: Biggest Walleye This Year

06-30-2005, 07:58 AM
Lets hear from the WC gang about the biggest Walleye they caught this year.

30", caught on Lac Seul 6/10/05....jig/minnow

06-30-2005, 09:42 AM
I had a career night of sorts on Georgian Bay last week. Caught 2 walleyes 30 in and 30.5 inches 20 minutes apart late at night trolling a large gold Rapala. Both fought like #### and I released one and gave the other one to my uncle for his cabin to eat(they needed some fish for dinner--I had a chunk next day and was surprised how good it was for being an old hawg). I don't imagine I'll ever have a night like that again.....................

06-30-2005, 10:18 AM
27" in front of my house on a 68 acres private lake in N. Central Iowa. 1/4 oz. tandem spinner bait with a 4" white power bait twister. Strange but true.

06-30-2005, 11:35 AM
Lets get this straight...you kept a 30" walleye to eat!?! This is not the right thing to do and you know it! Lately i have been getting a sore neck from shaking my head at the things some people do!!


06-30-2005, 12:17 PM
Destroyer, I've kept and eaten a number of 28-32 inch fish over the last few years. As long as the law allows it, there's nothing wrong with it. In fact I had one for dinner last night. Lake Ontario,Erie and the other Great Lakes have plenty of these fish and the rod and reel fishermen will NEVER deplete them. I'm sick and tired of others (especially people not logged in) telling me what fish I should and should not be keeping.

06-30-2005, 12:32 PM
Another example of the need for being able to put people to sleep!!

06-30-2005, 12:47 PM
Putting them to sleep might be a little drastic. But waking them up to the fact that eating that 30" Walleye may not hurt the population today but if it is consistently done it will hurt tomorrows population. Just imagine that a thousand fisherman a day on a monster lake decide to eat a 30" fish. That means that during a 5 month season there would be 150,000 less 30" walleye that would lay eggs. it is my understanding that about 200 fish grow to adulthood out of each egg laying. Thats 30,000,000 less adult fish for the future...now just figure that is done for ten years...thats 300,000,000 fish. How long does it take to ruin a fishery? It took the state of Minnesota about 25 years of over harvesting of brood stock to ruin theirs. I can remember fishing Minnesota in the 50's and 60's and it was great.....not anynore.

History can be our best teacher. besides that 18" Walleye taste better than big Mommas.

06-30-2005, 01:02 PM
I won't get into a peeing match here but the bigger walleye do not have as many viable eggs as the smaller females do. These fish are close to the end of their lives ( probably 10-15 years old).

Are you guys afraid to register and/or post your names or can't you figure out how?

06-30-2005, 01:17 PM
A Female Walleye lifespan can 25 years plus in northern climes such as Canada and the Northern States.

Egg production per pound decreases slightly as female walleyes age HOWEVER egg size and viability increases significantly with age.

Do whatever you want within the law.

Others telling you what they would do and question you is well within their rights as this is a public forum where you post your actions for all to see.

No matter how you look at it, if you ate a female that size you have impacted many future year's catch - like it or not, legal or not.

Anyways.....back to the point of the thread.....I've not had much luck this year with large ones.....so far my biggest is a mere 22 incher.

I'm going tomorrow so I'll be sure to update if I snag a lunker.

Mike Kansas
06-30-2005, 01:24 PM
Wow, this topic is getting a little heated. I for one agree that the larger fish should be released in order to assure future generations the opportunity to enjoy Walleye fishing at its best. However there are many other issues that may affect the fishery. One that I think is of concern is how each of us handle the fish that we release. Landing nets and hands remove the protective covering on each fish and make them prone to infection. The less handling the better.

Each of us who fish has the responsibility to protect todays fish and tomorrows fishery. Applying a little common sense to this duty tells me that a fish that is relesed is better for the future than one that is filleted. I personally would never eat a 30" Walleye and feel that they should be released. But to each his own.

06-30-2005, 01:31 PM
Just so you all know, I do NOT keep every large fish ( or even every fish for that matter). Last month I fished for a week and our average fish was over 9#. The smallest was probably 7#. You bet I kept a few

NWO Fishing Bum
06-30-2005, 01:48 PM
A 30" walleye in Canada is far more than 10-15 years old.

