I’m sure this is a dumb question, but…
What size makes a bluegill a “keeper”?
I ask because I keep tossing them all back but read something about keeping them to balance the population. I’ve noticed many times a largemouth taking interest in a fly only to have a bluegill zip in and hit the fly. Do they need ot be harvested?
In my area there is a small lake where they have a kids fishing contest each year. I’m not sure of the contest rules, but the ultimate goal is to see how many 55 gallon drums of stunted bluegills could be taken from the lake.
Where as in the past, catching any fish larger than three or four inches was rare, now larger pan fish and nice bass are caught regularly
soda,
I consider a “hand sized” bluegill to be a keeper.
A couple of the small lakes that I fish have large populations of hand sized and bigger bluegills and redears. I will usually keep 8-10 of them per trip since that is enough filets to make us a good meal.
Steve
“If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went”-Will Rogers
To eat. I prefer fish not over 8". I make a conscious effort to return large males.
Here’s some info from the MN DNR.
Bluegills are a favorite among anglers
Fish and wildlife management, to the untrained eye, can be a strange breed of cat when it comes to the female of the species.
Hen pheasants are fully protected when it comes to pheasant hunting. In the spring, we protect hen turkeys, but then make them fair game in the fall. Hunters can generally take female deer throughout the hunting seasons, but only at prescribed numbers.
As for fish, certain waters are closed to early season fishing in order to protect spawning females, most notably walleyes. But not so for bluegills.
Quizzically, the Department of Natural Resources delivers this message to the angling public: ?During the bluegill spawning season, keep some of the females but throw the males back!?
Brady Becker, assistant DNR area fisheries manager at Little Falls, said that while it can seem a contradictory message when considered in the context of typical game and fish management, there is actually good, solid science behind protecting male bluegills.
?Male bluegills may play a critical role during the spawn,? Becker explained. ?They fan out the nests for the females and they also guard the eggs and fry. But most importantly, by keeping small, genetically inferior male bluegills away from the nest, they may actually help prevent stunting in the population.?
Bluegills, Minnesota?s largest and most popular sunfish, are notorious for becoming stunted in certain lakes. ?While there are a number of factors that can lead to stunting, it basically comes down to over-population,? Becker said.
?Bluegills are more prone to over-produce than to under-produce,? Becker explained. ?When you have a lake with lots of bluegill, the bluegill can eat all the available forage. Then they grow very slowly. A bluegill that typically matures at six to seven inches will mature at five inches in lakes where there are too many bluegills.?
One means for keeping the population under better control, while at the same time protecting a more genetically superior strain of ?gills, is to leave those larger males on their nests, letting them ?do their thing? of protecting their nests during the spawn, explained Cindy Tomcko, a DNR fisheries research biologist in the Grand Rapids fisheries office.
?Smaller, inferior males (called cuckolders) swarm around the nests of large males and try to spawn while the large males do their best to keep the cuckolders away from their nests,? Tomcko said. ?If large males are fished off of their nests, the result is the production of too many, slow growing offspring - stunted bluegills.
Tomcko said there are usually more than enough females and eggs to produce plenty of young fish. ?But it?s the large males that may be the key to quality in bluegill populations,? Tomcko noted. Well meaning anglers think the are doing the right thing by keeping the males and putting the females back, when in fact they should be doing just the opposite.?
Tomcko also pointed out that because of their aggressiveness during the spawn, the males are considerably more vulnerable to hook and line at that time.
?Anglers usually aren?t going to keep four-and five-inch bluegills but they will keep those six inches and larger,? Tomcko said. ?Yet it?s the larger, male bluegills that prevent cuckolders from spawning and give you the genetic pool you want to produce large bluegill. Leave more of them in the lake and you stand a much better chance of eventually having a good, healthy crop of large bluegills.?
Other factors, such as the effects of predation (or lack thereof) and the presence of submerged aquatic vegetation also affect the size of bluegills.
Tomcko said, ?If there aren?t enough predators, particularly northern pike and bass, in a lake, bluegills are much more prone to become stunted. And we?re still studying just how much submerged aquatic vegetation along shorelines is best. We know that clearing shorelines of vegetation is bad news, but it appears too much vegetation can also be detrimental.?
The DNR has been working on improving the size of bluegills in Minnesota lakes for nearly a decade. A study by Peter Jacobson, a DNR fisheries researcher in Detroit Lakes, involved lowering the bag limit to 10 bluegill on eight similar lakes. Some lakes with the lower daily limit began to grow bigger bluegills.
The DNR continues to experiment with different daily bluegill limits in an effort to determine which lakes are most likely to respond positively to lower limits. A few lakes, such as Annie Battle Lake in Otter Tail County, Mink, Somers and Crawford lakes in Wright County, and Bass and Grave lakes in Itasca County, currently have a five-fish limit. Most lakes have a 20-fish limit.
