Wayne SW/MO

That's great! I know your pain and the comfort of a clean report.

I don't think it makes a lot of sense to allow 6 stream bass to be kept, but only 4 trout which don't rely at all on weather or riparian changes to survive. I don't like slots because I don't think most meat fishermen really understand the point in them. I think they do understand preserving a seed stock and most would support a cutoff point if its not to short. Four fish with only one between 14 and 17 with none over 17 shouldn't raise that much of a fuss, not if its sold right.

CGB I don't assume anything, but I do know you seem to be opposed to any regulations and bring up the fact that your area has streams that are overpopulated. I've ask you several times what you consider overpopulation, how you arrive at that term. Whether you like it or not the future of quality smallmouth fishing in Missouri streams is not secure. many streams are overpopulated with small fish, but its not that the stream has too many fish, its out of balance from overharvest. If anyone thinks that some of the locals are going to hang stringers out with signs on them you're mistaken. The evidence is generally in the form of a cleaned carcass, and they can be hard to spot if you're not looking. I've worked with my sahre of "good ol' boys" and they aren't stupid about regulations, what the agent drives, or where they live. That doesn't mean you can't make regulations work, you just have to be satisfied they will work for most but not all. Its a whole lot more effective to back away from regulations on some streams then to come in late and try to recover on many.

Its not illegal to fish during the closed season, never has been, but killing smallies is. I can't count the number of times I've come across carcasses, but I wish I could. I think its great CGB that the streams in your area are not only overpopulated, but well protected. The thing is, unless you've fished across the state, don't assume your experience is the standard. I've fished many areas here and in AR with better fishermen than myself and I rarely see the fishing living up to what I believe to be its potential. I know it certainly doesn't compare to the quality 25+ years ago.

I've used both a lot and I like both, in fact I have two of each, but the difference in reality and possible makes a big difference. While its true the 22/250 has a better range you still have to contend with the wind that's the enemy of all 22's. I would prefer the 22/250 for its killing ability rather then any range increase I might squeeze out of it. Coyotes are tough and I have some stories to prove it, so to be humane, the 22/250 is the better choice. Both the 22/250 and the Remington 17 will flatten 95% of coyotes under 200 yards, the same can't be said for the 222 or the 223.

There's a lot of water in TR between the dam and Campbell Point, reportedly the best smallmouth water. It also prime habitat for them. I suspect that because much of the stocking came from the James, Kings, Roaring River and Flat creek to name a few, they were slow in adapting to the lake. Time has probably now taken care of that. I don't see the parallel however, they are probably in every stream that's friendly to them. The point is quality and while a 5# fish would probably be about as rare as frogs teeth, even 15" fish aren't as abundant as they should be in many waters. Some streams appear to be well populated, but loads of 10-12" fish don't equate to a quality fishery.

You can get an X-Rap for about $7.50 and without fooling with it everytime the water temp changes get it to suspend real well. I have about 20 Rogues, maybe more, and I've caught more fish on Raps then the Rogues in all the years i've used them. Pointers are great, cost two X-Raps and I haven't found them to be better either. I believe the color scheme is very important in a suspending jerk bait because they receive so much scrutiny by the fish. In cold water I've found the fish come up and look, clamp down on the lure, and if you're not ready, spit it out. The visual take is very similar to a trout taking a nymph.

I haven't run into any spots on the Niangua above and below, Beaver, Finley, James, Elk, Indian, Gasconade, Osage Fork, and Flat creek that I remember, but I have caught a couple of hybrids in the lower end of Bryant.

I would still like to see one size limit for all streams that allows people to keep fish, but in itself isn't all that attractive. I would then like to see them take a section from most streams and simply call it a trophy section, which to me is a no kill above a certain length, probably 15". A Trophy section could easily be set up between public access.

That seems to be a common occurrence in older deep lakes and the deeper ends of those not so deep. The reason I've always heard was that it was a product of bottom change. When wave action removes soil from areas and deposits it in the deepest parts of the lake it leaves a more smallie friendly environment. I think any degradation of smallie waters can probably be correlated with the increase in human habitation, rather than warming. I suspect that the drop in the water table has a larger impact on temps. Deforestation doesn't seem to be as bad in Missouri as it is in some states and that helps the water temps in smaller streams. There's also the fact that any increase in solids will raise the temps and many waters simply aren't as clear, year round, as they were..

My favorites are the X-Raps in Ghost and Gold. The gold has been especially good to me in the late Fall. The X-Rap gold isn't what one would expect in a gold color lure.

