eric1978

No management was needed back then because there were very few anglers harvesting fish, in comparison with today's numbers. The fish could easily sustain their populations without protection. I'm sorry Drew, but making the case that most of Missouri's streams couldn't be improved is an excercise in futility. Maybe we don't have what it takes for "trophy" status, but there's just no denying they could be better. I don't understand why a devoted angler like yourself wouldn't want to fight for that.

I hear you Deer Slayer, and I don't think anyone wants to stop you from a tasty meal every now and then. I enjoy fish very much, too. But I think you're missing the middle ground...how about a slot limit, where you could keep a few fish around 13 inches, and one big fish over 18 or 20 inches? Those fish, mixed in with some spots or largemouth, would make for quite a meal. In fact, you could make the argument that you would be able to harvest more meat from a slot limit, since smaller fish are much more abundant and easier to catch than big fish. And I have to ask, since you brought it up...would you harvest smallmouth from a river if you knew it was detrimental to the population, even though it is technically legal? What guides your philosophy on harvesting fish...the law, or what you think is ethically right? I'm not trying to jump on you, I'm just curious about your views, because there are many anglers who agree with you.

Might wanna see what fishinwrench has to say about it. Shoot him a PM.

Per MDC: "The success of the management areas led to a statewide effort to identify, study and improve Missouri’s best black bass streams." Ozark streams are perfectly capable of producing greater numbers of trophy-sized fish, given that they are managed correctly. Have you ever seen the stringers in those old black and white photos? Guess the old-timers just knew something we didn't.

I can't stand all the coverage of this nonsense. It's nobody's business. He's a human being, he screwed up. The only thing that matters is the guy's golf swing.

?? Not sure what you mean KC. Guess you'll have to spell it out for me...maybe I'm a little slow.

Good thing for Tiger he's a billionaire...well, soon to be a half-billionaire. His PR manager really screwed him by recommending he get married.

I support that 100%, and if I knew there was some way I could contribute to realizing improvement in these kinds of areas, I would be more than willing to participate. There's a difference between "use" of resources and "exploitation" of resources. If people are taking fish out of a stream faster than they are able to reproduce and grow, then I call it exploitation. Just because we have the right to do something, doesn't mean we should do it. People have the right to be lousy parents, but chances are their kids will ultimately be unable to access their full potential. Same thing goes with stream management and fish.

Kathy, I can only speak for myself, but you have my permission to use anything I contributed to this thread or any other pertaining to this issue. I would personally love to see an article in the Post about this issue to raise awareness of the growing concerns that smallmouth anglers have about a beloved resource. This thread is not about slamming MDC. Its only goal is to identify the problems that many people feel the Smallmouth Management Area program has. In many people's opinions, including my own, thus far the approach being implemented is, while better than nothing, quite insufficient.

I stored the number on my phone ness, and you can bet I'll use it if I get the chance...unfortunately I have terrible service, so even if I saw a violation, I wouldn't be able to make the call. But I would try.

Okay, I hear you Chief. But you did have the choice of "SMAs for selected streams," and I think for the streams you believe need thinning out, a slot limit would be ideal to get rid of some of the smaller fish while protecting the bigger fish. My opinion is that some regulation is needed on almost every stream, and in some cases that would include harvesting some fish if it would be beneficial to the stream. Length and creel limits are only one aspect to the problems with our fisheries, absolutely positively true. But I really don't feel like I have very much control over habitat, land use practices, forage, water quality, etc. However, I think (possibly naively) that since MDC is a function of the state government, and I'm a tax paying citizen, that I have a tiny bit of say about the decisions they make. I know many factors contribute to smallmouth's problems, but just because you can't stop a farmer from letting his cows into the river, you don't say, well, screw it...why bother with regs if this problem can't be fixed. To me it's all the more reason to implement support. And man, seriously, I'm not bashing MDC. I just think they could do better. I don't think they can fix all the world's problems, but they can help fix a few in our streams.

Yes, there are ALWAYS going to be some bad apples...no getting around that. And guess what? I don't care how many agents are hired by MDC, they're never gonna catch every poacher. You know what the consequences for a DWI are? They're pretty steep, but people drink and drive ALL THE TIME. They roll the dice and hope for the best. And they know they got a pretty good chance of getting away with it as long as they don't run into someone, because there just aren't enough cops to watch every road at all times. You gotta set the laws based on what is right and wrong, not based on how many tickets will be written.

I think the emphasis on enforcement is overblown. Most people will follow the regulations even if they don't like them simply because it's the law. We all know some people are going to break the law, whether it's enforced or not...would more agents roaming around be a deterrent to those people? Of course. But I think the majority of poaching is being done by people that are simply UNAWARE of the regulations, not by those who are intentionally ignoring them and breaking the law.

Very cool!

Interesting....I find it curious that everyone thus far has stated they always C & R, yet one person prefers no change in regulations. I can't figure out why a person who always practices C & R would care if the regs were tightened...Maybe that person would like to explain that, just for conversation's sake.???

Cool beans. I heard a rumor a 9 pounder was caught there last week. The guy said he saw the picture of it but couldn't verify the weight. But he said it was BIG nonetheless. I'm guessing it's probably frozen over again right now but might be thawed out by Thursday. How deep was he fishing his jig?

I don't know whether or not they trust the biologists...I think the main problem is that MDC doesn't like to make tough choices that will draw heat from one group or another. They are afraid of the political ramifications of changing the regs if you ask me...has nothing to do with what the biologists say. We all know that most streams could use some additional support, and so do the biologists, but those opinions are gagged by the beauracracy side of the department. That's why I'd like to see a study done by a group that is uninfluenced by anything except science.

While I agree with Gavin, I wouldn't mind seeing an optional additional fee for those who want to harvest fish. For catch and release only, you pay the regular price. If you want to possess a creel, you need an additional stamp for that, and those funds should go directly to fund enforcement. Of course there would be riots in the streets over that change and it would never happen anyway. But I'd still like to see it.

I think that would be ideal for most of our streams. I would personally like to see a state-wide slot limit of 1 fish over 20" and 2 or 3 fish under 14. Some streams I would like to see pure C & R, but I would take anything over what they have now.

Yes it does Wayne, and actually the entire poll is geared toward streams. I'll fix that. Edit...looks like I can't change the wording on the poll questions because they've been voted on.

Let me know if you guys think these questions are flawed somehow. NOTE: All of these questions are geared toward streams, not reservoirs.

I don't always agree with you Chief, although for the most part I do, but I respect people who say what they think, regardless of its popularity. Of course that's coming from someone who HAS been dogpiled on for expressing his opinion, so maybe I'm just more aware of how crappy it feels when people try to twist things around and make you look like an idiot or a jerk because they don't agree with you.

Sounds like fun...good idea

Brand names don't matter as much as quality. There are a lot of good rods and reels out there. Get a couple that match what type of fishing you do, and go with 'em. Mid quality is plenty sufficient...really expensive stuff is unnecessary and cheap stuff sucks. Too many opinions to narrow stuff down for you.

http://www.missourismallmouthalliance.org/MSA/Welcome.html