|
|
Post by featherduster on Sept 14, 2018 18:13:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by esshup on Sept 14, 2018 19:43:24 GMT -5
While at first the high hatch numbers seem to bode well for the fishery, the true measure of how well the fishery is the relative wieghts of the specific year class fish. Having a huge number of fish hatch won't guarantee a great fishery unless there is an abundance of food (in the correct size) for them to eat. Just like you and I can't get fat if we have to pick up single pieces of popcorn to eat that are scattered all over the gym, but we can get fat if we have a big bowl right in front of us. I've seen this in ponds with bass and bluegills. The bass have a good spawn one year and overeat the forage base. So, while there are plenty of small fish to eat, the bass expend a lot of energy chasing down a lot of small fish vs. one larger fish to eat. Look at the graph, the years following a huge hatch have relatively small hatches. That's nature letting the forage fish population rebound. How fast the fish grow in the next few years will tell a lot about the health of the fishery. You know the fish have a lot to eat of the properly sized forage food when their relative weights are over 100% on the relative weight charts. That is for fish that aren't laden with eggs or milt. www.in-fisherman.com/biology/walleye-length-to-weight-conversion-chart/ |
|
|
|
Post by featherduster on Sept 15, 2018 5:10:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by esshup on Sept 15, 2018 6:29:17 GMT -5
Not disputing the great fishing at all!! From a biologists standpoint I would be interested to see what the age of the fish are. i.e. how many are being harvested that were from the boom spawning year, and what their relative weights are.
|
|
