Wayne SW/MO

Speaking for myself, I've never thought it was "The fix", but it is one that we can control. You're right that there are many parts to the problem, some we can control and some we cannot. Because there are many that we can't control, I believe there are times when excess control of some factors might be warranted. I'm surprised that there waters to the west that are overpopulated, but because I've fished a lot of the waters west of Springfield without seeing overpopulation I have to think there aren't many.

I'm not convinced that the MDC could afford enough agents to make a big difference. While they might do some good in areas where hunters and fishermen are concentrated, that's a very small area.

Me too, wish I could remember where I put it?

Funny, but many years ago I ask, in a letter, why they didn't have a similar setup in the trout parks. I suggested that those who kept the hatcheries busy could foot a larger share of the cost or face lower limits. I was told it was a good idea, but it would be too hard to enforce..

I would if I had to pay for a license. If you're not doing anything wrong then ........never mind. :lol:

Eric I'm assuming the last question means fishermen who target streams.

Rangerman I'm not questioning their presences, they've been here since before I was born as Jack Salmon. The state has had populations in Bull, LOZ and the southeast rivers long enough to create a large following, but they haven't. The problem, as I see it, is that they aren't needed in the ecology of the White river lakes, so the only reason to stock heavily is for economic reasons. I don't believe they are causing that much money to be spent. Will the Walleye tournament trail return to BS, I don't think thier first trip was a big success, especially on virgin waters. I just don't think they qualify for the extensive stocking program going on because it isn't paying back any dividends. I've been advocating the stocking of Stripers/Wipers for a long time. From an economic standpoint Bull Shoals could use the push and given the fact that it is more accessible to western Missouri and Kansas, it would probably not compete that much with Norfolk. It should be noted that the last two state record Stripers have come from the Rock and BS, if I'm not mistaken.

You definitely need to prepare for a swim in cold water. I think that without spending a fortune, neoprene waders with a splash top and light wading shoes will give you enough time to get out of trouble.

Lets face it, the MDC agents will never do a good job of enforcing game laws, the sate is too big and they are too few. My problem with it lies in considering the ability to enforce laws as a criteria. I also, as I've stated, take exception to preconceived results that are dependent on so many factors. Fishing pressure, weather, changes in stream ecology and a host of other factor I've probably overlooked makes it impossible for any biologist to predict the future years down the road. The only way to do it realistically is to put a plan in place and them let biologist use their training to do what they are paid to do, tweak it.

That may well be true, but I don't know about Busch, but there are a lot of misses on Taney. Did you really mean to imply that Taney was ridicules Eric?

I've used a lot of rods over the years and the Falcons are hard to beat for a shelf rod. For baitcasters, Shimano and Diawa are a toss up for me. The ability to adjust a baitcaster is probably as important as the reel. I don't normally carry but one spinning rod, so I'll pass on what's best there.

That was the idea behind putting them in Texoma about 30 years ago and it turned out to be true. They spent most of the time in open water feeding on shad that were too large for the natives. I'm not against the walleye, but it does seem to me that its time to scale back and see what the reward is going to be. There simply doesn't seem to be that many caught, or even fished for to warrant the expense. Maybe it just me, but the catch below Powersite isn't huge and its short lived. It seems that most of the catch we hear about is incidental to some other fish target. I say switch the hatchery to Stripers and/or Wipers.

Well put, too have nothing but praise for the bulk of the work done by the MDC, but we have to be vigilant because nothing is perfect. They have and will have personnel changes and influences that from time to time will rub the wrong way. I think the White Paper is one of them and while the idea behind it may have been noble, the reasoning behind remaining at the status quo isn't in my mind. As far as a chapter here goes, I believe to be successful it will take enough members to keep the chapter viable by being active in some way. This doesn't mean attending meetings or a fishing "get Together" 100%. If enough have an interest than there will always be enough to make a meeting worth a visitors time. It will simply be a chapter of the state organization, but allow members here to invite speakers, keep track of the health of SW Missouri waters and fish, and hopefully enjoy some comradeship with like minded fishermen and fisherwomen. If someone has any ideas where a meeting could be held they might put it forward. I don't know if BPS has any "free" space or not.

