Spots to 12" possibly

[Al Agnew]

I don't have a dog in this hunt because I live too far from Table Rock and don't particularly care to fish reservoirs with the glitter boat crowd anyway.  But the theory is simply that current regulations with a 15 inch limit means there is a lot more harvest of smallmouth and largemouth than of spotted bass, because the spots seldom reach 15 inches.  If more fish of one (or two) species are harvested than of the other under the same rules, then the species not being harvested is going to take over more and more of the bass biomass of the lake, simple as that.  And the observed significant increase in the percentage of spotted bass in the population of bass in Table Rock bears this out.  Babler wants them to stock largemouth, which hasn't been a management tool anywhere in the country for more than 50 years, except for stocking Florida bass in places where they don't live naturally.  It won't do a darned thing to increase the largemouth population.  It's expensive to grow bass to 10 inches or so when they have a bit more of a chance of surviving to catchable size, and if you stock fingerlings into an existing population of various bass species, they simply get eaten before they grow.  

Some other things that have been brought up...I'm no biologist, but seems to me the whole key is how much bass biomass combined with other predatory fish biomass can the habitat and forage base support, and is there room for more bass biomass than there is now?  It's a dynamic balance, and removing more of one species of the biomass than another means the other increases to fill the gap.  And that is exactly what is happening with the population dynamics of the three bass species.  So then the question becomes, what would reducing the limit on spots accomplish?  Will there be enough catch and keep of spotted bass to put things into a different balance?  But it probably isn't that simple.  Like it or not, tournament angling with all the weigh-ins and hauling fish all over the lake, even though they are supposedly mostly released "unharmed", is also a big factor in the biomass percentages.  Since spots seldom reach 15 inches, they aren't hauled around and weighed in nearly as much, either.  So that's also a factor in more of them surviving to old age and breeding like fruit flies for 5 or 7 years.

Two final questions...

What are the management goals?  Is it to bring harvest and hauling around back into some kind of balance that doesn't favor spotted bass?  Then lowering the spot limit to 12 inches should theoretically work.  Is it to produce more big bass?  Same thing, since the smallmouth are largemouth are far more likely to grow bigger than 15 inches.

Will the proposed change actually work?  Will there be enough increased harvest and mortality of spots to push the balance back toward smallmouth and largemouth and stop the continual increase in spotted bass as a percentage of the bass population?  

I still think slot limits on smallmouth and largemouth are the best way to go if you want more big bass, probably combined with separate regulations on spotted bass.  On spots, a 6 fish limit with no length limit.  On largemouth and smallmouth, a 14-20 inch slot, with 3 fish under 14 and 1 fish over.  But the tournament crowd would scream bloody murder over that idea, and don't kid yourself...these days the tournament crowd has all the power.

[Alex Heitman]

32 minutes ago, Al Agnew said:

I don't have a dog in this hunt because I live too far from Table Rock and don't particularly care to fish reservoirs with the glitter boat crowd anyway.  But the theory is simply that current regulations with a 15 inch limit means there is a lot more harvest of smallmouth and largemouth than of spotted bass, because the spots seldom reach 15 inches.  If more fish of one (or two) species are harvested than of the other under the same rules, then the species not being harvested is going to take over more and more of the bass biomass of the lake, simple as that.  And the observed significant increase in the percentage of spotted bass in the population of bass in Table Rock bears this out.  Babler wants them to stock largemouth, which hasn't been a management tool anywhere in the country for more than 50 years, except for stocking Florida bass in places where they don't live naturally.  It won't do a darned thing to increase the largemouth population.  It's expensive to grow bass to 10 inches or so when they have a bit more of a chance of surviving to catchable size, and if you stock fingerlings into an existing population of various bass species, they simply get eaten before they grow.  

Some other things that have been brought up...I'm no biologist, but seems to me the whole key is how much bass biomass combined with other predatory fish biomass can the habitat and forage base support, and is there room for more bass biomass than there is now?  It's a dynamic balance, and removing more of one species of the biomass than another means the other increases to fill the gap.  And that is exactly what is happening with the population dynamics of the three bass species.  So then the question becomes, what would reducing the limit on spots accomplish?  Will there be enough catch and keep of spotted bass to put things into a different balance?  But it probably isn't that simple.  Like it or not, tournament angling with all the weigh-ins and hauling fish all over the lake, even though they are supposedly mostly released "unharmed", is also a big factor in the biomass percentages.  Since spots seldom reach 15 inches, they aren't hauled around and weighed in nearly as much, either.  So that's also a factor in more of them surviving to old age and breeding like fruit flies for 5 or 7 years.

Two final questions...

