I just wanted to weigh in about what I know about the proposed regulations, which will not go into effect any sooner than 2012, thanks to whining from just a few folks.
As one poster in the other thread noted these proposals were only undertaken after a 5-year tagging study on Truman revealed that flathead catfish 19-inches or longer were being kept at a rate of just 9.4%, while blue catfish were being kept at a rate of 74.2%. Larger blues over the size of 24-inches were kept at a rate of 84.4%. Some tags were lost and some catfish died a natural death and both factors were taken into consideration. The Missouri Department of Conservation study arrived at a figure of a little less than 8% for the number of tagged blue cats that were released after being caught, so at the conclusion of the study very few of the original blue cats remained in the population for anglers to catch.
So, 9.4% of bigger-sized flatheads were kept and fewer than 8% of larger blues were released. No wonder there's concern for the blue catfishery. At this rate of being caught a large population of huge, but slow-growing, blue catfish is unsustainable. which means there are darned few in the Lake to catch.
Back when MDC first got wind of angler dissatisfaction with catfishing on Truman the biologists for the department did an Angler Survey. Almost 50% of the anglers surveyed stated that catfishing in Truman had declined. The other 52% were divided among 'no opinion,' 'stayed the same' and 'improved,' with only a minority saying catfishing had improved in the lake.
THAT survey is what initiated the Truman catfishing tagging study. The biologists were not looking to make restrictions, they were attempting to verify what the public had been telling them, and they did: blue catfish -- especially in the larger sizes -- were in serious decline.
MDC has now been getting the same type of feedback from Lake of the Ozarks catfishermen.
Biologists know that not every group of catfishers has the same goal. Some want meat for the skillet, some want to win tournaments, others want their kids to have a good day of catfishing, and still others are happy to catch and release fish.
The department realizes that many folks love to eat catfish and so they even did a survey about this, with 20-pounds of catfish as the goal. The question was this:
Which would you prefer to catch?
1.) 1 20-pound catfish
2.) 2 10-pound catfish
3.) 4 5-pound catfish
4.) 10 2-pound catfish
The most popular response was four 5-pound fish.
Under the proposed regulations an angler could catch five 5-pound fish; 10 5-pounders if the creel limit is bumped up as the proposal states.
Anglers would still be able to keep 10 channel cats and 5 flatheads, too, more than enough to have a big fish fry or win a tournament since there is no length limit for these latter two species on Truman or LOO.
Those who point to other studies, such as the one conducted on Wilson Lake, in Alabama, and say that their biologists came to an opposite conclusion, which was to protect ALL blue catfish under the length of 24-inches, must not understand the basics of fisheries biology. ALL LAKES ARE NOT THE SAME. That is why when you read through all the various catfish studies each lake and each river is studied independently of the others.
One poster noted that Alabama catfish have a longer growing season than Missouri catfish.
But that doesn't take into account recruitment into the base population. How successful are Wilson Lake's catfish at reproducing?
Even if they are highly successful, what about the predation upon blue catfish fry in Wilson Lake?
What about the forage base in Wilson Lake? Is it substandard, which might lead to skinny, unhealthy small blue catfish that need to be babied along to maturity?
What we know is that the habitat in Truman and LOO is good for catfish. The forage base is good. Recruitment is good. The ONLY problem that the Department has identified is that too many larger fish are being kept. Cut down on the numbers being kept, the Department says, and fishing for larger blues will improve dramatically.
They aren't saying that no blues can be kept; in fact, one part of the proposal is that 10 blues per day (10 in possession) be kept rather than 5.
The slot would allow the most prolific breeders to be protected during their peak reproductive years. Afterwards, they would be available for taking within the limits of the proposed regulation.
I remember all the wailing and the whining that went on a few years back (well, maybe a decade ago), when MDC slapped a 9-inch minimum on crappie in LOO. You would have thought the world had ended!
Now, according to Greg Stoner, crappie anglers who have seen what a new -- and wise -- length limit can do -- and who now regularly catch slab-sides -- are lobbying for a 10-inch length limit. (I don't think they will get it, but it just goes to show you that some people who are adamantly opposed to something 'new' will be the first on the bandwagon to see if that 'new' reg might be improved even more).
Do I think MDC is ALWAYS right?
Heck, no!
I only have to look at the multiflora rose, the autumn olive, the ruffed grouse and the otters to know that they can be wrong.
But then I look at all the other great things they have done for those of us who hunt, fish and trap and I am more than willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. And in this case, by reading over the numbers, I myself think there is little doubt but that the blue catfishery needs some help. (Not that I am always right, either).
Heck, if there isn't significant improvement within the time frame that MDC believes is required, then anglers can always go back to the department and lobby to get the regulation changed back to the way it was.
Thank goodness we live in Missouri. MDC may have its flaws, but when it comes to fishing and hunting we live in one of the finest states in the U.S. to enjoy those types of activities at a uniformly high level of satisfaction.
