Pros and Cons on slot limits. Opinions needed

I am doing a project for my high school current events class. my choice was the pros and cons on slot limits. i need all people’s help here. thanks.

This is a complicated subject because not all slot limits are the same. For example a protected slot versus a harvest slot. Then you have to factor in that every lake is different in its make-up. But, if you are talking just pros and cons of slot litits in general I will give you a few.

In most cases fish benefit from a slot limit as do anglers. I am in favor of protected slots on all lakes. I think prime spawning sized fish should have a restricted harvest when compared to smaller fish. Not only do they insure proper balance in a lake or system but they are the future of the lake-a gift that just keeps giving.

One con is that a random slot limit rarely works on every lake. The limit needs to be tailored to the fish population in the lake. For example, if a lake has little or no natural reproduction, then protecting big fish does little good. In a lake like this, protecting small fish is best so small stocked fish can reach a better size before they are harvested.

Anther Con is the fact that they can get complicated and this leads to enforcement issues. Not the biggest deal but it happens all the time.

Without this getting to long, the PRO’s outweigh the CON’S by a long shot. With a slot limit in place we all win. It allows the harvest of some fish yet insures that their will be a future for that lake. They protect the balance of the lake and usually keep the number of small fish in check. They prevent over harvest during periods when the “bite” is really on. They usually result in more trophy size fish in a lake or system if that system is capable of producing that size fish. And, of course, they result in more fish being left in the system.

One more “CON”

Slot limits concentrate the harvest pressure on a few year classes at a time as they pass through the “harvestable slot”.

Although I have never actually seen this tried, one possible way to distribute the harvest would be a “laddered slot”.
Such as with a 6 fish limit where no more than 2 can be over 18 inches and only 1 over 28. This example would allow an 6 fish under 18 inches or 5 fish under 18 and one over 18 or fish under 18 and two over 18 (but only one could be over 28).
Or the ladder could be more specific such as 4 under 18, 1 between 18 and 22, and one over 29. (This would not allow a 5th fish in the under 18.) This is basically a 5 fish limit with an allowance for one additional as a trophy. Note that it also would protect the fish between 22 and 29. So a “laddered” schematic can still include a “protected slot”.

I am a firm supporter of protected slot limits. We have a protected slot on all walleye from 20″ to 27″ on pools 12, 13 & 14 of the Mississippi. The slot limit has only been in effect for a year and a half so it is too-soon to see what type of impact it will have on the river. I know I released many fish in the protected slot last year and again this year. Hopefully this will help to protect the prime spawning females for which the slot was set up. It should also increase the number of trophy fish in a few years.

I don’t fish a great number of lakes but I know of one lake in northern Minnesota that definately benefited from a protected slot limit. I used to take my 4 daughters to Black Duck lake north of Bemidji. The first couple of times we went up there was no slot limit. I didn’t catch many walleye and the average size was not much more than 14″, if that. Then a protected slot was started where you could only keep one fish over 20″ or 22″ (I can’t recall which) a day per person. Three years after the slot limit had started ALL the walleye we caught were over 22″ long. I’m certain that there were plenty of shorter fish in the lake but I could not find them. I didn’t catch a huge number of these larger fish but I did catch at least 3 or 4 each day minimum. With my daughters along we weren’t really targeting walleye but managed to catch several while fishing for jumbo perch. I haven’t been back up in several years and couldn’t even tell you if the lake still has a protected slot but from what I witnessed I have to say the slot limit worked.

Eyehunter

I would like to see a slot limit on the Mississippi River on Walleye between 16 and 20 inches, and perhaps a 2 fish minimum on fish over. Assuming that was imposed Walleye 13-15 inches would be legal to keep up to a max of 6. The comment is based on my experience from fishing those pools (5 through 8) about 40X per year.

I like slots. One can only look at and admire a large fish so long before you have to butcher it or it spoils. I know it is hard to throw the big one back, but those little eyes are are better eating. Take a picture intead.

