I'm Really, Really Sick Of This...

[smallmouthjoe]

It's interesting to see how this conversation has devolved into personal attacks, political tirades, tackle bashing, etc. All counterproductive, in my opinion.

Al makes two main points: giggers kill gamefish and it's impossible to police. Seems to me that cutting out all the other nonsense and focusing on these two things just might lead us to some ideas to improve the situation.

One of my favorite sayings is 'If you want to cook an elephant, first you cut it into little pieces'.

In my experience, it's not a widely-known or well-publicized problem. So, that's a decent place to start, no? We've got several assets at our disposal: this forum; MSA; Conservationist; our St. Louis Post friend.

I have no doubt that it's difficult to police, but I'd need more convincing to believe it's impossible. It seems to me CAs have access to jet boats and lights, and might just be able to check creels on the water, or at least at some of the take outs. As was mentioned above, a bust or two, especially if widely publicized, could serve as a wake-up call to those who feel they're unlikely to get caught, and a deterrent to all. I wonder what the CAs would say about that?

There's a precedent for restricting gigging on Blue Ribbon trout waters. How did we get there?

Just some thoughts that, hopefully, may help steer this in a more constructive direction.

I too would like to think that it is not an impossibility to enforce the game laws that we have in place but everything I've experienced tells me it is. At least it is with the current numbers of CAs that are out there now. I don't know about other places in the state but I've only seen a CA on the water twice in southwest missouri, once at fellows lake, and once on The James. Both times they didn't ask to see my fishing license and just gave me a wave and were on their way. I would have to assume that the lack of CAs it is due to a lack of funding. They most likely focus their efforts on bigger bodies of water where their will be a higher number of anglers and must sacrifice all the smaller rivers and streams. The idea of a few publicized busts is a great idea, get people thinking that there is a chance that they will get caught if they break the law. I wonder if the state shifts their agents around? Do all agents have to work out of centralized location? It seems to me that if they could take some agents that would normally work lakes during the summer months and put them on a river patrol during sucker season it might help this problem. Almost like Wayne's idea of a group of agents who are free floating and can go anywhere.

[awhuber]

my 2 cents on lights. When I staeted giggin we had a coleman lantern, it was hard to identify fish. We now use halo lights and can see very well and dont make any mistakes now.

[Flysmallie]

I do agree that it doesn't need to be banned. That does nothing for anyone. I know there are a lot of guys out there that love gigging. It sounds like a fun time on the river, I have never had an opportunity to go.

I shorter season might help, but wouldn't most just concentrate their efforts in a shorter time. I don't know how you enforce it. I understand the argument about not being able to sneak up on them because you need a jet boat and big lights. But having an agent run up and down a river during peak gigging season wouldn't hurt. They could stop and talk to each group of giggers they came across. Yeah you are not going to catch them in the act, but just the presence would cause most to be legal.

I've been checked on Table Rock several times at night and they never tried to hide from me.

[cwc87]

I've read the white paper and all this thread. Gigging 1s the 1# factor of smallmouth mortaility. The only way to prove it is ask our local agents how many game fish gigging tickets they issue. And AL and Mitch is right being out and seeing dead bass on the bottom just gets us all fired up. Only thing we can do is contact our agents and tell them this is happening in that certain hole(stretch) of water. About 5 years ago, Just because I let my passion of a smallmouth protector out the local giggers left me five gigged bass over 18inches in my mailbox. They all know that if they gig a bass that I will drop the agent a call but it seems a useless effort until the local prosecutor and the MDC guy's can up the fine for a mistaken gigged bass.

This weather really stack's all bass and suckers up in the wintering holes and boy are they really lathargic or easy for the giggers to get. I know that the MDC fisheries guy's recognized that the wintering holes on the Missouri river was being prayed upon by commercial netting of big BIG catfish and then what do ya know they have a law against this now.

The MDC heads or assistants are changing next week so Like a fellow Missouri smallmouth Alliance guy said "line all your ducks up in a row and then give em your best shot" Data and proof as mitch said may be the best tool against gigging. Either way MDC is in a NO WIN situation.

[fishgypsy]

I'm sure the agents have it tough- deer season, turkeys, waterfowl, and gigging all around the same time. Plus it's that time of year where every critter from rattlesnakes to raccoons is trying to find a warm place to stay for the winter (i.e. an attic or crawlspace), and I know the Department gets a ton of calls on those issues every year.

