Nebraska Length Limit Poll

[Hoosier]

There are some that have asked for a general feeling of how the public feels about instituting a lenght limit on Nebraska Waters. This is an informal poll to get an idea of how the public thinks.
 This poll is set for 10 days.Let your friends and others that fish Nebraska waters to chime in.

[Uplandhuntr]

I think recent history (the implementation of more state-wide limits to lessen confusion) shows that the easier the better when it comes to regs.

Personal implementation of said limits have merrit where applicable.  Maybe we could challenge folks to 'sign on' to the challenge and take it to heart, but not sure a 'cookie cutter' length limit for panfish is the way to go. 

Likewise, enforcement would be challenging at best.  Go after the fish hogs and double dippers.  The rest of us will remain using common sense and not need to keep every fish we catch.

JMHO

[Wilb3]

Hoosier, I am curious how interest in NE came about.  Is this eventually going to be a statewide pole?  Or was something similar instituted in Indiana?  Just curious.

[JAM3S]

I believe a length limit like this would be the best thing for the panfish populations of Nebraska.  Ten bluegill and crappie are plenty to clean in a day and are bounty enough for one day's outing.  I would be completely for this.

[ryno]

Hoosier, I am curious how interest in NE came about.  Is this eventually going to be a statewide pole?  Or was something similar instituted in Indiana?  Just curious.

I contacted Hoosier and requested this poll.  With recent conversations that have came up I was curious how people felt...especially if its anonymous. 

[ULking]

Im for this as long as some lakes if needed can have specific limits or regs like a few lakes do

[eyewinder]

Why not go ahead and eliminate all keeping of fish in Nebraska?

I'm guessing that the ranks of fishermen living in Nebraska who purchase fishing licenses in neighboring states, but not Nebraska, would grow.

Before someone looks at my identifier and says, "You don't live here--keep your opinions to yourself;" I've purchased either a resident or nonresident fishing permit in Nebraska for more than 40 years.

I just have a feeling that the more vocal individuals when catch-and-release is discussed do not speak for the majority of Nebraska's fishermen.  I'm pretty sure that professionals in fisheries management (and attendant politics) will admit that there is a point of diminishing returns.  That is, if you take this far enough you are going to erode one of your primary sources of income--fishing licenses.

If you want to license fish eaters and fish catchers differently, and sell a license for half the money that allows you to catch but not keep fish, then try offering a monetary incentive to be a C&R guy or gal.  I'd love to see some creativity employed beyond what I'm hearing:  "Just let all licenseholders keep a few little fish."

[ryno]

I think recent history (the implementation of more state-wide limits to lessen confusion) shows that the easier the better when it comes to regs.

Personal implementation of said limits have merrit where applicable.  Maybe we could challenge folks to 'sign on' to the challenge and take it to heart, but not sure a 'cookie cutter' length limit for panfish is the way to go. 

Likewise, enforcement would be challenging at best.  Go after the fish hogs and double dippers.  The rest of us will remain using common sense and not need to keep every fish we catch.

JMHO

From my experiences there are far to many anglers that don't care and take the specified daily limit with no care to selective harvest and not to mention possession limits.  Simply look at the huge numbers of perch that have been harvested off just a couple sandhill lakes over that past few years....not much for selective harvest going on!  The only way to change that is by law!  Im very aware that several anglers will still break the 'new' law...however several will not.  Thus, improvements have been made.  Also the same way that our social medias(like this) inform anglers of 'hot bites' they also inform anglers of individuals breaking and being busted of not following said regs.  Word of mouth via the web is very powerful.

I am too in favor of C&R and or trophy only fisheries along with slots and reductions of total fish.  I am aware that the C&R and trophy only enforcement is somewhat more difficult but can be easier to enforce on more isolated lakes.  The implementation of panfish slots is not that demanding...either one abides by it or doesn't and hence if in violation gets caught or gets away.  Same principal as now but only difference from now is a measuring devise is needed...which any game warden already has and any respectable angler should have as well.  There is a reason that there is slot limits on other game fish...in which some are far more complicated like on walleye with minimum and maximum size limits.  So IMHO an implementation of a simple slot as stated is not going to me very much more demanding on our law enforcement bodies nor confusing to anglers.  Its black n white state wide!

