Updated info on new smallmouth special regs areas

[Dan Kreher]

In response to our request, the Missouri Smallmouth Alliance just received some additional information on the new/expanded smallmouth bass special regs areas from MDC Fisheries biologist Craig Fuller. Here goes:

Current River "The proposed boundaries for the Current River SMBSMA would extend from at least the confluence of the Jacks Fork to the Van Buren Riverfront Park. This new 33 mile addition would begin and end at accesses which are readily identifiable, with the intent to minimize issues of anglers going from less restrictive to more restrictive areas. The proposed area utilizes modeling information from the recent exploitation study, which indicates this reach would most likely benefit by implementing a 15-inch MLL. Also, the boundaries take into consideration the seasonal movement that Smallmouth Bass have demonstrated in recent telemetry studies."

MSA Comment - perhaps with some additional public input the MDC may consider extending this regs still farther up the Current to Round Spring where the horsepower regs change -- anglers are used to this line of demarcation and this would help improve the smallie fishing still more on this very nice stretch of water from there to Two Rivers. MSA had proposed an 18 inch limit on the middle Current back in 2010 but this at least meets us halfway.

Jacks Fork - " The proposed boundaries for the Jacks Fork SMBSMA would extend from Hwy 17 to the confluence with the Current River, an expansion of 13.5 miles. This area (total of 37.5 miles) would join with the proposed Current River SMBSMA to simplify regulations and minimize the issues of anglers going from less restrictive to more restrictive areas. Also, the proposed area considers results from a recent telemetry study, which shows Smallmouth Bass have the potential for significant seasonal movements."

MSA Comment - still wish they wouldn't drop from 18 to 15 inches on the upper Jacks but this will likely be an effective change on the most popular section of Jacks Fork.

Big Piney - "The proposed boundaries for the Big Piney River SMBSMA would extend from Slabtown Access to the confluence of the Gasconade River. This expansion (31 miles) would provide a total of 46 miles on the Big Piney River with identical Smallmouth Bass regulations. The proposed area would eliminate anglers going from less restrictive to more restrictive areas, downstream of Ross Bridge Access into the Gasconade River. Also, the proposed area would offer more protection during seasonal Smallmouth Bass movements"

MSA Comment - MSA had proposed an 18 inch limit on lower BP from Fort to Gasconade back in 2010. Changing to Gasc to 15 but adding 31 miles (albeit some if hard to access) to BP regs protection is a nice step forward.

Meramec -- "The proposed boundaries for the Meramec River SMBSMA would extend from the Highway 8 bridge to the railroad crossing at Bird’s Nest. This extension (8 miles) would provide a total of 23 miles on the Meramec River with identical Smallmouth Bass regulations, while providing clear, well defined geographical boundaries for anglers. Also, the proposed area would offer more protection during seasonal Smallmouth Bass movements as it encompasses the

Maramec Spring area. In reference to the area mentioned in MSA comments (Birds Nest to Hwy H): this downstream expansion on the Meramec River would create problems with anglers floating from a less restrictive area (Courtois and Huzzah creeks) into a more restrictive area (Meramec River), which is a situation we want to avoid if at all possible."

MSA comment - appreciate extension of 15 inch limit in the trout area purportedly frequented by both smallies and those trying to catch them in the winter months. Could fix the "problems" downstream if they just put Courtois/Huzzah under 15 inch limit as well and took 15 inch reg on Meramec down to Onondaga -- but perhaps folks can lobby for that expansion at the meetings and in future years as additional protection for these seasonally migrating fish on these streams.

Big River -- "The proposed boundaries for the Big River SMBSMA would be from Council Bluff Lake dam to its confluence with the Meramec River. This change will simplify and standardize black bass regulations by adding the remaining 27 miles of the Big River to the SMBSMA."

MSA comment - nice to see this additional protection on the upper river as many on this forum have called for. Now the entire river is under 15/1 regs on smallies. We need to work to bring streams like the Bourbeuse under similar management given its potential and predominance of spotted bass particularly below Noser Mill.

There will be more on this and related topics in the next MSA newsletter. I invite those interested to sign up at www.missourismallmouthalliance.org.

Thanks.

[Greasy B]

Thanks Dan, can you provide contact information for those within MDC that we can address our comments to?

[ColdWaterFshr]

15/1 - help me understand what this means. I'm a little slow. Is it a 15 inch, 1-fish, possession limit??

