Maybe you have a workable plan. If so let's hear it.

You're right. I'd much rather try to fuel change toward cooperative efforts to manage Lake Erie than to go down a dead end road trying to ban another country's activity in THEIR portion of the lake. At least there's a chance to save what's left and improve it. Like I said before...the other alternative is for them to simply fish it out.

Buckeye

[bob oh]

LAST EDITED ON Mar-22-01 AT 03:08PM (CST)[p]So far you've had all the answers so you should be able to answer your own questions. But just in case you missed one, many, many U.S. fishermen are working on just that at the present time and the group that sets Erie quotas is expected to cut them 40 to 50%, guess somethings being done heh ???
Bob

PS It is called political pressure and no one is immune from it. Do you really think that Canada couldn't drastically increase their Lake Erie tourism if they removed the wall-to-wall gill nets that cover their side of Erie?? It may be impossible to get the nets out of Erie but if we start out looking for compromises that's what we'll get the same compromise we've always had -- we give, they take.,....
Sorry, but we just don't see eye-to-eye and this and never will. You want to think of the netters as farmers and I don't. They don't own a ##### thing except the killing tools. The citizens of four states and Ontario own the lake. Does it make you wonder why all 4 states have banned eye netting (3 have banned all netting), but the Ontario govt. is more concerned with a few netters rather than their citizens???????

[Rick]

cmb, are you a fisheries biologist by any chance? If you are then you must remember that at the time of the walleye ban, Lake Erie and especially the western basin was at it's worst as far as water quality goes. The phosphorous was so high it looked like you were riding in pea soup. The majority of the central basin was devoid of oxygen in the deeper waters. The walleyes main food fish (gizzard shad) were at an all time high. The beaches were littered with them. You say that we are now dealing with goby predation. Haven't heard any proof that this happeneing. Gobies, even though they are a pain in the butt, have become another food source for perch, walleyes and smallmouths. Please explain how improved water clarity has caused the walleye population to drop from 125 million to 25 million. The only thing that caused this was overharvesting. And yes it just wasn't by commercial fishermen. However, the majority of the walleyes taken from the lake have been by the commercial guys. In fact 87% of the total catch from the lake (all species) were taken by the commercial industry last year. Do you think that this is fair and equitable? When you take this into consideration along with all the law violations that occur almost weekly you can see why nearly every sportsman wants rid of these guys. Maybe we should direct more of our anger at the Lake Erie Commission that continued to allow liberal quotas to be taken even when all indicators kept telling them that the walleye population was sliding. But once again , is the tail (commercial fishermen) wagging the dog (Lake Erie Commission). It all adds up to the fact that a sporfishermen can never compete with a net when it comes to harvesting fish and once a population gets too low only the commercials will be harvesting fish, as is the case now. No one wants to see anyone put out of a job. Is it fair that a small group of people (commercial fishermen)are allowed to exploit a resource at the expense of everyone else that derives a living from the lake ? All businesses along the lake have suffered a decline caused by the lack of walleyes. The state of Ohio has lost billions in tourist dollars. THERE IS NO ROOM FOR AN UNLAWFUL, WASTEFUL COMMERCIAL INDUSTRY ON LAKE ERIE.

[Buckeye]

Bob I broke your post in 3 parts.

Part one:

>So far you've had all the
>answers so you should be
>able to answer your own
>questions. But just in case
>you missed one, many, many
>U.S. fishermen are working on
>just that at the present
>time and the group that
>sets Erie quotas is expected
>to cut them 40 to
>50%, guess somethings being done
>heh ???

Still no answer to how you expect to get Ontario netters to walk away.


Part two:


>PS It is called political pressure
>and no one is immune
>from it. Do you really
>think that Canada couldn't drastically
>increase their Lake Erie tourism
>if they removed the wall-to-wall
>gill nets that cover their
>side of Erie?? It may
>be impossible to get the
>nets out of Erie but
>if we start out looking
>for compromises that's what we'll
>get the same compromise we've
>always had -- we give,
>they take.,....

Part two is consistent with your arguement all along but it contradicts part one. Part one is the type of action I've been touting all along. Reducing the harvest by 40 to 50% is not a ban on netting. It's an attempt to finally get Ontario with the program of looking past today and restoring a healthy fishery and it appears they have agreed to do that as you sarcastically pointed out. YAY! HOORAH! YIPPIE! BOTH SIDES ARE NOW WORKING TOWARDS THE SAME GOAL INSTEAD OF ONE DEMANDING THE OTHER QUITS!!!!!!

But then you go on in part 2 to say there are no compromises. I agree with you there hasn't been any up til now and it remains to be seen if it happens. But don't forget that up until now Ontario never said they would reduce anything except the walleye population.

