Smallmouth Issues/msa Meeting

[drew03cmc]

For many years we have posted all public stream accesses in Ozarks with our MDC approved Help Create World Class Smallmouth Bass Fishing in Missouri signs.

I haven't seen a sign at the accesses I have used. The Elk River system is either forgotten or neglected, which is it? How about the Spring River system, which includes Shoal Creek? Same story. Not to stir the pot, but yet again, if it feeds the Missouri or the Mississippi (north of Memphis), it gets attention from you all. If not, it seems to get forgotten.

[Mitch f]

Drew, where do you live? Do you go to any MSA meetings and plead your case? Do you put up any signs? What have you done? Maybe there aren't any signs there because you weren't there to put them up? Stop complaining

[drew03cmc]

Mitch, your issue is that the MSA is not infallible as you all seem to think. The MSA has NOT posted all public accesses in the state as Dan just stated. I called you guys out on it and you have given a typical response. I am NOT driving 6 hours to a meeting which lasts 2 hours. It is a waste of my time to drive to St. Louis, which isn't a great place for a "state" smallmouth alliance meeting. Perhaps Springfield would be a better meeting place, with meetings on weekends, or somewhere else centrally located in the region. Oh well, have fun in the bass club you all hold in such high regard.

[BackCastingGolfer]

Obviously, there is a ton of interest in improving the managment of our beloved Ozark stream smallmouth fisheries to produce higher quality angling. Biologically speaking in those environments with suitable habitat, restricting angler harverst via catch & release regulations or high minimum length limits is the most effective means to achieve this long term objective. Fish will still grow slowly, but they will be protected from harvest to a much greater degree than they are under current statewide regulations. Slot limits can also be an effective managment tool in those fisheries where fish growth is being curtailed by restricted food supplies and too much competition for the resource to support the population. Not so sure these conditions exist to a large degree in our stream fisheries -- likely not. Most high MLLs and slots both typically include reduced daily creel/possession limits that keep better anglers from overharvesting fish.

Stream smallmouth bass here in the Ozarks represent the apex predator in the food chain and the most sought after game fish in the majority of our rivers. Expecting our fisheries to remain strong and/or improve under the current 12-inch minimum, 6 fish creel limits (which have been in place since the 1970s/1960s, respectively) is ridiculous. Fishing pressure, easier access, jet boats, etc. all place undue pressure on our adult SMB populations to an unprecedented degree. We need help. The existing special regs areas here as well as elsewhere have shown that quality based regs work to improve smallmouth bass fisheries. The science works, now it's down to educating anglers on the steps necessary to make our bronzeback fisheries better in terms of average sizes and angler catch rates -- basically help them reach their angling potential.

Given the majority of anglers preferences today as fishing for the enjoyment of it -- no one really fishes for food in this country (don't even go there) -- our fisheries should be increasingly managed in a manner that serves those interests. I agree, that total C&R on our native SMB fisheries is likely impractical to impose. Perhaps we could propose certain stream reaches for this designation, but they would likely be rather rare. Most C&R is purely voluntary. Updated regs are needed for sure and various proposals have been included here as well as proposed officially to the MDC by the Missouri Smallmouth Alliance (back in 2010). Certainly, there are a number of regs regimes that could work more effectively than the current program in place. I have my concerns about slots limits from both a biological perspective and a angler behavior standpoint. It is likely, based on science, that slots would not be terribly effective in improving angling quality on our SMB streams. Would it serve as a appeasement for catch & keep guys if it the top end of protected range was high enough (18") and the slot wide enough 13"-18"to protect a large swath of adult smallies? Perhaps. I fear that if the regs are liberalized on the low end to allow greater harvest of SMB below 14" for example, come Memorial Day weekend, it will be a free for all by local / consumptive anglers on little smallies on our streams. I'd expect lots of limits of smallish fish to be taken with total harvest numbers initially likely exceeding what we experience under the 12-inch MLL today. But enough on regs.

