MDC Smallmouth Regs Recommendations

[Al Agnew]

Spoondog, you made some very good points. I will say that some of the things you suggested "we" do are already being done by some Smallmouth Alliance members, myself included. Others not so much.

Look, I realize that MDC must make management decisions based upon the science. However, there are other states out there looking at the same science that are doing things differently. And it seems the difference is that they value the quality of the fishery more than the harvest aspect. Things like 2 fish, 14 inch limit. Slot limits. They appear to be working as planned in those states.

The Smallmouth Alliance is the best organization we have advocating quality smallmouth fishing, but I don't know that the Ducks Unlimited/Wild Turkey Federation/ Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation model will ever work when it comes to smallmouth. It's been tried before, but for whatever reason, when you get away from trout, the only way these organizations really grow is by offering competitive fishing programs--tournaments.

[SpoonDog]

There are lots of folks out there working proactively- Ron put up some great stuff regarding CFM earlier this season, MSA's involved in stream teams, signage, spotted bass roundup, and several other projects, and I'm sure there's other folks out there doing things with kids, scout groups and other projects I'm not aware of. I'm not trying to minimize or belittle their work, just pointing out this whole "explore all possible options" concept goes both ways. It doesn't take much to come up with a pile of constructive ways to get involved in Ozark smallmouth, it only took me a pot of coffee and a little thought.

Other states do manage smallmouth differently- just as other states manage largemouth, flatheads, walleye, whitetails, turkey, trout, otters and a whole host of other species differently. Quality regs would probably work here too, it's just not a science-based argument to say "let's do it because they do." To my knowledge there are few (if any) Ozark smallmouth streams with harvest rates so high they're in danger of collapse, which makes it hard for any biologist, regardless of where they are, to make a scientific argument for restrictive regulations. It's a social problem, and in a lot of states with trophy smallmouth regs it isn't that they (the managers) value the quality of the fishery over harvest, it's that the anglers pushing trophy regs have been able to cultivate a broad-base of support for. Sometimes I wonder if us folks back home have the cart before the horse.

I think MSA does a pretty good job with the projects it focuses on, and there's limitations in any organization regarding manpower and interest- I'm not trying to single them out, just using MSA as a placeholder for smallmouth anglers in general. That said, I think it's fair to question why we're clinging to this model of outsourcing so much research, management, protection, conservation, habitat improvement, outreach and education when it seems other sportsmen's groups have figured out a much more effective arrangement. If MDC is as incompetent as we say...and yet we keep asking them to do the jobs we can't or won't do...what does that say about us? How much room do we really have to complain?

Maybe a more integrated approach has been attempted and maybe it's failed, making it as effective at bringing about trophy regs as anything else we've tried. If we're going to abandon an approach because it hasn't panned out in the past...why are we still talking about changing smallmouth regs?

[rFisherk]

The only way to implement the desires of the minority (smallmouth trophy anglers) over the vast majority is through politics, which is what SpoonDog is so eloquently outlining.

MSA is the ideal organization for that, but their membership is very small, compared to WTF, DU and the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation mentioned, their funds are miniscule and, from what I've seen, the majority of the membership treat it only as a social organization, leaving almost all the grunt work and sacrifices to Matt and Dan.

From the political pressure perspective, the Conservation Federation of Missouri is by far the best vehicle for the voice of citizen conservationists, both in the legislature and with MDC. Very few people have the ear of MDC these days, but CFM, under the recent leadership of Brandon Butler, has become very influential. Our problem with CFM, however, is smallmouth anglers are a pitiful minority there as well, and the few members don't make their voices and presence heard and felt. Even CFM has to serve in a democratic fashion the majority of its members.

Eco-tourism is beginning to influence the tourism, financial and political conservation scene, and all they want to do is see an eagle or wolf at a distance. It's like Disney World to them, with happy creatures running around and taking care of each other. The majority of them don't mind that we catch and kills things (some do), but they aren't about to lobby for our interests. But these eco-tourists are passionate. And vocal. And political.

We are not. We are like the spoiled children of past conservation efforts, and we are about to be royally spanked.

Minorities only have power through organization and effort. It is time to become politically involved through organizations like MSA and CFM.

http://www.missourismallmouthalliance.org/

http://confedmo.org/

[Jerry Rapp]

The only way to implement the desires of the minority (smallmouth trophy anglers) over the vast majority is through politics, which is what SpoonDog is so eloquently outlining.

MSA is the ideal organization for that, but their membership is very small, compared to WTF, DU and the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation mentioned, their funds are miniscule and, from what I've seen, the majority of the membership treat it only as a social organization, leaving almost all the grunt work and sacrifices to Matt and Dan.

