A spin on the skinny bass theory

main forum

Moderators: Stan Wright, roadwarriorsvt

OO7:BASSINASSASSIN
King Sushi level
Posts: 356
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 12:43 pm

A spin on the skinny bass theory

Postby OO7:BASSINASSASSIN » Wed Aug 17, 2011 9:43 am

Back in the day, late 70's and 80's, bass and tucs seem to coexist decently. There was no aquatic weed (maybe the bass fishing would have been better if there was). There were some fish kills ( a fish biologist went to the lake after a sudden rise in water level and found 20 dead channel catfish floating in 20 to 30 pound range) and periods of very low water, for example no water under the south fork bridge. Despite this the lm bass fishing was decent. What we did have was a healthy forage base. Tilapia (hamburger), puntat (prime rib), crayfish (lobster), blue gills, baby tucs and pongees. These would be the larger food items. Even with all those prey items available we still caught a few skinny bass, especially the large ones ( six pounds ). Our theory was that they had finished spawning and started to feed. Fast foward to present day. The introduction of exotics changed the dyanmics of the lake. We no longer have huge schools of tilapia and the others are nonexistant or fewer (yes there were more baby tucs back then) in number. When the female bass finishes spawning they lose a lot of weight. In their weakened state, they may not be able to find enough prey items and die. Eventually you end up with no bass.

BASSTRACKER
King Sushi level
Posts: 518
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2008 8:42 pm
Location: north shore
Contact:

Postby BASSTRACKER » Wed Aug 17, 2011 7:07 pm

im sure the reason is complicated, but forage is definatley part of the equation. i recall the good ole days you could walk on the tilapia at the effluent discharge,dont see many these days either. but like assasin says there were always skinny fish at times even in the prime.


Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests