MDC Meets the MSA in St. Louis on Tuesday May 19th

[Guest]

deleted.

[Gavin]

Think Dan K got a copy. Maybe he can scan and post for those who were not able to attend.

[Mitch f]

I did attend the meeting and relayed to Scott what I heard. The general consensus of the meeting was disappointment in the fact that the only possible stream reg change seemed to be a section of the current river. Any changes to smallmouth fishing for the better won't be in our lifetime. The meeting was about as enjoyable as the Mayweather -Paquiao fight.

[Greasy B]

The meeting was about as enjoyable as the Mayweather -Paquiao fight.

Yeah but the beer was cold and the company was good.

[Mitch f]

Yeah but the beer was cold and the company was good.

Yes, it was very good seeing you again my friend!

[Dan Kreher]

We have requested a copy of MDC's presentation. I have a copy of the exploitation (tagging) study but have not yet had a chance to go through it in detail.

At the outset of meeting, MDC stated that they would not discuss any particular regulation recommendations at this time as they will be putting them in front of the MDC commissioners within the next few months. During their presentation, however, they did indicate that they would be proposing the imposition of a 15-inch MLL on a section of the upper Current (Two Rivers/Owls Bend area) as the sampling/modeling indicated relatively high angler mortality (catch & kill) rate there such that it would significantly benefit from having a higher MLL. At first, I was disappointed that this may indeed be the only recommendation they propose, but as meeting wore on it became apparent to me and others who attended the full meeting that there would be more on the table for consideration. So do not despair at this point. There will be plenty of time for that later if no substantive regs changes are indeed enacted within the next 2 years (ha ha). BTW the other 5 river stretches included in the tagging study also showed that they would benefit from a 15-inch or 14-inch MLL but to a lesser degree due to composition of existing size structure and harvest rates. Again, this is all based on the data the MDC has at their disposal while our own anecdotal observations may differ somewhat.

It is clear that angler input (as Gavin points out above) will play a significant role in the shaping the MDC's slate of final regulations proposed to the Commission. It is incumbent on those concerned sport anglers to actively participate in this process and to voice their opinions and support for the enactment of quality based regs for our smallmouth streams. If we sit on the sidelines as this process takes place, we are doing ourselves and our beloved pastime a disservice and will be left to griping on Internet forums about what's wrong with our fisheries, the MDC, etc. with no attention paid to that by anyone in a position of influence.

So, I invite anglers to attend these meetings whenever and wherever held and to stand up for their beliefs as avid smallmouth SPORT anglers. Whether you are an MSA member, a TU member, a bass club member, or just an unaffiliated fisherman, your voice will matter in this process. MSA will highly publicize these meetings and will keep its membership informed of developments in this process. We will publish the MDC's presentation from last night on our website as well as publish an interpretative article on the Summer issue of The Bronzeback News, our quarterly newsletter.

We sport anglers need to speak with a united voice in demanding that the MDC manage the SMB in our streams as the SPORT fish they are widely recognized here in the early 21st Century rather than the food fish they were viewed as back in the 1960s/early 70s when the 12/6 regs regime was first enacted. We cannot let a minority of consumptive anglers dictate how these fisheries should be managed. Maximum sustained yield is not appropriate for management of a sport fish at the top of its food chain. This is fishing; it is not farming. We are not fishing for food, we are fishing for fun and spend an awful lot of time and money (both here and across the country) pursing our quarry.

We should not apologize for our passion, rather we need to embrace it and let the MDC staff and the four Commissioners hear it loud and clear. Message board postings are fun to read and engage in but the only real way to influence decision makers is to speak with them directly in a show of force and to let them know that there are a whole bunch of united fishermen pulling on that rope towards quality-based management.

[Smalliebigs]

I heard something completely different. The results were what they were and opinions are what they are, but I think they are going to make some changes. They were not specific about any possible changes, but they did lay down a timeline. Presentation to management, probably some public hearings regarding proposed changes if management approves, Possible reg changes for the start of the 2017 season at the earliest. Its a slow process...will see how it goes. It isn't all BS because you don't get something you want right now.

I never said anything was BS if I didn't get what I want right now??? It's BS if the MDC is saying the rivers are what they are and regulations will not effect the fish populations. I will make sure to keep as many BIG Smallies this year as I can with in the regulation set forth by the MDC......I wonder if everyone I knew who fishes for Smallies kept as many Smallies as they were allowed with in the guise of the current regulations every time they went out would fish populations suffer in areas???

We disagree on the MDC....let's just agree on that.........I see what I see on rivers and streams.

[ozark trout fisher]

I'm done reporting any poaching to them anymore and I'm gonna keep the maximum amount of Smallmouth I can keep with in the useless regulations every time I go fishing now.......it's on!!!!

No you won't. You fly off the handle plenty but I know how much you love smallmouth bass. Killing smallies/letting others do so illegally to prove a point doesn't fit into that.

[fishinwrench]

SB makes a valid point. The only reason SMB fishing even exists in this state is because a lot of us CHOOSE to C&R.

If we all kept a legal limit every outing then Smallies would be as rare as Musky in this state.

[Chief Grey Bear]

SB makes a valid point. The only reason SMB fishing even exists in this state is because a lot of us CHOOSE to C&R.

If we all kept a legal limit every outing then Smallies would be as rare as Musky in this state.

So shouldn't they have been wiped out by the 1990's when C&R started getting popular?