Ohio River Catfish Project 2014 Update
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Ohio River Catfish Project
2014 Update
The 2013 Ohio River Catfish Project was an effort by KDFWR to increase data collection of catfish in the
Ohio River. The goal of the project was to determine the overall status of blue, flathead, and channel
catfish in the Ohio River and determine if the catfish population as a whole is being over harvested and if
trophy-sized fish are being harvested disproportionately to their abundance. This project was conducted
in response to trophy and tournament anglers’ assertions that commercial fishing is overharvesting larger
catfish because of increasing demand for the larger fish by pay lakes. Additionally, there are some catfish
anglers that are adamantly opposed to all commercial fishing since they believe the catfish populations,
as a whole, are being overfished in the Ohio River.
The State of Ohio implemented angler harvest restrictions in response to their trophy catfish anglers’
concerns. The regulations were implemented despite a lack of data to verify that numbers of the larger
fish are in fact dwindling. Blue catfish (one of the two species of primary concern by trophy catfish
anglers because of their ability to attain very large sizes), are notoriously aggressive when compared to
other fish species and have created issues concerning overpopulation in some rivers where the fish have
neither commercial harvest pressure or top predators that would prevent them from becoming too
numerous. For this reason, primarily, KDFWR believes that understanding the demographics of our Ohio
River catfish populations is essential prior to establishing harvest restrictions that may create future
issues that are products of over population such as stunted growth and reducing the number and quality
of catfish and other sport fish species in the river. It should be noted that Ohio is not the only state that
has implemented regulations without knowledge of the resource. Large rivers are very hard to sample
effectively. It takes considerable effort and funding to adequately sample those resources, and since
every state has limited funding, their resources are generally spent managing fisheries that are more
heavily used on a per-acre basis than the big rivers. Kentucky actively manages other sport fish species in
the Ohio River, and this Department feels that the resource is important enough on many levels to
warrant the funding necessary to properly manage it. KDFWR expresses thanks to the Illinois DNR,
Southern Illinois University, and Eastern Illinois University for providing catfish sampling effort and data
during 2013.
The following represents key data that KDFWR used to help formulate potential harvest regulations.
Information gathered from two public meetings that KDFWR hosted and which were attended by
representatives from the trophy catfish anglers and Kentucky commercial fishermen were also
considered prior to the regulation proposals that are provided at the end of this article.
The Tennessee DNR implemented a harvest catfish restriction (1 fish over 34 inches daily) in 2004. The restriction included anglers and commercial fishermen. This slide was shown to illustrate differences in catch numbers and fish sizes per fishing trip as reported by anglers in surveys that were taken in 2006 and again in 2012. Anglers reported catching more catfish in general, but the number of catfish over 34 inches had decreased, actually by almost two thirds (not the 1/3 as presented on the slide) after the regulation was implemented. This slide shows data from the same Tennessee survey. The percent of anglers favoring the increased harvest restrictions on commercial fishermen decreased from 2006 to 2012. Potential reasons for the decrease were not given. It should be noted that Tennessee implemented the regulations to appease their catfish anglers without data to indicate they were warranted. As previously indicated, this type of action is not uncommon for big rivers due to the cost and difficulty in sampling in relation to higher profile fisheries that demand effective resource management.
Catfish Tournament Weights Comparison
140
Average Winning Weights
120
Average winning weight (pounds)
100
80
Missouri River
Ohio River
60
Ohio Above Louisville
Ohio Below Louisville
40
Missouri River has
No commercial fishing
20 since 1992
0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year
Missouri began restricting commercial harvest in their portion of the Missouri River in 1992. The
expected result would be that the relative number of trophy-sized catfish should increase over time.
However, the average winning weights for catfish tournaments held in the Missouri River were actually
lower than those held in the Ohio River below Louisville. Average winning weights of catfish tournaments
held in Ohio River pools above Louisville were lower than both the lower pools and in the Missouri River.
Winning weights were used for comparisons because many tournaments do not keep records beyond
that information.
