MOPanfisher Posted August 10, 2016 Posted August 10, 2016 Spoondog, the part I think you are missing is that the limit in most streams is 12 inches so there would have to be science based evidence to show that changing it would benefit. I believe most of the real catch and keep anglers do go to the river prepared to keep fish, that's why they went, it's the casual fishing crowd and the "hey I caught a nice one, ima gonna string it and show my buddies" crowd that are not prepared to keep fish. In the end habitat will Trump the fisherman, gravel choked streams, loss of riparian habitat, erosion, etc. will do more damage than all the catch and keep fisherman ever dreamed of.
MOsmallies Posted August 10, 2016 Posted August 10, 2016 2 hours ago, Chief Grey Bear said: This is the Bingo. Nobody but the STL7 has ever said the MDC's goal is "Maximum Sutsatined Harvest". In fact, MDC data shows that relatively few catch and keep fisherman take a full limit every trip. And those fisherman make fewer trips per year than most people here. Just curious who make up the STL7???... Increased by 2
Chief Grey Bear Posted August 10, 2016 Posted August 10, 2016 4 minutes ago, MOsmallies said: Just curious who make up the STL7???... Increased by 2 It was always 7. But I called it STL5 the first time because it was the FOX show The Five that sowed the seed. Chief Grey Bear Living is dangerous to your health Owner Ozark Fishing Expeditions Co-Owner, Chief Executive Product Development Team Jerm Werm Executive Pro Staff Team Agnew Executive Pro Staff Paul Dallas Productions Executive Pro Staff Team Heddon, River Division Chief Primary Consultant Missouri Smallmouth Alliance Executive Vice President Ronnie Moore Outdoors
Al Agnew Posted August 10, 2016 Posted August 10, 2016 George Fleener, the biologist who was most instrumental in getting the original and still existing 6 fish 12 inch limit, told me and others several times that the 12 inch mml was picked out of thin air--they were just as willing to put on a 14 inch mml at the time but somehow decided at the last minute to make it 12 inches, mainly to appease the anglers who were used to keeping 10 inch and smaller bass. In other words, there was no valid scientific reason at the time for the 12 inch mml, and there still isn't. Studies throughout the years have shown that, even with the majority of anglers releasing all the fish they catch, that there is a very significant and abrupt decline in fish right at the limit. Make it 15 inches and there will be the exact same decline around that mark, unless the creel limit is also signficantly reduced. In addition, their more recent studies seem to show that a lot of smallmouth die off from apparently natural causes before they reach 15 inches, so there would still be 50% or so fewer fish making it to 15 inches than there are now making it to 12 inches. That's their rationale for not being too gung ho about higher length limits in general. Even though Chief said my math wasn't the way regulations come about, the fact is that regulations manage angler perceptions and expectations as much or more than they do fish populations when it comes to stream bass. Numbers will thrive with the current regs. They will thrive, with some change in size structure, with whatever kind of regs you want to put on; all they would be managing with different regs is the size structure within the population. So that being the case, if they can manage for the majority of anglers, which according their surveys want bigger fish and don't keep them anyway, and still allow the meat anglers in the minority to harvest simlar amounts of protein, why wouldn't they do it? Apparently, two reasons...one is that they have a built in bias against changing regulations unless and until a clear need to do so appears, and two...tournament anglers, since that appears to be the impetus behind not putting on the special regs on that section of Current River. Brian Jones, jfrith, Mitch f and 1 other 4
Gavin Posted August 10, 2016 Posted August 10, 2016 Current river tourneys don't appear to be much of anything. 10-20 boat boat sausage fests a couple times a year. 3lbs might get you big bass. No big deal. Seems like an excuse, not a reason to ignore their data. Mitch f and Greasy B 2
SpoonDog Posted August 10, 2016 Posted August 10, 2016 2 hours ago, MOPanfisher said: Spoondog, the part I think you are missing is that the limit in most streams is 12 inches so there would have to be science based evidence to show that changing it would benefit. I believe most of the real catch and keep anglers do go to the river prepared to keep fish, that's why they went, it's the casual fishing crowd and the "hey I caught a nice one, ima gonna string it and show my buddies" crowd that are not prepared to keep fish. In the end habitat will Trump the fisherman, gravel choked streams, loss of riparian habitat, erosion, etc. will do more damage than all the catch and keep fisherman ever dreamed of. It can be 12 & 3/4" inches or 13 & 1/2" or 15", the number is arbitrary as long as it protects enough spawning-size fish to maintain the population. And as I said- if there's no science-based evidence suggesting at 15" MLL would benefit Ozark smallmouth fisheries, there's no rationale for MDC using that reg in special management areas. We both know MDC didn't survey every river mile when they implemented the 12" reg, no need for them to start now. We know these fish grow slowly, we know these fish are harvested at some level, we know a good year class is continent upon stream flows, seasonal weather patterns, and many of the habitat issues you mention. That's all the more reason to be conservative with length and creel limits. And regarding those habitat issues: we can't turn back the clock. MDC, DNR, and other state agencies are limited with what they can do to rehabilitate streams, much less the average Missouri resident who doesn't own creek or river frontage. That's largely beyond our control. What isn't beyond our control, though- is harvest.
MOPanfisher Posted August 10, 2016 Posted August 10, 2016 Many of the habitat issues are beyond our control but not beyond our influence. Many agencies have $ and are more than willing to spend them for such things. The MLL is not arbitrary it is what is set currently by law, you say you want to see them use science and biology to make changes, which also means that if there is no data to support a change it doesn't change. If MDC can show daat from those special management areas that the population as a whole (not just big smallmouth) is improving then they would be foolish not to put it forth and push for changes. Please understand I would love to see the overall MLL go to 15" for SMB, honestly don't care about what happens to the spots or LMB, doesn't mean for a second that it would be the right thing to do, I am the verst to say I am heavily biased but I acknowledge it. I also believe that the MDC is working to fulfill their mission, regardless of whether or not it agrees with my personal preferences.
fishinwrench Posted August 10, 2016 Posted August 10, 2016 MDC appears to support the whole idea.... So confusing.
MOPanfisher Posted August 10, 2016 Posted August 10, 2016 Sort of what I tried to allude to, MDC is not against a larger MLL or smaller # of take home fish, however to change regulation like that, the ones who propose the change have got to show some data. Otherwise, the answer, hmm interesring, and quite possibly a good idea, come back when you have some data to back it up. Some of that is the fault of missouri sportsmen, if you wish to see it as a problem, MDC has been hit enough over the years for changing regs without data to show why they have posible over compensated the other way. Only on a few odd istances such as Feral Hogs have they shorted the system, rightfully thinking that waiting for all the data would truly be waiting too long. But that's a discussion for a different topic, or not. Seems like some of the more interesting threads wander over several pages about many things. Ham 1
Recommended Posts