olfishead

Finally made it out on the lake today, just me, (wife was shopping for me, darn I couldn't go!). December weather was fantastic! Fished from 12:30 to 4:30 out of Mutton Creek. Caught 11 keeper crappie from 10 to 14 inches one short walleye and a lowly Wht. Bass. All from 25-30 ft. deep off of brush piles on Garland baby shad. Can't wait to fry 'em up!

Sometimes, if all the stars line up, the COE will consider a small lake rise to better accommodate migrating waterfowl. Not saying that that is the situation now, but it makes the duck hunters happy!

I was able to download the GPS waypoints from the MDC site myself with my old Lowrance unit using the EasyGPS program on an SD card. I am assuming I can still do that with a Garmin?

Good report! I'll be out tomorrow.

Thanks for the advice aarchdale@cores! Ill check into that. I really don't think Ill be linking to anything???? Explain........please!

Its time to gear up for more fishing and what better time than Christmas! I've been wanting a GPS/side scanning fish locator for some time now and I think it might just happen this Christmas. I've got to admit that it will most likely be one in the mid to lower price range. So, my question for all of you technology experts is: What one would you recommend and Why? And, while I've got the platform>>>> Merry Christmas and a Great fishin' New Year!

I'm pretty sure Dutch is right. Muskies are expensive to raise, take up a lot of hatchery space, and they don't reproduce naturally in MO. That's one of the reasons smaller lakes were picked for Muskie stockings. It would be too expensive to stock the numbers required to establish a viable population in a lake the size of STK. And, Muskies in Pomme don't really seem to make an appreciable difference in the rough fish populations. Also, In the early 70's Northern Pike were stocked in Stockton, later when they reached 30+ inches they became floaters due to warm water stress and bacterial infections thought to be caused by such rapid growth that their immune system could not keep up with their body size. (A Short explanation) Nowadays, most states stay away from stocking any species that weren't once native to their state, with some exceptions for hybrids..

Great report and good to know that the crappie population is still good at Pomme and the Muskies aren't eating them all!!!!!

I really don't recall the crappie LL being 8" but I was in north MO for several years, so maybe I just missed out on that. However, I do remember when MDC installed the first 12" LL for black bass at Stockton. I also remember a lot of bass anglers who opposed that regulation, most saying that it would ultimately ruin the bass fishing on STK lake! (And, that was one of the first length Limit regulations in the country at that time.) As the lake aged and densities decreased from the initial reproductive "Boom" years the LL was increased to 15" to maintain optimal densities and growth rates. It was such a success that now nearly all states have Length Limits for black bass. MDC was a leader in fisheries management at that time. As for the life expectancy for Crappie, If I my old memory serves me correctly, the oldest crappie that we ever aged from STK was 7 yrs. But very, very few make it to that age. We always thought that most end up in hot oil by age 5. Hope this helps!

Some good questions concerning the length limits. I think I could write a 5000 word essay on this subject (and still not adequately address the subject for all MO Reservoirs), but since I am a retired biologist I don't feel compelled to elaborate to that extent. So here goes the short version: First of all, let me assure you that there has been a lot of research went in to selecting the appropriate size limits for the each of the various MO lakes. Also, it is a very complicated with many social and biological considerations. These include: Growth Rates, fecundity (reproductive rates), harvest rates and fishing pressure, fish densities, age and length of maturity, Natural mortality, weight/length relationships (overall condition), food availability at the utilizable sizes in relation to fish sizes, angler preferences and regulation simplicity and enforcement. Add to those the need to manage for optimal production over the long term due to changing water conditions and yearly forage fish density fluctuations. Now to get down to a complicated simple explanation of why some lakes are 9" and others 10". Truman is a more turbid lake, therefore reproductive survival of crappie is better than clearer lakes like Stockton, most likely because other sight feeders cannot see them to feed on them. Additionally, Truman is more fertile and that increases zooplankton production, feeding the baby crappie, equaling better survival of the fry. Also, because of the turbidity, sight feeders like crappie cannot see their prey as easily, leading to slower growth rates. That means that if you would protect crappie in Truman to 10 inches (or greater) the crappie would likely over-populate and growth rates would slow even more. So, take that same logic and apply to Stockton, if a 12 inch length limit were applied, the growth rate could slow due to increased densities and add a year or years of poor forage production, to a point that it would take longer for them to reach the legal size, possibly effecting overall condition (skinny fish) with less ability to reproduce. Stockton experienced poor shad production in the late 90's anyone remember that? And, what was the crappie fishing like at that time? Note: Surveys have shown that most anglers would rather catch more medium sized crappie rather than a few larger ones. I am convinced that the 10 inch crappie length limit is right for Stockton. Boy, I could go on and on but its late time to hit the sack!

