Why Doesn't The Ozark Have Smallies As Big As Elsewhere?

[Ham]

I've made a few trips fishing for river smallies to other areas of the country. When fishing those other places, bigger smallies were relatively easier to come by. So as I fish Ozark waters catching 10 inch smallie after 10 inch smallie, I wonder why we can't seem to grow them as large as the east coast (or Texas or Tennessee for that matter).

I would think we have fertile enough water ; I think there is plenty of food for the smallies.

We have a nice long growing season for them. Most of our rivers have deep enough wintering locations.

I don't think we have significantly more natural predators than the other areas I have fished. I'm sure herons and otters get their share, but that sort of thing tends to work out a balance point.

It could be too much catch and keep angling.

It could be too many are dying from repeated handling even though the anglers are using catch and release.

It could be a few too many bad apples poaching.

Stream degradation from gravel mining or excessive nutrients from farming or mining runoff ?

I have a lot more curiosity about this than answers. Maybe someone hear has it all figured out though.

[denjac]

I think our impoundments hold there own against most states as far as size. I did say most. Dont you think smaller creeks just have smaller fish? I know in our area I can fish Center creek and catch some respectable smallmouth 12- 18 inches. If I fish Jones Creek a tributary of Center the size goes way down. Its a smaller and shallower creek but has colder water. I am sure others will have a differant slant on it. Now here is a big smallie!

World Record Smallmouth Bass

Weight: 11 pounds, 15 ounces.

Angler: David Hays

Date: July 8 / 1955

Location: Dale Hallow Lake, Kentucky

Length: 27 inches

Girth: 21.66 inches

As usual, there is controversy. Raymond Barlow, whoever the hell he is, submitted an affidavit to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers stating that Hayes' fish had only weighed 8 lb 15 oz and that he had stuffed three pounds of metal in the fishes' mouth and stomach to make it a record.

Most records that pre-date the 70s are not accurate. Fish were not properly weighed or documented. Over-excited fisherman often added 30% to the size and weight of a fish. Many records that have been submitted are of people that catch fish and then let the story grow for a few years before entering.

In this case, if you input the dimensions into a bass weight calculator , it shows the fish should weigh close to what David's claims are. David Hays does have the World Record Smallmouth Bass, which is backed by an investigation by the IGFA.

[jdmidwest]

I think it is more habitat than anything. Other states have more deep cold water habitat than we do. The streams that support them here in the summer warm up too much and stunt their growth. Our lakes do not provide the temperatures needed for good growth. They are similar to trout in their temperature requirements, just a little on the warmer side. When placed in warm ponds, they do not do well.

Our spring feed streams and deeper cool rivers that are spring fed provide our best habitat in MO. Alot of the habitat has been altered by man, dams and trout stocking. I really don't think fishing has much to do with it, but would not be opposed to stricter limits to ensure better sized fish.

The Tennessee River system provides some real nice fish, Pickwick Lake being one of the best Smallmouth areas I have ever fished do the size and health of the fish. Kentucky Lake is changing over into a good smallie fishery also, most feel it is the change in currents creating the habitat necessary for them.

[fishinwrench]

Competition for food maybe ? Do the Eastern streams have the numbers of LM, spotted bass, sunfish and Goggleye that our streams do ?

I also don't think our streams have the volume % of deep Wintering holes and sanctuarys that the Eastern rivers do.

[smallmouthjoe]

I think it comes down to energy and other limiting factors. Most of our streams are very oligotrophic and growth of smallmouth is limited by the lack of structure building elements. I have noticed that in some places where there is an addition of nutrients, at levels that smallmouth can still withstand, the smallmouth tend to grow a bit larger. Another factor is energy, the smaller the stream the smaller the amount of energy input from the surrounding landscape, which means that there is less energy pumped into the base of the energy pyramid and therefore a smaller amount of energy available to the top of the pyramid. These are my thoughts on the whole matter and this why I believe that a slot limit would be the best for Ozark streams if people would harvest fish that were under the protected slot. The removal of these smaller fish should make more energy and building block elements available to the larger fish.

[eric1978]

It could be too much catch and keep angling.

It could be too many are dying from repeated handling even though the anglers are using catch and release.

It could be a few too many bad apples poaching.

Stream degradation from gravel mining or excessive nutrients from farming or mining runoff ?

I think it is more habitat than anything. Other states have more deep cold water habitat than we do.

I also don't think our streams have the volume % of deep Wintering holes and sanctuarys that the Eastern rivers do.

I say all of the above, but my guess is that is has most to do with the fact that Ozark streams are relatively small, compared to many good smallmouth streams in other parts of the country. By the time that our best Ozark smallie streams get big enough to support considerable populations of large fish, the habitat and water quality on those rivers is less than ideal for smallmouth...with a few exceptions.

