Bass Vulnerability to fishing video

[MSURoss]

Here is a VERY interesting study on how fishing pressure affects spawn fishing and many other things!

http://129.15.97.19/bass/Philipp_2/Philipp_2.html

[MSURoss]

This video of a northern study shows the dangers of fishing for males protecting eggs and fry....

http://129.15.97.19/bass/Phiipp_1/Phiipp_1.html

[djkimmel]

Referring to the first link, I didn't find it that interesting. Here's why. This is not a new thing. It has been studied before. Especially down south where anglers would demand that more bass are stocked because their catch rates go down over time on new reservoirs. So they took a lake similar to what they did here, but bigger and public, and to save everyone a long, somewhat similar story, they found there will still plenty of bass in the lake. An excellent population. The bass were just not as easy to catch anymore. Big surprise.

That is actually one of the possible benefits of bass fishing all year - during the spawn more of the bass may be harder to catch eventually in general. Some people don't like this possibility. They want to bass to be easy to catch.

Easy. Hard. That's all relative to many factors, not just how used to being fished for the bass are. The skill of the angler. Familiarity with the water. Weather patterns. Time of year.

Here's what I noticed about this study. When they drained that 15 ACRE lake, there were 1,785 adult bass in the lake!!! That is an amazing number of bass per acre for any lake, especially in the North part of the country. DESPITE more than double the captures of the adult population over 4 years.

Nowhere in the study did he mention ANY effect on the actual bass population numbers in a negative way. The effect was the bass may get harder to catch and more of the bass may not be as good 'dads.' Yet, that 15 ACRE lake still had 1,785 adult bass in it!!! That is 119 adult bass per acre!! That is a super dense population.

Apparently, 'lazier' largemouth bass dads still did a pretty darn good job getting bass into the population.

I really like what Dennis Lee, a senior fisheries biologist in California, who has spent 30 years researching and managing fisheries, had to say when B.A.S.S. interviewed him back in 2008: www.bassmaster.com/news/ethics-bed-fishing - he was replying to comments Randy Blaukat made against bed fishing:

"When you talk about 'honor' and 'respect,' it has nothing to do with the biological world. The lion does not honor and respect the gazelle it takes down; it eats it as part of the food web. That's the biological system. When you start throwing in those social aspects, it's a whole different ball game. If you want to justify bed fishing socially, you can argue it. It's a philosophical argument. You may not like it. You may not want to see other people doing it. You may not practice it yourself — those are your decisions. But all those have nothing to do with the biology of the system."

You should read the article and see what he has to say after that. It is what I have been going by for a long time. I've read his information, information put out through Humboldt University, studies from Texas, Florida, MICHIGAN (going back all the way to 1950), Illinois, Ontario, you name it, on bass populations and fishing practices. And they have all reached the same conclusion. Closed bass seasons take away fishing opportunity. They do not effectively protect bass populations. I have the study on Lake St. Clair bass by our MDNR that said there was no scientific justification for that season to open any later than the rest of the state, yet they chose to leave it as is because the anglers didn't want it changed.

I prefer science, and letting individual anglers decide if they personally want to fish during any particular time of the year or not. Already, the great majority of bass anglers in Michigan have personally decided to voluntarily practice catch and release.

I definitely listen a lot less to any angler who tries to debate with me over the social aspects of bed fishing, and then goes out and does it too. I've had plenty tell me they were opposed to the season we have now, but in the very next breath tell me if I 'won' they would be out there right alongside me. Doesn't give much credibility to a point of view does it? If you're against it, then don't do it. That is what I would say to Randy Blaukat and anyone like him. Since, on average, only about 1/3 of the adult bass population spawns in any one year, he still has 2/3's of the bass to fish for like everyone else without ever going near a bed!

[MSURoss]

I definitely found your opinion more interesting! 

[djkimmel]

Interesing, our own MDNR did a study some time ago similar to their 'small ponds with different levels of angling pressure' so that isn't even a new thing without leaving Michigan. It was actually a more direct study because they used a different pond for each level of fishing pressure, and catch and release practices. They found pretty much the same answers everyone else has found as far as how bass react to being caught and how it seems to affect the overall numbers. Still plenty of bass. Some just get harder to catch. Some don't. They are most likely to be caught and kept though the high level of catch and release voluntarily practiced lessens that.

I really like the short I've seen on TV a few times lately from well-known bass biologist Hal Schramm urging bass anglers to be more knowledgeable about what they are asking biologists to do when it comes to wanting more bass stocked. Believe me, I have heard this many times over the years just in Michigan. He points out how numerous studies have shown that stocking more bass into most existing populations results in little or no return of additional catch-able bass and do you really want your limited fisheries dollars spent inefficiently like this? That is the kind of truth and information I expect good fisheries biologists to share with the public! Whether it is easy to share it or hard. The truth is always better for everyone if enough people listen with their brain.

