Bonkers for Bluegill

[Kyle]

I enjoy having meaningless arguments with people on the internet in order to sound like an expert on topics I know next to nothing about.

there are better ways of living then doing that. to each their own. first step is admitting it. and you did just that.

or less your joking around. i cant tell on an internet forum lol. enjoy the weekend.

 

[falcon]

Shohola once had regs for bsss and panfish. Not sure about now. I will look at the regs. It certainly has good habitat.

 

[hooker-of-men]

Isn't harvesting panfish/perch in large quantities extremely common in the ice fishing world??

 

[tomgamber]

It wasn't until I convinced my Aunt to bring the church kids to her farm pond that that pond got "normalized". The gills dominated. Bass were small and apparently few. After the big harvest. The gills went from dinner plates to desert plates. Still really big, strong gills. But the bass are plentiful and quite large. Now when they need a church activity, they'll but some rainbow trout, its spring fed, and let em rip em all out.Its still a farm so it gets a good bloom in late summer. My cousin's kid skips plastic froggs across the green felt and bass blow it up. Good times.

 

[redietz]

Highly, highly invasive in Japan. Whew, they have done a number on the aquatic resources there, or so I have read.

As they have here. They hybridize with a number of other species of sunfish to the point that are probably no pure strains of any other Lempomis sunfish left.

 

[Mike]

It wasn't until I convinced my Aunt to bring the church kids to her farm pond that that pond got "normalized". The gills dominated. Bass were small and apparently few. After the big harvest. The gills went from dinner plates to desert plates. Still really big, strong gills. But the bass are plentiful and quite large. Now when they need a church activity, they'll but some rainbow trout, its spring fed, and let em rip em all out.Its still a farm so it gets a good bloom in late summer. My cousin's kid skips plastic froggs across the green felt and bass blow it up. Good times.View attachment 1641231730

There can be a balance struck between BG and LMB numbers in farm ponds, but it’s a tricky affair. If you wish to check the science behind it, which is pretty simple and deals with ratios of various size bass and BG, look up Anderson’s proportional stock densities for ponds. In contrast to good ratios, what typically happens is people don’t harvest any bass or BG from the ponds and the bass stunt in the 0.5-10.5 inch range with an occasional large fish present. Meanwhile, with the overpopulated bass looking for anything they can eat, BG reproduction fails for the most part because the bass consume the fingerling BG. Ultimately, this results in an abundance of nice BG for a while but then their numbers decline to almost zero as this scenario plays out to its end point.

 

[Frederick V. C.]

Isn't harvesting panfish/perch in large quantities extremely common in the ice fishing world??

It is; apparently some ice fishermen equate the size of a pile of dead fish with their man hood. Personally I like to keep two meals worth and release everything else. On a good day that usually results in the release of some of the larger pan fish.

Love catching gills on my fly rod and if my ribs ever heal I'll be back at it again. Won't keep any til the fall when the water cools down.

 

[Mike]

When you say that part of the problem is attributed to excess aquatic plants or limited aquatic plants is there any chance that those two issues are a water quality issue? Thinking back on lakes where I caught big bluegills over the years most of them had plenty of lily pads and some had almost floating island mats of grass

It would certainly be related to the amount of available Phosphorus in the water column and/or in the substrate. It also would depend upon water clarity, water depth, and plant genera/species. Even alkalinity/pH can dictate whether or not certain species dominate. The problem with aquatic plant densities being too high has to do with protection from predation by certain plant genera, such as Myriophyllum sp.(milfoil). Milfoil forms very high stem densities and has leaf/leaflet configurations that add to the vegetative density. Other species, such as lillies…not so much.

 

[silverfox]

Bluegill in Pa have always been in much greater need of special regs in select waters than wild trout. In fact, the statewide BG regs that have historically existed in Pa (it turns out from research over the past 20 yrs) do not and did not recognize the important behavioral aspects of bluegill biology that naturally prevent stunting. The commonly stunted BG populations in Pa have resulted from overharvest of the larger males, high densties of aquatic plants, limited numbers of aquatic plants in some cases (thus, little insect forage), and in some cases competition for zooplankton by gizzard shad and alewife. Overharvest has been a big problem though and in fact was encouraged out of ignorance even when I was a fledgling biologist in order to ostensibly prevent the stunting panfish, the exact opposite of the message that should have been sent if the knowledge of BG biology today had been available 100 yrs ago. Even in lakes where there are nice size BG, 8” and longer today, they could in some cases be larger with more protection for the larger males. Even the Panfish Enhancement reg applied to some lakes in Pa is inadequate with respect to BG. It only worked well for crappie and had no impact on yellow perch.

