Arizona Fishing Forums on AZBZ banner

Slot length..??

17K views 85 replies 42 participants last post by  CatchNRelease 
#1 ·
Should Rosey reestablish they slot lengths??? Seems like ever since the lifting of slot length the fishing has went to hell.
 
#5 ·
Yes, all the lakes should!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
We cant do anything about the water but maybe we can put slot back on
you and baxter are not the brightest bulbs in the pack are you. probably one of those new florescent energy saver ones that the Government made mandatory. even though they suck.

think about what your saying, if your older than 40 your a dumb ass if your younger than 30 your a self centered individual that can't catch a fish if he tried. if your in between those ages There might be still hope for ya but I doubt it.

Delw
 
#11 ·
you and baxter are not the brightest bulbs in the pack are you. probably one of those new florescent energy saver ones that the Government made mandatory. even though they suck.



think about what your saying, if your older than 40 your a dumb ass if your younger than 30 your a self centered individual that can't catch a fish if he tried. if your in between those ages There might be still hope for ya but I doubt it.



Delw

Fine, no slot, I'll just take home and slaughter all the 8 pounders I pull from their beds in March/April. You'll be crying even more then.

How about before putting others down, you actually give me a viable argument as how a slot limit negatively impacts the lake?

I am by no means an environmental biologist, but here's my philosophy:

Abundance of bass with a limited quantity of baitfish/food, you end up with a lake filled with unhealthy dinks. Properly practicing selective harvest by implementing a slot limit will increase the food source due to reducing the number of predators. The slot limit protects the big girls to pass on stronger genes, the abundance of food will cause the smaller fish to grow quicker.

Please explain to me why I'm wrong. Also explain to me the recent 1st and 2nd place finishes I've taken in my last three tournaments if I "can't catch a fish if I tried." While you're at it, explain to me any logical connection you have made to supporting a slot limit, and being self-centered? I'll agree that I'm a self-centered prick, but I see no connection to supporting a slot limit....



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
#6 ·
You tell them Delw the slot won't do squat never did never will. All lakes and waters go in cycles, I've fished rosey when you couldn't buy a fish and them times when it seems all you had to do was dangle a bait over the water and it game on. Don't sweat youngsters it will come around as most lakes do. Just look at Saggy.
 
#13 ·
you going to fish from shore? or are we going to share a boat.

you bet I am a real smart ass, with some common since which is lacking from a bunch of you fools
 
#18 ·
No one is arguing the fact that lakes don't face various cycles like the ones you have mentioned. However, still no one has put up an argument for how a slot negatively effects the environment. Other than of course "they don't do squat", but that kind of evidence only stands up in red neck court.


Edit as Del posted as as I typing this:

You are probably right regarding the protection of the big fish. People are going to continue taking them home regardless of the law, but what I'm saying is it couldn't hurt. If even one person put a fish back that they otherwise would have taken home, then that is one more big fish that remains in there.

Now, on to my actual point. Removing the mid-range fish, in which there are quite a few, will increase the food source for everything improving the quality of all species in the lake.

And now for the extra point that adds no substance to this thread. By saying every one else must suck, you've disrespected quite a few real good sticks here on this site.
 
#25 ·
problem is, is that back when rosy was full and good, and full of crappy, all those damn snowbirds would camp out at the lake and catch as many as they could, never worried about limits and no limit on crappy drew em there, the slot they would somewhat obey, Sooo, they would KEEP ALL bass under 13 and ALL bass over 16, therefore after a few years of that it became a "SLOT" lake, sure there was always guys that would bring decent bags to the scale, but if you werent on em, it was slot after slot after slot all day just 13-16"ers all day. F@*k the slot, AZGFD does not manage our bass like texas does.the slot would work with proper managment but we dont have that here, it ruins a lake in my opinion, but we all know about opinions.
 
#28 ·
I think the gizzard shad has a lot more to do with the lower catch rates over the past few years than removal of the slot. I don't see the shad busting surface activity like there used to be. The gizzard shad consume zoo plankton but bass aren't able to eat most of the gizzard shad. Less zoo plankton means less threadfin shad and ultimately less bass. That's the most logical explanation. Just my opinion.
 
#29 ·
Slot limits are great and do wonders, they're put in place to ensure that every fish you catch is a clone to the one you caught before it. They also produce monster 3 fish stringers at weigh ins during tournaments. Oh and don't forget being docked 1/4-1/2# for every under that decided to relax in a live well or every over that tensed up because it got pissy, maybe if you lucky enough you might even get checked by a ranger while you have one of those border line fish and wind up getting DQ'd to go with your fun new fine. If you want to catch an abundance of clone ass fish ho to Bartlett, why cry about another lake and **** it up.
 
#30 ·
Wormslinger, Baxter
every time fishing gets slow or people cant catch fish a few numbnuts start complaining and finding better ideas to help them catch fish. They complain about this idea or that idea that was done long ago.

you need to make up your mind on what is really hurting the bass fishing at rosy. you seem to be saying its the tournys all the time, then the snow birds. Face it dudes I think you suck at fishing, otherwise you wouldn't be complaining..

:Iconrotfl :Iconrotfl :Iconrotfl



 
#32 ·
fvck you Dewl and Franklin ...you both are always the first two pricks to make fun of anyone's ability to fish because you don't agree with their posts..your both immature bomb throwers. This site used to be fairly good source of info, it's turned into a Dewl **** sucking site and Frankie your always the first one in line to start sucking.
 
#36 ·
Your mentality seems to be commonplace nowadays. Cant catch fish so they must not be there, right? Some cocksuckers from the catfish site want to lower the possession limit from 25 fish to 5 fish for some goddamn reason even though nobody they have ever known has caught a limit.
Its simple human greed, the fish all belong to you, right? Do you know how many people keep bass to eat? I bet its less than 5% of the anglers on the lake.
 
#33 ·
Hey dumbass. Drive a few more miles to Apache. I fish both lakes and caught a 15.7 pound five fish bag two weeks ago in 4 hours on Apache. I fished Roosey since 1967 and you can bet the fish are still around and as soon as we get some water the game will be on again. Hell, Nummie was catching 23 pound bags on Roosey when it was full. The reason G&F dumped the old slot limit on Roosey was it did not work other than being a pain in the ass for tournaments and producing too many mid sized fish. Call the G&F and ask for the biologist for the area for the real scoop.
 
#38 ·
Some note from the last round table meeting w/ AZGF...

After a question about fish harvest by anglers and a potential slot limit, recent creel surveys were discussed. Of surveyed anglers, a total of 5292 hours fished produced 1919 fish caught by 935 anglers surveyed at the boat ramps and 176 rover anglers surveyed (shoreline fishermen surveyed by boat). AZGFD personnel recalled harvest was less than 5% and most fisherman were practicing catch and release. At this time the AZGFD does not recommend or support a slot limit as it could affect the desire for people to fish the lake, specifically bringing bass tournaments to Roosevelt.

The fish sampling survey results concluded that gizzard shad were the most common fish in the combined surveys, something like 70% of those sampled, followed by largemouth bass in the +- 15% range. Other fish species were not common in the surveys but most were captured in low quantities. It was discussed that survey results were similar those found in recent years and nearly identical to those in 2013. The relative weight, also explained as the condition and/or fatness of the fish, was calculated for each species.
1. Results show the gizzard shad fall way below the average, indicating overpopulation and competition for resources.
2. Largemouth bass appeared to fall just below the national average relative weight but in a generally healthy condition.
3. Crappie were not surveyed based on a minimal catch rate by the sampling methods used.
4. Threadfin shad were also not surveyed based on a minimal catch rate by the sampling methods used.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top