Never new this before about Panfish

Minnesota had length limit and seasons for Bluegills until 1945, the season was closed from February 15 to May 15 and size limit was 5 inches, in 1951 all that changed to basically what we see now.

Fullers Hardware in Park Rapids ran a big Bluegill fish contest from 1930-1987. Until 1953 the average weight of Bluegills entered was 1.3 lbs. After 1953 the average weight started to decline by 1987 the average Bluegill weight entered had dropped to .75 lbs.

The article is in In-Fisherman is a very interesting read.

That is some interesting history. At the same time its troubling to see how the average size of entered gills has dropped so much. I’ve seen some of the same on our local lake with both bluegills and crappies. The DNR is aware of this size reduction too. For our lake I am hopeful that some special restrictions can be put in place on panfish, similar to what the dnr has in place on all of our flood retention lakes around Rochester.

I’ve met with the DNR officials and plan to work with them on getting a new limit in place for the lake that includes ten panfish with no more than five sunfish or five crappies or ten perch, or any combination that stays within the limits for the specific fish.

When I was a kid I saw much larger fish basically everywhere I fished. In some places I caught really nice crappies as a kid, but today the same water has zero crappies in it. Same for sunfish and bass. Some blame goes to Mother Nature, but in large part its archaic possession limits and lack of size slots that’s erased those fish forever.

I have read that the DNR does not want that kid on a dock to have to measure a sunfish. Sunnies are the ‘gateway’ to fishing. Numbers could definetly be lower on some lakes though.

That article was very interesting I learned that with out large males in the population Bluegills will mature faster allowing smaller males to breed. With the larger males most gills will not become breeders until 4-7 years old where as without them they can breed at 3 years old.

In the Crappie world this does not happen as they seem to have to have more age to become breeders.

tim hurley wrote:

I have read that the DNR does not want that kid on a dock to have to measure a sunfish.

THAT kid isn’t cleaning fish…Just catching whatever bites.

Tape measures are handed out FREE in many places and can be as cheap as you want them to be if you’re buying.

I’ll bet many kids would enjoy measuring a fish’s length. I know they seem to enjoy guessing the length and measuring it when in my boat.

ooooooookay

I wonder what regs would help increase this size structure, like nothing over 7-8″ along with smaller possession limits?

Tom Sawvell wrote:

That is some interesting history. At the same time its troubling to see how the average size of entered gills has dropped so much. I’ve seen some of the same on our local lake with both <em class=”ido-tag-em”>bluegills and crappies. The DNR is aware of this size reduction too. For our lake I am hopeful that some special restrictions can be put in place on panfish, similar to what the dnr has in place on all of our flood retention lakes around Rochester.

I’ve met with the DNR officials and plan to work with them on getting a new limit in place for the lake that includes ten panfish with no more than five sunfish or five crappies or ten perch, or any combination that stays within the limits for the specific fish.

When I was a kid I saw much larger fish basically everywhere I fished. In some places I caught really nice <strong class=”ido-tag-strong”>crappies as a kid, but today the same water has zero <em class=”ido-tag-em”>crappies in it. Same for sunfish and bass. Some blame goes to Mother Nature, but in large part its archaic possession limits and lack of size slots that’s erased those fish forever.

Might also have something to do with evolution. The evolution of the fishing industry as well. 100k boats with electronics that can look out 50 plus feet or literally see fish moving in real time is also a large factor.
Which I am agreeing with you and goes along with the limits as you stated. I don not see there being a size limit on panfish however. Especially a minimum size limit. You would be better off having a maximum size limit and I still think that would be pretty difficult to enact.

Tom maybe the fish were not bigger it was your hands were much smaller..J/K

As I’ve gotten older I really like the idea of limit management and leave the size thing along. Kids on docks or piers aren’t going to damage a large-sunfish population in a lake of any size. Crappies either. As Ripjiggin has alluded to, its technology that has really taken its toll on our fisheries, both in open water and thru the ice. Minnesota does have certain waters designated as primitive fishing only. No electronics, paddle only, no power augers. Maybe expand the number of those lakes to help preserve a fishery.

