Last week on a national fishing weekly program and somewhere about a year ago I heard it said that when fishing for gills, perch, bream or red ears, fishermen should throw back the huge males we catch.

It was explained that the size of the fish in the schools is genetically dependent on the size of the males.

On the show last week he discussed why genetically it does not apply to crappie.

Any ideas on this?

I have raised trophy bluegills for many years and I absolutely agree with the genetics comments. I can't give you any scientific basis. Mine is based on common sense.

As a cattle producer, I try to get the best bull I can afford for those genetics and only a stupid rancher would make hamburger out of his genetic provider.

In my 40 some years of raising bluegills, I have never once intentionally killed a specimen male and never intend to do so...this is one important factor that separates private water from public water, IMO.

Fish size is determined by space and other variables. A small generic goldfish will stay small if it is inside in a goldfish bowl; it'll grow much larger in a larger goldfish pond. So, we all know this about space and food and weather.

Then, in the animal kingdom, larger parents have larger offspring, so this makes sense that you'd want to keep the best genetics swimming around and breeding. I can't recall where I heard this, maybe the same program, but if I remember, a large dominant sunfish might suppress the size of others in the area. We see this same sort of repression in bee colonies, for example.

The only thing I can think of regarding crappie being different is they have very short lives. I read they average around 4 or 5 years, so considerably less long-lived than some of the others.

*** I'll dig around for more over on the Bluegill page; it seems they have some idea on this issue.

Brad

To leave genetics out of your "other variables" speaks volumes. No, we don't all know this is all about space. Some of us have other views!

.

This is an interesting article about bluegill size and harvest rules --

http://bigbluegill.com/forum/topics/why-everything-you-know-about-bluegill-management-is-wrong

.

Yes, I purposely separated the genetics issue, if you re-read my post; I didn't omit it.

Why? A fish can have great genetics for size and it might never come to fruition if the environment holds it back. I thought it needed to be separated for this reason as I recall while typing the post.

Aquarists know the issue well regarding fish size potential and tank size. Some breeders used to move tropical fish outside, weather permitting, to grow them larger, for example. And, in the old days, one could buy little baby turtles, sliders, and their growth would be stunted inside; move them outside to a fish pond and they'd take off.

Well, anyway, I found the original issue as it was presented in at least one other forum. The claim is very large male bluegills suppress or slow down the sexual development of younger, smaller males that then direct "energy" away from the physical attributes to compete in the breeding arena, and into physical growth. The theory is this: that if you remove the large bluegills, the smaller less mature males will become sexually mature very quickly . . . the ones that won't ever grow to have the 10" + size genetics will compete better against other younger males. And, once the bluegills start advancing quickly in sexual maturity, their growth curve stops or slows dramatically. Those particular fish don't finish growing. The offspring from the fish are more mixed in size, less large ones, because of the more "democratic" breeding.

Makes some sense knowing we see similar patterns in the animal kingdom where dominant males "get the girls." But, as regards bluegills, it is still controversial.

Brad

Yes a good article and a very interesting study they have in progress. Thanks for posting it.

Great read! I also do not keep any trophy size Sunfish 10" or longer! To me genetics is a HUGE factor in producing big fish. Just my two cents.

You guys knowledge base amazes me. I too raise registered Black Angus, Dorper sheep, California White rabbits, and Brahma chickens. I constantly think of my breeder bulls(males). I've never looked at my pond this way. Thanks so much for lifting my sunglasses! Great info from some smart folks! Appreciate that! CK

Littlefeather,

I have to ask... "what's a Brahma chicken"?

Now I have Brahma cows, I have chickens, but I never came across a Brahma chicken, LOL.

Seriously, are they a good chicken?

Brahms chickens are the largest and most dosil of all the breeds I've found. Bigger than Jersey Giants. Very slow to grow into maturity. Very special once grown. Kinda like huge bream! Just special!

Thanks for that...I'll give them a try.

Speaking of bluegill sex, 80% (or more) of the offspring of the hybrid bluegill are male. This is the primary reason they make a good small pond choice...low numbers of reproducing and successively possibly inferior offspring that can be easily managed by predators without overpopulating and stunting the original stockers.

The copper nose bluegill, on the other hand, produces primarily female offspring which makes them a great choice for larger bass ponds in which you want to generate forage production for the bass and to grow big 'gills for catching.

There's nothing I can bring to the table that Meadowlark hasn't already said better.

One thing I will try to add is that it has been my field experience that Northern Bluegill or "true" bluegill are highly susceptible to a population dwarfing over time when the bull males get taken out. Big lakes like T-Bend and Big Sam can handle more amounts of larger males being taken since the larger males have numerous and diverse places to be away from the two legged predators. I say "be" and not "hide" because big bull bluegill don't hide from much. Smaller lakes, ponds and running waters have similar potential as their bigger water cousins in the same region but can be covered more efficiently. There are quite a lot of anglers who fish for sunfish. A fair percentage of those anglers know how to catch and some do keep large and trophy size sunfish. When the good genes leave a small-ish water in a big chunk at a time (instead of a small bite) the mean size gets smaller as does the maximum potential and there is little to nothing you can do to the habitat to get it back to the way it was short of introducing new superb genetic stock.

I will say, superb habitat and superb genetics? Oh, the places you will go...