During late summer, 2013, KDFWR conducted a catfish angler survey to determine attitudes concerning
the quality of fishing for catfish in the Ohio River. Five thousand post cards were sent to Kentucky license
holders to reach out to catfish anglers, specifically. The recipients were asked: I) Have you fished for
catfish in Kentucky in the last three years; and 2) Will you take and return a written survey concerning
fishing for catfish in Kentucky? The following results were derived from 894 respondents:
Percent of Kentucky Anglers Surveyed Species of Fish Kentucky Catfish Anglers
And Fished for Catfish in Last 3 Years Fished For Most
(Targeted catfish anglers using preliminary survey cards)
12.8
20.7
8.2
Yes Blue Catfish
No Channel Catfish
91.8 Flathead Catfish
66.6
Almost 92% of the returned surveys had indicated that they were catfish anglers (left chart). Anglers that
did not fish were not included in the survey. The chart on the right indicates species anglers targeted
most.
Reasons to Fish For Catfish
50.0
45.7
45.0
40.0
35.0 32.1
30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.7
10.0
5.9
5.0 3.1 2.5
.0
Fun to Abundant Large or Eat Close to Other
catch Where I Trophy Where I
Fish sized fish Live
Almost 79% of the surveyed anglers fish for catfish or food or because they were fun to catch. Only 6% of
the surveyed anglers said that trophy catfish was their primary reason for fishing.
Angler Satisfaction For Channel Catfish in Large Rivers (21.6% Fished) Angler Satisfaction for Blue Catfish In Large Rivers (19.8% Fished)
45
42
40
37 40
36
35
35
30
30
25 25
25
20
16 20 18
15
15
10 9
10
10
5
2 4
5
0
Very Satisfied Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very Dissatisfied
0
Satisfied Dissatisfied
Very Satisfied Somewhat Satisfied Neutral Somewhat Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied
Angler Satisfaction for Flathead In Large Rivers (19.1% Fished)
40
35
Angler satisfaction in Kentucky’s large rivers 35
30
ranged from 59% to 63%; while dissatisfaction 25 24 24
20
ranged from 12% to 17%. Approximately 19%
15
13
to 22% of the catfish anglers surveyed fished 10
5 4
large rivers.
0
Very Satisfied Somewhat Satisfied Neutral Somewhat Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied
Angler Satisfaction With Pay Lakes (18.5% Fished) Anglers Supporting Unlimited Harvest of Large or
35 Trophy-sized Catfish for Pay Lakes
32 31 35.0
30 30.2 29.7
30.0
25
25
25.0
20 19.4
20.0
15
15.0 13.4
10 10.0
7 7.2
5
5 5.0
0 .0
Very Satisfied Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very Strongly Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly
Satisfied Disssatisfied Dissatisfied Support Support Oppose Oppose
Approximately 19% of the anglers surveyed fished in pay lakes; but 49% of all respondents opposed
allowing unlimited harvest of trophy-sized catfish that would be sold to the pay lakes.
This slide was used to educate the participants about utility of commercial fishing to sportfish and catfish
anglers. The survey, although subjective, was conducted to determine the importance of trophy-sized
catfish to their overall harvest and income. At the public meeting, anglers protested that commercial
fishermen would not answer the survey honestly since the results would help shape future catfish
regulations. When asked, the commercial fishermen indicated they answered honestly because they
were not sure which way to dishonestly answer questions in the survey since: 1) if they indicated that
trophy catfish represented a small percentage of their catch, that fact would make it easier for KDFWR to
propose stricter harvest regulation since the impact on their income would be minimal; and 2) If they
answered that they collected many trophy-sized catfish, KDFWR would assume there is a problem with
overharvest and propose harvest restriction on trophy catfish.
This map depicts where the commercial Ohio River Commercial Harvest by Fishermen Location
fishermen reside and their relative (Circles represent relative harvest totals)
Ohio River catfish harvest numbers.
Assuming that most of the commercial
effort occurs within some proximity of
their residence, this chart indicates that
most of the catfish harvest likely occurs
in the lower portion of the Ohio River.
However, the two green dots in Ohio
indicate that some substantial harvest
likely occurs in the upper pools as well.
