San Diego & SoCal Fishing Forums

Posted: **Fri Feb 23, 2024 8:30 am**

Halibut tastes like “fish”. If you cooked a fillet of halibut and bass without any seasoning, one would taste like a jersey mikes level fish, the other one like a premade sandwich from 7-11. If you disagree you don’t have taste buds. I couldn’t care less about how many people have eaten bass in their lives. They’re gross. People also buy salmon and tilapia from Vons and think fish tastes good. Mahi Mahi is good. It’s not halibut or even yellowtail though. Fish isn’t fish that’s a ridiculous take

Posted: **Fri Feb 23, 2024 3:31 pm**

Here are von Bertalanffy Growth Curves of LMB from Sutherland using data collected in the early 1960's (LaFaunce et al 1964), most of the 1980's (Bottroff 1987) and in 2015 (OEHHA data 2016). The biggest variable from the early 1960's to now is the difference in exploitation (harvest) of LMB and how that contributes to growth.

La Faunce et al (1964) found that exploitation was 35-48% of the harvestable population resulting in total mortality of 55-83% of the population at that time. The growth rates were the best of the three vBGF plotted.

Bottroff (1987) found that exploitation was 18-35% with total mortality at 22-46% in the 1980's. The growth rates were intermediate.

The 2015 OEHHA data shows the worst growth rates taking 2x-3x as long to reach 300 mm as it used to. Exploitation rates at all of the SoCal lakes CDFW has conducted angler surveys since 2008 (San V, El Cap, Lower Otay, Murray, Perris, DVL and Skinner) show 0.5-2% exploitation rates with total mortality likely 15-20% given how natural mortality averages 15-20% under average conditions. Sutherland anglers have not been surveyed, but I don't believe their tendencies toward releasing 98-99% of their legal catch varies from every other lake we have studied.

I would love to exactly replicate the study La Faunce and Bottroff conducted but they relied upon anglers bringing fish to a check station and that isn't going to happen. LOL

C&R has absolutely gone too far in my professional opinion based upon the differences observed. Growth rates don't lie.

Posted: **Fri Feb 23, 2024 3:55 pm**

2 factors at play in any body of water when talking about the size or growth rate of fish. first is how much bio-mass a place can hold, not just about volume of water but quality of the water, vegetation, structure, forage etc. the second is the number of fish in the system, that includes all fish, not just the bass. 100 bass that compete with other species within a system will grow slower than 100 bass with no other predatory fish in the same size system.

harvesting fish is the #1 tool for growing more big fish, and them growing faster.

basically they need large areas of good habitat and fewer fish.

for those math guys, if a pond can support 100 1lb bass, it can support 50 2lb bass (give or take)

so it would be harder to find fish in general but the fish would be bigger if we kept more of them.

Posted: **Sat Feb 24, 2024 6:37 am**

A listing of measured mercury levels is at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_in_fish . The levels will vary depending on where the fish are caught. Despite the mercury hazard, fish consumption overall correlates with better health. The larger predator fish (tuna, sharks, swordfish) are the highest risk. Freshwater bass are not on the list but are probably higher than yellow perch for the same environment.

San Diego Bay is probably the riskiest source of fish locally as there used to be a lot of polluting from plating ship building operations.
https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/ne ... story.html

Although Mission Bay typically measures higher in bacterial count (especially after a rain), as long as those fish are cooked they are much safer than the ones from San Diego Bay.

If anyone wants to know for sure, a test kit is available: https://www.attogene.com/shop/mercury-kit-rapid-lab/. Would love to see the results. I have read of people having mercury poisoning from eating tuna sushi every day. https://www.ft.com/content/41ee5670-26f ... cb60e8f08c

Posted: **Sat Feb 24, 2024 9:43 am**

Gotfish? wrote: Sat Feb 24, 2024 6:37 am A listing of measured mercury levels is at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_in_fish . The levels will vary depending on where the fish are caught. Despite the mercury hazard, fish consumption overall correlates with better health. The larger predator fish (tuna, sharks, swordfish) are the highest risk. Freshwater bass are not on the list but are probably higher than yellow perch for the same environment.

San Diego Bay is probably the riskiest source of fish locally as there used to be a lot of polluting from plating ship building operations.
https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/ne ... story.html

Although Mission Bay typically measures higher in bacterial count (especially after a rain), as long as those fish are cooked they are much safer than the ones from San Diego Bay.

If anyone wants to know for sure, a test kit is available: https://www.attogene.com/shop/mercury-kit-rapid-lab/. Would love to see the results. I have read of people having mercury poisoning from eating tuna sushi every day. https://www.ft.com/content/41ee5670-26f ... cb60e8f08c

I'm surprised that the San Diego bay fish don't have 3 eyes and legs! Between the Navy dumping everything in there for years, and the boatyards sandblasting copper filled paint into the bay, the fish didn't have a chance in the 40s-60s! Yum!

Posted: **Sat Feb 24, 2024 10:47 am**

Queue wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2024 3:31 pm Here are von Bertalanffy Growth Curves of LMB from Sutherland using data collected in the early 1960's (LaFaunce et al 1964), most of the 1980's (Bottroff 1987) and in 2015 (OEHHA data 2016). The biggest variable from the early 1960's to now is the difference in exploitation (harvest) of LMB and how that contributes to growth.

La Faunce et al (1964) found that exploitation was 35-48% of the harvestable population resulting in total mortality of 55-83% of the population at that time. The growth rates were the best of the three vBGF plotted.

Bottroff (1987) found that exploitation was 18-35% with total mortality at 22-46% in the 1980's. The growth rates were intermediate.