In a few spots, but you talk like its that way period, and it not. I know some spots on the Rock that come close to that description. No one is saying what it will do to those with an investment on the shoreline, or don't they matter in this scheme?

No they drive a truck up to the bank and open the valve, and that's the last help they get. They don't feed them like Kansas does Channels.

I will assume people are sincere in their interest, you don't have to be a Missouri resident to support the MSA. I would be interested in what you believe to be Hateful Rhetoric. I've visited the site off and on for years and apparently missed it.

Is there interest in establishing a MSA Chapter in this area? Possibly alternating meeting locations to make it more available to different sections. For instance if there is sufficient interest in the SW corner, then meetings could alternate in Neosho or Joplin and Springfield.

That is a good question, I looked just the other day and it was still full of water.

I don't think they can make the argument that populations won't increase. The study seemed aimed at whether they could increase size and fish available. Enforcement shouldn't be the determining factor in my opinion, because enforcement in itself is a slow moving deterrent. There are probably few waters with more enforcement then Taney and the Parks, yet who hasn't seen violations? We simply don't have that many regulations that are enforced. Its one thing to cruise roadways, but quite another to oversee millions of acres with little or limited access. Might point out that the no fishing for smallmouths in the spring has been on the books forever, and there are and will continue to be violations of it. There's also the method of evaluating the streams, it seems to be an unknown. I know I have NEVER been approached by a creel checker on a smallmouth stream. How do you conduct a 20 year study in today's environment? Nothing in the Missouri outdoors remains unchanged from 20 years ago.

Hi Matt, you may not remember me,, but we talked several years ago about this very thing. I'm glad you brought it up, given the fact there are a lot of smallmouth fishermen on this site and its probably the best vehicle for information that has existed to date. Maybe this will rekindle some interest in forming a chapter in this area and the forum can provide a source for communication. I know your yearly Alliance fishing trips on the James and Gasconade were aimed at gathering more members in areas to the west. Maybe times have changed.

It probably will depend on the design, but they won't stop generating for any length of time. It sounds like they're going to do the same as they did on 65, build a new bridge for other lanes. I don't know about a roundabout though, there isn't a whole lot of room there. It will be interesting to see how they accomplish that.

You have to layer, light to heavy. I like lightweight poly long underwear to start. Pants and shirt depend on the the weather, but fleece has a good range for wading or temperatures you know won't top about 45F. I like flannel, then wool, then fleece on top depending on temperatures and how much movement I'll be making. I worked outside most of the time in temperatures from 100+ to -20F and much of what I do is based on many hours outside, comfortable and not so comfortable. Its hard to be too specific without knowing what a person intends to be doing, sitting in a duck blind, walking in the woods or wading in cold water al change the game plan a little. The one thing that never changes is in layer lighter to heavy.

I think the MDC's main objectives are increasing opportunities and protecting wildlife and fish. But they don't have to accomplish both and its likely that smallmouth opportunities in streams can't be increased. Streams are subject to too many variables that reservoirs aren't to predict a solid future, but I still contend they should try harder, or try period. If they make the effort and fail, there will be answers instead of theories.

That one normally won't fly because according to the commission the trout program must be self sufficient. I think it was in the red this year and I don't know the consequences of that. There are some programs that I think could be questioned, and maybe parts of the trout program. The thing about smallmouth and the MDC that irritates me is that the plan always seems to be dependent on some other species, guaranteed success, or a myriad of other excuses. I don't even buy the "will it positively affect them", at least not if that means gains, preservation of the status quo should be enough in some instances. I would like to see them simply put some strict, but reasonable, regulations on the stream fish for a period of time and then evaluate for the affect. No educated guessing, but evaluation of facts.