Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ehg

New FMZ 17 Walleye regs?

Recommended Posts

Hoping to get out to the Kawarthas soon, checked the regs and they were much different this season.

Apparently you can only keep one walleye/pickerel between 13.8 to 19.6 inches with a conservation license,(4 in the same range for sport license). Bass and musky season is extended to Dec. 15th... etc

Good thing i looked so i wouldn't make a mistake and pay for it.... just a heads up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i like these regs in place. although that wont deter half the people from actually following the slot or the C&K limits.. aww well i suppose those of us that do, help the fishery more than we know. hate seeing someone pull out a huge hen and toss her on the stringer.. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those regs if followed by the majority (and you are breaking the law if you aren't) should do wonders for the walleye fisheries. I've mentioned this before, but, wish they would do the same thing for south-western ontario...up to the grey-bruce area. Some of the walleye lakes that were decent when I was a teenager have been decimated. With some stocking and some decent management they could once again be what they were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember Balsam/Mitchell lake you cant keep anything over anymore. Special regs for there.

it's all zone 17. 35CM to 50CM so my last one had to go back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait a sec, can someone clear this up for me?

The exceptions in Balsam and Mitchell goes along with the normal zone 17 rules? So this means you can only keep fish 13.8 - 14.6" long? Or do you just follow the exceptions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should be able to help here.

 

The new regulation for walleye in Zone 17 is a harvestable slot, you may keep wallye between 35cm-50cm (call it 14-19inches), 4 fish for a regular sport license, 1 fish for a conservation license. Any fish above or below the slot shall be released.

 

Prior to this regulation change a protected slot on Balsam lake had been in place, you may not keep fish inside the slot size. (sorry I don't have the exact measurements handy, but it close if not the same as the Zone 17 sizes). This slot was left in place as a comparison model for the zone.

 

I also like these new regulations and not just because I was involved in the process. It is really nice slipping a big female back into the lake knowing she will spawn as many times as possible before passing of old age. I would rather catch twenty a day and have to release most, instead of only catching a couple.

 

Also Rick, the 300 limit is for sunfish in all of Zone 17 of which only 30 can be over 7.1 inches, if you have a sport fishing license. :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a fan of this new slot too. I've released a lot of over slot eyes this season already, that probably would have been kept if the slot wasn't in place. I've also released a ton of unders lot fish, that will be perfect keepers next season. I think the next few years are going to be good walleye fishing around here :)

 

S.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Balsam = 3 walleye with a regular license and 1 with conservation ,nothing between 37-55 cm.

 

Rest of the zone 17 = 4 with regular 1 with conservation, must be between 35 -50 cm.

 

 

http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/stdprodconsume/groups/lr/@mnr/@letsfish/documents/document/mnr_e001336.pdf

 

Was planning to hit Balsam sometime, good thing you posted that. Almost the opposite of the other FMZ 17 lakes walleye fishing regs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats awesome. I read them wrong, nothing strange. Lol. I thought you were not allowed to keep anything over but 3 under 12.5 inches with a sport licence. Thanks for clearin that up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These new regs are a good thing. Put in place to protect the Big girls with the good genes and letting the fish do the deed at least least once before they are harvested.

 

Balsam is indeed different, almost the opposite in fact. Not sure why they didn't change it to follow suit with the rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These new regs are a good thing. Put in place to protect the Big girls with the good genes and letting the fish do the deed at least least once before they are harvested.

 

Balsam is indeed different, almost the opposite in fact. Not sure why they didn't change it to follow suit with the rest.

 

The MNR probably has more research and information on the Balsam Lake Slot limit than any other regulation they have implemented over the last number of years. The idea is to use it as a comparison to the rest of the zone to see which regulation is the most effective. 10 years from now it might be that the entire zone would benefit from the harvestable slot or the restricted slot, at that point the regulations could be changed for the zone to the model that appears to work the best.

