Possession limit

[FishingSteve]

How would everyone feel if the possession limit for the Southeast section of Idaho was reduced to two fish, except in family fishing waters. I know that there would have to be studies to see how many fish some lakes could sustain, but I think that it would improve our fisheries. Just something to think about.
[signature]

[drowning_flys]

I would be for it. But i just catch and release I would rather have a healthy fishery and plenty of fish but then fear that an over population of fish would leave more room for disease less habitat and yield smaller fish.
[signature]

[jigs]

i agree this would make many fisherys alot better and the quality of fish much much better. if nothing i would like to see more trophy fisheries like, tresurton, daniels, and those sorts of waters. the question i have is in many of the res. expesialy around the preston area would the trophy quality survive with how the water fluxtuates in droubt years. i would love to see this in all rivers and natural lakes.
[signature]

[windriver]

I guess you are talking about trout. Kokanee and panfish can take a little more pressure. Although I am not sure what those guys who fish Ririe every day do with all those Kokes. I have a fridge full of smoked salmon after only a couple trips.

Windriver
[signature]

[flygoddess]

I know there was allot of Whining when Strawberry changed their regs, but now everyone is liking it (however still have the old school that are breaking the law)
It has helped immensely. Fish are getting bigger.

The thing is, you want to be sure the lakes/Res. that do this have nice health food source.

I remember going to one of Idaho's lakes a few years after being drained. Thinking little planters, but they weren't. The water is so full of food and nutrients, the fish grow quite rapidly. Plus the Kamloop strain really grow fast.

Danels, to me, use to be a Trophy lake. With the two fish limit, artificial, and barbless...plus being FULL of food, it was not uncommon to land a 27". Those days are gone.......for now. I have noticed an increase in their size over the past two years, but it is slow. I don't know why or where all the big fish went with those regs, but I do think they might want to cut the weeds down along the shore line.
Watch two (lets just say foreigners and leave it at that) hiding in the weeds next to our camp. I headed into shore to find out what they were doing. Needless to say, they made a fast retreat and drove away. BUT, there was a pile of worms over where they were hiding.

I agree, personally, I don't keep fish, so of course my feelings are "Less is More" meaning, less fish, more size, but the waters have to be able to support it.
Our Uinta's get their share of the big head skinny fish.

Besides, does anyone think BIG fish taste that good?[]

Plus how many fish become freezer burn fertilizer.
[signature]

[FishingSteve]

Yes, I am talking about trout. Its funny that even though you can only keep two trout, there were probably 75 to 100 people at Chesterfield today (1/10) and the reason was, is that they have a chance to catch really nice fish, not its location. I also drove by Devils creek, there weren't to many people there, but it was after 1:00. Deep creek was almost deserted by the time we started fishing there at 2:00 PM.
I know the reason that I drive 250 miles one way to Henrys Lake, is because I have a chance to catch a nice fish, but the scenery is great also.
I would like to have some more lakes, like Chesterfield, in SE Idaho.
[signature]

[MMDon]

I think we need a balance of put and take waters to trophy waters. Not everyone is into trophy fishing and limiting their access to subsistence fishing is probably not fair. To limit put and take fishing would severely limit the number of licenses sold as well and that could have a negative impact on the programs the F&G now maintain.That being said, I wouldn't mind seeing a few more trophy waters. Perhaps a slot limit on some of the Reservoirs and Lakes previously mentioned would have the desired effect as it has done on other lakes in the Western U.S.? Ririe however will never be a trophy fishery. The biomass simply won't support that kind of fishery with it's lack of food source. This decision should probably be put to a public vote rather than undertaken behind closed doors in my opinion.
[signature]

[flygoddess]

My choice on as you say SLOT LIMIT and bag limit, throw in artificial, barbless, to 2 would of course be bag limit.

Chesterfield (come on, it's out of the way anyway[])
Daniels (alright, already there)
Springfield (already there)
and Henry's (specially Henry's)
Since your bag limits stop at the door, what's the big deal. you bag two (and face it, from these waters they are going to be big) and take home and go back the next day.[crazy]

You would still be able to troll, ice fish, and the family.

That leaves, just off the top of my head, Palies, Island Park, American Falls, Ririe, plus allot of little put and takes. Roses ponds when there is water, and Blackfoot has a few.

Like I said before, I like fish, don't get me wrong, but seriously, how much fish do you all eat? It doesn't taste good after being frozen, and it is always there when the hunger strikes for nice fresh fish.
I understand the smoking, canning I am not too sure of, but again, How much fish do you all eat?

Just save some for another day instead of stocking up...besides it is a great excuse to get out.....WE NEED FISH[][laugh]
[signature]

[cpierce]

I think that a 2 trout limit on the small waters would improve some of them greatly. I think it would reduce the pressure on them. I hate to see some of the small reservoirs and "easy hike lakes" fished out before June is done. Maybe even a size limit, just not as much as like what is on Daniels.

