MDC Smallmouth Regs Recommendations

[SpoonDog]

Estimates of mortality, tag and survey returns are always going to be fuzzy. Technicians will miss fish. Every management biologist in every agency everywhere deals with it. Those studies we cite regarding the value of C&R and restricted harvest use the same sampling techniques, the same statistics, and make similar estimates and assumptions as these MDC studies. Not only do we accept their results without question, we use those results to justify tighter regulations.

Experience, gear choice, lure choice, size, presentation, patience, number of days on the water...there's a ton of factors which feed into an angler's success. You can put an inexperienced angler and a very experienced angler on the same stretch of water and they'll have vastly different estimates of the population size, structure, and quality of the fishery. Neither of those estimates may be representative of what's actually there. The experiences of individual anglers are biased too, and it's not as though biologists are unaware sampling gears have a certain effective range. If you've read a research paper on any fish species published in the last two decades, there's a good chance there was some form of bias in the original dataset. It doesn't mean the science is junk, and it doesn't mean there's no useful information present.

We can throw out MDC studies because they use assumptions and estimates, but it means we have to throw out all the other studies which do the same- most of the stream smallmouth literature. We can insist MDC adopt unbiased fish sampling techniques, but the only way you're going to get that sort of data is through a couple jugs of rotenone. You guys are going to offer up your favorite fishing spots all in the name of science, right? This isn't skepticism. This isn't criticism. It's ginning up reasons to dismiss results which are contrary to your beliefs.

Maybe MDC biologists ARE passionate about smallmouth bass fishing in the state, they're just constrained by the limits of reality. I know I don't have all the answers. I doubt MDC does. I'm positive MSA doesn't. Maybe it really is as easy as upping length limits and/or reducing creel, but given the information we have that doesn't seem likely. Maybe it's something no one really has control over, like the decline in smallmouth abundance/size mirrors some general decline in stream productivity following implementation of the Clean Water Act in 1972. I couldn't prove it, but it'd be awfully neat- maybe the heyday of Ozark smallmouth in the 70s through the mid 80's wasn't the baseline of how great the resource can be- maybe it's the anomaly. At any rate, I suspect the new regs will move the needle a little more towards quality smallmouth fishing in the Ozarks, and I'm looking forward to seeing how the larger special management areas effects angling over all.

[Mitch f]

Maybe MDC biologists ARE passionate about smallmouth bass fishing in the state, they're just constrained by the limits of reality.

This statement pretty much sums up the problems with the mind set. If you're constationed by the limits of reality, time to punt and find a new solution. Being constrained by reality is a good thing

[Smalliebigs]

Spotted bass in that stretch? I haven't floated it this year, but did last year and have almost every year since long before spotted bass started to show up in lower Big River, and have never caught a spot up there. Last year I caught one spot just above the Leadwood Access, which was the first one I'd caught above that low water bridge, though they are common below it. I figured it was just a matter of time before the spots made it above that bridge, but up until last year it had been a pretty good barrier to their upstream movement. I hate to hear that they are up around Irondale in numbers. Perhaps all the high water this year made a bunch of them move up there.

Al I caught 3 Spots and 1 Smallie above Meyer Rd. bridge in June just messing around.....very unfortunate. the whole stretch has deteriorated in recent years and that hurts me bad as I consider that home waters.

I agree with Mitch......your current way of thinking and doing things as it pertains to fish stocks is not good. On that note I need to go get five bass for my feesh fry.

[Chief Grey Bear]

Estimates of mortality, tag and survey returns are always going to be fuzzy. Technicians will miss fish. Every management biologist in every agency everywhere deals with it. Those studies we cite regarding the value of C&R and restricted harvest use the same sampling techniques, the same statistics, and make similar estimates and assumptions as these MDC studies. Not only do we accept their results without question, we use those results to justify tighter regulations.

Experience, gear choice, lure choice, size, presentation, patience, number of days on the water...there's a ton of factors which feed into an angler's success. You can put an inexperienced angler and a very experienced angler on the same stretch of water and they'll have vastly different estimates of the population size, structure, and quality of the fishery. Neither of those estimates may be representative of what's actually there. The experiences of individual anglers are biased too, and it's not as though biologists are unaware sampling gears have a certain effective range. If you've read a research paper on any fish species published in the last two decades, there's a good chance there was some form of bias in the original dataset. It doesn't mean the science is junk, and it doesn't mean there's no useful information present.

