Thread: Crappie Biology at Kentucky and Barkley lakes

Bandchaser

I mostly agree with you. There is no doubt that anglers using more poles will have better catch rates, and likely their harvest rates will be higher than anglers using one or two poles. The question is, does allowing anglers to use unlimited poles increase harvest to a level that may negatively impact the fishery. One might argue that all anglers, regards of pole numbers, are limited to the same daily creel limit. An angler harvesting their limit in 2 hours with 5 poles is no different than an angler harvesting their limit in 8 hours with 3 poles. Therefore, over-harvest can be avoided by daily creel limits. However, daily creel limits for crappie are typically not set so every, or most, anglers can go home with one. Spider rigging with multiple poles, and the associated technology of fish finders makes it easier for a higher proportion of anglers to get a limit, increasing exploitation. Additionally, the less time it takes to get a limit also increases the temptation of anglers to "double dip", a regulation very hard to enforce.

I to am not for making more regulations just to avoid enforcing the ones we already have. I agree we need more officers on the water, however believe it or not, the Dept. is struggling to get good candidates that will complete the required training. The current academy started with 24 and I believe is down to 11, because several dropped out. However, be aware....the man that Marshall County will be getting, he is in the academy right now, will be a good one.

Please don't take my previous post as one to set the stage for pole limits. I was trying to inform anglers that we are keeping a close eye on the management of our crappie fishery.

I was asked by a local sportsmen club (well the request actually went to our commissioner and then down to me) to consider a pole limit because the group suspected there is an overharvest problem. Which, is something I already keep up with. If overharvest.. let me repeat that, if overharvest was to become a concern, pole limits might be better accepted by crappie anglers better than a further reduction in creel limit from 20 down to 15 or even 10. It has been shown that poles limits could be used as an additional tool to reduce harvest where the fishery is heavily influenced by anglers using numerous poles (Mississippi has studied this on their great crappie lakes, and hence they have pole limits). Additionally, a pole limit might be best where a reduction in creel limit alone might require the limit to be reduced to a level that is unacceptable to most crappie anglers. In their study, they compared the reduction in harvest from a pole limit to that of a daily creel limit. They found that implementing a 5 pole limit would be similar to reducing the daily creel limit from 30 to 20 at Sardis Lake. Furthermore, a 3 pole limit would result in a reduced harvest similar to a creel reduction to 10 fish daily.

Paul, first let me state i appreciate you and the department, the work you do, and your excellent communication with the public. I have heard you speak numerous times in both states in various settings with crowds numbering up to several hundred. When compared to other states biologist you, and your office, are a cut above others. A character trait in which I, as a Kentucky sportsman, am very proud.

However, I do remember the informations and facts that you have previously supplied audiences of sportsman. After all discussions i have been present at, you always return to the cyclic spawn of the current spawn and recruitment which gives the numbers of fish available to be harvest. You also stated to sportsman in a meeting in Tennessee, that reducing the limit will not have an impact on the fish due to the very low number of fisherman whom actually habitually catch a limit regardless of the quality of spawns. I cannot remember the percentage given of actual fisherman/fisherwomen whom actually catch a limit. It was very low. I believe it was below 20%. Please correct me if i am remembering falsely. I do not wish to mislead anyone here.

Based on these numerous opportunities to soak in your professional data, I feel limiting the number of poles or reducing the limit will have little to no effect in long term fish management. That is my opinion and I respect all others opinion and do not pass judgement. I also will disclaim that I pull jigs or cranks 85% of fishing time on the water with multiple poles. The remainder fishing time is with spider rig or single pole. I feel that the current creel limit is the correct guideline of regulating catching fish and managing populations. Once it is met, regardless of the number of poles utilized, the angler goes home or then violates. As a 28 year law enforcement veteran, I can tell you with authority a violator will violate regardless of the rules stipulated. Whether its speed limits on a highway or the number of poles in a boat. A violator, violates, unless a authority figure is monitoring. Thus, more game wardens are needed on the water enforcing existing laws instead of pole reduction.

Finally, I become alarmed when individuals, or individual groups, input is weighed on matters where the majority should have input. If weight is given to this sportsman group then in public meetings they should be identified. This group should also be examined to where they have negative views on multiple poles anglers or if they are honestly concerned with over harvesting. I am not stating this is the case and hope this group intentions are honorable. However, crappie fisherman is an army that shoots its own soldiers. Single polers have issues with spider riggers. Spider riggers have issues with longliners and crank bait pullers, etc. etc. We all need to compromise and support these agencies which give us the opportunities we have on the water. If it is a legal means of harvest and the angler is abiding with legal creel limits, smile and congratulate them on their efforts and success.

Paul, if the agency ever goes to a 3 pole limit, I hope there will be public meetings where everyone has the opportunity for input. This will impact retail sales of angling equipment and possible future decisions of out of state anglers coming here to fish. In reality the pressure on crappies is the 60-90 day window of pre spawn, spawn, and post spawn. The rest of the year the is very little pressure on them. Consider this,if the over harvest of the spawn/recruitment class of crappie is a concern, any increased limitation, i.e. pole reduction or creel reduction, should only be applied to this 90 day window. The rest of the year the current regulations remain in effect.

