God Bless The Kentucky Bass

[ozark trout fisher]

If the decimation of the smallmouth is as described in these waters, then why hasn't the MDC instituted a no harvest rule in these sections? It would be no different than SBMMA's that have been established. Why still allow their harvest if they are on the brink of extinction in those sections? Why haven't LMB numbers been effected?

I think some of us have been wondering why the MDC hasn't done exactly that. I think it goes without saying that I'm not a biologist-so I'm not going to sit here and tell you that in river sections like the lower Bourbeuse that smallmouth are actually on the brink of extinction. I'm just a fisherman, so all I can tell you with any certainty is that their numbers are seriously, seriously depressed.

It's a great question why largemouth haven't been affected as drastically. Hard to know the answer...That said, it does seem that spotted bass and smallmouth tend to share the same habitat to a much larger degree than spots and largemouth. Largemouth on these rivers are mostly found in the "frog water" (of which there is plenty.) Spots are sometimes found in that same type of habitat but more often where there is some good, steady current...the same places where smallmouth would normally be. Of course you can say this is all very unscientific, and you'd be right. But you asked...

[Outside Bend]

I will dispute that they have caused an almost 100% reduction in smallmouth populations. Have they caused some reduction in smallmouth populations??? Good question. It is possible. But I highly doubt it is anywhere near the numbers that have been mentioned.

Spots compete with smallmouth for food and other resources. They're more tolerant of warm water and higher turbidity. Juvenile spots grow faster than juvenile smallmouth, and adult spots produce more eggs than smallmouth- a big smallie will produce around 10,000 eggs, a big spot can produce as many as 40,000. Larval spots are tougher for predators to see than larval smallies. And they can hybridize with each other.

If spots have the biological advantage in the lower Meramec, it's not surprising they'd out-compete the native smallmouth. If a spot can produce four times the babies as a smallmouth, it makes the idea of four spots for every smallie sound like a pretty logical estimate to me.

In looking at the Biotic Communities for the area's we are discussing, the smallmouth is not listed as threatened or endangered by the MDC in any of them. I would think that certainly if the smallmouth had experienced a 95% drop in population, they would have made that list.

The threatened/endangered status you're looking at is determined by looking across the entire state, not watershed-by-watershed. Smallmouth are listed as stable because, across their entire statewide range, they're doing pretty alright.

If the decimation of the smallmouth is as described in these waters, then why hasn't the MDC instituted a no harvest rule in these sections? It would be no different than SBMMA's that have been established. Why still allow their harvest if they are on the brink of extinction in those sections? Why haven't LMB numbers been effected?

My guess is that no-kill smallmouth regs don't address the number of spotted bass in the system, It doesn't matter how many smallies we leave in the river if spots can out-eat and out-spawn them.

The overlap in habitat requirements is much greater between spots and smallmouth than it is between spots and largemouth- it's therefore no surprise that LMBs wouldn't be suffering as much as smallmouth due to the spotted bass invasion.

[Al Agnew]

I've discussed all this with the biologists, and basically they don't know which of all the factors are doing the most damage. They just know that as the spot population increases, the smallmouth population decreases. They have also seen adverse changes in largemouth population densities, but very minor compared to the smallmouth. But the factors listed above are all possibilities. All we, or the biologists, know for sure is that it appears that there is a finite amount of smallmouth/spot habitat, and a finite amount of smallmouth/spot biomass it can support, and the more spotted bass biomass, the less smallmouth biomass.

I've said this a lot of times before, but in reality these streams, especially the Bourbeuse and Big River but also the lower Meramec, are perfect spotted bass habitat, a little murkier, slower, warmer in the summer, and more fertile than typical smallmouth habitat on the classic smallmouth streams. That kind of habitat was obviously also perfect for smallmouth as long as they didn't have the spots to contend with, but once the spots moved in, the smallmouths were at some kind of competitive disadvantage, and they hadn't evolved in these streams to live with spotted bass.

