Keeping trophy walleye

I am curious what the membership thinks about keeping trophy walleye over 27″ long. I kept a 30-3/4″ walleye I caught back in 1977 at Lynxville but that was a long time ago. Last year I CPR’d a 29-1/2″ walleye packed full of eggs. I don’t keep walleye over 20″ unless I am guiding in an area without a protected slot limit. Even then I try to convince my clients to release these 20″+ fish which isn’t always easy. According to John Pitlo from the Iowa DNR walleye over 27″ produce sterile eggs and are no longer considered to be part of the brood stock in the river. John says the best egg producers are from 20″ to 27″ or from about 3 Lbs to around 7 Lbs. The larger females over 27″ produce tons of eggs but the eggs are sterile. Putting these large trophy fish back will not increase the population of walleye other than the fish you are putting back in the water. I will continue to CPR the big walleyes as I want to see more trophy sized fish but because these larger walleye are sterile I might not feel quite as bad when a client wants to keep one. The only way I might consider keeping a trophy is if I think it might be a legit state record. Just looking for feedback.

Eyehunter

Sterile eggs or not, if you kill them nobody will ever catch them again and they won’t get bigger. Therefore, it makes sense to me that they should be released.

20″ is a great maximum keep size, if you ask me. I like your boat’s policies, eyehunter.

Anyone know about the sterile egg theory? Seems like BS to me, but I’ve been wrong before.

John

I don’t buy what he said about eggs of a 27+ inch fish being sterile. Even though they may not be the most prolific spawnerns, I think they still reproduce fairly efficiently. The way I look at it, yah, a bigger fish like that may not produce as much as say a 23-26 inch fish, but the ones that do make it will have those good genetics and may have a chance to grow to be a hog.
Also what you said, those fish can still grow bigger.

It seems to me that the population of fish in the river is doing great..when was the last time it required stocking? I also feel that the DNR pays enough attention to it that if it was needed they would impose a slot limit rather than the 15″ minimum. As far as releasing fish goes. I like to eat them. They taste great, and IMO tourneys that are held around here week after week kill more fish than I do.

Excellent question as I feel fishing guides have an obligation to any fishery they work on to teach selective harvest at the same time they’re teaching people how to be more successful.

Tournaments, or more appropriately tournament anglers, kill so few fish in comparison to sport fisherman that this arguement holds no water. The man hours fished on any pool on the river by tournament fisherman is miniscule in comparison to the total fished by sport fishermen. And then there’s the fact that nearly ALL tournament caught fish are released. I’m not a big tournament angler but I do grow a little weary of people using an arguement that just can’t be backed by facts.

I will need to see some statistical data on the absense of fertile eggs from fish over 27″. I HIGHLY doubt this to be true and I believe the role of genetics in growing trophy fish simply cannot be overstated. It is true that 27+” fish contribute a small portion of the spawned eggs due solely to the small number of walleyes in that size range. 20″ – 24″ fish will always represent the “prime spawners” due to the sheer number of walleyes available in that size range. Natural mortality and angling pressure take a huge toll on walleyes of all ages and by the time a fish hits 27″ it is a rare and exceptional animal with far too much value to be “experienced” by one angler… or heaven forbid end up on somebody’s dinner plate. With the availability of 16″ – 19″ fish on the river when is this ever actually neccessary?

This may ruffle a few feathers but my guide partners and I work by the following guidelines regarding the keeping of fish on guide trips on the river… customers are told before the trip starts that ALL fish over 20″ will be released. This is a boat rule and all must follow it as fish over 20″ are almost always females and are the prime spawners. If a customer was to object they would be free to find another guide. I have NEVER had a customer object in any way and I feel I book MORE trips because of this policy as the more affluent customer (those able to afford guide trips) want to be on the water with someone that can teach them how to catch fish as well as appropriate ethics. The days of the guide making his living by sending home limit after limit of fish is well on its way to extinction and I’m seeing an ever increasing number of customers that keep few if any fish at all.

So set your boat rules in advance and you will find you have few if any problems. Should you run into a person that has a problem with an arrangement like this you wouldn’t want to show them how to hog out the larger fish any way.

My 2-cents.

James you got any openings and if so how big is your livewell?

What you need a guide for? You sick of fishing BOTH of your spots… lol

Just kidding buddy.

You’d better warn your clients they might see one of these too You’ve got to admit (as much as it kills you) that 1 of my 2 spots is a very good area

Indeed it is… no doubt about it. Not yet… but in a couple weeks it will be a dinger. And thankfully you release the big girls you catch or I’d have to take a hole saw to your hull…. lol

All smack aside, I feel the way you do James. I’m no guide by any means but if I am going to show friends what I know about the river the rules are the same as yours, it’s nice to catch 20 – 27″ers but if your going to keep them your killing the breeding stock and everyone did that none of us would have a good place to fish like pool 4 anymore.

