Jump to content

Keeping fish in trophy water


jdavis

Recommended Posts

Gentlemen~

This thread has been a very spirited, interesting and humorous debate.

Thanks to all for your continuing input, opinions, passions and (for the most part) cool heads.

At this hour, the total views of this topic is almost 1500. Amazing!

I'd like to shift gears and ask your opinions about regulations in the upper river.

What do you think the result would be if the MDC made the stretch of river from the Dam to the Lookout Hole (prox. 1 mile) a No Kill Zone?

I'm not suggesting it or promoting it, but I am asking because I would like to see this awesome fishery get even better, IF it is possible without making too many fishermen and business owners mad in the process.

What would be the result in 3, 5 or 10 years?

Would the average size be larger in the upper river?

What if a No-Kill Zone was established all the way to Fall Creek, or Branson?

Most of the beautiful big Browns and Rainbows that congregate in the upper river in the fall and winter spend the majority of their lives somewhere in the other 20 miles of river/lake from the Lookout Hole to Powersite Dam.

Is it realistic to think or hope there could ever be 10 times or a 100 times the trophy fish in our beloved river/lake?

If you've fished the river for 30 years or longer, you know it IS possible because there were many times more trophy Rainbows (prior to the introduction of Browns) in the river in the 60's to mid-70's. It was truly World Class.

What we enjoy in this fishery, today, is very special but it is not World Class, yet.

It would be awesome if management of the river/lake gradually brought it back to that lofty status.

Your thoughts?

Bill Butts

Springfield MO

"So many fish, so little time"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 109
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Gentlemen~

This thread has been a very spirited, interesting and humorous debate.

Thanks to all for your continuing input, opinions, passions and (for the most part) cool heads.

At this hour, the total views of this topic is almost 1500. Amazing!

I'd like to shift gears and ask your opinions about regulations in the upper river.

What do you think the result would be if the MDC made the stretch of river from the Dam to the Lookout Hole (prox. 1 mile) a No Kill Zone?

I'm not suggesting it or promoting it, but I am asking because I would like to see this awesome fishery get even better, IF it is possible without making too many fishermen and business owners mad in the process.

What would be the result in 3, 5 or 10 years?

Would the average size be larger in the upper river?

What if a No-Kill Zone was established all the way to Fall Creek, or Branson?

Most of the beautiful big Browns and Rainbows that congregate in the upper river in the fall and winter spend the majority of their lives somewhere in the other 20 miles of river/lake from the Lookout Hole to Powersite Dam.

Is it realistic to think or hope there could ever be 10 times or a 100 times the trophy fish in our beloved river/lake?

If you've fished the river for 30 years or longer, you know it IS possible because there were many times more trophy Rainbows (prior to the introduction of Browns) in the river in the 60's to mid-70's. It was truly World Class.

What we enjoy in this fishery, today, is very special but it is not World Class, yet.

It would be awesome if management of the river/lake gradually brought it back to that lofty status.

Your thoughts?

What is a no kill zone??? You must remember that many of us that fish taney come just 4 or 5 times a year and don't want additional regulations added. We just want to try to be sportsmen using our hand tied flies and try to catch and release some fish. Maybe even harvest a few legally for lunch. I think what MDC has done so far needs to be kept in place. It seems to be working well.

What good are any regulations anyway if they are not enforced any better than the one we have now? Every time I fish Taney I witness violations in the trophy water. I see people in boats fishing bait and even though it is legal they chum the water from boatsand shuffle in the gravel. In the wading water snagging takes place in the outlets without any obvious attempt to stop it. Why is fishing above the lake level in the outlets allowed? I see 16 inch and larger fish with people floating flies past them for 6 to 10 feet and then jerking the line hard and repeating the process over again.

Thom Harvengt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Gentlemen~

This thread has been a very spirited, interesting and humorous debate.

Thanks to all for your continuing input, opinions, passions and (for the most part) cool heads.

At this hour, the total views of this topic is almost 1500. Amazing!

I'd like to shift gears and ask your opinions about regulations in the upper river.

What do you think the result would be if the MDC made the stretch of river from the Dam to the Lookout Hole (prox. 1 mile) a No Kill Zone?

I'm not suggesting it or promoting it, but I am asking because I would like to see this awesome fishery get even better, IF it is possible without making too many fishermen and business owners mad in the process.

What would be the result in 3, 5 or 10 years?

Would the average size be larger in the upper river?

What if a No-Kill Zone was established all the way to Fall Creek, or Branson?

Most of the beautiful big Browns and Rainbows that congregate in the upper river in the fall and winter spend the majority of their lives somewhere in the other 20 miles of river/lake from the Lookout Hole to Powersite Dam.

Is it realistic to think or hope there could ever be 10 times or a 100 times the trophy fish in our beloved river/lake?

