eric1978

I would gladly trade the new waders and various other fishing toys I'll be getting for Xmas for new smallie regs. I'll be waiting until next year to worry about tricycles and dollhouses (hopefully not the dollhouses). Let me enjoy my last Xmas as a fisherman, would ya? Because it's soon goin' bye.

That's a good point, but if you made the upper stretch a Red Ribbon, it would most likely improve the size of the fish, and most people prefer to catch a few bigger fish than a bunch of dinks. I do agree though, that Blue Ribbon regs should be saved for the streams that have the greatest potential for trophy fish, like the middle stretches of the Current and Niangua, for example...bigger streams that don't have the spot problems. I really think that most streams would do well under the Red Ribbon regulations.

Agreed! I think a more comprehensive website would be a great tool for gaining more membership. I've considered joining several times, but when I'd go to the website to check what they've been up to, the lack of info kind of stunted my motivation. Having a forum at the MSA website I think is a great idea. MSA members could post on current issues and upcoming events, and visitors could read everything, and I think it would be a great way to pique people's interest who are somewhat inclined to join.

I'm gonna try to nudge this thread back towards where I had originally intended it go. I'd like to see the entire Meramec System under the Yellow Ribbon regulations because of the spots. However, I could live with the Huzzah and Courtois being under the Red Ribbon regs. I could also live with the Meramec above MSP under a Blue or Red Ribbon...but for simplification...the whole Meramec goes Yellow, along with all of the Bourbeuse and Big Rivers. I'd like to see Jack's Fork under Red, which would actually be a decrease in regulation, and I'd like to see the Current under Blue because I think that river has the potential to be a trophy smallmouth river.

I met patfish out at 28 today, and we spent a few hours in the drizzle. The lake's almost completely thawed right now, but it's gonna be frozen back over by next week, so I'd get out there soon. The bite seemed a little slow today, except for about a half hour we were tearin' em up. Probably caught 25 or so between us...jigs and woolly buggers caught some...eggs seemed most productive. This fish of Pat's was the best one: I still can't figure out how to post pics here without making them HUGE

Right now I'm not really interested in what MDC may or may not be willing to do in regard to this idea. My only interest right now is what it would do to smallmouth numbers and sizes in a purely scientific sense. I know it's a shot in the dark, but everything starts with an idea. The White Paper in itself provides enough data to establish a rough idea of what Ribbons would likely be appropriate for many streams that were studied. Studies will continue to be made by MDC, and they could change and modify regulations as they see fit as they collected more data. The trout ribbon areas do not cover the length of entire streams, but they could...all they'd have to do is say so. It just isn't relevant if the fish don't populate the entire stream. In the case of smallmouth, usually they do, so a designated area from headwater to confluence would usually be desirable.

They use the Ribbon areas for trout, so I don't see why they couldn't do it for smallmouth. I don't think it would be practical to break single streams into more than one color. I would think the easiest way to implement it would be to make an entire stream the same color, both for enforcement convenience and to make it easier for people to understand. I don't really get why MDC is worried about slightly more involved regulations. It's their job to know them and they are easy to learn in five minutes. I've always thought certain regulations should be printed on fishing licenses, and that would be a simple way to convey the basic rules of each Ribbon area.

I thought these suggestions were the best (perhaps only) so far in terms of ideas for state-wide protection for smallmouth. This system for regulations offers a type of management for any stream in Missouri, and is versatile enough to be used appropriately according to the needs of each individual stream, yet is simple enough to be easily understood by even the most casual angler. Since it's the only real "plan" I've seen thus far, I thought it would be good to knock around ideas concerning such a plan, and get all your thoughts on it. We have to galvanize behind some kind of idea, so why not start here. On this thread, how about leaving out comments about lack of enforcement, how pushing for regulations is a waste of energy, etc. Start another thread if you want to rain on the parade. I'd like to hear opinions on how these regulations could be tweaked, and which "Ribbon" you guys think would be best suited for your favorite and most familiar waters. Here's what they came up with:

All that matters is the memory. I just like to document my memories because my brain ain't what it used to be.

