SpoonDog

For a fella who's never seen dead smallmouth on an Ozark stream, you sure know a lot about when they're harvested. I'm driving 120 on the way to work tomorrow because I'm pretty sure someone, somewhere has done it before- and that absolves me of any responsibility for my own actions. I'm sure the arresting officer will understand.

Back in highschool I learned to process my own, but I haven't had the time or the space to keep up with it.. As much as I'd like to take you up on the offer, it looks like the Canon lenses won't mesh with what I'm currently shooting. Still like the old photos, though. My dad had a vintage Indian...about the time I was old enough to start worshipping it, it miraculously disappeared from the garage Thanks again for the photos!

Thanks for sharing, Billethead. I still enjoy shooting film, and I love the detail captured even in in the cavalier old photos. It'd be interesting to see some of those places now for comparison.

Really great ties on here folks, thanks for sharing. Trigg- I'm curious how you did the head on this guy. Craft fur and CCG like a deadhead minnow? Or something else?

You're absolutely right about educating the ignorant Seth, and I hope someday you'll figure it out yourself. Good luck.

It isn't just MDC's job, Seth- two agents per county can't be everywhere at once, especially during the fall and winter. If you value this resource- it's your job to protect it, too. It's perfectly legal to harvest smallmouth until February 28th. But when 80% of the fish are below 12 inches, I think it should be discouraged. Maybe you've never personally witnessed a filleted smallmouth carcass in an Ozark stream. Maybe all your buddies are strict C&R. But if you think it means everyone behaves that way, you're living in a fantasy. You have people on this forum stating they keep them. You have firsthand accounts of people witnessing big fish and big stringers being kept. And if that isn't enough, there's plenty of information from MDC on smallmouth harvest. Believing it doesn't happen is just that- a belief. It's willfully ignorant of reality. I would really, really encourage you to spend a couple hours cruising the MDC website and learning about our smallmouth fisheries- growth rates, harvest rates, habitat use and angler attitudes. I think you had a little more information, you may make different decisions.

Exactly. I'm not worried about photos or trip report. I'm worried about over-exploitation of stream smallmouth- and if what I've written wasn't clear about that, I'm sorry. The fact is many smallmouth stack up in a few areas during winter. The fact is smallmouth are cold-blooded, and their metabolism is dictated by stream temperature- a fish in 58 degree spring water is going to eat more than a fish in 34 degree river water. The fact is smallmouth- especially big ones- aren't particularly social critters, and when you crowd 'em all together in a small space it can lead to stress. Because they're all in one place, because they're in warmer water, because they're aggressive- they're vulnerable. And because the season is still open, higher chances of being caught mean higher chances of being kept. I'm happy to deal with the facts. I'm sure the majority of folks on this site do care- I'm not worried about them, and I'm happy to offer information through private message. As much as I'd like to believe the 60 guests browsing the forum right now feel the same way- I don't know that. I don't know how many folks troll this site for info, but I'm not going to pretend it doesn't happen. If you disagree, by all means- throw up your username and password, home address and security alarm passcode, your SSN, your credit card information, mother's maiden name etc. If you think that's a bad idea- is it because you're paranoid, or because you want to protect the things you value? I'm not trying to propose unwritten fishing rules- I'm using math. Subtracting quality fish from a population is a terrible way of adding quality fish to a population- and while it's easy to scapegoat MDC, they're not ones providing explicit instructions on where and how to target wintering smallmouth. I don't see how the information reduces winter harvest and I don't see how it benefits smallmouth populations- but maybe I'm missing something. I'd be happy to work with MSA and other folks to shorten the harvest season on smallmouth- but that could take years, and cost millions of lives. In the meanwhile I'll be careful about who I share information with- and I'd suggest others who want to see better fishing in Missouri think about what information they make public. If that makes me a jerk, I'm fine with it.

When the bulk of a fish population is stacked up in a limited number of wintering holes and spring branches, I think location does matter. And if it didn't, why bother posting the specific location in the first place?

I've seen enforcement on both the Jacks Fork and the Current, but I agree more can be done. But it isn't just about floaters and it isn't about making new amendments- they're closing roads, accesses, and horse and ATV trails which were never authorized in the first place. They're barring vehicles from gravel bars- which was never authorized in the first place. They're doing exactly what you've asked of them- enforcing the rules which have always been in place.

