Smallmouth Regs Debate...again

[Al Agnew]

Okay...I suspect that not too many avid smallmouth anglers have fished more streams across the Ozarks and across the country than I have. Maybe a few on here...don't know for sure. But I think I bring a pretty widespread perspective on this. At the same time, I've only fished Shoal Creek in SWMO, so I can't pretend I'm an expert on Neoshos.

First, to answer on the spotted bass. The invasion continues in the upper portions of Big River and Bourbeuse River. In Big River, the stream I've fished several sections this year, the smallmouth population has further declined and spotted bass population has further increased between Desloge and St. Francois Park...this is the first year where I've caught more spots than smallmouth in that section. It's been a steady population shift from 90% smallmouth, 10% spots about 6 years ago, to 45% smallmouth, 55% spots, this year. In the next section upstream, Leadwood Access to Desloge, it's now 55% smallies, 45% spots according to my catch rates and those of others I have talked to. The first spotted bass showed up in that section about 5-6 years ago. And above the Leadwood Access, where a concrete slab low water bridge has so far served as a barrier to spot migration, I caught my first spotted bass this year. Spots have increased some in the middle Meramec, and I saw several in Huzzah Creek the other day, but this could be due to the high water spreading them around. I don't know for sure about the Bourbeuse, but others have said they are increasing in the upper Bourbeuse.

It's not that I'm no longer concerned about them. And I believe the liberal spotted bass regs have done some good in slowing the increase in spotted bass numbers in many sections. I also think that we are seeing some stabilization of spotted bass numbers on the middle portions of the Bourbeuse and Big River, and I think we've also seen the "lower-middle" Meramec stabilize. Of course, the stabilization has replaced, apparently permanently, a 100% to 0% ratio with at best 25-45% smallies and 55-75% spots.

And to correct a bit of sniping from I believe it was Drew in the other thread...the SMA is concerned MAINLY with the Meramec river system when it comes to spots, and to a much lesser extent the Gasconade river system. They, and I, are perfectly satisfied with spotted bass being in the streams where they are native. And...oh, yeah, the USGS isn't composed of biologists. All biologists with any knowledge of spotted bass in the Ozarks agree that they were not native to the north flowing streams.

Now as to smallmouth slot limits...I agreed to go along with the SMA's proposed regulations, which did not include slot limits. But I would much prefer slot limits. I do not think that overpopulation is a problem on most Missouri streams, but certainly a lot of Ozark streams have high enough numbers that they can stand harvest. There are streams all over the Ozarks where on a decent day, if you know what you're doing, you can rack up 100 fish days. On most of them, the majority of those fish will be under 12 inches, and maybe 10% will be 15 inches or better. And that's if you're actually fishing with stuff that allows you to target those 15 inch plus fish. Does that mean they are overpopulated? I don't think so. I think that's just the nature of the smallmouth population numbers or biomass in these streams, especially under current statewide regulations. I do know that MDC's studies of the existing special management areas have shown that they produced somewhat better size structure, with very little difference in growth rates. Growth rates are the key. If a stream is overpopulated, its growth rates should be considerably worse than a healthy stream. And you can look at the fish and see if they are long-bodied and big-headed. I know what that looks like because in Big River in the section most affected by old lead mine waste, the fish look like that. Reason for there is that the mine waste has smothered much of the bottom organisms that make up the base of the food chain, so a "normal" population of smallmouth simply doesn't have a "normal" amount of food to eat.

But the one fish, 15 or 18 inch limit in the special management areas should theoretically mean a lot higher numbers of smallies in the stream, which should translate to slower growth rates. But that just hasn't been the case to any real significance. And when you look at ANY Ozark stream, it's pretty difficult to believe that a lack of food due to overpopulation would ever be a problem. Crayfish, aquatic insects, and minnows of many different species are always abundant.

Of course, the question to me in SWMO is, to what extent does the genetics either mimic or mask overpopulation? Are the fish small and long-bodied because of genetics or because of overpopulation? But let's assume they are the way they are due to genetics...I believe that to be true, by the way. The question then is, is it possible to improve upon the size structure of the population? Or is genetics the limiting factor on the numbers of 15 inch plus fish and on top end size? I'm interested in hearing what Chief and Drew think on that subject.

