Size vs Quantity?

[Trout Addict]

.

[Phil Lilley]

I’ll be to post the results here. But most ppl agree with you, so far. 

[Gatorjet]

Been surveyed a couple times this year. My answer has been fewer, bigger both times.

[Seth]

Same here. Less fish, better quality.

[MoCarp]

4 hours ago, Trout Addict said:

One of the questions was "would you be ok with stocking fewer numbers of trout if It means catching bigger fish?" 

yup bigger fish....could counteract that less part by dropping the limit to 2 fish

[Gatorjet]

1 hour ago, MoCarp said:

yup bigger fish....could counteract that less part by dropping the limit to 2 fish

That will never happen. Taneycomo would instantly become the least fished body of water in the state. Followed by the elimination of the trout stocking program entirely.

Yes, some people, many on this forum would be happy with a two fish limit, or even all catch and release, the vast majority of anglers on Taneycomo want to keep those four fish limits.

[Phil Lilley]

You're forgetting about carrying capacity.  MDC stocked 1.6 million rainbows back in the 80's and the quality of trout went south fast.  Too many fish and not enough food.

So cut stocking numbers equals more food for less trout - bigger trout.  That's how it's worked, that and stocking slightly larger rainbows an average.

MDC cut stocking numbers this year because of hatchery problems - flooding.  Question is did anyone notice?  I don't think so but that's what the creel study will tell us.

What if they decide to grant the wish of the anglers in the survey that say less trout - bigger trout.  They'll cut stocking numbers again and bump up the size.  Right now it's 11.5.  If they go to 12, that may cause issues with the trophy area.  They may have to bump up the minimum size up there to, say, 13 inches.  That would makes things interesting.

[MoCarp]

2 hours ago, Gatorjet said:

That will never happen. Taneycomo would instantly become the least fished body of water in the state. Followed by the elimination of the trout stocking program entirely.

Yes, some people, many on this forum would be happy with a two fish limit, or even all catch and release, the vast majority of anglers on Taneycomo want to keep those four fish limits.

if that was the case no-one would fish the trophy area....2 big trout has more meat that 4 dinks

2 hours ago, Phil Lilley said:

You're forgetting about carrying capacity.  MDC stocked 1.6 million rainbows back in the 80's and the quality of trout went south fast.  Too many fish and not enough food.

So cut stocking numbers equals more food for less trout - bigger trout.  That's how it's worked, that and stocking slightly larger rainbows an average.

MDC cut stocking numbers this year because of hatchery problems - flooding.  Question is did anyone notice?  I don't think so but that's what the creel study will tell us.

What if they decide to grant the wish of the anglers in the survey that say less trout - bigger trout.  They'll cut stocking numbers again and bump up the size.  Right now it's 11.5.  If they go to 12, that may cause issues with the trophy area.  They may have to bump up the minimum size up there to, say, 13 inches.  That would makes things interesting.

well said phil

[tjm]

Restricting the take in a put and take fishery seems a bit odd to me. Restricting the stocking and only stocking fish over  5# sounds feasible, maybe. Turn it all into C&R. Use the rest of the hatching facilities to grow more fish for the winter pond stocking.

fwiw, I recently saw a pond full of 8-9"ers at Neosho that the sign said was meant for Taneycomo.

Set a maximum length to keep limit,  it seems to me would leave all the big fish to get bigger. Allowing me to eat a15" fish when you want it to reach 16"+ just seems backwards; wasted growth time.  You could increase the numbers and set a max limit of six less than 13", keep no biguns; meat fishers would have more by increased numbers and the trophy fish could eat their smaller cousins.

So, "a verbal survey" is one done by phone or on the lake? Do they just stop random people and ask some questions while marking down on their pad what ever they want to? Census gal came round asking, she didn't like my answers I guess she kept marking "other".

[MoCarp]

2 hours ago, tjm said:

Restricting the take in a put and take fishery seems a bit odd to me. Restricting the stocking and only stocking fish over  5# sounds feasible, maybe. Turn it all into C&R. Use the rest of the hatching facilities to grow more fish for the winter pond stocking.

now your just getting salty

2 hours ago, tjm said:

fwiw, I recently saw a pond full of 8-9"ers at Neosho that the sign said was meant for Taneycomo.

federal fish

2 hours ago, tjm said:

Set a maximum length to keep limit,  it seems to me would leave all the big fish to get bigger. Allowing me to eat a15" fish when you want it to reach 16"+ just seems backwards; wasted growth time.  You could increase the numbers and set a max limit of six less than 13", keep no biguns; meat fishers would have more by increased numbers and the trophy fish could eat their smaller cousins.

perhaps "meat fishing" is a thing of the past....a fine trout dinner a couple times a year is ok....but stacking fish like cord wood in your freezer is an antiquated way to look at things anymore...at the expense of great fishing that could be had

2 hours ago, tjm said:

So, "a verbal survey" is one done by phone or on the lake? Do they just stop random people and ask some questions while marking down on their pad what ever they want to? Census gal came round asking, she didn't like my answers I guess she kept marking "other".

its a "random sample".....done all the time to take the pulse