Home   |  Message Board   |  Information   |  Classifieds   |  Features   |  Video  |  Boat Reviews  |  Boat DIY
Strange fish measuring situation - Page 5 - Walleye Message Central
Walleye Message Central

Go Back   Walleye Message Central > Canada Eh? > Canada

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 07-16-2018, 09:56 AM
bus33 bus33 is offline
Keeper
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Central Iowa
Posts: 212
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspencreek View Post
There is a lesson to be learned here, 18 really means 17 or even 16.5. I was stopped several years ago and had one that measured 17.75 uncut, legal, but the amount of concern while he was measuring it was enough to lower my limit.
This is the rule I live by on LS. I know that 18 is the magic number but I won't keep anything over 17.5. I'm afraid of the fish loosening up when it's death or like the OP posted having the filet measured. Not worth it for me.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #42  
Old 07-17-2018, 06:07 AM
tv4fish tv4fish is offline
Wallhanger
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Aitkin, MN
Posts: 2,598
Default

AND - Some studies show differently:
http://www.fishingmonthly.com.au/Art...inkage-of-fish

AND: other "experiences" agree:
http://www.stripersonline.com/surfta...o-fish-shrink/

Quote:
Now the reason stripers shrink is simply because when The fish dies the muscle contracts and compress the spinal cord, and that's how you loose some length. Maybe for Striped Bass you may loose up to an inch .

Last edited by tv4fish; 07-17-2018 at 06:14 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 07-18-2018, 06:56 PM
yoopertrout yoopertrout is offline
Wallhanger
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,108
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shotgun View Post
Two years ago on Lac Seul we were checked out on the lake by the MNR. As he was checking us he commented that he just checked two boats and all walleye were within a 1/4 inch of the no keep slot. He knew they had been culling fish to manage this occurring. He mentioned even though it was legal it irritated him to see this happening as these fish were next moving into the upcoming group, which would be laying the eggs for several year in the future. If everyone did this it would reduce the upcoming year's hatchlings as this size fish would never hit the no keep slot for several years of growth. He felt a better way was to spread your catch out over a couple inch wide band prior to the no keep slot. Interesting perspective and makes a person think.
This makes sense.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #44  
Old 07-18-2018, 07:04 PM
PRO-V16 PRO-V16 is offline
Keeper
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Grand Rapids, Mn
Posts: 223
Default

Doesn't make sense to me otherwise they would or should change the slot. Also, you can't cull up there as it's a keep and kill lake.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 07-18-2018, 08:16 PM
Slim03 Slim03 is offline
Slot Fish
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 119
Default

I was up there last year and during the trip heard of several people getting ticketed for not killing fish all the way and other violations such as beer in the boat. We had a boat get checked and it was a walleye that was a legal fish at 17 7/8. They measured it multiple times knocked it again and measured and it still was legal and they let them go and agreed it was a perfect fish. But they ran them through the ringer including counting plates in the trash bag from shore lunch as the group had split up after lunch. This year my rule was anything 17.5 on up including overs goes back as it’s not worth the hassle.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 07-19-2018, 06:55 AM
pjshorthorn pjshorthorn is offline
Wallhanger
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Cumming,Ga
Posts: 4,641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shotgun View Post
Two years ago on Lac Seul we were checked out on the lake by the MNR. As he was checking us he commented that he just checked two boats and all walleye were within a 1/4 inch of the no keep slot. He knew they had been culling fish to manage this occurring. He mentioned even though it was legal it irritated him to see this happening as these fish were next moving into the upcoming group, which would be laying the eggs for several year in the future. If everyone did this it would reduce the upcoming year's hatchlings as this size fish would never hit the no keep slot for several years of growth. He felt a better way was to spread your catch out over a couple inch wide band prior to the no keep slot. Interesting perspective and makes a person think.
Lac Seul regs require a person to immediately kill any fish they are keeping in order to prevent people from culling fish that have been in a livewell or on a stringer. The officer's comments don't make sense. The slot limit is there for a reason and a 17 3/4" walleye is legal to keep. I understand that a same size fish would most likely fall into the slot the following season,but the officer was just imparting his opinion and not what the regs allow.

Just a general question for anyone that reads this post. What is better for the fishery? Buying an Ontario conservation license ( 2 fish possession) or a Sportsman license ( 4 fish possession) and keeping 2 17" walleye or keeping 4 16" walleye ? I'm not a biologist, but harvesting half the number of fish per day( if intended to be eaten each day) seems less invasive to the fishery.