[ryno]

Eyewinder...
As your quote says.... "We are hunters. . .when the buffalo are gone, we will hunt mice. . ." Sioux war chief

"We are anglers...when all the 'perch' are gone we will catch minnows"...uneducated angler

Just sayn....learn from history. 

Why does Wyoming have fabulous trout fisheries? Strict regs and slots is why!  I would just like to see the same in Nebraska for pannies.

As far as reduced income from our resources and expenditures...anglers have and will travel long distances to catch monster perch, gills and crappies.  Oyeah they would like to harvest as many as possible be it local waters or foreign waters but still the allure of the trip is for that fish of a lifetime.  If one thinks back when Pelican was producing mamoth gills and hoards of people from all over the country were partaking in harvesting them...and now talk to them about what they remember: it was how awesome of a fishery it was and how much fun they had catching them!...not how much meat they brought home or how they enjoyed depleting the fishery. The greater allure of a fishery is for quantity and quality of fish not the limit that can be kept.   I honestly feel the revenue generated would increase.  The expenditures of the state would decrease in regards to the need of continually restocking lakes to keep up with fish being harvested. 

[efrey]

The idea of a specific size limit will not work in all lakes, when fishing deep water you will be killing a hole lot of fish! This may work on some lakes, but will never work as a hole state regulation that is can see! Good idea but needs a bit more thought

[ryno]

The idea of a specific size limit will not work in all lakes, when fishing deep water you will be killing a hole lot of fish! This may work on some lakes, but will never work as a hole state regulation that is can see! Good idea but needs a bit more thought

For one the vast majority of panfish come from shallow sandhill lakes...no worries there.  Secondly...no different than now...people throw back the small year classes to creel up.  There is no minimum on pannies however there is on walleye and yeah that is an issue of having  to throw them back...another subject for another day. Also the majority of panfishing occurs on hardwater so the survival of released fish far higher than on open water.

[efrey]

Ryno, maybe so, "the majority of panfish come from shallow lakes, but head to a deep reservoir to fish for crappie and you will be in 35 to 50 ft and I don't care what fish you take out of that deep of water, there not going to survive!

[eyewinder]

We all need to be careful of citing generalities in this discussion:  "the vast majority of panfish come from shallow sandhill lakes" and "the majority of panfishing occurs on hardwater."
Or ". . .why does Wyoming have fabulous trout fisheries? Strict regs and slots is why!"

All three statements could be argued by someone with more data than I have at hand.  I do believe that education rather than over-regulation is the best path to healthy fish populations.

I only contributed to this thread because I believe that fishermen who don't agree wholeheartedly with the politically correct C&R partyline need to speak up, too.  While we all love our sport, we don't all have to think alike. 

[efrey]

We all need to be careful of citing generalities in this discussion:  "the vast majority of panfish come from shallow sandhill lakes" and "the majority of panfishing occurs on hardwater."
Or ". . .why does Wyoming have fabulous trout fisheries? Strict regs and slots is why!"

All three statements could be argued by someone with more data than I have at hand.  I do believe that education rather than over-regulation is the best path to healthy fish populations.

I only contributed to this thread because I believe that fishermen who don't agree wholeheartedly with the politically correct C&R partyline need to speak up, too.  While we all love our sport, we don't all have to think alike.

Could not agree more, education will beat any regulation!!

[Wilb3]

I contacted Hoosier and requested this poll.  With recent conversations that have came up I was curious how people felt...especially if its anonymous.

Thanks ryno.

[ryno]

I agree totally with angler education in regards to sportsmanship.  However it seems apparent that is very monumental task.  In my opinion it is far easier and beneficial to use a force of hand to get them to see the light.  In hopes of a slot implementation those that refuse currently to partake will be pressured to do so by law and thus they too will reap the benefits of it years to come and will than hopefully have an open mind to selective harvest and ultimately practice it freely and possibly beyond what the law states...as many of us do now.