102 Commercial Fishermen Fish the Ohio River For Catfish
20 Commercial fishermen Harvested more than 10,000 pounds
36 Harvest more than 5,000 pounds
Commercial Fisherman Survey Commercial Fisherman Survey
Ratio of Blue Catfish >35 Inches in the Harvest (n=141) Ratio of Flathead Catfish >35 Inches in the Harvest (n=140)
0.60
0.50
0.46 0.53
0.45
0.50
0.40
0.35
Ratio of Fishermen
0.40
Ratio of anglers
0.30
0.25 0.30
0.20
0.15 0.12 0.12 0.20
0.11
0.10 0.08
0.04 0.09 0.09
0.05 0.04 0.10 0.08 0.07
0.01 0.01 0.06
0.00 0.04
0.00 0.03
0.01 0.00
0.00
0-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 81-90 91-100
Ratio of total pounds harvested >35 inches
Ratio of total pounds harvested >35 inches
Commercial Fisherman Survey
Most commercial fishermen (46% - 62%) indicated Ratio of Channel Catfish >28 Inches in the Commercial Harvest (n=55)
0.70
that less than 10% of their total harvest included 0.62
trophy-sized catfish while 61% to 73% indicated that 0.60
the fish accounted for less than 20% of their harvest. 0.50
Ratio of Fishermen
At 20% and less, the commercial fishermen were
0.40
harvesting catfish at a ratio of trophy-sized catfish to
the rest of catfish sizes in the populations in proportion 0.30
to their abundance in the populations; those were not 0.20
targeting the larger catfish. 0.11
0.09 0.09
0.10
0.04
0.02 0.02 0.02
0.00
0-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 81-90 91-100
Ratio of total pounds harvested >28 inches
3000
Angler Days with catfish
2500
Yearly Effort Commercial Fishing Data
160 Yearly CPUE: Ohio River
2000
1500 140
1000 Barkley Lake
120
Pounds caught/AnglerDay
Kentucky Lake
500
Ohio River
0
100
80
60
Blue CPUE
350,000
Yearly Catch (lbs): Ohio River 40 Channel CPUE
Pounds caught
300,000
250,000 20 Flathead CPUE
200,000
150,000 -
Blue Catfish
100,000
Channel Catfish
50,000 Flathead Catfish
-
Commercial fishermen are required to fill out daily harvest reports and send them to KDFWR at monthly
intervals. Failure to complete the reports ultimately results in license suspension. Some anglers at the
public meeting, again, protested due to the likelihood of cheating since the reports are not scrutinized.
But for the same reasons indicated on the survey, commercial fishermen are not likely to significantly
falsify their reports since they have no idea as to how results of the data will be used. These charts depict
an increase in angler effort (the number of days with gear in the water) and a corresponding increase in
harvest from the Ohio River. If this data were falsified, then it could certainly result in new restrictions on
commercial fishing in the Ohio River if scientific data indicated that effort and harvest were impacting the
resource. The chart on the right shows increasing trends in catch per fishing effort for Ohio River catfish.
Commercial fishermen will tell you that this chart indicates that the catfish populations in the Ohio River
have never been stronger; and to an extent, they are correct. However, a dip in the flathead CPUE
(though still in the historical range) may be symptomatic of a decrease in numbers. It will be important
for KDFWR to continue monitoring their harvest and look for continuing decreases or new ones with
other catfish species.
140,000 Average Harvest of Catfish in lbs by month - 1999-2011
Channel Catfish
120,000
Blue Catfish
Flathead Catfish
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
Catch (lbs)
-
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
One concern that KDFWR biologists have with the increasing trend in catfish harvest CPUE is that the
increases are a result of increased pressure on trophy-sized catfish. The harvest reports do not currently
require differentiating between trophy and other catfish. This concern is partly a result of the data in this
chart showing that most of the harvest occurs during pre-spawn, spawn, and post-spawn migration when
larger catfish are more susceptible to harvest in passive gear types.KDFWR is the only state on the Ohio River that has routinely sampled for catfish data over the years. The
Department has been sampling with electrofishing and trot lines for several years. Sampling and
commercial harvest data prior to 2013 had not indicated that the catfish populations were being over
harvested. However, that sampling effort was deemed by our biologists to be potentially inadequate to
sufficiently describe the catfish populations. The following charts were presented to illustrate results
from the increase effort for our 2013 sampling as well as comparing among methods of data collection
and among years within data methods when that data was available.
