One More Poll On Smallmouth Management Areas

[Al Agnew]

Chief, I'm going to address some of your points...

Too many smallies

There is no doubt that the better quality Ozark streams have plenty of smallmouth. Too many? Only way you could say that is if a stream that you believe has overpopulation also has lower growth rates than the average. As far as I know, growth rates are fairly consistent throughout the Ozarks. However, I will grant you that more restrictive regs that protect all sizes of smallmouth, like strict catch and release or a one fish 15 inch limit, will in some cases result in slower growth rates. I believe I mentioned that in another post somewhere--I've posted so much on this topic I can't remember what I said where! But anyway, the studies show a decline in growth rates in some of the SMAs that the biologists don't consider very significant.

It's also complicated by the fact that some streams, including, I believe, some in your area, have both smallmouth and native or non-native spotted bass. A regulation that protects smallmouth and not spotted bass MIGHT result in more smallies and fewer spotted bass, or it may just mean more and smaller fish of both species.

For that reason, as I know I've said before, I'd favor exploring slot limits rather than one fish limits on such streams. If the object is maintaining or even slightly reducing numbers on the heavily populated streams while producing more big fish (maybe "big" is over 15 inches on the SW MO streams where the smallies probably have a lot of Neosho genetics), then there should be harvest of small fish and protection of those that are approaching the "big" size. Perhaps a 12-15 inch slot limit on those streams. And perhaps on the streams where spotted bass are native, the slot limit should include all species. I have no problem with spots where they are native, and no wish to wipe them out in those streams, although I doubt that any reduced limits on smallies would do so.

Other problems for smallmouth streams

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.)

More on this later...I'm going to bed.

[MoJohn]

I release all the smallies I catch but I don't care to eat them either. I think we need to add more SMA areas to the State or lenghten a few we already have. I do however know a few fisherman who like to catch and eat smallies, they like them. I would be all for a slot limit with only one being over 18"-20" and reducing daily to four total. I may be wrong but I am of the opinion that you have to take some out or they will overpopulate, thus lowering available food supplies and hurting growth in the long run.

[Wayne SW/MO]

I'm not for a blanket C&R, it just gives people an excuse to break the law. We have to share the resource, but that doesn't mean that the fish many of us release should allow a larger creel.

CGB, what's your criteria for overpopulation? What conditions do you see that leads you to believe that the fish are short on habitat and food? What about their overall condition?

What streams are you talking about, you don't have to be specific, but then again if they need thinning maybe you should.

[Gavin]

Overpopulation...I dont see that on the streams I fish...Not many big heads and skinny bodies like you find on LMB in an out of balance pond...They look like a healthy smallmouth but there arent many fish over 15". Plenty of 11" fish though.

It would be nice if landowners took care of their streambanks...but many dont. It would be nice if we could keep the gravel dredgers out of our streams...but we cant. Control the weather...forgetaboutit...The only thing we can control is the fishing regulations so its the logical place to start.

[Deer Slayer]

I answered yes to all the questions. I voted for pure C&R for the regulations (statewide preferably)... Not gonna happen, but it is what I want. I do not see a need for people to keep smallies, there are enough food fish. Catfish and bluegill both taste WAY better anyway.

I also said that folks who want tighter regs are in the majority, but I can't be sure about that.

I will admit that there was a time when I would keep a smallie here and there, among a stringer of sunfish, catfish, etc. I just didn't realize the harmful effects at the time.

I don't fish for Catfish or sunfish- I occassionaly will be lucky enough to include a keeper smally in with my limit of bass. Since I love to eat bass, only keep legal fish, and get to go maybe 3 times a year, I will continue to do so. It seems as though there is no middle ground here. I see comments about people keeping everything they catch, which obviously isn't legal and people adament about catch and release. Where is the group that keep a couple to eat but release everything else. There are enough rules and far too much Government intervention. Enforce the rules and laws that we have and maybe then we can talk about introducing new laws. The giggers, accidently or intentionally gigging game fish is far more of a threat to fish populations than the law abiding angler who keeps a few for the skillet. Jet boats allowed to operate in trophy brown trout waters, people using bait, littering- go after them and stay out of my skillet.

[Wayne SW/MO]

I don't fish for Catfish or sunfish- I occassionaly will be lucky enough to include a keeper smally in with my limit of bass. Since I love to eat bass, only keep legal fish, and get to go maybe 3 times a year, I will continue to do so. It seems as though there is no middle ground here. I see comments about people keeping everything they catch, which obviously isn't legal and people adament about catch and release. Where is the group that keep a couple to eat but release everything else. There are enough rules and far too much Government intervention. Enforce the rules and laws that we have and maybe then we can talk about introducing new laws. The giggers, accidently or intentionally gigging game fish is far more of a threat to fish populations than the law abiding angler who keeps a few for the skillet. Jet boats allowed to operate in trophy brown trout waters, people using bait, littering- go after them and stay out of my skillet.

