anglers need to hear and understand this...

[Queue]

[DarkShadow]

Queue,

What are the methods that the DFW uses to estimate fish population and size?

[Queue]

Pop’n size is estimated by using multiple mark/recapture sampling with Schnabel and Shumacher/Eschmeyer statistical analysis

Fish size is measured by total length and weight. These measures are then used to calculate things like Proportional Stock Distribution and Relative Weights to determine population structure, health and condition.

[DarkShadow]

Pop’n size is estimated by using multiple mark/recapture sampling with Schnabel and Shumacher/Eschmeyer statistical analysis

Fish size is measured by total length and weight. These measures are then used to calculate things like Proportional Stock Distribution and Relative Weights to determine population structure, health and condition.

I'm focusing on population count, rather than actual fish size of the fish you DO happen to sample. I notice you say, 'estimated.' Im curious what the margin of error you have calculated from the collection methods.

So, in layman's terms, that means you ask anglers at the dock what they caught, in conjunction with electroshocking <1% of the lake as your collection methods?

Also, it seems that the selective harvest suggestions always came from bodies of water where they don't have 20 million people located next to it. Al Linder of the InFisherman fame was a big advocate of the selective harvest mentality, but many, if not all, of the bodies of water he was referring to, rarely saw a fisherman. Is SoCal the same?

Has DFW done actual studies regarding how selective harvest affects OUR specific bodies of water, or are you just simply posting YouTube videos that talk about selective harvest from bodies of water that are the polar opposite than the waters that we have here in SoCal? If I kept every 12" fish that I caught from my local pond, I'd be shooting myself in the foot.

So, what happened to DVL? We still gonna use 'water level fluctuation?' as the reason why the fishery went to #hit? Because it seems that you're saying that if we take all the 1 pounders from DVL, that lake will suddenly rebound with the 5 pounders that were running around years ago. I highly doubt that considering the elephant in the room, that the DFW continues to ignore. Much like Castaic. Let's not blame the lack of bluegill that killed that trophy fishery.

What say you?

[camobass]

Lake schedules, open times, access limitations, cost of permits, launch fees and California view point priorities are affecting the size of bass locally…. These economical times, I’m surprised the bass can even afford to eat!

[Queue]

The population estimates are 95% confidence intervals. So basically, there is a 95% chance the actual population is within the upper and lower bounds of the confidence interval. For example, this last spring we collected and marked 3,437 LMB larger than 12" from Lake Skinner over 4 laps around the entire perimeter of the lake, which resulted in a Schnabel Estimate of 3,957-4,908 fish over 12" and a Sch-Esch of 3,901-5,193. The population is likely to be within the bounds of these estimates with 95% confidence. So, when compared to the last population estimate we conducted 10 years ago when we collected and marked 3,079 LMB over 4 laps around the entire lake the estimates were 4,071-5,197 and 4,226-5,115 respectively. From this I can say the population is relatively stable and unchanged from 10 years ago.

Anglers are asked about their days efforts, with some of that information to infer what the harvest rates are. For example, from 2013-2023 at DVL, anglers reported catching 43,205 legal sized LMB and kept 488 for a 1.1% harvest rate. Skinner anglers caught 8,399 legals with 280 harvested for a 3.3% harvest rate. Perris anglers 2020-2023 reported 8,524 legal LMB caught with 68 harvested for a 0.7% harvest rate. The overall harvest rate at all three is 1.3%. Based upon a couple studies done by L Bottroff in the 70's-80's, exploitation (harvest) used to be 20-40%. This also is when larger bass were seen with greater frequency than they are today. It is not a coincidence.

At the moment, CDFW cannot do studies to evaluate selective harvest because anglers almost unanimously have decided amongst themselves to voluntarily release 98-99% of the legal sized bass they catch. I would love to replicate the studies that Bottroff did back then where he marked a batch of fish by electrofishing and set up a check station to look at all of the fish that were taken out of each of the lakes that were studied. The reality is that anglers won't bring us anything these days. Period.

The fact that biologists across the nation whom I've never met or talked with are seeing the very same things I am seeing here speaks to the erroneously adopted belief that C&R is good for growing bigger bass. It obviously is not.