The 2015 OEHHA data shows the worst growth rates taking 2x-3x as long to reach 300 mm as it used to. Exploitation rates at all of the SoCal lakes CDFW has conducted angler surveys since 2008 (San V, El Cap, Lower Otay, Murray, Perris, DVL and Skinner) show 0.5-2% exploitation rates with total mortality likely 15-20% given how natural mortality averages 15-20% under average conditions. Sutherland anglers have not been surveyed, but I don't believe their tendencies toward releasing 98-99% of their legal catch varies from every other lake we have studied.

I would love to exactly replicate the study La Faunce and Bottroff conducted but they relied upon anglers bringing fish to a check station and that isn't going to happen. LOL

C&R has absolutely gone too far in my professional opinion based upon the differences observed. Growth rates don't lie.

Sutherland vBGF.jpg

Interesting information! I would like to see how water levels affected those numbers. I don't recall the low water levels in the 60s and 70s that we have experienced in the 2000s. It seems that low water levels effect the fish holding capacity of a given lake! I guess we'll see the effect of low water levels in the future, with the City and State letting the dams at El Cap, Hodges, and Morena go to hell.
I think that Sutherland's percentage of fish taken home might be higher than some of the other lakes, there's a number of people that take a good amount of bass and crappie. It's hard to argue with your growth rate numbers, whatever the cause may be!

Posted: **Sun Feb 25, 2024 12:21 am**

bendopolo 44+ wrote: Wed Feb 21, 2024 1:02 pm Mushrooms are good, especially the blue ones. I just can’t ever remember why.

Oh I know why! I remember at least a few times a year!

Posted: **Sun Feb 25, 2024 9:22 am**

Queue wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2024 3:31 pm Here are von Bertalanffy Growth Curves of LMB from Sutherland using data collected in the early 1960's (LaFaunce et al 1964), most of the 1980's (Bottroff 1987) and in 2015 (OEHHA data 2016). The biggest variable from the early 1960's to now is the difference in exploitation (harvest) of LMB and how that contributes to growth.

La Faunce et al (1964) found that exploitation was 35-48% of the harvestable population resulting in total mortality of 55-83% of the population at that time. The growth rates were the best of the three vBGF plotted.

Bottroff (1987) found that exploitation was 18-35% with total mortality at 22-46% in the 1980's. The growth rates were intermediate.

The 2015 OEHHA data shows the worst growth rates taking 2x-3x as long to reach 300 mm as it used to. Exploitation rates at all of the SoCal lakes CDFW has conducted angler surveys since 2008 (San V, El Cap, Lower Otay, Murray, Perris, DVL and Skinner) show 0.5-2% exploitation rates with total mortality likely 15-20% given how natural mortality averages 15-20% under average conditions. Sutherland anglers have not been surveyed, but I don't believe their tendencies toward releasing 98-99% of their legal catch varies from every other lake we have studied.

I would love to exactly replicate the study La Faunce and Bottroff conducted but they relied upon anglers bringing fish to a check station and that isn't going to happen. LOL

C&R has absolutely gone too far in my professional opinion based upon the differences observed. Growth rates don't lie.

Sutherland vBGF.jpg

Our lakes haven’t been the same since Larry Bottroff was on the job

Posted: **Sun Feb 25, 2024 9:26 am**

StinkyPinky23 wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2024 8:30 am Halibut tastes like “fish”. If you cooked a fillet of halibut and bass without any seasoning, one would taste like a jersey mikes level fish, the other one like a premade sandwich from 7-11. If you disagree you don’t have taste buds. I couldn’t care less about how many people have eaten bass in their lives. They’re gross. People also buy salmon and tilapia from Vons and think fish tastes good. Mahi Mahi is good. It’s not halibut or even yellowtail though. Fish isn’t fish that’s a ridiculous take

Agree. And since this thread has blown up already, my 3 favorite fish to eat (not in particular order) are halibut, wahoo, and white seabass. Hmmm…nothing freshwater

Posted: **Tue Mar 05, 2024 1:42 pm**

I release all bass from lakes because they don’t appeal to my palate. ( besides the hassle of cleaning them later in the evening) I have released dozens of DD bass ( those I guess I wish to catch again someday… and they have monster genes)
Keeping a few fish if you eat them is ok but areas can get wiped out by over catch and poaching. Larry botroff told me
Thinnng the herd helps to size up the others.
Ocean fish are better eating IMO

Posted: **Tue Mar 05, 2024 2:09 pm**

In my experience, freshwater fish taste has a lot to do with the body of water they come from. Colder bodies definitely taste much better. I’ve had very tasty bass, walleye and crappie from cold lakes (not local). Fish from flowing water tastes better too. It’s all about caring for them too. Gill them while alive to bleed, gut and then immediately throw on ice for 12-24 hours before filleting. That makes the biggest difference.

When all else fails, batter and deep fry for tacos.

Posted: **Tue Mar 05, 2024 4:47 pm**

In the last two days I’ve had a few of the best fish tacos I’ve ever come acrossed. Halibut, swordfish, and a mahi mahi elote taco that made my head explode. I didn’t see any bass, catfish, carp, or even sweet panfish available

Posted: **Tue Mar 05, 2024 6:41 pm**

One of the best fish tacos I ever ate in my life was calico bass. It was also prepared by a 6 figure salary chef aboard an 18million private sport fisher. Lol

San Diego & SoCal Fishing Forums

C&R gone too far?

Re: C&R gone too far?

Re: C&R gone too far?

Re: C&R gone too far?

Re: C&R gone too far?

Re: C&R gone too far?

Re: C&R gone too far?

Re: C&R gone too far?

Re: C&R gone too far?

Re: C&R gone too far?

Re: C&R gone too far?

Re: C&R gone too far?

Re: C&R gone too far?

Re: C&R gone too far?