Is big lake done?

[schol]

Originally Posted by DaPointIsDaBomb

Been going downhill since they lowered the limit to 15, that is the main reason

Explain the rationale behind this.

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by schol

Explain the rationale behind this.

The gist of the rationale is that with lower limits, there were too many small trout in the lake eating too much of the available food, so fewer fish would have enough to eat to be fat and grow fast enough to become true trophies.

For trout to get really big, they have to grow fast, which means there can't be more fish in the lake than the lake can support (carrying capacity).

Conserving ample forage is key for producing trophies in species that don't live a long, long time. Conserving lots and lots of 12-15" trout can be counter productive to conserving ample forage.

[schol]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

The gist of the rationale is that with lower limits, there were too many small trout in the lake eating too much of the available food, so fewer fish would have enough to eat to be fat and grow fast enough to become true trophies.

For trout to get really big, they have to grow fast, which means there can't be more fish in the lake than the lake can support (carrying capacity).

Conserving ample forage is key for producing trophies in species that don't live a long, long time. Conserving lots and lots of 12-15" trout can be counter productive to conserving ample forage.

So, although counterintuitive, I definitely see the logic there.

My main issue is, why does Texas produce so many huge trout with their lower limits? Is it bc they have so many fisherman their total harvest is equivalent to ours with a 25 fish limit?

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by schol

So, although counterintuitive, I definitely see the logic there.

My main issue is, why does Texas produce so many huge trout with their lower limits? Is it bc they have so many fisherman their total harvest is equivalent to ours with a 25 fish limit?

Could be. Each estuary is really different with regard to the speckled trout dynamics. I've had a very close eye on Big Lake since our fisheries work began in earnest there in 2011 (in addition to growing up in Lake Charles as a fishing enthusiast). I've carefully reviewed every bit of published data relating to specks and redfish in Big Lake, as well as a lot of unpublished data about Big Lake from LDWF and other private sources. My level of confidence in describing the fisheries at Big Lake is simply much higher than anything in Texas due to much greater care. I've spent thousands of hours studying Big Lake.

In contrast, I've spent between 10-20 hours studying most of the estuaries along the Texas coast, so my knowledge is much more limited. I will note that the variation from the different estuaries in Texas is much greater than the variation between Louisiana estuaries (which is also large). The Laguna Madre is a much different deal from Sabine. In the Laguna Madre, for example, speck on speck predation is a significant component of the diets of larger specks. The waters are clear and very salty and lots of 10-12" specks are not strong competitors for the food of the big ladies, they ARE food for the big ladies. That ain't at all how Big Lake works.

[biggun]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

The gist of the rationale is that with lower limits, there were too many small trout in the lake eating too much of the available food, so fewer fish would have enough to eat to be fat and grow fast enough to become true trophies.

For trout to get really big, they have to grow fast, which means there can't be more fish in the lake than the lake can support (carrying capacity).

Conserving ample forage is key for producing trophies in species that don't live a long, long time. Conserving lots and lots of 12-15" trout can be counter productive to conserving ample forage.

Well U know exactly what the oyster fisherman are saying??? TO MANY Redfish and Drum eating oysters!!!

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by biggun

Well U know exactly what the oyster fisherman are saying??? TO MANY Redfish and Drum eating oysters!!!

Bull drum eat lots of oysters. Redfish do not. Lower drum numbers would help the estuary, but so would lower oyster harvests.

[tigerhead]

Last year was by far the toughest year on Big Lake in my life but IMO those two 18 degree nights with 3 days below freezing took a toll on system.

I've seen the freeze mentioned more than once, but I haven't seen anyone corroborate this theory with eyewitness testimony. I'm not saying it didn't happen, and it is certainly a plausible theory, but did anyone see evidence? If you have a major fish kill, you typically find lots of dead fish. Maybe someone talked about it and I just missed it? Or was it so cold that no one got out on the water, even LDWF, in time to witness the kill?

