I think they used to have a 25 fish limit on Sunfish....the one that gets me is the one fish limit on catfish over 28" long....why? I still have trouble remembering all the regulation changes from last year.
It is indeed accurate http://www.in.gov/dnr/fishwild/files/fw-Got_Input_dfw_proposals_2014.pdf
Keep in mind these are not yet rules, they are gathering input about these proposed ideas.
AND the hour restriction is for "designated DNR properties", not just any land anywhere in the state
Looks like they're serious about whacking and stacking the deer in urban areas...
I'll get the popcorn for this thread, should be a good one with lots of civil debate and well thought and informed points :)
Whats paylakes got to do with it?
Most of it doesnt effect me, I hope they have solid reasons for making the changes...changes for changes sake doesnt make sense.
However, I fully support the 25 fish limit on sunfish. When I see people walk off the ice with 50, 75, whatever number of fish, I just never get it. 25 is plenty.
It's illegal to transport fish to a different body of water or to sell them without a license to do so in Indiana. Many of the reservoirs and state owned ponds I fish here in Central Indiana don't offer spawning habitat for catfish anyways and the populations are maintained by annual or bi-annual stocking by the DNR. I think limiting the taking of large catfish could cause an over abundance of them in lakes where they do spawn and really hurt the panfish population. It's a double edged sword really...
I am all for the panfish limit, IF they actually enforce it. To many use the spawn to catch 100's of gills in a day and they are all the biggest males in the lake. It is not good for the fisheries, so putting a limit on what any one person can take would help. The rule says SUNFISH....perch are not part of the sunfish family, so are they included in the 25?Perch are not included in Michigan for your 25 fish creel
However, I fully support the 25 fish limit on sunfish. When I see people walk off the ice with 50, 75, whatever number of fish, I just never get it. 25 is plenty.
I'm curious as to the reasoning behind the proposed sunfish limit. Is it due to input from anglers wanting bigger fish, or has the DNR noticed a decline in sunfish populations and/or quality?
I agree. I wish they would tell us why they make changes to the regulations instead of just making them. With as much as we spend on fishing and hunting licenses, entry to DNR parks, etc, I think we have a right to know.
If you are concerned about any of the proposed rule changes or have ideas of your own....I would suggest you send the DNR your thoughts and ideas. It's important they hear our voices.
[DNR] DNR seeks input on fish, hunt, trap regulations
Start Date: 1/2/2014 Start Time: 12:00 AM
End Date: 1/2/2014 End Time: 11:59 PM
Event Description
The DNR Division of Fish & Wildlife wants to hear your ideas on fishing, hunting, trapping and other fish and wildlife related regulations in Indiana, including special permits.
From Jan. 2 to Feb. 28, the public can use a convenient online form to contribute ideas and provide input on issues the DNR has identified for consideration.
The form is at wildlife.IN.gov, at the “Got INput?” box near the middle of the page.
“Got INput?” allows the public to comment on ideas put forward by the DNR Division of Fish & Wildlife as well as requests for rule changes from citizen petitions.
The program also allows members of the public to propose their own ideas on any fishing, hunting or trapping topic.
“This is an opportunity for people to let us know what changes they would like us to consider,” said Gregg McCollam, assistant director of the Division of Fish & Wildlife. “This process also allows us to get much-needed feedback on issues that the division is in interested in moving forward.”
Got INput users must register with a username and a password.
Input and ideas can also be mailed to:
DNR Division of Fish & Wildlife
Attn: Got INput
402 W. Washington St., Room W273
Indianapolis, IN 46204
After Feb. 28, the Division of Fish & Wildlife staff will evaluate all comments and determine which proposals to forward to the Natural Resources Commission for consideration.
Contact Information:
Name: Michelle Cain
Phone: (317) 234-8240
Email: [email protected]
Don't know but I do know lots of anglers have wanted this for some time and it's been struck down. Unfortunately one explanation given several year ago was the simplistic the more fish caught the more food to go around and the better it is for the population. Tony, you and I know it's not as simple as that and studies by the Illinois Natural History have shown one can bring down the average size of bluegills by over harvesting the large males. Then there are the sneaker and cuckhold males and you actually have a mating and courtship ritual that rivals a lot of other animals in the animal kingdom. You and I manage our ponds for large bluegills and we know it's not simple!
