Latest Data on Lower Susky Bass

[Fishidiot]

Here's the latest PFBC study of SMBs in the lower, main stem of the Susky:

http://www.fish.state.pa.us/images/reports/2010bio/7x12_14susq.htm

I suppose if I had to characterize these numbers I'd describe them as "slightly promising" using classic glass-half-full psychology. The good news is the numbers are roughly twice what they were last year and well above the last five years. This is significant. Of course the bad news is that, compared to 20 years ago, the numbers are only about half. There are plenty of good sized fish but the needed strong classes of younger fish continues to be lower than we'd want. As previous studies have suggested and angler reports confirm, the numbers of SMBs improves as you head upstream into and above the Dauphin Narrows.

Just a side note.....
My long quest for an honest 20" SMB on a fly may continue awhile as the sizes of the bass in this study reveals.

 

[Mike]

Despite the use of electricity, I have gone for years without seeing a 20" SMB from the Susquehanna, and that includes series of years from 1985 to the present. I only occasionally see one, and this year my crew and I saw two at Accomac....one each night of Electrofishing. On the other hand, 19 inch fish have been relatively common by comparison. As I think you already know, 20 SMB in the Susquehanna are a rarity. Exceptional anglers go for years without catching one.

 

[Fredrick]

I guess I got lucky my first Susky bass was a 20" :-D

 

[ryguyfi]

Without reading anyone elses posts I was going to say that even the electroshockers can't come up with a 20"er.

Not a big smallmouth guy, but my best is 19 3/4" and was a heck of a story finally catching her.

 

[Fishidiot]

Fredrick wrote:
I guess I got lucky my first Susky bass was a 20" :-D

Got a photo of this fish next to a ruler?

There are guys on this site every year holding "20 inch" smallies.

As Mike points out honest 20" fish are extremely rare. I've fished for SMBs for many years. I took several fish earlier this year that I thought were 20 and, upon measurement, found them to top out in the 18.5-19" range. I've looked through the PFBC electrofishing reports - these are fish that are actually measured, not estimated by anglers - and fish of 20 inches rarely show up. They're out there - just gotta keep casting I suppose (or go to Lake Erie).

 

[afishinado]

I've caught a few 20" SMB, mostly on the NB of the Susky and on the Delaware River. Some were estimated and released (maybe a little short - who knows), some were measured with my ruler on the boat, and some were measured and kept! (back in the day). I've been fishing for SMs in those rivers since I was a kid (over 40 years...:-o) and I've caught a hand full of them. I once caught and measured a SM 21"+ on the D river.

One final observation, compared to back in the day, the size of SMs in all rivers I fish are larger today, overall. I attribute this to many anglers practicing C&R for bass. Back in the day, every one had a string attached to their belt. Today you seldom see that.

Fred, that was a heck of a fish you caught. Thank God I was there to show you where, how and when to catch it!!! At least you reeled it in all by yourself...:lol:

 

[Fredrick]

afishinado wrote:

Fred, that was a heck of a fish you caught. Thank God I was there to show you where, how and when to catch it!!! At least you reeled it in all by yourself...:lol:

Tom that's funny because I remember clearly you telling me not to cast in that area I caught the fish in because you never did good there .

Dave don't be upset at me for your short comings :lol:

 

[CPR]

Could the larger size fish and the lower population of bass be directly related?

The less fish in the river the less competition for food resources. The more they eat the bigger they get.

Does that make any sense?


matt

 

[Fishidiot]

Fredrick wrote:

Dave don't be upset at me for your short comings :lol:

Fred,
Guess I'll never measure up. I'll just have to keep casting. Someday I'll catch him. :-D

CPR,
I doubt that the larger population of bigger fish is in any way related to the lack of smaller year classes in the lower Susky. What you describe makes sense, however the number of large bass has remained fairly stable across all sections of the Susky in the last 15 years or so - only in the lower Susky have the smaller bass severly declined in the last eight years or so. The reason for this decline of smaller bass has not been identified (although theories abound).