MDC Smallmouth Regs Recommendations

[Dan Kreher]

Sorry, Corey. I didn't mean to include my comments within your quote. OA Forum user error.

[Smalliebigs]

I hope they expand the Big River management area all the freaking way to Council Bluff dam. All the local butchers who used to float the entire river are now focusing on the area between Cedar Creek and Leadwood and pounding the stretch pretty hard; especially since we've had an unbelievably wet summer.

Agreed the whole river from Cedar Creek to Blackwell is getting brutalized in recent years.....it's a shell of it's former self and I think that sucks butt and I really don't care who I offend with my adjectives to describe people who keep smallmouth, no real change will come about......Missouri is backwards assed in it's ethics towards fish stocks plain and simple and the MDC exemplifies those values of a good portion of Missouri fisherman.

[Jerry Rapp]

Missouri is backwards assed in it's ethics towards fish stocks plain and simple and the MDC exemplifies those values of a good portion of Missouri fisherman.

I agree with your thoughts SB, but the MDC should regulate to the majority of the fishermen. The question is, how do we define the "portions"?

[Al Agnew]

I agree with your thoughts SB, but the MDC should regulate to the majority of the fishermen. The question is, how do we define the "portions"?

Ah, but you can't have it both ways. MDC says that only a small percentage of anglers keep smallmouth. So, according to them they are NOT regulating to the majority, but to a small minority. They are, in effect, assuring that a small minority can harvest to their heart's content. They admitted that higher length limits would result in greater numbers of larger fish, and you gotta think that the supposed majority of catch and release anglers would like greater numbers of larger fish. So the majority, according to their statistics, is not being considered as much as the small minority.

I understand their thought processes. They think that, since only a small minority keep smallmouth, more restrictive regs are not necessary and would not have a significant effect on population structure. If only a small percentage of smallies are being harvested under current regs, then more restrictive regs simply aren't necessary.

As long as they are convinced that their data is correct, we aren't going to be able to get them to put on more restrictive regs. But like cwc, I'm not convinced that their biologists are always operating in the real world. I think they have too much reliance on methods that, in my opinion, are not sound. I think they really don't KNOW what these streams are capable of producing. Most of their baseline studies are either later than 1990 or earlier than 1970. I know that the rivers I'm familiar with saw their best fishing from about 1975 (after plenty of time had passed to let the 6 fish 12 inch limit have an impact) to 1985 (before jetboat technology resulted in a huge increase in fishing pressure).

I think tagging studies probably have too small a sample size to be really accurate on the percentages of fish harvested (and too heavily dependent upon anglers actually turning in the tags). I think, from personal experience, that electrofishing is pretty questionable on sampling larger smallmouth and other larger fish. I helped one of the biologists on a shocking day on Big River, and was not impressed with the results--on a stretch that I KNEW held quite a few nice fish and probably several truly big ones (because I'd caught big ones over the years in that stretch), we shocked up a lot of little bass and very, very few over 12 inches, with only one "nice" fish of a little under 17 inches. I suspect that under fairly common conditions the bigger fish simply either aren't as susceptible to shocking, or recover far too quickly.

I also wonder a bit about the biologists' mantra that Ozark streams are too infertile to grow lots of big smallies. I just looked up some data on growth rates for the New River in Virginia, which is well known for producing good numbers of big smallmouth--far better according to most people than any Ozark stream. The growth rates on the New aren't much better than growth rates in the Ozarks. On average, it took 6 years for a smallmouth on the New to reach 14 inches. According to most of the data, Ozark stream smallmouth reach 14 inches at 6 or 7 years. Top end size of New River smallies is probably more a function of genetics than growth rates; Ozark smallmouth apparently just don't get to the 5-7 pound class that the New River has produced. But it would appear that Ozark smallmouth could get to 20 inches at rates not too different from New River smallies.

I think their studies have convinced the biologists that the Ozark streams can't get much better than they are now, that most anglers can't catch many good smallies, and that harvest rates are not high enough to have a major effect on the populations. I think they are wrong on all counts. I know of too many streams that, as long as they weren't being pounded, produced plenty of big fish, and these were small, clear, presumably infertile streams. And once they started getting pounded by just a few good anglers who kept their fish legally, the big fish numbers plummeted. And I know too many anglers who fish every week, often more than once a week, and are good enough that if they wanted to keep a legal limit of fish, could take out 6 14 inch plus smallmouth every trip, and on their better trips could cull to where their 6 fish were all 16 inches or better. It doesn't take many anglers that good to have an impact on the population of adult smallmouth. And a few of those I know who are that good DO keep legal limits, and they tend to pound a stretch until it starts to decline, and then seek out another stretch.

