Thread: KY Lake Fall Shindig. helping with KDFWR data collection

Majority of the time the mentality of the sportsman and the state is a them vs us! We have to tear down that stereotype together, educate the masses, and each side understand the challenges that frustrates the other.
Thank you for what you guys and gals do, its a thankless job most of the time. You never hear the positive but always hear tell negative. If you need anything, please let us know!

Sent from my SM-G900V using Crappie.com Fishing mobile app

Hey guys, We have finished our initial analysis of the fall crappie data from ky lake and lake barkley. Some general take aways: the fishery continues to be supported by the strong 2014 year class, as well as the average 2015 year class. 2016 was a very poor spawn. We won't know about the success of the 2017 spawn until next fall, but early indications suggest that it was only average.

Although we catch thousands of crappie in our nets, our numbers of big fish are typically pretty low due to a bias of the fishing gear towards smaller fish. Because of your help during the tournament we were able to increase that sample size by 86 fish in ky lake and 25 fish in lake barkley.

Most of your largest fish were age 7. (a result of a strong 2010 year class)
Below you will see a column for length, weight, species (bc=193 wc=192) and age.
length weight age

10.8	0.66	192	1
10.9	0.69	193	1
11.3	0.79	192	1
10.0	0.45	192	1
10.4	0.62	192	1
10.5	0.60	193	1
11.2	0.72	192	1
10.9	0.69	192	2
10.4	0.61	193	2
11.3	0.72	192	2
11.2	0.64	192	2
11.2	0.63	192	2
11.9	0.82	192	2
10.0	0.51	192	2
10.6	0.54	192	2
11.8	0.80	192	2
10.9	0.68	192	2
11.2	0.70	192	2
11.4	0.82	193	2
10.5	0.65	193	2
10.8	0.63	192	2
10.9	0.73	193	2
10.8	0.66	192	3
12.1	1.04	192	3
11.5	0.90	193	3
11.1	0.66	192	3
12.0	0.78	192	3
11.6	0.78	192	3
11.1	0.72	193	3
11.8	0.91	193	3
12.1	0.85	192	3
11.8	0.82	192	3
12.7	1.02	192	3
12.4	1.06	193	3
11.3	0.85	193	3
10.5	0.60	192	3
10.3	0.52	192	3
10.3	0.50	192	3
10.1	0.47	192	3
11.6	0.75	192	3
10.3	0.53	192	3
11.4	0.64	192	3
10.5	0.57	192	3
10.5	0.55	192	3
10.2	0.48	192	3
10.5	0.56	192	3
11.1	0.66	192	3
11.4	0.78	192	3
10.4	0.62	192	3
10.2	0.49	192	3
10.5	0.56	192	3
10.3	0.53	192	3
11.8	0.82	192	3
11.9	0.89	192	3
10.2	0.49	192	3
10.3	0.58	192	3
10.5	0.57	192	3
10.2	0.53	192	3
10.2	0.52	192	3
10.5		192	3
10.5	0.53	192	3
11.8	0.92	193	3
10.2	0.62	193	3
11.1	0.66	192	3
11.5	0.78	192	3
12.1	0.93	192	3
11.5	0.84	192	3
11.7	0.71	192	3
11.8	0.82	192	3
11.6	0.75	192	3
10.7	0.72	193	3
14.0	1.49	193	4
12.4	1.10	193	4
11.5	0.90	193	4
13.3	1.25	193	4
10.0	0.44	192	4
12.9	1.10	192	4
10.1	0.54	193	4
10.2	0.56	193	4
10.9	0.72	193	4
11.0	0.67	193	4
11.9	0.93	193	4
14.0	1.28	193	7
13.2	0.99	193	7
15.0	1.50	192	7
14.0	1.07	192	7

growth patterns observed in ky lake and lake barkley were very similar to growth patterns observed in previous years.
We also evaluated the condition of crappie in the lake. We do this by measuring its length and its weight and putting it into an equation that lets us know how it compares to fish from hundreds of other populations (This is know as relative weight, and each lake in the country uses the same equation) a score between 105 and 95 is considered healthy.
Lets start with ky lake. Our net collected black crappie scored an 87. This is below our long term average of 92, but lower values have been seen before.
Black crappie collected in the tournament actually scored higher at 91.6.

This value is dependent on how much food is available for these fish. It is influenced by the strength of the shad spawn, the strength of the crappie spawn, and also the numbers of other predators such as black bass, white bass, sauger, catfish, gar, cormorants, pelicans, etc.

The table below lists the relative weight values of ky lake black crappie since 1985. As you can see, this years values are low, but not at all unheard of even in the pre asian carp days.

