Chief Grey Bear

Looks great!!

A crock can be your best friend. As lean as deer is I would suggest adding a can of beef broth. I have and it is freaking delicious!!

I just can't do hominy.

next time we're out, I'll make you some of my Brownie Breakfast Burrito Bombs! No chocolate involved!

Oh I bet that would be delicious with some smallmouth filets!!

One of us did.

Is this the new Ned?

It sure as hell ain't me doing the sensationalizing. Its funny to read your take on the MDC when you never leave a 10 mile square area. And that is being generous.

Well I have a choice. I can either go on what they say, which I have yet to figure out a reason for them to lie about stocking fish. Or I can go with you which is ardent hater of everything they do and is going on a one time mention from someone 20 years ago which if the MDC is just a bunch of liers....

http://mdc.mo.gov/discover-nature/field-guide/striped-bass I'd say from here. Where did you get the idea they quit stocking them in the '80's?

And fighting MoFoer's they are!

I thought you hated spots??? Looks like a chunk too!

I agree. There is a proper balance of forage and consumers. But we also need to maintain that balance. It's a tough living in the Ozarks. This region is not known for growing anthing large except it's women. Look at the deer. Overall there are no huge deer harvested. But that doesn't mean that occasionally a large buck won't be taken. The Ozarks has smaller, fast flowing water. The fish expend a great amount of energy here. As compared to the "world class" areas you want to pattern this area after. Can 20" fish be had here? Yes it's been proven. Consistantly? Maybe. But it's not as easy as just changing regulations. There are many factors that create fish like that. Habitat is a very key factor and as more and more people move into the Ozarks and land use changes, so does the equations that are conducive to what you are wanting.

What do you think a 15"-1 or 15"-3 or 18"-1 or any current proposal is going to do to overall populations?? It's almost a zero harvest. You will substantially increase the younger class fish which consumes the vast amount of available forage. Since these are also the more active fish and larger population wise, this can inturn cause even slower growth rates in what fish that do start reaching the sizes you are desiring. EDIT: i should have read your whole response. You can tell where I stopped reading by the addition of my last paragraph.

One important factor to remember, you can only sustain so many predator fish per water acre before you break over the line of sustainability. A pasture will only sustain a certain number of cows. Just because you put more in there and never take them to market, doesn't mean they will grow bigger. Just as some pastures will sustain a higher number of cows per acre than than others, streams are the same. But at any point, does anyone have any factual evidence that the current harvest regulations are causing a reduction in smallmouth populations as is continually marketed as gospel? I myself have yet to hear one fisheries biologist say or see one report stating that.

Can you provide me with a link to the report you are citing? I want to make sure I'm reading the same report you are. I don't want to speak out of turn without knowing for sure we are looking at the same data.

For true migration one must have the same beginning and ending point continually. Meaning that the smallmouth in question will have to move from its summer hole to its winter hole then back to the summer hole then back to...and so forth over its lifespan. Distance is not a real factor. Now there can be variables in that also. It may not be the same exact hole that he comes back to in summer or vise versa. But needs to be in a close proximity. Changes in habit or other factors may cause this action. From studies that have been done, it appears that most smallmouth spend the majority of their life in about a 100 yard stretch. But I don't think that means they don't move further for the winter. I think most of that data came before some of the tracking methods we have now. I would like to see a large scale radio-telemetry study in our waters. I think the results would be fascinating to study. There would be so many different factions to look at. Speaking of of the birds, a few years ago they were doing a study on duck movements. They were in North Dakota and radio tagged a group. This one particular duck the very next day was in southern Arkansas! Something like a 1300 mile trip in less than 24 hrs! That sucker had a hellasious tail wind!

That and true migration is to and fro. You will never get migration information from a tagging study. You have to have a multi-year radio telemetry study. Which did happen and if I remember, an extremely small percentage of those fish actually made a true migration. Some fish are just wanderers. I have read some fascinating reports of radio-telemetry tagged fish. One such was a Spoonbill tagged in the lower Grand River in OK that was later found in South Dakota. A few thousand mile trip. But yeah, you are right, everyone will acknowledge that fish move around to more favorable wintering spots. Some move farther than others. Some don't move at all.

My mistake.

Actually you'd think they have motors down. They've been that even longer. And they were created totally in house.

Gavin, I have great respect for you and what you stand for. But please don't stoop to this level. This is what a few select legislators were doing just a few short months ago. It's this "if you don't manage the way I want it managed, I'll force you to manage it my way because that is the way I want it!", that causes great division. Does not anyone want to have a conversation that promotes the best possible solutions that will work best for ALL concerned? This is exactly what we blame our federal government of doing and then here we are doing the exact same thing. To accuse the MDC of doing nothing for the last 20 years is ludicrous. Since establishing the SBBSMA's, they have continually monitored them and areas outside the SBBSMA's to establish if they do indeed produce the desired results as designed. And they are studying the possible migration habits of the smallmouth. But they also have other commitments they must pay attention to also. Do know who your local fisheries biologist is? Does he know who you are? If not, why don't you invest the same amount of time speaking with him and learning what is going on as you do on here belittling them. I think a few of you on here should do the same. I can tell from the comments you need to.

Oh I did. But I don't forsee any give and take happening. I think their minds are pretty much made up on what's coming down the pike from the conversations I've had.

At the table? Who are they negotiating with??

I agree. It must be me because that sucker looks much bigger than 9 and change.

While do a little research for the Griesedieck sign, I ran across this. I took a screen shot. Im sure Mitch will spot it right off.