Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I usually fish Table Rock or Stockton I do catch larger walleye on Table Rock. The length limit on Table Rock is 18 inches they only stuck Table Rock about every 3 years I believe for some reason the Table Rock walleye survive better.

Posted

The survival rate (recruitment factor) is also tied to the eggs remaining suspended long enough to hatch. Lakes with flow and constant wave action do better. That partially explains the high water year successes. As for the dietary deficiency, remember that walleye, in their natural range, do not compete with 60 godzillion shad fry for food.

  • Members
Posted

I thought that the Rock was stocked every other year with walleye fingerlings the same for Stockton. The walleye on the rock aren't targeted as much as Stockton but I don't believe they aren't populated as well as Stockton.  Bull Schoals on the other hand has a good population of walleye why the rock doesn't have the same population both lakes being similar in depth and makeup.  Stockton doesn't have the depth or size but I noticed more and more fisherman targeting walleye because of the good fishery we have. I believe there are good sized walleye in Stockton but the truly big walleye strain were once present in the Bull and also in table rock up in the white river arm some of those bruisers are in the 15 plus club. I knew a guy from the St. Louis area who fished up around holiday island and caught walleyes in that category. Years ago the pothole would produce those big girls also.

Posted

Gary Parsons said he believed Table Rock had the best chance to produce a world record. He felt the original genetics hadn't been diluted as much as in some of the other lakes, and the lack of pressure and the huge forage base could combine to produce a real monster or two. His idea was that a truly huge eye in Table Rock would stay deep all the time.

Johnnie Candle said a 20+ lb. walleye would not be likely to respond to "normal" walleye tactics. That 20-inch eater you caught would be "brunch" to a walleye that size. He suggested a major change in tactics for those looking to catch a record. Seems to me the early spring bass tourneys on Bull Shoals pretty much show how it could be done--jerkbaits on the lower lake points in March. Don't know how that would translate to Table Rock, aka Bass City, but it definitely works at Stockton.

Posted
 

I don't know that anyone is "complaining" about the survival.  Just like the bass guys on TR we would love to have more and bigger, who doesn't.

The only difference is that the bass guys don't take home every legal fish that they catch and they are self sustaining. I've always caught a bunch of legal walleye on Stockton, mostly while bass fishing, but I've taken very few home. 

 

 

Posted
 

The only difference is that the bass guys don't take home every legal fish that they catch and they are self sustaining. I've always caught a bunch of legal walleye on Stockton, mostly while bass fishing, but I've taken very few home. 

Yes no bass fisherman ever keep bass and all walleye fisherman take every legal fish. Come on.  Our boat caught over 300 legal walleye last year and probably kept 40.

Posted
 

Gary Parsons said he believed Table Rock had the best chance to produce a world record. He felt the original genetics hadn't been diluted as much as in some of the other lakes, and the lack of pressure and the huge forage base could combine to produce a real monster or two. His idea was that a truly huge eye in Table Rock would stay deep all the time.

Johnnie Candle said a 20+ lb. walleye would not be likely to respond to "normal" walleye tactics. That 20-inch eater you caught would be "brunch" to a walleye that size. He suggested a major change in tactics for those looking to catch a record. Seems to me the early spring bass tourneys on Bull Shoals pretty much show how it could be done--jerkbaits on the lower lake points in March. Don't know how that would translate to Table Rock, aka Bass City, but it definitely works at Stockton.

Good to see you back PD! It seems like I read somewhere that a northern strain of lake walleye were introduced to Stockton back in the day, in hopes of creating lake spawning walleye that wouldn't require the yearly harvesting of eggs for stocking hatchery raised fish for eternity. I believe the thought was that the native river walleye didn't spawn successfully due to the change of their native spawning habitat as a result of damming the rivers. Over the years, maybe too many of the big native Sac River fish have been harvested and enjoyed as table fare, and the majority of the fish now shocked up for egg collection are more genetically linked to the non-native northern fish? I'm thinking maybe they just picked the wrong lakes to harvest those initial non-native stocked fish. Wonder what would have happened if the MDC would have initially collected fry from places that produce huge walleye like Lake Erie or The Bay of Quinte back in the day? Feel free to chime in here bfishin!

WM

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.