It’s anecdotal, but the yellow perch regs on Beaverdam reservoir seems to have worked. Still a lot of smaller ones, but some really nice ones now too. I think given the species present there the yellow perch would get hit hard by anglers if it weren’t for the reg.

 

[TheAppalachianAngler]

Bluegill in Pa have always been in much greater need of special regs in select waters than wild trout. In fact, the statewide BG regs that have historically existed in Pa (it turns out from research over the past 20 yrs) do not and did not recognize the important behavioral aspects of bluegill biology that naturally prevent stunting. The commonly stunted BG populations in Pa have resulted from overharvest of the larger males, high densties of aquatic plants, limited numbers of aquatic plants in some cases (thus, little insect forage), and in some cases competition for zooplankton by gizzard shad and alewife. Overharvest has been a big problem though and in fact was encouraged out of ignorance even when I was a fledgling biologist in order to ostensibly prevent the stunting panfish, the exact opposite of the message that should have been sent if the knowledge of BG biology today had been available 100 yrs ago. Even in lakes where there are nice size BG, 8” and longer today, they could in some cases be larger with more protection for the larger males. Even the Panfish Enhancement reg applied to some lakes in Pa is inadequate with respect to BG. It only worked well for crappie and had no impact on yellow perch.

Always?

Didnt the PFBC keep lowing the creel limit on trout once they realized people were over harvesting them to oblivion along with all the other things they dealt with (logging, agriculture). Then we decided to just manufacture the fish to make up for it.


Seems to me that was kind of a "special regulation" unto itself, it was statewide and not just on select waters.


I think your brush was so broad it could paint a barn in one swipe.

 

[Fish Sticks]

Always?

Didnt the PFBC keep lowing the creel limit on trout once they realized people were over harvesting them to oblivion along with all the other things they dealt with (logging, agriculture). Then we decided to just manufacture the fish to make up for it.


Seems to me that was kind of a "special regulation" unto itself, it was statewide and not just on select waters.


I think your brush was so broad it could paint a barn in one swipe.

I remember photos of game poles filled with brook trout and angler logs of 200lb of brook trout per angler per weekend at the henryville angler house. Over harvest was a really big blow to brook trout when the logging/mining/stocking first started

 

[Mike]

Always?

Didnt the PFBC keep lowing the creel limit on trout once they realized people were over harvesting them to oblivion along with all the other things they dealt with (logging, agriculture). Then we decided to just manufacture the fish to make up for it.


Seems to me that was kind of a "special regulation" unto itself, it was statewide and not just on select waters.


I think your brush was so broad it could paint a barn in one swipe.

It wasn’t a broad brush. The key words in the first sentence were “select waters.”

Silverfox,
My comment about the crappie, BG, and yellow perch regs in the Panfish Enhancement Program was based on the statewide, multi-lake study/evaluation of those regs.

 

[TheAppalachianAngler]

It wasn’t a broad brush. The key words in the first sentence were “select waters.”

Silverfox,
My comment about the crappie, BG, and yellow perch regs in the Panfish Enhancement Program was based on the statewide, multi-lake study/evaluation of those regs.

So those "select waters" were always in need of special regulations since 1934?

Or since the 50's and 60's when special regulations for trout became nationally accepted for both biological and social needs?

Always?

I'm not seeing it. Panfish proliferation is epic and they are fast growing.

Everything I just posted came from PFBC literature.

 

[Fish Sticks]

So those "select waters" were always in need of special regulations since 1934?

Or since the 50's and 60's when special regulations for trout became nationally accepted for both biological and social needs?

Always?

I'm not seeing it. Panfish proliferation is epic and they are fast growing.

Everything I just posted came from PFBC literature.

And to add onto that mike since they have hybridized with with native sunfish and are invasive and wild native brook trout have a need assigned as “ of greatest conservation need,” from a conservation standpoint they had no need at all and brook trout which historically suffered greatly from overfishing have had a greater need for protective regs.

Wild invasive brown trout have dominated planet earth and they just got the same harvest regs in some stream sections that federally endangered Atlantic salmon in the Penobscot have. 🤢🤮

 

[Mike]

Yes, select BG waters were in much greater need of special regs than the select wild trout waters when special regs were first applied specifically to wild trout in Pa (with the exception of Big Spring…early to mid-1970’s). By “special regs” for wild trout I am not referring to statewide regs or stocked Fish For Fun projects of the 1960’s or 1970’s to the early 1980’s.

If one wants to speak about statewide general regs, then general regs that would have been in tune with the behavioral ecology of BG would have been much more appropriate had their behavioral ecology been understood long before the time when special regs for select wild trout fisheries were first being developed. And such regs in my view would have potentially saved a number of BG populations from becoming overharvested in specific length groups and stunted.