If you've fished the river for 30 years or longer, you know it IS possible because there were many times more trophy Rainbows (prior to the introduction of Browns) in the river in the 60's to mid-70's. It was truly World Class.

What we enjoy in this fishery, today, is very special but it is not World Class, yet.

It would be awesome if management of the river/lake gradually brought it back to that lofty status.

Your thoughts?

Bill I don't think it would be healthy for the fish. I believe fish continue to move upstream to an extent when they run water. It seems there wouldn't be enough food for the fish if some weren't removed. If you want more trophies would it be better to release everything over 12" and just keep the smaller fish? I don't know I guess it depends on the food base. I know that fish move down stream too because the browns move up and them back down after the spawn. vince
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill:

I have a lot of respect for what you say but unfortunatly in this case I have to agree with Thom and Vince. The water will only support so many trout. Also not all fish have trophy potential so the smaller fish should be removed on a regular basis so the fish with trophy potential can grow. Further the problem I see with a no kill zone is that a certain number of fish are going to die of shock from being caught and handled. The longer it takes to land the fish the higher the mortality rate therefore, the bigger the fish the higher the death rate. The only way I really see to have a no kill zone is to not fish or as Phil, I think it was, said to cut the hook off the flies and settle for strikes only.

That being said I think if people want really big fish then then the slot should be eliminated and fish over 15 or possibly even 16 inches should be returned to the water unharmed period. I also think the daily limit for smaller fish should be raised back up to 5 or even 6. This way the fish that have trophy potential could truly become trophies.

I don't think however that a lot of people would be happy with that so the only other way I see that it would work would be to change the slot. If the slot were changed to where any fish between 15 inches and 24 inches had to be immediatly returned to the water unharmed. It would give the fish capable of attaining trophy status the opportunity to do so. Again I believe smaller fish have to be removed regularly so the limit for smaller fish should also be increased in order to leave ample food and habitat for the larger fish.

I am in full support of a trophy area and I think extending the trophy area to Fall Creek would be great if one of the above plans were adopted.

Bud

I would rather be fishin'.

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." Benjamin Franklin, 1759

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thom, Vince and Gonefishin (Bud)~

Your comments and thoughts are appreciated.

I'll address the main ones:

Thom:

To answer your question, a No Kill Zone would not allow the take of any size trout for any reason in a specified area.

I believe you are totally correct about the enforcement of the current regulations. I've seen every violation you detailed and it is frustrating. There are only 2 courses of action we can take: (1) to very nicely try to educate folks when they are breaking the law, as Phil described, and it is possible because I've had people thank me for nicely pointing out what they apparently didn't know, and/or (2) report the violations to MDC Agents or at the hatchery (they will get ahold of the agent).

Anglers fishing above the current lake/river level are at risk, too, of being cited for a violation. Again, you have to determine whether to seek #1 or 2 above, or do nothing. Our world unfortunately is full of "do-nothings" isn't it?

Vince~

If regulations drastically reduced the "take" from the river/lake, the obvious factor becomes less demand for the MDC Hatchery to produce and stock fish. Fisheries Biologists are skilled at determining the ideal trout population the river is capable of feeding and growing by monitoring growth rates and some other factors.

Your idea of a regulation allowing the take of only trout under 12" is potentially a very valid one. Then, the mortality rate of larger trout becomes mostly 2 factors: old age/disease, and angler-induced injury (mis-handling).

I believe this approach could be a good one for part of the upper river/lake, though it would never fly for the entire 21 miles.

Bud~

How do you define a trout of "trophy potential"? Are you suggesting that trout have a genetic pre-disposition to be smaller or larger as adult fish? Maybe, but I seriously doubt it.

In 30+ years of discussing fisheries issues with our outstanding MDC fisheries staff, I've never once heard them talk about fish from certain parents being more likely to grow larger than those from smaller parents.

I am sure fisheries folks would tell you that if a trout in Taneycomo is given the time (avoiding being caught and kept, disease and angler abuse if released) to feed and grow in the river/lake it will grow to trophy proportions. Taney is so rich in forage for trout (freshwater shrimp, sowbugs, midges, and much more) it can grow trout very quickly given the time.

I haven't heard the average Taney trout growth rate for a while, but at one time it was .75 to 1 inch per month up until it attained considerable size, then of course it continued to add girth and weight as it kept growing.

Regarding mortality from playing fish, I disagree that just because a fish is larger the risk of mortality from playing and releasing it is greater. There are many other important factors.

I think most Taney anglers that understand the proper methods for handling and releasing trout would agree that the single largest factor in trout mortality is "mis-handling". This encompasses multiple factors including improperly removing the hook, improperly holding the fish, sometimes playing a fish too long and not giving it proper revival time to recover, and others.