?We?re looking for a good balance,? Tomcko said. ?Not all lakes have the food, habitat, and abundant predators to produce bluegills larger than 8 inches. But if bluegills in a lake grew large in the past, we may restore those bluegill populations by lowering the bag limit of bluegill. In the end, we hope to restore quality bluegill populations to those lakes. Releasing those larger males during the spawn and keeping the females all year round is may be one way to start growing bigger ?gills in other lakes.?
For each acre of pond, where the fish population is not being fed the recommended harvest each year is 15 pounds of bass, 100-200 pounds of bluegill, and 50 pounds of channel catfish.
otter’s rule is that if I can fillet 'em, I can fry 'em. My beloved late Grandmother’s rule was a little more…liberal I guess. I can still here her saying “If he’s big enough to bite the hook, he’s big enough to eat”. Nobody freak out…yes she did keep lots of fish that, when held up to the sun, were transparent. But we would let most of them go from the livewell when we got back to the landing and she never knew the difference. Still makes me laugh to think of that.
sodajones,
It certainly is not a dumb question…in fact is a question that has no general answer. The right answer depends on the body of water, what other fish are present, and what the best use of that water is, i.e. fishing objectives.
I build, manage, and stock my own ponds. In that setting, and with lots of predators including largemouth bass and hybrid striped bass, I allow no BG to be taken when the ponds are in balance. They are the fundamental forage base which the predators utilize. If I see too many small BG, I generally will first try to improve the predators numbers rather than remove BG. If I see all sizes of BG including very large ones, my pond is in balance.
If I’m hungry for BG, okay I make an exception, but not often.
The myth that BG need to be harvested is generally misdirected…if there are too many small BG, there are not enough predators in that particular body of water. It’s the predators that need adjusting, not the BG.
I don’t fillet them, so my rule of thumb is kinda kooky, but: If the shape of the fish has begun to expand beyond an oval into a more of a rectangle, if you see what I mean, then I keep 'em.
I fry 'em on the bone, find I waste a lot less.
[url=http://www.native-waters.com:bcee6]http://www.native-waters.com[/url:bcee6]
There is some research out that says there are two strains of gills. One reaches about 7" and the other can get larger.
If you want larger gills then put the larger one back in, male or female. Keep those that are 7"long for eating. Do this for a while and the size will increase.
This is my experience on several ponds.
Rick
Rick;
‘Several’ ponds? Could you be a little more definitive on the word ‘several’? 
Don
[This message has been edited by drolfson (edited 21 September 2005).]
Yes Rick, MUCH more specific.
You see, Don and I have yet to fish together, and well, a little trip over to Iowa might just be the ticket!
Ed
20 ponds that I go to regularly over a two year period.
Some of them canot take any more fising than that.
Rick
There is some research out that says there are two strains of gills.
Rick,
Do you happen to have a source to cite on who did the research and if it is valid (endorsed by the fish and game commissions or some other government agency as a fish fact rather than a theory)? Not that government agencies are always correct either but they usually validate research by publicizing it and putting it into practice 
. The source would really be helpful to me because there are a lot of “studies” out there, some valid and some not. I haven’t seen anything on the FWC site or from another government agency yet about this. That doesn’t mean its not there because I could have missed it. That’s why I would like to know the source.
I have always thought along the same lines as what Meadowlark thinks.
Thanks.
Robert B. McCorquodale
Sebring, FL
“Flip a fly”
[This message has been edited by dixieangler (edited 21 September 2005).]
It was some prelominatry research eported in an “IN-Fishermean” article about 4 years ago.
I will see if I can if find it again.
Rick
Sorry Rick, was just “yankin yer chain.”
Ed
I was just kidding with you too Rick. I been reading your adventures and doing my best to apply them here in NE. I gotta try the buzzers and bombers more and se if I can’t get some success there.
I was using one Tuesday, and missed every hit I got. 
It will take a few trips mor me to get it down, but I will.
Don
PS. Don’t worry, PastorEd and I won’t come invade your fishing without your invite!
Interesting thread INDEED.
Couple questions for Rick Z.
Do any of your ponds go kaput?
How often do you fish a “new” pond (or do you) to learn the “personality” of it?
Some of our ponds deteriorate sometimes due to pollution (mostly cattle) and sometimes due to erosion. Sometimes we lose a pond because of land sales and what not, then it gives us time to explore new ones. It is quite interesting to see what similarities there are between some of’em and deciding why…maybe. Seems like a full season is handy for intimate familiarization of sorts…yes?
…lee s.
drolfson, I have noticed that most small fish do short strikes. I still have not catch a BG over 8 1/2 inches.
Since most of the pond are roughly one of three shapes and contours, it is fairly easy to fish a new pond. It is usually like one of the others I have been on.
A few ponds go bad , but that is because the land owner let folks take to many bass out.
I try to talk to them to make sure we can keep the pond good.
Rick
PS Don You and Pastor ED have an invivitaion. It would just have to be a mutaully agreeable time.
[This message has been edited by Rick Z (edited 24 September 2005).]
Great information. I appreciate the responses. Now I have to ask another question. How does one determine the sex of a BG? Is it just the breast color?
Soda,
These guys will correct me if I’m wrong, but the male is more brightly colored.
Mike