Whenever I have seen changes made solely by the IDNR there is usually an explanation from what I have seen. Maybe you've seen otherwise? However what we are talking about here are proposals that have been brought forth by sportsman, they are taken under consideration by the IDNR, and either accepted or denied.
Ain't that the truth Cecil! I will be following this proposal closely, with a keen interest in the impact it might have on the fisheries, should it pass. Like you, I believe a blanket proposal leaves something to be desired, but realize that it's difficult, if not impossible, to evaluate and govern each of the state's many lakes independently.
Ain't that the truth Cecil! I will be following this proposal closely, with a keen interest in the impact it might have on the fisheries, should it pass. Like you, I believe a blanket proposal leaves something to be desired, but realize that it's difficult, if not impossible, to evaluate and govern each of the state's many lakes independently.
The blanket rule (if that is what they go for) is a start. Hopefully it will help more lakes than it will hurt. It will also raise alot of funds for the DNR if they just patrol the lakes from mid may to the end of june. The guys will coolers full off the beds don't care about the resource now or they would not be taking that many at that time. They will be the same ones that won't follow the rule and if the DNR hammers them with fines and makes it public, it may deter others from trying the same. I would be for them raising the license fee to 40.00 or more a year if it puts more feet on the ground to enforce the current and new rules.
There are plenty of deer around. I see herds of them about every time I am driving at dusk. Have just about hit 2 in the last couple weeks. You may need to change where you are looking for deer. Just becuase you are allowed to shoot 8 or 10 or whatever it is does not mean as a hunter you have to do it. Blame the 'sportsman' for not having any self control. Humans have ruined alot of habitat and driven the deer into neighborhoods, onto the roads where they are hit and damage cars and people and destroy crops. Last time I checked bluegills did none of the above. The DNR is doing what they can to provide hunting opportunities while keeping the herd at a reasonable level.
OK lets say for sake of argument that the suggested changes are passed AND enforced. What do you see the results on the fisheries being? In a 5 year period what changes? Do we see larger fish? Do we see better fishing?
Or do we maybe see some overpopulation? Do we already have a stunted breed of fish in many of our waters that bag limits would not effect fish size?
I don't know any of these answers. If it means improved fisheries and a chance to create a larger population of those bull gills - I'm all for it. I've heard this debate and curious of what most people see the effect being.
I'm torn on this one. I have limited time to fish and like to put on a fish fry for my friends. What is the difference between going out five days in a row and taking 25 a day versus one day keeping 100+.
I have to ask... Do you hunt deer?
maybe the dnr has witnessed them "bearded" fellas taking five gallon buckets of 3-4 inch pannies ???? some of us have...
I had an interesting conversation a couple weeks ago with a C.O. I asked him if there would ever be a limit of 25 for panfish? He did not have all the info but thought some lakes would benefit from it while others seem to keep producing even with high panfish harvest. He said he checks MANY fisherman during spring and summer with coolers full of panfish....hundreds of fish! And many times the same fishermen multiple times. One guy bragged to him that this was his 5th cooler full this week!
He said the spring/summer boat fishermen really slaughter the panfish!....ice fishermen don't even come close.
The blanket rule (if that is what they go for) is a start. Hopefully it will help more lakes than it will hurt. It will also raise alot of funds for the DNR if they just patrol the lakes from mid may to the end of june. The guys will coolers full off the beds don't care about the resource now or they would not be taking that many at that time. They will be the same ones that won't follow the rule and if the DNR hammers them with fines and makes it public, it may deter others from trying the same. I would be for them raising the license fee to 40.00 or more a year if it puts more feet on the ground to enforce the current and new rules.
Does this really surprise anyone that lives or hunts in this terrible state? The DNR has single handily ruined very bit of hunting and fishing in this state. Tele check, urban deer zones, basically unlimited bonus county,antler less only, they have killed off the deer heard, they do not maintain any state properties or publicly funded boat ramps, they removed all of the boats from state properties for duck hunting. When is enough enough? This state has been in a downward spiral for the past 4 years. They have not done anything positive for the sportsmen it has all had negative effects on us, a bluegill limit? C'mon really they are more worried about limiting the number of bluegill as opposed to the number of deer you can harvest. Which state property or public access have you been to recently? How was it? In disrepair, trash all over the place, no one there, no information? We sportsmen pay for this in one way or another either by taxes or license sales we need to stand up to these Indianapolis IDIOTS and pull their heads out of their asses. We demand more not less the time is now not later I fear by the time my son is old enough to fish I they'll probably have ZERO hook restriction by then....