They can't be everywhere at once, and I could see how patrolling streams would fall through the cracks. I like the idea of a roving group of CA commandoes- lots of us have probably heard stories of agents being terrorized by locals, and if you're being ticketed or arrested by someone outside of your county, that may benefit that situation. My only question is whether it'd be an issue when it came to prosecution.

As for publicity, it may be pretty tactless, but if someone's frustrated enough...the MDC's Natural Resources Conference is coming up at the beginning of February, and if a couple folks were to go flashing around pictures of big, dead, gigged smallies...well I think that'd be about all the attention you need.

[eric1978]

Don't you love incrementalizm. This is how it happens, one rule at a time. Divide and conquer, get the Indians fighting among themselves, and the anti's will take over. Guys, we are all sportsmen. Some groups annoy the others. But, we have had enough erosion of our freedoms already. Let's not keep losing our freedoms one issue at a time. The law breakers don't care. The laws aren't enforced anyway.

I haven't noticed the erosions of freedoms you mentioned, except that since 2002 the government can surveil me without a warrant. I personally don't care about that, because I have nothing to fear. But I can understand why that would bother some people based on principle and political perspective. Other than that, what freedoms, specifically, have you recently lost?

Look, I agree that the legal system is backward. A guy can get locked up for years for having a bag of pot, but well-connected bigwigs can do whatever they want without consequences (I'll spare you examples, but you know plenty of them). Yes, the system is a mess, but we have to have some laws. If not, it's just anarchy. Do you really want that? How about making burglary legal since the punishment for that crime is so inconvenient for thieves?

Allow me to make an anology:

Banning gigging would be the same as outlawed campfires in certain forests. Gigging violations are destruction of a resource, plain and simple. Same as man-caused forest fires due to negligence or arsen. Why are campfires against the law in some places? It's not to take away your freedoms, it's to protect the resource. If you are somewhat inconvenienced because of the rules, well that's just too bad, because your small sacrifice means that thousands of others can continue to enjoy what you haven't destroyed. I can't tell you how many times I've been backpacking in no-fire areas when I would have loved to have had a small fire for warmth and entertainment. I'm quite certain that I could have responsibly started and contained a campfire without causing thousands of acres of old-growth forest to burn to the ground, and I would have left that campsite with all but a trace of evidence that I was there. But accidents do happen, and I also understand that many people don't know how to properly manage a fire. So I begrudgingly accept the fact that some people's irresponsibility means that I have to adhere to rules I may find unnecessary, in order to reduce the risk of accidental or intended harm to a resource cherished by many others.

So again, we must have laws. Deciding which laws to implement and how to enforce them is the difficult part. It's my opinion that laws should be decided based on what is best for the most people. Liberal creel regulations for smallmouth is advantageous for only the few meat anglers who constantly take limits. (I use the word few in comparison to the greater number of anglers who mostly C&R smallmouth). The impacts of those few are greatly disproportionate to the impacts of the larger majority of those who prefer to conserve the resource. I think it is unfair that a small group of exploitative people can have a direct and profound effect on the enjoyment and experiences of a larger group of people. And therefore I think the laws should be changed to accommodate the larger group. Same goes for giggers. If participants of the sport (and I do see it as a sport, if it's done in a sportsmanlike manner) cannot, as a group, be trusted to pursue the activity in a way that is non-detrimental to a resource that many others enjoy, then the activity must be banned or more strictly regulated in order to benefit the greater majority of the relevant population.

I know that's not the world we live in. One percent of America's population owns 95% of the wealth. We're greedy and exploitative people. We only think of ourselves and our own interests. And I know that the opinions stated above are wishful thinking and not likely to ever be realized, but I still think that's how it should be. It's a shame that one bad apple spoils the bunch, but it does, and every once in a while you have to just throw out the whole barrel.

[smallmouthjoe]

As for publicity, it may be pretty tactless, but if someone's frustrated enough...the MDC's Natural Resources Conference is coming up at the beginning of February, and if a couple folks were to go flashing around pictures of big, dead, gigged smallies...well I think that'd be about all the attention you need.

I might actually be going to this event, but I don't know why anyone from the conservation department would care about what a little pee-on undergrad has to say. However, I will ask the biologist that is associated with the MSU chapter of AFS a few questions as soon as I can get a hold of her. I'm interested to hear not only what she has to say in regards to this subject but also her take on the smallmouth bass white paper summary.

