Was told this by one of the workers at the wing dam saloon. She said the DNR has found evidence larger fish are not as fertile spawners.
Can anyone attest to this? I’ve always thought the larger fish should be released?
Define “large”, species and what water.
Even if they dont reproduce, they can still be beneficial for keeping fish from stunting or pure entertainment.
It would make sense there is a prime age window for spawning success. Anything older may not do as well.
Sure, they are not AS fertile spawners, meat eaters have used this excuse for a long time. So does it sound like a good idea to take a big fish who most likely has good genes completely out of the gene pool?
ive heard this too, I feel that the DNR is right. though not all big fish should be kept and it also depends on the species.
Quote:
ive heard this too, I feel that the DNR is right. though not all big fish should be kept and it also depends on the species.
I absolutely trust the DNR, I had never heard someone ever say that the DNR prefers people keep the big ones. 
Small ones can’t spawn if you keep them.
Big ones can’t be caught again if kept…
and medium sized ones can’t be eaten if you release them 
Where is this so called evidence? If the DNR found this to be true wouldn’t that be reflected in most slot limits placed on lakes? The majority that I have seen allow medium fish harvest while releasing small and larger fish.
Sounds like a meat hunter making excuses.
Quote:
Was told this by one of the workers at the wing dam saloon. She said the DNR has found evidence larger fish are not as fertile spawners.
Can anyone attest to this? I’ve always thought the larger fish should be released?
In walleyes and sauger the bigger fish may not produce as many viable eggs, but they hold the genetic cornerstone for the future.
Crappies and sunfish have their reproductive strength in the larger fish.
Table quality is NOT found in any large fish.
Caught a 30″ eye up on LOW last spring and when we pulled our boat and started talking to the DNR they said we should have kept the fish. He said when they get that big they are no longer fertile and a walleyebthat size eats an incredible amount of baitfish. Makes sense to me I guess but I sure as heck don’t want to eat a 30″ walleye!
If you research slots that actually benefit a fishery for walleye you will probably only find one based on actual biology. That is Lac Suel. It was basically Ontario’s version of our Red Lake in the late 70’s early 80’s. The MNR stopped commercial netting and studied which size walleye actually had the most eggs hatch and grow into adulthood. They found out at least in that system contrary to popular belief you need to protect the 18 inch to 21 inch females as they have the most fertile eggs and the highest rate of survival of fry. They found the large females do have more eggs but like older women they are not as fertile. So that is why they protect the 18 to 21 inchers and let keep below or keep one above 21. You still have the large fish for the trophy obsessed guys the meat hunters get there fish also and you end up with a fisheries with all year classes and sizes spread through out. It is an absolute amazing fishery. What does MN do slaughter the the best spawners solely based on trying to meet a certain poundage of fish creating the Mille Lacs situation and now it seems to be happening to Leech and Winni all big fish. The River Biologist posted on this website why slots are a bad idea for the Miss with it ultra fast growth rates and rich food sources. This info is all out there search for it.
Mwal
Quote:
Quote:
Was told this by one of the workers at the wing dam saloon. She said the DNR has found evidence larger fish are not as fertile spawners.
Can anyone attest to this? I’ve always thought the larger fish should be released?
In walleyes and sauger the bigger fish may not produce as many viable eggs, but they hold the genetic cornerstone for the future.
Crappies and sunfish have their reproductive strength in the larger fish.
Table quality is NOT found in any large fish.
ever had smoked walleye? the bigger the better.
Quote:
Caught a 30″ eye up on LOW last spring and when we pulled our boat and started talking to the DNR they said we should have kept the fish. He said when they get that big they are no longer fertile and a walleyebthat size eats an incredible amount of baitfish. Makes sense to me I guess but I sure as heck don’t want to eat a 30″ walleye!
And again I must ask why they don’t adjust their slot limits to help out?
Lake of the woods special regs…
Only 1 walleye over 28″ all walleye 19.5 to 28 inches must be immediately released.
You’d think they would bump up the number of fish over 28″ if they wanted to lower the number of larger fish.
Quote:
Quote:
Was told this by one of the workers at the wing dam saloon. She said the DNR has found evidence larger fish are not as fertile spawners.
Can anyone attest to this? I’ve always thought the larger fish should be released?
In walleyes and sauger the bigger fish may not produce as many viable eggs, but they hold the genetic cornerstone for the future.
Crappies and sunfish have their reproductive strength in the larger fish.
Table quality is NOT found in any large fish.
depends on how you cook em! 