We can throw out MDC studies because they use assumptions and estimates, but it means we have to throw out all the other studies which do the same- most of the stream smallmouth literature. We can insist MDC adopt unbiased fish sampling techniques, but the only way you're going to get that sort of data is through a couple jugs of rotenone. You guys are going to offer up your favorite fishing spots all in the name of science, right? This isn't skepticism. This isn't criticism. It's ginning up reasons to dismiss results which are contrary to your beliefs.

Maybe MDC biologists ARE passionate about smallmouth bass fishing in the state, they're just constrained by the limits of reality. I know I don't have all the answers. I doubt MDC does. I'm positive MSA doesn't. Maybe it really is as easy as upping length limits and/or reducing creel, but given the information we have that doesn't seem likely. Maybe it's something no one really has control over, like the decline in smallmouth abundance/size mirrors some general decline in stream productivity following implementation of the Clean Water Act in 1972. I couldn't prove it, but it'd be awfully neat- maybe the heyday of Ozark smallmouth in the 70s through the mid 80's wasn't the baseline of how great the resource can be- maybe it's the anomaly. At any rate, I suspect the new regs will move the needle a little more towards quality smallmouth fishing in the Ozarks, and I'm looking forward to seeing how the larger special management areas effects angling over all.

I appreciate you posting this.

Again.

It's sad that people can't understand this.

[SpoonDog]

This statement pretty much sums up the problems with the mind set. If you're constationed by the limits of reality, time to punt and find a new solution.

You guys aren't asking MDC to come up with a solution, you're demanding they adopt yours. They proposed a science based set of regulations, a compromise between the status quo and trophy regs. It's shot down because it doesn't meet all of your demands.

Trophy regs would add more 14-15 inch fish to the mix, and maybe they'd add couple more >18" fish per mile, too. For an experienced angler those few bigger fish may make a noticeable improvement to the fishery. I'm not convinced it translates into dramatically better fishing for the average angler though- in my experience it takes more skill and knowledge to successfully target trophy fish. Do we want MDC managing smallmouth resources for the benefit of a wide spectrum of anglers, or the average angler? Then the proposed regs seem a good fit. The only reason they don't work is if you're actually looking for MDC to shift management focus from one demographic (meat anglers) to a different demographic (trophy anglers).

Truth is, MDC is not the only party in this conversation with others options to explore. Look:

How many third parties have we contacted about reviewing MDC's data? There are tons of folks in academia and the private sector with the skills to determine whether their data and results are sketchy, who's looking into it?

We want to fill in some blanks regarding Missouri Smallmouth biology? Great! How many biologists or academics are we talking to about projects which can be implemented. How many grant proposals have we written or assisted with? How many funding sources have we investigated? How many professional meetings have we attended. How informed are we regarding the latest research and techniques?

It's summertime! Cole County fair is this week! Gasconade has a fair, Washington county has TWO fairs- TWO FAIRS GUYS! The Missouri State Fair's in Sedalia in August, Eureka Days in September, Butler County something-or-other in September, what excellent opportunities to engage the public! How many booths are we setting up?!

What about other networking opportunities? How many of us have contacted state biologists directly to express our interest in smallmouth regs? What about conservation commissioners? What about Conservation Federation of Missouri? How many of us are members of CFM? How many have talked to Commission members or folks at the administration level? What other non-profit groups are we partnering with to raise awareness of issues affecting smallmouth? Stream Team? LAD? Ozark Land Trust? Nature Conservancy (*gasp!*).

What about boots on the ground stuff? How many landowners have we talked to regarding issues ranging from livestock management to gravel mining to in-stream habitat modifications which would benefit smallmouth? Heck, how many other anglers- outside of OA and MSA, are we talking to about these issues? How many landowners have we put in touch with NRCS or MDC so they can get some cost-share regarding water quality or aquatic habitat improvements? How many of those projects have we assisted with? How many MDC areas have we inventoried, looking for possible projects and improvements to aquatic habitat? How much have we put up for those efforts, in terms of direct funds or man hours?

What about other media opportunities? Lame gaudy stickers may be the only thing that can unite both Bros and Rednecks- where are they? T-shirts, brochures, giveaway stuff for all those county fairs we're going to and setting up booths to get people interested in smallmouth- where are they? How many smart young kids have we approached about creating an app that'd allow users to directly report poachers to the local conservation agent, along with a GPS location and the ability to send a photo of the suspect or their vehicle or license plate? How many websites have we created illustrating the value of smallmouth angling in the state, the issues quality smallmouth fisheries face, and what people can do to help? How many fishing clinics have we hosted? How many youth groups have we talked to? How many kid's outings have we participated in? We have a nationally-acclaimed wildlife artist and the flagship store of one of the nation's biggest fishing retailers, and just on this forum we have folks building handmade canoes, kayaks, fishing lures, flies, rods, nets...we have professional fishing guides- where's the fundraising arm? Why aren't we using these people to help improve our smallmouth fishing? Who's going on local sports radio programs to talk about smallmouth? How many scholarships are we funding at MSU or Mizzou for students interested in some day being fisheries biologists? How many internships are we funding through MDC or the American Fisheries Society to get young talented fisheries professionals in the door? Screw that- who's judging your local science fair? Who's cultivating an interest in science? Who's cultivating an interest in nature? Who's cultivating an interest in the outdoors?