I don't agree that the upper portions of most spring-fed Ozark streams are too warm for smallmouth in summer...they can tolerate temps well into the 80s as long as there is good current and enough riffles to keep the dissolved oxygen levels up. But when the flow slows farther downstream, the higher temps in combination with lower DO make the water intolerable for smallmouth. So they are forced to inhabit the slightly cooler, faster moving, and smaller sections of our streams, which IMO limits their growth. Many of the good smallmouth streams are big (compared to ours), but also contain the correct habitat, flow, temps, DO and forage from top to bottom. So they have the best of all worlds. The streams in our country that produce the most and largest smallmouth are ones, as far as I can tell, that look like large-scale replicas of the middle and upper-middle sections of our better Ozark streams.

Add to that our generally liberal creel regulations, poachers, and habitat degradation, and I'm actually amazed that we have the fishing we do.

Another consideration is that smallmouth in our area have just evolved to be somewhat smaller to be better suited for survival here, for whichever reasons. Of course that's more of a result than a cause, but it's pretty clear that we just don't grow fish the same size as some other smallie states do. I'm pretty sure that even in pristine condition, untouched or influenced by human activity, our streams still wouldn't produce a world-record smallmouth...but we can certainly help make it better.

[Al Agnew]

Those of us in the Smallmouth Alliance wrestled with this question extensively when we were trying to come up with a strategy for increasing the number of bigger smallmouth in the streams. But here are my thoughts on it...

First, genetics. As Chief and others have clearely pointed out, the Neosho subspecies is either slower-growing, or has a lower maximum size, or both, compared to other smallmouths, and the Ozarks is isolated enough from other smallmouth range that the chances are that smallies all over the Ozarks have a bit different genetics than those in other parts of the country, which likely means that they simply don't have the potential to grow as big. You can see this most clearly when you compare the big Ozark reservoirs like Table Rock and Bull Shoals with those in Tennessee and Kentucky at the same general latitude, similar habitat, and similar climate conditions. Smallies over, say, 6 pounds, are a lot more common in those reservoirs than they are in the Ozark lakes. With a few rare exceptions, 5 pounds or so seems to be the maximum size of Ozark reservoir smallies. And since the smallmouth in the reservoirs of both regions are basically the descendants of native river fish that were there when the reservoirs were built, genetics is probably the reason for the disparity in growth.

On the other hand, Ozark stream smallmouth obviously do have the potential to grow to be over 20 inches fairly regularly, even though such fish are exceedingly difficult for most casual anglers to catch. We'll probably never see an eight pound smallmouth come out of an Ozark stream, but we should be able to produce more four pounders than we do.

I do think part of it is habitat. Yes, smaller streams are less likely to produce big fish for many reasons as others here have noted. Less fertile water. Fewer winter sanctuaries. Limited holding areas. But this can't be a huge factor, because we know of too many small streams that produce big fish.

One thing we SHOULD have going for us is the character of many of the larger Ozark rivers. Yes, they are not as big as some good smallie rivers in other parts of the country. But we are far enough south that we have a long warm weather growing season, AND our more spring-fed streams stay warm enough in the winter for the fish to do some feeding and growing year-round. Compare that to, for instance, the Menominee River in northern Wisconsin, which produces a LOT of very big smallmouth. Yet it has a short growing season and is so cold in the long winter that the fish probably more or less go dormant.

Another factor we should have going for us is the mass and variety of smallmouth food in the streams. Lots of crayfish, many different kinds of minnows, and other food. In some places there are only a few prey species that feed the smallmouth, and they can be cyclical or have bad years. But on the other hand, there is quite a bit of competition for all that food from other sunfish, other bass, flathead catfish, walleye, even gar.

So I think genetics is a big factor. Habitat probably comes out a wash when it comes to the Ozark streams with healthy habitat.

Which leaves human influences as the other limiting factor.

The very best smallmouth streams in other parts of the country have one or both of two things in common...they either have light fishing pressure, or they have a much greater percentage of large adult smallmouth in the population. I've fished streams in many areas, so maybe I should take the time to analyze them a bit.

.

John Day River, Oregon. It's a river about the size of the Meramec at Steelville, a little faster, with rockier rapids, but probably no deeper. In fact, if you can ignore the high desert canyon landscape and just look at the water, it kinda looks like the Meramec with more rocks and no logs. It has historically regularly produced huge numbers of smallmouth of all sizes, including 5-6 pound fish. It gets quite warm in the summer, gets quite high and cold during spring run-off. It has a very limited supply of food, with crayfish and juvenile squawfish being the most common prey species, and probably seasonally young steelhead trout as they migrate down river to the ocean. The biggest difference? Probably that it's remote and doesn't get a lot of fishing pressure.

Upper Mississippi River, Minnesota. A bigger river than anything that holds smallies in the Ozarks, but with somewhat limited habitat--lots of stretches hold few smallmouth. Fertile water, but fairly limited food sources. It produces lots of big fish, with much, much fewer small fish than Ozark streams. It gets moderate fishing pressure.