General info put out by agencies concerning panfish management underwent changes sometime in the 1980’s or early 1990’s as panfish creel survey and special reg studies were conducted and sometimes presented in the scientific literature. Wisconsin was a leader, as was New York. In Pa’s case, experimentation with special panfish regs began in 1986 with the Conservation Lakes Program. I can assure readers that this program and those that followed regarding panfish management were not initiated because the PFC/PFBC perceived that management under statewide regs for all waters and species was just fine. And if you look at the Panfish Enhancement regs and then the regs at Sayers Dam, Centre Co, you’ll note that special reg use for panfish is still evolving in Pa, and appropriately so.

Finally, not all panfish populations are prolific nor are all populations characterized by fast growing individuals.

 

[Mike]

And to add onto that mike since they have hybridized with with native sunfish and are invasive and wild native brook trout have a need assigned as “ of greatest conservation need,” from a conservation standpoint they had no need at all and brook trout which historically suffered greatly from overfishing have had a greater need for protective regs.

Wild invasive brown trout have dominated planet earth and they just got the same harvest regs in some stream sections that federally endangered Atlantic salmon in the Penobscot have. 🤢🤮

The needs were fisheries quality and management needs for BG.

Having handled multiple 100,000’s of panfish during population surveys, it was a rare event to have handled a hybrid sunfish that resulted from cross-breeding with BG. Even where they occurred, the numbers were very low, as if the occurrence was by accident. The common combo is Pumpkinseed with Green Sunfish and it is most prevalent in turbid waters.

 

[TheAppalachianAngler]

Yes, select BG waters were in much greater need of special regs than the select wild trout waters when special regs were first applied specifically to wild trout in Pa (with the exception of Big Spring…early to mid-1970’s). By “special regs” for wild trout I am not referring to statewide regs or stocked Fish For Fun projects of the 1960’s or 1970’s to the early 1980’s.

If one wants to speak about statewide general regs, then general regs that would have been in tune with the behavioral ecology of BG would have been much more appropriate had their behavioral ecology been understood long before the time when special regs for select wild trout fisheries were first being developed. And such regs in my view would have potentially saved a number of BG populations from becoming overharvested in specific length groups and stunted.

General info put out by agencies concerning panfish management underwent changes sometime in the 1980’s or early 1990’s as panfish creel survey and special reg studies were conducted and sometimes presented in the scientific literature. Wisconsin was a leader, as was New York. In Pa’s case, experimentation with special panfish regs began in 1986 with the Conservation Lakes Program. I can assure readers that this program and those that followed regarding panfish management were not initiated because the PFC/PFBC perceived that management under statewide regs for all waters and species was just fine. And if you look at the Panfish Enhancement regs and then the regs at Sayers Dam, Centre Co, you’ll note that special reg use for panfish is still evolving in Pa, and appropriately so.

Finally, not all panfish populations are prolific nor are all populations characterized by fast growing individuals.

Special regs in PA started in 1934 on a wild trout water.

 

[Mike]

Special regs in PA started in 1934 on a wild trout water.

Then we disagree on the definition of special regs for wild trout, which to me differ considerably from statewide regs and target wild trout specifically.

 

[Kyle]

Isn't harvesting panfish/perch in large quantities extremely common in the ice fishing world??

they are delicous. nice white flaky meat. ill keep a few XL ones for the pan. i have been ice fishing a few times. from what i found its more of a social event? guys will bring their portable grills out on the ice. cook up some burgers and dogs while catching pan fish. i wont lie, i enjoyed myself each time i went. then when you get home you have a great dinner ahead of you.

 

[TheAppalachianAngler]

Then we disagree on the definition of special regs for wild trout, which to me differ considerably from statewide regs and target wild trout specifically.

You mean you disagree with the PFBC definition of special regs.

In late 1932, the Pennsylvania Fish Commission purchased for $12,000 about 90 acres of land along Spring Creek 2.5 miles south of Bellefonte Borough (Manchester 1994). The tract, which included 1.12 miles of Spring Creek and a large spring, was labeled the Spring Creek Project with the dual purpose of fish cultural activities and demonstration of techniques to
improve fish habitat.

This happened on a wild trout stream. This is a special regulation area, as labeled by the PFBC.

Are you saying it's purpose and locale doesn't make it a special regulation area?

Are you now saying it wasn't "always"?
I find it hard to believe panfish needed special regulations the very day the settlers arrived or the introduced ones hit the first stocked water.

I think your brush was too broad, your verbiage to extreme and inconsistent with what happened in history.

Native trout were decimated by over harvest and industry and have lost stream reaches due to stocking and proliferation of brown trout in the wild, which happens just to make up for the loss of native stock.

No. I not only think it wasn't always but more likely it was never.