3 walleye limit on Winnebago

2/28/18 @ 2:54 PM
ORIGINAL POST
Tealioitis
Tealioitis
USER since 4/5/13

Up for debate at the spring hearing this year is a reduction to a three fish walleye limit on the system.

 I like it as studies have shown there is a high catch rate of walleyes on the system, especially immature females.  Look at battle on Bago, how many fish were brought in over the slot, not that many. The only thing that protected those 16 to 20 inch fish out there till last summer was the huge Shad hatch in 2016.



Edited on 3/9/18 10:33 AM
Post Your Comment
Displaying 31 to 40 of 267 Posts
4/6/18 @ 3:04 PM
BagoBoy320
BagoBoy320
USER since 11/4/10

I know this thread was intended for the walleye change but the spring hearing questionaire can be found on the DNR website. If you go to the hearing I suggest combing through the questionnaire before hand, as there are some unique proposals from increasing guide fees to registration of kayaks and skiffs.  

Looks like a lot of changes could create new revenue streams but a lot of conservation proposals not just for walleye but panfish. bass, and muskie. Just a heads up that the questions are available to public.

Post Your Comment
4/6/18 @ 12:15 PM
.Long Barrels
.Long Barrels
USER since 12/9/14

MT...you know what we talked about a few days ago?  when and were in the river???  SJB just told you the why.  now you got the where and the why.

In august you can change that handle to Full_Stringer. 

Edited on 4/6/18 12:17 PM
Post Your Comment
4/6/18 @ 12:00 PM
MT_Stringer
MT_Stringer
USER since 11/10/15

Sjb -thanks. Has the dnr ever imposed their will saying "this will be a trophy destination" or do they mainly just keep the lakes population from going extinct.

I mean they would never put in a recreational slot but rather only as a means to rebuild the population ?

Post Your Comment
4/6/18 @ 8:09 AM
SJB
SJB
USER since 7/16/01

MT - according to the biologist, Lake Winnebago doesn't and won't product many "trophy" sized walleye.  Their theory is the water becomes too warm in summer to have an area that allows that continued growth throughout summer.  The lake is essentially a single story lake, with no cool water to move to.  The bay, for example, as the water warms in the lower sections, the fish migrate north towards door county and bay de noc.  In 'bago, the fish don't have that option. 

Post Your Comment
4/5/18 @ 5:23 PM
MT_Stringer
MT_Stringer
USER since 11/10/15

Has there ever been a discussion what they want out of the lake? I thought I read there would never be a decent trophy out of here because its not large enough to support it?

What is considered a small fish? To me a small fish is under 15. It seems like even though they have only grown a couple inches in length between 13 and 15 the girth has changed quite a bit more.


I don't see how you could ever close the run down. Seems like fremont exists because of fishing.

Edited on 4/5/18 6:00 PM
Post Your Comment
4/5/18 @ 4:27 PM
OO Buckshot
OO Buckshot
USER since 10/4/05

Bago is in class right there with the great lakes fisheries.  Not to say bago doesnt have a really strong walleye population and is bad shape I just think it could be a much better fishery.  The Petenwell could be right up there with bago being as good or better.  Definitely better in terms of quality of size because of the slot limit and harder to get eaters a lot of undersized fish and a strong population of over 20" fish.  If Bago went back to a 15" size limit most likely we would see a lot of small fish and few over 15".  Protections in the spring and/or reduced bag limits to 3 would help improve the system IMO.  There are a few lakes I know of throughout the state that are top quality for size and numbers but they are under 150 acres.  Little hidden gems.  But they have their boom/bust population cycles as well.   The larger northwoods lakes just cant handle the combined spearing and angling pressure without strict limits even the large lakes like bago arent immune.  Just look at what happened to mille lacs.

Post Your Comment
4/5/18 @ 2:55 PM
SJB
SJB
USER since 7/16/01

OO  Buckshot - I do believe 3 will be the limit in the future for the whole state.  If 'bago is going that route, please mention one lake from a walleye standpoint is in better shape that Winnebago?  I know the lakes up north, at least the ones I fished, are much worse.  Maybe Green Bay, and the Mississippi.  I am fine if the whole state would be 3. 

Longbarrels - few tourneys are 14" minimum FWIW.  I don't know of any that are less than that FWIW. 

Post Your Comment
4/5/18 @ 12:13 PM
.Long Barrels
.Long Barrels
USER since 12/9/14

Tourney's have a 15 inch limit.

Post Your Comment
4/5/18 @ 12:00 PM
MT_Stringer
MT_Stringer
USER since 11/10/15

Thats the riddle, the "one" regulation change that is easily understood, easily enforced, and is fair to all.

I still think minimum size.  I think guides are more concerned with fish on their clients lines. Then size later. They are looking to have their clients enjoy themselves and would adjust the trip accordingly. I dont think fish is their families scarcity and so they most likely not overbagging or hoarding. No need.

Question, is it socially acceptable while in a tournament to bring in 5 10-12" fish? Seems like they would already be enforcing a self imposed size limit?

Post Your Comment
4/5/18 @ 11:44 AM
Peterskeeter
Peterskeeter
USER since 2/6/11

All of the guys I fish with still focus on the "Sport" of walleye fishing. As it was the tradition in the Winnebago System in the past. Nothing under 15", only enough for a meal or two, (how can you fish for eyes if you have 10 fish in the freezer already?) and always release anything over 20". Especially the females. With the increase in guide fishing, the focus today is on "we got the meat"! The more fish they can catch, keep and post, the more 'clients' they feel they will get. And the more money they can make. Nothing "WRONG" with that. I'm simply pointing out that the rules and regs for the system were never designed to conserve the walleye population given today's 'meat and money' over 'sport' focus. Gillespie and others on TV,  STILL keep with that sport focus as well. As one pointed out. They are not the 10+ guides trying to make a living 'every day' 'while they can' on the water I was referring to. Nor is the problem I speak of the "Guides" themselves. When keeping within the rules and regs, nothing wrong with such a cool living and more power to them! It's rules and regs that are not in time with today's fishing pressure. I used catch 25 fish in less than an hour, and on many days/year. The last 5 years it happens only once/year and takes 2 hrs. So yes, I for one, have noticed a big decline in walleye numbers. Yes there are many other people who can catch 25 fish in a couple hours. And they KEEP every last one of them! Iv'e watched them do it...... 3 fish limit, the now 3 instead of 1 warden to cover the system and catch poachers, and guides not allowed to keep fish "While Guiding".

Post Your Comment
Displaying 31 to 40 of 267 Posts