[Dan Kreher]

Gigging is certainly a hot -- albeit hopefully localized -- issue concerning the quality of our Ozark SMB streams. Based on MO Smallmouth Alliance's discussion with the MDC on this topic, they do not appear to possess the political will to seriously address the threat that the illegal gigging of sportfish places on our "managed" fisheries. Lots of good enforcement ideas have been posted on this thread. Perhaps a noteworthy bust or concentrated enforcement presence on stream reaches of suspected abuse of gigging priviledges would be effective in thwarting would-be poachers illegal intentions.

In 2008 the MDC produced a, for lack of a better term, "warning sign" to giggers to strongly suggest that they identify their quarry first and not to gig smallmouth bass. I will try to attach a PDF of that sign to this reply if I am able. The MDC has posted these signs at bait shops, gas stations, convenience stores in selected areas of the Ozarks to remind giggers of their responsibilities. The sign contains a thinly veiled threat noting that smallmouth bass fishing and gigging are both traditional Ozark stream pursuits. Obey the law and the MDC can keep it that way. If not . . .

I don't believe they're interested in eliminating fishing for smallmouths.

MSA will help do its part in 2010 to post these signs at suitable locations throughout the Ozarks next fall. We already post informational signs at stream accesses encouraging anglers to know the length/creel limits, release bass they don't want to eat and educating them on the extremely slow growth rates of stream smallies. So this will just be an extension of that effort.

Gigging is a very difficult issue for the MDC to address in that any additional restrictions to curb the harmful practices of the few would affect the presumbly law-abiding majority. Members within MSA do believe that it is a major issue on a localized basis but our Blue Ribbon Panel is hesitant to push the issue with the MDC since it is a political football and we believe that changes in statewide length/creel limits and expansion of special regs waters are less controversial, more achievable objectives. Not that that fisheries regs changes won't require siginficant, sustained effort. But I cannot see the MDC taking definitive action on gigging unless they are forced to by overwhelming public concern and empirical data. Such data would likely need to fall in their lap, of course, since they aren't embarking on any gigging studies to my knowledge, however. We will once again broach the gigging subject with the MDC when we meet with them early in 2010, but it will not be our group's primary agenda item.

[Kathy E.]

Here's what I think, FWIW. I love whitetail deer -- big bucks, in particular -- and I suppose MDC does, too, because they assign undercover agents with some regularity to infiltrate known groups of big buck poachers.

Whitetail deer, however, can use all sorts of land-based habitats; it is much easier for them to escape (in most places, and I'm not talking about the after dark, open habitat feeding places where they can be quite vulnerable to poachers) than it is for smallmouth bass, a species which is limited for the most part to Ozark streams in our state.

I think if MDC would assign a couple of undercover agents to infiltrate some of these outlaw gigging groups that would be a great step forward. I don't care if they actually become friends with the poachers first, or 'meet up' on a stream sometime after dark and let the 'friendship' proceed from there. I don't even care if the undercover operative has to gig a few smallmouth to gain the poachers' trust. Just get in and get names. . .

The second prong of my anti-gamefish gigging program would be to have each and every person who is upset about the way our smallies are being targeted by these outlaws carry a camera along the next time they head out to the stream. If you just want something to do this winter -- and gigging season is still ongoing -- this might be a good thing that YOU can do for our stream smallies. Document with a photo every gigged smallie you see. If the fish is dead, then measure its length and weigh it, too. Note where you found the fish -- the stream, and the mile, if possible. Nothing will get MDC's attention like a sudden deluge of digital photos -- or mail-in photos -- and measurements of a precious resource like a smallmouth bass.

What we should also do is log in here or over on Midwest Anglers -- or both -- and post our photos on these two sites, as well. When enough photos of dead or dying gigged smallmouth have been posted, I'll bet others will join in with the rest of us in demanding that something be done.

Now, I don't propose that we outlaw gigging. I've interviewed enough giggers to know that a LOT of them would never think of gigging a smallmouth bass, fish fry or not. But even these ethical giggers acknowledge a problem with those who would kill a stream's smallmouth. I am not too sure that even the ethical giggers might buy into a crusade to root out these outlaws because the outlaws are just damaging the ethical guys' reputations, too.

[ness]

Coupla good posts right there, Kathy and Dan.

As much as we've hashed and re-hashed the enforcement issue, it bears repeating: if you see something, call it in and document it as best you can. Most cell phones take pictures, if you're not carrying a camera. People, boats, cars, license numbers, dead fish all help inform. Kathy: good idea to post them on the forum here too.

Dan -- thanks for carrying the torch. I'm sure folks here would love to get an update on MSAs efforts in this area.