Other Ozark Stream Or Should I Say Smallie/spot Debate

[ozark trout fisher]

The Mother Ship is constant change and/or evolution. As was said on another thread of this subject, we appear to be experiencing a warming trend that I believe has precipitated movement by the Kentucky bass into waters that it has not been known to previously inhabit.

In that case, this migration would be caused by rising water temperatures in the Meramec River. But I am not aware that water temperatures are rising.... Maybe they are, but I've not heard of it.

I don't dispute that there is global warming going on, I know there is, but I am just not sure that the Meramec's water temperatures have been rising. Is there a way to figure out if they have been, I'm honestly asking.

[Wayne SW/MO]

Lot's of spots in SW Missourri too, including Table Rock. Where did those spots in the Rock come from? Not from the Mississippi.

The White is connected to the Mississippi and there were probably some Kentucky's in the mainstream White. The Spots/Kentucky's are native to Missouri, but they haven't competed heavily with the Smallmouth in the past. Lower, warmer waters creates a less desirable habitat for Smallies and one that is more desirable for the Spots. If the Spot population can be kept in check, there is some hope that any damage will be mitigated and when/if the streams return to some semblance of normal, the Smallies will rebound much quicker.

As for Otters, they weren't reintroduced to the same environment.

Southwest Missouri is showing some invasions of Spots/Kentucky's, Bryant creek comes to mind. It hasn't developed here like in the Southeast, but the Southeast doesn't have the large lakes with their large shad populations to attract and hold them. We have are problems, low water and floods most notably, but the term "Smallmouths galore" is more a dream then a reality.

The Spots, lower warmer water, and the mysterious disappearance of many Smallies during gigging season all contribute to keeping this great fishery from being what it could be. I don't know where we would be without the season closure during the river spawn, but I don't want to find out either. I would like to see more research on what effect the gigging season has on the populations.

[creek wader]

I tried to move this debate to a different post, it didn't work. So, I changed the title. ..... lol .... There ya go boys, have at it. ... Meanwhile, I'm going fish'n ... wader

[ness]

Eric, I'd tend to agree with your assessment of the situation.

Sorry Chief, but quoting anonymous scientists who you claim have spent their lives on the subject doesn't exactly build an air-tight case. And who cares if something happened 200 or 10,000 years ago? I'm sure you've spent a lot of time studying the topic, and on the water, but your positions and statistics are hardly scientific. Expanding the conversation to armadillos, birds and global warming doesn't help anyone zero in on an answer to the discussion at hand.

If you'd take a moment to read Eric's posts, I think you'd find they make a lot of sense. And he doesn't make any wild claims, just common-sense observations about a changing environment. Hard to argue with Eric's position, IMHO. Maybe that's why you argue around it?

I don't have a dog in this fight, but more and more of the posts here are counterproductive.

[Chief Grey Bear]

Don't apologize to me. It is obvious that it appears that I don't know what I am talking about. Therefore it doesn't appear that I can add to this discussion. So on that, I'll just let you guy's carry on.

[eric1978]

The Mother Ship is constant change and/or evolution. As was said on another thread of this subject, we appear to be experiencing a warming trend that I believe has precipitated movement by the Kentucky bass into waters that it has not been known to previously inhabit.

We must also remember that the borders of the historical home range of both of these species overlap in our area, so we are going to get movement into new territories. Especially with the warmer winters we have been having late. But warmer winters are not all that is warming the waters. One of the most significant habitat changes to occur is the removing of trees along not just the bigger streams but, mostly the smaller feeder streams. No shade means more heating by the sun. Just a few degrees difference can have a huge change and I think we are seeing that.

These are interesting points, and honestly I hadn't thought about warming being an issue on this topic. I do agree with Chief that if the water had substantially warmed in the Meramec in the last several decades, that could have been a factor in making the river more hospitable for spots. I'd be interested in seeing average temperature trends on the river over the last century, if they exist. I'll check into it.

I'm pretty sure that scientists say that the earth is about 1 degree F warmer, on average, than it was a century ago. That's significant in the sense that something is changing and we should be alarmed by that, but I'm not sure that that slight uptick in temperature would have a huge impact on migration, although I have heard some similar talk about the birds that Chief mentioned. Our planet is certainly changing, and I wouldn't be surprised to hear scientists attribute any number of biological anomalies to global warming. However, even if the lower Meramec, Big and Bourbeuse Rivers were, say, 5 degrees cooler than they are now, I think the spots could still easily survive and thrive in waters at that temperature. But the rivers couldn't have been 5 degrees cooler 50 years ago, and there weren't any spots in them then.

