Mdc's Smallmouth Management Area Selection

[eric1978]

Do you have link to confirm that only one biologist worked on this project?

I did a small bit of resreach yesterday and found that there is in excess of 300 endangered species, plants, animal, and incects, 66 of those being fish, in the state of Missouri. Some of these are only found in Missouri, nowhere else on earth.

Smallmouth bass were not on the list.

No, Chief, I don't have any link, and you know I was taking liberties when I said ONE biologist. I'm sure there are others involved.

I know smallmouth aren't "endangered," but I'm reaching the point where I wouldn't hesitate to call them "threatened" in Ozark streams, generally speaking. I think other species are just as important and just as deserving of protection as smallmouth, especially if they are in more immediate trouble. But hey, I'm a smallmouth angler...it's one of my favorite things to do, so I guess it's no surprise I have stronger opinions about that species than others.

[drew03cmc]

No, Chief, I don't have any link, and you know I was taking liberties when I said ONE biologist. I'm sure there are others involved.

I know smallmouth aren't "endangered," but I'm reaching the point where I wouldn't hesitate to call them "threatened" in Ozark streams, generally speaking. I think other species are just as important and just as deserving of protection as smallmouth, especially if they are in more immediate trouble. But hey, I'm a smallmouth angler...it's one of my favorite things to do, so I guess it's no surprise I have stronger opinions about that species than others.

Umm...threatened? Since Missouri officially acknowledges one strain of smallmouth in Missouri, and in the headwater creeks, they are abundant, I hesitate to call them anything but plentiful. If they recognized two, one would be threatened at best.

[eric1978]

Umm...threatened? Since Missouri officially acknowledges one strain of smallmouth in Missouri, and in the headwater creeks, they are abundant, I hesitate to call them anything but plentiful. If they recognized two, one would be threatened at best.

Great. Nice work. Wow, your devotion to preserving our fisheries is just staggering. I hope you enjoy the moment you realize your oppositional position has brought to fruition nothing more that a detriment to the activity you proclaim to have interest in. You are part of the problem, not the solution. You should lie silent instead of pushing in opposition for only opposition's sake. You have no position. Why even post on OAF? Go gig some game fish, I'm sure you support that.

[Chief Grey Bear]

I think that was really uncalled for. Are we to remain silent because we don't express the same view point as you?

I have had the pleasure of fishing with Andy and we got into some pretty indepth conversations about fish and fisheries. And can tell you without doubt he has spent a lot of time researching and learning. He is very knowlegeable and it is a pleasure to have a conversation with him.

So lets get back to the discussion.

It is hard to shed a tear for you boy's on the east side when we read post like this:

MDC's official mantra is that habitat degradation is the smallie's biggest problem, and I don't disagree. But smallmouth are surprisingly resilient fish when it comes to habitat. I could take you to upper Big River, the most abused stream in the Ozarks. Flows 30-70 cfs in summer water levels. So choked with lead mine waste that the gravel bars and bottom are much more fine sand and gravel, the crushed tailings, than chert and rock rubble like a normal Ozark stream. The gravel bars are almost completely sterile because the crushed tailings are completely sterile and they fill in all the spaces in the gravel that would allow seeds to sprout out of the water and bottom organisms to live underwater. Deep water on this stretch is maybe 3 feet, with absolutely no place on it that's much over 5 feet. Long stretches are less than two feet deep. Plus it's right in the middle of an expanding urbanized area, with subdivisions everywhere, so the land use practices are exceedingly poor. Plenty of denuded and eroding banks. Poorly treated sewage running into it from a population center of more than 30,000 people. And...surprisingly good fishing. In fact, this is one stream section that IS overpopulated--you can tell because the larger fish have big heads and slender bodies. At least they are overpopulated for the lack of habitat! Nobody drives very far to fish this section of Big River, so it doesn't get a whole lot of pressure. And spotted bass are gradually increasing at the expense of smallmouth. It's had the 1 fish 15 inch limit on smallies and the 12 fish no length limit on spots for a few years.

Point is, the population of BASS (forget the species for a minute) is strong, in spite of terrible habitat. If anything, it shows that if the spotted bass weren't there, the smallies would be doing just fine. But in such a population in such poor habitat, if fishing pressure was much greater they'd need some protection. And since I still catch 20 inchers out of this stretch once in a while, protection that maximized preserving the bigger fish would probably work to produce more 20 inchers. As was said above, it would be ideal if we could improve the habitat, but I think you can also maximize the production of bigger fish out of the habitat you have. (And by the way, the MDC biologists are seriously brainstorming ways of bettering the habitat on this stretch.)