As one poster in the other thread noted these proposals were only undertaken after a 5-year tagging study on Truman revealed that flathead catfish 19-inches or longer were being kept at a rate of just 9.4%, while blue catfish were being kept at a rate of 74.2%. Larger blues over the size of 24-inches were kept at a rate of 84.4%. Some tags were lost and some catfish died a natural death and both factors were taken into consideration. The Missouri Department of Conservation study arrived at a figure of a little less than 8% for the number of tagged blue cats that were released after being caught, so at the conclusion of the study very few of the original blue cats remained in the population for anglers to catch.
So, 9.4% of bigger-sized flatheads were kept and fewer than 8% of larger blues were released. No wonder there's concern for the blue catfishery. At this rate of being caught a large population of huge, but slow-growing, blue catfish is unsustainable. which means there are darned few in the Lake to catch.
Back when MDC first got wind of angler dissatisfaction with catfishing on Truman the biologists for the department did an Angler Survey. Almost 50% of the anglers surveyed stated that catfishing in Truman had declined. The other 52% were divided among 'no opinion,' 'stayed the same' and 'improved,' with only a minority saying catfishing had improved in the lake.
THAT survey is what initiated the Truman catfishing tagging study. The biologists were not looking to make restrictions, they were attempting to verify what the public had been telling them, and they did: blue catfish -- especially in the larger sizes -- were in serious decline.
MDC has now been getting the same type of feedback from Lake of the Ozarks catfishermen.
Biologists know that not every group of catfishers has the same goal. Some want meat for the skillet, some want to win tournaments, others want their kids to have a good day of catfishing, and still others are happy to catch and release fish.
The department realizes that many folks love to eat catfish and so they even did a survey about this, with 20-pounds of catfish as the goal. The question was this:
Which would you prefer to catch?
1.) 1 20-pound catfish
2.) 2 10-pound catfish
3.) 4 5-pound catfish
4.) 10 2-pound catfish
The most popular response was four 5-pound fish.
Under the proposed regulations an angler could catch five 5-pound fish; 10 5-pounders if the creel limit is bumped up as the proposal states.
Anglers would still be able to keep 10 channel cats and 5 flatheads, too, more than enough to have a big fish fry or win a tournament since there is no length limit for these latter two species on Truman or LOO.
Those who point to other studies, such as the one conducted on Wilson Lake, in Alabama, and say that their biologists came to an opposite conclusion, which was to protect ALL blue catfish under the length of 24-inches, must not understand the basics of fisheries biology. ALL LAKES ARE NOT THE SAME. That is why when you read through all the various catfish studies each lake and each river is studied independently of the others.
One poster noted that Alabama catfish have a longer growing season than Missouri catfish.
But that doesn't take into account recruitment into the base population. How successful are Wilson Lake's catfish at reproducing?
Even if they are highly successful, what about the predation upon blue catfish fry in Wilson Lake?
What about the forage base in Wilson Lake? Is it substandard, which might lead to skinny, unhealthy small blue catfish that need to be babied along to maturity?
What we know is that the habitat in Truman and LOO is good for catfish. The forage base is good. Recruitment is good. The ONLY problem that the Department has identified is that too many larger fish are being kept. Cut down on the numbers being kept, the Department says, and fishing for larger blues will improve dramatically.
They aren't saying that no blues can be kept; in fact, one part of the proposal is that 10 blues per day (10 in possession) be kept rather than 5.
The slot would allow the most prolific breeders to be protected during their peak reproductive years. Afterwards, they would be available for taking within the limits of the proposed regulation.
I remember all the wailing and the whining that went on a few years back (well, maybe a decade ago), when MDC slapped a 9-inch minimum on crappie in LOO. You would have thought the world had ended!
Now, according to Greg Stoner, crappie anglers who have seen what a new -- and wise -- length limit can do -- and who now regularly catch slab-sides -- are lobbying for a 10-inch length limit. (I don't think they will get it, but it just goes to show you that some people who are adamantly opposed to something 'new' will be the first on the bandwagon to see if that 'new' reg might be improved even more).
Do I think MDC is ALWAYS right?
Heck, no!
I only have to look at the multiflora rose, the autumn olive, the ruffed grouse and the otters to know that they can be wrong.
But then I look at all the other great things they have done for those of us who hunt, fish and trap and I am more than willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. And in this case, by reading over the numbers, I myself think there is little doubt but that the blue catfishery needs some help. (Not that I am always right, either).
Heck, if there isn't significant improvement within the time frame that MDC believes is required, then anglers can always go back to the department and lobby to get the regulation changed back to the way it was.
Thank goodness we live in Missouri. MDC may have its flaws, but when it comes to fishing and hunting we live in one of the finest states in the U.S. to enjoy those types of activities at a uniformly high level of satisfaction.
