Big Indiana Bass

The Economic Impact of Bass Tourneys

One of the first arguments bass anglers like to make whenever tourneys are questioned, is that they bring a significant economic impact to an area where they are held. While it is probably an economy of scale thing, a news story in The Daily Commercial (Talavares, FL) detailing the economic specifics of January's Bass Pro Shops Southern Division Bassmaster Open on the Harris Chain of Lakes provides some interesting data that backs that argument up.

Some highlights from the story include;

• 400 anglers participated, and brought as many as 400 guests with them.
• 108 (27%) of the anglers were from Florida, while the other 73% represented 31 other states and 2 other countries.
• Paid lodging nights (hotel room nights) totaled 1,846.
• After lodging, meals, fuel, bait (artificial), etc., direct economic impact came out to about $553,000. Indirect/induced economic impact, a somewhat more vague figure calculated by multiplying the direct calculated figure X's 3, amounted to another $1.65 million.

For more specifics on the study, the most complete economic survey of an event the city has conducted, as well as term definitions used in the article, click the link above in the opening paragraph.

The Impact of Line Damage on Monofilament Strength

Effect of Surface Damage on Tensile and Fatigue Properties of Nylon Fishing Line

Worawit Wanchana , Haruyuki Kanehiro and Hiroshi Inada

From the file of 'things you already knew, but needed a research study to prove'. You know the importance of checking your line frequently for nicks and abrasions, but this study quantified the degree to what effect that has on overall line strength (tensile strength). While the authors used very heavy tuna fishing line (monofilament of 150 and 400 lb. test) for this study, the findings should be pretty applicable across a wide range of monofilament line sizes, and if anything, the smaller sizes of line bass and recreational users utilize is probably more a concern relative to nicks due to less 'room for error'.

Here are some of the findings from the paper;

• Tensile tests indicated that the strength of notched nylon monofilaments was rapidly decreased with increasing notch depth, and that between thicker and thinner nylon monofilaments, the decrease in the tensile strength of the heavier line was steeper than that of the thinner line.
• It was shown that nylon monofilament absorbed in total about 5% water (the equilibrium state), and took about 10-14 days to do so. This time period should be much shorter for thinner monofilaments used by anglers, and many studies done by various persons or sites when testing lines have typically used soak times of between 2 to 6 hours.
• The tensile strength for the wet samples of both lines was about 10% lower than for the dry ones. This is a pretty well documented fact with monos.
• The tensile strength of both nylon monofilaments decreased about 30-50% with only a 10% (vs. total diameter) notch depth. This drives home the point that even a tiny nick or gash in your line can severely weaken it's overll strength.
• When comparing between dry and wet tensile strength of the same diameter and notch depth samples, it appeared that the tensile strength of wet notched samples were similar to dry samples.
• In the case of un-marred wet monofilament, the loss in breaking strength occurred after absorbing water due to the weakening of the line from water absorption. For notched wet samples, it appears that the surface damage has a more significant effect on the loss in breaking strength than that of weakening after absorbing water.

So the best advice and line of caution should be to A.) check your line frequently for any nicks or abrsions while fishing, and B.) if you notice or feel anything unusual, you should immediately cut off the bad section and retie on to a fresh section of line. As always, it's better to be safe than sorry. You just never know what your next cast might hook.

Largemouth Bass and Fish Leeches - A Story

This post is a great example of why I love the Internet. It starts out with an observation I've made several times over the past 10 years or so while bass fishing, that being the prevalence in some waters for bass to have very small leeches attached inside their mouths. Cool thing I noticed, but never thought much more about it. Then recently I stumble upon this piece of research and the lightbulb goes off - this is what I've been seeing.

High prevalence of buccal ulcerations in largemouth bass, Micropterus salmoides (Centrarchidae) from Michigan inland lakes associated with Myzobdella lugubris Leidy 1851 (Annelida: Hirudinea).

Faisal M, Schulz C, Eissa A, Whelan G.

Widespread mouth ulcerations were observed in largemouth bass collected from eight inland lakes in the Lower Peninsula of Michigan during the summer months of 2002 and 2003. These ulcerations were associated with, and most likely caused by, leech parasitism. Through the use of morphological dichotomous keys, it was determined that all leeches collected are of one species: Myzobdella lugubris. Among the eight lakes examined, Lake Orion and Devils Lake had the highest prevalence of leech parasitism (34% and 29%, respectively) and mouth ulcerations (53% and 68%, respectively). Statistical analyses demonstrated that leech and ulcer prevalence varied significantly from one lake to the other. Additionally, it was determined that the relationship between the prevalence of ulcers and the prevalence of leech attachment is significant, indicating that leech parasitism is most likely the cause of ulceration. The ulcers exhibited deep hemorrhagic centers and raised irregular edges. Affected areas lost their epithelial lining and submucosa, with masses of bacteria colonizing the damaged tissues. Since largemouth bass is a popular global sportfish and critical to the food web of inland lakes, there are concerns that the presence of leeches, damaged buccal mucosa, and general unsightliness may negatively affect this important sportfishery.