Folks have commented that we need more angler education on the biology of SMB, growth rates, benefit of C&R, etc. The MO Smallmouth Alliance couldn't agree more. For many years we have posted all public stream accesses in Ozarks with our MDC approved Help Create World Class Smallmouth Bass Fishing in Missouri signs. Likely many of you have seen them in field ove the years. We are in process of updating our signage to be more noticeable and impactful with anglers who gain acces to our rivers at public landings. Our proposed sign update will be posted on the MSA website www.missourismallmouthalliance.org website sometime next week. It features a great SMB illustration by Al Agnew as well as valuable info on the slow growth rates of stream SMB (4-6 years to reach just 12") as well as summarizes the existing statewide black bass regs (12"MLL, 6 fish, closed season). Efforts like these, in addition to growing our membership and circulating conservation messages through our newsletter, MSA is working to imrove angler education any chance we get. Regs certainly work, but providing anglers with knowledge might just get them to modify their behavior in a manner that supports more sustainable fisheries long term. Changing attitudes is the toughest part of the process.

I certainly appreciate the dialog -- sometimes quite colorful -- on this thread and am pleased to see such strong interest in this topic. MSA will keep working for the benefit of like-minded anglers for the betterment of our fisheries. We will be meeting with the MDC Chief of Fisheries, Chris Vitello, this weekend at the CFM annual meeting at Lodge of Four Seasons. We'll try to express our collective desire to get the show on the road with regards to stepping up the MDC's managment efforts for stream smallies. At an appropriate time (post publication of official angler survey results) MSA is poised to approach Conservation Commissioners on this topic as we have been more than patient here.

BTW -- no info on goggle eye angler survey results presented at MSA meeting. Info not yet compiled for publication.

I dissagree that NO ONE fishes for food. I don't keep smallmouth, but there was a stretch recently where I was unemployed and crappie,bluegill, and goggle eye was a SIGNIFICANT source of my food.

[drew03cmc]

Fish is a cheap food source. If you need food, you can catch fish all day long, limiting on difference species and fill the freezer. It is a perfectly acceptable source of food.

[eric1978]

Total C&R is not a solution

Then how exactly did the smallmouth make it through the tens of thousands of years when there was NO human impact at all upon their streams? If they so desperately need to be thinned out, they'd be long gone, thousands of years ago. They don't NEED thinning. Never have. That's a problem you run into with little forageless man-made mudholes, not a gushing vein of neverending nutrients. Let's be realistic...the smallmouth would be better off with NO human impact than any arbitrary slot or creel limit. Of course C&R won't be implemented, but let's not pretend we're doing them some biological favor with a slot limit.

[ness]

Dan -- thanks for the information on what MSA is up to, and for your efforts for the cause. I think a lot of us would like to hear how the discussion with Chris Vitello this weekend goes.

[Dan Kreher]

I never said that MSA has posted our signs at ALL accesses in state. Last year, we hit about 140 public accesses -- I can provide the exact accesses posted by us if anyone is interested. The SW corner of state as well as remote (in relation to STL metro area where most of our members reside) areas in S. Central Ozarks have been difficult for our volunteers to post. We certainly have members in SW MO area (Springfield mostly) but unfortunately our primary volunteer for sign posting down there was unable to help out last year.

If anyone is interested in assisting MSA in posting signs at MDC, State Park, USFS stream accesses, please send me a private e-mail and I'll make sure you receive signage, posting materials, signage, etc. We are non-profit volunteer based organization that in 2011 spent hundreds of man hours and drove thousands of miles throughout the Ozarks to hit as many stream accesses as we were able. We don't receive any compensation for our time or for our gas. Not whining here. We do this because it is part of our organization's stated mission.

Again, if anyone wants to help out they are more than welcome to speak up.

PS -- a former member of the Illinois Smallmouth Alliance, Gary Lange of Nixa, tried to get interest in a SWMO MSA chapter going early last year (on this board) but became frustrated by a lack of interest from folks as almost no one turned out for his organizational meeting. If folks are interested in making a real difference in helping to shape the future of our state's native smallmouth fisheries, I welcome them to get on board with the MO Smallmouth Alliance. Message board postings are interesting and informative, but constructive dialog with fisheries managers will be more effective in really getting things done.