From the political pressure perspective, the Conservation Federation of Missouri is by far the best vehicle for the voice of citizen conservationists, both in the legislature and with MDC. Very few people have the ear of MDC these days, but CFM, under the recent leadership of Brandon Butler, has become very influential. Our problem with CFM, however, is smallmouth anglers are a pitiful minority there as well, and the few members don't make their voices and presence heard and felt. Even CFM has to serve in a democratic fashion the majority of its members.

Eco-tourism is beginning to influence the tourism, financial and political conservation scene, and all they want to do is see an eagle or wolf at a distance. It's like Disney World to them, with happy creatures running around and taking care of each other. The majority of them don't mind that we catch and kills things (some do), but they aren't about to lobby for our interests. But these eco-tourists are passionate. And vocal. And political.

We are not. We are like the spoiled children of past conservation efforts, and we are about to be royally spanked.

Minorities only have power through organization and effort. It is time to become politically involved through organizations like MSA and CFM.

http://www.missourismallmouthalliance.org/

http://confedmo.org/

you make a good point about the Minority Ron. All you have to is read the Missouri Conservationist magazine regularly to see what MDC concentrates on. And it sure isn't stream smallmouth management or even Lake management for largemouths.

[Chief Grey Bear]

you make a good point about the Minority Ron. All you have to is read the Missouri Conservationist magazine regularly to see what MDC concentrates on. And it sure isn't stream smallmouth management or even Lake management for largemouths.

The vast majority of material in the Conservationist is submitted by the readers.

Feel free to write up all the stories you want on stream smallmouth or lake management for largemouth for publication and present them for consideration.

Growing up, we had a yearly subscription. After moving out on my own, I have contiued my own yearly subscription.

So for the last almost half century, I can say without any concern, the Conservationist is not biased towards any one demographic of the outdoor world.

[Jerry Rapp]

there not biased for sure. They publish what the majority want to read.

[Chief Grey Bear]

Yeah, those were excellent deer hunting story's the last three months weren't they?

[MOPanfisher]

If you publish an article about hunting and get 3 comments back then print one about rock cairns or butterflies and get 100 comments why wouldn't they lean toward the rocks and butterflies. A well thought out article from the MSA or a university researcher would likely be well received. One about how poorly the MDC manages and that people who keep smallmouth are bad probably not so much.

[Mitch f]

MSA is the ideal organization for that, but their membership is very small, compared to WTF, DU and the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation mentioned, their funds are miniscule and, from what I've seen, the majority of the membership treat it only as a social organization, leaving almost all the grunt work and sacrifices to Matt and Dan

http://www.missourismallmouthalliance.org/

http://confedmo.org/

Guilty...I'm a member and love to fish, but with family obligations and such, I don't have the time or desire to spend much of my free time volunteering. I will donate to the organization occasionally and feel like I do a very small part. Dan and Matt are my heroes!

[joeD]

There is validity to all comments. I daresay most make sense and are sensible for Missouri anglers. Change will happen due to political pressure on someone who can get things done. Who and how and when is any ones guess.

But it won't happen in our lifetime, unfortunately. Missouri right now is just too divided on too many issues, with no clear leadership or state identity.

To wit:

1. St Louis is still a dying and dysfunctional metro area due to a mostly city vs county partisanship and lack of a cohesive effort to bring the city into the 21st century.

2. East St Louis is in Illinois

3. Kansas City can be considered a Missouri City.

4. There is no consensus on the correct pronunciation of our state name.

5. There are entrenched rural traditions that are banned in most other states and are, due to political cowardice, allowed to continue and flourish.

5a. Mumps made a comeback due to the stupidity of people who didn't trust smart people and so, didn't get their children vaccinated. Now look. Childhood sicknesses easily vanquished making a comeback, despite all evidence supporting vaccinations.

6. Point being, until Missouri wakes up and realizes that it is OK to be smart and ambitious, and that, despite the protestations of a mulish rural (and self serving urban) constituency , smallmouth regulations that benefit the smallies, the anglers, and the state, won't happen until other state pathologies are resolved, or at least mitigated.

7. Arkansas is more advanced than us when it comes to the outdoors.

8. See #7

9. The fear offending anyone hamstrings decision making, thereby passing the buck to others. Paper shuffling bureaucracy at work.

10. I don't know, geez. Kind of all over the place. Anyhow, hmmh. Where was I....?

A passive public gets what others decide for them.

Don't be passive if you want things to change.