Sharelunker program cons?

[SwingAway]

13 minutes ago, Mossyback Angler said:

Out of curiosity where can one read this literature you are referring to?  I would be interested in reading it.

My opinion in simple terms is a bass is going to adapt to its environment and eat whatever it wants to eat, in order to survive. I don’t think through breeding, the offspring genetics will be influenced by what artificial lure it’s mating pairs were caught on. 
I do believe there is inherent intelligence though. That bass can be conditioned to avoid certain situations, including eating a particular bait or lure it’s been caught on. Even that, is going to be determined by year of class of the wild hatched bass, not hatchery born.

In other words, for simple terms, one bait is very productive for many years, many anglers are using said bait, until the bass in a fishery learns to avoid it. A new baits comes out and all of a sudden them same fish are actively biting the new bait until that looses its appeal, through the same cycle. Fast forward a bit, that older first bait, since it hasn’t been used in quite some time, all of sudden starts to get bit again. I feel the younger fish were not accustomed to that older bait due to anglers adapting and using newer baits and so the cycle begins again.
(I really hope I am making sense)

I personally would like to see a “Share A Lunker” program like this in my area. I don’t think it’s meant for every fishery. But for those waters that could sustain larger fish with proper habitat and forage base, I think it would be beneficial for anglers. 
 

Interesting topic though. 

Here is just one study. Genetic and heritable traits influence bass behavior, that is well documented in fisheries Sciences. Not here to argue that with anyone. I tend to behave like my parents did, partly because of how I was raised but largely by the genes I got from them. My parents love rare steak, I love rare steak. They get sunburned easily, I get sunburned easily. Same basic tenants apply to fish. There are plenty of journal article studies that show this. I'd recommend browsing the American Fisheries Society journal's peer reviewed articles for those that doubt genetics strongly influence bass behavior.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090414153532.htm

[willlliw]

I would think large fish are proportionally less likely to be caught because i'm sure that's part of the reason a lot of them get big. So in breeding these large fish there's a possibility they are getting more fish that are LESS likely to eat baits, because the gene pool of larger fish is likely a higher proportion of fish that generally don't eat baits. It probably all balances out in the end and there's no measurable effect, only larger fish.

[Mossyback Angler]

45 minutes ago, SwingAway said:

Here is just one study. Genetic and heritable traits influence bass behavior, that is well documented in fisheries Sciences. Not here to argue that with anyone. I tend to behave like my parents did, partly because of how I was raised but largely by the genes I got from them. My parents love rare steak, I love rare steak. They get sunburned easily, I get sunburned easily. Same basic tenants apply to fish. There are plenty of journal article studies that show this. I'd recommend browsing the American Fisheries Society journal's peer reviewed articles for those that doubt genetics strongly influence bass behavior.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090414153532.htm

Interesting read, thank you for sharing. I don’t think anybody is here to argue. It’s an interesting discussion. With some valid information we can all learn from. I am no fishery biologist, this is all based on opinions and readings. 
 

My thought after reading that article you shared is there is no way to quantify the number of high vulnerability (HV)caught and low vulnerability (LV) caught bass that have been used for breeding in a “Share A Lunker” program. 
 

In theory, if a “Share A Lunker” bass, which was used for the breeding and rearing of offspring, was caught, then, in theory it’s  already susceptible to being “vulnerable” to catch. I think in a controlled environment, yes, can you make the distinction between HV and LV bass. I’m sure in nature that exists in all creatures.  But the amount that a “Share A Lunker” program can contribute to that is on a small scale and not going to impact bass fishing to an extended degree. 
 

We as angers need to analyze and adapt to the changing behavior of the fish we pursue. That’s the allure of bass fishing, especially for larger class fish. 
 

***Good stuff, something different to  discuss, think about and read on the forum.

[azsouth]

Okay let's think about this... most scientific studies last years if not decades... what studies I have been able to find are small and very site specific and not broad and not years to decades long.

Funny with all the $$ that goes into bass fishing but very little money goes to research into Bass.

Go fishing and have fun doing it..... Most of us are not getting paid to do it.

 

[CG_Fishes]

As someone with an opinion largely against the stocking off fish. I would rather see the management of lakes as ecosystems, focused on creating/preserving natural systems. Of course that isn't possible in man-made reservoirs. Personally I would rather catch a fish born in, and grown in nature than some fish created in a lab. The idea that the fish I am catching are created by man, often ignoring the natural sucession/state of ecosystems takes away from the connection to nature that I find myself fishing for. Big fish are cool, but I wouldn't feel as accomplished with a PB from a Sharelunker/stocked lake as I would from a lake with no anthropogenic input. Just my 0.2 of hippie nonsense

[SwingAway]

Stoked other folks on here like thinking about this sort of ish! Part of what's always kept me obsessed with fishing is trying to learn why fish do what they do in certain fisheries and in different times. What's cool is we all have different takes on it based on where we fish and our ifferent experiences chucking big stuff. SU rocks. Tight lines yall 

[BittyRanger]

I’m a simple man. I see a 15lb bass I hit like. That’s my opinion. 

[I_dont_fish_swimbaits]

13 hours ago, SwingAway said:

So genetics don't often dictate where bass tend to position and feed? Seems the literature I've read points to the opposite. You have fish that are predisposed to spend the summer months in the tules and in shade and you have separate metapopulations that head to deep shelves, points, etc. Those instincts are absolutely influenced by genetics.

i agree with you on that but there are going to be different forage types for bass depending on where they are so its just dependent on what kind of body of water they are in

[swimbaitrookie]

1 minute ago, CG_Fishes said:

... Big fish are cool, but I wouldn't feel as accomplished with a PB from a Sharelunker/stocked lake as I would from a lake with no anthropogenic input. ..

A good friend of mine, one of the premier guides on Lake Fork back in the heyday, caught a 15+ from a small, trophy bass managed pay-to-play lake; the equivalent of a high-fence game ranch.  I asked him if he'd have a better sense of accomplishment if he'd caught it out of Lake Fork - his reply was "dude, I caught a 15lb bass!  I don't care where it came from!!"

Trophy bass are hard to catch - period.  So why not grow more of them!

 

[SumoNinja]

I honestly would love california to do a program like this too. We have the environment to grow a world record. In fact we had the biggest ever recorded. 

I'll worry about how dumb they are after they're in my waters 

[SwingAway]

20 minutes ago, SumoNinja said:

I honestly would love california to do a program like this too. We have the environment to grow a world record. In fact we had the biggest ever recorded. 

I'll worry about how dumb they are after they're in my waters 

Those fish came from the days of trout plants and those days are over. Not enough water and too hot for the last decade for trout plants to be feasible for dfw. Hope I'm wrong, but I think those days are in the past and staying there unfortunately. 

[SumoNinja]

3 minutes ago, SwingAway said:

Those fish came from the days of trout plants and those days are over. Not enough water and too hot for the last decade for trout plants to be feasible for dfw. Hope I'm wrong, but I think those days are in the past and staying there unfortunately. 

We still get trout plants every year all over SoCal in lakes and park ponds

[SwingAway]

1 minute ago, SumoNinja said:

We still get trout plants every year all over SoCal in lakes and park ponds

Of the amount and in the waters that used to produce those trophy fish?

[SumoNinja]

Just now, SwingAway said:

Of the amount and in the waters that used to produce those trophy fish?

Idk how it was before but from November to March we get trout anywhere from weekly to monthly depending on the lake/park. 500 lbs up to 3000 lbs per plant  

[SumoNinja]

What we don't have is a breeding program. Our big fish just grow the way they do naturally. Would be nice to collect and control some breeding to pass on those monster genes to release the offspring