Yes, they often have good sized egg sacks this time of year. And, with the abundance of food and conditions this year (high water, shad populations, water quality, etc.) the crappie are in fine condition which translates to extra energy to prep for reproduction!

GEEEZ, you did it again! You"re the man! BTW, I'd like to find a "one and done" when it comes to bowhunting.

Hey Lifes2Short, Holler real load if you need a Yamaha to pull that Merc back to the ramp!! Hee Hee Glad to hear your back underway!

Gaining weight and not on a stringer. Guess I've been following the wrong kind of food lately!

Don't mean to make light of the problem, and hold up for the illegal giggers but Great Blue Herons poke holes in fish too! I used to see that at the fish hatchery all the time.

I believe they are legal to gig or bowfish in impounded waters (lakes) in the daytime all year. But they would be extremely difficult to gig in streams in the daytime due to their rapid movements and just plain wariness during daylight hours. You SM bass guys need to realize that suckers and other non-game fish can mess with the spawning activity of game fish including the consumption of eggs. So, gigging them and keeping the sucker population (Numbers) under control may be a good thing.

Try fishing for a few days at 60 ft. deep ( or far below the summer thermocline) in any lake and see what you catch! Not just a theory....................

I like to fish where the fish are. End of story.

The fish you catch are where you catch them! huh? Like I said, fish will chase forage fish OR feed outside of their comfort zone if needed. But, the thermocline is usually there in summer months and that zone is where they are most comfortable. Junk science or not, it is an important factor that warrants consideration. Most anglers know that there are a lot of factors involved with being successful. By the way, I guess climate change is a myth (junk) too.

Certainly the thermocline relates directly to temperature change over a short distance of depth. But more importantly from a fishing standpoint, the oxygen content corresponds directly to how deep the fish can survive for any length of time. In other words, if oxygen is below 3 ppm below the thermocline the fish will not stay there for very long. I have often heard people talk about catching fish below the thermocline but I think that happens only when fish are pursuing prey species and for short periods of time. Keep in mind that larger fish tend to have higher oxygen demands than smaller fish (varies some by species). Also, most freshwater, warm water sportfish species become stressed at anything above 80-82 degrees F. which usually results in less feeding activity. And, in turn causes them to seek thermal refuge in that thin transitional layer of mixed cool and warm water at the thermocline, only leaving that "comfort zone" for short feeding periods. For the above reasons, I really don't buy the stories about giant catfish living at 100-200 ft. deep (reports by divers) in Missouri lakes, especially during the summer months. Anyone want to weigh in on that?

Hey, There's a whole lot of folks that would be happy with 5 keeper eyes in a day! Maybe that beautiful wife had you distracted though!!??? Hmmm ....

Again, Thanks for the link Mojorig. Interesting that the July 10 readings indicate a thermocline on the upper little Sac at around 21 ft. Not so much from the temperature standpoint but from the D.O. reading. I have a feeling that the flow thru the system caused by the flooding is playing havoc with the thermocline. I image that there are areas of the lake that are more "protected" from the central or main lake flows that the thermocline does exist. The sudden drop off of D. O. may be partially due to the accumulation of decomposing vegetation washed in by the floods. All in All its been one crazy summer on the lake (s)!

Does anyone know if the thermocline ever developed this summer? Maybe the high water and subsequent high releases kept it from forming???

Where's the Docks? I used to fish LOZ a few years back. A great fishing lake IF you go in the winter!

No doubt where lmt out gets the name!