Chief, the mill dams on Big River and the Bourbeuse are all low dams, no more than 10 feet or so higher than normal water level. There are 3 on Big River and 2 on the Bourbeuse. Each one of them formed a barrier that slowed the spotted bass encroachment for a period of time. But spotted bass are great wanderers, especially during high water, and eventually they made it above each dam, probably during floods. There are also two concrete slab low water bridges on upper Big River, which also formed barriers for a while. They both formed "dams" of about four or five feet high. The farthest upstream one is at the Leadwood Access, and until last year it was the final barrier. The other one, only 2.5 miles downstream, had stopped the spotted bass for about four years--as they increased from nothing to about 20% in my catch rate below that slab during those four years, they were still non-existent above it. And then I started catching them above it three years ago. Now they are at about 20% of my catch in that short 2.5 mile stretch between the slabs, and 40% below the lower slab. I caught two last year above the upper slab.

You said that I was throwing out wild numbers. But those percentages are from my own catch rates, which I have kept records of, and from conversations with the biologists, who have seen much the same. Their percentages may vary a little from mine, but not drastically.

A couple of the biologists have speculated that changes in water and habitat quality have allowed the spots to spread as fast as they have on these rivers. But I think that's a standard response to any perceived change in a wild population, and I'm not sure it applies here. The water quality has never been good in Big River--too much civilization and poor land use practices, and too much lead mine waste. The habitat has also always been worse on Big River than on many Ozark streaams, due to the mine waste. Habitat has actually improved since the mine waste areas became federal superfund sites and have now been buried and stabilized--not much, but you can see a difference in the most badly affected areas. The Bourbeuse has not suffered from those things as has Big River; it's only real problems are with poor land use and allowing livestock in the water. The Meramec has suffered from that as well, and also from heavy jetboat use and resulting wake damage to the banks. But really, unless there is something that is invisible at this point, there isn't a whole lot of difference between these streams 30 years ago and the way they are today. I believe it's simply a classic case of an introduced (whether on purpose or by accident) species moving into a niche where they have competitive advantages over the native species. As I've said before, at some point the two species reach some kind of equilibrium, and perhaps the native species evolves to handle the new one eventually and makes a rebound, and perhaps that's what we're seeing on the lower portions of these rivers, where the ratios seem to have stabilized. But the Big, Bourbeuse, and lower Meramec will probably never be the smallmouth fisheries they were before. I'm just glad of one thing...for whatever reason (probably a combination of faster water and cooler summer temperatures, but maybe even water chemistry issues due to the fact that it's so much more heavily spring-fed), the upper Meramec appears to not be very hospitable to spotted bass.

[drew03cmc]

Why is it so difficult for so many stream anglers to come to grips with the fact that spotted bass are both a nuisance and a threat to smallmouth bass? That the the very presence of spotted bass in our Ozark streams is worrisome, to say the least. On this forum, we fish for trout and smallmouth bass. We don't fish for spots. If YOU do, fine. Godspeed. Start a new forum, called "Spotted Bass: Really, We Are Misunderstood and Belong In Your Ozark Streams." Really. If you love spotted bass so much, wouldn't you be in favor of our Ozark streams becoming slower, siltier, less healthy? Allowing spotted bass to thrive?

Imagine replacing the smallies in the Jacks Fork with spots. In the Huzzah. Big Piney. Gasconade.

I make no apologies in saying that my interest in keeping spotted bass out of streams I want to fish is the correct and prudent path. Selfish? No question. Simply put, absolutely NO stream will suffer by protecting smallmouth bass. They will, however, suffer in both quality and health, if spotted bass are allowed to flourish.

I love fishing for smallmouth bass in Missouri's Ozark streams.

You are speaking of 3 streams as if it is representative of the Ozarks as a whole. There are spotted bass that occur naturally in the streams of the upper Osage basin, Spring, Elk and the entire White River system. Are they a threat to smallmouth bass that are also native to these creeks and streams? Of course they aren't, but we can't convince you, the expert of this. You also state that we fish for trout and smallmouth, but you neglect that there is are MANY other species in the Ozarks to fish for. If you wish to make these absurd statements, please do so and realize that nobody will take you seriously.

