Msa's Blue Ribbon Panel Update

[drew03cmc]

I really believe that they do, Chief. They certainly know far more than I do, but I can say that the few streams I fish regularly are all part of new proposals or already under tighter regs, and I guarantee you they need them. I won't pretend to know anything about your streams down there or the Neoshos, but I can't help but feel optimistic about new regulations here on my home waters.

I hear where you're coming from, and that's why I think people like you who know your home waters so well should join the new chapter down there and be an active voice for their protection.

Every time anyone who knows about the Neoshos and their needs/concerns, we get bashed by those who know absolutely nothing about them. I wish the MDC would spend some time in this part of the Ozarks and not write the entire region off as a mediocre smallmouth fishery. They come up with excuses to not put an SMA on Shoal Creek, rather than to do it and see if it helps. I would imagine they surveyed this area the same way they did the tribs of LOZ.

[Chief Grey Bear]

On streams east of Neosho/Spring River watershed, I wouldn't dispute that eric. I think it could increase the size and numbers that you are looking for. I am not sure though, it will increase as much as you are hoping for. I hope it does though.

Anyway it is a futile conversation. By the postings of MSA members it is quite obvious that there is only one direction it is headed. I can't see spending $20 to butt heads with them when I can do it here for free.

Plus, if I need to pay $20 for them to take me seriously, then that says a lot about the organization and how it views the concerns of others that also use the resource.

[Al Agnew]

Okay, Chief, now I'm starting to get a little frustrated with your comments. First of all, we're mostly a St. Louis based organization at this time, partly because when we tried to organize in SWMO before, we couldn't make it last because the few passionate anglers who were willing to do the grunt work burned out because there weren't enough other anglers willing to come in and spell them. Exactly who's fault is that? Second, because we're based mainly on this side of the state, OF COURSE we don't know as much about SWMO streams. Third, we DO have a retired biologist on the committee who probably knows as much or more about the smallmouth fisheries in this state as anybody, and he thinks the proposals we put forth stand about as much chance of achieving better smallmouth fishing as anything we could do. Fourth, the rest of us, myself included, have spent enough time on the water on this side of the state, AND have read and studied the scientific literature enough to know what we're talking about as much as is possible for people who are not professionals. Fifth, we KNOW that our proposals are not the be-all and end-all of achieving maximum quality smallmouth fishing, but we believe, and apparently so do some of the folks at MDC, that they could be a major step in that direction.

So, as has already been said, if you have ideas on what would work for the Neosho strain smallies and SWMO streams, we want to hear them. If you think MDC should be concentrating more effort on Neosho strain conservation, THEY need to hear it. Exactly how are you going to accomplish ANYTHING other than making people like me grumpy if you simply sit on the sidelines and boo all sides? You refuse to join us, then say we obviously don't care what you think.

I for one would like to discuss with you ALL your thoughts on smallmouth conservation as it relates to the waters you know well. I think the more we ALL know about stream smallmouth fisheries in MO, the better. I will go back and read what you wrote in the other threads related to this, but I'd guess you probably have more to say. I'm listening.

[hank franklin]

Dan and Al and the others, excellent, excellent work on this issue. I need to rejoin MSA.

One question that came to mind in the recount of the appearance before the MDC Regs Committee. Dan writes that the Regs Committee says it must be sensitive to the needs of others using the resource, inplying there's an angler population strongly in support of existing regs. My question is where is the data on that? Does MDC have data / surveys etc. demonstrating support for existing regs? Do some of the other angling groups have surveys supporting existing regs?

My feeling is a sizable majority of Meramec watershed anglers (where I have the most experience) would support the BRAP recommendations. This is evidenced at least in part by SMA surveys. What is the evidence, if any, for support of existing regs?

Thanks.

[Chief Grey Bear]

Okay, Chief, now I'm starting to get a little frustrated with your comments. First of all, we're mostly a St. Louis based organization at this time,

That is fine with me Al. You have to be based out of somewhere. I don't have a problem with it being St. Louis and never have.

partly because when we tried to organize in SWMO before, we couldn't make it last because the few passionate anglers who were willing to do the grunt work burned out because there weren't enough other anglers willing to come in and spell them.

I don't think that because anglers don't join your club, they are not passionate. It is comments like that, that I think may make some look the other way.

Exactly who's fault is that? Are you casting blame at those that don't want to join? Maybe they just don't believe there is the problem on their waters that the MSA seems too. I can't really say.

Second, because we're based mainly on this side of the state, OF COURSE we don't know as much about SWMO streams. I think that may be where some of the problem lies. I am just thinking out loud here but, it could be that folks don't take kindly to those "from the big city" telling them what they need for regs on their water.

Third, we DO have a retired biologist on the committee who probably knows as much or more about the smallmouth fisheries in this state as anybody, and he thinks the proposals we put forth stand about as much chance of achieving better smallmouth fishing as anything we could do.

I am all too familiar with Spence and his accomplishments. In fact, I will be going to his place this spring to discuss some research that I have been doing. On a whole, though, he may be right and I can agree with that. But did anyone ask him his thoughts on weather different regs should be placed on the waterways that the Neosho inhabits?

Fourth, the rest of us, myself included, have spent enough time on the water on this side of the state, AND have read and studied the scientific literature enough to know what we're talking about as much as is possible for people who are not professionals.

I don't deny that. Nobody has. But I think you should give Andy and myself the same repsect.

Fifth, we KNOW that our proposals are not the be-all and end-all of achieving maximum quality smallmouth fishing, but we believe, and apparently so do some of the folks at MDC, that they could be a major step in that direction. Like it or not, it looks like we are going to find out.

