Hawaiibassfishing Forum

Catch & Release, or Hook'm & Cook'm?

Is it time to start keeping some of the peacock bass?

As you have noticed, the largemouth bass are looking a little skinny. I caught one last week that weighed 4 1/2 pounds.... It should have weighted 6 or 7 pounds. Skinny as a rail.

All the peacock bass are fat and healthy. From the ones just 4 inches long to the ones weighing over 7 pounds. Our average fish last month was a little over 2 1/4 pounds. I think it might be that they feed mostly on smaller fish. There seems to be lots of shad, and the peacock bass are much faster and more aggressive than the largemouth. Even when they are both schooling and chasing the shad we catch 20 peacock for each largemouth taken. And the bass look thin.

Would an open season on peacock bass help the large mouth population? Would you keep a peacock bass and eat it? What kind of size and bag limit would you set?
How about a slot limit???..... say you keep 3 peacock bass weighing between 2 and 5 pounds? Release the ones under 2 pounds and over 5 pounds.

What do you think?

Personally, I will continue to release everything I catch. (I hate cleaning fish, and my wife refuses to eat any fish out of freshwater) <grin>

Aloha,
Stan

Good question! All I can say is if we use Florida as an example, there are places where the canals have both largemouths and tucs. The largemouths in those canals don't seem to be outcompeted by the tucs.

I don't remember if Wahiawa has good weed growth. From what I remembered, it doesn't look like it. Largemouth bass is mainly an ambush predator and without good weedgrowth and adequate ambush areas, they will have a hard time hunting for prey.

On the other hand, those big bass lakes in Texas supports huge bass that feeds in open water as well as chases small rainbow trout...somewhat like the tucs in Wahiawa. So I dont' know. I can't think of an answer but I think weed growth may have something to do with it.

Stan, I was just thinking about the exact same thing lately. I also think that Ken has a good point too. Maybe if there was controlled harvesting of the tucs, a side benefit would be that the average size would be higher due to less competion for food. On the other hand, do you think that there are actually no tucs being taken? Despite what the law says, I bet there's still a lot of people taking fish home. These same people don't even have fishing licenses.
I think the tucs have a huge advantage when hunting for food because they can attack in groups and use their numbers to corral the baitfish. The bass, on the other hand, are so low in population that they have to be solitary predators. That and the fact that they are much slower moving than the tucs are the obstacles they must overcome. Now throw in the fact that there aren't any more crawfish and very few bluegills for the bass to eat and it makes life hard for the bass. Another thing is that the tucs viciously guard their fry for a while, but the bass don't. Also, did anyone notice that there's hardly any tilapia left in the lake? I see a few when I go, but it's not like how it was when I was young when I could catch a hundred per day if I wanted to. What I see now are mostly the cichlids, stickfish, and baby tucs along the weedlines. All of these are too smart and quick for the bass to effectively prey on.

Skunked, largemouths and smallmouths do guard their eggs and fry for a short period. It is usually the males that guard the nest and the fry. That's why in most part of Ontario, bass season is closed during their spawn to protect them. It's just an FYI.

You're right about bass. They are solitary hunters when they reach adulthood. You may see a few large bass grouped loosely in good feeding areas, but they do not hunt cooperatively as far as I know.

I'd keep a few to eat, but how clean is that water? I don't think I'd keep fish for food just because of all the crap that gets in that waterway.

Has anyone had water samples/fish tested?

The Health department is working on testing the water and the fish.

Ken wrote:Skunked, largemouths and smallmouths do guard their eggs and fry for a short period. It is usually the males that guard the nest and the fry. That's why in most part of Ontario, bass season is closed during their spawn to protect them. It's just an FYI

Yes, I know they guard their eggs and newly hatched fry, but it's not like the tucs who guard their babies for a while after that. On many occasions I have seen pairs of tucs slowly cruising large stretches of shoreline with hundreds of their offspring. Whenever another fish comes near, they viciously attack and chase them away. I think with the bass, once they leave the nest, they're on their own.

Stan Wright wrote:The Health department is working on testing the water and the fish.

I'd be very interested in the results. I assume they're testing all up and down Lake Wilson?

I want to try some red devil fillets...or maybe an oscar.

Yea, testing all over the lake. I have no idea when the testing will be finished, probably sometime next year. I'll ask. I'll also post the results when I get them. I'm sure it will be in all the papers when it's finished.

This is an interesting idea, Stan. Here is my spin on the topic. First of all, I would continue to catch and release. My question is , will this encourage poaching?

Second will more aquatic weeds help? My best guess is no.

Third, would removing some of the bass's competition improve the bass's ability to forage successfully? I do not think it will help.

The way I see it, by looking at the lake's history, you can get a clue as to what the answers might be. Would more vegetation help? Before the 90's, the biomass in the lake was much greater. The tucs were more plentiful, but the largemouth bass fishing was decent, both in numbers and size, therefore they could both coexist. You could even catch smallmouth bass in the main basin. There was more california grass back then, but the lake's water level fluctuated a lot also. The water level would often drop below the grass line for long periods of time and yet the bass still could forage successfully. In the late 80's, the largemouth bass population crashed, even though the amount of grass remained the same. Later, 2 events occurred that reduced the amount of california grass. First, the water hyacinth covered the lake, and the DNLR used a weed killer on tlhe hyacinth, which also killed a lot of grass. The second event was when S. Molesta covered the lake. Again an herbicide was used to remove the floating weed. We lost a lot of grass again. I think when the floating weeds covered the lake, it was benefical to the bass and the pongee since both forage well in low light, but not well enough for the population to come back. You also have to remeber the lake has a lot cover in the form of timber. I would, however, like to see more vegetation in the lake. Even some floating type vegetation.

Finally, harvest the tucs in order to remove some of the bass's competition. In this scenario, I see more damage being done, because I foresee an increase in public enemy number 1, the jeweled cichlid. It is the tucs that keep the jeweled cichlid somewhat under control. The jeweled cichild is a small, but voracious feeder that seems to spawn year round. They only forage on samll prey items but they are so numerous that they wipe out everything, including baby tucs and bass. They also eat up the young of the bass's prey. Skunked is right when he said there is not as much tilapia as before. I think the jeweled cichlid had something to do with that. Maybe if the baby bas could be program to hunt cichlids when they are at the hatchery then they might be able to forge successfully.

Wow, I feel almost daunted posting in such a two sided debate with such well educated bass fisherman, but here I go. I was thinking that perhaps we should be looking at the puzzle from another angle. Instead of eliminating that competition (and according to one senario, encouraging the growth of the ciclid population) why not increase the forage? There is a hatchery in place for the largemouth bass, could it not also product, say, bluegill? By increasing the forage, the largemouth and smallmouth should have a better chance at getting to some of the food and there would be more bluegill to catch.

I wonder if this is also one of the reason for skinny bass...

The abstract suggested that increasing predation on the nest by nest robbers increases parental protection and decreases parental growth and survival. Just a thought...

http://beheco.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/16/2/427

In the Wahiawa scenario, largemouth = smallmouth, jewel cichlid = round goby.

From what I can gather, jewel cichlid is fast and more ravenous than the natural nest robbers like sunfish species (including bluegills). Perhaps the bass cannot cope with this exotic nest predator and never recovered in growth throughout the year.

I think the hatchery is already in the process of supplementing the lake with more bluegills. I do not know how well that is going. As far as stress from protecting the nest goes, maybe you have something there. I also find it strange that the oscars, which are not all that fast, can be well fed but the bass and pongee are not. I know that the oscars are not very big but even alot of small bass are skinny.