I have to say that aside from JoeD, this conversation has been relatively subdued compared to some of our past smallmouth/spot debates. As soon as I say this, I must add my two cents. Spotted bass were likely NOT placed in the Meramec drainage by man directly. They have migrated to these streams and are here, unlikely to go away now. I wish there were a way to go back to the premier smallmouth fishing we used to have in the Ozarks, but let me tell you, there are streams in the Ozarks with both spots and smallmouth over 3 and 4 pounds within the same mile of water.

[Chief Grey Bear]

Spots compete with smallmouth for food and other resources. They're more tolerant of warm water and higher turbidity. Juvenile spots grow faster than juvenile smallmouth, and adult spots produce more eggs than smallmouth- a big smallie will produce around 10,000 eggs, a big spot can produce as many as 40,000. Larval spots are tougher for predators to see than larval smallies. And they can hybridize with each other.

All predator fish compete for forage. It is not just a spot v. brownie when it comes to eating. I have never found a report stating that spots lay 40,000 eggs. Most that I have read have been around the 5,000 range. Usually lower. I have seen studies on LMB's producing 40,000 but that is also females that are much larger than spots and most likely from lakes.

Unless you do a close up inspection, the fry from all black bass look very similar. The most notable and easily recognized difference is the tri colored tail of the smallmouth. Growth rates also appear to be similar for the first couple of years when smallmouth and largemouth being to pull away.

If spots have the biological advantage in the lower Meramec, it's not surprising they'd out-compete the native smallmouth. If a spot can produce four times the babies as a smallmouth, it makes the idea of four spots for every smallie sound like a pretty logical estimate to me.

Nature, by her very nature, is not logical. Higher egg production is usually associated with higher mortality rates.

The threatened/endangered status you're looking at is determined by looking across the entire state, not watershed-by-watershed. Smallmouth are listed as stable because, across their entire statewide range, they're doing pretty alright.

No, it was on a per stream basis.

My guess is that no-kill smallmouth regs don't address the number of spotted bass in the system, It doesn't matter how many smallies we leave in the river if spots can out-eat and out-spawn them.

I don't know of any species in recent times that was near extinction that did not receive maximum protection.

The overlap in habitat requirements is much greater between spots and smallmouth than it is between spots and largemouth- it's therefore no surprise that LMBs wouldn't be suffering as much as smallmouth due to the spotted bass invasion.

I would say that 80% + of the Kentuckies that I have had the great pleasure to catch have come more from LMB type habitat than brownie.

[Chief Grey Bear]

I'm just glad of one thing...for whatever reason (probably a combination of faster water and cooler summer temperatures, but maybe even water chemistry issues due to the fact that it's so much more heavily spring-fed), the upper Meramec appears to not be very hospitable to spotted bass.

From what I can tell you of my experiences of catching Kentucky bass over the last 40+ years on this side of the Ozarks they shouldn't expand but little more than half way. They don't seem to care for the upper reaches of any of the creeks and rivers. They also seem to be mostly consentrated in those flowing into the Spring River watershed. And those are a little slower flowing and on the very edge of the Ozark plateau. I cant say that I have ever caught one in the Elk drainage. And that drainage more closely resembles those from deep in the Ozarks.

[Outside Bend]

All predator fish compete for forage. It is not just a spot v. brownie when it comes to eating.

But when you add a nonnative predator, it changes the game. Predators like smallies and largemouth are partitioned by habitat- they may be eating the same types of prey, but they're not doing it in the same ecological space. That's not the case with spots, they're habitat requirements overlap so much with the native smallies that they're directly competing for food resources.

I have never found a report stating that spots lay 40,000 eggs. Most that I have read have been around the 5,000 range. Usually lower. I have seen studies on LMB's producing 40,000 but that is also females that are much larger than spots and most likely from lakes.

http://www.dnr.state.../pdf/pub058.pdf

And Pflieger says spotted bass eggs are about 1/3 the size of smallies. It doesn't matter whether they're large fish or from lakes- even a 12 inch spot is producing substantially more eggs than a 12 inch smallmouth.