As far as the C&R dilemma some of you are expressing...I don't see the huge difference from now.  Let me ask how many of you have witnessed or been part of creeling up when fishing for crappies in 30+fow??  I would assume almost everybody has.  So my point is currently we throw back lets say most crappies under 11" to keep a limit of 11+".  With a slot the same will hold true only that potentially there is going to be only one over going home.  Most anglers would classify a 13"+ crappie as a darn nice catch and by protecting them their numbers should increase and those smaller fish at that would have to be part of one's limit.  Thus there maybe fewer small fish released that may not survive.  I for one would rather be on this end of the spectrum than were we are now.  This to would need some assistance of angler sportsmanship in not harming the overs during catching and releasing and hopefully knowing when further catching isn't worth the mortality of these said overs.  However one looks at it fish will be getting released...I would just rather have to be letting large ones go. 

Yeah I know its alot to ask n hope for but in comparison to what we currently have in place the hopes are far more of a dream.

[ryno]

Could not agree more, education will beat any regulation!!

as I have stated I implore the concept and even more those that preach it.  Humans need laws as much we all may hate it.  Everybody is educated far more on the consequences  of speeding or not wearing seatbelts than on selective harvest...and we still have speeding and seatbelt laws.  Those too are broken frequently.  So my argument that sportsman education will beat regulation is obvious...even if we had billboard's preaching the concept as well as endless other media there still will be the problem.  Laws are in place for a reason...to help discourage human actions that have negative consequences.

[efrey]

So as I am reading this, we might as well make all lakes in this state c&r!!??? Every lake has a totally different echo system, not all lakes can be controlled the same, it is going to depend on water depth, fish population and a number  of other circumstances, I don't have the answers to solve the over fishing of a particular lake and no matter how hard you try no body else will either! To many people telling there buddys hows great the fishing was on a particular lake and three weeks later there are 100 people on it, but a state wide restriction will be nearly impossible to make work!! I agree to selective harvest but it a little harder than just making a law that says don't keep 2 crappies or perch over 12" when you catch the second and it dies because its bladder pops just leave it dead on the ice and a buzzard can eat it

[ryno]

So your not behind slots on other species that are in effect currently??  Haven't seen any devastation there...only has helped ones odds of catching an over walleye/smallie/large mouth etc.  Just dont see the problem...maybe Daryl can chime in with more credible info..

[okcableguy]

Why wouldn't this work?  10 is more than enough.  Eat what you catch, no need to stock up 200 fish before you attempt to start eating them to find out that you freezer burnt 80 of them...

This would be great to have, and it would really open up the size some of these gills are limited to because people think that a 6" gill is a "good size fish"

[Uplandhuntr]

So your not behind slots on other species that are in effect currently??  Haven't seen any devastation there...only has helped ones odds of catching an over walleye/smallie/large mouth etc.  Just so see the problem...maybe Daryl can chime in with more credible info..

I have several TB rods: 27" quiver, 24" quiver, 24" powernoodle, 27" perch sweetheart, 24" Tripwire on panfish sweetheart, 24" Tripwire on quiver, 16" sweetpea and 36" Tripwire on panfish sweetheart.  My favorite is the 24" quiver with okuma fly reel for shallow water gills and 27" quiver with Pflueger president for deep or shallow panies.  I have never been a fan of the spring bobbers but I love the Tripwire for those litebiters.  Each rod has its place.  The next TB I get will prolly be a 27" perch sweetheart with ml Tripwire ...btw my other Tripwires are ml as well.  Here is a pic of all but the perch sweetheart
 (Image removed from quote.)

I can say that, statistically, you are somewhat preaching to the choir regarding selective harvest, and your personal statements are coming from a place that a lot of 'average' license buyers and fisherpeople in Nebraska aren't even familiar with.