So, as has already been said, if you have ideas on what would work for the Neosho strain smallies and SWMO streams, we want to hear them. If you think MDC should be concentrating more effort on Neosho strain conservation, THEY need to hear it. Exactly how are you going to accomplish ANYTHING other than making people like me grumpy if you simply sit on the sidelines and boo all sides? You refuse to join us, then say we obviously don't care what you think.

I for one would like to discuss with you ALL your thoughts on smallmouth conservation as it relates to the waters you know well. I think the more we ALL know about stream smallmouth fisheries in MO, the better. I will go back and read what you wrote in the other threads related to this, but I'd guess you probably have more to say. I'm listening.

I have said all along that I don't think that blanket regs across the state are a good thing. Especially in the very SWMO corner. Maybe to start you could establish a "No Possession" for smallmouth in the alread established SMA? Do that for a minimum of 5 years. If it has a possitive effect then look at expanding. If it reamains somewhat the same, well then regroup and look for another solution. /quote]

[Gavin]

Chief, its easy to stand on the sidelines and snipe at what others are doing without investing anything personally. Its clear that you have some definite ideas about whats going on in your part of the state. What have you done to improve the resource?

[Wayne SW/MO]

Dan writes that the Regs Committee says it must be sensitive to the needs of others using the resource,

I can't speak for Dan, but I'm sure that those who keep them are being given equal consideration, as they should. Regulations can benefit them too once the fish gain the new length requirement. Theoretically there will be just as many fish, only the average will be larger.

Something not often mentioned, in regard to increased creel size, is that there's also the added benefit of increasing the spawning group which can speed population recovery after negative environmental events.

[drew03cmc]

Okay, Chief, now I'm starting to get a little frustrated with your comments. First of all, we're mostly a St. Louis based organization at this time, partly because when we tried to organize in SWMO before, we couldn't make it last because the few passionate anglers who were willing to do the grunt work burned out because there weren't enough other anglers willing to come in and spell them. Exactly who's fault is that? Second, because we're based mainly on this side of the state, OF COURSE we don't know as much about SWMO streams. Third, we DO have a retired biologist on the committee who probably knows as much or more about the smallmouth fisheries in this state as anybody, and he thinks the proposals we put forth stand about as much chance of achieving better smallmouth fishing as anything we could do. Fourth, the rest of us, myself included, have spent enough time on the water on this side of the state, AND have read and studied the scientific literature enough to know what we're talking about as much as is possible for people who are not professionals. Fifth, we KNOW that our proposals are not the be-all and end-all of achieving maximum quality smallmouth fishing, but we believe, and apparently so do some of the folks at MDC, that they could be a major step in that direction.

So, as has already been said, if you have ideas on what would work for the Neosho strain smallies and SWMO streams, we want to hear them. If you think MDC should be concentrating more effort on Neosho strain conservation, THEY need to hear it. Exactly how are you going to accomplish ANYTHING other than making people like me grumpy if you simply sit on the sidelines and boo all sides? You refuse to join us, then say we obviously don't care what you think.

I for one would like to discuss with you ALL your thoughts on smallmouth conservation as it relates to the waters you know well. I think the more we ALL know about stream smallmouth fisheries in MO, the better. I will go back and read what you wrote in the other threads related to this, but I'd guess you probably have more to say. I'm listening.

Al, it has become apparent that you all on that side of the state, are not really interested in devoting MDC time, money and research on streams in 5 counties of the state. Anytime it comes up, we (Chief and I) get bashed for wanting to conserve a natural resource, specifically, a rare one. If the sign of passion is spending $20 to join a smallmouth alliance, then there are very few passionate smallmouth anglers in this state.

Chief, its easy to stand on the sidelines and snipe at what others are doing without investing anything personally. Its clear that you have some definite ideas about whats going on in your part of the state. What have you done to improve the resource?

Gavin, I love this statement from people who know nothing about this part of the Ozarks. You all seem to think that because things work on the Meramec, Current, Gasconade, etc. that they will work here. They won't. Neosho smallmouth seldom broach 15" in length. If they do, that is a trophy fish. So, a 15" MLL over here is darn near C&R. We have stated this in many places on this forum, yet, it has been written off as nonsense because smallmouth in other parts of the state (separate genetics), grow larger. Whatever we propose, will have to be done through the SWMO MSA, as the experts in the eastern Ozarks are really nonexperts on this area of the Ozarks.

[Gavin]

Andy,I dont have to be an expert on your part of the country and I never claimed to be. What have you done to improve the resource? Any skin in the game? Or is it all talk and no action?

[ColdWaterFshr]

Wow. Fruit Loops this all is.

Andy and Chief keep beating this Neosho thing to death, as if somehow these proposed reg changes are going to wipe them out! Help me understand how they will? You don't know whats right for our side of the state!! Hilarious!!

I know that corner of the state fairly well. Grew up there and now live on the east side. I don't think anyone is suggesting that the Neosho strain don't deserve extra consideration . . . but as a longtime smallmouth angler, I sure didn't know very much about them. So to me at least, it sure seems like you're splitting hairs and using as it an excuse to tear everything else down and just making yourselves look like those type of people that can turn a 10 minute meeting into a 2 hour long one. Just to stroke your ego.

I'm not a member of MSA, but I have been in the past and I have nothing but good things to say about the organization. I just don't have time to go fishing enough let alone go to MEETINGS about fishing. Be that as it may, I will say this again, if I were organizing a club -- you dudes are the cancer that I would not want in it.