Erie steelhead limit change, and keeping steelhead

skibo5

skibo5

Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
104
I was browsing fisherie.com and came across this..

Trout and Salmon regulations changed on September 6th, 2011 for Lake Erie and its tributaries. Minimum size is now 15", with a creel limit of 3 (combined species) only two (2) of which can be Lake Trout.


Just wondering if anyone knew what the change was from years past. I can not remember the regulations in the past because i never keep fish.

There is also a nice little debate going on about keeping fish posted under the Fishing reports section.

What are your opinions on people keeping the steelhead up there?
 
If someone wants to keep a limit legally caught, they are in within their rights to do so and it doesn't bother me at all. If they take a full limit every day all season long, they are being gluttonous. That's about as much thought as I have given to the matter.

 
I don't know about the lake trout reg, but the steelhead reg (3 over 15") looks the same as in years past.

I keep at least one every year to placate my wife. She doesn't understand why I fish all the time any never bring any fish home for her. I'm with Jack in that I don't begrudge anyone keeping a couple fish or a limit on occasion, it's multiple limits that really start to impact the resource.
 
The creel limit changes every year between the 5 fish Spring and 3 fish Fall seasons.
 
There's already entirely too many fish in those streams. You're not doing any harm at all by keeping your share. That's what they are there for.
 
jayL wrote:
There's already entirely too many fish in those streams.

Amen to that and that's why it's a circus up there most of the time.
 
skibo5 wrote:
I was browsing fisherie.com and came across this..

Trout and Salmon regulations changed on September 6th, 2011 for Lake Erie and its tributaries. Minimum size is now 15", with a creel limit of 3 (combined species) only two (2) of which can be Lake Trout.


Just wondering if anyone knew what the change was from years past. I can not remember the regulations in the past because i never keep fish.

There is also a nice little debate going on about keeping fish posted under the Fishing reports section.

What are your opinions on people keeping the steelhead up there?

I think it wa sonly an increase on the size. I believe you could keep 3 before the change.

Ohio was 2 fish, PA 3, and Ohio was already 15 inch minimum size. don't remember what PA's min size was.

I could be wrong. That is just how I remember it.

edit: I think albatross got it right.
 
albatross wrote:

I keep at least one every year to placate my wife...

LOL! I always did that with regular stocked trout. I only had to do it once with steelhead.;-)
 
Jayl wrote;

"There's already entirely too many fish in those streams. You're not doing any harm at all by keeping your share. That's what they are there for."

Yes, there are alot of steelhead in the Erie creeks but I don't think that guys should go there day after day and keep their three fish limit either. What in the world can they be doing with all that steelhead?

They are being planted as smolts to create a sport fishery and to kill for those who want to eat some. I keep one or two every year to have smoked for my wife. Otherwise I'd never keep any as I don't think they taste all that good.

I don't know what the legal length is but I do know that for the last few years the fall limit was three fish per day.
 
Agreed, and that's why I said "keeping your share". I don't think that implies keeping everything you catch, just what you can use.

If I planned to consume (or give to someone who will) the fish, I'd have no reservations about keeping it, especially in Erie.

I haven't ever killed one because I don't eat them.

Wild trout, on the other hand, are always released because I value the resource so much.
 
I agree 100% with your opinion.
 
The regulation has not changed this year. As stated before, they change the limit on the same date every year for the steelhead season.

I think I've kept about 5 steelhead total in the last 4 years. I smoked a few and filleted/baked a few. They're ok fish... smoking is the way to go.

There's a ton of fish up there, except the last 2 years. I think when 100 people are taking out 3 fish a day in a few mile stretch, then it can have a big impact on the fisherie. However, that's what they're there for. I like to catch 10+ a day and toss all of them back, but have no problem with others keeping their limit.

My problem is rotating fish out due to their size, or people not knowing the regs. I see people give fish away all the time and not count them towards their creel limit. Or foul hooked fish being kept. There's not much you can do up there with so many people, but I've run into a wco a few times, which I appreciate.
 
100 people keeping 3 fish a day, 2100 fish a week. Imagine if 2100 fish were kept out of your local creek on a weekly basis. I do agree that they can keep whatever they would like if those are the rules, but I do not feel like it is necessary. I do not care as much for people keeping non stocked fish, but when something needs to be placed there, I think the resource should not be so abused. I would not mind seeing the limit lowered to 2 fish, personally I would like it to be 1 considering you get 10lb fish up there. I usually would be fine with a 3 fish limit for people but considering how low the number of fish were in the creek, compared to years past was, I will stress my opinion.

Sure there are a lot of fish in the creeks, but I love it. Taking a first time steelhead fisherman or my Girl friend up there and watching them catch a bunch is a treat.
 
skibo5 wrote:
I do not care as much for people keeping non stocked fish, but when something needs to be placed there, I think the resource should not be so abused.