If you're really that inclined to go swimming when you wade, maybe you should consider just taking a disposable. They won't be great pics, but you can still scan them in and claim your bragging rights when you land that 20 pound pike on 7X.

Well, that's not exactly true. In the realm of science, theories are often fact, but they remain named a "theory" until it is generally accepted by all the slower members of our species. Take evolution, for example. It's called a theory, but it is a fact...some people just haven't caught up yet. But I realize this is just semantics and I get your overall point.

All good points as usual from you CWF. Now, let's just say that everything you just stated is true. Which is better, tighter regulations, or nothing at all? I agree.

Don't forget your camera. You'll need it up there.

Beautiful. Sounds good to me. Al's concept simplified by Gavin's color coding sounds like a simple and logical way to provide state-wide protection for smallies. So what now? How do we get that done?

Intellectually I know they won't hurt me, but I just can't bring myself to eat a fillet that had just ONE of those nasty little things in it, picked out or not. I'm not even close to a picky eater, but I gotta draw the line there. Just can't do it.

I don't know most of the streams farther south or west of the Current, so I won't make any assumptions on what I think would be best on those rivers. If Santa was willing to give me whatever I wanted for SMAs, I would have him extend the Jack's Fork SMA to cover the entire Current, but instead of 1 fish 18 inches, I would make it 1 fish 20 inches. I would want all streams in the Meramec River system, which include Big River, the Bourbeuse River, Huzzah and Courtois Creeks, and other smaller creeks, to be C&R only for smallmouth and unlimited harvest for spotted bass. I would prefer the spotted bass be under a mandatory kill, but I don't think that would be realistic in terms of enforcement. Instead of the mandatory kill regulation, I would at least like to legally be able to humanely kill spotted bass and leave them where they are, so the spots that are so infested with yellow grubs that I couldn't fathom eating could still be removed from the river without dragging them around with me all day just to pitch them when I got home. And honestly, I'd like to see jetboats outlawed above certain points on these rivers as well, though I know I'll catch some flack from you guys about that. They're dangerous in skinny water and they facilitate giggers to kill or injure game fish, whether it be purposefully or not.

Look on ebay. There are some real steals on there. I'd even consider buying something used from a seller who has outstanding feedback. Just get something cheap.

The grubs...for me, it's so disgusting that I can't bring myself to clean a fish I see has even one. So for a while I was just killing the spots and tossing them on the bank, even though I hate killing any animal and not harvesting the meat. But then I found out that was actually illegal. The law says it is illegal to waste the edible portion of a fish. After I found that out, I would bring along a stringer and drag the darn things along with me all day, even though I had no intention of cleaning them when I got home. I hate to admit it, but there were several occassions last year that I actually released some spots because I was just too lazy to keep them and I also didn't want to break the law, as stupid as it is according to this particular situation. I plan to harvest every spot I catch next year, grubs or not, but it would be really nice if they could also change that law about wasting fish for just this one case on these few rivers.

I guess it just seemed that way since you mentioned you'd like to see some increase in regulations on some streams in your area, but at the same time you suggest to the folks concerned about several eastern streams we should just grin and bear the problems they're having. I think many streams unjustifiably get the shaft from MDC, and of course that's what all these threads have been about. I want to see increased SMAs across the state. One stream is not more "important" than another, and regulations should be implemented and then evaluated and modified until every fishery is producing numbers and sizes to the best of its capabilities. We'll never know how well a particular stream could do if we don't experiment, which is for the most part what's happening...nothing.

