Record Fish and Size Limits

There is a pretty good thread on another board about what lakes you think might hold record fish.  I didn't want to mess up a good thing so I thought I would present this here.

I have mixed feelings about Wisconsin's size limits and how they impact what is available to catch.  Many people I have talked to, as well as myself, have more and more spent entire days catching "just shorts" and then having to go a restaurant for a fish fry.  It seems that any fish that crosses into being fair game is gone to the freezer. 

I remember a time when fishery biologists talked about a lake being able to support so many POUNDS of fish per acre.  In that scenario, it would make sense that size limits would cause that carrying capacity to be a rather homogenous right under the limit size structure.  So wouldn't it make more sense to do more management with the daily catch limit than with size limits?

Don't get me wrong, I love my spots and the sport of fishing.  I realize the resource must be preserved and some types of regulation will be crucial toward that end.  It just seems to me that in the days when you could keep a few smaller ones we also caught more bigger ones.  (I do think slots are a better approach).

Lastly, on a more personal point of view, when over the top size limits (50" musky) are used for "quality fishing" opportunities, how can you claim bragging rights?  In my opinion the state is running the equivalent of a "canned high fence hunt".  I suspect this is aimed more at tourist dollars than preserving a resource.

So I would appreciate your putting out there (nicely) your 2 cents worth on this.  Thanks for listening.

I usually only keep enough to make a meal for myself and one for the freezer in case I get skunked the next time out. No need to limit out every time I go. I won't eat it fast enough by the next time I want to fish anyways.

I feel like a lot of people are the opposite and view limiting out as a sign of success and something that must be achieved. I live in st croix county where we have a 10 panfish limit on all lakes. It really has saved the total collapse of the panfish populations from the intense pressure of metro area fisherman. If it could help other species as well I think it would be a no-brainer.

Agreed on the rough fish. I will gladly keep them for smoking or pickling just as I would gladly keep a game fish for the pan.

I think anglers need to simply adjust what they are fishing for.  I've been trying to catch different species of fish, and it's been a blast.  Things like sheepshead, channel cats, bullhead, and carp are really fun to catch, and I bet there's good recipes out there that make them tasty to eat, too.  You don't always have to target "gamefish".  Who decided that anyways?  Any fish that swims in Wisconsin is game to me.  

I agree that size limits (and sometimes slots as well) result in a population that seemingly becomes nearly devoid of keep able fish.  That tells me that keeper populations are being over exploited and limits may need to be adjusted.

You lose me on the musky/trophy comments. Don't get the canned hunt analogy at all. You think catching a 50" musky on Green Bay or other trophy waters is a slam dunk like a canned hunt? I don't get it...

Bragging rights? First off..who cares.. but if you do, you're telling me a photo and measurements can't suffice?

In an age with heightened fishing pressure and growing technology our harvest expectations need to be adjusted and tempered.