Then, of course, finding one study leads to a list of references and more searching, and I find another paper;

• Epidemic oral ulceration in largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) associated with the leech Myzobdella lugubris

which backs the first one nicely, actually coming out much earlier and from the east coast, and assures me this is what I've been noticing. The cycle continues as I now learn that this particular leech is highly present in the freshwater fishes of Lake St. Clair;

• Leeches (Annelida: Hirudinida) Parasitizing Fish of Lake St. Clair, Michigan, U.S.A.

and most recently, this leech was found to be able to harbor the disease Viral Hemorrhagic Septicemia virus (VHSV) and is highly likely the/a vector for the transmission of this fish killer;

• Detection of Viral Hemorrhagic Septicemia virus (VHSV) from the leech Myzobdella lugubris Leidy, 1851

which brings this story full circle for me, as this disease and the subsequent federal ban on transportation of game fish from and between Great Lakes states several years back was the reason we didn't get our local lake stocked that year with fish from a hatchery in Wisconsin that I had ordered. It really is a small world after all...

The Best Time to Go Fishing is When You Can

Long-Term Changes in Recreational Catch Inequality in a Trout Stream

David A. Seekella, Chase J. Brosseaub, Timothy J. Clinec, Raymond J. Winchcombed & Lee J. Zinnce

We've covered the topic of catch inequality before, the theory or statement you hear all the time about 10% of the anglers catching 90% of the fish. You can find that original piece in our articles section with the title, MythBusting: 10% of Anglers Catch 90% of Fish. It talks about Gini coefficients, Lorenz curves, and other fancy terms researchers use to describe and model this axiom. This new paper looks at catches from a single body of water over 20 years during a significant period of decline in catch per unit effort (CPUE). In other words, the fishery kept getting tougher as less fish were caught in any given year for the same or increased amount of fishing effort. The hypothesis on the table was whether between-angler inequality increases as catch per unit effort declines. That is, do we see an even bigger differences between catches of very skilled anglers and less skilled anglers as a fishery gets worse.

Without getting into too much scientific gore, researchers found that "catch per unit effort still plays a critical role in determining the magnitude of catch inequality."  That is, on lakes where the average number of fish caught by an anglers per hour of effort is high, catch inequality is low. On the other hand, when fish captured are few and far between, greater inequality exists among anglers, or a small percentage accounts for a majority of the fish caught.

The new and interesting result coming out of this study was that trip-to-trip inequality increases with declining catch per unit effort, but between-angler inequality changes very little. Between angler inequality does go up, but not significantly. It's trip-to-trip inequality that accounts for the significant difference. I'll try and put that into simpler terms.

In any given year on a body of water, you have a range of anglers representing all levels of skill and ability; some really good, some not so good. From year to year, individual anglers fishing a body of water may change, but overall you pretty much keep that same general percentage level of both skilled and unskilled anglers in the pool. There's always some good anglers and there's always some not so good, 5 years, 10 years, even 20 years later. As such, inequality between anglers when assessed over the entire angling population over time remains a relative constant. It would be similar to saying that if you looked at the average age of anglers 5 years ago, versus say 5 years from now, it probabaly wouldn't be a whole lot different. There will always be a mix of both young and old anglers, and that age difference between them doesn't change much over the course of time.

What did change significantly though was trip-to-trip variability. So as the fishery went downhill, catching that fishery on a "good day" became much more important than the relative skill level of anglers on that body of water. Catching it on a "good day" equated to environmental randomness. As the researchers stated, this "explains why, on any given trip, a weak angler can be more successful than a skilled angler." It's the 'sucker shot'  played out. Example: you may be an above average fisherman, but the last time you hit "the dead sea", you had blue sky cold front conditions and a 15 mph north wind - you caught some fish, but overall fishing sucked. Your buddy, who isn't near the fisherman you are, hit "the dead sea" on a good cloudy, drizzly day with light winds as a slow moving front was approaching - he wacked them. It really had little to do with his ability, but rather more to do with his timing.

And so this was the end result of this particular piece of research. As a fishery gets tougher and tougher over the years (CPUE declines), catching that body of water "on a good day" becomes the more significant reason for angler inequality among catches. The trick then lies in getting very good at predicting when the "good days" will be (the 'sucker shot'), or simply going every chance you get so when the good days occur, you'll already be there.

**David A. Seekell, Chase J. Brosseau, Timothy J. Cline, Raymond J. Winchcombe & Lee J. Zinn (2011): Long-Term Changes in Recreational Catch Inequality in a Trout Stream, North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 31:6, 1100-1105

White River’s rebound continues after 1999 fish kill

The White River has received its cleanest bill of health since a major fish kill in 1999.

During a fall 2011 fish survey, Indiana Department of Natural Resources biologists collected 7,128 fish from 57 species at sample stations between Anderson and Indianapolis. This was the greatest number of species collected since the fish kill, and further proof that the river has recovered.

In December 1999, an estimated 4.3 million fish died as a result of a fish kill that started at the outfall of the Anderson Waste Water Treatment Plant and stretched 55 miles into downtown Indianapolis. The kill was traced to an industrial discharge from the Guide Corporation in Anderson.

A $6 million settlement overseen by the DNR, the Indiana Department of Environmental Management and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was used to restore the river. A 10-person citizen’s advisory committee assisted the agencies.

“The fish community is healthy and an increase in darters and minnows is an indication of improving habitat and water quality” said Sandra Clark-Kolaks, a DNR fisheries research biologist.

Game species have also recovered since 1999, providing ample angling opportunities. Black bass, rock bass, saugers, crappies, and channel catfish were collected in plentiful numbers.