Why aren't WE exploring options outside MDC? Why aren't WE being more proactive? It's easy to ask other anglers to give up their creels for the sake of our trophy fisheries and then balk at the idea of making any sort of sacrifice ourselves. We know it only takes a couple meat anglers to impact a stream reach. You can implement a 15/1 rule or an 18/1 rule or a slot or strict C&R and never change that. You have to make the angler think twice about harvesting those fish in the first place. That isn't something you're going to get through increased regs- you're going to get that through education and outreach. But that's hard and it cuts into our fishing time, so we'll play lip service and hang a couple signs to make ourselves feel good and then go back to scapegoating MDC. We'll conflate dogmatism, misinterpretation of scientific data and grousing on internet forums with passion for protecting and enhancing a resource and we'll pat ourselves on the back for being such good stewards. Maybe someday MDC will adopt the regs we want, maybe they'll dramatically improve fisheries, maybe they won't- in which case we'll pick otters, giggers, poachers, jet boats, or something else out of a hat and start the whole process over again.

Because that's all we ever do.

[Chief Grey Bear]

You guys aren't asking MDC to come up with a solution, you're demanding they adopt yours. They proposed a science based set of regulations, a compromise between the status quo and trophy regs. It's shot down because it doesn't meet all of your demands.

Trophy regs would add more 14-15 inch fish to the mix, and maybe they'd add couple more >18" fish per mile, too. For an experienced angler those few bigger fish may make a noticeable improvement to the fishery. I'm not convinced it translates into dramatically better fishing for the average angler though- in my experience it takes more skill and knowledge to successfully target trophy fish. Do we want MDC managing smallmouth resources for the benefit of a wide spectrum of anglers, or the average angler? Then the proposed regs seem a good fit. The only reason they don't work is if you're actually looking for MDC to shift management focus from one demographic (meat anglers) to a different demographic (trophy anglers).

Truth is, MDC is not the only party in this conversation with others options to explore. Look:

How many third parties have we contacted about reviewing MDC's data? There are tons of folks in academia and the private sector with the skills to determine whether their data and results are sketchy, who's looking into it?

We want to fill in some blanks regarding Missouri Smallmouth biology? Great! How many biologists or academics are we talking to about projects which can be implemented. How many grant proposals have we written or assisted with? How many funding sources have we investigated? How many professional meetings have we attended. How informed are we regarding the latest research and techniques?

It's summertime! Cole County fair is this week! Gasconade has a fair, Washington county has TWO fairs- TWO FAIRS GUYS! The Missouri State Fair's in Sedalia in August, Eureka Days in September, Butler County something-or-other in September, what excellent opportunities to engage the public! How many booths are we setting up?!

What about other networking opportunities? How many of us have contacted state biologists directly to express our interest in smallmouth regs? What about conservation commissioners? What about Conservation Federation of Missouri? How many of us are members of CFM? How many have talked to Commission members or folks at the administration level? What other non-profit groups are we partnering with to raise awareness of issues affecting smallmouth? Stream Team? LAD? Ozark Land Trust? Nature Conservancy (*gasp!*).

What about boots on the ground stuff? How many landowners have we talked to regarding issues ranging from livestock management to gravel mining to in-stream habitat modifications which would benefit smallmouth? Heck, how many other anglers- outside of OA and MSA, are we talking to about these issues? How many landowners have we put in touch with NRCS or MDC so they can get some cost-share regarding water quality or aquatic habitat improvements? How many of those projects have we assisted with? How many MDC areas have we inventoried, looking for possible projects and improvements to aquatic habitat? How much have we put up for those efforts, in terms of direct funds or man hours?