I wonder if there are any case studies to draw from?
I used to, but not recently. What does that have to do with the number of deer I see just driving? My point was there are still a ton of deer around where I live and drive. Maybe different where you live. Because I don't hunt anymore means the deer I see are not real? Guys I know that hunt are not having any issues seeing plenty of deer.
Point still stands...blaming the DNR for the 'rules' causing the deer herd decline (his opinion) is laying the blame in the wrong place. No one forces any hunter to shoot more than 1 a season. Example, the DNR says you can keep 5 LM bass a day over 14", but that does not mean you shuold do it just because it is in the rules. If all bass tournament fishermen kept 5 a day there would be very few LM in IN lakes. Tournament anglers and most recreational anglers let the bass go to enjoy another day despite the 'rules' saying we could all keep them. DNR knows bass are 90% C&R so they leave the rule in place. When they put the rules in to allow 4, 6, 8 deer in some counties, they probably underestimated the overzealous hunters that would actually shoot that many. Hunters need to show some restraint if they care about the resource. Get your buck and one doe and call it a season. Should be basic math to anyone including the DNR that deer have 1 fawn (sometimes twins) a year. Everytime they kill a doe they are removing 2 or 3 from next years population. Multiply that by 5 or 6 doe tags (because the DNR rules say they can), add in the affects of the virus and yotes killing fawns, and it is not hard to see why some are complaining there are no deer. One or two guys that go by 'if its brown its down' hunting mentality can put a dent in the herd in a hurry especially if they hunt the same area.
this topic will make your brain hurt if you let it. lol way too many variables for a definite assumption. we see lakes give up really nice gills with unbelievable pressure year after year. obviously very fertile and easily able to support a huge population of gills. what would happen if that harvest was limited? would it turn into a over populated and useless fishing water?
sylvan is a great lake to look at rite now. everyone tells of sorting through hundreds of runts for a nice meal of eaters. wasnt like that a few years ago or had it been like that in the past. why is it like this now? is it from the zebra mussels clearing the water, and allowing weeds to grow out of control, therefore limiting predation? last year it looked like pea soup from an unreal algae bloom. was that because of the clearer water in a shallow fertile reservoir? was it from a growing lawn fertilizing trend? is it from global warming? i just dont see how one law would benefit every lake, when they are always changing.
Does this really surprise anyone that lives or hunts in this terrible state? The DNR has single handily ruined very bit of hunting and fishing in this state. Tele check, urban deer zones, basically unlimited bonus county,antler less only,they have killed off the deer heard , they do not maintain any state properties or publicly funded boat ramps, they removed all of the boats from state properties for duck hunting. When is enough enough? This state has been in a downward spiral for the past 4 years. They have not done anything positive for the sportsmen it has all had negative effects on us, a bluegill limit? C'mon really they are more worried about limiting the number of bluegill as opposed to the number of deer you can harvest. Which state property or public access have you been to recently? How was it? In disrepair, trash all over the place, no one there, no information? We sportsmen pay for this in one way or another either by taxes or license sales we need to stand up to these Indianapolis IDIOTS and pull their heads out of their asses. We demand more not less the time is now not later I fear by the time my son is old enough to fish I they'll probably have ZERO hook restriction by then....
It's illegal to transport fish to a different body of water or to sell them without a license to do so in Indiana. Many of the reservoirs and state owned ponds I fish here in Central Indiana don't offer spawning habitat for catfish anyways and the populations are maintained by annual or bi-annual stocking by the DNR. I think limiting the taking of large catfish could cause an over abundance of them in lakes where they do spawn and really hurt the panfish population. It's a double edged sword really...
I used to, but not recently. What does that have to do with the number of deer I see just driving? My point was there are still a ton of deer around where I live and drive. Maybe different where you live. Because I don't hunt anymore means the deer I see are not real? Guys I know that hunt are not having any issues seeing plenty of deer.