06-30-2005, 01:52 PM
Since i apparently started this debate, allow me to add to it. First, I threw back one 10 lb fish and I'm glad I did. And I gambled(and lost) that my camera flash was working and consequently I lost the pic of a lifetime by not having both the next morning for a picture. But I'm still glad I threw the old gal back.

And I kept the other one for my uncle. The slot was 16-22 inches for a reason--they're the prime breeders. Keeping one over 22 inches was perfectly legal, and, as I said, I had a small taste of it and it was surprisingly good. If you disagree fine but if you have to resort to attacking people personally with inane blabber about "putting them to sleep" just save it. That's the problem with us--can't have a simple discussion about a big fish without someone going on a tirade and lobbing personal venom behind the safe distance of a PC.

06-30-2005, 02:24 PM
30 1/2", in Ontario. Released.

06-30-2005, 02:48 PM
Quoting you... "Lets get this straight...you kept a 30" walleye to eat!?! This is not the right thing to do and you know it! Lately i have been getting a sore neck from shaking my head at the things some people do!!"

And then you go on to suggest such people be put to sleep?

Obviously you are quite brave when you show up here unregistered and unnamed. Another coward hiding behind a computer.

Mr. Walleye
06-30-2005, 05:06 PM
A walleye 24" or larger should never be kept unless to put on the wall. There is absolutely no reason for it. Take a picture, let it go, and keep the smaller ones that are better to eat anyway. Are there people out there killing 50" muskies to eat as well?

06-30-2005, 05:28 PM
Well, according to the biologist I would say you are all wet and those "eaters" you are killing are the best spawners. Below is part of a discussion from marine biologists on the Ohio sea grant.

With respect to Rick's comments regarding older walleye vs. younger walleye----the older, larger 'hog size walleye' may produce more eggs than younger fish. However, it's a well known fisheries science fact that as females grow older and bigger, the 'viability' of those eggs (ability to become fertilized, incubated and hatched) decreases significantly. The younger females, ages 4-7 and lengths of 18-24 inches (these are averages, and can vary), will produce the most 'viable' eggs.
In comparison, walleyes in far northen Ontario lakes are known to reach sexual maturity at age 7, and may only be 13-14 inches at that time, compared to age 4 and 17-18 inches in Lake Erie. Northen Ontario walleyes exhibiting the highest 'viability' of eggs range from 13-22 inches---with walleye over 22 inches significantly less viable than the younger, shorter females.
Why is this? In Lake Erie, due to our warmer waters and abundant food supply, our walleyes grow fast and die young. Colder waters and less abundance of food result in northen Ontario walleyes growing slow and dying old.
Currently, regulations in Northern Ontario for walleye allow a bag limit of 4. All 4 must be 16 inches and under, or 3 can be under 16 inches, with one being over 22 inches (this provides a big trophy walleye to be taken by outfitter/guide clientele). This protects their most viable spawners. Mixed emotions were raised among anglers when first imposed, yet the realization for a better fishery in the near future has now been accepted.
This may be a great management program for cold, northen Ontario lakes where food abundance is low, grow rates are slow, and both angling pressure and native Indian netting has impacts on the fishery.
However, you must remember that these northern cold water lakes are NOT comparable to the size and productivity we experience on Lake Erie.
Just thought you might like some additional info regarding walleye age/size/sexual maturity from a different region.
Hope this helps with your questions above.

Dave Kelch, District Specialist, Ohio Sea Grant College Program

06-30-2005, 07:06 PM
Ahhh here we go with the viability versus value debate.
Here's the deal. Lake Erie or Ontario...not a big deal to eat a 30 inch fish..I personally would not cause I like them around 17 inches for eating.
But if in Northern Ontario and you eat a 30 inch fish you deserve a tap on the knuckles.
We do not preserve the big fish for the volume of eggs she can produce, but for the genetic value (superiority) that she passes to each offspring.
A smaller fish may have more eggs hatch, but a fish with better genes will see a higher survival rate.As well those offspring will be much more likely to reach trohpy size.
BTW the walleye in my avatar was 33" and around 17 pounds.

Mr. Musky
06-30-2005, 08:08 PM
A walleye isn't anything close to a 50" Musky.(other than swimming under water). There is kind of a difference in population densities betwixt the two species.;-)

Some good cheek meat on them 24 to 30 inchers too.