Part 3:

>Sorry, but we just don't see
>eye-to-eye and this and never
>will. You want to think
>of the netters as farmers
>and I don't. They don't
>own a ##### thing except
>the killing tools. The citizens
>of four states and Ontario
>own the lake. Does it
>make you wonder why all
>4 states have banned eye
>netting (3 have banned all
>netting), but the Ontario govt.
>is more concerned with a
>few netters rather than their
>citizens???????

You're right about not seeing eye to eye. I can't figure out which eye you are looking out of half the time. I compared commercial fishing to farming and any other enterprise that uses natural resources (logging etc.) in the respect that they have to take care of the medium they harvest from to keep it productive for future generations. If they don't it will quit producing. End of story.

Of course Ontario is going to be more concerned with the netters. Money talks and they produce bushels of loonies to the Ontario economy. Plenty of it is exported to feed the huge U.S. demand for fish. From what I understand most of the fleets are owned by major distilleries. Talk about clout.

All I can say is keep after it. We both want our grandchildren to be able to fish for walleyes, bass, and perch and they want to keep supplying their markets with fish. I just don't see demanding them to quit as an option.

[cmb]

taken from FWS website:
The Round Goby Neogobius melanostomus, is a freshwater fish native to
Eurasia. It was transported and released into the Great Lakes accidentally
from the ballast water of ships travelling from Eurasia. The round goby was
first reported in Lake St. Clair in 1990. It has since spread into each of the
Great Lakes where their populations are growing and spreading.

What is the Problem?

The round goby is an aggressive bottom dwelling fish. It builds and actively defends nests laid in rocky crevices.
They are able to spawn up to 5 times during the mating season. They have a sensitive sensory system and are able
to locate prey quickly. There is some concern that:

1. Their aggressive nature and ability to become abundant quickly may allow them to out compete
some of our native species for food resources and spawning habitat

2. They will feed on small native fish, including darters, and native fish eggs

3. Their aggressive feeding nature will be a nuisance to fishermen who have difficulty catching target
sportfish in areas where goby are present

I have not done any stomach content sampeling, but have pickeled specimens that have puked up caronomids, and other benthic inverts.

and, yes the lake was a mess, but you CAN NOT state that the ban was THE reason the walleye population rebounded and even exploded!

it is my belief, that the ecosystem wide changes resulting from increased water quality, have had an effect on the walleye population. I agree that overharvest has a major role in the current decline, however it is only a pice of the puzzle.

[Rick]

cmb, buckeye, bob oh, If the walleye quota gets cut 40 to 50 percent like they say, I will guarantee you that the perch quota will go up to make up for the difference either next year or the year after regardless of perch population. Just keep it in mind next spring when quotas are set.

[Paul]

Haven't done much perch fishing the last few years to small.Keep waiting for the rebound but when the Canadian gill netters reduced the size of there mesh because they weren't getting their quota it's a little bit hopeless unless the fish learn how to stay in U.S. waters.Fighting smaller size gill nets and voracious invasive predators seems like it's a losing battle all our scientific advancement you would think we could eradicate certain species that have gained a foothold in our waters.I personanly dont see an end to small fish and smaller harvest's.

[BMT]

Paul do you mean the perch have been too small on Erie?? Where are you fishing for them and what time of year?? Yea the smaller fish are around until September but from then on Ive done well with bigger fish not more than 1 mile off of Pt Clinton in about 16ft of water, lots of 10-12 inchers and an occasional 13+. The bigger fish are out there but it just depends on time of year and so on.

[BMT]

Has anyone else caught perch or smallmouth with gobys in their mouth?? I know I have. I agree, gobys are a pain in the rear end and I kill every single one I catch, yes they eat other fish eggs and so on, what about the walleyes that eat their own offspring? Yes it happens but we dont talk about it. I dont think the goby is responsible for the walleye population shrinking as is has, it may be a tiny factor with the egg thieving but lets place the blame with our Government for not doing something about the netters.

[Buckeye]

I borrowed this reprint from a post Aqua Man put up in the general discussion forum. I made a comment on a previous thread about the balance of predators and prey in Lake Erie and posed the question how many walleyes do we need as sport fishermen? Several people said they'd like to see commercial fishing banned and give us sport fishermen a higher limit. I'm not sure I want that to come about the same way as in Lake Oahe.




At a time when most state agencies are tightening walleye bag limits, one of the nation's premier fisheries has opened its arms to anglers who want to fill their freezers with fish.

Anglers who fish on South Dakota's Lake Oahe this year are allowed to keep 14 walleye a day, as long as some length restrictions are honored. Each fisherman is allowed to possess a three-day limit of 42 walleye.

