25 fish aggregate panny limit

[tightliner812]

I think a 25 fish limit on gills is fine . I don't like to clean to many more that that at a time anyway .

[blueultra2]

OK, I'll bite, what are "the beards". I'm 60 and in 50 years on the ice I've never heard any talk about the Beards. If its slang for Old Timers, I'm a Old Timer and I'm for a gill limit.

[Stinkybaits]

Lol Travis!

[musky8it]

The term beards = Amish = :

Ok, makes sense now. Guess you have to live/fish their neck of the woods to know the slang.

[Fishking83]

I know plenty of people who keep fish that are just as small and keep just as many as the "Beards" and they don't have a beard at all.

[princecraft]

good one Travis and Tightliner.

[Eye Fish]

The term beards = Amish = +

Im amish and i dont have a beard Oh wait im not married yet

[Gills-only]

Is this a for sure law, and if so when does it take effect?  Don't fish that often in Indiana but want to be up on the law!

[wax_worm]

Is this a for sure law, and if so when does it take effect?  Don't fish that often in Indiana but want to be up on the law!

Not a law yet.  It is on the list of rules up for possible laws based on a surveys from the public from last year and DNR biologist input.  At the earliest it will go into effect April 1 as the new license year begins.  I think there are few public hearings/feedback sessions scheduled too.

[slabgill]

  ...Fear the Beard!!!!! blue..lol

[Awk5658]

Michigan water seems to be better than Indiana, I wish our state would manage our water like Michigan does.

[Cool Cat]

OK, after reading ALL the replies on here and reading the "proposal" of new regulations, here's my take on this whole thing.  A 25 limit on sunfish, all those mentioned in the proposal, is a good thing.  For several reasons.  Like the proposal says, the technologies involved have greatly increased the catching ability of most fishermen.  Second, the need for more than 25 fish is just pure greed in my eyes.   Morally I think that's just wrong.  Twenty-five fish is more than enough for any one person.  As for what they do in Michigan, I could care less what they do up north of us.  This is Indiana and the fish and game are owned by the people of Indiana.  That's why if you're out of state you have to pay extra for licenses.  Now for the naysayers thinking they will include crappie in all of this.  Won't happen guys.  The biologists know the difference between sunfishes and crappie.  Technically, crappie are in the sunfish family, so are largemouth and smallmouth bass.  BUT, same family, different species alltogether.  From what I learned in Fish Management Class at Vincennes University studying Conservation Law Enforcement, you need to harvest bluegill from the smaller impoundments or they will over populate in a couple of years.  Unless you put some catfish and bass in there to help control them.  Bluegill do spawn several times in a year, the spring spawn being the biggest.  And they can lay quite a few eggs in one season.  Now I said bluegill, not redear.  Redear already have a 25 limit and it's your reponsibility to know the difference.  Because redear are known to spawn only in the spring and don't reproduce as prolifically as bluegill.  But I see nothing wrong with putting all other species of sunfish, excluding crappie and bass, in the same bag limit as the redear.  As for catching bigger gills, there are so many factors involved.  Food availability, genes, and something a lot of people don't know or realize, a body of water can only hold so many pounds of fish.  How is that?  Well, it has to do with the factors I mentioned and also the amount of oxygen levels in the water.  Fish need oxygen we all know.  But if that body of water hasn't got the right amount plant life, they suffer and the more fish there are the less oxygen involved.  But most of our lakes do have proper oxygen levels.  Point is, a larger impoundment should mean larger fish.  If all the factors involved are optimum.  And we all know nature isn't always optimum.  The animals adapt or die. Adapting could mean smaller fish.  Our reservoirs are all fed with rivers or creeks and they produce oxygen when they have ripples and areas like that where the water roils over rocks or rills.  Every try to put fish in water from your well?  They die.  There isn't any oxygen in that water.  Wind also produces oxygen on a more limited level.  When there are waves rising up from wind activity, that creates some oxygen.  It's all about a balancing act and hopefully by making limits on the amount of bluegill we catch, we'll continue to see the future of sport fishing in these wonderful United States and especially in the state of Indiana, to grow and produce like we see today.  Continue to catch and waste fish like we've seen some do, we can tell our grandkids the good old days when you really could catch bluegills 8 to 10 inches. 

[sprkplug]

A limit would be a start, but I would still prefer a trial program on a few, select BOW. Blanket limits, while quick, cheap, and easy to enforce, could have the opposite effect on some lakes.

Oxygen levels are certainly critical to survival, but remember that water temps and stratification have a role to play where DO is concerned also.

[Cool Cat]

A limit would be a start, but I would still prefer a trial program on a few, select BOW. Blanket limits, while quick, cheap, and easy to enforce, could have the opposite effect on some lakes.