[djkimmel]

As far as that second audio, I have read David Philipp's studies. I have read AND talked at length to the Ontario biologist who is really the driving force behind the studies in Ontario he is talking about - Mark Ridgway. Ridgway has been trying for a long time to prove a direct relationship between fishing for spawning bass and bass recruitment that affects populations negatively. Something they claim has not been studied much though I have found plenty of studies and talked to biologists all over the country about the large number of studies on bass seasons, fishing, bass recruitment and related factors.

Did you notice Philipp never once said there are any bass populations were a population failure has actually occurred due to bed fishing? He used the word 'hypotheses' quite a few times because they don't have any live examples EVEN in Ontario. Even though they admitted illegal bed fishing has occurred for many years as it has in Michigan, and pretty much everywhere else there are the 4 or 5 closed bass seasons of any impact. A few states even threw in the towels on keeping the season closed when it became obvious to too many people that the spring / spawn fishing was going anyway for many years, yet no 'big collapse' has ever occurred. Eventually, people actually can come to the conclusions that have been staring them in the face for so long.

I will save anyone who doesn't want to read a lot by going right to the KEY question right now. I know, because I asked Ridgway this question during our last Michigan season change effort. A few people in the MDNR were quoting him quite a bit at that time.

In all your attempts at studying the relationship between bed fishing and bass recruitment over all these years, what have you proven? Answer: He does not want a bunch of angry anglers or, especially, other fisheries biologists calling him, so he asked I don't quote him publicly. This, unfortunately, happens too often. My opinion of course is, if you work for the public, you should answer their questions publicly, but I understand that some people get upset when they don't get told what they want to hear.

So, I talked to him about his study at length. I asked him about his results in detail. I told him how I was interpreting his results and asked if the following statement was an accurate summary of his results and all he said was, 'yes.'

He's proved that individual smallmouth bass beds may be harmed if the bass is caught by an angler. I can tell you that without any study. Catching any bass at any time of the year can be harmful to that bass. The only way to rid ourselves of that is to stop fishing at all. Think about it. You deep hook a bass in October causing it to bleed all over the boat, have you reduced that chance that bass will successfully spawn in April, May or June the next year? If that is the end result of all this, we should stop fishing. How many of you want to do that?

I talk about my long discussion with Ridgway more in my response to SALBRC a few years ago here http://www.greatlakesbass.com/fishing/mdnrearlybassltr.html if you want to read it. Just pull up the page and search for Ridgway. Some of his studies' other conclusions actually support those of us who don't believe in the completely closed bass, and are even helpful to 'issues' brought up about bass tournaments! Though I don't recall too many people quoting those parts of his conclusions...

I can only imagine how frustrating it must be to try to prove something as long as he has tried to prove it over all this time, and not prove anything new about bed fishing verses bass recruitment that affects the population. Philipp says their hypotheses is that all the bedding bass will be caught on this one 150 acre lake, but he doesn't mention that most bass populations do not have all the bass spawn at the same time. He does not mix in their own results that as you fish for bass more, they get harder to catch! Or again, their own result - 'we generally can't say seasons do too much for bass populations because the openers are usually fixed while the spawn is a variable occurrence.' Again, many biologists I've talked to stated this as another reason they don't feel a closed bass season is necessary. You can't pick the same date each year and protect bass the same each year. Does anyone need me to explain why? Hopefully, on this website, the answer is no.

With that fact alone, how successful can anyone really claim a long term closed season with a bass opener that falls on the same date every year regardless of weather patterns, drought, rainfall, that obviously opens during and before many bass have spawned many years - how many people can really believe that arbitrary date has any involvement in protection and enhancement of the bass population? Scientifically, it does not add up. Which is why you now have only about 4 significant closed bass seasons in the entire US.

Almost no state or province's longstanding closed seasons actually protect most of the bass spawn year to year! Philipp and Ridgway never mention the big one, DID THEY ACTUALLY SHOW A NEGATIVE POPULATION EFFECT FROM BED FISHING? They never once say they have answered how many successful beds does a lake need and how much actual recruitment! I can tell you there are studies out there that actually do answer that question and you might be very surprised what the answer is. I have read them.

In all my years of reading the studies and asking the researchers about their actual conclusions, I have asked Ridgway, and many other biologists, how many beds in a lake need to be 'successful' for a bass population to sustain itself. The most common answer: "Don't know."

I asked him, and many other biologists, how many bass does any lake need to recruit each year for the population to sustain itself? Most common answer: "Don't know."