James and others – while I haven’t heard that info from John Pitlo personally – never asked – but I will tell you that if in fact he said it about walleyes on the Mississippi then I would take it as gospel. John is a precious resource for walleyes on the river and his research and knowledge exceeds that of even you guides at some levels different than yours… please understand that I believe in the release of eyes over 20 inches – and in fact have released some eyes over 29 inches in the past. That said – John has spent a very illustrious career defending and studying walleye and sauger on the mighty Miss and is well respected amoung his professional peers. Either way – as you stated – even if they are sterile those eggs add mass and help to make a great story when one is released – and that fish then lives to perhaps fight another day. A graphite or fiberglass mount gets the point across without the sacrifice of the fish.

Last item I would mention is that tournament walleye survival is really based on a huge number of factors – some of the important ones include water temps, O2 levels in the livewell, time handled at the weigh in, length of run to the weigh in and perhaps the wave action for that trip – many fish under the wrong conditions will die after being returned to the water – may not happen often until those conditions are right. That said – the sport anglers as you mention in a years time likely remove many times the fish impacted by a tourney… still difficult for an angler to swallow if there is a high mortality rate after a tourney and the carcasses are visible.
Chuckles

Eyehunter,
I have fished the river around pool 16 for a lot of years, my goal has always been to break the 10 lb mark and hang it on the wall, but that was before I met James, Dustin and the rest of the guys from IDA. Their dedication to protecting the future of walleye fishing has made me take a look at how I can help, I still want that 10 but when I catch it it will be photographed witnessed and slid back gently for the next guy who dreams of a true 10,whether it can reproduce or not.

I have the uttmost respect for Mr. Pitlo. I was challenging the “he said, she said” nature of the source and not John Pitlo specifically. If John has done a study and says the larger walleyes simply do not spawn successfully then they don’t.

With the speed with which our walleyes grow and their relative yound age at which they hit 27+” I would suspect they have a few good years left in them on the spawning grounds. Our fish aren’t canadian shield fish that may take 10 – 15 years to reach 27+” but then we have such an incredibly high natural mortality rate from the studies I’ve read that we seem to be blessed, and at the same time limited, with a walleye population that grow like mad and burn out early with few fish surpassing the 8 – 10 year mark.

This brings up a question I have had for awhile and have not gotten around to asking. I want a big walleye for the wall and would like to know how to go about getting a replica made. Where do you get the measurements and how many pics do you need to get one made? I definitely agree with the theory of releasing the bigger fish whether it be bass, eyes, or the toothy critters. If the price is the same for a replica as it is a real fish, why not release the fish

It is really crazy to see the growth rates the DNR puts out on the Mississippi walleye. If I remember correctly, most of the growth is related to the great shad population in the river.
Looking at the growth rates on the Mississippi versus most lakes is mind boggling!

Quote:

---

It is really crazy to see the growth rates the DNR puts out on the Mississippi walleye. If I remember correctly, most of the growth is related to the great shad population in the river.
Looking at the growth rates on the Mississippi versus most lakes is mind boggling!

---

No doubt about it, the river fish grow FAST!

Here’s a quote from the WI DNR website.

Quote:

---

In northern Wisconsin lakes, walleye typically reach 15 inches in 4 to 7 years.

---

I believe the Missisippi River walleye achieve 15 inches in under two years on average. That’s an incredibly fast growth rate that is the reason, combined with the rivers ability to pull of some unbelieveably successful spawns when the conditions are right, behind the mind-boggling numbers of 15″ – 19″ fish some years.

Who is Crazy George? Love em’ or hate em’

Oh man, you know who “singin’ crazy george” is?… lol

His cheek meat is larger than my 15 inch fillets

All I’m going to say is that this is an example of a problem that can only be fixed by the passing of time.

After this site educated us we put a 20″ max for our boat but over time we tend to get more selective yet. When we want a meal of walleye the 15 to 18 inchers seem to cook up the best so now it is rare that anything over 18 comes home with us. It doesn’t hurt that our measuring stick is a little over 18 so if it’s longer than the stick it goes back! Never had any inkling to put one on the wall—does that make me weird? That question was not for you to answer James.

I think James pretty much summed it up. These ARE amazing creatures and should be treated as such. I release everything over 20″ and usually anything that is obviously a female, regardless of size. I am not trying to put myself or any others on a pedestal. I too love to eat fish, and have only until the last couple of years really made a conscious effort to abide by my own set of rules. I believe this is the only way our children are going to enjoy these wonderful fish too.

Take care all and good fishing!!