YEAR	BC Wr
1985	87.25
1986	93.40
1987	86.49
1988	96.31
1989	82.06
1990	91.51
1991	92.64
1992	86.28
1993	88.76
1994	86.90
1995	88.59
1996	88.40
1997	81.21
1998	93.35
1999	93.85
2000	92.55
2001	93.90
2002	104.16
2003	96.31
2004	91.49
2005	93.46
2006	91.33
2007	99.98
2008	100.33
2009	103.63
2010	90.01
2011	99.50
2012	89.77
2013	93.09
2014	86.19
2015	92.30
2016	98.52
2017	87.00

Kentucky lake white crappie relative weights were very near the long term average of 90.93. Our 2017 net collected fish scored 89.15. Fish from your tournament scored 91.61.

See below for the long term relative weight data for ky lake white crappie.

YEAR	WC Wr
1985	84.47
1986	91.19
1987	90.67
1988	95.51
1989	81.20
1990	84.51
1991	85.24
1992	83.56
1993	84.27
1994	85.90
1995	84.54
1996	83.85
1997	79.90
1998	91.32
1999	90.34
2000	94.28
2001	87.37
2002	107.57
2003	90.43
2004	89.86
2005	94.82
2006	96.33
2007	101.77
2008	101.18
2009	103.05
2010	90.49
2011	99.38
2012	91.21
2013	93.12
2014	84.94
2015	90.57
2016	98.71
2017	89.15

And now Lake Barkley relative weights. Our net collected black crappie in 2017 scored 94.60. The tournament collected black crappie scored 94.90. The long term average is 93.5. See below for the long term data since 1985.

YEAR BC Wr +/- 95% CI BC (5-7.9in.) Wr S.E. BC (8-9.9in.) Wr S.E. BC (>10in.) Wr S.E. 1985 70.46 4.06 62.92 3.62 83.77 12.05 92.95 7.54 1986 86.97 3.31 81.27 2.62 95.64 9.47 98.96 2.17 1987 101.92 1.18 93.59 5.36 103.56 1.34 101.42 1.76 1988 97.47 2.25 85.53 1.91 101.55 2.97 101.35 2.23 1989 78.74 4.00 82.03 3.92 72.15 0 1990 96.43 1.99 91.2 4.54 98.64 2.08 98.24 0 1991 85.60 0.90 84.39 0.93 95.82 2.03 95.99 4.56 1992 91.28 0.46 86.26 1.77 90.86 0.47 96.39 1.05 1993 101.74 0.95 96.04 2.05 104.93 1.19 102.25 1.34 1994 86.95 0.46 85.47 0.47 86.77 2.66 91.56 0.93 1995 87.44 0.87 82.71 1.13 91.28 1.1 98.79 0.87 1996 88.45 0.49 88.25 0.57 86.63 0.92 97.28 1.66 1997 91.90 1.08 90.85 1.01 92.86 2.78 97.27 3.15 1998 84.98 0.43 85.36 0.51 83.48 0.72 82.64 1.07 1999 90.77 0.99 84.87 2.19 93.47 0.77 98.36 3.47 2000 96.92 0.46 95.03 0.61 100.39 0.78 96.17 0.99 2001 89.72 0.70 82.35 0.97 89.26 1.49 95.08 0.73 2002 101.58 0.62 91.58 1.4 103.74 0.71 101.32 1.21 2003 90.64 0.48 89.95 0.66 91.79 1.35 91.91 0.65 2004 98.04 0.68 92.28 1.53 101.51 0.68 100.06 0.82 2005 103.10 1.01 99.5 2.1 104.9 1.5 105.9 0.9 2006 90.09 0.93 85.85 1.14 93.27 1.47 98.64 1.5 2007 114.26 8.50 105.75 5.64 106.27 0.8 130.27 25.48 2008 109.77 0.79 104.85 3.53 111.83 0.74 106.51 1.16 2009 99.10 1.45 90.18 2.68 103.23 1.09 97.86 3.78 2010 96.32 0.93 86.95 1.11 102.18 1.39 101.42 1.22 2011 87.93 0.70 86.61 0.79 93.52 1.66 92.53 1.29 2012 98.04 0.44 96.73 1.74 97.65 0.52 99.2 0.71 2013 93.06 0.78 93.83 3.33 93.36 2.55 92.93 0.82 2014 94.80 0.62 92.17 0.64 97.06 0.81 99.91 2.41 2015 95.36 0.54 93.64 0.96 93.45 0.86 99.94 0.74 2016 92.55 0.52 90.78 0.65 96.19 1.03 94.5 0.96 2017 94.60 0.79 95.36 1.17 94.23 1.35 93.83 1.66

Lake Barkley white crappie actually scored above their long term average. 2017 net collected fish scored 96.37. Tournament collected fish scored 102.58. Once again a value between 95 and 105 is considered healthy. See below for the long term average since 1985.