Fishing slot limits are good on bodies of water where enough research has been done to apply them correctly. Slot limits on Pool 4/5 of the Mississippi River would need to be different from most lakes in that the walleyes on Pool 4/5 have phenominal growth rates. One year to grow a 12″ walleye on the river vs 3-4 in a lake. At this point I don’t believe a slot would be beneficial on Pool 4/5 for walleyes due to the great reproduction and growth rates.

Something more beneficial for the walleye population would be to restrict the fishing below the dams during wintering times and then have a closed season during spawning. However, the guides have frequently mentioned that the spawning walleyes do not appear to have been harmed by the massive numbers of fishermen during the spawn.

One thing to keep in mind when considering slots. Not all stocked fish spawn, actually, very few of them do, so protecting stocked fish that do not/will not contribute to the natural reproduction of the species within the system will actually take away forage from those fish that are needing of that food to grow. Protecting 20-28″ fish in a system that is completely stocked because of a lack of natural reproduction is a waste. Those waters are called “put and take” lakes, and that is the best way to treat them. Slots are a great managment tool if used correctly, but too often they are used in cases they do not fit into.

Here’s some good info from the Pioneer Press May 1, 2005.(bold emphasis added by me) Sounds to me like the best conclusion is “we don’t know yet “

“The science of length regulations for walleye is in its infancy,” said Paul Radomski, a DNR research scientist who helped formulate the toolbox regulations. “The toolbox plan is designed to pick one set of regulations that we can study and see what the consequences are. Does it achieve the objective? Does it save bigger fish? What kind of harvest is forgone with the regulations? Those things have yet to be definitely addressed.”
Radomski tells managers to consider what they’re trying to accomplish before proposing slot limits on a particular lake. He said slot limits have drawn mixed reaction from anglers on some lakes, causing DNR managers to drop the idea.

If the goal is to reduce harvest, Radomski said, slot limits alone probably aren’t best.

“A lot of places, walleyes still are managed as a good eating fish, and this regulation really wasn’t designed to maximize the amount of fish for consumption,” Radomski said. “We thought the current statewide regulations do a pretty good job of making sure there’s a sustainable harvest and yet providing a maximum amount of fish for people to take home.” (Gem Eye Guy note: the current statewide regulation refers to 6 walleyes with no more than one over 24 inches, thus he is referring here to a regulation with no slot limit doing a pretty good job.)

Others worry the trend toward slot limits will discourage anglers from fishing and ultimately do more harm than good.

Tom Neustrom, a Grand Rapids fishing guide and member of the DNR’s Fishing Roundtable, a consortium of anglers who help guide the DNR on fishing issues, says he believes slot limits too often are imposed without good biological reason.

“We’re starting to get ourselves into a situation of being over-regulated when there’s no biological evidence that the population is going to get depleted,” Neustrom said. “If you give me a reason that shows me this is a need, and it’s proven, then I’ll agree with it.

“The thing is, they haven’t proven that slots are the answer.”

Ron Payer, the DNR’s fisheries management chief, says it’s going to take time, perhaps 10 years, to gauge whether slot limits produce the desired effect, but he defends the science behind them.

“They’re based on the best biology we have, and every lake is different,” he said. “The worst thing we can have is a complicated regulations system that isn’t working. We’ve used the best biology we can to try to achieve specific goals on a body of water.”

I fish Lake Wisconsin a lot every year. Slot limit there is 5 fish total, 15 inch minimum, no fish can be kept between 20 and 28 inches, and only one over 28 can be kept. This slot has been in place about 4 years. The system is self sustaining, with no stocking. 4 years ago, I may have caught 2 fish over 20 inches. Last year, I had between 10 and 20 in the slot, biggest at 26 inches. It has made a noticable difference in the quality of the fish caught, and protects the spawning size females.

I agree with everyone else that any slot limit needs to be tailored to the lake it’s applied to, with at least a couple years of research before hand to make sure they get the right slot in place. Overall, on a self-sustaining lake, I think slots are a good thing.