Test for me, too. Seems easy enough. Boy, I've sure been doing multiquotes the hard way. Glad you guys brought it to my attention. I like the update. It does seem a bit slower though. Edit: But I don't know why my picture comes out so huge when you click on it and I can't figure out how to shrink it. Oh well. http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/8123/busch1218006.jpg

If spotted bass grew to the same size that smallmouth did in the Meramec, we may be having a different conversation, although I would still be saying I prefer smallmouth because I think they are prettier and better fighters, and the spots would still be invasive regardless of their size. But the fact that they remain small is just the cherry on top that makes me really hate them in the streams in question. They really are good for nothing there. Talk about a logistical nightmare...If MDC tried to implement a kill regulation on spotted bass, the apparent troubles with enforcement we see now would pale in comparison. I wouldn't mind seeing that become a law, but I would really just prefer to see all Meramec River System streams become C&R only for smallmouth, and no limit for spots, and hope that the majority of the people would obey the law and be happy to eat the tastier meat from the huge pile of spotted bass you can easily catch on any of those streams...and I think for the most part people would.

I don't know how many more times I can beat this same dead horse, but I guess I'll give it one more try. Yes, the spotted bass migrated to the Meramec, but only after man made that possible for them to do so by tinkering with the waterways. It's not natural. It's not evolution. And it's not okay to turn a blind eye to it. If it's not a problem that can be "solved," then we have to live with that, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to help the situation any way we can, which means new regulations that say you can take few to no smallmouth and all the spotted bass you want...that's good for the fishery. And what good are regulations without enforcement? Better than nothing. It's better than nothing, isn't it? Yes, it's better than nothing, and unless you have another idea of how to solve this real problem, I suggest you either get on board, or stay neutral instead of standing in opposition to people who only want the same things for the streams they fish as you want for yours. Your argument about the spots that, well, they're there now, so that's the way it is...you might as well just embrace them...it doesn't hold any water, so to speak. It's a problem, and an attempt needs to be made to remedy that problem, period. Letting it go at its own peril is irresponsible and frankly just plain dumb since there are things we could at least try before giving up on it altogether. Let's see what happens after we try X and Y, then we can have another conversation.

I've pretty much been taking the camera every time I go lately. I like cataloging the better fish I catch, and you never know when you're gonna get that really big boy. It's the memory that counts the most, but you don't have a lot of bragging rights without the photo. I like looking back at the fish I caught after the trip, too, because I try to keep the fish out of the water as little as possible, and sometimes I don't get the greatest look at them. You can pick up a cheap digital camera on ebay for very little, and keep it in a waterproof box like a Pelican, as Chief suggested. I don't ever want to be out without one anymore. That twenty incher is a great fish, especially on the fly rod. Congrats.

For every spot in that river, there is seemingly one less smallmouth, and since that is not the river's natural predisposition, passing regulations to protect spotted bass is the exact opposite of what should be done. It makes no sense through the lens of conservation, and it makes no sense practically for angling opportunities...I don't know this as fact, but I have a feeling that spotted bass cannot reach large sizes easily in the Meramec system. A fish kill would make no sense because the spots would eventually find their way back and repopulate, and therefore MANAGEMENT through REGULATION seems to be the only way to HELP the river. Farther upstream there are far more smallmouth than spots, but their march continues, and that's why I think it's important to implement protection NOW to help the rightful inhabitants of the stream fight their battle against the invasive species. If your favorite smallmouth stream was being taken over by some invasive species of little catfish, and for every catfish you lost a smallmouth, would you just say, oh well, guess I'll fish for catfish? Or would you say, something's wrong here and something needs to be done to fix it? I'm guessing the latter. And look, I don't know how this conversation turned back into the old smallie vs. spot debate, but it's just one of the issues that concern me on just one of the river systems that I believe need help. I want to see new regulations and better management on ALL streams, including the ones closer to you, not just the ones that I fish frequently.

I can't help but think you'd have a different attitude if this problem was in your backyard instead of someone else's. The correct approach is not to shrug your shoulders and give up on a river and just move to another one. The correct approach is to implement a strategy to make the best out of a bad situation. That hasn't been done yet. Will you please explain why you think the Meramec River is not worthy of effort?