A total of 154 smallmouth bass ranging from 2.6 to 19.9 inches long were collected, and the number of smallmouth bass greater than 17 inches increased since 2007. A total of 223 largemouth bass ranging from 2.3 to 17.4 inches long were collected.

Of the 186 channel catfish collected 31 percent were longer than 14 inches and 19 percent were longer than 20 inches, with most being collected in the Lake Indy pool. Crappies were most prominent in backwater areas with several black crappies in the 10-to-12-inches size range. Six saugers were collected in the Landings Pit area and ranged in size from 17.5 to 21 inches.

In addition to fish, the White River is home to an abundance of other wildlife. During the fish survey, biologists noted bald eagles, great blue herons, foxes, and white-tailed deer.

“Thanks to fish stockings, monitoring, habitat protection, public access improvements and public awareness, the White River is an excellent recreational opportunity for Indianapolis residents,” said Bill James, DNR chief of fisheries.

James says groups like Friends of the White River and the White River Watchers have also had a major impact on the White River by organizing annual trash cleanups and improving public access.

A list of DNR-managed fishing access sites can be found at the DNR “Where to Fish” finder at http://www.in.gov/dnr/fishwild/3591.htm

A copy of the 2011 White River fish survey report will soon be posted to http://www.in.gov/dnr/fishwild/3352.htm

2011 Midwestern States Bass/Panfish Research Updates - Part II

MISSOURI

Smallmouth Bass Management 2011 Executive Summary

In 2009, the Missouri Department of Conservation (MDC) released two, key smallmouth bass reports, compiling the detailed history of regulations, evaluations and management of this keystone aquatic species in Missouri. To date, there is a total of 358 miles of water on 12 streams with Stream Black Bass Special Managements Areas (SBBSMA) that differ from the statewide regulations. In an effort to expand on information supplied in these reports and the decades of smallmouth bass management in Missouri, in 2010, smallmouth bass managers and researchers were assigned to five committees to further refine future management direction. The following are the brief results, updated progress and planned work by the Smallmouth Bass Work Group and these five committees.

1) Smallmouth Bass Angler Survey Committee

Obtaining information from anglers was a consensus top priority and, although many methods of retrieving this data were discussed, an angler mail survey was chosen. To maximize value, the survey targeted smallmouth bass and rock bass (goggle-eye) anglers to gain valuable information regarding future management of both species. In October of 2010, 100,000 Missouri resident fishing license holders received a screener card, simply asking if they were a smallmouth bass or rock bass angler. If an angler responded yes about fishing for either species, they were mailed the full survey. The survey mailings were stratified toward anglers in southern Missouri while also surveying a representative group of statewide anglers.

2) Smallmouth Bass Stream Evaluation Criteria Committee

This committee was primarily assigned to evaluate and update the criteria used when the 12 SBBSMA areas were created. The following are four key areas of biological evaluation that would need to be addressed, along with social factors before any additional management areas would be considered and/or proposed:

• Are there electrofishing mortality concerns for Species of Conservation Concern or other species evaluation conflicts?
• Are the stream gradient, maximum summer temperature, dissolved oxygen levels, riparian corridor width and watershed health appropriate?
• Are the field habitat observations and fish population indices appropriate?
• Does the outcome of fish population modeling indicate a positive outcome?

3) Smallmouth Bass Research Needs Committee

Two management/evaluation projects have been initiated from recommendations presented by this committee.

a) Identification of smallmouth bass exploitation rates in selected streams – Knowing angler harvest rate is an important part of evaluating the status of smallmouth bass populations, we tagged 1,420 legal sized (12-inch minimum) smallmouth bass in five rivers (Black, Castor, Courtois, Current and North Fork of the White) with angler reward tags in 2011 and plan to repeat in 2012, pending data review and budget approval. Selection of river reach was diversified to include sections considered to be accessible by wade, float or boat fishing. Also, rivers selected are being managed with statewide regulations with no increase in minimum length limits or reduced daily limits.

b) Seasonal movement of smallmouth bass in relation to spring influences in Missouri Ozark streams - MDC is partnering with the National Park Service in 2011 to track smallmouth bass movements within the Current River while concurrently monitoring water temperatures within and adjacent to spring habitats. This information will provide baseline data on water temperatures in and adjacent to springs and provide information on fish movements within the river and spring systems that can be used in the future to evaluate the effects of climate change on the park’s aquatic resources.

4) Smallmouth Bass Sampling Protocol Committee

This committee revised the smallmouth bass sampling guidelines and developed project proposals to aid in the electrofishing efficiency of these guidelines. The updated guidelines are also intended do the following:

1) give MDC the ability to more effectively summarize black bass and goggle-eye data collected by different biologists on different streams at different times;

2) make it easier to detect significant changes in a fish population over time; and

3) help MDC evaluate future management decisions. These guidelines should be used regardless of whether or not the site is within a SBBSMA or part of a special regulation proposal. Detail and updates on these efforts should be completed in 2012.

5) Smallmouth Bass Stream Habitat Committee

The goal of this committee is to use previously collected smallmouth bass sample data and GIS watershed characteristics to define watershed conditions that are associated with various degrees of a stream’s potential to support smallmouth bass. The assumption here is that different watershed characteristics (e.g., geology, land use, riparian, springs, etc.) will be associated with a stream’s potential to support smallmouth bass. Modeling the five valuable criteria of a smallmouth bass habitat model (stream gradient, maximum water temperature, dissolved oxygen, riparian corridor width and watershed impervious surface), should produce an effective and informative tool for biologists. Modeling will be done one watershed at a time, starting with selected pilot watersheds.

