Calcasieu Relative Condition Factor Study 2012 Preliminary Results

[Kajundave]

I did go on line to see how many eggs a trout can spawn; less than 5 lbs. 100,000, over 5lbs could be up to 1000000, about one percent survive to 12 inches, It also said it takes two years for a trout to reach 12 inches, you add environment changes, pressure, boat traffic running across the reefs, it all adds up, I will admit I had to buy a golden rule this year, I have never had to measure a fish before in BL.. I am not sure what is making the changes but something is for sure!
I believe there is a lot more Ship Traffic than usual; I have seen more ships since late last year than I have seen in several years combined. Generally the salinity stays the same in the bottom half of the ship channel, but those big ships churning up the bottom, mixing all of that fresh water with the salt water can’t be good on the fisheries either. Man fixes one problem and creates another; it is just the way it is!

["W"]

Originally Posted by Kajundave

I did go on line to see how many eggs a trout can spawn; less than 5 lbs. 100,000, over 5lbs could be up to 1000000, about one percent survive to 12 inches, It also said it takes two years for a trout to reach 12 inches, you add environment changes, pressure, boat traffic running across the reefs, it all adds up, I will admit I had to buy a golden rule this year, I have never had to measure a fish before in BL.. I am not sure what is making the changes but something is for sure!
I believe there is a lot more Ship Traffic than usual; I have seen more ships since late last year than I have seen in several years combined. Generally the salinity stays the same in the bottom half of the ship channel, but those big ships churning up the bottom, mixing all of that fresh water with the salt water can’t be good on the fisheries either. Man fixes one problem and creates another; it is just the way it is!

Big Fact for smaller trout is the only thing that has changed and that is from 25 trout to 15 trout in a healty estuary ..
We are leaving 40% more trout per day than 6 years ago

Here is some good Facts for Trout

SPECKLED TROUT FACTS
by Jerald Horst

(Revised June 2003)

Besides being popular in many south Louisiana restaurants, it is targeted by more recreational fishermen than any other saltwater fish. In the last 10 years, recreational fishermen have harvested an average of 6,578,061 speckled trout from Louisiana waters annually – this is more than 93% of the combined recreational/commercial harvest. The best year for recreational landings was 2000 with a take of 9,615,942 specks and the poorest year was 1990, the year after the great freeze, with 2,679,167 landings.

Although the commercial catch had been regulated by minimum sizes and gear restrictions, the recreational fishery was unregulated until 1977, when a combined daily limit of 50 was placed on speckled trout and redfish. In 1984 the possession limit was reduced to the daily limit, and a new saltwater fishing license was required. This was followed by a 12-inch minimum size (14- inch commercial) in 1987 and the recreational limit was reduced to 25 in 1988. Speckled trout management and biology remain an area of high public interest. Some of the most commonly asked questions on the subject are answered below.

Why do we have a 12-inch minimum size on speckled trout?
A minimum size of 12 inches allows most fish to spawn at least once before reaching harvestable size. All of the males and more than 75% of the females are sexually mature at 12 inches long. The minimum size also increases the overall yield of the fishery. Each year since the regulation went into effect, the average size of recreationally caught specks has been more than 13 inches. Before the minimum size requirement, the average size of recreationally taken specks was as low as 10 inches.
'Why don’t we have a larger minimum size, such as 14 inches?
Speckled trout have sex-specific growth and survival rates. Males grow slower and don’t grow as large as females. In Louisiana, males do not reach a size of 14 inches until their third or fourth years. Since few specks live beyond age 5, and more than 70% of the total speckled trout population is age 3 or younger, very few males grow to larger sizes. This would result in a loss of recreational opportunity to harvest the males and could possibly cause a shift of harvest pressure to females.
How many of the undersized, released speckled trout really survive?
The majority of hook-caught speckled trout survive when released. Louisiana conducted a 18-month study ending in 1995 on the survival of released speckled trout. The survival rate depended on the fishing method. Treble hook artificials had a 97% survival rate, single hook artificials were 91%, treble hook with bait had 83%, and single hook with bait was 74%. The overall average survival rate was 82.5%. Research done in 1984 in Texas showed a survival rate of 73%, and a Georgia study, done in 1990, showed a 63.8% rate.
Why don’t we close the season during spawning time?
Speckled trout exhibit a protracted spawning season, lasting from April to September. Females ready to spawn have even been recorded in March and October. Closing the season during spawning would result in a 5 to 7 month closure. Also, from a biological perspective, any removal of a female fish from a population has the same impact. Regardless of whether the fish is caught 8 months or 8 days before it spawns, the result is the removal of the fish and all of her future offspring. Since there is little biological advantage to such a measure and since the closure would take place during the months of best fishing weather and most intense recreational activity, the negatives outweigh the possible benefits.
Why can’t I catch more big trout?
Aside from the fact that there are many more small trout than large ones, large speckled trout are very specialized creatures. Large trout are not as widely distributed as small trout. The largest trout are taken in the spring, next largest in winter, then fall and summer, out in the Gulf. Large but lesser sized trout are taken near beaches, lesser still in lakes and bays, and the smallest usually in the marsh. Anglers prefer to fish for specks in summer and the second preference is fall. Fishing is most intense in sheltered inside waters. More big trout are caught in spring because they move into shallow beach and bay habitats at that time for their first spawn of the season. The rest of the summer and early fall, the larger trout tend to stay in cooler Gulf waters and only periodically enter beach and bay habitats for subsequent spawns. Many of the large fish winter offshore, with a few wintering in the interior marshes, where they are very sluggish. [/SIZE]
[Large trout also have very different food habits than school trout. Small trout eat large amounts of shrimp and other crustaceans. As trout become larger, their diet shifts toward fish, the larger, the better. Studies in Texas and Mississippi show that really big trout strongly prefer to feed on mullets; a large trout will find the largest mullet it can handle and try to swallow it. Often the mullet is half or two-thirds as large as the trout. The key to catching large trout is to fish where they are and use big baits.
What is the future of recreational speckled trout fishing?
The future of the fishery depends on two factors: good habitat and good management. If our coastal areas remain unpolluted and coastal erosion is controlled, management will be the key. Very few more speckled trout can be produced from other sources. If the entire commercial speckled trout harvest were divided up equally among Louisiana’s over 400 thousand recreational anglers, each sport fisherman would get less than one fish per person per year. Research has also shown that very few speckled trout appear in shrimp trawl bycatch. This means that gains and losses will be the result of management within the recreational fishery. Management priorities, as set by recreational leadership, will determine whether the fishery is managed for liberal limits and smaller fish or restrictive creel limits and larger fish.