In closing, if my words have offended you Paul or anyone else, you have my heartfelt apology. We need to keep all our local, state, and federal agencies in our prayers. Thx for all you do and feel free to holler anytime

Paul,

Let me start with a HUGE THANK YOU for all the information you have continued to give us for years and years. I continue to go back and read your survey that you and your department did on specs compared to white crappie looking for information that could help me to become a better fisherman on a regular basis.
I would like to also thank you for not only your interest in our fishery in general but the fact that you have 30 Years in your field and you still are tolerant for people that continue to tell you how to do your job! I doubt anyone on this site would be as mild mannered if someone stepped into their workplace whether it's an office or a craft and tried to tell them how to conduct their job while having 30 Years of expertise in their respective field. I also realize the information you provide us is from data collected from studies not only from your agency but from other state agencies across the country.

As far as the poles, creel limits and various other things related to fishing, my opinion means squat and cannot compare to any data that you guys have collected. I do have opinions, and guys that know me know that I'm very passionate about our fishery, from aspects of over harvest, to structure placement, and a number of other things related to fishing.
In a perfect world we would never have to discuss or explore any of these things that are related to fishing, but as we all should know we definitely do not live in a perfect world.
Thanks Again for all you do!

Great information. Thanks for taking the time to post it.


Sent from my HTC6525LVW using Tapatalk

Thanks for the great info, just a thought, 3/4 of the fish I've kept and cleaned this year were full of eggs, what if there was a 4-6 week window of a closed season during the peak of the spawn? Please don't shoot me!

Paul,

On January 16th, 2017, I sent you a detailed email with some follow up questions relating to different things dealing with crappie on our big lakes. And, you replied on January 17, 2017, with a very detailed, statistical and data driven email that was much appreciated. Now, in this email we discussed the 11" minimum and you provided all that information. You also taught me about fishing mortality and natural mortality rates which total 55% on our lakes. Here is your reply:
As I mentioned previous, from tagging studies we can assume fishing mortality is around 40%. Could be lower since we have reduced the creel limit to 20, but have not funded another tagging study to check exploitation. So for this explanation, I will use 40% fishing mortality. From many years of data we collect we know that annual (total) mortality of crappie is estimated to be 55%. So, if you subtract out fishing mortality from total mortality, you are left with about 15%. That means on average, 15% of the crappie die of old age or what is referred to as natural mortality. Just to look more recently (last decade), in a period of years just prior to the 20 creel limit the average natural mortality was 52%. In the years, following the change to a 20 fish creel, the average is now at 57%. So that means since the change to a 20 fish limit, natural mortality has been a little higher, even a little higher than our historical (30 years) data average. More specifically, during the last two years, natural mortality has been over 60%. Again, assume, fishing mortality is staying the same at 40%, natural mortality is 20%. That is 5% (20-15) more crappie dying of natural mortality as compared to the historical average. That is fish dying of natural cause, rather than due to fishing mortality. We know some fish are going to die of natural causes, but we would rather see then consumed by anglers than wasted. This is all a juggling act. Keeping natural mortality low, while maximizing fishing mortality to maintain good growth with regulations, while dealing the natural population changes caused by environmental factors and population density-dependent factors. So while we try to juggle this, it’s like someone occasionally adds a few ball (good year classes), and other times the reach in a take a few out (poor year classes).

Also, you pointed out how an average female lays approximately 40,000 eggs and used very low adult survival numbers to drive your example. In conclusion, it is year class driven but the creel limit is just fine where it is. Here is your answer:
In addition, protecting the crappie one more year by having an 11” length limit, in order to get another spawn would not help to stabilize out the good and bad spawns, nor necessary create a better fishery. Crappie are one of the more cyclic species of fish that we manage. Some of their best spawns have occurred when adult populations were the lowest. This is often related to density-dependent factors which drive a population of any animal to propagate. Deer do the same thing. When numbers are low, does will sometime have three fawns. In other years, when numbers of adults are high in an area, the does may only have one offspring. Think of the spawning this way. Above I mentioned that the number of eggs a crappie might have. For this example, I am going to use 40,000 eggs (conservatively low). Let’s say that only 1% of the eggs produced by one female eventually makes it to a harvestable size crappie. So from that 40,000 only 400 make it to an adult. Also above I mentioned the recent annual harvest of crappie, but for this example, I will round up to 200,000. So in order to replace harvest, I would only need 500 female (500 adult female x 400 viable eggs = 200,000 harvest in a year) crappie in the lake… along with the males. But also knowing a male will spawn with a few different females. But even if we assume the 1 to 1 relationship that is only 1,000 crappie we need to replace harvest. So, my point is, spawning potential is not an issue, hence we don’t need to protect more crappie to produce better numbers. I believe the current regulations have us protected from over harvest, given fair to good year classes produced. However, if we experience consecutive poor year classes for several years, then changes in our current regulations might be needed.