NEBRASKA

Statewide Panfish and Largemouth Bass Regulation Changes for 2011

The statewide harvest regulations for panfish and largemouth bass were simplified during 2011. The catch-and-release regulation for all largemouth bass at fisheries designated as “high-use areas” was changed to 21” minimum length limit and 1 daily bag limit. The statewide length limit remains a 15” minimum. Prior to the regulation change, there were two panfish regulations in place. At high-use areas, the daily bag limit was 10 fish in any combination while the statewide regulation was 30 fish per species. These two limits were combined into a statewide limit of 15 panfish in any combination. The use of length limits to manage bluegill (8” minimum) and crappie (10” minimum) populations was also eliminated on many waters throughout the state.

Priority effects among young-of-the-year fish: reduced growth of bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus) caused by yellow perch (Perca flavescens)?

When available, Daphnia spp. are often preferred by age-0 yellow perch and bluegill sunfish because of energetic profitability. We hypothesised that predation by age-0 yellow perch could lead to a midsummer decline (MSD) of Daphnia spp. and that priority effects may favor yellow perch because they hatch before bluegill, allowing them to capitalize on Daphnia spp. prior to bluegill emergence. Data were collected from 2004-2010 in Pelican Lake, Nebraska, USA. The lake experienced a prolonged MSD in all but one year (2005), generally occurring within the first two weeks of June except in 2008 and 2010 when it occurred at the end of June. MSD timing is not solely related to seasonal patterns of age-0 yellow perch consumption. Nevertheless, when Daphnia spp. biomass was low during 2004 and 2006-2010 (< 4 mg wet weight L-1), predation by age- 0 yellow perch seems to have suppressed Daphnia spp. biomass (i.e., < 1.0 mg wet weight L-1). The exception was 2005 when age-0 yellow perch were absent. Growth of age-0 bluegill was significantly faster in 2005, when Daphnia spp. were available in greater densities (> 4 mg wet weight L-1) compared to the other years (< 0.2 mg wet weight L-1). We conclude that age-0 yellow perch are capable of reducing Daphnia biomass prior to the arrival of age-0 bluegill, ultimately slowing bluegill growth. Thus, priority effects favor age-0 yellow perch when competing with age-0 bluegill for Daphnia. However, these effects may be minimized if there is a shorter time between hatching of the two species, higher Daphnia spp. densities or lower age-0 yellow perch densities.

Kaemingk, M.A., J.C. Jolley, D.W. Willis, and S.R. Chipps. In revision. Priority effects among young-of-the-year fish: reduced growth of bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus) caused by yellow perch (Perca flavescens)? Freshwater Biology.

 

WISCONSIN

Black bass

Much of the recent discussion surrounding black bass management in Wisconsin has focused on an apparent increase in bass densities, particularly Largemouth Bass in the Northwest part of the state. Concerns are being raised as to the implications of the increases which include reduced growth rates and substantive community interactions, particularly negative effects on walleye populations. The cause of the increases in bass abundances is unknown however many have been suggested including climate change, overly restrictive regulations, fluctuations in water levels, increased water clarity and changes in angler dynamics. An experimental suite of regulations and walleye stocking have been implemented on 20 waters in northern Wisconsin with the general goal of reducing bass abundance and increasing walleye abundance. AJ Repp (Masters student, UW-Stevens Point) is close to completing his thesis where he has analyzed a WDNR long-term dataset and found a negative correlation between various Largemouth Bass and Walleye population parameters. Further research at UW-Stevens Point and UW-Madison will focus on quantifying the magnitude of changes in Black Bass and walleye populations and modeling potential cause and effect pathways between the most probable variables involved in the interaction. Additionally, research and data analyses being conducted by WDNR staff and UW-Stevens Point researchers will focus on determining the effectiveness of regulations in altering black bass populations.

Panfish

A review of potential changes to the panfish regulation options in Wisconsin is being discussed as part of a larger statewide effort to evaluate the role of all sportfish regulations in the state. Kyle Mosel (Masters student, UW-Stevens Point) is nearing completion of his thesis in which he simulated the effectiveness of various black crappie and yellow perch regulations. His results indicate that a drastic reduction in bag limit would be necessary to reduce harvest enough to realize population level changes.

2011 Midwestern States Bass/Panfish Research Updates - Part I

SOUTH DAKOTA

Crappie removal project

Lake Marindahl is a 139 acre small impoundment in Yankton County, South Dakota. Game Fish and Parks survey the fish populations every other year. Black crappies are the most abundant species in the lake. Crappie size has been a problem with few fish reaching desirable keeper size for anglers. Growth is slightly slower than the small lakes and impoundments mean. Mortality is very high with only 176 age-4 fish out of 1,474 sampled from 2007, 2009, and 2011 surveys. Lake Marindahl was used as a source of black crappies for stocking other lakes.

Growth was monitored during the bi-annual lake surveys to see if the removal had an effect on crappie size. The increased mean length in 2011 is due to a large year class of age-3 fish and very few younger fish. The maximum length did not increase. Anglers in 2011 have commented on the seemingly larger crappies they are catching. The number removed may not have been enough to affect growth.

