tjm

I'm not good at computer and have no idea how that happens. sorry

"Just curious though, what demographics chooses C&R? The privileged? I see people from 8 to 80 C&R in the trophy area." Any one that fishes is privileged, some more than others. As to practitioners of C&R, I would assume that the Lazy make up the greater percentage. Either too lazy to clean fish, as I was fifty years ago when I discovered how easy C&R was; or too lazy to look for new water/new fish; so release where you know you can come back to recycle it. Done that too. There is a different demographic at work though in those who would mandate C&R where the resource is not endangered.

I used to just keep the fly rod in the water up past the guides or periodically give it a wash in the river, these days I keep it at home on those kind of days. Water is always above freezing and ice turns back to water. Don't recall ice on the line ever being a problem.

Signage at access points might hit the most anglers, I've never been asked for an Email when buying a permit and I expect many anglers don't have one. Try getting a local news paper to front page an article on the subject and provide them with picture descriptions of how to ID spotted and largemouth bass. How timbered are those stretches of river where the spots are thriving? I have thought a strip of timber over hanging and shading the rivers keep the water a lot cooler and think it is especially needed on south and west banks. Cool water benefits smallmouth more than spotted bass, I think. " I think resurrecting the Spotted Bass Roundup is a great idea " Rather than just a club project/event, people in the area with an interest in that river and reducing the spotted bass population could sponsor/promote local-community-town events, perhaps get a few more people interested. MDC might even allow a free fish day for such an event?

????

One of the FWS studies theorizes that because spots nest in deep water in reservoirs that they are less affected by spring draw down than other black bass.

Would you guess (or is it known) that about three-four years is the average use of a trout in the trophy area? Take a whack at delayed mortality of C&R fish there? I know I've seen some terrible handling and release on other waters. Some long long photo ops.

me too The spots and lateral line don't stand out to me in those pictures, since you mentioned it the tail is more like a spotted, but on the water I doubt I would have noticed. I see vertical barring, is that the clue that it is hybrid rather than pure spot? Al that's a nice bit of history there and I was unaware of the northern stockings by MDC. I'll buy your theory of Mississippi migration too, makes perfect sense and fits the facts as we know them. A question, why do you reckon the spots have not displaced smallmouth in streams where they both exist historically yet have in the Meramec drainage? Is that perhaps temperature related?

I suspect the entire hatchery and stocking program depends heavily on those 4 fish limit anglers more than it does the C&R crowd. A stocking once every 2-3 years should be all that's needed for a C&R area by full time expert fishers. The entire basis of the trout program is put and kill. It would be interesting to survey all purchasers of permits on the subject of trophy versus take some home conditions. 500/1, 1000/1, 10000/1 in favor of meat; what's your guess? C&R anglers are ten times more vocal but I have the feeling that they all post on this forum. Take a count Huh? You may overestimate the requirements to join this board, they let me join and I am both a poor fisher and less than part time, not more than 50-60 hours a year these days, from some of the reports I read even some of the better fishers are not full time at it. My part time experience does go back over fifty years though so it might all add up to a year so of full time fishing. Even in the years I fished 300 days a year it was part time and more about me than about dedication to conserving an invasive species (trout).

There was a study about bass and Bergman's Rule, but I don't know the conclusions it reached, if any. (Increased size with increased latitude.) For sure though a stocked fish is not a native fish. It is a stocked fish and if it has growth attributes that surpass the native fish, it very likely will become invasive and extirpate the native species, either by devouring them or by hybridization. imho, we should learn from past mistakes of this nature. Concentrate any efforts on the fish we have and accept the limitations they might have. If I want to fish for exotics, I can always go to where the exotics are native.

Biology loses to politics every time.

If the fish is native, why would it need stocking?

Probably won't be getting any changes from DNR, fishing doesn't seem to be their focus. Used to be a lot of gravel mining here as well and the creek has certainly changed since it stopped, I'm not sure why it stopped, but if anything it seems there are more big smallmouth caught now than then. And this is as to what I see and hear of, science might prove my observations false or others might have different observations. Also, the size and nature of the annual floods has changed over that same period, so that may be a factor in the channel changes, on this stream. I wonder if there are less wintering holes capacity wise or if they are just in different spots and not as abrupt. I'll throw another question out there with Jim's; as pertains to forage and habitation, what impact do you guys see or suppose increased power boating has on these streams? Bottom disturbance, bank erosion, debris disturbance etc. must have some effect on things like crawdads and minnows? I'm guessing that any of the above factors is worth a couple of objective studies.