Someone posted some interesting graphs on walleye growths on this site a while back. Miss River fish grow very fast, but die at around 8-10 yrs old. I think Rainey was the other comparison, they reach the same 10lb size that the Miss fish max out at around 12 yrs, but they can live into their mid teens and get to 32-34″ or so.
Quote:
Small ones can’t spawn if you keep them.
Big ones can’t be caught again if kept…
X2
Rainy Lake vs Lake Pepin Growth Rates<
Courtesy the MN DNR
Here at the walleye hatchery, we find that the 7-10 lb fish give the best viability percentage from their eggs. Fish 12+lbs typically aren’t as fertile, BUT they spawn a ton of eggs. For example, this spring we had a female give us 3.6 liters of eggs (486,000 eggs by our counting method). That fish probably gave us 80% viability, which is by far the best we’ve seen from a large fish like this in a long time. 50% is more the norm. The 7-10 lb fish we’re usually seeing 90-95% viability. This year we averaged 280,000 eggs/fish with really only a couple fish under 7 lbs and a handleful over 12 lbs.
So, its true that the older fish aren’t as fertile, but they typically put out more eggs. We prefer the 7-10 pound fish at the hatchery because we only have so much jar space to hold eggs. Moral of the story, you got to have some fish out there to make more baby fish.
My Personal feelings: If your going to put a knife to them, throw it back. An 8 year old fish doesn’t taste that good. If your going to put in on the wall, enjoy the experience and use it to get another kid out fishing! Everyone loves to see a big fish. 
Quote:
And again I must ask why they don’t adjust their slot limits to help out?
Lake of the woods special regs…
Only 1 walleye over 28″ all walleye 19.5 to 28 inches must be immediately released.You’d think they would bump up the number of fish over 28″ if they wanted to lower the number of larger fish.
The answer lies within the consideration of: what fishing regs are based primarly on biology vs what fishing regs are based primarily on politics.
Older walleyes have concentrated that much more heavy metals and toxins in the meat. You guys eat all you want… I’ll stick with the smallest ones I can legally keep. I’d make the slot 14-16 inches if it were me. I won’t/don’t keep big ones out of respect to the fish. That 10 lb fish has probably had a hell of a life… I’ll get a replica if I want to mount it.
PS to the OP… I highly doubt that is the DNR’s position on the matter.
Quote:
Quote:
Small ones can’t spawn if you keep them.
Big ones can’t be caught again if kept…
X2
X3
It’s pretty obvious if you’ve ever caught a big female in the spring that there’s an incredible number of eggs in them. I’ve never seen any reputable source that says big fish have less viable eggs.
Beware the excuses people use to validate their greed.
Quote:
Quote:
Table quality is NOT found in any large fish.
depends on how you cook em!
I find the firmer flesh of the older walleye decompose slower in the garden when used for fertilizer. Works like a time release capsule.
Trust me, I went through a lot of walleye to figure that out.
Quote:
Was told this by one of the workers at the wing dam saloon. She said the DNR has found evidence larger fish are not as fertile spawners.
Can anyone attest to this? I’ve always thought the larger fish should be released?
There is literature that suggests that a 30 inch walleye will actually produce less viable eggs then a 20 inch walleye. It is approximately 50,000 eggs per pound of fish. However as a fish gets older the percentage of viable eggs in each spawn decreases. With that said, there still is no good reason as far as I am concerned to kill a fish just to put it on the wall. If you’re eating it, that’s a different story.
Along those same lines, I just read an interesting article about why you should leave the big fish in the system to eat the smaller fish. That way you don’t get the stunted bluegills is stunted Pike.
Quote:
Small ones can’t spawn if you keep them.
Big ones can’t be caught again if kept…
…You can Not have a Fish Fry Without FISH. 
…rrr
You never know. That big one might be a freak of nature, so to speak, and be 100% fertile, grow big egg masses every year and still live longer than the normal life expectancy.
Blinky says, Please let the big ones go! 
Quote:
This is good info, and brings up a good point. Just because the really large females aren’t AS fertile as the younger ones, they are still producing a large amount of ‘viable’ eggs. They might be hatching at a lower rate, but the sheer quantity means they are still producing a lot of baby walleyes.
Sure, they aren’t as efficient and they eat more baitfish than the smaller one would, but it’s not like they are blue-hairs playing bridge behind the wingdam…
x2 and good point!
This has been brought up before on here, but to bring it up again, big fish taste really good. In the case of walleyes I would rather eat meat from a larger fish than a smaller one. Many people reading this are probably disagreeing, but only based on general sentiment and not on firsthand comparison or experience. A big walleye has firm meat, and nice big flakes. YUM.
I just keep the walleye cheeks. Less toxins and heavy metals but still has the big flakes. 
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