Smallmouth bass and yellow perch interactions project

Researchers from South Dakota State University are working in conjunction with Game, Fish and Parks biologists to examine potential interactions between smallmouth bass and juvenile yellow perch in northeastern South Dakota glacial lakes. Specifically, we are interested in evaluating the potential for smallmouth bass to act as an additional constraint to age-0 yellow perch recruitment. The research will involve estimation of smallmouth bass population size, smallmouth bass food habits, and age-0 yellow perch abundance. Bioenergetics models will be used to estimate the proportion of the yellow perch population consumed by smallmouth bass during the growing season. This research is slated to begin on Pickerel Lake (Day County) spring 2012 and Clear Lake (Marshall County) spring 2013.

NORTH DAKOTA

A tagging project was initiated the spring of 2011 on Pipestem Reservoir located near the city of Jamestown, North Dakota. During a four day period in late May, 1278 black and 11 white crappie were captured and tagged with Floy dangler tags. Lengths to the nearest cm and sex were recorded. Short-term objectives were to obtain a population estimate, and estimate angler exploitation. Tagged crappie ranged in length from 200-340mm, averaging 230mm. The male to female ratio was approximately 40/60. Standard adult population surveys conducted at Pipestem Reservoir over the last 20 years suggest that the 2005 year class comprises the bulk of the crappie population which appears to be at an all-time high. Unfortunately however, so was the water…

Record high reservoir elevations persisted throughout the summer of 2011 hampering boat access for anglers as well as the department’s ability to re-capture enough crappie to obtain a valid population estimate. Despite crappie fishing being reported as “good” overall throughout the summer, (by shore fisherman and those able to get a boat on the reservoir) only 18 tags have been reported to date.

A creel survey had tentatively been planned for the winter of 2010-11, however environmental conditions warranted postponing. Dangerous ice conditions combine with heavy snowfall prevented anglers from doing much ice fishing at all on Pipestem Reservoir last winter. The creel has been re-scheduled for this winter (2011-12). A primary objective of this creel is to evaluate a 10 fish daily crappie limit placed on Pipestem Reservoir. For all other waters of the state, the crappie limit is 20 per day.

IOWA

Monitoring smallmouth bass fishery

A dam breached in Northeast Iowa during the summer of 2010 just above one of the best smallmouth bass fisheries in the state. The habitat and fish community components were extensively studied prior to the dam washing out and have provided good comparative data. The graph below shows the population estimates over the last 30 years. The smb population crashed after the dam broke. Habitat surveys have shown a significant change from rock to mud substrates. Walleye, one of the other game fish found in this area have not shown a dramatic decrease in numbers. This fishery will continue to be monitored.

MICHIGAN

On April 1, 2006, Michigan established a catch-and-immediate-release (CIR) season for black bass (largemouth bass and smallmouth bass) that occurs prior to the start of the possession season. We used a variety of data sources to evaluate whether this change in regulations had biologically important impacts on bass populations. Specifically, we evaluated whether CIR resulted in a decrease in recruitment of young fish, an increase in adult mortality, and an increase in nest failure. Information from the statewide Lake Status and Trends Program strongly suggests there has been no measurable change in recruitment of age 1 fish and no change in mortality of adult largemouth bass and smallmouth bass before and after the regulation change. Many other sources of information provide a large amount of circumstantial evidence that there have been no large changes in black bass populations that could be attributed to the new regulations. We conclude that there have been no catastrophic effects of CIR regulations on black bass populations in Michigan. This report also contains recommendations for additional research to support black bass management.

We figure that with our current limited information, we would only be able to detect large changes in bass populations, and we did not see any such large changes. We recommended looking at this topic again in about five years. By then there should be additional information (especially from our Lake and Stream Status and Trends Program), and more time for effects and trends to make themselves evident, if they were occurring, and so we would have a better chance of detecting moderate-to-small changes in bass populations.

The report recommends (among other things) collecting information on the timing of bass reproduction across the state. We don't have much quantitative information on this, but it is important for setting the timing of fishing regulations. The best information on timing of bass reproduction comes from Mark Ridgway's long-term study of a smallmouth bass population in Canada, and I used some of his data in my predictions of timing in Michigan lakes. Michigan should probably set up a study to monitor timing of bass (and other fish?) nesting in a set of lakes across the state. Such changes in timing of fish reproduction might be a noteworthy phenological signal of climate change.

Effects of spring angling, habitat features, and guarding male attributes on largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) nest survival and implications for fall young-of-year abundance

