Question About Gigging/spearfishing?

[Chief Grey Bear]

I hate getting sucked into this argument again, but here goes...the huge difference between illegal gigging and illegal hook and line poaching of game fish is that gigging selects for the biggest fish. Does it harm overall numbers? Nope. But it harms the population structure, by depressing the numbers of the largest fish. Do illegal giggers kill all the big smallmouth (and walleye and largemouth)? Of course not, but they can and do kill a significant percentage of them. We've seen it, how as the winter goes along the big fish simply disappear out of some of the best wintering pools, and how so many of those we catch even early on in the winter season have fresh gig wounds.

Poaching is poaching no matter the method. Do you have absolute evidence that it was giggers and that it wasn't some rod and reelers pick your holes? Unless you were watching the giggers, I don't know how you could be posititive. Not saying it can't happen, or may not occasionaly happen, but to lay all the blame at giggers is without fact.

Hook and line poaching will never have the same impact on the biggest fish. The nimrod who keeps more than the limit of 12-14 inchers because that's what's easy to catch, or the pinhead who keeps undersized fish, will never bother the big ones which are much more difficult to catch. I actually worry more about those who routinely LEGALLY keep a limit of fish out of the smaller streams, than I do the poachers. I can't fault them too much for doing so since it's legal, but I think it's stupid, selfish, and short-sided because it doesn't take very many of those legal limits to really depress the numbers of legal fish on those smaller streams. I get mad at the poachers more because they are doing something they know is illegal more so than that they are harming the population any more that the legal meat fishermen who continually pound the streams.

Over the course of fishing season, there will be numerous fishermen hit any given stretch of water. Since we like assumptions here lets use this one. Lets say on these waters that you say are being stipped of large smallmouth it gets hit by 25 different fishermen over the course of the year. I think we can both agree that is a very conservitive number. Each person only needs to keep one large fish and you have now lost 25 of your large fish you blame soley on the giggers. And I don't know anyone that doesn't catch at least one good fish per trip. If you don't believe that R&R fishing both legal and illegal doesn't have a huge impact on fish, it is because you choose to not accpect it.

And please note, I understand and support keeping fish in principle, but I wish people would think about what they're doing and understand population dynamics. You'd think some of these guys believe that there is an inexhaustible supply of adult game fish and that they can take as many as they want from the same waters every week and it won't make a difference. Either that or it's the kind of mentality that says, "I gotta get mine before somebody else gets them all."

I agree 1000%!!! You couldn't say it any better!

And although I agree, I still cringe at the thought and site of it. And I know it also makes a healthier stream.

I applaud MDC's attempts to study the whole stream smallmouth situation, and I applaud what they HAVE done. They are operating under one big handicap; they do not have good baseline statistics. They don't know what kind of population structure these streams are capable of producing. Early studies were done back when the stream smallmouth populations were already severely depressed, before the advent of the present statewide creel and length limits, and on a couple of streams that were probably not capable of producing the numbers of bigger fish that rivers like the Meramec were.

How do you know they were already depressed? What are your baseline stats to confirm?

Later studies were done AFTER jet boats made gigging so much more easier and after the gigging season was greatly extended, putting so much more pressure on BIG game fish by illegal giggers. There were, to my knowledge, no studies done between 1975 and 1985 when, in my opinion and experience, the numbers of big smallmouth in streams like the Meramec were at their best in recent history.

Again it is always the giggers. Without any confirmation of fact, it is only opinion. The fact is, nobody knows.

I am certain that, had I known then what I do now, I could have caught at least double or triple the numbers of big fish from the Meramec during that 1975-1985 time period as I do now. It's not that there are no big ones there now, it's simply that there are far fewer big ones there now. The knowledgeable angler can still catch some, but not nearly as many. And illegal gigging is not the only reason why, but it's a big reason.

Well yeah, if any of us would have known then what we know now....that has been said for centuries. We all, well maybe not all, gain knowledge and experience as we get older.

But how do you know you could have caught triple the numbers of bigger fish? Based on what? Do you know for sure there were triple the number of bigger fish? How do you know? Not opinion, fact.

[Chief Grey Bear]

Yes, you guys are correct. I don't think they are serious enough (as Scott says) to do anything about it. I mean, short of having Seal team 6 to do it, who could justify sending troops out at night to hide in the bushes. They don't have the funding or man power to do it. You could possibly luck out and have a guy at the boat ramp and bust someone. But that guy would have to be pretty stupid to get caught.....and he has a cell phone. The biggest gigging poachers are the guys who have their gig boats tied to their own dock at their club house directly on the river. Almost impossible to catch.

The same MDC that you say does nothing, just had a big bust a couple of years ago. But I don't belive any smallmouth were involved. Just huge amounts of suckers.

[fishinwrench]

Don't feel too bad about it, Mitch. I have sat around and shot the bull with a couple of MDC agents and fished a tournament with a MDC biologist where we discussed all manner of things throughout the day, and they all said worse things about "hunters/fishermen" (in general) then I have ever heard said about them.

Give someone a title and a badge and immediately everyone without one becomes a dumbass with zero credibility.

[Chief Grey Bear]

There is too much talk on the extremes of this issue IMO. Chief, I just don't get the argument of "well, you all are still posting plenty of pictures of nice fish, so it must be okay." No one thinks that these giggers are taking all of the big smallmouth out of our rivers, or if they say that, it's obviously an overstatement. Of course people still catch nice fish, and sometimes post pictures of them here, which has very little to do with the conversation at hand. Just because there are some left doesn't mean that illegal gigging of smallmouth isn't a problem. We occasionally get a deer hunting in the south-central MO, sometimes a nice one, but all the people running deer with dogs is still something that is a problem. So it seems like you're attacking a strawman there.