What about other media opportunities? Lame gaudy stickers may be the only thing that can unite both Bros and Rednecks- where are they? T-shirts, brochures, giveaway stuff for all those county fairs we're going to and setting up booths to get people interested in smallmouth- where are they? How many smart young kids have we approached about creating an app that'd allow users to directly report poachers to the local conservation agent, along with a GPS location and the ability to send a photo of the suspect or their vehicle or license plate? How many websites have we created illustrating the value of smallmouth angling in the state, the issues quality smallmouth fisheries face, and what people can do to help? How many fishing clinics have we hosted? How many youth groups have we talked to? How many kid's outings have we participated in? We have a nationally-acclaimed wildlife artist and the flagship store of one of the nation's biggest fishing retailers, and just on this forum we have folks building handmade canoes, kayaks, fishing lures, flies, rods, nets...we have professional fishing guides- where's the fundraising arm? Why aren't we using these people to help improve our smallmouth fishing? Who's going on local sports radio programs to talk about smallmouth? How many scholarships are we funding at MSU or Mizzou for students interested in some day being fisheries biologists? How many internships are we funding through MDC or the American Fisheries Society to get young talented fisheries professionals in the door? Screw that- who's judging your local science fair? Who's cultivating an interest in science? Who's cultivating an interest in nature? Who's cultivating an interest in the outdoors?

Why aren't WE exploring options outside MDC? Why aren't WE being more proactive? It's easy to ask other anglers to give up their creels for the sake of our trophy fisheries and then balk at the idea of making any sort of sacrifice ourselves. We know it only takes a couple meat anglers to impact a stream reach. You can implement a 15/1 rule or an 18/1 rule or a slot or strict C&R and never change that. You have to make the angler think twice about harvesting those fish in the first place. That isn't something you're going to get through increased regs- you're going to get that through education and outreach. But that's hard and it cuts into our fishing time, so we'll play lip service and hang a couple signs to make ourselves feel good and then go back to scapegoating MDC. We'll conflate dogmatism, misinterpretation of scientific data and grousing on internet forums with passion for protecting and enhancing a resource and we'll pat ourselves on the back for being such good stewards. Maybe someday MDC will adopt the regs we want, maybe they'll dramatically improve fisheries, maybe they won't- in which case we'll pick otters, giggers, poachers, jet boats, or something else out of a hat and start the whole process over again.

Because that's all we ever do.

I know when I brought those points over the years, I was ostracized! Or as some like to call it persecuted.

You're treading on thin ground. I applaud you though.

[SpoonDog]

We have led a long, aggressive campaign at badgering MDC into adopting trophy smallmouth regs. They didn't get the numbers to justify it scientifically, we didn't build the constituency so they could justify it socially. The end result is a study lots of people are skeptical of and a regulations change lots of people aren't happy with. We can continue with a strategy which isn't working, or we can try emulating some of the conservation groups in the states that are, you know. Successful.

Groups like Pheasants Forever and Wild Turkey Foundation are focused on more than just regs changes. They have people informed regarding the latest pertinent studies. They partner with MDC instead of treating them as adversaries. They're proposing studies and then helping fund them. They're funding scholarships. They're heavily involved with youth groups and programs. They're involved with habitat improvement projects. They're networking not just with field biologists but their supervisors, administrators, conservation commissioners and the conservation federation. They're partnering with other state agencies, as well as federal conservation agencies and non-government organizations, and private landowners. They put a ton of effort into fundraising, education, and outreach. Not only do they have MDC's ear, they're able to effectively implement boots-on-the-ground change. They are as good at getting things done as we are terrible- so why aren't we paying attention?

I know when I brought those points over the years, I was ostracized! Or as some like to call it persecuted.
You're treading on thin ground. I applaud you though.

Don't care. I know I'm not the first person on the planet to make these sorts of suggestions and I know they've been given short shrift in the past, maybe a more direct approach will light a fire under someone's butt.

There are a handful of conservation/sportsmen's groups just in this state providing us a roadmap to get from where we are now to where we want to be, and our collective response has been to give them the finger. Maybe that's a terrible and demonstrably ineffective way of getting things don, and maybe instead of throwing ourselves some online pity-party or blaming MDC we we can take this moment to figure out a meaningful, intelligent way of moving ahead.

[Chief Grey Bear]

I don't know anyone that has given a bonfide conservation group that actually practices conservation, as you have stated, the finger.

[SpoonDog]

Sorry, it just seems like there conservation/sportsmen's groups which have been really effective at getting the changes they want implemented- and I think we can learn a lot from their experiences instead of ignoring them.

[MOPanfisher]

If you want to get a regulation change to let alone through the Commission then have to show; numbers, data, research, hard facts, without it all you have is someone's idea or thoughts not facts no matter how many might agree. And regulations are not going to change based upon our opinions regardless of how educated any of us might be. Honestly I would prefer to see some of the conservation groups make a push for the state to clear up access/ownership along and in streams than pushing for particular regulation changes right now.

One of the biggest lessons learned from successful organizations such DU and NWTF is money talks and working with agencies is much more successful than trying to Convince them you are right.