[rFisherk]

I have seen just one fish hog ruin a good section of a creek in a single season and strongly suspect just two or three of them could do the same on one of the bigger rivers. I've also wondered if this forum doesn't inadvertently inform them of new prospects to exploit. The vast majority simply read and never contribute, and I suspect there could be some meat hunters, even poachers, among them.

[Gavin]

I agree Al. The sample sizes were small, and they rely on lots of assumptions with their surveys. I figure that avid anglers are the ones most likely to fill out a survey and send it back. Occasional anglers probably have a much lower return rate, and the poaching heathens never would. They results are probably screwed accordingly. Did they adjust for that?

Not surprising on your shock boat trip. The electrodes have a limited range, and the results often depend on the fish eyes and skill of the person netting the fish, the boat operators read on the water, and the coordination between the two. Might provide an indicator to an increase our decrease over time but the results are never a true indicator.

[jackdizo]

Agreed the whole river from Cedar Creek to Blackwell is getting brutalized in recent years.....it's a shell of it's former self and I think that sucks butt and I really don't care who I offend with my adjectives to describe people who keep smallmouth, no real change will come about......Missouri is backwards assed in it's ethics towards fish stocks plain and simple and the MDC exemplifies those values of a good portion of Missouri fisherman.

I say I have to agree with Smalliebigs... I floated Cedar Creek to the U road bridge with a friend yesterday and overall I would have to agree that the area must be getting pounded in recent years. Im a catch and release only guy, caught a good amount of fish, but the majority were smaller fish, only a handful of 14 inch fish and one 15 inch fish in that stretch of the river between the two of us. With it being better than average habitat (in my opinion) for SM bass in that stretch of the Big River, I was somewhat confused as to the numbers of SM bass, specifically larger fish. Now I obviously cannot catch only "big fish," however, I feel like the area must be getting ran through pretty hard to not give up any more than what we ran into. To add to it, the spotted bass population was pretty strong through that stretch as well, which also adds fuel to the fire for those smaller SMbass to get big. I understand its tough either way to enforce better regs on a stretch of river such as that and many others in Missouri with the amount of manpower the MDC has, however without doing anything, the SM bass in the BIg river and other streams throughout Missouri will continue to suffer unfortunately. I can only hope the MDC takes two steps back and really looks and listens to what the anglers such as the many of us on this forum (and are out there experiencing first hand) have to say about the current state of SM bass in many of our Missouri streams...

"it cannot always be great, but it can always be better"

[Dan Kreher]

We need to be sure take what we see on this forum to the public meetings with MDC. They hear from the MO Smallmouth Alliance members here and there but it will be even more important to them to hear from the general public -- whether folks are members of MSA, BASS or some other angling group or not.

Agree that we may never see world class SMB fishing here in Ozarks - for a whole host of reasons -- but it can certainly be better than it is with some better management, angler education, enforcement and a change in angler attitudes. It would be nice if the MDC shared our passion for improving this resource as much as we do.

[Al Agnew]

I say I have to agree with Smalliebigs... I floated Cedar Creek to the U road bridge with a friend yesterday and overall I would have to agree that the area must be getting pounded in recent years. Im a catch and release only guy, caught a good amount of fish, but the majority were smaller fish, only a handful of 14 inch fish and one 15 inch fish in that stretch of the river between the two of us. With it being better than average habitat (in my opinion) for SM bass in that stretch of the Big River, I was somewhat confused as to the numbers of SM bass, specifically larger fish. Now I obviously cannot catch only "big fish," however, I feel like the area must be getting ran through pretty hard to not give up any more than what we ran into. To add to it, the spotted bass population was pretty strong through that stretch as well, which also adds fuel to the fire for those smaller SMbass to get big. I understand its tough either way to enforce better regs on a stretch of river such as that and many others in Missouri with the amount of manpower the MDC has, however without doing anything, the SM bass in the BIg river and other streams throughout Missouri will continue to suffer unfortunately. I can only hope the MDC takes two steps back and really looks and listens to what the anglers such as the many of us on this forum (and are out there experiencing first hand) have to say about the current state of SM bass in many of our Missouri streams...

"it cannot always be great, but it can always be better"

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.

[oneshot]

Ok considering I catch fish to eat I see them cutting back on what I can keep in cold water other than Suckers.

Seems to me they need to be doing more with the Otters they put in there. Seen plenty times Otters killing fish and them floating down stream belly up.

oneshot