Why were these dredgings stopped?

Not knowing the Meramec up close and personal, I think these should be examined prior to any changes of regulations, forage is probably the main ingredient in size production of any animal. A comprehensive study of forage in the system shouldn't take an awful long time to complete, set up a coop or something that would get a gang of students working on it. Either find the cause of poor growth or eliminate forage as a factor. I have always thought latitude a major factor in smallmouth size. How do you think this will affect the river as whole, or smallmouth in particular? Has this improved some other body of water in the past?

Do you be careful out there TA , if a horse comes through the windshield it can bleed about 5 gallons all over your upholstery and fill the floor pans. Chevy ain't worth much after that. Don't know what kinda damage a surrey would do. 0230, musta been a good singin.

How deep and wide is that 5 mile area? Any of it wadable?

Road kill numbers are down on deer, turkey and German Baptists I believe. Or maybe I just don't get out on the roads that much. Armadillos are still plentiful in the roads though. We lost all local turkeys in the 90s due to bad weather during hatch in several consecutive years. They have not moved back in and probably were only here because of former stocking programs. More important to the question though might be the general lack of fertility in these worn out mountains, the entire food chain is dependent on tiny stuff that exists in fertile areas to a greater extent than in oak barrens.

https://www.nationalgeographic.org/media/lake-turnover/

Restricting the take in a put and take fishery seems a bit odd to me. Restricting the stocking and only stocking fish over 5# sounds feasible, maybe. Turn it all into C&R. Use the rest of the hatching facilities to grow more fish for the winter pond stocking. fwiw, I recently saw a pond full of 8-9"ers at Neosho that the sign said was meant for Taneycomo. Set a maximum length to keep limit, it seems to me would leave all the big fish to get bigger. Allowing me to eat a15" fish when you want it to reach 16"+ just seems backwards; wasted growth time. You could increase the numbers and set a max limit of six less than 13", keep no biguns; meat fishers would have more by increased numbers and the trophy fish could eat their smaller cousins. So, "a verbal survey" is one done by phone or on the lake? Do they just stop random people and ask some questions while marking down on their pad what ever they want to? Census gal came round asking, she didn't like my answers I guess she kept marking "other".

About 4' lighter. I used to carry, launch and solo in a 17' Lowe Line , stand to pole it. Think it weighs about 80#, at Cabalas the guy had me looking at a kayak that was about 70# just carry my fat and have enough over to be safe. Been a bit since I looked on line seems that it was in that neighborhood for most of them. My interest in the kayaks was actually more about the rooftop transport. I need to go up the pasture and see if I can still tote that old Lowe, been a few years since I did. But iirc a 12' O.T. canoe was around 50# and could float 500#

There is always that SCOTUS decision way back in the 18xxs that is quoted in Elder and says that navigability of each stream has to be determined in a court. That case was about that Federal law that says all streams that can float a canoe are navigable. I'm guessing that EPA rule is in violation of the SCOTUS rule; but til some one fights it and takes it all the way EPA will go on collecting the fines. Does a Federal agency have the authority to over ride a US Supreme Court ruling? It appears to me that in our court system a fact can be known by all but only becomes a fact legally when a court rules it a fact. Even if the case law would apply to a particular stream, it doesn't until a court rules that it does. Common knowledge that your 90 year old relative is daffy doesn't make her/him daffy, only a court can decide that. Common knowledge that steam boats pulled barges up the local spring branch doesn't make that spring branch navigable unless a court rules it so. Every case I have read and some other legal opinions all say the same thing. I don't think the laws are ignored, I just think no one has had the gumption to get court rulings on all these small streams.

How does that work out? I was thinking I might get a kayak, they are supposed to be it all and lighter too, by the time one is big enough to carry a grownup and stable enough to stand in/on the length and weight are in the range with canoes?

Didn't recognize the ramp is why I asked, I don't know the river that well even though it's 4 miles from me. Not being a power boater I don't know the places that are accessible to them and that doesn't look like either of the two ramps I do know of, but it seems that the streams change after every flood so maybe it is a place I've been. Doesn't matter unless we are thinking banning boats on special management waters. How fast was that boat traveling the first, say, 8 minutes? Video gets me disoriented but it seemed they went 5-12 miles updown stream.

Where and how did you identify the stretch of river? Lot of water went by at high speed the first several minutes and then it appeared to me that the water was small as a tributary might be. I couldn't tell because I never gigged from a boat, (gigging used to be a wading game) like that but he looked incompetent. Looked to me like he was hitting badly.