Black bass reproduction and factors affecting individual nest success have been studied extensively, but the effects of these factors at the population level are poorly known. We monitored largemouth bass nests in four southern Michigan lakes with varying fishing pressures during spring 2008 and 2009 and sampled for young-of-year (YOY) bass abundance and condition during the fall of 2009. We used Program MARK to determine the importance of factors affecting nest survival probabilities and whether a recent change in fishing regulations in Michigan (allowing a May catch-and-immediate release [CIR] season) affected nest survival. Differences in survival among lakes and between stages of offspring development varied between years, but between-year differences may have been due to sample size and method changes. Nest survival was higher during the CIR season than during the subsequent harvest season for both years. Nest survival probability estimates for 5- or 6-day intervals ranged 14-73% among years, lakes, fishing seasons, and stages of development. Differences in nest survival among lakes and between seasons and stages indicated the importance of the timing and development of nests to the observed percent of nests that were successful in each lake. The high fishing pressure lakes during 2009 (the year for which we had more data and improved sampling methods) had higher nest survival probability estimates (during the CIR season only) than the low fishing pressure lakes and greater observed abundances of YOY in the fall. We hypothesized that among-lake differences in nest survival probabilities during the CIR season are reflective, in large part, of inherent differences among lakes in the productive capacity of their bass populations. The positive relationship between nest survival probabilities during the CIR season and general fishing pressure levels could reflect that bass anglers spend more time fishing in lakes with more productive bass populations. The seasonal difference in nest survival probabilities within lakes (higher survival during the CIR season) could reflect negative effects of intensified fishing hours and/or practices during the harvest season. Future research should explore this hypothesis. Finally, the outcome of the spring nesting season was strongly linked to fall recruitment during 2009, but the population-level effects of fishing on recruitment appeared complex. We suggest that the CIR season can remain, with continued monitoring of bass populations for long-term effects.

Forum Topics: Do Big Bass Spawn Earlier?

Often times I never really know where the next site post will come from, but frequently I'll come across a good discussion on a fishing board forum that triggers a post. This is one of those cases.

We're still a decent ways away from spawning season, but the discussion in question was whether larger bass spawn first. As you can imagine, opinions were all over the board on this one. While there are no absolutes when it comes to bass biology and behavior, there's a lot of scientific literature that suggests they do. I wanted to provide a fairly detailed listing of studies in this regard.

  

Ridgway, M. S.. B. J. Shuter, and E. E. Post. 1991. The relative influence of body size and territorial behaviour on nesting asynchrony in male smallmouth bass, Micropterus dolomieui (Pisces: Centrarchidae). Journal of Animal Ecology 60:665-681.

"Much of the observed variation in timing of nesting was explained by a consistent relationship between the size of individual males and their thermal history (number of degree-days above 50 F) immediately prior to nesting: larger males accumulated fewer degree-days prior to nesting than smaller males. Larger females also appeared to spawn earlier than smaller females."

 

Baylis. J. R.. D. D. Wiegmann. and M. H. Hoff. 1993. Alternating life histories of smallmouth bass. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 122:500-510.

"Larger males nested and spawned earlier in the season than smaller males, a finding also reported for a Canadian population of smallmouth bass by Ridgway et al. (1991)."

"...However, the older, larger fish made nests almost entirely in the first half of the season; nests constructed in the last half of the season were defended by small 3- and 4-year old fish."

"(1) Large males spawn earlier within a breeding season than small males, and are generally older than small males. We have observed this relationship for male smallmouth bass in Nebish Lake (Figures 2-4; Table 2), and other workers have documented the same relationship in populations of smallmouth bass and largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides under both field and experimental conditions (Carlander 1977; Ridgway et al. 1991; Goodgame and Miranda 1993)."

 

Mirandaa, L. E.. and R. J. Muncya. 1987. Recruitment of Young-of-Year Largemouth Bass in Relation to Size Structure of Parental Stock. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 7:131-137.

"The proportion of body weight contributed by the ovaries - the maturity index - was used to examine the relation between time of spawning and size of the parents for largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) in two Mississippi reservoirs. The maturity index increased before the fish spawned, reached a maximum, and then decreased as eggs were released. The maximum was interpreted as occurring at the onset of spawning. A plot of maturity index against time, according to size group, indicated that the larger fish attained a higher index and spawned first."

"We postulate that largemouth bass populations with large adults can start spawning earlier and produce larger fingerlings that are better prepared to become piscivorous when prey fish begin to hatch."

 

Goodgamea, L. S.. and L. E. Mirandaa. 1993. Early Growth and Survival of Age-0 Largemouth Bass in Relation to Parental Size and Swim-up Time. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 122:131-138.

"Larvae spawned by larger adults had significantly more daily rings on the same sampling date than larvae of smaller parents, indicating that larger adults spawned earlier."

"Our results suggest that protecting the larger adult largemouth bass may advance the average time of spawning in a population, thus increasing the length attained by young at the end of their first year and possibly their recruitment to age I."

 

A. J. Gingerich and Suski, C. D. 2012. The role of progeny quality and male size in the nesting success of smallmouth bass: integrating field and laboratory studies. Aquatic Ecology 45:4:505-515.

"Nesting male smallmouth bass that successfully reared their offspring to independence spawned earliest in the nesting period were the largest individuals, and guarded eggs with greater concentrations of cortisol compared to males that abandoned their offspring prematurely."

 

Finally, a study that researched the physiological reasons that might explain the theory of why larger fish, bass included, seem to spawn earliest.

 

Cargnellia, L. M.. and M. R. Grossa. 1997. Fish Energetics: Larger Individuals Emerge from Winter in Better Condition. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 126:153-156.

While their study couldn't discern between the two most likely scenarios of what might be happening, either one, or some combination of both, results in the same outcome.

• Bigger fish just store more "fat" energy (technically "lipids", which have 2X more energy per unit of weight as compared to either proteins or carbohydrates).
• Bigger fish, from a metabolic standpoint, simply deplete less energy stores than smaller fish do over the course of the winter - they live more efficiently from an energy use perspective.

