Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) NO LARGEMOUTH...OH NO!! (Read 20546 times)
Larry S.
Ex Member


NO LARGEMOUTH...OH NO!!
12/15/04 at 18:27:44
Quote Print Post  
The permits just came and it is going to be interesting!!!
Banks Lake and Columbia River at Wallula are .....gulp.....

SMALLMOUTH ONLY!


Sorry had to get off the floor......

Yes it was decided that Smallies will be only target fish for these two fisheries....as far as I know there is no options and the waters will be fished thus-ly.
For Wallula it will not hurt as bad as Banks during the Jamborree as some of our members have targeted the Largemouth but this is a challenge and we will have to re-tool.........Thank goodness it was'nt Potholes!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Admin
Forum Administrator
*****
Offline


I love YaBB!

Posts: 2
Location: The Land of YaBB
Joined: 11/08/05
Re: NO LARGEMOUTH...OH NO!!
Reply #1 - 12/15/04 at 18:57:59
Quote Print Post  
Who's brilliant idea in the WDF was that? Since when did the permits force an either/or format, and why then not for the other lakes?

I'm confused here.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Larry S.
Ex Member


Re: NO LARGEMOUTH...OH NO!!
Reply #2 - 12/15/04 at 19:20:32
Quote Print Post  
Hey Glenn.....the permits have always stipulated species and type but this is the first time I have seen this and will be talking with Bruce Baker as to why....I would assume there was a study returned to indicate a risk to Largemouth populations due to mortality of the events prompting a reflex action and for Banks it is possible this is in a master plan for the rehab project....I guess it is time to finally read up on all those signs they had at Banks!!
either way....We are still gonna catch lots of fish and if our mortality numbers continue like this year we shall be fine!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
gotfive
Ex Member


Re: NO LARGEMOUTH...OH NO!!
Reply #3 - 12/15/04 at 20:06:31
Quote Print Post  
Larry - Please let us know as soon as you here from Bruce.  This is completely ridiculous.  This is a topic of MAJOR concern for me.  What is next, only certain waters will be allowed?  I would be interested in what other state agencies may be doing.  If the LM are in that much trouble, why do they not list them as endangered and then we will finally have some money to do something with.  This is an absolute joke.  They must be graduates of the University of the Liberal School of Fisheries.  Not conservation, but preservation.  These people want us all off the planet anyway, so that the animals and fishes can all have a safe life away from us ruthless preditors.  Why are the anglers being punished for a perceived lack of fisheries management?  I am completely pissed about this!!  I despise the way our resources are managed in this state.  They make no sense.  If the biologists and managers continue to manage our precious resources in this haphazard and knee jerk manner, we are doomed to watching the rich fish in private waters on TV on Saturday mornings.  Good Grief, I am just simmering....
Kirk Angry Angry Angry
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Rob M.
Ex Member


Re: NO LARGEMOUTH...OH NO!!
Reply #4 - 12/15/04 at 20:22:44
Quote Print Post  
My thoughts are......If they feel a species is in need of rejuvenation, why don't they built some restocking program? Look at what they do in the South, especially Texas. They actually grow and restock bass like we (WA) do with salmon. Now I know that won't happen because bass isn't as popular as salmon, but is still is a better solution if they feel there is a problem. I personally think they may feel the smallmouth are overcrowding. In this case, you change the allowed limits for smallmouth bass. I would keep and eat some smallies if it was better for the fishery.

My question is...So largemouth have to be released if caught in a tournament and won't count for your weight?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Nick
Ex Member


Re: NO LARGEMOUTH...OH NO!!
Reply #5 - 12/15/04 at 20:29:41
Quote Print Post  
Hey maybe we should see if their is anyway we can do a stocking program ouselves for banks and thecolumbia. Any help could make a difference. It took some small timers to make a big difference in our world.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Larry S.
Ex Member


Re: NO LARGEMOUTH...OH NO!!
Reply #6 - 12/15/04 at 21:20:31
Quote Print Post  
UPDATE.....
Just got off the phone with Bruce Baker at fisheries and here is what has prompted this action....
Largemouth have taken a beating ...especially on the Columbia where they have been caught on tournaments...weighed in...and not returned to largemouth waters and even not to same pool as in when anglers lock through.
This decision was made at the federation and fisheries level and I shall try to get more info from Gary Morris at the federation.
This action is described as a test for this year and will be re-evaluated.
I asked him if there will be exceptions as for the Jamborree and was told "This stands for all tournaments" so time to get the smally notes out and someone get Kirk a hose to cool off with!

p.s. the phones are ringing off the hook at fisheries so do'nt give up hope!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Sarge
Ex Member


Re: NO LARGEMOUTH...OH NO!!
Reply #7 - 12/15/04 at 21:22:38
Quote Print Post  
As weird as this rule sounds, I think we should wait for the entire story before flying off the handle. I can't think of one off the top of my head, but maybe there is a good reason for these decisions.