These are localized answers usually thinking about each biologists' local waters. I have found studies that indicate on many smaller lakes like we have in Michigan, as few as 2 or 3 successful beds can produce enough bass to sustain the entire bass population! Why? Because bass are big panfish. They are extremely successful at what they do! Despite Philipp making it seem like fishing is a new thing in their evolution that could tip the balance, over 50 years of studies from North to South say that the general fishing levels with the voluntary catch and release in general show that bass fishing pressure is not a significant enough factor to impact most bass populations. All the factors he said are the generally accepted factors - weather, environment, excess production, those things ARE the factors that make a difference from year to year for bass populations. That HAS been proven over and over and over. North to South. By many studies.

Man can impact fish populations. I'm not saying we can't. But when we do, it is almost always something other than fishing. Pollution. Water restriction or the opposite. Something significant we do to the environment, not the the bass. Even when people think a small lake has been fished out, that isn't always true as a number of studies have shown how bass can become more difficult to catch. The bass are often still there in good numbers.

[djkimmel]

We have very little water in and around Lansing. A number of years ago, anglers started complaining about how tough the Grand River was getting here in Lansing. When my friend and I started, we only had one evening tournament every other week. With the increase in popularity of tournaments, the newer batch of anglers were having up to 5 nightly tournaments every week on our few waters. Lots of anglers mostly fished the river. The river rats. It was getting pounded. Besides several nights a week there were many weekend events too.

Add in all the other anglers who also fish there all the time, fFishing pressure was up quite a bit. Catches overall dropped off. Less and smaller bass were being weighed in, especially over the summer months. I was fishing more tournaments out of the area so I caught wind late about how far the complaining had gone. A group of anglers was demanding the MDNR stock bass in the Grand River. The catch-all answer that really doesn't work great when it comes to bass in most situations.

So the MDNR came down to the Grand River in Lansing and surveyed the bass. Guess what they found? A reasonably good number of bass of all sizes including a solid, healthy population of adult bass. The number was pretty good for the water. And as knowledgeable people know, adding more bass through stocking to a healthy population usually just means more fish get to eat a bunch of small bass. So the MDNR said no to stocking. I found out about that time and applauded them for doing the right thing.

Some anglers grumbled.  Doubted. Questioned. Then they started to do what anglers often do. They fished the river less. Know what happened next? Yeah, the bass fishing started getting 'better' again. Sheesh! All you had to do was go down there early in the year and see how many beds were visible. Or go their late in the years OR even just go there in the middle of the week, and the fishing was a lot better. The bass were there. They still are. Fishing pressure is down again now and the fishing is getting better again.

You can find more information about bass biology and management on GreatLakesBass.com here: http://www.greatlakesbass.com/fishing/bassbiomgmt1.htm#BassBio

At the top is our own study that we recently did and I'm very familiar with,having spent quite some time discussing the study with the well-respected MDNR fisheries researcher who headed it up. You'll even see in another state's biologist comments where he is mentioned as a well-respected researcher, and that they also followed his study results. His short answer is 'we found what we already knew we would find.'

You definitely want to read the conclusions (below my commentary) from New York fisheries biologists at the bottom of the second link on the Biology Pages from a study they performed about the same time 'SALBRC' was put out. Pretty much says what I was saying during that whole process. It was not colored by any attitudes, just the known facts and science. The way it should be. Please remember, if you read it, that my commentaries at the time were not really directed at the entire MDNR. They have people within that I greatly respect and trust. My commentary was always directed at the small group of people who put out 'SALBRC' and were working pretty hard to take away even more bass fishing opportunity from Michigan anglers. I did fight that very hard. That time has passed in Michigan. Hopefully forever. The findings of these other Northern fisheries biologists in New York speak for themselves quite well.

The short collection of comments from various fisheries biologists from the North and South on closed bass seasons is also very interesting. You can scroll below my commentary to see the answers they all gave me when asked about their bass seasons. http://www.greatlakesbass.com/fishing/fishbio_interviews.html These were not handpicked biologists. I just called each state and asked to speak to someone who could talk to me about their bass season. I actually had quite a few more interviews but many biologists are publicity shy as I have mentioned above.

Maybe if more of them were willing to speak to the public about the actual conclusions of the various studies honestly and openly this wouldn't all be so difficult? The biologists in Maryland told their bass anglers no when they wanted to give up fishing opportunity that would not accomplish what they wanted to give it up for. Even the MDNR said no to stocking more bass in a good population in the Grand River in Lansing. I admired that greatly!

[MSURoss]

Thanks for the great information Dan, never knew any of this!

[djkimmel]

Thanks for reading it!