There are a few other scenarios in play, most all of which the researchers were able to sufficiently feel they could discount due to their exacting methods, but which are interesting none the less due to their anecdotal relationship most bassers have probably experienced.

"Larger individuals may feed during the winter" - While it has generally been believed/accepted that bass metabolism slows down to the point of minimal if not totally ceased feeding during the coldest water periods, we have all caught or know of plenty of bass taken through the ice or during partially iced conditions, somewhat discounting this theory. These fish are usually "keeper" sized or better individuals.

"Larger individuals may begin feeding earlier after ice break than smaller individuals" - Again, those who start their bass season immediately after ice out will relate that some of the biggest fish are caught earliest in the year, and that in general, very few small bass are taken during this time.

"Larger individuals face less predation risk. They may consume more prey items than do smaller individuals, and thus build up a greater energy reserve prior to the winter..." - It's the old axiom of eat or be eaten. If you're big, you have much less risk of being eaten, and hence can feed more freely or frequently without fear of negative repercussions, e.g., 'If you can't run with the big dogs, stay on the porch' (and possibly starve).'

2011 Year in Review - Indiana Weather Summary

Once we got past all the snow and frigid temperatures in the earliest parts of the year, 2011 turned out to be a pretty good year for fishing. Here's a quick look at the highlights;

• We didn't set any kind of monthly records due to cold temperatures
• July was the 5th warmest July on record, and the warmest July we've had in at least 15 years.
• November was the 9th warmest on record, and you have to go back 10 years to to find the last time it averaged the same temperature.
• December, as you might have guessed, was also warmer than normal, and the two months combined allowed for open water fishing all the way through the New Year, the first time that has occurred in 10 years (since 2001). I kept trying to impress this fact upon my wife every time I'd take a vacation day or miss a family event to go fishing :) It was a once a decade phenomena...
• As you also might have guessed, the average temperature for the year as a whole was above normal, especially when compared to the past 3 years (colder than normal years).
• April turned out to be the wettest on record, though not by much over April 2009. When you combine that with June 2011, the 13th wettest on record, you suddenly have the reason why I caught no smallmouth bass this past year, as the rivers were almost always blown out when I like to go. The flip side of that though was that it made for a good white bass spawning run up the headwaters of most reservoirs, and so that bite was above average this year, at least in my area.
• July and August were very dry months in my part of the state, but on a staewide average, they ranked 24th and 27th driest on record respectively out of 116 years worth of record keeping.
• After the dry summer, September and October turned out to be wetter than normal months, though again it depended upon which part of the state you were in. Statewide averages resulted in them being the 11th and 9th wettest months on record in their respective categories.

Who knows what 2012 will bring, but we're starting January off on the right foot in my book, with air temps today already 48 degrees as I type this, and even warmer air temps expected tomorrow. Above average temps are supposed to run well into most of next week before cooling down to more seasonal highs. Here's to hoping I get the boat out on open water again in a few more days, as well as to an early start (ice-off) to our bass fishing season in just another month and a half or two.

2011 Year in Review - Site Stats Summary

It was another great year here at "Big Indiana Bass" (BIB) as relates to the site and it's associated statistics. Growth continues to be rapid and continuous, as more and more anglers find their way over by whatever means. I pulled a bunch of data from Google Analytics to share comparing 2011 stats with 2010 data. Here are the highlights;

• Yearly site visits grew from 85,000+ in 2010 to 123,000+ in 2011
• Unique visitors climbed from 36,000+ to nearly 51,000
• Total Page Views went from 135,000 to nearly 230,000 this year
• Pages per visit climbed from 1.58 to 1.86
• Average time spent per visit went from 1:45 to 2:04
• New visitors stayed consistent, 42.45% vs. 40.92%. That means that roughly 60% of all people who hit the site return at some point in the future at least once during the year.
• 94.15% of all traffic came from U.S. visitors, representing all 50 states. International presence grew to include visits from 114 other countries.
• The largest non-BIB or search engine-related referring site in 2011 was Fishin.com
• Direct landings on the main site occupied the #1 and #2 most landed initial pages. Three of the next 4 most highly landed pages continued to be related to my jon boat customization. Just like last year, this continues to be a highly trafficked topic, and a niche market that obviously has some big potential. Also positioned in the Top-5 most highly landed pages was this years new feature, "On Tour with Todd", a combination bio/tour journal/diary documenting Todd Hollowell's year on the FLW EverStart circuit.
• Over 43% of all visitors, comprising 50,000+ visits, stopped in at least once a month. The big kudo's go to all you hardcore fans, and amazing 11.8% of all visits, some 14,500+ in total that dropped in more or less daily, tabulating over 200+ visits per year! You guys really need to get out and fish more (LOL)!
• Finally, the site is rapidly closing in on half a million total Page Views in it's brief history, probably attaining that lofty mark sometime in February.

As always, a big thanks to everybody who visited the site in 2011, whether once or more than 200 times ;-) If you ever have ideas, topics or content you think others would like to hear about, you can always send us an e-mail at our contact address, found near the top of the left hand sidebar. We're always happy to post pictures of your "Big Indiana Bass" caught throughout the year, either on the main site or on our companion Facebook page, another new site venture in 2011 that has rapidly expanded beyond what I ever imagined.

Here's hoping I run into a bunch of you at the fishing shows this winter, or on the lake in 2012!