What are the management goals?  Is it to bring harvest and hauling around back into some kind of balance that doesn't favor spotted bass?  Then lowering the spot limit to 12 inches should theoretically work.  Is it to produce more big bass?  Same thing, since the smallmouth are largemouth are far more likely to grow bigger than 15 inches.

Will the proposed change actually work?  Will there be enough increased harvest and mortality of spots to push the balance back toward smallmouth and largemouth and stop the continual increase in spotted bass as a percentage of the bass population?  

I still think slot limits on smallmouth and largemouth are the best way to go if you want more big bass, probably combined with separate regulations on spotted bass.  On spots, a 6 fish limit with no length limit.  On largemouth and smallmouth, a 14-20 inch slot, with 3 fish under 14 and 1 fish over.  But the tournament crowd would scream bloody murder over that idea, and don't kid yourself...these days the tournament crowd has all the power.

Lol you obviously don’t fish Table rock because there is plenty of 15 inch spotted bass in Table Rock. This lake is not like the little rivers you fish. 

Actually there is plenty of states that stock LMB still. Who cares if they are northern or Florida strain. Heck if Missouri could have giant Florida strain I would be all for it. Texas regularly stocks LMB and there lakes are thriving. If you remember we have a LMB virus that decimated the population on the 90’s. It has slowly been recovering. If it would have been stocked I’m sure it would have significantly helped. Sorry don’t agree with most of your points 

[Quillback]

"On largemouth and smallmouth, a 14-20 inch slot, with 3 fish under 14 and 1 fish over.  But the tournament crowd would scream bloody murder over that idea, and don't kid yourself...these days the tournament crowd has all the power."

That's what happened on the Coosa river lakes proposed changes, the Alabama DCNR proposed a 14-20" slot limit for bass, the tourney crowd and local chambers of commerce freaked out and got the proposal killed off.  So in that case, the tournament crowd exercised their power.  In spite of a study showing a 30% mortality rate to bass that are kept in a livewell,  which was the reason for the proposal.  Economics won out over fish management.

The thing is, Lake Fork has had a slot limit for years and that lake is pounded by tourney and recreational bass fishermen.  If the fishing is good, people will come and fish.  Killing off a slot limit proposal designed to improve the quality of the bass population was short sighted.  I highlighted a statement below that shows you how hard is to bring about change that could be beneficial to the fishery.  People complain about the fishing being poor, but fight back against any changes designed to improve the quality of the fishery.   

"Slot limits have been a hot topic in Alabama in recent months. In November 2024, the Alabama Wildlife & Freshwater Fisheries Division proposed a plan to institute a 14- to 20-inch tournament-only slot limit for all six lakes on the Coosa River in response to research conducted by Auburn University that tracked bass mortality rates on the Neely Henry Reservoir over the past three years.

The DCNR paid for that research project to the tune of $843,000 “in response to persistent complaints from anglers about the declining quality of the black bass fisheries on Coosa River reservoirs.”

“After taking into consideration all of the fisheries data collected by our staff, various scientific studies and feedback from tournament and local fishermen as well as many city and county government entities, I have determined that the short-term economic impacts of a 14-20 inch slot limit outweigh the long-term benefits of a larger size structure of the bass population on the Coosa River reservoirs. At this time, no changes for the Coosa River fishery will be presented to the Conservation Advisory Board for consideration."

 

[Bill Babler]

We’re talking Table Rock here. As Alex stated limits of 15 plus inch spotted bass 2-3 pounders are easily obtainable. You for sure don’t want to see them in tournament bags as more often than not it takes low to mid 20 pound bags to win and high teens to get a check. 
In the Winter from point 9 to point 21 as usual it’s never a problem to catch 15” spotted bass in huge numbers. 

These locations harbor threadfin shad that will black out your sonar from 20’ to 90’ deep in 1/2 mile section. 

As far as stocking  LM I don’t care one way or the other. I just would hate to see the K’s decimated as lowering the size limit would without a doubt cast a very negative stain on them.   

 

[bobby b.]

I have a counter proposal - Set the minimum size for all three bass species on TR to 18 inches or better yet 20 inches - surely this would send the tournaments to Texas, Forida, or better yet Mexico.😊

Bobby

[top_dollar]

14 hours ago, Alex Heitman said:

Lol you obviously don’t fish Table rock because there is plenty of 15 inch spotted bass in Table Rock. This lake is not like the little rivers you fish. 