No just growing tired of the lopsided vile hatred of the legal practice of gigging. It was anywhere near as bad as is said here, there wouldn't be a fish swimming.

Here's what it its: it's the knowledge that, with the wrong attitude and the right skills, a gigger can do significant damage to the bass population, at least within limited areas. It's the knowledge that some of those fish that have been in the river for 4, 5, 6 years and are tough to catch by traditional methods by this point can be taken out of the river in relatively wholesale fashion without even having to be fooled. Just because every gigger in the Ozarks isn't doing this (and I'll be the first to admit it's almost certainly a minority) and because there are still smallmouth in the river doesn't mean it isn't a problem.

As I have said before, you loose far more fish to R&R fishermen than giggers. If we are going to continually point the finger at giggers, then we need some concrete evidence, not opinon.

As I've said, I don't advocate we ban gigging. That isn't the right solution. What I would advocate is increased enforcement presence (something I believe we'd all agree on) and yes, at least considering the possibility of shutting it down altogether in smallmouth bass management areas. If we can do the same thing for non-native trout in their best habitat, then I certainly think our native smallies are worth that protection in several of the better stream stretches. But again, a wholesale ban on gigging probably isn't the answer IMO.

There is no proof, from MDC research, that smallmouth population, of any size, has been impacted by gigging in management areas.

[ozark trout fisher]

No just growing tired of the lopsided vile hatred of the legal practice of gigging. It was anywhere near as bad as is said here, there wouldn't be a fish swimming.

As I have said before, you loose far more fish to R&R fishermen than giggers. If we are going to continually point the finger at giggers, then we need some concrete evidence, not opinon.

There is no proof, from MDC research, that smallmouth population, of any size, has been impacted by gigging in management areas.

"Lopsided, vile hatred". Ok.

Yes, it's a legal practice. And, I don't think that it should be made otherwise, at least not until such time as there is a compendium of evidence that the illegal faction is doing significant damage to game fish populations. But here's that staw man again. You're saying that rod and reel fishermen probably poach more fish than giggers over the course of the year, which is an almost undeniable fact. But no one is even saying otherwise, so I'm left wondering exactly what your point is.

I can think that rod and reel poachers are a problem while also thinking some more measures need to be taken against their gigging counterparts. I believe we just spent a thread berating suspected "regular" poachers, so it's not like we're discriminating against anyone here. I think that increased enforcement presence especially on streams heavily pressured by giggers is a good place to start. While rod and reel anglers cause more damage overall in all likelihood, it seems extremely likely that during gigging season (especially from November on) it's very much the other way around. Sure, a few of the better anglers do fish during the cooler months but your typical rod and reel fisherman has hung it up for the year.

To your final point: obviously the MDC is under the impression that gigging is enough of a threat to trout populations in blue ribbon sections that gigging isn't allowed. With SMAs essentially being the warm-water equivalent, it's difficult to understand why our highest quality smallmouth waters are not afforded the same protection.

[BATCAB27]

And I don't know anyone that doesn't catch at least one good fish per trip.

now you do...ME!

[fishinwrench]

To your final point: obviously the MDC is under the impression that gigging is enough of a threat to trout populations in blue ribbon sections that gigging isn't allowed. With SMAs essentially being the warm-water equivalent, it's difficult to understand why our highest quality smallmouth waters are not afforded the same protection.

Word !!!!!

[Flysmallie]

, it's difficult to understand why our highest quality smallmouth waters are not afforded the same protection.

Agreed. Is the MSA doing anything to get this corrected?

[ozark trout fisher]

Agreed. Is the MSA doing anything to get this corrected?

You are asking the wrong person. It's a question I've posed before, though.

I have never been an MSA member, though I support a bulk of what they do.

[Chief Grey Bear]

You are asking the wrong person. It's a question I've posed before, though.

I have never been an MSA member, though I support a bulk of what they do.

Which is what?

"Lopsided, vile hatred". Ok.

Was that a little strong??

Yes, it's a legal practice. And, I don't think that it should be made otherwise, at least not until such time as there is a compendium of evidence that the illegal faction is doing significant damage to game fish populations. But here's that staw man again. You're saying that rod and reel fishermen probably poach more fish than giggers over the course of the year, which is an almost undeniable fact. But no one is even saying otherwise, so I'm left wondering exactly what your point is.

No I said both legal fishermen, that follow all fishing regs and illeagal fishermen that couldn't care less about fishing laws or the negitive impact that they cause. And yes they are saying otherwise and they have in this very thread. And that is my point. Very easy to understand. It is a pure numbers game with the law of averages against the fish population.

I can think that rod and reel poachers are a problem while also thinking some more measures need to be taken against their gigging counterparts. I believe we just spent a thread berating suspected "regular" poachers, so it's not like we're discriminating against anyone here. I think that increased enforcement presence especially on streams heavily pressured by giggers is a good place to start. While rod and reel anglers cause more damage overall in all likelihood, it seems extremely likely that during gigging season (especially from November on) it's very much the other way around. Sure, a few of the better anglers do fish during the cooler months but your typical rod and reel fisherman has hung it up for the year.

Please don't think for a minute that meat hunting anglers put their rods away for the winter. The clear water makes it easier for them too. All you need is a 1/4 oz jig head and clear water. You can snag them in the gut or lip. All you need is a half way warm day.

To your final point: obviously the MDC is under the impression that gigging is enough of a threat to trout populations in blue ribbon sections that gigging isn't allowed. With SMAs essentially being the warm-water equivalent, it's difficult to understand why our highest quality smallmouth waters are not afforded the same protection.

Its much easier to gig trout due to their habits. They cost a lot of money to produce. They make a lot of money. But I say gig'em anyway. They ain't supposed to be here anyway. Dang things are invasive!!

But in truth, I answered that in the previous post.