2011 Year in Review - Bass Fishing Summary

When I first started fishing, I kept a fishing log/diary. I've thrown the old diary away (wish I hadn't now), but it was started in 1982-1983 or there abouts. Over the years it morphed into a lot of different things, including a searchable card file. I stopped tracking it all back about 10 years ago. Then, when I started this blog back in December 2006, I decided to keep track of the number of bass caught, again. I did it for one year in 2007, more as a way of seeing exactly how many bass I catch in a season. I'm guessing most guys have no clue how many they catch. Thought it would be neat, and at one point in the year, I decided to try and catch 1,000 bass. I ended up falling short, catching 963 bass that year on 93 trips and fishing 259 hours. I caught 2 bass verified over 5 pounds that year.

In 2008, I started another tracking, but gave it up after just a couple months. Didn't bother with it in either 2009-2010. This year, I again decided to track my catch for a year, more out of curiosity as well as for the fact of making some good post material. Ned Kehde over at In-Fisherman wanted the specifics for this year and just reported it recently on the IF site. He also posted their finesse catch totals for the year in today's post. I was very happy to see that my stats were right in line with theirs for 2011. You can't rely too much on state to state comparisons, but styles are somewhat similar, fishing hours are very comparable, and these guys are some of the best when it comes to putting numbers in the boat given their nearly 100% dedication to finesse.

So on to the numbers for 2011. Keep in mind this is all bass caught, whether 5 inches or 5 pounds - they all count equally in the stats. This is also a tracking of "bass only" trips, though miscellaneous bass caught during crappie trips or such did count in the total numbers, but weren't given a trip or hour count. I would love to track specific size and length by waterbody, but that would take some pretty solid dedication and note keeping, or a photographic memory, neither of which is in me at the moment.

• Total bass caught: 2,305
• Number of bass trips: 82
• Number of hours fished: 260
• Average trip length: 3 h 10 m
• Ave. # bass per trip: 28.1
• Ave. # bass caught per hr: 8.9
• Worst hrly trip: April 13; 2 bass in 2.5 hrs or 0.8/hr
• Best hrly trip: June 8; 51 bass in 2h 15m or 22.7/hr
• Most bass caught: May 14; 78 bass

It is also easy to break down the numbers to bass caught by month;

• Jan-Feb: None
• March: 277
• April: 283
• May: 388
• June: 223
• July: 138
• August: 79
• September: 18
• October: 117
• November: 447
• December: 335

Like in 2007, I only had 2 bass that weighed 5 lbs or better on certified scales. They were a 5-08 from Glenn Flint on a frog, and a 5-02 from Heritage on a shaky head. I caught a whole lot of 4 pound plus fish, but whether it's where I'm fishing or how I'm fishing, I simply don't see a lot of legitimate 5 pounders being caught despite what guys claim. That truly is, in my mind, the starting point of a "big bass" in Indiana.

Haven't decided if I'll track anything in 2012 or not. Was a fun challenge to try and catch 2,011 bass in 2011, and the unusual weather certainly helped in that effort, a post on which is coming soon. Also, I didn't chase the crappie bite nearly as much as usual, as well as mostly missing the bluegill spawn bite. When I figure it out I'll let you know. I'm not one to create "New Year's Resolutions" or "goals" for the upcoming year, so whatever I end up doing in 2012, it will be something that just "strikes" me and develops as time moves forward.

Carp In 'Keep Sacks' - Say That Fast 3 Times

Influence of Retention and Air Exposure on Physiology and Behaviour of Common Carp (Cyprinus carpio L.): A Field Study
Tobias Rapp

"Spanning the globe to bring you the constant variety of sport!"

OK, so I'm not that good, but this one doesn't necessarily fit the standard bass fare that I normally cover, either. Still, it's interesting to me. I'm not certain how many anglers are familiar with the enthusiast carp scene, or for that matter the bank angling crowd (competitive). Regardless, I know several people involved in both, and have spent several hours talking to a couple World Champions in this area (Mick Thill and Tony Forte). Plus, you might not know that Indianapolis hosts one of the largest competitive carp tournies in the country courtesy of Jim Donlan and West Side Bait & Tackle.

Anyway, one thing you'll commonly see at all these events is what is referred to as a "keep sack", a  collapsible mesh bag made of synthetic fibre cloth that is used to hold your catch alive until weigh-in. In the research paper mentioned above, they studied the physiology of carp held in these keep sacks ("carp sacks" as they referred to them) for periods of up to 9 hours, and then also looked for recovery times as well as delayed mortality following a 10 minute additional air exposure time to simulate the weigh-in and picture taking that might occur.

As you might have expected, carp are pretty tough characters. While blood chemistry did show signs of being in a stressful situation, and there was some short term (<12 hr) differences in behavior, all fish returned to normal within half a day, and none were lost to delayed mortality. Part of the conclusion as excerpted from the paper;

"From a fish population perspective which is interested in survival endpoints, the short-term impacts of retention in carp sacks and air exposure associated with handling and photographing are of minor concern as carp showed high resiliency to these stressors and suffered no mortality and limited behavioural alterations."

So if you ever come across anglers on your home waters with a holding contraption that looks like a small tent staked to the shoreline and protruding into the shallow waters, you'll now know both what it is you're seeing as well as the minimal risks they pose to our "rough" fish and similar minnow species.