But the reality elsewhere in the Ozarks is that, except for the streams where spotted bass are replacing large numbers of smallmouth, and the streams where habitat degradation is limiting their numbers, and the possible future threats like Asian carp invading, the population NUMBERS of smallmouth are not a problem. The problem is purely one of size structure. It's a question of whether we want plenty of 10-12 inch smallies and not many bigger ones, or whether we want a more balanced size structure with more 15 inch plus and 18 inch plus fish. Or, to put it in a political perspective, whether maximizing harvest is more important than maximizing the quality of the fishery. That's really the big choice. Do we want to be able to catch more big fish (while keeping the numbers of fish we catch about the same) while being limited on the number we harvest, or do we want to be able to catch and keep more fish with less chance to catch a big one?

And that question is complicated by the uncertainty of just how much we can affect size structure through regulation. Or even how much a better size structure would actually improve fishing. Because, it seems with smallmouth that just because more fish are being caught and released to survive to grow bigger, it doesn't mean that it becomes easier to catch those bigger fish.

I know where I come down on those questions. I believe that Ozark stream smallmouth are valuable enough that it doesn't make sense to maximize harvest of them. And I believe that regulations CAN and should work to produce more quality size fish. And I believe the way you do it is to try the regulations, study their effects, and if they don't seem to be working the way you want, dump them and try something different. As for Neoshos...I'm for whatever will protect their genetics and optimize the fishery. My question to you SWMO guys is...is there a reason to allow harvest of 15 inch plus fish as opposed to 18 inch plus fish or even 20 inch plus fish? Is there anything good that comes of harvesting the top end size fish? Or is allowing harvest of 15 inch plus fish simply a sop to the catch and kill crowd?

One other thing...if we're going to appease the catch and eat bunch, then go ahead and make it a 14-20 inch slot on all but the Neosho streams. Make it worthwhile for them to clean fish under the slot, while REALLY making a fish over the slot a true trophy instead of just a bigger fish in the frying pan.

[Chief Grey Bear]

Well there you go boys, case closed.

[ozark trout fisher]

Oh, you guys are all crazy.

I'm not about to step into this one. I figure that I only have a certain portion of my life that I should be able to waste on pointless smallmouth regulation threads on OAF-and I have greatly exceeded it!

[Al Agnew]

Well there you go boys, case closed.

C'mon, Chief...all the above was my opinion. I think it's a fairly informed opinion, but I have no delusions that it's all correct. I really do want to hear what you think SHOULD be done about the stream smallmouth you care so much about. Is the status quo okay? What exactly is your thinking on why 15 inch plus fish in your streams should be harvested? What do you want...I think we know what you DON'T want.

And let's talk about this overpopulation thing a bit more. Is the fact that you can catch 100 smallies a day on a given stream, with few if any much over 12 inches, proof of overpopulation, or is it because bigger ones are getting cropped off by the catch and kill crowd? Overpopulation, seems to me, happens when the numbers of fish outstrip the ability of the habitat to sustain them and allow them to grow at normal rates. If the fish in that stream are growing at normal rates up to 12 inches but are disappearing after that, it isn't overpopulation, and it won't be solved as long as the conditions that are making those fish disappear at 12 inches remain.

And I really do want to hear what you think the optimum fishery for Neoshos would be. In other words, what would be their top end size, what would be a quality size, and how many would reach quality size if everything was perfect regulation-wise?

[Chief Grey Bear]

Oh, you guys are all crazy.

I'm not about to step into this one. I figure that I only have a certain portion of my life that I should be able to waste on pointless smallmouth regulation threads on OAF-and I have greatly exceeded it!

Haven't we all...haven't we all.

C'mon, Chief...all the above was my opinion.

Just having a little fun ya with Al.