[Al Agnew]

Yes, 15 inch, 1 fish.

I'd really like to see the 15/1 extended to Onondaga, too, and it would be easily doable if they made Huzzah and Courtois 15/1 from Hwy. 8 (Huzzah Valley) on Huzzah and Butts Bridge (Bass Campground) on the Courtois. Most people either float down to those two places or put in at those two places and float on down. I'm really glad to see the regs extended up to include the mouth of Maramec Spring, but that stretch from Birds Nest to Onondaga has terrific potential to grow big smallmouth, more so than the stretch under the regs now.

Largemouth and spotted bass are uncommon on the Current and Jacks Fork, so in effect, the 15/1 reg is nearly catch and release, since 1 15 inch fish is not enough for a meal unless combined with goggle-eye, or unless the angler really seeks out the scattered places where largemouth are found. On the Big Piney and Meramec, largemouth are common and spotted bass are certainly present on both and somewhat common on the lower Big Piney, so the meat angler could still keep a lot of bass.

I just don't understand why they don't put the Bourbeuse under the same regs as Big River. It is suffering at least as much from spotted bass encroachment.

[moguy1973]

15/1 - help me understand what this means. I'm a little slow. Is it a 15 inch, 1-fish, possession limit??

Yes

[MOsmallies]

Thank you Dan for taking the time to update everyone! Your efforts with the MSA are very much appreciated!!!

[joeD]

Doesn't 15/1 mean anything over !5? Meaning, not for a meal's sake, but a trophy for some. So, anyone who catches an 18 incher or a 20 incher can walk out with it? How would that help? How would you like to see people carrying those size fish, legally, when you arrive at a stream? How would taking big fish consistently out of streams where it is known that their size is relatively rare. help overall fishing?

And really, what is the frigging point of possessing ONE FISH?! Good grief, its 2015. It's not salmon fishing on the Great Lakes.

Nevermind, I guess I'll have to dig out my metal fish stringer.

[cwc87]

Al hit the nail on the head that from birdsnest to Onondaga the Meramec has Great Potential to produce some big smallmouth. BUT we still have the gigging issue The eleven point has the right regulation no gigging in the trophy section The smallmouth tagging/movement study taught everyone how fish migrate.

The real statistics I and everyone want to know when citations are issued for harvest of smallmouth gigged and over limit harvests What rivers ( areas) citations are issued. Breakdown on zip codes who received citations.

What really bad is the archaic six fish twelve inch length limit for smallmouth is that it's gonna still exist when we all know it's time for a change.

[joeD]

Smallmouth lives matter.

[Dan Kreher]

Smallmouth lives matter.

That is a classic, Joe.

Or this could be expanded to "black bass lives matter" - unless you happen to be a non-native spot from Kentucky.

More serious comments on the proposed smallmouth regulations can be directed to the MDC's Smallmouth Bass program coordinator, fisheries biologist Craig Fuller at Craig.Fuller@mdc.mo.gov. I believe he is in the Lebanon office.

Angler input can still have some impact on the scope of these proposed regulations. Let the MDC know your thoughts, comments and concerns either via e-mail, phone call or at the upcoming public comment meetings - dates/locations TBA by MDC. Please be respectful in your communication with the MDC as it does appear they are sincerely trying to be responsive to angler concerns.

Yes, we would like them to do more regs areas, consider changing the overall state length/creel limits, and further address other related issues such as illegal gigging of sportfish, seasonal concentration concerns (Black River/Clearwater/etc). But these proposed regs are certainly an overall positive for conservation minded anglers and the resource.

It would be helpful if the MDC would re-consider imposing some additional protection on SMB/Neoshos or otherwise in some of the SW MO streams. Only regs there are on James and Elk. I realize they reviewed several other streams here during their White Paper project, but the distribution of regs could certainly be expanded.

Even with this addition of some 113 miles of special regs water, still just 460+ miles, or 16%, of the Ozarks 2200+ miles of its major SMB streams as listed in the Missouri/Ozark Waterways floaters' guide are under special management. This leaves the vast majority under the maximum sustained yield-based 12-inch, 6 fish creel limit. Progress, yes, but we need to continue to push for more progressive management of this sportfish while the MDC remains focused on this species long-displayed in the agency's recognized logo -- our native smallmouth bass.

Harvest oriented management approaches take a long time to dispel. It is up to we anglers to let our voices be heard in this regard. So don't stop now.