fishinwrench Posted June 16, 2015 Posted June 16, 2015 Drum aren't fun to catch when your bass fishing because of the letdown factor. For the first 6-8 seconds after the bite you think you've stuck a TOAD... .then they start going in circles and the disappointment hits ya. james and trythisonemv 2
Mitch f Posted June 16, 2015 Posted June 16, 2015 Drum aren't fun to catch when your bass fishing because of the letdown factor. For the first 6-8 seconds after the bite you think you've stuck a TOAD... .then they start going in circles and the disappointment hits ya. Yep, or a 7 pound channel cat on a Wiggle Wart in between 2 docks in the Big Bass Bash "Honor is a man's gift to himself" Rob Roy McGregor
trythisonemv Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 I love catching drum as well ham totally catch and release. I caught a twelve pound one on a micro lite once best fight ever. dtrs5kprs and Ham 2
West Fork Jason Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 The Cajun permit variety of drum are way too tasty to be let go! How accurate is using scales to age fish? Any biologists out there reading this thread? I spent an evening with the Wisconsin DNR electro boom shocking a local lake, and bass age and growth rate was discussed. The biologist in the boat said something about not really knowing how old the bass were, until they literately cracked a few bass heads open. There was something in the skull structure that led them to determine a 20" fish is about 20 years old here in our water, but our growing season is surely much shorter up here in the north and plays a significant role. http://www.WestForkJason.com
Al Agnew Posted June 18, 2015 Author Posted June 18, 2015 Apparently it isn't easy to read the age from the scales, especially on larger fish, for some reason. Back when I was taking scale samples for the biologists, I caught one that was 20.7 inches. I really wanted to know the age of that fish, but the biologist told me later they couldn't come up with a definitive age.
jtram Posted June 18, 2015 Posted June 18, 2015 This statement surprises me: " They said that angler surveys showed no support for catch and release." Who the heck are they surveying? I know several river smallmouth fishermen and they are all catch and release types. I know there are folks out there that keep their fish, but I have to think that at best they are about half the fishermen out there. Pretty much invalidates a lot of what they are saying if they think that there is no support for catch and release fishing. Little late to the party, but I would guess the guys hanging out by the public accesses, generally a good crowd!
cwc87 Posted June 18, 2015 Posted June 18, 2015 Can the biologist cross reference the fish that were tagged during the two tagging events? That would be a nice statistic!!
rFisherk Posted June 19, 2015 Posted June 19, 2015 "There weren't very many fish over 18 inches captured. Largest was a 20.4 incher from the Current at Big Spring. But there were some big surprises on individual fish. Some fish were aged at being very young for their size, such as 15.8 inch three year olds from Castor and Black, 17.9 inch four year old from Black, 18.8 five year old from Black and 17.2 five year old from Courtois, 19.0 inch six year old from Black, 19.7 seven year old from Black and 18.5 and 18.9 seven year olds from Current. The biologists seemed to assume these were probably errors in the aging techniques." I have an explanation for this: From two years of year round investigation, I've determined that all, or nearly all, of the fish in the Black River run down to Clearwater Lake for the winter--even those from the upper arms of the three forks. Not just smallmouth, but panfish and baitfish too. The river is completely dead during the wither. In Clearwater they congregate mostly around Bluffview, where the smallmouth feed veraciously on lake and river baitfish. It's like salmon fattening up in the ocean. That's why the smallmouth are so big for their age. Problem is, in Clearwater, 12-inch smallmouth are still legal, while the season is closed in the river. But these are river fish, and far fewer of them survive the now heavy winter fishing pressure to run back up the Black in the spring and repopulate the river. There was one short paragraph near the end of the study about this migration, though I suspect even the biologists don't realize the scope of the migration. These river fish in Clearwater should be protected by the same regulations as if they were in the river. If protected, the Black could become one of the best, if not the best, rivers for big smallmouth. MOsmallies 1
drew03cmc Posted June 19, 2015 Posted June 19, 2015 "There weren't very many fish over 18 inches captured. Largest was a 20.4 incher from the Current at Big Spring. But there were some big surprises on individual fish. Some fish were aged at being very young for their size, such as 15.8 inch three year olds from Castor and Black, 17.9 inch four year old from Black, 18.8 five year old from Black and 17.2 five year old from Courtois, 19.0 inch six year old from Black, 19.7 seven year old from Black and 18.5 and 18.9 seven year olds from Current. The biologists seemed to assume these were probably errors in the aging techniques." I have an explanation for this: From two years of year round investigation, I've determined that all, or nearly all, of the fish in the Black River run down to Clearwater Lake for the winter--even those from the upper arms of the three forks. Not just smallmouth, but panfish and baitfish too. The river is completely dead during the wither. In Clearwater they congregate mostly around Bluffview, where the smallmouth feed veraciously on lake and river baitfish. It's like salmon fattening up in the ocean. That's why the smallmouth are so big for their age. Problem is, in Clearwater, 12-inch smallmouth are still legal, while the season is closed in the river. But these are river fish, and far fewer of them survive the now heavy winter fishing pressure to run back up the Black in the spring and repopulate the river. There was one short paragraph near the end of the study about this migration, though I suspect even the biologists don't realize the scope of the migration. These river fish in Clearwater should be protected by the same regulations as if they were in the river. If protected, the Black could become one of the best, if not the best, rivers for big smallmouth. Ron, I would love to see those regulations as well as the requisite enforcement. I want to see what that system is capable of. MOsmallies 1 Andy
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now