Maybe that would send some of the food fishermen to the larger waters that are stocked heavier and that can handle the pressure better.
[signature]

[wagdog]

Slots don't bug me. A two-fish limit would not bug me either. I've fished Henry's and parts of the Snake. I also wet a hook further south in the Provo. I'm not a huge fan of trout but I know some folks love em smoked, canned, and fried. I get more enjoyment out of catching trout rather than eating them. They are more of a challenge for me since we didn't have them where I grew up. Now when I get my eat on, I will go pull limits of gills, crappie, and other panfish. Throw in some white bass, seasoned cornmeal, cajun seasonings and hot oil and my teeth start sweating. Love those panfish. I could eat a ton of those. I guess not a true ton but me, the wife, two kids, and a good fishing buddy mowed through about 50 bluegill last spring. Granted, we didn't eat for the next day and a half...[]
[signature]

[flygoddess]

Now I can relate to that. First trip to Pelican, we had a chef with us. So I went out and brought back a limit of gills. He cooked and we gorged!
Good stuff there.
But a nice Uinta trout, or Brookie, fresh caught, piece of bacon and a littl garlic powder (Italian, what can I say) cooked over an open flame, then smothered with lemon ....it is heaven. But I am talking 12" or pan size trout/brook
[signature]

[Widastick]

I totally dont mind! I wish they would do that in alot of places. I am 98% catch and release so it would not effect me much. I love catching the big fish so I love the slot limits on lakes.
[signature]

[idahoron]

I am going to go a different direction with warm water fish.
Catfish
On water that has "planted" catfish. I think there should either be a 6 fish limit OR a length limit of no cats killed less than 14" and I would rather see it 18". I am seeing harvest in some of the put and take water with channel cats that is sick. People keeping 8" channel cats by the sacks full. An 8" cat just does not have much on him. And killing that many is a waste. F&G only has so much money to spend on planting cats. Limiting the harvest only makes sense. It spreads the resource out a little more. If I would have kept every cat I caught last year it would have been ugly.

Crappie
I would like to see a limit on crappie. I know that they reproduce like fly’s at times but I personally know one guy that claims that him and his friends KILLED 1800 crappie last spring on CJ Strike!
My thought is this. A daily limit of 30 crappie per person from March 1 to July 1. The rest of the year can be no limit. Ron
[signature]

[FishingSteve]

What really started me thinking about this is the discussion we had, about possession limit, and catch and release that we had a couple of weeks ago. I was angered by someone who released a few "possibly" mortally injured fish, in retrospect I think I was wrong, maybe some of the fish that were released died, but I did enjoy the injured ones that I chose to keep.
I watched my dad in his retirement, catch many more fish that he and my mom could eat, I think he felt his responsibility was to keep the neighbors happy witch he did very well. I think he and others like him can and do systematically remove and destroy more fisheries than you can imagine, because of boredom.
He didn't understand C&R and so he deprived a lot of the younger generations of catching fish on the weekends.
I think if we imposed a two fish bag and possession limit sales of fishing licenses would go up because of this one statement "I went Glendale the other day and caught two fish that were 3 and 5 lbs. Word of mouth is the best advertising.
I really believe in the quality of our fishing waters and not quantity.
[signature]

[flygoddess]

+1 again & again Steve. I want quantity, I go to put and takes, Uinta's..etc.
[signature]

[prvrt]

I would not have a problem with a 2 fish limit in more areas. The thing I wonder is if people would C&R more or catch their 2 fish in 30 mins and leave? I know a lot of people who will not drive a long ways for 2 fish. I also know other people who would sit and fish all day and just C&R and only keep the biggest 2. The C&R mortality rate may sky rocket and you just may end up with the same result as you have with a 6 fish limit. I am all for quality like Henry's, but then there are times you just want to get out and catch some fish to eat. I could see quite a few lakes, small reservoirs and certain parts of rivers a 2 fish limit, but at the same time I think the large reservoirs and other parts of the rivers should stay as a 6 fish limit. American Falls reservoir has some huge fish in it. The 6 fish limit does not seem to hurt it. Below the dam and above the reservoir the fish are quite large also. It may be more of a water issue than a limit issue.
[signature]

[FishingSteve]

I agree 100% !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
[signature]

[MMDon]

[quote FishingSteve]What really started me thinking about this is the discussion we had, about possession limit, and catch and release that we had a couple of weeks ago. I was angered by someone who released a few "possibly" mortally injured fish, in retrospect I think I was wrong, maybe some of the fish that were released died, but I did enjoy the injured ones that I chose to keep.
I watched my dad in his retirement, catch many more fish that he and my mom could eat, I think he felt his responsibility was to keep the neighbors happy witch he did very well. I think he and others like him can and do systematically remove and destroy more fisheries than you can imagine, because of boredom.
He didn't understand C&R and so he deprived a lot of the younger generations of catching fish on the weekends.
I think if we imposed a two fish bag and possession limit sales of fishing licenses would go up because of this one statement "I went Glendale the other day and caught two fish that were 3 and 5 lbs. Word of mouth is the best advertising.
I really believe in the quality of our fishing waters and not quantity.[/quote]

Good thoughts Steve. I mostly fish with guys that are late 60's up to 90 some years old. Some are feeding fish to their neighbors and even their dogs. I don't believe stewardship has ever entered their consciousness as they come from a different generation and time.
[signature]