I could really see the clearing of trees and other industrial and agricultural warming contributors having an impact on rivers such as the Bourbeuse or Big, which are slow moving and have no major springs. But the Meramec is very heavily spring-fed, and until the Bourbeuse and Big Rivers join the Meramec, I have to believe that the water temps are quite consistent year after year, since the majority of the flow is rising from beneath the earth. And I suppose that those springs are what is keeping the spots from spreading to the upper Meramec, while the Bourbeuse and Big Rivers are seeing spots way high up and approaching the headwaters. It's only a matter of time before they occupy the entire lengths of both those rivers.

So we've found some common ground in terms of possible reasons the spots migrated to the Meramec. But all these reasons are still man-made reasons, and still make the spots non-native and invasive. If they migrated here because we made their migrational waterways cleaner and more hospitable through dams and clean-water acts, we are responsible for their presence. If they are spreading into waterways that used to be slightly too cool for them, but now find the temps perfect becase of deforestation or global warming, we're responsible for that as well. Any way you slice it, if it wasn't for man, the spots wouldn't be there, so it's up to man to fix the problem we created, in my opinion.

[laker67]

This is only an observation and not directed to any one involved in this topic.

As a kid, in the 50's and the 60's, I learned to fly fish in the most of the creeks and rivers in camden, miller, and laclede county. In all of those creeks and rivers I caught smallmouth, largemouth, and red eyed kentuckys. In all of the creeks, the kentuckys were the most common. To me they were a creek bass, and the largemouth was more of a rarity. That was 50 years ago and they were well established back then. Bagnell dam and tunnel dam had been in place for years, which means that kentuckys had to be in the system prior to the dam. Now if you fish a tributary that empties into a tributary that eventually empties into a lake. Most of those dams have been in place since at least the fifties. I don't see kentuckys being a "new" problem. They have been in the rivers and streams that I fished for 50 plus years. By making this next statement, I will expect to see my head on the chopping block.

I personally think, that continual catch and release, leads to overpopulation and stunted growth rates. You see it most often in ponds, but I believe it has the same effect in rivers and especially smaller streams. Pretty soon the fish will eat up most of the crawdads, frogs, and other aquatic food that the creek can maintain.

Just an observation, thanks for listening.

[ozark trout fisher]

Don't apologize to me. It is obvious that it appears that I don't know what I am talking about. Therefore it doesn't appear that I can add to this discussion. So on that, I'll just let you guy's carry on.

Oh stop it Chief. No one is saying your opinion isn't worth hearing, we're all just saying it ain't the ONLY opinion worth hearing. I know you know your stuff, and I'm sure you're a good fisherman. No one is debating that you're a knowledgeable fisherman, and you know that full well. Some people happen to disagree with you, and you shouldn't necessarily jump to the conclusion that we're coming after you personally. I WANT to hear what you have to say about the spotted bass issue. I find your posts informative and interesting. I just don't want to be attacked personally.

[eric1978]

This is only an observation and not directed to any one involved in this topic.

As a kid, in the 50's and the 60's, I learned to fly fish in the most of the creeks and rivers in camden, miller, and laclede county. In all of those creeks and rivers I caught smallmouth, largemouth, and red eyed kentuckys. In all of the creeks, the kentuckys were the most common. To me they were a creek bass, and the largemouth was more of a rarity. That was 50 years ago and they were well established back then. Bagnell dam and tunnel dam had been in place for years, which means that kentuckys had to be in the system prior to the dam. Now if you fish a tributary that empties into a tributary that eventually empties into a lake. Most of those dams have been in place since at least the fifties. I don't see kentuckys being a "new" problem. They have been in the rivers and streams that I fished for 50 plus years. By making this next statement, I will expect to see my head on the chopping block.

I personally think, that continual catch and release, leads to overpopulation and stunted growth rates. You see it most often in ponds, but I believe it has the same effect in rivers and especially smaller streams. Pretty soon the fish will eat up most of the crawdads, frogs, and other aquatic food that the creek can maintain.