I am concerned about the many fish that are caught and released in the fall when the DO (dissolved oxygen) rate gets very low. Low DO is kind of like if we tried to survive breathing on just one lung or part of one. Also, when DO is below 5-6 ppm (parts per million) trout in Taney don't digest at the normal rate and therefore feed less frequently and don't grow at the usual rate either.

More and more anglers (including self at times) are using 7X tippets to induce more hook-ups and catch more fish. 7X works, period. The issue becomes that it usually takes longer with lighter tippet to land them. Therefore, the risk of mortality does increase, because the low DO rate already has the fish stressed, oxygen deprived. However, if an angler takes the proper steps to revive the fish it is probably OK most of the time. Just be patient and don't rush the process.

Your idea for changing the slot regulation to 12 to 24" might be a very good one, too.

I haven't kept up with the most recent philosophies of management of this great fishery by our MDC, but hopefully Phil Lilley will weigh-in on this since he has followed it more closely.

Bill Butts

Springfield MO

"So many fish, so little time"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bud~

How do you define a trout of "trophy potential"? Are you suggesting that trout have a genetic pre-disposition to be smaller or larger as adult fish? Maybe, but I seriously doubt it.

In 30+ years of discussing fisheries issues with our outstanding MDC fisheries staff, I've never once heard them talk about fish from certain parents being more likely to grow larger than those from smaller parents.

I am sure fisheries folks would tell you that if a trout in Taneycomo is given the time (avoiding being caught and kept, disease and angler abuse if released) to feed and grow in the river/lake it will grow to trophy proportions. Taney is so rich in forage for trout (freshwater shrimp, sowbugs, midges, and much more) it can grow trout very quickly given the time.

Regarding mortality from playing fish, I disagree that just because a fish is larger the risk of mortality from playing and releasing it is greater. There are many other important factors.

Bill:

First I want to agree with everyone on here in that I don't like to see people taking fish they shouldn't or to see them fishing illegally. I certainly would not mind mentioning to someone if they were breaking the law to see what the response is and then make a decision of how to pursue it from there. As you say some people simply don't know and I think it is better to let them know they are breaking the law than to see them get a ticket for inadverently breaking it. If they don't seem to care or if I see them repeatedly do the same thing then I would certainly not be against calling an enforcement agent.

In regards to fish growth what you say is true up to a point. It is true that any fish can grow if given enough food and time but not all fish are going to grow at the same rate nor have the potential to become true trophys. There are rough averages that say a fish will grow at X rate per time however, some fish will simply grow faster and larger than others and some slower than others. No different than people or animals how else does one explain Ethel at Bass Pro or the various sizes of trout in the hatcheries that were hatched on the same date. Why are some bigger than others. Ethel wasn't the biggest Bass because she was fed more or because she was the oldest bass alive; she was the biggest because of a genetic pre-disposition to be so.

About food availability I have heard a lot about how one small fish will eat more than a big fish. This simply isn't true. It takes X number of calories per lb for a fish to maintain its weight and X+ for them to get bigger, up to a point. Therefore it takes more calories for a 20 lb fish to maintain its weight than it does a 2 lb fish.

Some fish will simply convert what they eat to body lbs faster than others hence it seems to me to have a decent population of large fish one would want to remove the smaller fish that aren't growing as fast so as to give the fish that are growing faster (the slot?) enough food and time to continue to grow and become trophys.

If I remember correctly isn't mortality caused by playing the fish for a long time which causes lactic acid build up in the system thus causing them to die later with the general thought being that bigger fish are more prone to mortality because of longer play time produces higher levels of lactic acid in their system? At least as I recall that is the decision a few years ago as to what was killing bass 1 to 2 days after a tourney. That was why they recommended heavier lines to bring fish in faster so the mortality would be less.

I couldn't agree more with with your assesment of the DO rate. In low oxygen levels people should use larger tippets and settle for less strikes.

One final thought. The trout hatchery is a big industry in Branson because of take fishermen. If no one were to take fish there would soon be no need to stock trout in Taney. What would happen to the hatchery industry?

I think it takes a balance of all the above to create a world class hatchery.

Anyway there are, I am sure, a lot of people who know a lot more about this than I do and I simply try my best to follow the rules so all the above is just my two cents worth.

Bud

I would rather be fishin'.

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." Benjamin Franklin, 1759

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they should make Taneycomo a 'Catch and Release Only' water stretch from the dam to the ShepHills boat ramp. The true wadeable water on Taneycomo is in this area. Most people already practice c&r in this area anyway. I just wish MO would pull the trigger.

best fishes - Brian

Just once I wish a trout would wink at me!

ozarkflyfisher@gmail.com

I'm the guy wearing the same Simms longbilled hat for 10 years now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill,

I have brought up the possiblility of at the very least making the upper mile or 2 C&R only in the fall - or at least no fish could be kept over 15". The Browns are way too vulnerable this time of year in my opinion. I would rather see it that way all year, seems like it makes sense to me to try to have bigger fish.