I understand you were fishing above the red ribbon section, but think of what effect all those smallmouth plus all those trout have on the limited prey base. The smallmouth are moving in and out of the spring branch just as the trout do- and when they're in the red ribbon area, they're vulnerable to harvest. I know other folks have harped on this, but these aren't resident fish. They're coming from miles away to overwinter in the spring water, and when they're harvested they go in the Fry-Daddy- not back to their warm-season haunts. Any harvest which occurs is affecting smallmouth populations miles upriver and miles down. I'm not a strict C&R guy, but I've been surprised by the stringers of smallmouth leaving these spring branches and wintering pools- and I'm sure you'll agree 15, 18, 20+ inch fish no longer qualify as "dinks." They're the ones in the population producing the most eggs and fry. They're the ones adapted to survive in our Ozark streams and grow large. We need more of them, not less. My experience is there's a lot of anglers who will happily keep the dinks- and the bigguns, too. Posting information like this rings the dinnerbell, inviting anyone- regardless of their conservation ethic- to come exploit the fishery. I'm sure it's well intentioned, but you don't know who's reading this forum- you don't know they're going to C&R, you don't know if they're going to keep every legal fish they catch and tell their buddies to come and do the same. It isn't a huge secret, but it certainly doesn't need advertisement. I understand the desire to make sure folks have a successful day fishing- and in the short term I suppose it's noble. But in the long term- you're doing neither the fishery nor its dedicated anglers any favors. We're still digging ourselves from out from the short-sighted viewpoint that today's great fishing is more important than tomorrow's.

I may be wrong on this, but can't you harvest smallmouth out of the red ribbon section? And isn't stream smallmouth season open until the end of February?

Use histrionics and intimidation to create a spectacle in one of the state's largest media markets? Brilliant strategy. I hope they do it, and I hope it gets picked up by the news. This stunt may wind up doing more for protection of the Riverways than anything else

I saw that, too. Certainly a hero in his own mind

I'm bummed there's no meetings planned for the other urban areas- then again I'm not surprised. I just hope folks get out and make the one event in Kirkwood standing room only. I'd really like to see TU, Ozark Flyfishers, Smallmouth Alliance, the local shops and other conservation-minded folks in the area do what they can to try and fill some seats.

Couldn't find anything specifically on Lake Fork- I did find some info on Alabama's mixed success with them. I was able to find a paper which stated Texas' broodstock croaked in the late 70's due to a severe winter. I'd hazard a guess that if they die in the hatcheries because it's too cold, they'll die in the reservoirs, too. Maybe this link will work?

I did a quick look- while I wasn't able to find anything TX specific a bunch of states- TN, Mississippi, Arkansas, Oklahoma, even Missouri, I think- has experimented with the Florida strain. Here's some of Oklahoma's results: In Boomer Lake, a shallow, turbid Oklahoma reservoir receiving a heated effluent, Florida largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides floridanus) grew significantly faster than northern largemouth bass (M. s. salmoides) during the first summer of life. Because Florida bass were smaller when stocked, however, the faster growth does not indicate a difference in growth potential. On the average, Florida and northern bass were the same size by the first fall, and the two subspecies grew at a similar rate over the next 1.5 years. Both subspecies suffered heavy initial mortality, presumably from stocking stress. After the first summer, the survival of northern bass was: winter 1976-77, 100%; summer 1977, 97%; and winter 1977-78, 45%. Seasonal survival rates of Florida bass over the same periods, 43, 45, and 58%, respectively, were independent of winter severity. Total survival of northern bass (10%) was significantly higher than that of Florida bass (1%) over 2 years. Florida bass offer no apparent management benefits in Boomer Lake. "Good" genes doesn't always translate into good growth, good survival, or good fishing.

