The Late Great Lake Taneycomo

[taxidermist]

Dont know about jail time, but certainly taking the rod and reel and tackle can set them back.

We fish Taneycomo from time to time and same as on White River when you are in the restricted areas follow the rules.

One night last year we made it up the Point Royal area before dark, some fly guys on the bank. We were using white crappie jigs, Texas rigged with a split shot, cast up stream and left them drift down and were catching good bows, releasing them of course and the bank fly guys yelled at us about using power bait. it was dark and they could not see, but they were sure we were using power bait.

Sometimes its not the bait or lure its a different presentation or even a lure they have not seen. We have had really great luck with small stump jumpers in white maribou, not your typical trout lure.

Just for a change a few weeks back I tried Beatle Spins way down White River, thinking smallmouth bass maybe! No luck but the rainbows loved them, never in a million syears would I think Buffalo SHoals would produce trout on Beatler Spins.

Another really good lure I tie, (yes fly guys even me) is a huge black knat with red stinger on a #6 hook. Its different and bigger fish like them.

It dont take power bait in restricted areas to catch the fish. Matter of fact this year Power bait has not worked nearly as well for us on White River or below Fall Creek.

[troutchaser]

I'm one of the guys who voted no. I'll tell you why.

Have you noticed that every time someone talks about length limits, everyone else gets all fired up about shuffling and poaching? Length limits won't stop that, folks. I think most people who bellow about limits on fish size are more concerned about sounding like high-minded "conservationists" than the true health of the trout population in their home waters, so they tie the subject to something they know is unsportsmanlike or illegal so as to give it an equally sinister reputation. I'm not accusing anyone on this discussion board, so don't think I'm cyber-bullying, I've just had a lot of experiences - both online and face-to-face - that point to this.

I've found that most people in favor of extreme length limits are typically trophy hunters, and that ranks in the dregs of sportsmanship in my book. I enjoy catching big fish. Who doesn't? It's exciting. But that isn't why I fish. My personal opinion is that trying to grow more really big fish in the tailwater would simply diminish the accomplishment of catching a large trout. Then what? Start shipping in steelheads so we can catch really really big ones? Come on, guys. At some point you have to be happy with what you have. Taneycomo is a great trout fishing destination, but not because of the trophies. It's a beautiful place with beautiful fish.

Finally, I do keep fish from Taneycomo. They are always of legal size and they taste wonderful with some onions and bell peppers and butter. That being said, I enjoy catching a fat pig of a trout only to release it to grow larger and give the next angler a shot at catching it. If the length limit was increased, I'd feel the need to release every one of them. That seems to defeat the purpose of the put and take fishing program currently in place.

[laker67]

I'm one of the guys who voted no. I'll tell you why.

Have you noticed that every time someone talks about length limits, everyone else gets all fired up about shuffling and poaching? Length limits won't stop that, folks. I think most people who bellow about limits on fish size are more concerned about sounding like high-minded "conservationists" than the true health of the trout population in their home waters, so they tie the subject to something they know is unsportsmanlike or illegal so as to give it an equally sinister reputation. I'm not accusing anyone on this discussion board, so don't think I'm cyber-bullying, I've just had a lot of experiences - both online and face-to-face - that point to this.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Troutchaser,

First off, I would like to say thank you for your opinion. But I would like to point out that you are wrong about Murdoc adding shuffling, poaching,unsportsmanlike and illegal activities to his poll. Seems like the only subject matter of his poll concerned a 24 inch limit for browns. As posters got off the subject, he was quick to remind them that 24 inch was the "only" subject of the poll. You might have voted for all the wrong reasons.

[soggyfeet]

Troutchaser

I am very impressed that you responed to the post after voteing no. I have been wanting to hear the other side. I agree that increaseing th length will not stop shuffeling, or poaching(only observant fisherman are going to dampen that). Another thought I had to go with yours is how much more fishing pressure can Tany handle once word gets out. I understand its a very popular place now but just think what it will be like wiht huge limits. And how many times can a Brown of 20 in or more be caught before it harms them. Sounds like one time and they are pretty well wiped out( I would know the only browns I've caught were well under 20)

[troutchaser]

I didn't mean to imply that the poll included illegal or unethical behavior. I was referring to the other posts within the topic. Sorry for being unclear on that.

I voted "No" for the other reasons I listed. Frankly, I think it's a bad idea. A 24" length limit is simply to please the trophy hunters and I don't care for trophy hunters. They truly sully the fine art of fly fishing. "Bigger fish, bigger stories" is a really poor reason to attempt to change current regulations.

There are big trout in Taneycomo already. If you can't catch them, improve your skills rather than asking the state to provide bigger fish. But that's just this fly fisher's bluntly stated opinion !

[laker67]

I didn't mean to imply that the poll included illegal or unethical behavior. I was referring to the other posts within the topic. Sorry for being unclear on that.

I voted "No" for the other reasons I listed. Frankly, I think it's a bad idea. A 24" length limit is simply to please the trophy hunters and I don't care for trophy hunters. They truly sully the fine art of fly fishing. "Bigger fish, bigger stories" is a really poor reason to attempt to change current regulations.

There are big trout in Taneycomo already. If you can't catch them, improve your skills rather than asking the state to provide bigger fish. But that's just this fly fisher's bluntly stated opinion !

And that was exactly what the poll was asking for, pro & con on the subject. Thanks!

[jdmidwest]

A 24" length limit should both insure that there will be alot of fish to catch and some of them should get a chance to breed and produce. It would be hard for them to breed due to all of the shuffling around on the redds and inconsistant water flows during the spawning season.

Why would you want poachers to go to jail where we have to spend our tax dollars feeding and housing them? Fine them heavy and take their equipment away. Make them do community service like clean up the stream.

As far as the illegals, most of them carry an Obama for President sign, but McCain likes to keep them busy in his yard, so if McCain gets elected, poaching will go down!

Fishing and politics all in one.

[laker67]

I didn't mean to imply that the poll included illegal or unethical behavior. I was referring to the other posts within the topic. Sorry for being unclear on that.

I voted "No" for the other reasons I listed. Frankly, I think it's a bad idea. A 24" length limit is simply to please the trophy hunters and I don't care for trophy hunters. They truly sully the fine art of fly fishing. "Bigger fish, bigger stories" is a really poor reason to attempt to change current regulations.

There are big trout in Taneycomo already. If you can't catch them, improve your skills rather than asking the state to provide bigger fish. But that's just this fly fisher's bluntly stated opinion !

Troutchaser,

In 2 separate posts you have really hammered "trophy hunters". I'm assuming that you mean "sight fishermen" who target big fish. A style of fishing that was developed in the trout parks about 40 years ago. You must have had a really bad experience with trophy hunters. I would like to hear about it and know if it happened at t-como or some trout park.

I personally know several "sight fishermen". They are without exception some of the finest sportsmen and finest trout fishermen in the state of Missouri.

Tell me more.

[Ryno]

I think you'll get the stories no matter what...so what if the brown trout length limit is increased, if it's eaters your after there's thousands of rainbows out there. I haven't met a fisherman that prefers browns over rainbows.

[Don]

Troutchaser,

I see where you are coming from. I guess just how many meathunters will keep those between 20 and 24. I see that you think most will release in that group of big fish that it won't change what's really caught and released down there anyhow. The proposal does mean more brownies back into the lake for those meathunters or live trout mounters who obey the law. That's why i voted yes.

The weirdest part about it all is that WHY large browns should be kapt at all above a certain length limit? Does anyone have a LEGITIMATE answer?

C & R.....Don May