Do anglers with live scope harvest more?

[MoCarp]

 

[fishinwrench]

I have a question for that last dude..... 

How do you talk that long without ever saying anything ?  🥺 

[Seth]

I tried out Livescope for the first time yesterday and still brought home the same number of crappie that I always did with just side imaging....🤷‍♂️

Daily and possession limits are there for a reason....

[Dutch]

I read about one study and the guys using live view reportedly caught 1 more fish per day than those without.

[Ryan Miloshewski]

People who clamor Livescope is ruining fisheries are ignorant to it. It's not the tool, it's the fishermen. Like Seth said, he went home with just as many crappie as he usually does. Are people "limiting out" more? Maybe so. But that's highly likely a good thing for the health of the crappie population in the lakes where it's being used. People I fish with use Livescope on the big reservoirs in Missouri and Kansas and we always institute a slot limit.

Three of us caught over 100 Saturday and we kept 25 (which is just over a one-man limit in Kansas), keeping fish only between 10-12-inches.

What did people think when sonar first came out? A Vex for ice fishing? The Aquavue cameras? Bottom line: still gotta catch em!

[Seth]

33 minutes ago, Ryan Miloshewski said:

People who clamor Livescope is ruining fisheries are ignorant to it. It's not the tool, it's the fishermen. Like Seth said, he went home with just as many crappie as he usually does. Are people "limiting out" more? Maybe so. But that's highly likely a good thing for the health of the crappie population in the lakes where it's being used. People I fish with use Livescope on the big reservoirs in Missouri and Kansas and we always institute a slot limit.

Three of us caught over 100 Saturday and we kept 25 (which is just over a one-man limit in Kansas), keeping fish only between 10-12-inches.

What did people think when sonar first came out? A Vex for ice fishing? The Aquavue cameras? Bottom line: still gotta catch em!

I guarantee that side imaing has increased catch rates of crappie FAR more than forward facing sonar ever will. Gaining the ability to see suspended fish and brush piles 100'+ off to the side was a legit game changer. Livescope lets you put it in their face with a bit more precision, but when you are around hundreds or even thousands of fish that you saw off to the side with your side imaging, you're odds of getting your lure in front of one is still pretty darn high.

[Johnsfolly]

1 hour ago, Ryan Miloshewski said:

People who clamor Livescope is ruining fisheries are ignorant to it. It's not the tool, it's the fishermen. Like Seth said, he went home with just as many crappie as he usually does. Are people "limiting out" more? Maybe so. But that's highly likely a good thing for the health of the crappie population in the lakes where it's being used. People I fish with use Livescope on the big reservoirs in Missouri and Kansas and we always institute a slot limit.

Three of us caught over 100 Saturday and we kept 25 (which is just over a one-man limit in Kansas), keeping fish only between 10-12-inches.

What did people think when sonar first came out? A Vex for ice fishing? The Aquavue cameras? Bottom line: still gotta catch em!

Ryan the point about Seth is somewhat misleading since he is a really good fisherman that has crappie and other fish figured out. Where a difference would be made are those folks that are not or were not good or great fishermen. Those guys may now be able to effectively target brushpiles they would have not known about. If they are now able to limit out there must be a greater effect on the crappie.

[Ryan Miloshewski]

24 minutes ago, Johnsfolly said:

Ryan the point about Seth is somewhat misleading since he is a really good fisherman that has crappie and other fish figured out. Where a difference would be made are those folks that are not or were not good or great fishermen. Those guys may now be able to effectively target brushpiles they would have not known about. If they are now able to limit out there must be a greater effect on the crappie.

I'd bet the amount of fish those guys are catching and keeping over a given year aren't making a dent in any crappie population. If they can't catch them traditionally, they just aren't good fishermen. In fact, most of the people I know utilizing Livescope are really good fishermen already--they're just using a new tool. They can catch fish without it.

Like Seth said, you can find cover even better with side imaging. The fact you can drop it in their face is fun, but without LS you'd still be able to find and catch them. It's just another thing for "traditionalists" to complain about. 

[Devan S.]

33 minutes ago, Johnsfolly said:

Ryan the point about Seth is somewhat misleading since he is a really good fisherman that has crappie and other fish figured out. Where a difference would be made are those folks that are not or were not good or great fishermen. Those guys may now be able to effectively target brushpiles they would have not known about. If they are now able to limit out there must be a greater effect on the crappie.

This right here.....Every argument I see for livescope assumes that the hammers are still hammers. 

Livescope and SI have allowed the bottom 90th percentile to get significantly better, to eliminate tons of unproductive water, to get real time feedback, to know nearly exactly where your bait is with respect to a fish or target, to shrink the years it took the hammers to learn. It doesn't make them all hammers but taking that bottom percentiles and making them 20% better is a huge deal. 

I don't think were going to see this kind of stuff go away but I do think between the last 15-ish years of side imaging, livescope, and the user base growth that were going to see some reductions limits in certain places pretty soon.

[Ryan Miloshewski]

23 minutes ago, Devan S. said:

This right here.....Every argument I see for livescope assumes that the hammers are still hammers. 

Livescope and SI have allowed the bottom 90th percentile to get significantly better, to eliminate tons of unproductive water, to get real time feedback, to know nearly exactly where your bait is with respect to a fish or target, to shrink the years it took the hammers to learn. It doesn't make them all hammers but taking that bottom percentiles and making them 20% better is a huge deal. 

I don't think were going to see this kind of stuff go away but I do think between the last 15-ish years of side imaging, livescope, and the user base growth that were going to see some reductions limits in certain places pretty soon.

Creel/possession limits are set for a daily harvest on each lake. Obviously, every day that threshold/quota is not met. Even if they're getting better (which I'd argue they're still bad fishermen), that doesn't put MOST lakes into an over-harvesting situation. 

At the end of the day the point is it's not Livescope "ruining" fisheries. Just because you catch 30 crappie does not mean you need to clean 30 crappie. People certainly abuse it, but like everything, it's up to fishermen to uphold and care for the resource.