Point still stands...blaming the DNR for the 'rules' causing the deer herd decline (his opinion) is laying the blame in the wrong place. No one forces any hunter to shoot more than 1 a season. Example, the DNR says you can keep 5 LM bass a day over 14", but that does not mean you should do it just because it is in the rules. If all bass tournament fishermen kept 5 a day there would be very few LM in IN lakes. Tournament anglers and most recreational anglers let the bass go to enjoy another day despite the 'rules' saying we could all keep them. DNR knows bass are 90% C&R so they leave the rule in place. When they put the rules in to allow 4, 6, 8 deer in some counties, they probably underestimated the overzealous hunters that would actually shoot that many. Hunters need to show some restraint if they care about the resource. Get your buck and one doe and call it a season. Should be basic math to anyone including the DNR that deer have 1 fawn (sometimes twins) a year. Everytime they kill a doe they are removing 2 or 3 from next years population. Multiply that by 5 or 6 doe tags (because the DNR rules say they can), add in the affects of the virus and yotes killing fawns, and it is not hard to see why some are complaining there are no deer. One or two guys that go by 'if its brown its down' hunting mentality can put a dent in the herd in a hurry especially if they hunt the same area.
All the major reservoirs in the southern half of the state have pretty much suffered the same fate. They start out as unbelievable bluegill fisheries then suddenly almost overnight are dink factories and they never really come back unless drained . Has nothing to do with limits . One only has to compare the fish sampling records and when the shad population explodes. You have places like Boggs Creek, where the only recourse has been to drain the lake and start over. They even offered rewards for information on anyone putting shad into the lake. Take a lake like Summit, which seems to be a bluegill factory year after year, and you probably wont find many shad there if any. We used to have a 25 limit on bluegill in Indiana. All the 25 limits in the world would not help reservoirs like Monroe or Patoka I'm afraid.
HHD
I think you took my question a little too personally. I have always respected your thoughts and opinions and I was just curious as to your current background in the deer woods.
I have been a passionate deer hunter for 30 or so years now from archery thru muzzleloader seasons. And yes, I have seen the deer herd being dwindled away over the past several years.
You have some very good points as to some of the reasons for this, but, with all that you said, your most compelling reason is indeed 'it is the hunter' who squeezes the trigger at every deer he/she sees that is most to blame. This can only be regulated by the DNR.
I am sure you see plenty of deer driving around covering many miles over the road. I don't have that luxury of driving miles and hunting which is how you are seeing most of your deer. You really need to get back into the deer woods again to see the reductions that us deer hunters have seen over the past few years.
Also, when you have someone leasing up 1/4th of Kosciusko county, Ken (fill in the blank) McIntosh, it makes it even tougher for the average 'ole green moe' to find those good properties that you are probably seeing those deer on to hunt.
I hope that some of what I just typed made a little sense, and I wasn't trying to call you out on anything waxie. I just wanted to know what your recent background was to be speaking out about the current deer herd. Thanks for giving us your opinions as they are always appreciated. ;)
OGM....I apoligize if my response came across the wrong way. I was possessed by penguins. I stopped hunting becuase I no longer enjoyed sitting in the woods waiting for a deer to come by and because as you said finding good areas to hunt is nearly impossible. Now I bass fish from march to decemember.
I was not trying to argue that the deer herd is what it used to be, becuase it is not. I did not do a good job at it, but I was just trying to say I still see alot of deer (saw 8 on the way to the lake this morining at the edge of a small wooded plot eating in a field) and of course what I see may be different 20 miles from here or where you hunt. Maybe there are fewer hunters up here or they aren't very good! LOL at the Ken M. comment. Been more than 10 years since I have heard anything abuot him. Used to be a big Bass guy.
What you say makes sense, but sometimes people have to self regulate despite the rules. As you know, there is alot that goes into the current rules like farmers complaining about crop damage, insurance company lobby, yearly harvest stats, etc., I know we don't always agree with what goes into the rules, but I don't think the DNR really expects most hunters to be killing 4-8 deer a year just because they can. Unfortunately those that can't self regulate are often the ones that are first to scream 'foul' when after a couple years they are not seeing the same numbers of deer. It really is a tangled web. Either allow the herd to grow and expand as we remove more and more habitat each year, which will cause crop damage, higher insurance rates for all, and better hunting for those that hunt, or 'try' to reduce the herd to keep crop damage low, insurance rates in check, and still maintain decent hunting. Somewhere there is a balance in this whole mess, but I don't know what it is.
I like the 25 fish limit, I would love to see a catch and release season for bass during the spawn. Michigan has a closed season bass till after the spawn. It would eliminate tourney anglers pulling bass off the beds, I know Im probably gonna catch flack for this post but I could care less!!! Check Wawasee parking in the spring, Michigan plates everywhere pulling bass off beds for there tourneys that they cant do in Michigan