Unless you do a close up inspection, the fry from all black bass look very similar. The most notable and easily recognized difference is the tri colored tail of the smallmouth. Growth rates also appear to be similar for the first couple of years when smallmouth and largemouth being to pull away.

True- but larvae and fry are different. Larval spots are translucent, larval smallies are very dark, almost black- making it easier for predators to see them. Spots do tend to grow a bit faster than smallmouths- and again, a little spot can produce as many or more eggs than a big smallie.

Nature, by her very nature, is not logical. Higher egg production is usually associated with higher mortality rates.

True- but everything from cane toads to kittycats has shown we can't expect species to behave when they're introduced to a new habitat. It may be that spots fare better in the Meramec drainage than in their native range- different predator and prey suites, fewer disease issues, etc.

No, it was on a per stream basis.

Can you provide a link or a screenshot?

It's a nice day. I'm going to go look for mushrooms now

[Chief Grey Bear]

But when you add a nonnative predator, it changes the game. Predators like smallies and largemouth are partitioned by habitat- they may be eating the same types of prey, but they're not doing it in the same ecological space. That's not the case with spots, they're habitat requirements overlap so much with the native smallies that they're directly competing for food resources.

There may be some validity to that on larger systems. But again, the overwhelming vast majority of Kentucky bass I have caught in the last 40+ years have come from LMB type waters.

And Pflieger says spotted bass eggs are about 1/3 the size of smallies. It doesn't matter whether they're large fish or from lakes- even a 12 inch spot is producing substantially more eggs than a 12 inch smallmouth.

You have some data on that??

True- but larvae and fry are different. Larval spots are translucent, larval smallies are very dark, almost black- making it easier for predators to see them. Spots do tend to grow a bit faster than smallmouths- and again, a little spot can produce as many or more eggs than a big smallie.

Yes, and the smallmouth male will continue to guard the fry. Spots will also. But as has been established by numerous reports that apparently are consistent with MDC findings, a 10 inch Spot is not going to drop 40,000 eggs.

True- but everything from cane toads to kittycats has shown we can't expect species to behave when they're introduced to a new habitat. It may be that spots fare better in the Meramec drainage than in their native range- different predator and prey suites, fewer disease issues, etc.

I am pretty sure the Meramec drainage mimics other drainages as they are exiting the Ozarks wihch seems to be the prefered habitat that Spots seek.

Can you provide a link or a screenshot?

http://mdc.mo.gov/landwater-care/stream-and-watershed-management/missouri-watersheds/big-river/biotic-community

http://mdc.mo.gov/landwater-care/stream-and-watershed-management/missouri-watersheds/meramec-river/biotic-community

http://mdc.mo.gov/landwater-care/stream-and-watershed-management/missouri-watersheds/bourbeuse-river/biotic-community

It's a nice day. I'm going to go look for mushrooms now

Best of luck to you my friend.

[Outside Bend]

There may be some validity to that on larger systems. But again, the overwhelming vast majority of Kentucky bass I have caught in the last 40+ years have come from LMB type waters.

The lower Meramec is a pretty large system. And as with other factors- your 40 years of observtions in spots native range may not translate once they're established in new watersheds. It could well be apples and oranges.

You have some data on that??

I don't. The guy who wrote the book on the state's fishes does, though. It's in Pflieger's Fishes of Missouri.

Yes, and the smallmouth male will continue to guard the fry. Spots will also. But as has been established by numerous reports that apparently are consistent with MDC findings, a 10 inch Spot is not going to drop 40,000 eggs.

I said a spot can produce 40,000 eggs. I said 10 inch spot will produce more eggs than a 10 inch smallmouth. I never said a 10-inch spot can produce 40,000 eggs.