In an effort to make fishing at Oahe even more attractive, a nonresident angler can purchase a special permit for $20 that is good for the entire year as long as he fishes exclusively on Oahe. If a nonresident wants to fish in other South Dakota waters, he must pay the normal $59 for a nonresident permit. He then would not be required to purchase a special Oahe
permit in order to fish there.

"We want people to come and catch lots of fish," said Wayne Nelson-Stastny, a fisheries biologist for South Dakota Game, Fish and Parks. "Our one-year record harvest is about 500,000 walleye. We'd like to triple that this year."

Oahe's fill-the-freezer message is being heard - and heeded - throughout the Midwest. Tony Dean of Pierre, S.D., delivered the catch-and-keep news on his television show a couple of weeks ago.

"When the people at the Pierre Chamber of Commerce came to work the following Monday," Nelson-Stastny said, "their answering machine was full with 218 messages. They fielded another several hundred calls that day.

"Guide bookings are up, and lodging reservations have increased. If you want to book a guide or make a reservation for a motel or lodge, you might want to do it as soon as possible. People are coming, which is good. We need a walleye harvest right now."

The problem is that Oahe has a near-record number of walleye that are having a tough time grubbing out a living because the smelt population has crashed.


"Our predator-prey balance is out of whack," Nelson-Stastny said. "We're really high on predators now, and our most abundant predator in the lake is the walleye. There are a lot of mouths to feed and not much to feed them with."

In addition to keeping walleye, Nelson-Stastny said anglers are also being encouraged to keep other species they catch. The daily limit is 25 for white bass, five for smallmouth bass and three for northern pike. There is no limit on channel catfish.

Prior to 1997, things were going just fine for Oahe's walleye. They had plenty to eat and the growth rate was good. They grew to an average of 14 inches after three years, and by five years they were 19 inches long.

The smelt population, however, began to skid out of control about that time. The huge reservoir - it is 220 miles long and covers 315,000 acres - contained 44 pounds of rainbow smelt per acre in 1996. By 1999, there were only 2 pounds of smelt per acre.

"Our walleye population, though, scarcely dropped," Nelson-Stastny said. "But because they didn't have much to eat, their growth rate really slowed down. A 3-year-old fish now is only 12 inches. They're not reaching 14 inches until they're 5. It's going to take about 10 years for them to reach
that 19-inch mark.

"The natural mortality hasn't increased substantially yet. But it has become almost a stunted walleye population. We have an awfully lot of 12- to 15-inch walleye that are just making it. They're not thriving. All the signs pointed to the fact that the walleye population was going to go downhill. If we had done nothing, our walleye population eventually would have declined
substantially."

The liberalized limits likely will be in effect for only a year or two and are aimed at reducing the lake's high number of 12- to 15-inch fish. Of the 14 walleye allowed each day, 10 must be under 15 inches. Four can be longer than 15 inches, but only one of them can be 18 inches or longer.

"We're not taking the population down to zero," Nelson-Stastny said. "But we do want it to be reduced, and the catch rates will decrease in a couple of years. There will be considerably fewer walleye then, and the prey fish - primarily smelt - will start to bounce back. The walleye then will have food, and they won't bite as good for fishermen.

"That is two years down the road," the fisheries biologist continued. "When the catch rate decreases, we realize we're going to take it on the chin for reducing the walleye population. But that would have happened anyway because
they wouldn't have had anything to eat. This way we're giving people a chance to harvest walleye that would have died in a few years anyway."

The angler catch rate when the predator-prey relationship was in balance was one walleye every three hours.

"That was the Oahe standard," Nelson-Stastny said. "One walleye every three hours for 1996 and prior. But from 1997 on, anglers are catching a walleye every hour. The catch rate is three times as fast following the crash of the smelt population. The catch rate is incredible right now - and we want people to take advantage of all those hungry fish."
<<<<

[Paul]

I've been fishing out of Marblehead and the fish have been 7-9" the past few years.Haven't been out in October in the last few years though.Gobies been tearing us up.

[BMT]

Paul, seems to me when the gobys move in you have to move to get away from them, they sure can ruin a frenzy of perching.

[cmb]

I don't know if you trailer, but if you do drive east towards cleveland, or better east of cleveland, it seems that tha further east you go the bigger the average perch is. We target eyes from lorain but don't waste our time on the drive for perch. we usualy find bigger fish off cleveland than friends docking near lorain.