I rarely keep any fish to take home anymore so I have bought a conservation license for about the last 10 years. Cheaper license cost and if I need to eat more than two fish a day I've been starving for a very long time.

PjShorthorn
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 07-19-2018, 07:08 AM
bigwalleye1's Avatar
bigwalleye1 bigwalleye1 is offline
Wallhanger
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: East Bethel, MN
Posts: 2,447
Default

Just returned from my second annual trip to Lac Seul, and wanted to update the group re: the measuring fish vs measuring skeleton issues...
It seems that the camp owner called the MNR and talked to a supervisor on the matter, and later received a call from the officer with instructions to have the ticketed individual tear up/destroy the ticket, and he would try to stop by to discuss the matter with the person that rec'd the ticket. The officer did not return, but, in speaking with the camp owner, indicated he may have been "overzealous" in his efforts to protect the resource. Camp owner told me that the point he made to the MNR was the regs indicate measuring LIVE FISH in an effort to determine length, not dead fish or fish skeletons. The skeleton measurement and process really is irrelevant, since no one has the ability to measure the skeleton on the fish before they decide to keep it or release it. Apparently, at least in principle, the officer agreed, and the ticket was destroyed.
Also sounded like there was some misunderstanding on the part of the officer. He indicated to the camp owner the fish skeleton was 1/2 in over. In fact, the skeleton measured 18.25, a quarter inch into the slot, but the fish skeleton WAS 1/2 in longer than the claimed on the water measurement.

Glad the issue was resolved and no fines were levied, since the "offending party" truly did nothing wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 07-19-2018, 07:13 AM
Bill Krejca Bill Krejca is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Robins, Iowa, US.
Posts: 4,870
Default

Perhaps the officer feared that the "culling" took place by simply putting over the side dead fish which were a bit smaller than the last one caught (and kept).

As for the just under keepers harming next year's hatch, the logic is a bit difficult for me to"fathom" (excuse the pun), in that logic would just dictate lowering the length limit somewhat, and to what end?

Bill
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 07-19-2018, 07:26 AM
pjshorthorn pjshorthorn is offline
Wallhanger
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Cumming,Ga
Posts: 4,641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigwalleye1 View Post
Just returned from my second annual trip to Lac Seul, and wanted to update the group re: the measuring fish vs measuring skeleton issues...
It seems that the camp owner called the MNR and talked to a supervisor on the matter, and later received a call from the officer with instructions to have the ticketed individual tear up/destroy the ticket, and he would try to stop by to discuss the matter with the person that rec'd the ticket. The officer did not return, but, in speaking with the camp owner, indicated he may have been "overzealous" in his efforts to protect the resource. Camp owner told me that the point he made to the MNR was the regs indicate measuring LIVE FISH in an effort to determine length, not dead fish or fish skeletons. The skeleton measurement and process really is irrelevant, since no one has the ability to measure the skeleton on the fish before they decide to keep it or release it. Apparently, at least in principle, the officer agreed, and the ticket was destroyed.
Also sounded like there was some misunderstanding on the part of the officer. He indicated to the camp owner the fish skeleton was 1/2 in over. In fact, the skeleton measured 18.25, a quarter inch into the slot, but the fish skeleton WAS 1/2 in longer than the claimed on the water measurement.

Glad the issue was resolved and no fines were levied, since the "offending party" truly did nothing wrong.
Thanks for that update. Glad it was resolved correctly. Kudos to the camp owner for making that phone call.

PjShorthorn
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 07-19-2018, 07:33 AM
pjshorthorn pjshorthorn is offline
Wallhanger
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Cumming,Ga
Posts: 4,641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Krejca View Post
Perhaps the officer feared that the "culling" took place by simply putting over the side dead fish which were a bit smaller than the last one caught (and kept).

As for the just under keepers harming next year's hatch, the logic is a bit difficult for me to"fathom" (excuse the pun), in that logic would just dictate lowering the length limit somewhat, and to what end?

Bill
Agreed about culling dead fish...that would be the only reasonable answer to the officer's comment. It would seem he didn't observe them doing so as a fine would have definitely been issued. I have fished Lac Seul off and on over the last 35 years and the reduction in possession limits, the slot limit , along with the keep and kill requirement has created a very healthy fishery.

PjShorthorn
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.