Paul Roberts

There are a fair amount of tournament mortality studies. From what I remember it was higher than I'd expected. Team9nine has those studies on hand. I gotta run here (little boy just woke); I'll post a link to some of this shortly, unless Brian beats me to it.

Every stream coming down those mountains have trout.

Unless angling affects nest success. Then angling would affect success of those males most vulnerable to angling. I think that is a HUGE stretch. By that logic you can flip this around to be a negative, the fish that are most vulnerable to angling would not be protecting their nests very well, and therefore the young would never make it. I think you're oversimplifying the correlation between biting a bait/protecting the nest and the behavior of adult progeny from those nests. If angling impacts nest success by catching the male (as the research in this case stated occurs) then one would expect a difference in relative success between HV and LV male bass. If LV bass fail to raise broods and HV succeed, there is selection at work, at the hands of anglers. I do not know whether this is so, I have no data and no opinion, just trying to clarify what the author's appear to be getting at. This IS a way that selection by angling for HV bass could occur in C&R fisheries. The other question there, and maybe what you are questioning, is whether HV status extends into nest defense behavior. Good question. The authors also address mortality in tournaments -which can reach 30% in some summer Ts. This is a more direct and obvious selective force. Not sure about this one. My guess is (taking the easy road here lol) that there is much more to the question than genetics. Learning in individual fish, variable competition due to cohort size, visibility, as well as angler know how and technology (think of deep water fishing before and after Buck Perry) all enter in. I'd like to know something about the behavior of HV bass to angling. Are they smarter, live in odd locations, or just plain spooky? Probably all three enter in. Trout managers in the UK think C&R is suicidal (to the fishing quality). They kill every fish, and intensively manage their fisheries for production and growth. They don't want their brown trout any smarter than they already are.

That thought crossed my mind too. But, after re-reading it I doubt there's anything insidious there. In this case, "protecting the resource" is about protecting catchable fish, not the species. The author's are well aware that bass as a species are not threatened or endangered in any way.

Unless angling affects nest success. Then angling would affect success of those males most vulnerable to angling.

Interesting article. I think the statement from the article: This is true in some waters (with high sunfish density) but not so for waters without. I see both situations existing in adjacent ponds. I've always had this concern about catching males off beds. While some studies have shown that it only takes a few successful beds on a good hatch year to create a good year class, I have to argue that this argument misses the food value good hatch years can bring to the mature bass in that water body. YOY are great food for mature bass in a lot of ponds I fish. I'd like to see more YOY bass not less. We can cull 'em (for growth of remaining bass) after they grow too large to be considered bass food. Wherever I've fish, males are vulnerable to anglers and on popular waters many are caught repeatedly and to a state of exhaustion. Another quote from the article: I guess I need to see the original article. Team9nine wrote: I can answer that one. Bass are way more vulnerable to angling under low visibility conditions, and much less so under high vis conditions. We mostly get our licks in under deep overcast, and our butts kicked when it's sunny. We can adapt by fishing deeper, or into cover, but it just isn't the same as a good dark day. Heck, I'll even settle for a light wind ruffling the water sometimes. Best case scenario: Give me a pond that's NEVER been fished, either sunny or cloudy.

Ya know...I don't get to say this often but.... I'm wondering if that fish doesn't weigh MORE than 5-8. I mean 22" with that kind of body condition, might push 6. You should check your scale -calibrate it. I use a 2.5# and a 5# barbell weight and put 'em in one of those plastic shopping bags. I check my 10# scale at 2.5, 5, and 7.5#. Your Dad might actually break his PB again -in your living room LOL.

Yup! That's a pretty fish. Hey Chris, I know you love photography: What kind of camera and pod do you use? Is it a full SLR, or something smaller?

Wow!

;D ;D

We have droughts here too that drop pond levels, and at first it serves to consolidate fish, and the bass get FAT! All those bass and 'gills all crowded together. But these ponds are also at risk of winterkill. This is the boom and bust cycle that WRB brought up earlier in this thread. This is a key point. Those booms (often following busts) bring on great numbers fishing but, at least in the north, size takes age. A 6lb fish in the north is at VERY least 10 years old and in some cases 15 or more. Boom and bust cycles don't support such ages. RW, don't write off that pond yet. LMs can survive surprisingly low oxygen levels -they are adapted to it. I have a pond that gives up "big" fish and it gets low and "stanky", but still supports it's fish. It's been in a low state the last two seasons -down almost 3 feet, with max depths at about 7-8ft now. Filamentous algae covers the milfoil and kills it off even before fall sets in. In late summer the last two years the place looks and smells terrible. But, those bigger bass are still there. Here are some bass from this pond from this year and last. (The white flecks on the ground is not snow, it's salts left from evaporation!):

WRB Wrote: ditto

Very nice. I noticed that slate gray color myself. Wish I could get out. Your pics remind me of my own fishing -last year :'(.