I don't personally keep steelhead, but that logic sounds a little crazy, imho, of course. By the same principle, would it be OK to wipe out a population of wild brownies but bad to keep stockies then? Not trying to be a @#&*, just trying to understand where you're coming from on this one.

Boyer
 
Skibo5 wrote;

"I do not care as much for people keeping non stocked fish"

I'm thinking (hoping) maybe skibo is talking about indigenous populations of warm water species like yellow and white perch, walleyes, bluegills, etc, that are for the most part self sustaining.
 
Yea sorry, I was talking about walleyes, etc as wbranch said. Im still not up for keeping warm water species either. I mean if you can afford a $50 fishing license your not starving, but its whatever.
 
skibo5 wrote:
100 people keeping 3 fish a day, 2100 fish a week. Imagine if 2100 fish were kept out of your local creek on a weekly basis. I do agree that they can keep whatever they would like if those are the rules, but I do not feel like it is necessary. I do not care as much for people keeping non stocked fish, but when something needs to be placed there, I think the resource should not be so abused. I would not mind seeing the limit lowered to 2 fish, personally I would like it to be 1 considering you get 10lb fish up there. I usually would be fine with a 3 fish limit for people but considering how low the number of fish were in the creek, compared to years past was, I will stress my opinion.

Sure there are a lot of fish in the creeks, but I love it. Taking a first time steelhead fisherman or my Girl friend up there and watching them catch a bunch is a treat.

Imagine if a million fish were stocked into your local creek... Oh wait, they are, in the Erie tribs (plus or minus 100,000)! Let's assume for the sake of argument and round numbers that the fish are in the stream from September until the end of March (7 months or about 213 days). Let's assume a 90% predation rate, meaning only 10% of those fish return (I'm uncertain what the actual return rate is - anyone?). Over that seven month period, you'd have to have about 156 people keeping their limit EVERY day of that time period, to wipe out the run. And knowing that the fish density in the streams will be somewhat of a bell curve, those assumptions for catching fish won't hold for the first month or so of the season, and will tail off in the last month as well. And you'd have to have a hearty bunch of meaters to be out there every day, catching fish when the streams are blown out completely, or when the snow flies on some of the winter days, and also discount the fact that some people who catch three fish release them all.

Those kinds of stocking numbers could support a weekly harvest of 2100 fish in the peak months of the steelhead season.

While the catch rate for steelhead is something like 0.5 - 1 fish/hour, which I understand is high, I simply don't think that there are enough people catching and keeping the fish to majorly undermine what the run is supposed to be - a contrived sport industry. I'm confident there is only minor spawning that occurs (although I'd bet that a stream I fished last year produces a few wild fish each year). If anything, we should be railing against the walleye who have a far bigger impact on the number of fish that don't return, than we do.. When it comes down to it, its still a stocked fisherie. If it was a wild Atlantic salmon run, you bet I'd feel differently about everyone keeping their limit.

And with that being said, I do my part to support those that have to have their fix and keep their limit each day, and dutifuly return my stocked catches..and then walk the streams that don't have the hordes of anglers, or the upper sections of stream off the beaten path, and target the survivors that managed to run the gauntlet..
 
skibo5 wrote:
I mean if you can afford a $50 fishing license your not starving, but its whatever.

??

That's a pretty lame statement. I'm pretty sure if I were a dedicated sustience fisherman, the $35 lisence fee could be offset in about the cost of 4 meals for my family, if that.

If you're starving, keep as many as you feel neccessary. Furthermore, they're steelhead: An artifical, stocked fishery. Eat 'em up yum, the trucks'll make more. Who. Cares. Their dharma is caught and eaten.
 
gfen wrote:
Furthermore, they're steelhead: An artifical, stocked fishery. Eat 'em up yum, the trucks'll make more. Who. Cares. Their dharma is caught and eaten.

Yup.

Eat em. thats why they are there. they are not going to reproduce. eat em. eat the living #OOPS# out of them. why would you put them back? if there was a fresh water mahi I would eat its spine and laugh at what a hog I am. Cause tuna is awesome. But fresh water fish suck, including steel and smoke steel.
 
wbranch wrote:


I'm thinking (hoping) maybe skibo is talking about indigenous populations of warm water species like yellow and white perch, walleyes, bluegills, etc, that are for the most part self sustaining.

Not to deviate from the original topic, and no offense, but the white perch is not indigenous to the Lake Erie system. Perhaps you meant white bass? Here in OH it is illegal to transfer white perch from one body of water to another. They do taste good though; just can be a little bony.
 
Back
Top