Statistically, I would say this poll is quite skewed.  I can't remember the last time I was a participant of an actual creel survey in Nebraska (oh, yeah....never) that takes into account actual participants' perceptions of their fishing experience and why they feel that way.  Online surveys are as are almost as significant as online petitions.

I am as concerned as Nebraska's resources as you are, I promise.  This isn't a personal attack.  More Regs aren't gonna fix the current situation.

Keep up the good fight!!  This IS part of education.

[ULking]

Why wouldn't this work?  10 is more than enough.  Eat what you catch, no need to stock up 200 fish before you attempt to start eating them to find out that you freezer burnt 80 of them...

This would be great to have, and it would really open up the size some of these gills are limited to because people think that a 6" gill is a "good size fish"

6" I dont care who you are thats a good gill! 

[efrey]

I don't know who ever thought a 6" gill was a good gill, you must fish different lakes than me!! Keep 8's and release any over 9! Thats the way I've done it for quite a few years and keep my mouth shut about a good lake and have never hard a issue with not catching good perch gills and.crappies!

[Tic addict]

With there being a slot on panfish it would definatly make better quality fishing only one over 10" gill is a good idea i think perch would be good to have one over 14" crappie one over 14"  I think if we are going to make some quality fishing lets do it like we do the big fish make em bigger !! my self I would rather eat the 11" perch 8" gill and 12" crappie and really only need ten and thats feeding three growing boys that are 13, 9 and 7 yrs old we dont have any waste around here.

[ryno]

I just threw out sizes for the slot to get peoples thoughts and attitudes on a more extreme level.  I would accept the 13 or 14 inch slot on crappie, 12 or 13 on perch however I'm kinda partial to 9 inch on the gills...guess I've got a soft spot for the bulls.  Even just a slot on only gills with current 15 fish limit is a start.  Maybe also try one trophy lake to see how that goes.  Just these baby steps can help show the 'uneducated' the meaning and importance  of selective harvest.  The goal here was to get ideas/suggestions/opinions and hopefully make a change with the most popular ideas.

Not sure what a pic of my hardwater rod collection has to do with this other than my passion or maybe better worded obsession of the sport! Atleast he didn't post pics my lure collection  or this thread would be very pic heavy!  At any rate my opinion is reg changes help and are needed as things change.  Just imagine the perch population on Blue if still had the 30 fish limit or the unimaginable 50 from years ago.  Also consider where our fisheries would be if there had been a slot on gills dating back to the late eighties....where would Pelican be right now? Just food for thought...

[CARTMATT]

Why not trust Game and Parks to do their job! They post lenght limits when need be.  I dont understand what the crying is about. I can go to Wagontrain and catch nice gills all day long. Head to Summit once a year and find nice crappie where theyre said to be gone! Lets enforce the regs we have now before wanting to add more. We already cut limit from 25-15. I rather like 15.  And if you fill water over the fish in a ziplock, they will never freezer burn.  I seldom keep fish, but am tired of the C&R pressure.  Tired of people being flamed for doing nothing wrong!

[eyewinder]

Succinctly put, Cartmatt!    

Grandpa always said, "Locks only keep the honest guys out."  Something similar could be said for laws and honest/ethical fishermen. . .

[1tohuntandfish]

I would love to see slots or better yet lakes that are selected for trophy fisheries.  Give the meat eaters lakes with over abundant populations and let them thin them down, and give me a lake were the big ones go back.

[ryno]

I would love to see slots or better yet lakes that are selected for trophy fisheries.  Give the meat eaters lakes with over abundant populations and let them thin them down, and give me a lake were the big ones go back.

Welcome to shanty!  Great first post.....that's what I'm and others are looking for are those that rarely speak up but give a about the future of angling across our great waters. 

[augergas]

I love to eat panfish but a limit of 10 is something I sure could live with. Throwing back the biggest ones wouldn't hurt very much either. I think this would help out those lakes that get overrun with fishermen when there's a hot ice bite and would probably improve the fishing on more lakes, spreading out the crowds a bit.