Just an observation, thanks for listening.

laker,

If you had fished in the Meramec River system back in the 50s and 60s, you wouldn't have been catching spotted bass, because they weren't there. They are native in the waters you were fishing when you were a kid, and they lived and continue to live in harmony with the other species in those ecosystems because they've had millenia to adapt.

As far as overpopulation goes, that's the farthest thing from a problem for smallmouth on any stream in the Ozarks (that I know of), spotted bass or not. Even if anglers were required to catch and release every smallmouth they caught, there still wouldn't be an overpopulation problem due to poachers, giggers, otters, invasive species, habitat degradation, guthooks, stress deaths, etc...

I'll just put it this way: If you could time travel, would you rather fish your favorite stream a few hundred years ago, when it was untouched by man, or would you rather fish that same stream now, with many of the fish taken or choked out? I know which one I'd choose.

[Buzz]

The White is connected to the Mississippi and there were probably some Kentucky's in the mainstream White. The Spots/Kentucky's are native to Missouri, but they haven't competed heavily with the Smallmouth in the past. Lower, warmer waters creates a less desirable habitat for Smallies and one that is more desirable for the Spots. If the Spot population can be kept in check, there is some hope that any damage will be mitigated and when/if the streams return to some semblance of normal, the Smallies will rebound much quicker.

As for Otters, they weren't reintroduced to the same environment.

Southwest Missouri is showing some invasions of Spots/Kentucky's, Bryant creek comes to mind. It hasn't developed here like in the Southeast, but the Southeast doesn't have the large lakes with their large shad populations to attract and hold them. We have are problems, low water and floods most notably, but the term "Smallmouths galore" is more a dream then a reality.The Spots, lower warmer water, and the mysterious disappearance of many Smallies during gigging season all contribute to keeping this great fishery from being what it could be. I don't know where we would be without the season closure during the river spawn, but I don't want to find out either. I would like to see more research on what effect the gigging season has on the populations.

Wayne, I'm not sure if you read this post ( below ) I made on another thread earlier in the month. I'm not going to divulge the stream I was writing about either, but the term "Smallmouth Galore" is not an incorrect statement. And although I don't see any sign of gigging in our area I do agree that it would probably be the most devastating to big brownies.

We still have a couple of nearly untouched Smallmouth streams in S.W. MO. that can rival any in the state.

I don't see any change coming soon. And, until MDC does start stocking Smallmouth, I will just enjoy what we have and not worry too much about what it was like a couple of hundred years ago.

BTW, we actually have a couple of streams that have an over abundance of Smallmouth( if that's possible ), to the point that it may be stunting their overall growth. Just sayin'.

Buzz

This is only an observation and not directed to any one involved in this topic.

As a kid, in the 50's and the 60's, I learned to fly fish in the most of the creeks and rivers in camden, miller, and laclede county. In all of those creeks and rivers I caught smallmouth, largemouth, and red eyed kentuckys. In all of the creeks, the kentuckys were the most common. To me they were a creek bass, and the largemouth was more of a rarity. That was 50 years ago and they were well established back then. Bagnell dam and tunnel dam had been in place for years, which means that kentuckys had to be in the system prior to the dam. Now if you fish a tributary that empties into a tributary that eventually empties into a lake. Most of those dams have been in place since at least the fifties. I don't see kentuckys being a "new" problem. They have been in the rivers and streams that I fished for 50 plus years. By making this next statement, I will expect to see my head on the chopping block.

I personally think, that continual catch and release, leads to overpopulation and stunted growth rates. You see it most often in ponds, but I believe it has the same effect in rivers and especially smaller streams. Pretty soon the fish will eat up most of the crawdads, frogs, and other aquatic food that the creek can maintain.

Just an observation, thanks for listening.

Laker, Thanks for your input.

As a C & R guy, I think you might have a good point. Don't get me wrong, I love to eat fish and I will admit to a small amount of laziness. I really just don't want to mess with cleaning them. And we are talking about all species of fish. Chief and I have talked about taking a few limits, but just haven't done it. Actually I think it would be most beneficial in the smallmouth stream that I wrote about being over populated with mostly smallish sized fish. There are a lot of good sized brownies in there but, the vast majority are in the 6 to 10 inch range.