2013 Electrofishing CPUE
Ohio River Channel Catfish 2013 Electrofishing CPUE
70 Ohio River Flathead Catfish
61 70
60 62
60
50
50 48.5
40 41 40.7
40 36
29.3
30
23 30
20
20
11 14.7
10
4.7 4.5 10 7.8
0.8
0
Greenup Meldahl Markland McAlpine Cannelton Newburg Smithland 0
Greenup Meldahl Markland McAlpine Cannelton Newburg Smithland
Electrofishing Catch-per-effort (CPUE) trends or comparative data give indications of the number of
smaller catfish that are in the populations. These charts should have had an asterisk beside Cannelton
and Newburg pools since those were last sampled in 2009. For channel catfish (chart on left) in
McCalpine, Cannelton and Newburg pools, the CPUE results were low; but the remaining pools were fair
to excellent. Flathead catfish (chart on right) were abundant in all pools except Cannelton and Smithland.
The flathead have historically not been very abundant in Smithland Pool. Since blue catfish tend to be
less vulnerable to electrofishing, no data is available for that species.This chart compared Electrofishing
Electrofishing CPUE in the Ohio River
data within pools when multi-year data was
70
available. Increases in CPUE were evident 62
60
over time in each pool for flathead and Markland Pool
50
channel catfish except for channel catfish
40
Channel Electrofishing typically samples
in McCalpine Pool which were low in all 29.3
30
Flathead smaller fish
three years. 20
10
0 1
0
2009 2013
45 60
40.7
40 48.5
McAlpine Pool 50
35 Newburg Pool
30 40
25
30
20 17.1
15 13.2 20
14.5
8.8
10
4.7 10
5 2.8 4.5
0 0
2009 2010 2013 2004 2009
Trot line data collected by KDFWR has been
very erratic for blue catfish, but a downward
trend appears evident in the Ohio River since
2009. Channel catfish data appears to be
more stable, but there also appears to be 7
a decline in CPUE for those catfish since 2010. Trotline CPUE by Year
However, 2013 CPUE remains higher than 6
data collected in 2004 – 2007 for channel
catfish. 5
CPUE (fish/trotline)
4
Blue catfish
3
Channel catfish
2
1
0
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2010 2011 2012 2013
YearPercent of Trophy Catfish Collected
(Trot Line Samples) Trot Line Samples
20
18 35
16 30
14
% trophy fish
25
Mean length (in)
12
10 20
Blues
8 15 Blue catfish
Channel
6 Channel catfish
10
4
5
2
0 0
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2010 2011 2012 2013
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year
Year
The percent of trophy blue catfish collected by trotlines (left chart) has declined steadily since 2010 after
an all-time high in that year. Too few trophy channel catfish have been collected over the years to make
comparisons of trends. The average size of blue catfish (right chart) has also declined since 2010,
however, channel catfish average lengths have remained stable.
7
BCF A=18.66
6
7
5 FHC = 10.9
ln (age frequency)
No Fishing 6
4
No Regs
5
3
1 over 35 in
Mortality based on commercial ln (age frequency)
2 hoop net catch. 4
No Fishing
Mortality based on
1 over 32 in No Regs
1 over 30 in 3
1 over 35 in
commercial hoop net
1
2 1 over 32 in
catch.
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 1 over 30
1
Age
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Age
7
BCF A=13.83
6 7
FHC = 20.9
5
ln (age frequency)
6
No Fishing Mortality based on KDFWR
4
No Regs trotline catch 5
ln (age frequency)
3
1 over 35 in 4
No Fishing Mortality based on
2 1 over 32 in No Regulations KDFWR electrofishing
3
1 1 over 30 in 1 over 35 in catch
2 1 over 32 in
0
1 over 30 in
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
1
Age
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Age
These charts were added to describe annual mortality of blue catfish (left chart) and flathead catfish
(right chart). Blue catfish annual mortalities estimated by using hoop nets and trot lines resulted in
mortality rates of approximately 19% and 14%, respectively. For flathead catfish, they were 11% and
21%, respectively. Annual mortality rates of approximately 25% are considered good for catfish
populations. Eastern Illinois University recently reported annual mortality for catfish in the Wabash River
to be over 50%; those catfish populations will not likely be able to withstand that rate of mortality for
many more years.Monsters of the Ohio Catfish
Tournament was one of many
attended by KDFWR as part of this study.
