Possible Release Of Stripers In Table Rock Today

[Feathers and Fins]

Champ. Why do you "Loath" them?

If all the science says they are not a problem what harm are they?

[denjac]

Lets stock some tiger muskies too why we are at it. At least they will die off in 10 or so years.

[bfishn]

To say that all the science agrees that stripers aren't detrimentally competitive with other predators for prey is stretching it a bit (but not by much). Several studies indicate a small, but measureable, decline in predator (including but not limited to black bass) growth in the presence of stripers, but only when an optimal predator/prey ratio was surpassed. Not surprisingly, in these cases it was not just the black bass that suffered, but all predators that relied on the same prey, including the stripers. Also not surprising is the fact that the same thing occurs when prey are in short supply in fisheries that have no stripers.

An objective consideration (OK, most single-species fisherman aren't known for their objectivity) would be the status of white bass in a given fishery. Where whites and stripers coexist, they share nearly identical habits and habitats (until the stripers outgrow them). If the stripers ate too many shad, decline in white bass growth would be the first telltale clue. Last time I checked, and by all the current reports, there are still plenty of big whites in Beaver.

Perhaps Beaver's black bass fishery could be improved, but blaming the current status on stripers is a waste of time better spent on finding real answers to the problem. It's an old argument though, going back to when they first stocked stripers in Norris, and won't likely go away overnight.

[Feathers and Fins]

BF, J-doc and I were talking about this a little today, with the high amount of spotted bass in the lake the forage on the same prey as the LMB and Smallmouth, I personally feel it is competition from other bass species that are playing a large role in the health of Beavers Bass population. Doc caught one nice LMB today and all the bass we caught were nice and chunky. The smallmouth population from what I have been seeing is doing phenomenal though. It makes me curious and the Smallmouth seem to prefer a more rocky environment where butt the largemouth and spots seem to prefer areas of Pea Gavel, transition banks and timer if it truly isn't a case of to many Spots eating the prey source of the LMB.

We all know LMB are a ambush predator and it would seem logical that the more they have to move to find the forage the less size they would obtain as energy used is equal to or more than the protein they gain from the meal. Hypothetically speaking.

[bfishn]

Based on the popular concensus that TR kicks both Beaver & BS' butts in the black bass department, the biggest common denominator I see is water levels. TR seldom varies by more than 5 feet, while B & BS are wild in comparison.

Also, while I wouldn't knock the increasing efforts by many to improve Beaver's water quality, reduction of nutrient inflows will affect the fishery. All lakes have a limit of total biomass they'll support, but few ever even get near that limit, and then only for short durations. To have an excellent forage base, you have to have excellent plankton populations, and they require some of the nutrients that are to be controlled/reduced for water quality.

All in all, it's a huge balancing act to satisfy the boaters, swimmers, flood-prone, fishermen, and everyone that drinks the water. Keeping most of the people happy most of the time is a success IMO. I'll be content with whatever the lakes provide, for the rest of my days.

[james]

Well, i don't think TR needs stripers by any means, it's a great fishery the way it is, but i do look at lakes like Ouachita which is plum full of them,

and the black fishery is great,and even Hamilton in hot springs has more bass per acre than any lake in Arkansas has stripers, perhaps stripers do make

for a healthier fishery.

[bfishn]

Look at the Arkansas River, where stripers reproduce at will, and have greater proportional populations than any of the stocked lakes. Plenty of big blacks there.

[Wayne SW/MO]

Based on the popular concensus that TR kicks both Beaver & BS' butts in the black bass department, the biggest common denominator I see is water levels. TR seldom varies by more than 5 feet, while B & BS are wild in comparison.

I think it's a mystery to a great extent and it kind of comes down to who knows? Maybe it's docks, TR and LOZ both have a lot of them. I do know that BS had a good reputation until TR was formed, but there was really nothing to compare it too because it was the only lake for hundreds of miles! When Beaver was formed it never really came off as an outstanding bass lake.

Today BS probably gets the best spawning chances over the long haul if you include cover for the fingerlings, but there is no doubt the popularity of TR keeps it squeaky clean in the lake level department. BS might be something of a sleeper yet because it doesn't see any pressure and Norfolk sees even less.

I've deliberately kept from mentioning another lake that has a pretty fair reputation for stripers and bass, Truman anyone?

Table Rock and Bull Shoals are probably the last 2 big lakes capable of supporting a striper population left, but I'll be the first to agree that they probably wouldn't really add to TR, but they wouldn't hurt it and the died in the wool bassers would still have their pond. Bull Shoals and the surrounding region could probably benefit from them, especially economically..

[rogerdodger]

As a warm water fly-fisher, I (and many others) would go crazy about a spring run of Stripers up our rivers. As a traditional angler fishing out of my little tin rocket (Xpress) I would have a few concerns. They certainly would be targeted. I caught 4 monsters many years ago on Norfork using waking baits slowly cranked in the surface film. Now men, that is some excitement. If I really had the power to help the bass fishery I would put a cap on tournaments a.k.a. "derbies", but I'm afraid that sacred cow has done sailed.............

[Feathers and Fins]

Here is something I was thinking about, many people talk about how poor the quality of Beavers fish are! Yet I continually pick off bass that average 3 pounds and get many 4 to 6 pound fish, I believe I have posted more than enough pictures on this forum to show that. So here is my thinking; The vast majority of Bass Anglers I see are fishing shallow and in the brush 10 to 0 fow basically. I am working deep water targeting shad balls for walleye, stripers, crappie and hybrids 12 to 35 fow.

On a typical day I can catch a 5 fish limited that will go 15 to 19 pounds on a good day it can be a 20+ pound 5 fish limit, the difference is where and what I am targeting! I'm Deeper than the typical bass angler and targeting shad vs the Guys targeting the shallow bass who primarily are feeding on crustaceans and worms. I truly have come to the conclusion the "BIG" bass on Beaver are chasing the shad balls or following the stripers, hybrids and whites picking off the easy free meals that the three species stun and or kill during their feeding attacks.

This would seem to make since as when im fishing shallow the 10 to 0 fow my average fish size seems to be 1.5 to 2.5 lbs yet in deeper water that average goes up to 3.0 to 4.5lbs. Also the deeper fish seem to be much thicker in the shoulders and look like they have been to a Chinese Buffet with the belly's on them. Now I understand trolling is not a legal method in Tournaments but the simple fact is just because its not legal in tournaments does not mean those fish are not in the lake. We had 13lbs yesterday and missed out on almost 4 hours of primetime fishing, wonder how much we would have had with those four hours back? My guess would have been at least 2 more bass probably in the 3 pound range based on many recent trips putting us at 19 maybe 20 pounds. Something to ponder!