Are you catching more bigger bass? I'm going to say you aren't, because no one is. Big LMB don't exist as they used to. Harvest is the most widely used variable we have control of in fisheries management and the lack of active participation by anglers over the last couple decades is a huge reason why bigger bass don't exist. Anglers need to harvest fish for regulations to work, if they don't, we end up where we are at the moment.

[twin22s]

Sometimes we forget that the goal of DFW isn't to produce a few large fish, but rather a sustainable population, they don't care if there are 1 million 1lb bass, they actually prefer that to there being 500,000 2lb bass, because that's 2x as many bass so that's better right? obviously the dynamic is complicated and specific to each body of water, so in order to keep things simple the rules are based on what is best for the majority of lakes. privatization doesn't seem to help either as most private lakes are C&R only, lakes being closed more days than open and a lack of active lake management are all factors. In over populated lakes you could keep every fish you are legally allowed to and not make a dent, in other lakes keeping too many bass would tilt the balance toward competing species and do long term damage.

[camobass]

I definitely believe harvest is a factor. Take tweakers for instance. Modern day tweakers aren’t into fishing like the old school guys. Back in the day, there were a lot of guys smoking the pipa and taking out over limits all over Sd at night…Back in the day for some odd reason, there were a lot more bigger fish being caught... Then take technology into the mix. Tresbassers take a lot more risk these days with cameras everywhere you turn, flir you name. This has all dealt a major dent into the harvest of bass…

[Queue]

Sometimes we forget that the goal of DFW isn't to produce a few large fish, but rather a sustainable population, they don't care if there are 1 million 1lb bass, they actually prefer that to there being 500,000 2lb bass, because that's 2x as many bass so that's better right? obviously the dynamic is complicated and specific to each body of water, so in order to keep things simple the rules are based on what is best for the majority of lakes. privatization doesn't seem to help either as most private lakes are C&R only, lakes being closed more days than open and a lack of active lake management are all factors. In over populated lakes you could keep every fish you are legally allowed to and not make a dent, in other lakes keeping too many bass would tilt the balance toward competing species and do long term damage.

If your statement was true, I wouldn’t post a link to information also advocating for more harvest to improve trophy bass fishing. I have been attempting to educate anglers on this subject over the last 10-15 years and not seen any change by the user group to actually achieve the ego boosting grade of fish in which.they seek. It will take time and persistent effort but increasing exploitation will shift the population dynamics in favor of trophy bass production. It’s in the angler’s hands to execute.

[twin22s]

If your statement was true, I wouldn’t post a link to information also advocating for more harvest to improve trophy bass fishing. I have been attempting to educate anglers on this subject over the last 10-15 years and not seen any change by the user group to actually achieve the ego boosting grade of fish in which.they seek. It will take time and persistent effort but increasing exploitation will shift the population dynamics in favor of trophy bass production. It’s in the angler’s hands to execute.

I didn't realize we had someone on the inside advocating for fewer but bigger fish, I agree with the principle. But I myself haven't kept a bass to eat since I was a kid and gut hooked a fish in a farm pond in OK. I keep and eat fish often in the ocean but rarely bring the required cooler/ice to a lake unless I'm trout fishing, I'm sure I'd get a lot of weird looks and possibly harassed if I put a couple 2-3lb bass in an ice chest in front of the wrong guy. keeping smaller bass doesn't have the same effect and a 4+ lb fish would be hard to justify keeping even though it would probably do the most good to remove to reduce total bass population. I am not a trophy hunter, so the biggest fishing in the lake being 8lbs doesn't bother me, my PB is 6lbs I'll have to look up the regs in my local lakes and see where I could even keep a bass. I usually try to catch and eat striper if they are present in the waters I'm fishing, make room for more LMBs, but I understand the overlap is minimal.

[Ol Dirty Basser]

I have been hearing this sentiment for a couple of years now. @Queue, having some knowledge of your background I put a lot of weight into you as a source.

I am buying into it. The problem is that after almost 40 years of bass fishing, and having a C&R mindset through the whole journey, I don't really want to keep bass. I recently took my nephew fishing and sent him home with a clone-sized bass, just to make an effort to change. I would have made it two to make a better meal, but I thought of it late in the day and finished with a 3+ pounder.

I may try to keep one/some for myself one of these days, but it's going to be hard. I'm also a little fearful of opening up Pandora's Box telling everybody it's OK to keep bass now.