YEAR	WC Wr	+/- 95% CI	WC (5-7.9in.) Wr	S.E.	WC (8-9.9in.) Wr	S.E.	WC (>10in.) Wr	S.E.
1985	79.64	1.10	71.60	1.15	89.22	1.8	98.2	1.38
1986	101.18	0.91	88.43	1.44	106.73	1.08	107.91	1.04
1987	98.17	0.95	94.87	0.97	102.16	2.57	100.72	1.83
1988	102.85	0.88	94.82	6.38	104.09	1.3	102.67	0.66
1989	87.87	1.07	84.28	1.44	92.17	1.26	89.01	2
1990	99.13	1.03	91.61	2.44	103.83	0.65	104.14	0.82
1991	92.71	0.56	88.84	0.91	94.69	0.79	96.57	1.14
1992	96.88	0.71	88.83	1.93	97.85	1	100.01	0.9
1993	102.46	0.82	93.48	1.13	107.94	0.86	107.64	1.32
1994	88.41	0.45	82.72	0.47	95.36	0.6	100.55	0.95
1995	89.64	0.38	83.44	0.39	95.96	0.5	103.15	0.98
1996	92.16	0.44	81.41	0.64	91.91	0.61	99.74	0.44
1997	90.22	0.37	88.31	0.43	92.59	0.78	98.61	0.81
1998	83.34	0.37	84.90	0.54	80.24	0.59	85.49	0.74
1999	97.46	0.66	91.01	1.26	98.44	1.44	100.73	0.72
2000	99.33	0.50	97.31	0.92	101.84	0.64	96.92	1.02
2001	87.20	0.85	79.82	0.69	93.52	2.39	101.12	1
2002	103.52	0.73	86.17	2.16	104.37	0.85	106.73	0.99
2003	92.42	0.57	87.53	0.68	98.34	1.09	98.91	0.97
2004	102.30	0.77	95.41	3.08	103.86	0.48	105.86	0.93
2005	102.79	0.72	86.7	1.4	106.9	1.4	108.5	0.6
2006	99.13	5.22	82.68	0.91	110.1	11.2	121.25	18.2
2007	105.73	1.03	104.16	2.96	109.15	1.37	105.24	1.26
2008	110.40	3.53	106.78	0.78	111.55	1.29	122.46	18.15
2009	93.87	0.96	79.91	1.32	100.85	1.17	99.55	0.85
2010	92.87	0.70	81.68	0.76	104.11	0.7	106.43	0.69
2011	85.20	0.38	81.41	0.39	94.56	0.61	98.13	0.92
2012	101.61	0.38	89.14	2.97	101.03	0.59	102.74	0.39
2013	96.68	0.71	83.75	2.02	96.26	1.03	99.07	0.7
2014	93.33	0.94	83.4	1.62	95.58	0.88	99.14	0.91
2015	89.38	0.31	87.16	0.31	93.1	0.72	99.86	1.12
2016	91.30	0.35	87.45	0.47	92.96	0.52	96.7	0.67
2017	96.37	0.79	91.17	2.88	94.41	1.48	98.32	0.9

I realize that I've thrown a lot of data up here, so feel free to ask questions about any of this information. One thing I would like to mention is the importance of perspective. These are long term averages based on large sample sizes of thousands of fish. The large sample sizes make it very accurate and reflective of the overall population. However, your own individual fishing experience might be different. Some of you may catch plump healthy crappie, others of you might catch skinny crappie. Without the perspective of thousands of fish, it is very easy to jump to conclusions.

Are Asian carp having an effect on growth and relative weight??? Maybe. Its impossible to say what growth and relative weight might have looked like without any Asian carp. But I can say that the growth and relative weights are not significantly different than their long term averages or the years before carp. This may change in the future, but we certainly hope not.

Spawn success continues to be controlled largely by environmental conditions during the spawning season. Generally speaking, a high flow, high water event around late april seems to positively affect the spawn. A no flood year like 2016 usually produces a poor spawn. We have an active research project in jonathan creek seeking a better understanding of these environmental factors but it will be several years before we are confident about our results.
Have Asian carp affected the spawn success? Maybe. But the year classes post carp are not significantly different than the year classes before carp. We have plans to evaluate the potential interaction between carp and larval and juvenile crappie, but at this point we don't know for sure whether they are competing for the same food resources.

Thanks for the data and for all each of you and the agency does.