But I don't want to bicker about how many eggs there are in a bass tummy. My point was simply that a lot of spotted bass' life history traits lend itself well to outcompeting smallies. We shouldn't be too surprised, or too dismissive, when we hear folks (MDC included) talking about substantial declines in smallmouth numbers in the lower Meramec.

I am pretty sure the Meramec drainage mimics other drainages as they are exiting the Ozarks wihch seems to be the prefered habitat that Spots seek.

In terms of habitat, probably. But there'll be differences in water quality and nutrient loads, different species and abundance of predators and prey, different parasites, and diseases, etc. As dissected as the Ozark geography is, there's a lot of variability between watersheds- what is the case in one may not be so in the other.

http://mdc.mo.gov/la...iotic-community

http://mdc.mo.gov/la...iotic-community

http://mdc.mo.gov/la...iotic-community

I understand the data was collected by watershed, but I don't see anywhere they say endangered/threaten status is determined on a watershed-by-watershed level. If it is, I'd guess that even though some reaches of the lower Meramec are heavily infested with spots, when taken at the scale of the entire watershed the decline may not be enough to generate concern.

[Al Agnew]

Actually, the decline in the Meramec system HAS generated a lot of concern, hence the 12 fish limit and no length limit on spots, and the extension of the 1 fish, 15 inch limit on smallmouths that is now on nearly all of Big River.

As Chief pointed out, in stream systems where they are native, the spots and smallmouth tend to separate by habitat, with smallmouth in the faster, clearer upper portions and spots in the slower, murkier lower portions. But that isn't always the case even in the streams where they are native. And it certainly isn't always true in the northern Ozark streams they have invaded.

While the spots in the Meramec itself thin out to near insignificance above Meramec State Park, you will catch them all the way up above Maramec Spring. You will also catch them in Huzzah and Courtois, which are about as clear and fast as any smallmouth streams in the Ozarks. And the two major tributaries, Big and Bourbeuse, are now spotted bass water all the way to their headwaters. In the Gasconade River system, they are the dominant bass species in the lower 75 miles or so, common up to the mouth of the Big Piney, and you'll generally catch a few on any given day on upstream for many miles. They are also in the lower portions of the Big and Little Piney. You have to go pretty far upstream on Tavern Creek and Maries River to get out of spot water these days. And on the small streams running directly into the Mississippi, like Joachim Creek and Saline Creeek, you'll basically find them anywhere as far up as the Mississippi backs water during huge floods, and that can be 30 or more miles up from the river. I once had hopes that the upper portions of Big River would prove inhospitable to them, because the river above St. Francois State Park is generally pretty clear and reasonably fast, but that has not proven to be the case.

To be honest, I don't think anybody knows all the population dynamics between smallies and spots, because it varies so much by stream. Take, for instance, the difference between the Castor River, native spotted bass water, and its largest tributary the Whitewater River. The Castor is exceptionally clear and reasonably fast until it gets to the vicinity of the 34 Highway Bridge, and then it slows considerably and begins to get murky. There are very few spots above that bridge, but within just a few miles below it they become the dominant species and smallmouth almost disappear. But on the Whitewater, a clear, fast stream in its upper reaches, slight less clear and fast in the middle, and slow and murky in the lower portions, the spots outnumber smallmouth all the way up to the far upper section. The biologists have speculated that spotted bass don't do well in water with a gradient of more than 3.5 feet per mile. Yet the upper St. Francis River, which averages 10 feet per mile or more and has sections dropping 20 feet per mile, is full of spotted bass. They don't do well in heavily spring fed water for the most part--they are almost non-existent in the North Fork above the lake--but they are pretty common in the somewhat less spring fed but still cool Bryant Creek. It seems to be some combination of cooler summer water temperatures, gradient, and water clarity, that discourages them, but it doesn't take all three. They can do well in clear water if it's not too cold. They can do well in faster water if it's not too clear and cool.

And they absolutely use the exact same habitat as smallmouth in many streams. You'll catch them in exactly the spots you catch smallies on the rivers of the Meramec Basin, as well as in the St. Francis and Whitewater.