Large fishing tournaments can be valuable
resources for data since trends can be used
as indicators of fish numbers and the size
structure of a given fish population.
Because of variability in river and weather
conditions, it takes many tournaments to
get data that is reliable as an index.
Ohio River Tournament Trophy Fish
100
Catfish Tournament Winning Weights
N=79
Average Tournament Winning Weight
90
% of fish that are trophy size
Blue catfish
80 Channel catfish 160
70 Flathead catfish
140
60 120
50 100
Meldahl
40 80 Markland
30 60 McAlpine
20 40 Cannelton
10 Newburgh
20
0
0
Markland McAlpine Newburgh Uniontown Lower River
2010 2011 2012 2013
Pool
Year
The percent of catfish caught and weighed at the 2013 Ohio River catfish tournaments varied among
pools (left chart), but it was clear that pools in the lower Ohio River yielded higher average percentages
of trophy fish than those in the upper pools. Trends of winning weights in tournaments (n=79) have
declined in the upper pools since 2010, however the trends are less evident in the Newburg and
Cannelton pools because of 2013 data. The 2013 Monsters of the Ohio Tournament held in the Newburg
Pool yielded an all-time record winning weight of 145.6 pounds, and the top four contestants caught over
100 pounds. The weights and big catfish (57.2 pounds) were records for the tournament. Weather and
river conditions were favorable for the 2013 tournament. When they are not favorable, the opposite
results are often seen. Weather and river conditions and related variability underscores why it is
important to have data from many tournaments prior to making conclusions on heath of a fishery when
using this data. Even in excellent fisheries, poor conditions will result in poor catchability; including in
tournaments with excellent anglers.River-wide Percent Length Frequency by Gear. River-wide Percent Length Frequency by Gear
20
Blue Catfish 45
18 Channel Catfish
40
16
35
14
30
12
% of sample
% of sample
25
10 Trotline Trotline
20
Hoop Net Electrofishing
8
Tournament 15 Tournament
6
10
4
5
2
0
0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Inch class
Inch class
The chart for blue catfish (left chart) compares trotline data collected by KDFWR, hoop net data collected
when KDFWR biologists rode with commercial fishermen, and tournaments data collected when KDFWR
staff took lengths and weights of catfish brought into the weigh-ins of several tournaments. The most
interesting aspect of this data for blue catfish was the way each method of data collection mirrored the
other. This not only gives us some confidence concerning the relative number of catfish in the river at a
given length, but it also tells us that any of the three types of data may likely be useful for determining
relative sizes of the fish. KDFWR will continue to collect all three data types for the next several years in
an effort to verify that this phenomenon is not unusual. The channel catfish chart (right chart) tells a
different story. We already knew that electrofishing was not a good method to use when looking at
length-frequency data, but that it is good for comparing trends of smaller fish. The charts are also clear
that trotline and tournament data is not comparable for channel catfish. Obviously, fewer small channel
catfish are going to be brought to the tournament weigh-ins when enough larger blue or flathead catfish
are caught. Therefore, this chart illustrates that the methods are not comparable, and that the selective
nature of the tournament data most likely makes it less useful for channel catfish than the trotline data
for trend analyses. As far as the actual length frequencies go, the left chart indicates that most of the
blue catfish caught were between 23 and 33 inches. Although a decrease in relative numbers of the fish
over 33 inches is expected, we will continue to watch these frequencies in the future to see if the peaks
and major contributions of the fish sizes continues to shift; hopefully to the right which would indicate
that whatever regulations are passed are sufficient to protect a portion of the larger fish. The decrease in
relative numbers of large fish (shown in the blue catfish chart) is not unusually steep. Additionally, the
tournament data reinforce that our trotline data in not sufficiently collecting the larger channel catfish,
and more years of all three data types will help us keep an eye on those fish.River-wide Percent Length Frequency by Gear.