D. Andrews

i have to agree with you on the very large females being sterile. one spring we fished greers ferry, ak. this was at night on one of the river arms. the dnr kept coming up where we were trying to catch a trophy, they weren’t 25 yards away. we could here them talking, there were netting the biggy slabs, sometimes they say, she’d go 18# heres one 16# and so on. they were milking them all and making us very . setting there for hours listening to them net those huge females. those females were spawing in a sharp river bend with all rock bottom. the water wasn’t even a foot deep. we could here the fish also, sounded like a bunch of hogs flopping. this went on the whole time we were there 3 nights i believe. they were the only ones to net any trophys this trip. what a experience though. sometimes we would set in the boat and shine the flash lights into the water and see all those shiny eyes looking back at us and no takers.

Quote:

---

i have to agree with you on the very large females being sterile.

---

I hate to ask the obvious but if these large females are known to be sterile, why would the DNR waste their time and resources stripping them of eggs?

First I would like to say that I do not know Mr. Pilto but will assume the facts stated here about his research are true: 27″+ fish are not productive spawners in (at least some pools of) the Mississippi River. I would challenge the statement that 27’+ spawners are unproductive in other waters. As an undergrad student in fisheries I read numerous fisheries reports published by UW-Stevens Point Fisheries Biologists that state 27″ fish are the MOST productive spawners on certain waters. Size and spawning productivity are closley linked to health of the fish at the time of laying eggs. For those big fish that are in waters where they will live a number of years (2-5?) as 27″+ inchers, taking out that female is taking out a highly productive, genetically rare and desirable fish.

Equally important in dismissing the argument that taking large fish out to eat is ok, is the simple truth that walleyes out of ALL MOST ALL WI & MN waters over 20″ have elevated levels of Mercury and other potentially harmful substances. Don’t get me wrong, I love a fish fry-but, I am an ardent supporter that those of us who love to fish (if you are reading this you fall into the category in my mind)have a responsibility to self regulate our waters. That coupled with the smaller fish are better for you and I would argue taste better, and you have my reasons for: LET THEM HOGS GO AND GROW!

I’ve never read any research stating the over 27″ fish are unproductive spawners on any pools of the Mississippi River. Can you point me in the right direction where I might find some data to back this up? I’ve heard them described as insignificant to the overall spawning effort due to their limited numbers but never that they were a complete non-factor on an individual basis.

Tell ya’ what guys… I’m going to try and get some “facts” by calling the large lake specialist in Lake City tomorrow to see if any real research has been done on this topic as it specifically relates to these large / older fish on the Mississippi River. I’ll report back ASAP if I’m able to bend an ear.

James: I was typing away fast and was unclear. The research I have read says that 27″+ fish ARE productive spawners in certain waters. Based on my reading I beleive the larger fish in at least some waters, and maybe most waters, are the most important spawners and should be released. I have not read anything specific to the Mississippi River so can’t speak to it.

Quote:

---

All I’m going to say is that this is an example of a problem that can only be fixed by the passing of time.

---

That is one of the best one-liners I’ve ever read. Only certain people will be able appreciate that !

Kelly, Thanks for clarifying. I’ve been digging around tonight go through research and what I keep finding contradicts the sentiment that older fish are infertile. In fact, as long as the older fish are well-fed (stated as expected length and weight for age) the older a walleye is the larger and heavier the eggs will be and the healthier and more viable the offspring will be.

For example…

Within-population variability in egg characteristics of walleye (Stizostedion vitreum) and white sucker (Catostomus commersoni)

T.A. Johnston

Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci./J. Can. Sci. Halieut. Aquat. 54(5): 1006-1014 (1997)

Abstract: I examined variation in egg characteristics among individual females of sympatrically spawning walleye (Stizostedion vitreum) and white sucker (Catostomus commersoni) from Lake Manitoba. White sucker produced eggs of greater dry mass and energy content than walleye. Walleye egg dry mass varied between years and was positively related to both female length and age. The relationship between white sucker egg dry mass and female length varied between years. Egg energy density did not vary with respect to female length in either species. Egg energy density varied between years for walleye but not white sucker. Hatching success of walleye eggs was positively related to female age and negatively related to female length adjusted for age. Length and dry mass of walleye larvae at hatch increased with egg dry mass.

Within-population variability in egg characteristics of walleye

This is the type of info that I keep finding. The older the walleye is (as long as it is healthy) the more eggs it produces in relationship to body mass with eggs being MORE VIABLE not less viable. I will dig some more and post a few more papers if I can find them and will also follow up with the large lake specialist in lake city tomorrow.

From what I can find now the notion that larger walleyes can be culled from fisheries due to the fact that they are sterile is a irresponsible load of poo that looks to have the potential to harm our fisheries as these spawning MACHINES are stripped from our waters out of ignorance.