Fish Eater
07-01-2005, 05:37 AM
24.5" - 5+ lb.s I brought it home and that's that. I caught 12-18 fish over 21" that week and released them all. I did keep 3-18" fish to bring home as well. Say what you will but the fishing on the lake that I go to has never been better. The slot and limit changes from several years ago has paid dividends. I caught 30+ fish each day with one day catching nearly 75 (a freak shallow water bite in a weed filled bay...wierd).

Anyway, I don't regret taking that fish home or the others. After all I eat meat and not Tofu. Where I have a problem is with how people handle and release fish. This is where more mortality can happen that is unnecessary. I will add to that the people that catch pike and remove only the backstraps. It's disappointing to look into the gut bucket at camp and see a 37" fish with only its back missing. Just my 2cents.

BTW, the 24.5" is my largest Walleye to date.


07-01-2005, 08:56 AM
Judging from the C&R lectures, apparently most people are like me and have been too busy to fish eyes. I've only been out once for eyes so far and the largest was slightly under 15". (beat that! ;-) ) If you want to talk blue gills, my kids and I have had some great outings. Things are winding down so, walleyes look out these next 3 months!

On my Soapbox !

I've had my fill with you C&R purist bigots. Like most frequent fishermen C&R the big ones is automatic for me, however I will defend any kid (or other infrequent fisherman) that keeps an occasional "legal" big fish from you guys. You have no right to ruin one of the happiest fishing memories they may ever have by scolding them. Education and stopping game hogs is one thing, but being a jerk and turning a happy kid's proud smile into a sniffle is unacceptable. x(

Off my soapbox


07-01-2005, 09:28 AM

Mr. Walleye
07-01-2005, 04:28 PM
Bigfish1965 is right on the money. The genes of these big fish need to be passed on. I've got no problem with a child or an infrequent fisherman keeping a trophy if they don't know any better. However, I would hope those fishing with them would explain C&R to them. A picture of the trophy will provide them way more memories and enjoyment than eating it will. Lake Erie, etc. may be a different situation, but I see no logical reason to keep a big fish in Canada unless you plan to mount it. Those of you concerned about releasing these fish properly are right on as well.

07-05-2005, 01:52 PM
While I generally agree with the comments that we should release the breeder stock, heaven help us if we have to debate someone's right to keep a fish for dinner. I say each person should keep what they think is right as long as they are within the law.

07-05-2005, 02:10 PM
I normally avoid this type of discussion feeling there is nothing beneficial to them but I would like to ask a question of all those who worry about someone taking a large walleye to eat.
Where is your indignation toward the commercial fishing industry in Canada that is raping Lake Erie, taking thousands of small 13 to 15 inch walleye while killing hundreds of others with their gill nets? These small walleye are the future of Lake Erie fishing but I never hear anyone speaking up. If you want a cause here is truly a good one.


Fishing Lake Erie aboard "DENIED"

(I don't represent any manufacturer or supplier "I pay my own way")

07-05-2005, 02:33 PM
Does the situation you are talking about make it OK for Walleye Fisherman to waste brood stock??

Two wrongs dont make a right

07-05-2005, 04:18 PM
I watched a tv show the other day that featured a fishing tour boat from the US goingout into lake erie with 140 people a trip to a fishing spot, the show said in the 4 hours the people fish off the boat, they all get their limit. When the boat returns to base, it reloads another 140 people and repeats the process. Same fishing spot same limits taken.

Day after day, all season long, this would be a little raping of the resource in my mind all for the sake of the other type of commercial fishing.

07-06-2005, 10:03 PM
28" on Cedar Lake Ont. and 20 min later my partner pulled a 26" kissed 'em and let 'em go. Talking to the camp owner he told us he had talked a guy out of cutting up a 48" northern opener week and a another fella out of cutting a 32" eye the next week. People do crazy things when they lack the understanding of what the consequences of their actions are.If it is well within law then by all means do what you feel is right, myself, I would never. I would like to give another fisherman the chance to trick that 28"er into bitting and feeling the excitement I felt when I caught it and would hope that he feels the same and so on but I won't condem him if he doesn't.
My 2 cent's

Navtech unlogged
07-07-2005, 07:07 AM
Nonsense. I'll bet big bucks that this does not happen. Not even one time. Where is the proof. 140 limiting out on one boat? Give me a break. RKW