[Howard]

Obviously Lake Erie would be better off without commercial fishing, but the fact is everyone fishing effects the lake and everyone needs to take more responsibility, including the DNR. I personally think there should be a size limit of 9" at the very least on perch for every group - commercial and sport fisherman alike - as well as limits on numbers. Charters do not help Lake Erie. They draw packs of boats numbering 200 or more. Doing a little math might help everyone to see what effect they have on a given Saturday on the lake. If there are 200 boats in a pack catching perch and only 2 people on each boat catching an average of half their limit (or 15 fish each), they will have caught 6000 perch. Mutltiply that by 5 different packs in the western basin alone and you have 30000 perch being caught. When you take into consideration that there are 4 or 5 people or more on a lot of boats as well as the fish thrown back that don't survive and the hundreds of single boats fishing, you can see that the number may not be out of line and that sport fishing also must have a great impact on the lake. I am not saying charters are the problem but are a part of it. Without them there would be a lot less people fishing. What effect do you suppose responsible size limits would have on perch fishing? What effect would it have on commercial fishing? What effect would it have on charters? Can you imagine how drastically the numbers would be reduced if everyone had to depend on their own knowledge of the lake and it's conditions as well as limits? It seems to me it would have a great effect. It also seems to me that having and living with limits would greatly improve the stock. Everyone should have to abide by adjustable limits. It provides a system of checks and balances that not only regulates the fishery but the economy and the growth around the lake. Unfortunetly, with all the considerable problems the lake has to overcome, it's probably the only way. Everyone should learn to live with limits and trust the DNR's of Canada and the U.S. can and will set effective limits for all, so we can all enjoy the lake forever. If your not happy with that then you will need to contact your congressman. Laws provide balances.

[cmb]

interesting view, but if the minimum size were set at 9" all fish under that size would need to be returned to the lake without regard to their chances at survival. On my boat the minimun keeper is 8" unless a smaller fish has limited chances at survival (ie it is bleeding or has a balloned stomach). these fish typicaly make up 25-30% of our selective harvest. using your same formula if everyone were required by law to release these dead or dying fish you would add over 18,000 more wasted perch to the quantity needlesly wasted (on one given day). your "model" fails to consider the fish under your 9" limit that would die after release, a minimum length restriction would actualy increase the quantity of perch wasted by sportfishing and would have the potential of impacting the fishery more than the fishermen that harvest limits of smaller fish and/or waste some smallish perch in the hopes of bringing home a limit of larger fish.

decisions like this are dificult for the experts, and are not something that even the informed and well educated sport fishermen should arbitrarily make. is the DNR perfect? No, however, they have a great base of aquatic and fisheries biologists that give their best effort to properly manage our fisheries.

[Howard]

Actually, the point of the "model" was used to show how everyone has an impact on Lake Erie. It's not the people who fish Lake Erie regularly that are the problem. They have all the fish they need, can be more selective and know how to fish. Have you ever been near a pack of boats catching doubles one right after another with barely a fish over 8" and watched the people yank on the poles as if they have a fishohio perch on both hooks? I've seen it often, especially in the summer months. As far as the survival rate goes, I don't have such a high mortality rate. I use big hooks. They're much easier to get out of the fish's mouth if they can even get it in their mouth in the first place. And there's no need to pull the fish's lips off. How long do you think that pack of boats would stay together if no one was catching the minimum size perch? The pack would be forced to look for better fish. Again the key is that everyone has to be responsible and better educated. I certainly see your point but I would be embaressed to keep a limit of perch that fit into my minnow bucket.

[cmb]

the 25-30% smaller "keeper" fish I noted is typicaly early season-deeper water fish with balloned stomachs. Using circle hooks has greatly reduced the quantity of deeply hooked fish. also, circles seem to keep the bait from little theives a little better. I fish further east where there are less 6-pack boats and only a few head boats, but do watch plenty of boats keeping small perch. we see many of these boats every time we are out, so it is a reasonable assumption that they are there every weekend. yes, that adds up to a lot of small perch, but less unnessesary waste of fish, than forcing the release of anything under 9". if you had only 10% mortality, and had to release 100 fish to catch 30 keepers that would translate into 10 wasted fish per harvest, or 2,000 wasted fish per 100 2man boats fishing in a given day. this is using conservative figures for mortality and very conservative numbers for fish released to have a limit of 9" keepers.

furthermore, harvesting only larger fish would decrease the number of fish that have the opurtunity to live long enough to become jumbos.

and yes boats would learn to search for larger fish, or if they coulden't find and produce limits of larger fish for their clients, they would stay at the docks! less charter trips=less $ for the local economy, hotels, bait dealers, marinas, resturants, and basicaly every service one uses when fishing or traveling to or from the lake. you would be unnessesarily hurting the very industry you use every time out.

I am not trying to trash your opinion, but we all need to realize that these decisions are verry involved and can have massive effects outside those that are intended. the biology and limnology itself is minde bogoling, but then the socioeconomic factors must also be considered.

[cmb]

by the way, I am all for the 30 fish limit, but think a minimum size restriction for such a small fish with with a fairly high released mortality rate would be a poor managment decision. it would run the risks of being counterproductive and risk significant negative impacts to the people it is designed to benefit.