Eh...not sure how much genetic difference there is between Ozark fish and those north and east- and just because TN fish do well in TN, and MN fish do well on MN, doesn't mean TN or MN fish will do well in MO. Sorta like saying I can pluck a guy off the street in Baaahhhston or Miami and drop him on an Ozark gravel bar- he'll be fine, right? Besides, we have a pretty checkered history stocking new things because it's a quick, easy solution- and we know better than nature. Texas got bigger bass when they introduced the Florida strain, but I'd wager many of those trophy fish are belly up with the cold snap they've had- because no one bothered to think that maybe Florida fish are more susceptible to cool weather. IMO the genetics thing is oversold- and I'm not sure how many biologists would be willing to posit that the only reason northern and Tennessee smallmouth grow bigger is because of genetics. TN rivers are generally bigger, tons of habitat, and regulated by dams- they're kept a bit cooler as a result, and they don't experience flood, shifting gravel, and drought the way many of our Ozark streams do. And in both northern waters and Tennessee smallies aren't the apex predator they are in the Ozarks- stripers, muskies and other species fill that niche. Perhaps smallies need to get big fast in order to avoid predation- and when that selective pressure isn't present, they revert to slower growth rates. Dunno- but the point is there are all sorts of factors which go into making a big smallmouth- genetics is just one. Regarding neoshos- it's crucially important to keep in mind there is no singular, monolithic definition of a species. Or a subspecies. The answer to those questions depends as much on who's asking as the species' genetics or morphology. Two animals can look almost identical externally (bull trout and dolly varden) but have very divergent genetics- making them distinct species. Others are genetically indistinguishable (Snake River and Yellowstone Cutthroat), but look so different they're often regarded as separate subspecies. There is no hard-and-fast rule, and if you locked a bunch of academics and biologists in a room I promise there would be no consensus. My point is you fellas are getting your panties in a wad debating a question which, as near as I can tell, doesn't have an answer. Have fun!

Looks like it's been addressed! IMO the hyperbole gets pretty tired, pretty fast. Wolves have wandered into Missouri on multiple occasions over the past few decades. It's odd, but it happens. IF it is a wolf, it wouldn't be the first one. I wouldn't call it "a problem" any more than the occasional piranha or alligator that crops up in Lake of the Ozarks.

I've been reading a bit, and it seems there's still a lot of unanswered questions about didymo and how to mitigate it (good synopsis here). Seems its native to much of the US, and only becomes an issue when phosphorous is low- adding P to streams seems to help eliminate it, at least in some instances. Whether it's had a negative impact on trout is a wash- in some instances it's had no effect, in others it's lowered growth rates. It doesn't seem as big an issue as it was initially feared, and that's great. We didn't know what we didn't know, and I'm glad MDC took conservative, proactive measures to protect our fisheries. I'm pretty happy with my rubber-soled boots, and the one bad spill I've had since the felt ban was on the NFOW, wading in a place I shouldn't have been trying it anyway. I haven't seen many anglers having trouble with them, and I certainly haven't seen scores of them carted off the rivers in stretchers. Perhaps both sides over-stated their case?

The commercial fishers where these carp are native have done a pretty good job fishing their populations down . And we've been very good at overfishing populations of cod, salmon, striped bass, most tuna species, most billfish species, most sturgeon species, orange roughy...I have no doubt it can be done if a market is developed for the things.

I don't feel terrible about the way it was handled- you'd have to be on drugs to think advertising and hosting a hippie jam festival in one of the most conservative parts of the state wouldn't raise any eyebrows. No doubt it had some great talent come through- but the other things which went on at Camp Zoe weren't exactly a secret, and that the Feds would take interest seems absolutely foreseeable. It's a pretty nice property, and having it in public hands won't hurt protection of the Current River watershed- I'd rather see it turned into a State Park than a CAFO as is happening down on the Buffalo at the moment.

I understand what you're saying, but that isn't the point of the Riverways. The Park exists to manage the Current and Jacks Fork- and only those two rivers. They're legally obligated to manage the Current and Jacks Fork for the protection of the Current and Jacks Fork- not for the protection of the Black, St. Francois, or any other Ozark stream. If meeting those obligations means reducing the number of users- that's what they have to do. And if reducing users on ONSR adds users to other streams- that's outside the Park's jurisdiction and beyond their mandate. It simply is not their concern. Besides, I'm sure there are liveries on other Ozark streams which wouldn't mind seeing a few more paddlers during the float season. And many of our streams outside federal jurisdiction could use all the additional advocates they can get.

I guess I don't understand the rationale...your biggest complaint seems that ONSR is overcrowded, overdeveloped, and overused...yet you don't want the NPS making changes which could fix that problem. Most Ozark streams have canoe liveries- if folks wanted to be fighting the jetboats around Van Buren and Doniphan, if they wanted to be floating the Black, the St. Francois, the Big, the Meramec, Big Piney or Gasconade....there's nothing stopping them from doing it now. More than a million visitors a year choose to experience ONSR. Regardless of how you personally feel about it, they value that resource. Asking them for input on how the resource they value is managed seems like a no-brainer to me, and about as democratic as the process can possibly be.

It seems the NPS has exactly the same concerns you do about development and resource use- hence the proposed management changes.

And when presented with the offer on the table- between two tracks and no tracks- I prefer the latter.