I read an article years ago (I believe it was in an old GCCA publication maybe?) that said Big Lake was not very susceptible to fish kills from freezing weather because the fish had quick and easy access to the deep waters of the ship channel. According to the article, fish kills happen primarily in back bays, far from deep water. So I don't know.

[DaPointIsDaBomb]

Originally Posted by tigerhead

I've seen the freeze mentioned more than once, but I haven't seen anyone corroborate this theory with eyewitness testimony. I'm not saying it didn't happen, and it is certainly a plausible theory, but did anyone see evidence? If you have a major fish kill, you typically find lots of dead fish. Maybe someone talked about it and I just missed it? Or was it so cold that no one got out on the water, even LDWF, in time to witness the kill?

I read an article years ago (I believe it was in an old GCCA publication maybe?) that said Big Lake was not very susceptible to fish kills from freezing weather because the fish had quick and easy access to the deep waters of the ship channel. According to the article, fish kills happen primarily in back bays, far from deep water. So I don't know.

dead, frozen fish will sink that's why you didn't see them

to experiment on this, I had some frozen mullet in my freezer and I stuck them in a bucket of water and they sunk to the bottom

[Drakes11]

Originally Posted by tigerhead

I've seen the freeze mentioned more than once, but I haven't seen anyone corroborate this theory with eyewitness testimony. I'm not saying it didn't happen, and it is certainly a plausible theory, but did anyone see evidence? If you have a major fish kill, you typically find lots of dead fish. Maybe someone talked about it and I just missed it? Or was it so cold that no one got out on the water, even LDWF, in time to witness the kill?

I read an article years ago (I believe it was in an old GCCA publication maybe?) that said Big Lake was not very susceptible to fish kills from freezing weather because the fish had quick and easy access to the deep waters of the ship channel. According to the article, fish kills happen primarily in back bays, far from deep water. So I don't know.

I?d like to add one thing to the aforementioned theory and that?s combining the cold temps with high freshwater flow from flooding to the north. Concentrating those fish in deep water due to cold and then flushing the channel with floodwater was a true double whammy. A lot of those fish never stood a chance. I?ve been guiding on Sabine for over 25 years now and on Big Lake for close to 20 ( just FYI we always only keep Texas limits on Calcasieu and imposed our own boat rule of releasing all healthy trout over 25? unless they were going to the taxidermist) and I can?t remember a tougher year on either body of water. There are multitudes of contributing factors to the decline of the trout population, hopefully we all will see those fish rebound sooner rather than later.

With much respect to all,

Chuck Uzzle
Wakes N Drakes Guide Service

["W"]

Originally Posted by tigerhead

I've seen the freeze mentioned more than once, but I haven't seen anyone corroborate this theory with eyewitness testimony. I'm not saying it didn't happen, and it is certainly a plausible theory, but did anyone see evidence? If you have a major fish kill, you typically find lots of dead fish. Maybe someone talked about it and I just missed it? Or was it so cold that no one got out on the water, even LDWF, in time to witness the kill?



I read an article years ago (I believe it was in an old GCCA publication maybe?) that said Big Lake was not very susceptible to fish kills from freezing weather because the fish had quick and easy access to the deep waters of the ship channel. According to the article, fish kills happen primarily in back bays, far from deep water. So I don't know.

Well for one
I don?t know who would ever attempt to go on the water after that big freeze .
Because we didn?t have much left in lake and dead fish in cold wasters will sink before they float .
Also during the hard winter your birds have slim to no pickings.
I would think any fish that popped up were gone in hours by pelicans .

I know lots of reds died behind weirs because I saw those pics but fish didn?t start surfacing back there until a week after sub temps.

This spring has been the best in last few years for sure

2016 was last great spring we had


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DaPointIsDaBomb]

Originally Posted by schol

Explain the rationale behind this.

and I heard a couple guides say it so I take their word over anyones. They are out there all the time and know more than anyone. Just ask one