15
Flathead Catfish
This chart looks similar to the previous
channel catfish chart, except that hoop
net and tournament data are more 10
% of sample
comparable to the blue catfish chart. The
relative number of young fish collected by Electrofishing
electrofishing looks good, and the peaks Hoop Net
and decreasing slope of fish from 26 inches 5 Tournament
to 40 inches is similar to the blue catfish.
As with the blue catfish, we will continue
to monitor these length-frequency trends.
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Inch class
Mean Length At Age Ohio River Channel Catfish
30 Mean Length At Age Ohio River Flathead Catfish
45
25 40
35
20
30
15 25
20
10 15
10
5
5
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31
Mean Length At Age Ohio River Blue Catfish
These three charts depict growth at age for the three 50
catfish species. Channel catfish reach 28 inches (8.74 lbs) 45
40
on an average of 14 years; blue and flathead catfish reach 35
35 inches at 14 (20.64 lbs) and 23 (20.92 lbs) years, 30
respectively. It should be noted that these growth rates 25
20
are averages, and many fish reach their trophy sizes much 15
quicker that others due to factors such as food availability, 10
gender, river conditions throughout their lives, and 5
0
genetics; others may never reach trophy sizes for the 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
same reasons even though they inhabit the same water.Based on the information gathered from sampling and public meetings provided above, the following
regulation proposals were submitted to the KDFWR Commission in December, 2013:
Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Commission Meeting
December 6, 2013
FISHERIES DIVISION
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
Action Item: Trophy Catfish Regulations in the Ohio River
Action Item: Ohio River Commercial Catfish Harvest Regulations
Action Item: Commercial Catfish Harvest Reports
Action Item: Reciprocal Non-Resident Commercial Fishing Regulations
Regulation Number: 301 KAR 1:201
Proposed Recommendation: Unlimited number of catfish harvested below trophy size and a daily harvest of 1
trophy catfish from each species for sportfish anglers fishing the Ohio River mainstem. (Trophy fish are defined
as: over 35 inches for blue and flathead catfish; and over 28 inches for channel catfish).
Regulation Number: 301 KAR 1:155
Proposed Recommendation: In the Ohio River and its tributaries open to commercial fishing:
1) A daily commercial harvest of an unlimited number of catfish below trophy size and a harvest of only 1
trophy catfish from each species.
a) Trophy catfish: blue and flathead catfish > 35 inches; channel catfish > 28 inches.
2) Special Quality Catfish Harvest Permit below the Cannelton Lock and Dam will allow, in addition to
unlimited harvest of smaller catfish, a daily commercial harvest of 4 quality catfish (in aggregate):
a) Quality catfish: blue and flathead catfish > 40 inches; channel catfish > 30 inches;
b) Permit is free and issued to a maximum of 50 commercial fishermen that:
1. Reported harvesting at least 10,000 pounds of catfish in at least two of the last three fishing years (n = 44);
or
2. Are randomly selected after registering in a lottery:
a. In 2014, the lottery will be held during the work week following passage of this regulation;
b. After 2014, if fewer than 50 permits have been issued by the first day of the commercial fishing season,
remaining permits will distributed by lottery on the first work day of the week following opening day;
c. If fewer than 50 permits have been issued following the lottery in any year, permits remaining will be
distributed on a first-come-first-serve basis;
Regulation Number: 301 KAR 1:155
Proposed Recommendation: Commercial fishermen daily harvest reports will be changed to include the
following information:
1) Total number of catfish harvested by species;
2) Total number of trophy catfish harvested by species;
3) Ohio River pool where catfish are harvested.
Regulation Number: 301 KAR 1:155
Proposed Recommendation: A resident of a state that does not offer non-resident commercial fishing licenses
will not be allowed to purchase a Kentucky non-resident commercial fishing license. A grandfather clause will
be in effect whereby non-resident commercial fishermen residing in states affected by this regulation would
qualify to continue purchasing non-resident commercial fishing licenses until the non-resident does not renew
their license in a year consecutive to the previous license purchased.
