Keeper bass

"alwaysfishking" wrote in message
...
While I have not kept track of hours on the lake I have 429 bass this
year.
I have no idea how many were dinks but I gotta say that a majority were 12
inchs or better. I am definetly not one to compare to. I have a very
unfair
advantage in the lakes here and the amount of time I can fish. My average
size bass this year would be about 2 pounds +, I plan on keeping more
detailed logs next year. like baits and time spent. One thing I won't
track
is money spent :-)


If we had a 12" limit, I'm sure my percent would be a lot higher. But we
don't. Not like it really matters. I enjoy catching them to just about any
size. I would like ot have a few larger ones this year, though. I think my
largest is just over 4lb this year.

I used to keep a really detailed log. I think I got so detailed, it became
a hassle, and I gave up on it. I'm just really hitting the high points on
this log.
--
Andrew Kidd
http://www.amiasoft.com/ - Software for the rest of us!
http://www.rofb.net/ - ROFB Newsgroup Home

Not to open up the "dinks are wothless" thread again, but I only keep count
of keeper bass in my logs. I know I've caught more dinks than keepers
overall too Andrew.

The thing that I can be proud of is that I've averaged far more than a
5-fish limit of keepers for every day I've fished this year. In my book
that's the most important factor. The total number of fish is
inconsequential to me.

Warren
--
http://www.warrenwolk.com/
http://www.tri-statebassmasters.com
2004 NJ B.A.S.S. Federation State Champions



"Andrew Kidd" wrote in message
news:WupYc.65784$9d6.50346@attbi_s54...
"alwaysfishking" wrote in message
...
While I have not kept track of hours on the lake I have 429 bass this
year.
I have no idea how many were dinks but I gotta say that a majority were
12
inchs or better. I am definetly not one to compare to. I have a very
unfair
advantage in the lakes here and the amount of time I can fish. My
average
size bass this year would be about 2 pounds +, I plan on keeping more
detailed logs next year. like baits and time spent. One thing I won't
track
is money spent :-)


If we had a 12" limit, I'm sure my percent would be a lot higher. But we
don't. Not like it really matters. I enjoy catching them to just about
any
size. I would like ot have a few larger ones this year, though. I think
my
largest is just over 4lb this year.

I used to keep a really detailed log. I think I got so detailed, it
became
a hassle, and I gave up on it. I'm just really hitting the high points on
this log.
--
Andrew Kidd
http://www.amiasoft.com/ - Software for the rest of us!
http://www.rofb.net/ - ROFB Newsgroup Home

I say turn em all loose.

You're extracting some good info from your records Andrew. Maybe some that
you never intended them to reveal. Now you know which lakes offer you the
best chance at bigger bass, and which ones you're more apt not to. That is
cool. 1/35 is not good, I'd be fishing some other lake.

Warren
--
http://www.warrenwolk.com/
http://www.tri-statebassmasters.com
2004 NJ B.A.S.S. Federation State Champions



"Andrew Kidd" wrote in message
news:XYoYc.80969$Fg5.2697@attbi_s53...
"IMKen" wrote in message
...
So why with everybody practicing C&R is this true. Should be more big
fish. Perhaps it will happen in a couple years as all these smallies
grow
up. maybe there are just too many small fish and some need to see the
frying pan?

What do you think?

Ken



Interesting thoughts. I'd had these myself too, except at one of the
closest lakes (pond) to me, I'm 19/36, for over 50%. TI used to have a
lot
of small fish. In another, I'm 1/35. I don't even want to caluclate the
percent on that one, although I've had fun both times out to that lake
this
year. It's been like that for years, even after a slot limit of 12-15
during the last several years. You'd think they'd eventually grow bigger.

I just don't think people were taking out the 12" and less bass. I know I
wasn't. Unfortunately, I'm a little lazy when it comes to the cleaning
fish
part. If I want fish, I typically go out to eat! :-)
--
Andrew Kidd
http://www.amiasoft.com/ - Software for the rest of us!
http://www.rofb.net/ - ROFB Newsgroup Home

So why with everybody practicing C&R is this true.

because we are making them smart and much harder to catch
Ronnie

http://fishing.about.com

I say turn em all loose.


on some lakes that adds to the problem of overpopulation of small bass.
Ronnie

http://fishing.about.com

I've said it before Ronnie, the overpopulation of small bass on any lake is
99% of the time based on an inbalance somewhere in the water's ecosystem.
The problem of stunted fish generally means that those fish don't have
enough to eat. Removing small bass is nothing more than a temporary fix;
It had nothing to do with the cause of the problem & it has no bearing on
solving it.

Balanced ecosystems have a way of mainting healthy populations at all
levels, that's my belief at least.