Oxygen levels are certainly critical to survival, but remember that water temps and stratification have a role to play where DO is concerned also.

I agree, but remember, I said factors, ALL of them.  That's one I forgot.  And it isn't always optimal.  It's always a balancing act. 

[revice]

I'm hoping that if the law is changed to a 25 panfish limit the DNR has a bucket at the parking space so I can get my fair share! :-) 

[Fishslayer81]

A limit would be a start, but I would still prefer a trial program on a few, select BOW. Blanket limits, while quick, cheap, and easy to enforce, could have the opposite effect on some lakes.

Oxygen levels are certainly critical to survival, but remember that water temps and stratification have a role to play where DO is concerned also.

good post!

[musky8it]

A limit would be a start, but I would still prefer a trial program on a few, select BOW. Blanket limits, while quick, cheap, and easy to enforce, could have the opposite effect on some lakes.

I can't see just haveing a few lakes w/25 limit, all Ind. lakes should start with same limits. Daily hopping from lake to lake happens more in the winter than summer so it could cause confusion or problems.

Ex: Say Bass lake gets no panfish limit but Maxie gets a 25 gill limit. In the mourning I fish Bass lake and catch 30 gills, then I decide to go to Maxie. What do I do with the 30 gills I caught at Bass Lake. I can't leave them in bucket and take them out on Maxie w/25 gill limit. And if I leave them in my truck and the DNR wants to check my truck. How do I prove I caught the 30 gills on Bass Lake?

[Stinkybaits]

I can't see just haveing a few lakes w/25 limit, all Ind. lakes should start with same limits. Daily hopping from lake to lake happens more in the winter than summer so it could cause confusion or problems.

Ex: Say Bass lake gets no panfish limit but Maxie gets a 25 gill limit. In the mourning I fish Bass lake and catch 30 gills, then I decide to go to Maxie. What do I do with the 30 gills I caught at Bass Lake. I can't leave them in bucket and take them out on Maxie w/25 gill limit. And if I leave them in my truck and the DNR wants to check my truck. How do I prove I caught the 30 gills on Bass Lake?

It's not going to be lake to lake but it's your responsibility to know what the laws are of each lake. Some lakes 12 inch Jack bass are ok. Other lakes have two walleye limits ect..... It's posted at every public access not that big of a deal imo. If you get confused the officers will be glad to give you some up training for a fee lol.

[sprkplug]

I can't see just haveing a few lakes w/25 limit, all Ind. lakes should start with same limits. Daily hopping from lake to lake happens more in the winter than summer so it could cause confusion or problems.

Ex: Say Bass lake gets no panfish limit but Maxie gets a 25 gill limit. In the mourning I fish Bass lake and catch 30 gills, then I decide to go to Maxie. What do I do with the 30 gills I caught at Bass Lake. I can't leave them in bucket and take them out on Maxie w/25 gill limit. And if I leave them in my truck and the DNR wants to check my truck. How do I prove I caught the 30 gills on Bass Lake?

You don't. If you're traveling to a lake that has a limit in place, you make sure you drop those earlier gills off at home before you go.

[High Tide]

Sprkplug, just tell them the truth... Fish are just like deer and many other things in life, the more you can control the environment with science and keep out the counter productive factors, the more likely you will realize the expected outcome.

[musky8it]

You don't. If you're traveling to a lake that has a limit in place, you make sure you drop those earlier gills off at home before you go.

So you're saying after Bass lake I should drive 1 hour back home and drop the gills off, then drive another hour back up to Maxie? Don't think to many would do that.

My point and example was a reply to Sprkplugs suggestion of starting off a few lakes w/limits. In my opinion I didn't agree with a few lakes, all should have the same gill limit. That way if I left one lake no matter what other lake I went to the gill limit would be the same at 25.

[musky8it]

.....It's posted at every public access not that big of a deal imo. If you get confused the officers will be glad to give you some up training for a fee lol.

Hm, don't think all fish limits or size limits are posted at to many lake accesses. You'll need to get a Ind. fishin Reg. phamplet for that info. You may but I don't need any officer to give me any training, I always have a copy of the regulations with me for any questions that come up.

Ignorance of the law is no excuss and will not get you out of a fine or ticket.

[wax_worm]

I think what they are advocating is the law not be made as a blanket for the 'convenience' of the angler, but instead applied to protect the fishery since it is likely some lakes could be hurt by the limit while others will benefit.  So if using your example, Bass does not need a limit and maxi does, it would be wise for them to make the rules that way if it benefits both BOW, despite how it many inconvenience you, me or any other anglers.