Just my opinion of course.

[drew03cmc]

Great. Nice work. Wow, your devotion to preserving our fisheries is just staggering. I hope you enjoy the moment you realize your oppositional position has brought to fruition nothing more that a detriment to the activity you proclaim to have interest in. You are part of the problem, not the solution. You should lie silent instead of pushing in opposition for only opposition's sake. You have no position. Why even post on OAF? Go gig some game fish, I'm sure you support that.

Wow, should I be offended? No...I shouldn't be. I am for preserving our natural fisheries, not artificially sustaining fisheries, or putting even more regulations into effect. Why can't MDC enforce some of these regulations that they have spent so much money creating? I am opposed to this crap that the experts have spewed about habitat degradation being the main opposition that the smallmouth has. I hope that your blind following of how the MDC can and will improve the smallmouth fishery and minimize the impact spotted bass are or aren't having on the smallmouth pleases you or at least makes you realize that they care about trout more.

When someone mistakenly uses a term like endangered or threatened, that will strike a nerve with me as it is not even accurate in the least. Endangered is on the brink of extinction, and threatened is what the Gila Trout is. Has the state had to air lift specimens into a headwater creek to prolong the inevitable? Nope. That is my stance on that. Enjoy spotted bass as they are game fish too, but apparently they are regarded as well as the bighead carp in the eastern Ozarks. Spotted bass were not put there by man, they migrated to these streams using the means available to them, and they are flourishing.

About gigging, obviously I am well versed in the Wildlife Code, and am aware of the difference of a smallmouth and a sucker, but you seem to paint me a redneck hillbilly with little respect for the laws. Thank God I will never have to look you in the eye...I might laugh at the prospect that you call yourself a conservationist. You cannot conserve an artificial species like trout, but you can make things the best you can for species that are native or naturally occurring in your watershed. Enjoy your spotted bass prejudice, and I will enjoy catching them along with smallmouth and largemouth.

[ozark trout fisher]

Wow, should I be offended? No...I shouldn't be. I am for preserving our natural fisheries, not artificially sustaining fisheries, or putting even more regulations into effect. Why can't MDC enforce some of these regulations that they have spent so much money creating? I am opposed to this crap that the experts have spewed about habitat degradation being the main opposition that the smallmouth has. I hope that your blind following of how the MDC can and will improve the smallmouth fishery and minimize the impact spotted bass are or aren't having on the smallmouth pleases you or at least makes you realize that they care about trout more.

When someone mistakenly uses a term like endangered or threatened, that will strike a nerve with me as it is not even accurate in the least. Endangered is on the brink of extinction, and threatened is what the Gila Trout is. Has the state had to air lift specimens into a headwater creek to prolong the inevitable? Nope. That is my stance on that. Enjoy spotted bass as they are game fish too, but apparently they are regarded as well as the bighead carp in the eastern Ozarks. Spotted bass were not put there by man, they migrated to these streams using the means available to them, and they are flourishing.

About gigging, obviously I am well versed in the Wildlife Code, and am aware of the difference of a smallmouth and a sucker, but you seem to paint me a redneck hillbilly with little respect for the laws. Thank God I will never have to look you in the eye...I might laugh at the prospect that you call yourself a conservationist. You cannot conserve an artificial species like trout, but you can make things the best you can for species that are native or naturally occurring in your watershed. Enjoy your spotted bass prejudice, and I will enjoy catching them along with smallmouth and largemouth.

This is just really mean spirited. I know based on some of the causes Eric 1978 has taken up he is a conservationist, and that's not something to lightly question. And to say that he blindly follows the MDC, well you just must not have actually read his posts.

I told myself I would be done arguing this issue on OAF, but I can't let this go without saying anything.

There are so many insults being thrown both ways that this is really getting out of hand. I have no problem with someone expressing their opinion, but there should at least be an attempt made to be respectful about it.

[eric1978]

Spotted bass were not put there by man, they migrated to these streams using the means available to them, and they are flourishing.

I don't know how many times or how many different ways it can be explained before you'll understand this: If humans did not inhabit the United States, there would be no spotted bass in the Meramec River System. Spotted bass we're given "the means available to them" by changes that MAN made on their waterways. I don't have an inherent problem with spotted bass as a species, and the larger ones that I have caught have been a lot of fun. I would love to spend a weekend on Table Rock catching those fat spots they got down there.

But the spots that are invading the Meramec System rarely get over 12 inches, and are really just a nuicance in terms of fishing. They always seem to get to your lure before a bigger fish and they've ruined more perfect casts that should have resulted in a better fish than I can fathom. Occassionally you will find a spotted bass that has reached a greater length than the 12 inch mark, but they're not common, and they really don't offer any enjoyable angling opportunities.