Actually there is plenty of states that stock LMB still. Who cares if they are northern or Florida strain. Heck if Missouri could have giant Florida strain I would be all for it. Texas regularly stocks LMB and there lakes are thriving. If you remember we have a LMB virus that decimated the population on the 90’s. It has slowly been recovering. If it would have been stocked I’m sure it would have significantly helped. Sorry don’t agree with most of your points 

Since I do fish table rock does that mean Im allowed to opine? I didn't realize those were the rules.

By your metrics, you and all the C&R folks shouldn't get an opinion because you don't keep any bass.

I do fish table rock, and I do keep the bass, so technically Mr Bush and MDC should regard my opinion the most.

Anecdotes dont equal evidence. The article very clearly states that the spotted bass population has increased yet the size of 15-inch fish has decreased.  As i already mentioned there are too many c&r anglers anymore for it to make much difference, but there is no denying that removing smaller bass will result in a higher % of larger fish.  Its just basic math. Bass fisherman just love bass too much to bring themselves to harvest one, but it is against their best interest in most cases. 

If they did limit the length to 12 I'd keep more of the 12-14 inches and throw back the 15+, but the current regs force me to keep the bigs that I'd rather toss back.  

[Alex Heitman]

7 hours ago, top_dollar said:

Since I do fish table rock does that mean Im allowed to opine? I didn't realize those were the rules.

By your metrics, you and all the C&R folks shouldn't get an opinion because you don't keep any bass.

I do fish table rock, and I do keep the bass, so technically Mr Bush and MDC should regard my opinion the most.

Anecdotes dont equal evidence. The article very clearly states that the spotted bass population has increased yet the size of 15-inch fish has decreased.  As i already mentioned there are too many c&r anglers anymore for it to make much difference, but there is no denying that removing smaller bass will result in a higher % of larger fish.  Its just basic math. Bass fisherman just love bass too much to bring themselves to harvest one, but it is against their best interest in most cases. 

If they did limit the length to 12 I'd keep more of the 12-14 inches and throw back the 15+, but the current regs force me to keep the bigs that I'd rather toss back.  

I guess you haven’t fished LOZ or any other of the Missouri lakes then. They have 12 inch rule and no quality of spotted bass. No where near Table Rock. Sure you can keep bass I don’t care. I would prefer every time that people went bass fishing they didn’t load their freezer though. Also there is so much for these fish to eat in this lake there is no way they are competing that bad for a meal. 

[Bill Babler]

Let’s put it this way. If you take out every 250 pound person that eats a Chinese buffet would that leave more food for a person that weighs 150 pounds?

Of course not!  There is more food there than all the customers can eat regardless of how many or how small or large they are.  

Table Rock is similar. There is more forage there than can be consumed by the current predator population regardless of how small how many or how large they are. 

Top_Dollar made some good points.

Bass are not like deer,  the herd does not need to be thinned.  This is not a 1acre farm pond. The creel limit is to prevent over harvest as they by far are the top sought after species on most lakes including TR. 

By lowering  the length they are sending a message to remove fish as the forage base cannot sustain the level of fish that are present. 

I’m telling you spending between 200 and 300 days a year on the water in ALL seasons during every migration, nothing is further from the truth. 

Top_Dollar and I believe what he said will throw back 15” fish and eat 12” fish. I’m sure he will,  but the next 100 folks won’t.  Worse than that the guides won’t be able to C&R. They are going to have to start cleaning 12” bass.  There are between 30 and 40 full time guides in TR.  99% are catch and release with their targeted species being spotted bass.  You do the math that’s 10’s of thousands of fish that are going to be removed from the population. 

Every 12” fish that gets a Crisco bath for sure will never get to 16/17/18 inches. Somehow eating 12” fish makes our fish bigger?   I guess that would be true if you had 10 fish sitting at a table dividing 1 threadfin shad. 

But, we don’t. We have threadfin shad gizzard shad and for those of you that don’t think K!s eat gizzard shad you need to remember gizzard shad aren’t born full size. On that note I’ve caught 14” to 19” K!s on 7 to 9 inch glide and swim baits. 
Besides the shad we have sunfish, crayfish and aquatic insects. Not to mention predators eat predators so yes they eat their own. Plus walleye and for sure the walleye return the favor. 

The forage base in TR out numbers the predator base thousands to 1.  Removing 12” K’s is not going to make us see 10 pound LM, 12 pound walleye and most certainly not 5 pound K’s. 

Y’all know my position. It comes from being on this lake since the 1970’s. I love it, it made my life. I’ve spent more days on it than the biologist have been on this earth. 

I’m constantly following the fish in every season. I follow the prey as well as the predators. 

Thank you for letting me express my opinion and maybe bring 50 years of history and 50 years of knowledge about this Great Lake

. 
I won’t take any more of you time on the topic.