In large part I like the idea that anglers can be responsible and practice a limited conservative harvest, but there are those who don’t live by limits. They’re the ones who pi$$ and moan about new, reduced limits. The ethical anglers just go about fishing as always.

Back to the original post though, things were better way back when and there are a lot of young anglers who will never get to realize what once was. Thankfully I learned at a young age that I did not like scaling fish and filleting sunfish wasn’t my cup of tea so I never have been a fan of keeping them I enjoy eating them if someone offers a package of fillets, but I don’t keep sunnies unless they’re deep hooked and are going to die. That doesn’t occur often using the plastics I use.

As far as the advancement in technology, I agree it could become a problem to panfish populations if used extensively by harvest fishermen. Having now joined the Livescope bandwagon, it’s clear to me that over-exploitation is possible, though probably not until more folks start acquiring and using the technology.

Advances in sonar technology are here to stay though, so our fishery management practices might need to reflect the increased efficiency of anglers once the advanced technology becomes more commonplace on the water. From what I’ve seen, it isn’t yet here in MN.

And for anyone who automatically thinks that those with advanced sonar technologies are over-exploiting the panfish population, consider that I’ve used Livescope to catch hundreds of panfish this spring and have kept a grand total of…zero! Like Tom, I don’t enjoy cleaning them. For me, the chase is the enjoyment.

Tom Sawvell wrote:

As I’ve gotten older I really like the idea of limit management and leave the size thing along. Kids on docks or piers aren’t going to damage a large-sunfish population in a lake of any size. Crappies either. As Ripjiggin has alluded to, its technology that has really taken its toll on our fisheries, both in open water and thru the ice. Minnesota does have certain waters designated as primitive fishing only. No electronics, paddle only, no power augers. Maybe expand the number of those lakes to help preserve a fishery.

In large part I like the idea that anglers can be responsible and practice a limited conservative harvest, but there are those who don’t live by limits. They’re the ones who pi$$ and moan about new, reduced limits. The ethical anglers just go about fishing as always.

Back to the original post though, things were better way back when and there are a lot of young anglers who will never get to realize what once was. Thankfully I learned at a young age that I did not like scaling fish and filleting sunfish wasn’t my cup of tea so I never have been a fan of keeping them I enjoy eating them if someone offers a <nobr style=”font-size: inherit”>package</nobr> of fillets, but I don’t keep sunnies unless they’re deep hooked and are going to die. That doesn’t occur often using the plastics I use.

Tom………Tom………Tom………. dont you know sunfish rule!!!!!

i’ll go along with whatever the rules are…….. i always return the big ones back !!!!!

Interesting facts but I wonder how much panfish pressure increased after ww2 into the 80’s to correspond with the decrease in size structure. Liberal 50 fish limits up until the 90’s didnt help either. The lake I live on is a pretty darn good panfish lake. Current regs on the lake are 10/5. Any species of perch, crappy, gils. Caught this 10″ off my dock a few weeks ago. A number of 9+” also. They all get to swim another day!

Attachments:

1. 

   20200426_162209.jpg
   

I learned something knew about panfish today…

In NY, the limit on sunfish and perch is 50 per day, open all year – any size. Crappy used to be limited to the 2nd Sat.in May but now is now open all year /25 limit, 9″ or larger.

Enforcement is rare in most parts of my state and recently an angler took a picture of over 40 nice crappie mixed with many nice yellow perch he caught recently. Sure, harvest should be encouraged when an overpopulation exists, but how does one know without shocking the water – including the DEC?

With the virus keeping people home from work, I’m seeing far more anglers on local waters and more fish kept than ever before. Hope the fish population and quality aren’t threatened.

FishBlood&RiverMud wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>tim hurley wrote:</div>
I have read that the DNR does not want that kid on a dock to have to measure a sunfish.

THAT kid isn’t cleaning fish…Just catching whatever bites.