Commercial fishing daily harvest reports will include the following additions:
- Number of catfish harvested by species;
- Number of blue and flathead catfish over 35 inches;
- Number of channel catfish over 28 inches;
- When fishing river systems, which pool was fished where the harvest occurred?All proposed regulations were passed by the KDFWR Commission and were subsequently approved by the
Legislative Research Commission. The sportfishing regulations are currently in effect. An injunction was filed
against the commercial fishing regulations and has delayed their implementation until December 01, 2014.
The commercial fishing regulations will be in effect after this date.
Points of clarification
1. The sportfishing creel and size limits are the same across the entire Ohio River mainstem, while the
commercial fishing regulations do allow for 50 commercial fishermen (with permits) to utilize an expanded
size limit from Cannelton Lock and Dam down to the confluence with the Mississippi River.
2. Commercial fishing regulations include the Ohio River mainstem and its tributaries.
3. Kentucky and Barkley lakes are not included in these regulations (sport and commercial fishing).
The creel and size limits as listed in regulation are as follows:
Sportfishing
(57) Ohio River.
(a) Walleye, sauger, and any hybrid thereof, no size limit; daily creel limit, ten (10), singly or in combination.
(b) White bass, striped bass, and any hybrid thereof, daily creel limit, thirty (30), no more than four (4) in the
daily creel limit shall be fifteen (15) inches or greater.
(c) The blue catfish daily creel limit shall be unlimited, except that no more than one (1) fish in the daily creel
limit shall be thirty-five (35) inches or longer.
(d) The channel catfish daily creel limit shall be unlimited, except that no more than one (1) fish in the daily
creel limit shall be twenty-eight (28) inches or longer.
(e) The flathead catfish daily creel limit shall be unlimited, except that no more than one (1) fish in the daily
creel limit shall be thirty-five (35) inches or longer;
Commercial Fishing
Section 5. Special Catfish Harvest Restrictions. (1) In the Ohio River and its tributaries open to commercial
fishing, there shall be:
(a) An unlimited harvest of:
1. Blue and flathead catfish that are less than thirty-five (35) inches in length; and
2. Channel catfish that are less than twenty-eight (28) inches in length; and
(b) A daily limit of one (1):
1. Blue and flathead catfish greater than thirty-five (35) inches in length; and
2. Channel catfish greater than twenty-eight (28) inches in length.
(2) A person with a valid commercial license shall obtain from the department a free Ohio River Trophy Catfish
Harvest Permit in order to harvest multiple trophy catfish downstream of Cannelton Lock and Dam.
(a) The department shall issue a maximum of fifty (50) permits annually.
(b) Beginning in 2015, the department shall issue a permit to a commercial fisherman who:
1. Has reported a minimum harvest of 10,000 pounds of catfish from the Ohio River and its tributaries open to
commercial fishing in at least two (2) of the last three (3) years; and
2. Sends a written request to the department postmarked on or before March 10.
(c) In 2014, the department shall issue a permit to a commercial fisherman who:
1. Has reported a minimum harvest of 10,000 pounds of catfish from the Ohio River or its tributaries open to
commercial fishing in at least two (2) of the last three (3) years; and
2. Sends a written request to the department postmarked on or before ten (10) days following the 2014
amendment effective date of this administrative regulation.
(d) There shall be an unlimited daily harvest of catfish less than trophy size for each permit holder.
(e) There shall be a daily harvest limit of four (4) trophy catfish in aggregate for each permit holder.
(f) Beginning in 2015, if fifty (50) permits are not issued by March 15, then the department shall conduct a
random electronic lottery drawing for the remaining slots.
(g) A commercial fisherman shall apply for the lottery established in paragraph (f) of this subsection by sending
a written request to the department to be entered in the lottery postmarked on or before March 10.(h) In 2014, if fifty (50) permits are not issued within fifteen (15) days following the 2014 amendment effective date of this administrative regulation, then the department shall conduct a random electronic lottery drawing for the remaining slots. (i) A commercial fisherman shall apply for the lottery established in paragraph (h) of this subsection by sending a written request to the department to be entered in the lottery postmarked on or before ten (10) days following the 2014 amendment effective date of this administrative regulation. (j) If the number of applicants for any lottery is less than the number of available permits, then the remaining permits shall be distributed on a first-come first-serve basis.
You can also read
