Thread: Wonder why Patoka didn’t make the 24 best crappie lakes According to state publicatio

Back in the days of crappie USA It was nothing to catch 13 inch crappie in that lake. I took a 3rd there with 17lbs best 10 fish . It was 1999 I think .

Sent from my SM-G965U using Crappie.com Fishing mobile app

Originally Posted by gone_fishing

I clearly remember those days. Patoka Lake then was the place to go.

How true!!! Gone_fishing, how you been? Long time no see! I will never understand why DNR and Indiana Bass is building and putting fish habitat in Patoka as well as releasing bass into it. Most your bass tourneys are weighing in 20 plus pounds,,,5 fish limits. And there is still tons of standing timber in Painter Creek as well as darned near over half the entire lake. If COE would keep from flooding the lake the weed growth would come back and the lake would thrive again with abundant fish. Just my opinion. Nice to see you posting!

Originally Posted by Japayton82

Back in the days of crappie USA It was nothing to catch 13 inch crappie in that lake. I took a 3rd there with 17lbs best 10 fish . It was 1999 I think .

Sent from my SM-G965U using Crappie.com Fishing mobile app

it was nothing to troll Crankbaits and limit out in 2-3 hrs with fish 12-14” when we had the weed lines and weeds in the lake! If this wind ever dies down below 10 mph, I am hitting Patoka.

We were still catching 12+ crappie 6 years ago. Not a lot but most fish still had some size to them. Know it’s mostly 8 inches and less. I know they stocked pretty heavy with walleye. Was this to help get rid of some of the small fish?

Originally Posted by mperry

We were still catching 12+ crappie 6 years ago. Not a lot but most fish still had some size to them. Know it’s mostly 8 inches and less. I know they stocked pretty heavy with walleye. Was this to help get rid of some of the small fish?

2 reasons. Walleye were introduced to fish for and eat. Walleyes introduced to help decrease shad population. However, I always question DNR not having the money or resources to raise the walleye fry large enough as they have only been releasing 10 to 20 million fry sometimes every year now for the past half dozen or more years at the size of 0.02 inches in size right after they have hatched. To add to that size, add the loss of weed cover past few years, the primary cover of the fry,,,what is the survival rates as I have fished for walleye numerous times and did better catching walleye when we had the weed lines and beds vs, lack of cover. So I give up, but will get sucked in to fish a couple of times again this year for the eyes.

Originally Posted by cevans

2 reasons. Walleye were introduced to fish for and eat. Walleyes introduced to help decrease shad population. However, I always question DNR not having the money or resources to raise the walleye fry large enough as they have only been releasing 10 to 20 million fry sometimes every year now for the past half dozen or more years at the size of 0.02 inches in size right after they have hatched. To add to that size, add the loss of weed cover past few years, the primary cover of the fry,,,what is the survival rates as I have fished for walleye numerous times and did better catching walleye when we had the weed lines and beds vs, lack of cover. So I give up, but will get sucked in to fish a couple of times again this year for the eyes.

You know most of them get eaten. That's a fact, I just made up.

Strictly fish food.

They really need to get the lake level down.
I did have some luck up the river near kings bridge and Walls ramp, but the water has just been to high most of the time.

My rule of thumb, anytime the water is too high to open the beach, better to fish someplace else...