"I'm not for a blanket C&R, it just gives people an excuse to break the law. We have to share the resource, but that doesn't mean that the fish many of us release should allow a larger creel."

There's middle ground. I agree about the giggers, they're messin' in their own nest, not to mention ours. You don't see big Redhorse anymore, at least I don't.

[Gavin]

There is plenty of middle ground. A fresh fish dinner is a real treat on occassion, especially when your out camping on a gravel bar.

[eric1978]

I don't fish for Catfish or sunfish- I occassionaly will be lucky enough to include a keeper smally in with my limit of bass. Since I love to eat bass, only keep legal fish, and get to go maybe 3 times a year, I will continue to do so. It seems as though there is no middle ground here. I see comments about people keeping everything they catch, which obviously isn't legal and people adament about catch and release...

...go after them and stay out of my skillet.

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.

[Paola Cat]

"I'm not for a blanket C&R, it just gives people an excuse to break the law. We have to share the resource, but that doesn't mean that the fish many of us release should allow a larger creel."

There's middle ground. I agree about the giggers, they're messin' in their own nest, not to mention ours. You don't see big Redhorse anymore, at least I don't.

I'm with ya Wayne .... i used to see big shoals of Redhorse 20 years ago .... you just don't see very many anymore. I'm for Redhorse protection. I think giggin' has a bigger impact that we know. I wouldn't surprise me if it negatively impacts most of our stream fish populations. PC

[fishgypsy]

I'm a bit indifferent to regulations. Don't get my wrong, I follow them to a T. I just don't think their the end all, be all solution, and I think that's the general consensus of this board.

Yes, they're the easiest variable to manipulate in a fishery (whether people obey those manipulations is an entirely different question). And you can put all the regulations you want in place in hopes of growing bigger fish- but if those fish don't have places to hide, if they don't have enough food to pack on pounds, if they don't have the proper water quality to fuel the ecosystem, then all the regulations dreamed up are for nothing.

It's true that smallies can put up with a lot of water issues- Al mentioned the Big River, which is just downright nasty in places, big floating mats and serious heavy metal issues. And smallies thrived in the James River when it was more or less an open sewer for the city of Springfield. Some of the destination streams- in Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, Pennsylvania- have had very serious water quality issues in the past, and are now phenomenal smallmouth waters. But these are also all big, nutrient-rich, fertile waterways flowing through corn country as well as the naturally rich glaciated plains. The Ozarks have been around for millions of years, the soils are thin and nutrient-poor, most of the nutrients available are locked up in the trees and other surface vegetation. The streams are clear, not green with algae blooms (except in places where there's significant human impact), and the food chain isn't based on plankton and shad so much as it is on dead leaves and crayfish. They're two aquatic ecosystems which are set up and function very differently.

I'm not sure if most Ozark streams have the habitat and chemistry to create truly phenomenal, big bass, destination-type smallmouth fisheries. And guess I don't really expect them to. A few- the Big, Bourbeuse, Meramec, Gasconade, and some others, certainly seem to me to be capable of supporting better fisheries than they do. And some, such as the Jacks Fork, are about as good as I figure they'll get given their limitations. I just enjoy being on those streams, and whether I catch a 20 inch smallie or twenty ten inchers, I'm content.

Out of curiosity though, I'll pose a few more ideas...

1.) How does Ozark smallmouth fishing stack up to smallmouth fishing in Northern Arkansas and central Tennessee and Kentucky (Cumberland plateau area, etc)? I've never fished most of those areas (KY only a bit), and they're physiologically the most like our Ozark streams. It'd be interesting, for me at least, to compare fish size, catch rates of quality fish, etc, and perhaps even learn what they're doing that MDC isn't, if their fisheries are in fact higher quality.

2.) Another thought while I was writing... up north, smallies compete with and are preyed on by numerous other species- northern pike, muskellunge, walleye, lake trout. Down here, what fish eat smallmouth? Gar, on occasion? I've read that one of the reasons biologists believe brook trout get so large in Labrador, for example, compared to other parts of their range- is because there is plenty of predatory pressure on the population (pike and lake trout munching on them). It'd be neat to explore whether the same holds true of smallmouth bass.

Just my thoughts. I'm going to start on dinner.

Tom