[bmac]

"Management priorities, as set by recreational leadership, will determine whether the fishery is managed for liberal limits and smaller fish or restrictive creel limits and larger fish."

I would have never guessed you were a liberal, W.

[Kajundave]

Liberal as in 25 per person and restrictive as in 15, not sure i understand, but that article was very informing, Thanks "W", the bottom line is if we band together we can force change

[Spunt Drag]

Good article

["W"]

Originally Posted by bmac

"Management priorities, as set by recreational leadership, will determine whether the fishery is managed for liberal limits and smaller fish or restrictive creel limits and larger fish."

I would have never guessed you were a liberal, W.

Not close....but I know 100% that the lake can handle a 25 per person trout limit...

[Smalls]

So in other words, what this article says about limits and fish size goes completely against what Waltrip says. As Kajun said, liberal limit = 25 fish and smaller based on the article. Restrictive = bigger fish. So answer me this, based on your source, if by your standard 15 fish has caused less big trout, then based on this article, the limit should reduce even more. maybe to 10?

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk

["W"]

Originally Posted by Smalls

So in other words, what this article says about limits and fish size goes completely against what Waltrip says. As Kajun said, liberal limit = 25 fish and smaller based on the article. Restrictive = bigger fish. So answer me this, based on your source, if by your standard 15 fish has caused less big trout, then based on this article, the limit should reduce even more. maybe to 10?

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk

you would have to go to 5

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Smalls

So in other words, what this article says about limits and fish size goes completely against what Waltrip says. As Kajun said, liberal limit = 25 fish and smaller based on the article. Restrictive = bigger fish. So answer me this, based on your source, if by your standard 15 fish has caused less big trout, then based on this article, the limit should reduce even more. maybe to 10?

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk

In the 1990's it began to be clear to many wildlife agencies that overpopulated deer are smaller deer because they stress their food sources, but it wasn't until the last 5-8 years that the wildlife management agencies began to realize that food availability and growth rates, rather than survival to older ages is the key to producing bigger fish, especially in relatively short lived species like the spotted seatrout.

The Colorado wildlife managers have had great success restoring the size and growth rates to lake trout in Blue Mesa Reservoir by removing the harvest limits on this species and by aggressive culling of smaller fish using gill nets. I've also seen a number of farm ponds in the midwest overpopulated with bluegill. You get tons of fish only a few inches long and none of them grow bigger than 6" long because there just isn't the food. Add ample predators (often bass and catfish) to keep the bluegill numbers down, and you get the big bluegill again. Humans can also effectively fill the predator role to prevent overpopulation of species with high fecundity in many ecosystems.

Lower limits produce older fish. But older fish are only bigger fish if the food supply is sufficient to feed them all for high growth rates.