You also spoke about with any regulation change, it takes approximately 2 years to fully conduct the change. In that time, as we all know from your teachings that crappie are cyclic, and it is population and year class driven. Here is a snip it of your answer:
Regulations are a tricky thing. Most people think we can just change a regulation. However, the fact it take at least 2 years to change a regulation, unless it is pushed through as an emergency regulation. That is why we try to stay with a happy medium in regards to crappie regulations. Crappie are fast growing and short lived. So by the time we have a few years of data to suggest we make a change, then we start through the regulatory process, the fishery has changed again based on good or poor year classes. There are time when numbers are low and growth is better, that an 11” size limit might work. But there are also times when the numbers have been high, but growth has slowed down, to where a 9” size limit would have been better.

So, here are two more questions that I have for you now.
1) What "local sportsman's club" has made this uneducated or data-less accusation to the state that is already proven by the facts that you have already presented to me and others? Where might this "club" reside, in Lexington or in Western Kentucky in the Lakes region??

2) So, if you believe the current regulations have us protected from over harvest, given fair to good year classes produced, then why haven't the Commissioner and yourself sat down with this "club", or called a public meeting for this "clubs" members and all interested fishermen, and set the record straight?

As far as i am concerned, this "club" is wasting Paul's time in this one sided attack against other fishermen. I completely believe what my grandfather told me, 90% of the fish are caught by 10% of the fishermen. This group studies the cycles of the crappie, contributes to their habitat, seeks to fish this species each and every month of the year, takes notes and fills out logs to better themselves as a crappie fisherman.

Thanks,
Brian Price

Last year I was Creel clerk on Barren River And would have fishermen throwing crappie over in the lake thinking I would ticket them. As a fisherman I have guys brag of double limits in one day. With our warm weather and the increase of spring time only fisherman with shorts and too many in the live well, I get discouraged an start thinking of my garden an turkey. I've learned from one of our officers that a man, whom I've turned in numerous times, has been ticketed this past week for having two short fish. Regulations can be changed so that we can only use a three foot ice rod, rotten butcher cord and a dull hook but it won't help unless we as fishermen are willing to become more ethical. Police ourselves. The general public coming to Kentucky to catch the quality fish they do needs to understand why the fisheries are of such quality and they too must follow the same laws if they expect to do so in the future.
Just my-two cents.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

crp4570

You are correct, the number of crappie anglers actually catching a limit is low. Looking back at six creel survey years for KY and Barkley lakes, the percentage is closer to 1%. However, I suspect that value will increase this year with the higher density of adults in the population due to the good year classes of 2013-2015. We are conducting a creel survey on KY Lake this year.

You are correct, my personal opinion is that we live in a time that more people are willing to break laws they deem trivial. They often justify breaking those laws based on self-satisfying reasons. Such as, "last time I went fishing I did not catch my limit, so this time I am justified to keep a few over the limit". Or what will it really hurt if I keep a few 9.8" crappie to fill my limit, since I often don't catch a limit. I doubt peoples attitude will change, until they get caught, which will take more officers on the lake.

Don't let it alarm you that we get pressure, or suggestions are made from individuals and even groups, to change a regulation. I have become accustomed to this over the past 30 years. Everyone has an opinion. I often see these opportunities as a challenge to dig deeper into the data to either prove them wrong, or change my understand. But mostly to prove them wrong. Hee Hee. In a nice way though. LOL.

We are not considering a pole limit or a reduction in creel limit. I merely brought this up in my original post, because it was something asked of us to consider. I have actually been tracking fishing methods (spider rigging) for more than a decade now. So the request was nothing that I was not already on top of. We know that more crappie anglers are using this method than 10 years ago. We also know that the more poles you have the greater your fishing success is. We will continue to monitor this trend. end of story

You are correct, before we make any management changes, we often have a public meeting. In addition, we also use creel surveys to ask anglers their opinions. So in the KY creel survey this year, we will be asking anglers their opinion about pole limits. The last time we did this was 2007. I believe only about 30% opposed spider rigging at that time. I suspect that percentage has drop, since more crappie angler spider rig now.

You mentioned a pole limit might affect retail sales and tourism (licenses sales). Licenses sales pay my salary, so that is important. But, I don't manage the fishery based on selling licenses. I attempt to manage the fishery (KY and Barkley lakes) based on biology. I believe if I do my job right, then we will sale licenses. I don't let the tail wag the dog, so to say. As a reminder for those reading, you need a new fishing licenses come March 1.

Our regulations are confusing enough, I do not every foresee making season gear restriction type regulation.

And lastly, no offense taken by anything you wrote. I made my original post to help inform anglers, that we work diligently on managing the fishery. And, most things that anglers are thinking or have an opinion about the fishery, we have already been thinking about it for years. We are annually collecting data to follow the population trends to make the best management decisions. But, I always welcome anglers opinion. Hence the other reason I put this information out here. I may not always get it right, so I value anglers comments.