Thread: Keepers

I was arbitrarily indicating an inch of growth each year. I know that this is not correct and I do know from reading this forum that growth rates are different for different lakes. There are, probably, many other factors involved as well. I am not smart enough or qualified enough to determine length or bag limits on any lake except the lake I fish most of the time, and I feel I could guess pretty close to what the biologists see on that lake. I would guess with the extreme fishing pressure that Sardis gets that the reduced bag limit and boat limit contributed greatly to the rebound. If what they have done with the regulations on Sardis have helped the fishing, it is a good thing. I would not be surprised if they could impose those same regulations and made the length limit 11 inches that the same result could have been achieved over an adequate period of time. I'm not sure of this, I'm just guessing. Again, another contributing factor could be the growth rate. If your minimum length limit is 11 inches and the fish reaches that length in 2.5 years from the time of the spawn, but reaches 12 inches exactly 3 years from the spawn. In the spring of year 2 you would have few keepers, but the next spring it would appear the fishing had rebounded just because most fishermen are spring fishermen. I imagine these little things do not mess up the biologist. That is why we need to rely mostly on them to guide us in making the right choice for keeping our fishing good. The resource is also not consistent. The effect of bad spawns will be delayed for several years depending on growth rates. I noticed on a lake Carol and I fish, that a few years ago, there were no small fish. We fished an entire week and probably did not catch over a handful of fish less than 10 inches while catching limits of fish from 1 to 2+lbs. I commented to her that bad years were coming and they have, but I do see that lake on the rebound as well. Again, do not take anything I say personally, because it is all just a guess and my point of view, and contrary to what I believe, I am probably often wrong.

Sorry for the hijack. A 14 inch personal minimum limit is a lofty goal and I salute anyone that holds themselves to such high standard. Personally, my fish eating would be cut substantially because we do not see many 14's caught in our local area.

We had a 10'' min length over 30 years ago but it was discontinued . The numbers got real high and we caught lots of fish just under 10'' but few good ones . Blue Mtn has a 9'' min length but with high numbers I don't understand that. I only keep 10'' plus and perfer the ones over 12''. We don't need a one fits all on size limits . That is the reason AGFC does regular testing to check numbers and growth rates . What works in the big clear northern flood control lakes would run shallow muddy ones like Nimrod and Blue Mtn . But those infertile clear lakes don't have big recuritment (spawn survival ) and need more protection (lower limits and size limits)

Ty for all your feedback or opinions that's why I love this site, now with that said I would never try to set someone else's standards to be like mine or lean my way to do so that's not who I am, my way is my way as is yours in anything you do for example I Preach different than anyone else who does so and I won't change neither will they, No we don't eat a lot of fish though we love eating them because of my standards, this is what my Dad and Grandfather taught me so I've continued the tradition. We just enjoy catching them it's fun and a challenge, but again Ty for the feedback and education.

MS has four lakes, Think they are called the Big Four...You have not seen pressure until you fish one of these in the spring. Yet they produce unbelievable catches every year. Why? because they only allow 12 inch plus fish to be taken and you are only allowed 15 per person in great habitat. I would like to see a The Big D managed like this here to see what happens, bet it would be even better and Arkansas would have it's very own Trophy Crappie Lake the big D has the potential to be a world class crappie Trophy fishery.

Crappie pro it's hard to convince anyone of that and I do agree with you we need a lake where we can have those trophy fish. Wishful thinking.

Just reading a good post!!!!

Thought they were doing this on Conway with a 10 inch minimum. I haven't heard how this is working out. How long has that been in effect? It may take a few years before you see good numbers of good sized fish. Dardanelle, I'm thinking, would be harder to manage as a trophy lake due to it being a river system and not confined.

Your right Randell Dardanelle would never work being on a river that runs from one end of the state to the other !!! Chicot I think would make a good one to try it has plenty of deeper water and the water is probably pretty fertile sence it's in the delta and already has A 10in.leanth limit and a 20 fish limit! !! Then some of them poachers might stay on the west side of the BIG CREEK !!!LOL