Gonefishin - I agree that the take fishermen bring in the bucks - but are you trying to tell me that if taney doubled or tripled it's 10 pound plus fish, that you don't think Branson would benefit from all the anglers that would come from around the country for a shot at that? I fish a lot in the west, at many C&R areas where there seem to be no shortage of anglers from around the world coming in to spend their money in the local economies. I really think there is a reason more people fish on the Dream Stream section of the Platte than do at the local bluegill pond- - - - that reason is BIG fish! So why can't taney be both? Make an area suitable for C&R with the goal of producing trophies, and keep an area where people can catch some lunch. But alas -until MDC enforces a few rules on the books, it will be sort of hard to think C&R is the answer. At the very least if the area was C&R none of you would have to worry about someone looking at you snobishly because you kept a fish - cause we'd all be looking then!! :)

JS

"We are living in the midst of a Creation that is mostly mysterious - that even when visible, is never fully imaginable".

-Wendell Berry-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JS:

No, I am not trying to tell you that at all. Obviously if big fish are being kept on every cast then people are going to come to fish. I am saying I have no problem with making the upper mile or 2 C&R only as long as it is kept within reason and as long as it is discussed and studied out beforehand. It should be determined what is best to create a good fishery not necessarly what is best for one group of fishermen or another. If that means limiting fishing pressure in the fall when fish are vunerable then fall fishing should be limited. If it means making heavier tippets the law then they should be the law. If it means keeping some of the smaller fish out then some smaller fish should be kept. That is all I am trying to say.

I agree with you about the west, I have fished out west a few times myself. People go their because the area is famous. There is one big difference between Taney and out west - that is that Taney is a man made trout fishery not a natural fishery.

Another thing I am talking about is that a lot of C&R fishermen think they are better stewards of the trout than fishermen who keep fish. I don't know what the actual mortality rate is for C&R trout but I would imagine that a person who catches 40 or 50 fish in a day will kill just as many trout as a person who catches and keeps 4. Especially in the fall. Actually they will probably kill more because a fisherman who keeps fish more than likley only fishes occasionally. Most C&R fishermen fish a lot.

I really don't have a problem making the area discussed C&R at all if that is what is determined by the MDC to be the best thing, I am in full support of it. On the other hand if the MDC determines that smaller fish need to be kept to make the fishery better then C&R fishermen should thank them rather than look down on their nose at them because they would actually be making the fishery better for everyone.

This topic is one of high emotion. I certainly do not mean to make anyone mad and am not mad myself. My position is that this is an issue which needs to be decided the facts of what is best for the trout fishery, not on emotions.

I would rather be fishin'.

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." Benjamin Franklin, 1759

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is an old saying that if it ain't broke don't fix it. The fishery at Taney was broke a few years back and it was fixed bueatifully. It think it gives an excellent chance of everone getting a shot at fishing their style. I also fished out west most notably on the San Jaun below the dam and that stretch of trophy water is much different as well as others in the west. There you have lots of opportunity for walk in fishing and if you wish to hire a guide most of the fish you catch are three # and aboveon that section of the San Jaun. You may keep one fish over 20" but must leave the stream after retaining the fish. I have fished there many times and have never seen anyone keep a fish. Most of the guides carry cameras and can procure a facimile of the fish that you can't tell from the original.

At Taneycomo if you limit the first 2 miles of the stream as CR only you have pretty well eliminated any chance of fishing without a boat for the fly fisherman. The white in Arkansas and the Red River below Greers ferry have many wade in areas in public access and some of the resorts also have areas that are wadeable in low water. That isn't the case at Taneycomo.

Unless there is another crisis let leave things alone (with the exception of maybe moving the upper limit of fishing down to below outlet 2 during the spawn to stop snagging and stress on the breeding stock for a month in winterlike they do in below Bull Shoals).

I also think that keeping the stockers under 12" is a good idea if someone wants to take them for lunch. I have been above fall creek in the trophy water after large stockings and been unhappy with the frequent hook up with the 10" stockers. I was glad to see others keep their limit which should in my opinion be returned to 5. The white in Arkansas allows 6 and I can't tell any difference in the upper stretches of water or at any of the other places that I have fished there. You certainly can't agrue that it has hurt the possibility of catching big fish. I always catch 1 or 2 20+ fish there. I just don't want to drive that extra hour to get to where I fish there. Also the resorts such as Lillies and other are much friendlier in Missouri.

Thom Harvengt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.