St. Croix River, Minnesota/Wisconsin border. A river about the size of middle Current River, same area as upper Mississippi, but much clearer and faster. Moderate fishing pressure. More small fish, lower top end size on the bigger ones. Compared to the Mississippi, it's probably the less fertile and smaller water that limits the number and size of big fish.

Menominee River, Wisconsin. About the size of the largest Ozark smallmouth streams. Heavy rapids in some places, lakes in others. Fertile water. Moderate fishing pressure. Big fish and plenty of them, smaller fish not very numerous.

Susquehanna River, Pennsylvania. Bigger than anything in the Ozarks by a lot. Excellent habitat, although suffering from a lot of the ills of civilization. Historically very heavily fished, but able to produce a lot of big fish and good numbers.

Shenandoah River, Virginia. A river the size of the Niangua. Very Ozark-like in appearance and similar in habitat. Before the present woes with too much sewage effluent and other environmental ills, a river that produced on a par with the best Ozark streams, with greater numbers of bigger fish but lots and lots of little ones. Fairly heavy fishing pressure.

New River, Virginia and West Virginia. A bigger river than anything in the Ozarks, clear water, lots of rapids in some places, great habitat, heavy fishing pressure. Produces some of the biggest stream smallies in the country, with excellent numbers of all sizes.

St. Regis River, New York. A river about the size of the Current. It's a seasonal fishery, though, as big smallmouth ascend it out of the St. Lawrence River to spawn. When they are in the river it's an amazing yet little fished place, where it's not uncommon to catch 100 fish a day with most of them being between 16 and 21 inches.

Penobscot, Kennebec, and Androscoggin rivers, Maine. About the size of middle Current River, up to 3 or 4 times as big. Shallow but excellent summertime habitat, with wintering habitat limited to impoundments behind low dams for the most part. Clear water, not very fertile. Light fishing pressure. Lots of big fish, not too many small ones compared to Ozark streams.

One note...on the streams above where fishing pressure was moderate to heavy, they almost universally have fairly restrictive regulations and relatively few people keeping smallmouth to eat.

So it seems to me that, as Eric said, it's a combination of factors, some of which we can do something about, some we can't. We can't do anything about the genetics, or the basic characteristics of Ozark streams. We can only do something about the number of people fishing for and keeping smallmouth, or otherwise removing them through poaching or gigging or bed fishing or whatever. I don't think we will ever be able to grow huge numbers of huge fish, but we should be able to increase the numbers of 18-21 inch fish in many Ozark streams if we can hit upon the proper regulations, enforcement, and education of anglers. While I think the regs proposed by the SMA are a start, I don't think they are necessarily the best answer. Personally, I think slot limits would work best, too.

[flytyer57]

Menominee River, Wisconsin. About the size of the largest Ozark smallmouth streams. Heavy rapids in some places, lakes in others. Fertile water. Moderate fishing pressure. Big fish and plenty of them, smaller fish not very numerous.

This is a great smallmouth fishery. The last time I fished it was about 5 years ago. While wading in this river, the crawfish were actaully climbing up my waders. Lots and lots of crawfish in this river. There had to be thousands of them swimming around devouring anything that got in their way. And as everyone knows, crawfish are high in protein. Makes for very healthy populations of smallmouth and walleyes.

[Al Agnew]

I always thought crayfish were highly nutritious as well, but a few years ago I read a study that noted that, compared to fish, they are actually greatly lacking in nutritional value. A diet of crayfish is not optimal for smallmouth growth, although the smallies obviously depend upon them for a good portion of their food. Far too much of a crawdad is actually not digestible. I guess if a fish eats enough of them, though, they will grow well, and crayfish are fairly easy prey for adult smallies.

I believe, however, that in Ozark streams the biggest fish eat a greater percentage of fish compared to crayfish and other invertebrates than the smaller ones do. It could be that the ability and the inclination to turn to more of a fish diet may be one thing that makes one smallmouth reach a bigger size than another.

[flytyer57]

I always thought crayfish were highly nutritious as well, but a few years ago I read a study that noted that, compared to fish, they are actually greatly lacking in nutritional value. A diet of crayfish is not optimal for smallmouth growth, although the smallies obviously depend upon them for a good portion of their food. Far too much of a crawdad is actually not digestible. I guess if a fish eats enough of them, though, they will grow well, and crayfish are fairly easy prey for adult smallies.

I believe, however, that in Ozark streams the biggest fish eat a greater percentage of fish compared to crayfish and other invertebrates than the smaller ones do. It could be that the ability and the inclination to turn to more of a fish diet may be one thing that makes one smallmouth reach a bigger size than another.

Im not too sure about what they eat here or there.

Compared to the smallies I caught back in Wisconsin, all the smallies here in the Ozarks look like they are starving. Here's a couple pics of some WI smallies, and one of a 17" Crooked Creek anorexic looking fish.