I was under the impression that a Char was native to Missouri during the Ice Age, but its been some time since I read that so I may not have it in sequence. The reason I brought up the Little Ice Age, not my description, was because it had an affect on water temperatures at a bout the same time the railroad theory evolved. Colder temperatures bring clearer water, but also larger floods and the smallies could well have used the period to make a move. When it comes to the big rivers and their silt load I have some reservations with that being a permanent barrier. The silt load, or I would assume, lessened somewhat during drought years, possibly to the point that spots "inched" upriver. There's also the fact that by stocking areas such as the Osage basin provides more fish for displacement. We always take the stance that fish don't move during floods, but common sense tells us that's not true of the Sunfish family. The fact that they will not fight the current for any amount of time means that some will move with it looking for unoccupied refuge. The fact that they have no homing instincts has to lead to some finding alternative waters where they stay. I think Al's reference to the schools of spots that occupied the lower stretches of rivers, in the area of the worst flooding, probably could have been a result of this. They could have found large backwaters being fed by two sources, one of which was acceptable. What negates the possibility that this population stayed in the area and periodically some move up river from time to time. Fish will move to avoid conditions that are intolerable, but not from conditions that are mildly uncomfortable because they are used to those conditions. If they move into a river, such as the Meramec, during a very brief period when conditions are perfect and those conditions change to something less than perfect, they may not leave because its still within the parameters of what they will tolerate daily. The same conditions however might prevent others of their species form following. the result could be a slow increase in their numbers based on a very few who arrive, a few who are spawned, and decreased by a few who leave during certain water conditions with a small net increase that eventually becomes a problem. At least I believe its all a possibility.

The beginning of the Little Ice Age seems to be in question, but most apparently agree it ended about 1850, a few climatologist believe we still are in recovery, but that's not pertinent to this discussion. The reason I brought it up was because smallies can tolerate colder water than their cousins, so I suppose its possible that they migrated during this time. I would assume that the rivers were much clearer than, especially during the winter because runoff would have been at a minimum. Its a thought.

I do have a couple of things for you to consider Al, just things that raise questions that I have no opinion on. The first would be the affect the Little Ice Age might have had on any migrations. I believe it ended sometime in the mid 1800's, but I don't know the affect it had on SO MO. The second question is how hard is it to document the number of fish by species in a river with the volume of the Mississippi? How accurate would it be if the numbers were a small percentage, but significant in numbers?

Not sure what you mean by link, but you can go the MDC site-fishing-atlas-Jackson co or James a Reed for a lot of information.

You can't overlook the fact that restricted limits on a fish species will send many people in other directions. Obviously it won't send all to more productive waters, but it will many. I suspect there is more interest in trout by meat fishermen then there is by C&R types.

Don't bet on it. I think if you spent a lot of time on some streams in the early spring you would realize there is a lot of poaching. The problem is that on many streams the smallies pack up in deep holes and are literally like shooting fish in a barrel in some areas.

Punkinseed comes to mind and although I haven't caught any out of BS, the Ozark Bass should be in there. I suppose there might be a Meanmourh or two. Merry Christmas all!

That would certainly increase their numbers on the table, but not in the water where most want them. I suppose you're referring to the overpopulated streams and you have another option, post them on here and maybe you can gets some help.

Something about 'bows in BS has always puzzled me. In the winter when the water is low and they congregate below Powersite, their size seems to be much smaller than I believe is stocked by MO. I know at times they dump some "Silver Bullets" in, but even those seem larger.

Perhaps he ran across a few Meanmouths.

I understand where you're coming from gypsy, but in the case of the stream smallmouth I don't think the resource is large enough, nor will it ever be. I just wouldn't want economics to be a consideration because I don't think its there.

Without any knowledge of cost or the time involved for a webmaster, I would think that a forum, dedicated strictly to the MSA and Missouri stream smallmouth, could have far reaching positive affects.

I don't think it would be wise to try and play an economic card What is viable is the fact that they are a native fish in a particular niche, and because of that fact alone deserve special attention.

There was nothing in my post aimed at your post, what I am saying is if they did bring some by rail they well could have been here anyway. CGB, if you look at my post you'll see that I've questioned whether the Spot invasion has never been seen before. It really doesn't matter, the raparian, the flows and many other forces are at work in a negative way on smallie waters. There are probably only two options to address the problem, stop mans assault on the stream environment and eat more spots.