Tape measures are handed out FREE in many places and can be as cheap as you want them to be if you’re buying.

I’ll bet many kids would enjoy measuring a fish’s length. I know they seem to enjoy guessing the length and measuring it when in my boat.

I agree. It’s never to early to start teaching conservation.

Tom P. wrote:

Minnesota had length limit and seasons for Bluegills until 1945, the season was closed from February 15 to May 15 and size limit was 5 inches, in 1951 all that changed to basically what we see now.

Fullers Hardware in Park Rapids ran a big Bluegill fish contest from 1930-1987. Until 1953 the average weight of <strong class=”ido-tag-strong”>Bluegills entered was 1.3 lbs. After 1953 the average weight started to decline by 1987 the average <strong class=”ido-tag-strong”>Bluegill weight entered had dropped to .75 lbs.

The article is in In-Fisherman is a very interesting read.

The counter intuitive part of that is in 1953(and before), people fished to eat. Maybe not always but there were hard times.

I also believe that you don’t get bigger bluegills by not harvesting them. You get big bluegills by having big predators and a good food source for the bluegills.

iowa_josh wrote:

The counter intuitive part of that is in 1953(and before), people fished to eat. Maybe not always but there were hard times.

I also believe that you don’t get bigger bluegills by not harvesting them. You get big bluegills by having big predators and a good food source for the bluegills.

I fished often with a neighbor back in the 50’s and he always told me we’d keep what was going to be eaten today. We caught tons of fish, just never brought a ton home but I do remember seeing huge fish bags and cages full of fish others were keeping.

The comment on predators and food availability is pretty much spot on as far as natural control goes.

Can someone post scans, pics, or whatever of the In Fisherman article? For those of us without a subscription. I’m more interested in the Fullers Hardware aspect of it.

A lot of areas that have the stunted bluegills would benefit from some sort of size structure in regulation. I’d be all for a 10 fish limit with nothing over 8″ allowed. This starts to help account for the increasing efficiency with technology as well as encouraging harvest of fish that are really stunted and rarely exceed 7″ or so. There are always going to be lakes where one can go toss out a bobber and catch 100 gills with a handful over 6″ long. The days of catching a dozen fish over 9″ though are becoming far more difficult. A legitimate bluegill that exceeds 10″ is on-par with a 28″+ walleye for me as far as probability goes.

The problem still remains – enforcement.

munchy wrote:

Can someone post scans, pics, or whatever of the In Fisherman article? For those of us without a subscription. I’m more interested in the Fullers Hardware aspect of it.

There really was not any more information about the hardware store just the information about there yearly Bluegill contest.

The counter intuitive part of that is in 1953(and before), people fished to eat. Maybe not always but there were hard times.

I also believe that you don’t get bigger bluegills by not harvesting them. You get big bluegills by having big predators and a good food source for the bluegills.
[/quote]

This is where Blue gills are different according to the articule as food source is a plus but having bigger male Gills forces the smaller gills to not mature until they are 4-7 years old so they will not breed. Keeping the better genetics of fish that can survive until they are old enough and large enough to fend off smaller males too breed. By having this then the tendency is to have only the best and strongest reproducing. Without the bigger males they may start to breed as young as three years old. The bully on the block controls who is doing the mating and the bully is usually the strongest and largest.

Hi Tom. I don’t know if the genetics influence bluegill size like it does other fish. I do know I don’t see people eating a lot of them. Maybe that is just my area. I do know having a minimum size limit creates a whole lot of bass just under that size limit. I don’t know if that is because people that eat them or not.

Normally larger fish do not hang out where there are smaller fish of the same species, which means changing how you fish. Same for Walleyes if you catching smaller fish most times you will not find larger Walleyes in that spot. Of course there are always exceptions large pods of bait fish etc.

One lake I have Bass fished if you pound shallow structure all you are going to catch is smaller fish find structure in deeper water, is where I find the bigger fish. It`s tough fishing but the rewards are worth it.