A lot of the origins and original distributions of fish, plants, and other animals are known. Lotsa time has passed and lotsa event shave happened that shaped the land and waterscapes we now have. Zoogeography is the field. Lots of work has been done and for most species especially popular ones like bass and trout (and others) a lot of it is understood pretty well. They can look at and date geographical and drainage changes over time, look at distributions of genera and species, and now look at DNA. LOTS has been done, and more on the way. A lot of the distributions we see today follows glacial runoff. The bird thing is a myth.

J Francho wrote: I doubt that. Too many anglers out there ready to brag. They dwarf the number of serious and close-lipped trophy hunters. Through the south we see and hear about DD fish from trophy hunters and the masses alike. In the inland north, nada. Look at the boards, top fish are 6 to 7. 8s come further east (that corridor) and south. roadwarrior Wrote: RW, to a northerner, that's just...amazing. Hey, how does one get the "roadwarrior wrote:" into the quote without my having to type it??

Nice fish. Love the prespawn. Care to elaborate? Lemme guess...A donut hole?? Is that your tackle box behind the fish in the second pic?

Great report! Love the details.

Yeah, the problem is slippage. Braid is just so slick. -Palomar.

Yup. Tiki's have the slowest sink rate I've found in stickworms.

M Starr, I really don't know yet. I've just bought one and will see. What I've read is that the color is easier to read/discern density differences. I really can't see why exactly but again, I'll see as I go. It's important to me to be able to discern relative bottom hardness. I've got spots that are a transition from muck to rubble that hold fish. I can find 'em dragging a Carolina rig. I want to see those types of transitions on my sonar. I also want to see if I can discern fish close to bottom and close to vegetation/light wood. I've used B/W units and at least on the old paper units, resolution was quite good. My big limitation is that I will be using this unit on small craft, and a float tube a lot, so I need a compact unit -that's a small screen. When I finally bought my unit (a couple of weeks ago) I wanted one that I wouldn't be disappointed in (not planning to trade up anytime soon) and the pixel count was higher/screen size in the color units. That, with a couple recommendations from friends, is why I went with color. Will keep you posted on what I find on the water.

Are your fish spawning yet?

OK, agreed. Rare. (How about "freakishly rare"?? LOL Ahhhhhh....I wondered what that fish had been eating. Actually, the climate here (on the plains at 5000ft where I fish) is about 3 weeks ahead of central NY, where I came from and where J Francho is. Summer temps on the plains regularly go into the 90s and some of my ponds get into the mid-80s in summer. It's advances about a week for every 1000ft from there.

WRB, state records are, in my opinion, the "freaks" I was talking about in the above post: If one fishes hard and smart in the north they will likely see a 7lb LM. But, they will not likely see an 8 over most of the northern range. A DD?? Fugettaboutit! The CO state record btw was 22.5inches long. Think how FAT that fish was! A 22.5" LM in good body condition would normally weigh ~6.5. The only 7 I've got a lip on measured 23". As WRB has stated in the past, body length is a real limitation. It takes a freak to pack DD weight on a 23inch frame.

Fun read. Thanks.

Raul, Specifically, We were comparing the NE coastal states and inland NY specifically, and (in my mind) other northern parts of the LM range. Peak size (beyond freaks) seems to be about 7lbs over much of the northern range, but 8s and 9s appear along the coast pretty far north. Beyond that, such fish seem to be a "southern thing". That aside, I think you are very much on the money that many of those big ones become inaccessible for much of most anglers fishing season. I think this is why the coldwater period in general (late fall through spring) is the best time to catch large bass -they have moved (to winter quarters or spawn areas) and are thus exposed. The vegetation dying back then helps too. In the south, without cold water there may not be a movement to winter habitat, so the spawn is the window.