[river_scum]

what perch arent included?!  (you catch that james? )

25 gill limit, i can live with. not sure if it will do anything for size though. time will tell, if it makes law.

when? cant see a ticket standing for a law that isnt in the rule book. so, 2016 at the soonest? mite start warning if passed in 15, though.

now the walleye limit, im in favor of. that should lead to better size fillets. i would have felt even better about an 18 or 20" limit.


what i wanna know is, can you eat a limit while your out there and still take a limit home?  burp,#**&, pass the shrimp sauce.


(PEOPLE, PLEASE DONT LEAVE TINY GILLS ON THE ICE. BE ECO FRIENDLY AND STOMP THEM AT THE HOLES EDGE. TY)

[sprkplug]

Sprkplug, just tell them the truth... Fish are just like deer and many other things in life, the more you can control the environment with science and keep out the counter productive factors, the more likely you will realize the expected outcome.

HA! Ain't that the truth though.... Leave the good genes, remove the less desirable ones. Not always what we want to hear, at least not when there's still space on the living room wall...

[wax_worm]

what perch arent included?!  (you catch that james? )

25 gill limit, i can live with. not sure if it will do anything for size though. time will tell, if it makes law.

when? cant see a ticket standing for a law that isnt in the rule book. so, 2016 at the soonest? mite start warning if passed in 15, though.

now the walleye limit, im in favor of. that should lead to better size fillets. i would have felt even better about an 18 or 20" limit.


what i wanna know is, can you eat a limit while your out there and still take a limit home?  burp,#**&, pass the shrimp sauce.


(PEOPLE, PLEASE DONT LEAVE TINY GILLS ON THE ICE. BE ECO FRIENDLY AND STOMP THEM AT THE HOLES EDGE. TY)

LOL at James..... I think the 25 panny limit has a chance to get on the books before the new license year that starts April 1, 2015.  It won't affect ice season, but may be in place by the spawn.  DNR could make a killing in fines if they enforce it from the moment it becomes a law.

[Gills-only]

what perch arent included?!  (you catch that james? )

25 gill limit, i can live with. not sure if it will do anything for size though. time will tell, if it makes law.

when? cant see a ticket standing for a law that isnt in the rule book. so, 2016 at the soonest? mite start warning if passed in 15, though.

now the walleye limit, im in favor of. that should lead to better size fillets. i would have felt even better about an 18 or 20" limit.


what i wanna know is, can you eat a limit while your out there and still take a limit home?  burp,#**&, pass the shrimp sauce.


(PEOPLE, PLEASE DONT LEAVE TINY GILLS ON THE ICE. BE ECO FRIENDLY AND STOMP THEM AT THE HOLES EDGE. TY)

                                                         Not in Michigan, 25 only, I think you cant clean fish on ice, if you do better have the carcass, to prove what you had, correct if I'm wrong!  If thrown in the water, littering!

[OpryIcin]

This has been a great thread to read!!  Good info and points by all.

When it comes to fish management, we all know the biologists have made some horrible decisions over the years.  In my home state of Colorado, the management of lake trout and kokanee salmon has been atrocious at times, sometimes ruining a great fishery.

That said, I think a 25 sunfish limit in aggregate is a no-brainer.  It will not only give the sunfish a minor respite, but will insure that the predator fish have plenty of forage.  Here in TN, there is a limit of 25 on redear but no limit on gills.  I feel like an aggregate limit and even a 6" minimum length reg would do great things for the fisheries around here... Embrace the regulation guys... I see that most of you do.  It will give you better fishing and opportunities at some better fish foibg forward.

[OpryIcin]

*going

[sprkplug]

So you're saying after Bass lake I should drive 1 hour back home and drop the gills off, then drive another hour back up to Maxie? Don't think to many would do that.

My point and example was a reply to Sprkplugs suggestion of starting off a few lakes w/limits. In my opinion I didn't agree with a few lakes, all should have the same gill limit. That way if I left one lake no matter what other lake I went to the gill limit would be the same at 25.

To be sure, it would be simpler to have a statewide limit. And if the law passes, that's probably how it will be. I just hate to leap off the bank feet first, without testing the water beforehand. As far as the inconvenience to you the angler,  if one chooses to look hard enough, you will always find an inconvenience or disruption, no matter the circumstances. If you're worried about going over the limit by taking fish from another location to a BOW that has a limit imposed, my suggestion would be to hit the limit area FIRST....then proceed to a lake without limits.

I personally don't think a limit is the correct solution for every BOW. But I recognize the need to start somewhere. Who knows....maybe a few lakes with limits in place might start turning out some huge gills...then they would become your priority destination, with the non-limit lakes being secondary.

There are so many variables in play, that I doubt that anyone has the answer. I certainly don't.