MSA has had some leaders emerge in the SEMO area of the state to form their own satellite chapter for members located in that area. They have their own periodic meetings, do an annual river clean up and participate in MSA outings when available. We keep connected through the newsletter and e-mail. Illinois has 3 different chapters in the state that are quite active. We fully realize the MO is a large state and don't expect folks to drive 100 miles to make a meeting. We have about 250 members across the state currently and at most 60 members show up at our biggest meetings. That's quite OK -- people are busy. Still, there is absolutely no reason not to join MSA if you care about the resource.

The voices of many are much louder than those of a few.

[Dan Kreher]

I dissagree that NO ONE fishes for food. I don't keep smallmouth, but there was a stretch recently where I was unemployed and crappie,bluegill, and goggle eye was a SIGNIFICANT source of my food.

Perhaps I was a bit presumptous on that point -- not that anyone posting on this board hasn't jumped to questionable conclusions in the past. My hope is that Missouri's citizens are not 'fishing for food' to sustain themselves. I realize that there is poverty out there both in urban and rural areas. Relying on the smallmouth bass population of our streams as a primary food source is not a viable solution to hunger. It's simply not sustainable -- few could argue that it is.

I certainly do not begrudge people eating meals of crappie, bluegill or other plentiful panfish. And smaller catfish are mighty tasty as well. Those species are relatively prolific and grow pretty fast. Put and take rainbows are the same way. Hope anglers value slow growing and naturally sustaining stream smallmouth bass populations more than as a food fish. Certainly believe folks on this board do based on the passion displayed.

I'll try to refrain from making generalizations in the future.

[Dan Kreher]

That is certainly your right. But, if you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the problem. Total C&R is not a solution or even a reality.

And I am glad you brought up growth rates Dan. Years of studies have show there is only a 1/2 inch difference in smallmouth bass from age 1 through age 10 between the SMA's and non-SMA's. Sure a 1/2 inch is a 1/2 inch but are we really getting our return on investment. (not that we have really invested any money per sa, just a way to word my point/question.)

C&R may not be a reality but it certainly does work to improve angler catch rates and average fish sizes.

The Special Regs areas were not about accelerating growth rates. They were about lengthing average fish lives essentially. By that I mean, they were about protecting smallmouth bass from harvest to a longer period allowing them to grow to larger sizes. Objectives were to increase average fish sizes and angler catch rates -- which all have largely accomplished to varying degrees (see MDC White Paper on topic). In fact, the MDC was pleased that SMB growth rates did not diminish notably in the Special Regs Areas. There was some concern that fish growth would decline due to greater competition for food resources with more adult SMB in stream under more restrictive regs. Any slowing of growth rates was very slight.

in the Special Regs Areas, the science was proven to work -- not necessarily to the full degree hoped by MDC -- but they were effective. That's why MSA would like to see more of them -- particulary more 18" MLL areas in selected areas as well as a raising of the bar statewide.

The initial results of the MDC's tagging studies, which Al Agnew did a good job of explaining in this initial post in this thread, have shown surprisingly high fishing pressure for SMB in our streams (42% of tags turned in for cash in first 7 months of study). No word yet on what percentage of these legal-sized fish were kept vs. released. We have a lot of anglers fishing for SMB in our streams. We need regulations and education which support sustainable, high quality fisheries that allow a reasonable amount of harvest by those so inclined but not enough to reduce these fisheries to mediocre avg fish sizes and proportional stock densities. Our current regime of maximum sustained yield regs (12"/6 fish) do just that. They are better than what we had before they were enacted some 40-50 years ago when we had a 10 fish creel and no MLL. But, it is well past time for a revision in those statewide regs that better fit current angler preferences (sport vs. food) and allow these fisheries to better achieve their potential if managed more effectively.