Warren
--
http://www.warrenwolk.com/
http://www.tri-statebassmasters.com
2004 NJ B.A.S.S. Federation State Champions



"RGarri7470" wrote in message
...
I say turn em all loose.


on some lakes that adds to the problem of overpopulation of small bass.
Ronnie

http://fishing.about.com

I've said it before Ronnie, the overpopulation of small bass on any lake is
99% of the time based on an inbalance somewhere in the water's ecosystem.
The problem of stunted fish generally means that those fish don't have
enough to eat. Removing small bass is nothing more than a temporary fix;
It had nothing to do with the cause of the problem & it has no bearing on
solving it.

Balanced ecosystems have a way of mainting healthy populations at all
levels, that's my belief at least.

Warren
--
http://www.warrenwolk.com/
http://www.tri-statebassmasters.com
2004 NJ B.A.S.S. Federation State Champions



"RGarri7470" wrote in message
...
I say turn em all loose.


on some lakes that adds to the problem of overpopulation of small bass.
Ronnie

http://fishing.about.com

I've said it before Ronnie, the overpopulation of small bass on any lake is
99% of the time based on an inbalance somewhere in the water's ecosystem.
The problem of stunted fish generally means that those fish don't have
enough to eat.

And one reason they don't have enough to eat is there are too many of them.
Remove enough of the small bass that are eating up all the small baitfish and
that allows more baitfish, and more food for the remaining bass, helping to
correct the imbalance. Other than feeding them, I don't know how else to
correct the problem of too little food for too many bass.
Ronnie

http://fishing.about.com

I've said it before Ronnie, the overpopulation of small bass on any lake is
99% of the time based on an inbalance somewhere in the water's ecosystem.
The problem of stunted fish generally means that those fish don't have
enough to eat.

And one reason they don't have enough to eat is there are too many of them.
Remove enough of the small bass that are eating up all the small baitfish and
that allows more baitfish, and more food for the remaining bass, helping to
correct the imbalance. Other than feeding them, I don't know how else to
correct the problem of too little food for too many bass.
Ronnie

http://fishing.about.com

Stunted fish are a DIRECT result of an over-populated water body and
removing fish IS the fix. Warren - think about what you wrote. "Stunted
fish are stunted because they don't have enough to eat and removing small
bass is nothing more than a temporary fix." If you have a limited amount of
food to be distributed amongst say 100 bass, each of those bass will only
get a certain amount of food - and that amount may not be enough to grow.
Maybe it's just enough for "maintenance feeding" - just enough to stay
alive, in other words, without the extra protien and nutrition needed to
metabolize and convert to somatic (body) growth (and increase in length and
weight). Now, if you take away 50 bass of those bass and give them the same
amount of food, each bass gets a larger share and will be able to grow
ultimately larger.

You're partly right in that removing just the small fish is not enough.
With a stunted population, a certain portion of that population NEEDS to be
removed to allow the food resources to be better distribution to the
remaining population - and the removal should include both large fish and
small fish. Large fish eat far more food than small fish do, so the removal
needs to include "some" of the large fish as well to return the water body
to a more balanced situation.

Most biologists you talk to nowadays will talk about "selective harvest" and
a better fisheries management tool over strictly catch-and-release, in most
situations. There are always exceptions - in slow growing, long-lived
species for instance, like muskie or lake trout. But for most basic
warmwater fisheries, harvesting fish is an integral part of fisheries
management. In 2000, I was sent by my Department to take part in the Black
Bass Symposium in St. Louis, Missouri that the American Fisheries Society
and B.A.S.S. put on. It was a 4-day event comprised of bass researchers,
biologists, and managers, giving presentations and papers on their research
and management activities from around the US and Canada. A full text book
has since been published on bass biology and management practices that came
from this symposium. During the symposium I attended multiple
presentations by bass researchers that basically said in some areas of North
America, the "catch-and-release" philosophy was almost having the opposite
effect as people were thinking, in that decreased harvest was resulting in
more bass, but smaller in overall size, bordering on "stunting" in some
populations because of limited food resource availability.

I'll leave it at that. I won't bore people further with bass biology and
management lessons ......

Shawn
n


"go-bassn" wrote in message
...
I've said it before Ronnie, the overpopulation of small bass on any lake
is
99% of the time based on an inbalance somewhere in the water's ecosystem.
The problem of stunted fish generally means that those fish don't have
enough to eat. Removing small bass is nothing more than a temporary fix;
It had nothing to do with the cause of the problem & it has no bearing on
solving it.

Balanced ecosystems have a way of mainting healthy populations at all
levels, that's my belief at least.

Warren
--
http://www.warrenwolk.com/
http://www.tri-statebassmasters.com
2004 NJ B.A.S.S. Federation State Champions



"RGarri7470" wrote in message
...
I say turn em all loose.


on some lakes that adds to the problem of overpopulation of small bass.
Ronnie

http://fishing.about.com