And let's talk about this overpopulation thing a bit more. Is the fact that you can catch 100 smallies a day on a given stream, with few if any much over 12 inches, proof of overpopulation, or is it because bigger ones are getting cropped off by the catch and kill crowd? Overpopulation, seems to me, happens when the numbers of fish outstrip the ability of the habitat to sustain them and allow them to grow at normal rates. If the fish in that stream are growing at normal rates up to 12 inches but are disappearing after that, it isn't overpopulation, and it won't be solved as long as the conditions that are making those fish disappear at 12 inches remain.

I have discussed this with the local MDC biologist and though he stopped short of saying they it was over populated, he did state, that the waterway did not need any more in it. We both agreed that it has an unusually high population. Forage in the stream comes at a premium. You will see almost 0 crawdads and what appears to be a lower than normal population of minnows. But there does seem to be enough to sustain the population. But in all streams I have noticed a, what to me seems, to be a drop in the population of crawdads and minnows from when I was a kid. Have you noticed anything like that???

Now let me add that this high population is in only one stream. All of the others that I fish appear to have a proper balance. So don't get too hung up on thinking that I am saying all steams in this corner are overpopulated.

And I really do want to hear what you think the optimum fishery for Neoshos would be. In other words, what would be their top end size, what would be a quality size, and how many would reach quality size if everything was perfect regulation-wise?

I don't think it would differ much from the northern strain. It has been my experience in fishing the waters of this corner as well as others of the state, the Neosho seems to top out at about 18 inches. In fact I have rarely caught one that size. You can and will catch some in the 15"-17" range but I wouldn't expect to do it all day. The northern strain that you are most accustomed to catching doesn't appear to have any trouble reaching 20" or more. And I can see and would agree that a 18" limit would work. But I don't think that is beneficial to the Neosho or the fisherman that fish for them. And that is someone that I also think we need to think about. I like to be fair to all that use our resources. As long as they are fair to the resource. But that is something you have to regulate on a one on one basis and that is why we have agents. Whether oone thinks they are doing their job or not.

I would hate to take a kid fishing down here and have him catch the fish of his life but it only be 17" and he had to turn it back.

[Guest]

deleted

[Chief Grey Bear]

You would be missing out on a an opportunity to teach a lesson in angling ethics and catch and release fishing if you tell that kid he can keep it.

Following the law is ethical.

BTW, 20" smallies aren't exactly common in most Missouri watersheds. They are usually only in the highest order streams like the meramac, big river, and gasconade.

You should get out more.

But to be more specific, we are speaking genetics here and and to a lesser degree but, no less important, habitat.

[Guest]

deleted

[Chief Grey Bear]

I think the top end size of neoshos and northern strain is driven by habitat more than genetics.

I will agree that habitat is very important. No question about it. But that is but one part of the puzzle. And I am not sure anyone really knows what all the pieces are. But I can tell you this, from my time on the water over the last 40 years, the Neosho and the Northern like to inhabit a little bit differnt waters. And the biggest difference seems to be the size of the water.

As the water gets bigger and the currents seems to slow as the rivers here expand out somewhat into more of a prairie stream, you will find less and less Neosho's. In fact, in western Jasper county in the Spring River, they seem to be none existant. They don't seem to care for larger, slower water. I have always found them streams with good current. And even in those streams, when you come to a long slow pool, it is highly unlikely you will catch one. But you will at each end of it where the water is flowing better.

Now that is not to say that Northerns don't like the same fast waters that Neoshos do. But on systems like say the lower Gas and such type, you will still find great numbers of the Northern. And that is one of the key differences in these two speices. And is also one of the reasons why I think the Neosho will not grow as large as a Northern.

I think that a slot limit and reduced daily limit is the way to go, but using a statewide approach makes no sense. Each watershed should be managed for it's potential, be it in the southwest part of the state or southeast.

I like the idea of a slot. I always have. And I think you are spot on that every watershed should be managed for its potential but that is just not practical from a enforcement perspective.

[Gavin]

every watershed should be managed for its potential but that is just not practical from a enforcement perspective

Why not? Other States with less conservation funding manage to live with some very complicated stream specific fishing regulations...Think folks in Missouri are smart enough to figure things out.