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

In the 1990's it began to be clear to many wildlife agencies that overpopulated deer are smaller deer because they stress their food sources, but it wasn't until the last 5-8 years that the wildlife management agencies began to realize that food availability and growth rates, rather than survival to older ages is the key to producing bigger fish, especially in relatively short lived species like the spotted seatrout.

The Colorado wildlife managers have had great success restoring the size and growth rates to lake trout in Blue Mesa Reservoir by removing the harvest limits on this species and by aggressive culling of smaller fish using gill nets. I've also seen a number of farm ponds in the midwest overpopulated with bluegill. You get tons of fish only a few inches long and none of them grow bigger than 6" long because there just isn't the food. Add ample predators (often bass and catfish) to keep the bluegill numbers down, and you get the big bluegill again. Humans can also effectively fill the predator role to prevent overpopulation of species with high fecundity in many ecosystems.

Lower limits produce older fish. But older fish are only bigger fish if the food supply is sufficient to feed them all for high growth rates.

I agree, just making the point that the argument he is making and the "sources" he is using are contradictory.

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk

["W"]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

In the 1990's it began to be clear to many wildlife agencies that overpopulated deer are smaller deer because they stress their food sources, but it wasn't until the last 5-8 years that the wildlife management agencies began to realize that food availability and growth rates, rather than survival to older ages is the key to producing bigger fish, especially in relatively short lived species like the spotted seatrout.

The Colorado wildlife managers have had great success restoring the size and growth rates to lake trout in Blue Mesa Reservoir by removing the harvest limits on this species and by aggressive culling of smaller fish using gill nets. I've also seen a number of farm ponds in the midwest overpopulated with bluegill. You get tons of fish only a few inches long and none of them grow bigger than 6" long because there just isn't the food. Add ample predators (often bass and catfish) to keep the bluegill numbers down, and you get the big bluegill again. Humans can also effectively fill the predator role to prevent overpopulation of species with high fecundity in many ecosystems.

Lower limits produce older fish. But older fish are only bigger fish if the food supply is sufficient to feed them all for high growth rates.

^^^^this

[Feesherman]

Originally Posted by "W"

Limit was 25 now 15 which is 40% less trout taken by anglers

So you're assuming everyone always caught their limit?

["W"]

Originally Posted by Feesherman

So you're assuming everyone always caught their limit?

Com on Man

...really ????

[Feesherman]

Originally Posted by "W"

Com on Man

...really ????

Really! You could be wrong, der could be 60% more trout in our estuary. Or not!

["W"]

Originally Posted by Feesherman

Really! You could be wrong, der could be 60% more trout in our estuary. Or not!

Last year I caught close to 3000 trout and I left 1200 behind due to limit change

So if 100 guides caught 3000 trout last year and each left behind 1200

That's 120,000 that was not culled out last year alone and add that up 3 years at a time
Seeing the picture yet???


I limit out about 75% of the time with 30 -60...and if I catch 30 I could of caught 50... If I catch 45 I could of caught 75...if I catch 60 I could of.caught 100

[mikedatiger]

Originally Posted by jchief

Then why is there bait all over the lake?

Not as simple as we would like it to be.

Agree with you 100% on this. Don't know why people keep trying to compare deer to trout, or pond fish to trout or brook trout to speckled trout… If there is an overabundance of bait then something else is the cause, or a contributor to the cause.

Using the same flawed comparison of deer - land has hugely different carrying capacities when it comes to supporting a healthy deer herd. I have seen both ends of the spectrum and hungry deer will eat dang near anything and pick the area clean - have even seen them eat magnolia leaves…

But we're talking about an open environment with an abundance of bait and a super highway influencing movement.

[PUREBAY2200]

Ok; all this debate and talk is great.
As W will tell u" I know zero/ nothing about trout. "

But do yal actually think that WL&F or the state is gonna change a limit law based off of a private party study; that was not commissioned by WL&F or the state??
I'm not being negative; just realistic.
I mean we vote for things and that don't change rules and reg....
Jut my .02

[Top Dawg]

They changed it once against wlf biologists.

[mcjaredsandwich]

Originally Posted by Top Dawg

They changed it once against wlf biologists.

Originally Posted by PUREBAY2200

Ok; all this debate and talk is great.
As W will tell u" I know zero/ nothing about trout. "

But do yal actually think that WL&F or the state is gonna change a limit law based off of a private party study; that was not commissioned by WL&F or the state??
I'm not being negative; just realistic.
I mean we vote for things and that don't change rules and reg....
Jut my .02

Theres your answer
sammich

[MathGeek]

The outcome of bureaucratic and political processes is inherently unpredictable.

As a scientist, I think the role of science should be to inform public policy, but not to dictate it.

As a citizen, I think the best interests of the people are best served if decisions are driven by the best available scientific data and that the burden of proof is always on the parties suggesting that governmental power be used to restrict liberty.