Larry will be talking to Bruce, and I just sent an email off to him asking for the story, so more info should follow!

Chris

P.S. Kirk, I know you were probably just taking a friendly shot at me, but you've got it backwards... UW fisheries usually gets blamed when people OVERHARVEST fish, not underharvest.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Sarge
Ex Member


Re: NO LARGEMOUTH...OH NO!!
Reply #8 - 12/15/04 at 21:29:21
Quote Print Post  
Oops. Sorry Larry, my last post came up just after yours.

Based on what you said, this sounds like an ill-conceived rule. It is especially disturbing that tournament anglers are being punished when it sounds like the recreational person will still get to keep largemouth in the same manner as always. To be consistent, it would only be fair if largemouth harvest stopped all-together.

As far as trying to improve largemouth conditions on the Columbia River... well, even though it is dammed, there is still a lot of current and it is just a fact that there isn't much largemouth habitat in a rocky river with few backwaters. I don't think banning largemouth fishing is going to improve their numbers.

I don't see this rule change standing up to the barrage of angry anglers. I will definitely be phoning and writing a letter, and everyone else should too!

Chris
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Larry S.
Ex Member


Re: NO LARGEMOUTH...OH NO!!
Reply #9 - 12/15/04 at 22:00:48
Quote Print Post  
Just rifled off an e-mail to Gary Morris at the Federation so we shall see....their website has no info.......
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
basspro
Ex Member


Re: NO LARGEMOUTH...OH NO!!
Reply #10 - 12/15/04 at 22:28:22
Quote Print Post  
I can understand the river issue, but tottaly confused about Banks. Not happy with the decision made in the state about both, but if it comes to pass, we will all have to make adjustments to our game plans this season or say the heck with it and go fish BASS opens.
RB
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Larry S.
Ex Member


Re: NO LARGEMOUTH...OH NO!!
Reply #11 - 12/15/04 at 22:58:34
Quote Print Post  
The Jamborree will be extra tough as they now have the Junior bassmaster qualifier there and OUR STATES kids will not be able to utilize Largemouth....not to mention the kids division in general.

BIGCANOWURMS!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Rob M.
Ex Member


Re: NO LARGEMOUTH...OH NO!!
Reply #12 - 12/15/04 at 23:17:18
Quote Print Post  
Well as for WBC tournaments, it really doesn't hurt us. We don't have Banks this year and most of us would probably have stuck with smallies in Wallula anyways. I caught 2 largemouth in the 7 days I fished Banks through the Jamboree and our tournament last year, so it doesn't bother me.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Sarge
Ex Member


Re: NO LARGEMOUTH...OH NO!!
Reply #13 - 12/16/04 at 00:06:09
Quote Print Post  
Rob,

I don't think this rule is really a matter of whether or not it hurts our tournaments, but more of about whether it is fair to single out tournament anglers and limit their fishing rights when other non-tournament anglers are not limited. Bruce Baker included in a recent email to me that this largemouth rule only applies to tournament folks. My feeling right now is that this rule does not pass the common sense test.

Chris
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
RobAllen
Ex Member


Re: NO LARGEMOUTH...OH NO!!
Reply #14 - 12/16/04 at 01:13:18
Quote Print Post  
I don't know anything about nothing but maybe it has somehting to do with habitat and where  fish get released after a tournament???

I know down here in the Columbia  largemouth and smallmouth  live generally in seperate locations and that smallmouth  will out compete largmouth  got habitat by their numbers..  Maybe WDFW  is afraid  that largemouth are not being returned to their habitat?  Released largemouth could become isolated for the rest of the largemouth population and suffer mortality as a result. Not  of being hooked and released  but being released where they cannot survive???  therefore if you had to release a largemouth as soon as you  catch it  you'd never displace it  from it's habitat..
Just a thought  from a guy who  doesn't know what he is talking about:)
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo