Leaderboard

TROPHY is a relative term.....my grand daughter caught her first fish, a 13 inch walleye...it is now a trophy.

Oh, I agree entirely...one of the biggest flaws with any size limit regulation is that it acts as a size bottleneck in a heavily-fished population. It's far from foolproof. But regarding the planning bit...ever since 2008 when they re-designed the management zones, MNRF has moved away from putting one-off exceptions on lakes based solely on angler observations. Everything is supposed to be measurable and based on sound science, and vetted through the consultation process associated with fisheries management planning.The point I was trying to make was not to disagree with you or Roger, nor to justify the current reg, but rather that these kinds of concerns should be brought to MNRFs attention the next time the planning process begins.

To address this concern, one needs first ti understand the purpose of size limits. A minimum size limit can be a useful tool when the is a problem with recruitment...insufficient spawning habitat, environmental challenges, high predation of young fish, etc. Once fish reach maturity, they're past the bottleneck, but the problem is retaining enough fish to reach maturity. Maximum size limits, on the other hand, can be useful when there is high mortality of mature fish...which overfishing can certainly contribute to. The intent is to protect the majority of the spawning age fish; the theory being that (a) a healthy spawning population will produce plenty of young fish and (b) mortality rates are naturally higher in juvenile fish, therefore, smaller size classes are better able to absorb angling pressure What we have in most of northern Ontario is considered a "modified maximum size limit"...the one-over basically being a compromise - it reduces the effectiveness of the maximum size limit, but allows anglers to keep a big one if they choose - making it more acceptable to many anglers and tourist operators. Sized based regulations aren't just grabbed out of thin air...effective size limits require a thorough knowledge of growth rates, maturation schedules and recruitment across the landscape. Determining these is one of the main reasons MNRF designed the Broadscale Monitoring Program. The one over 46cm regulation was developed in Northwestern Ontario, and has subsequently been adopted through much of the rest of the province. The 46cm value was based on their understanding of growth, maturity and recruitment at the time (mid 90s). Twenty years later, many anglers would agree that the regs have done a good job of improving walleye fishing in the region. However, given the passage of time and changes to populations, it is not unreasonable to expect the criteria upon which 46cm was chosen to have shifted. However, determining whether the size limit is still appropriate, or what might do a better job, again requires an understanding of the growth, maturity and recruitment across the landscape...these types of analyses are typically completed as part of the background work for a fisheries management planning exercise.