I apologize for my previous post. It was mean-spirited and sarcastic and inappropiate. I really can't figure out your position and I feel like all you do is oppose ideas for protection, so I lashed out at you. I'm frustrated by this issue, but you're allowed your opinion, whatever it is, so I'm sorry 'bout that.

[drew03cmc]

I don't know how many times or how many different ways it can be explained before you'll understand this: If humans did not inhabit the United States, there would be no spotted bass in the Meramec River System. Spotted bass we're given "the means available to them" by changes that MAN made on their waterways. I don't have an inherent problem with spotted bass as a species, and the larger ones that I have caught have been a lot of fun. I would love to spend a weekend on Table Rock catching those fat spots they got down there.

But the spots that are invading the Meramec System rarely get over 12 inches, and are really just a nuicance in terms of fishing. They always seem to get to your lure before a bigger fish and they've ruined more perfect casts that should have resulted in a better fish than I can fathom. Occassionally you will find a spotted bass that has reached a greater length than the 12 inch mark, but they're not common, and they really don't offer any enjoyable angling opportunities.

I apologize for my previous post. It was mean-spirited and sarcastic and inappropiate. I really can't figure out your position and I feel like all you do is oppose ideas for protection, so I lashed out at you. I'm frustrated by this issue, but you're allowed your opinion, whatever it is, so I'm sorry 'bout that.

Eric, I wasn't lashing out so much as responding...but I am all for protecting natives, when possible. I a I want to see spots gone from the Meramec, but honestly, I see few ways they are able to do that. Kill regulations and rotenone are the two I can think of off hand and unless MDC acts soon, the smallmouth will be in trouble in a few eastern Ozark streams. There is equilibrium between smallmouth, spots and buckets in the western Ozarks and it is possible in the east as well, given enough time. I think if spotted bass were out of the Big, Meramec and Gasconade systems the smallmouth would get close to where they were before. If spotted bass took advantage of what has been given to them as far as migration routes and what not, they must be a very smart species and worthy of my time to pursue.

What would it take for the MDC to consider kill regs?

[eric1978]

Eric, I wasn't lashing out so much as responding...but I am all for protecting natives, when possible. I a I want to see spots gone from the Meramec, but honestly, I see few ways they are able to do that. Kill regulations and rotenone are the two I can think of off hand and unless MDC acts soon, the smallmouth will be in trouble in a few eastern Ozark streams. There is equilibrium between smallmouth, spots and buckets in the western Ozarks and it is possible in the east as well, given enough time. I think if spotted bass were out of the Big, Meramec and Gasconade systems the smallmouth would get close to where they were before. If spotted bass took advantage of what has been given to them as far as migration routes and what not, they must be a very smart species and worthy of my time to pursue.

What would it take for the MDC to consider kill regs?

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.

[Al Agnew]

Drew, I'm with you on the "endangered and threatened" thing. Smallmouths (other than pure strain Neosho smallmouth) are far from threatened or endangered over the Ozarks as a whole. They could probably be considered "threatened" as a species on the lower 30 miles of so of Big River and the Bourbeuse, but even that is a questionable proposition since chances are they'd never totally disappear there because they would be continually being replenished by upstream and tributary sources. They won't disappear from Big River as a whole, and probably not from the Bourbeuse. (And, off the topic a bit, not much trips my trigger more than somebody saying a particular interest group of humans is "an endangered species", like loggers in the Northwest, for instance. To say something like that about any subset of Homo sapiens, the most UN-endangered species on earth, is really trivializing the whole concept of endangered species...but enough of that rant.)

What we're talking about with smallmouth regulations is ENHANCING, and perhaps protecting where it has the potential of declining, a FISHERY. It has nothing to do with threatened or endangered species, or preserving populations of a species. Heck, I can still catch smallies over most of Big River, for instance. It's just that the fishery has declined from what was once a thriving smallmouth fishery to a mixed bag fishery that includes a lot more and smaller spotted bass. Regs have the possibility of making it better. And even in a good (by Ozark standards) smallmouth fishery, it's possible that the right regulations could serve to make it better by increasing the percentage of larger fish in the population.

I believe that regulations have both direct and indirect effects. Directly, they manage harvest of fish so that management goals are reached. Indirectly, they "educate" the fishing public on the value of a fishery and the threats to it. The direct effect only works if the vast majority of anglers follow the regs. The indirect effect works to convince some of those anglers that the fishery needs the protection. The direct effect works best only if there is enforcement of the regs, but the indirect works even without adequate enforcement.