 

Also because the model for this harvestable slot predicts population increases with a year long season, it should really benefit Scugog, which allows ice angling for walleye in zone 17. :good:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The worse thing to happen to Balsam was the slot. Previous to the slot was a very normal population of every size fish. And just stunning amounts of walleye.

 

Now we have a big group of slot fish.

 

What happened was the KFA had a chapter of cottage anglers that couldn't catch walleye and a MNR netting program that didn't go deep enough to get the correct information.

 

The only good thing is both Balsam and Rice have a huge supply of 12 inch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The MNR probably has more research and information on the Balsam Lake Slot limit than any other regulation they have implemented over the last number of years. The idea is to use it as a comparison to the rest of the zone to see which regulation is the most effective. 10 years from now it might be that the entire zone would benefit from the harvestable slot or the restricted slot, at that point the regulations could be changed for the zone to the model that appears to work the best.

 

Also because the model for this harvestable slot predicts population increases with a year long season, it should really benefit Scugog, which allows ice angling for walleye in zone 17. :good:

 

We actually had a biologist from Oceans and Fisheries Canada/MNR speak at my last Bass club meeting. Our talk wasn't just about bass etc. I asked him why they didn't implement the same slot on Balsam across the board on the Kawartha's. Unfortunately he could not answer. IMO whatever they have done on Balsam is the way to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If MNR changed the Balsam slot to the general Kawratha slot it would take 1 season for Balsam to collapse because 90% of the walleye are in that slot.

 

I can already see the negative effects of the slot on Rice. On any day the smallest % of caught walleye are in the slot. Later this year the current 12 inch crop are going the make the slot and start disappearing. And those over slot fish that you think are great to protect are getting older and older the clocks ticking 5 years before another Rice Lake collapse.

 

No fan of slots here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Catch and release is the best answer to all the concerns.

Eat panfish! They taste better anyways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rice will be fine. There are enough of those 12"ers around for next year, and if you think all the slot fish will get caught, your crazy.........sorry. I'm getting a lot of over slot fish out of there too, they're safe as well. There are enough protected fish in that watershed, to last for years. As long as this years spawn went OK, I can't see where your concern is??

 

I think it will benifit the rest of the kawartha's, the tri lakes in particular. Most of the guys fishing were keeping the small eyes, because that's all they could catch. At least now they're somewhat protected.

 

Your beef with Balsam makes no sense either. Is there a lack of fish in there?? I don't get it.

 

S.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right now I would put my legal walleye catch at 15-20% with most being 17.5- 18.5 fish. By this fall those fish will be overs.

 

Crazy is agreed also around when Rice crashed.

 

So far this year I've kept 1 walleye (Balsam) and people in my boat have kept 5 and 3 of those came from Rice. And I do sample these lake at a very high level (often).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Garnet;

 

Let's hear your idea about what walleye regulation would work for all anglers and all lakes in zone 17. I know your not a fan of slots and you attended the public meetings on these regulations but I don't remember if you proposed anything that might be a good alternative.

Remember you cannot base a regulation on only the skilled anglers ability to catch fish. I think if there was even one walleye in these lakes some guys would track it down and catch it.

 

A few more years of good spawning reproduction will do wonders for these lakes, there was a few years when we had very little reproduction and the population suffered.

If you want to get more involved, over the last few springs a small group of angling volunteers have been doing walleye spawning counts at night in the fast water spawning sites in this area. Gathering information on the prime spawning areas and possibly identifying areas that might be considered for spawning site rehabilitation. I will post the contact info in the early spring.

Edited by Michael Brown

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did the walleye spawning survey on Scugog with the KFA. Both years took me 3 weeks before all night sleep was possible. (All those wallys and I couldn't catch them).

 

I really need to thank you Ronnie and pete for going to all those meeting, we all know MNR are great for going to meetings not so great at making decisions.

 

Think what should be studied is co relation to angler results to Kawratha Assessment netting results. I know that Balsam has a couple student techs riding around in a boat.

 

Take these student techs put them in good walleye anglers boats measuring board sample kit and a small budget. Yes get some real data.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...