TXPW ShareLunker breeding program might be working

http://tpwd.texas.gov/newsmedia/releases/?req=20170213a

It seems a Texas fisheries bred fish has been caught shattering the lake record by over 2 pounds!!!!

I feel bad for the rest of the fish in this small lake. It also makes me wonder whats is hiding just up the road in Worth or Eagle Mountain.

It works. Just a lot of misconceptions and myths about the program.

Great story behind this fish. Thanks for sharing.

The science does not lie, now if they can catch a big one in Raven like that or one of the other lakes they were giving special attention to (or is this lake one of them also) wasnt it operation WR or something?

Good for TPWD! They deserve some kudos.

I firmly believe we have been enjoying the benefits from the SAL program for many years and just didn't realize it. There are lots of naysayers out there that will try to discredit the program but it works. The facts don't lie.

Yes it was part of the program as well

In a search for TPWD Operation World Record Bass I found an article that stated the average time it takes a brood fish to reach Share a Lunker size is 11 years. Since that project was done in 2006 this fits perfectly. It will be interesting now to see if 2nd gen lunkers start to show with more frequency.

If the funding was possible, it would be great if all Tx lakes had participated in this. Tpwd is one of the greatest if not "the" greatest wildlife regulating and conservationist a state has governmentally provided.

Texas is far ahead of other states in Fish and Wildlife Management. I think the S.A.L. Program has changed the way people think about catch and release. I remember the "old days" at Toledo Bend" with pictures holding up stringers of 40-50 fish. All of them to be filleted for the skillet. Now, I know that I haven't kept a bass for over fifteen years. Thank God for Catfish! Lake Fork is full of them and not many folks fish for them. They eat well.
It's the same with Quality Deer Management in Texas. Most of us can do without shooting another three yr old 8 pt every year, if we know it will grow into a big'un.
Anyway, TPWD has changed the way we fish.
Keep it up, I live to catch a 13# BASS.

There are more bass kept on Toledo than any other lake in the country. I witness more bass put into coolers and live wells during the week than I see get released.

If you do Facebook look at the Toledo Bend Fishing Reports page. Release to the grease is still very much the norm on Toledo.

Good read!

11 years is a long time Ivy should be good In 3-4 years I remember watching them dump buckets of fry one year

Falcon and Amistad have alot of fish be taken off the lake, TB too. But they produce big fish. Catch and release does not work perfectly if your not harvesting some of the fish.

You guys are funny..

I'm not an expert by any means, but I believe and agree with, some selective harvest is needed.
If they would just leave the brood stock alone... I'm excited to see these results from the WR project..

So out of all the trophy bass they took out of the lakes and all of the 13+ lb bass that have been killed in attempt to get them in the program it is a success because a single 13 lb fish was caught that can be attributed to the program. That's a hell of an expensive 13 lb bass in money, time, and effort.

That's the definition of cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Leave those big bastards in the lake and just let them spawn in their natural environment. If the program worked, there would be lakes that aren't big fish factories turning into big fish factories. So far, all we've done is pull big fish out of our big fish factory lakes. The lakes that have traditionally been good for big fish are still good for big fish and the lakes that aren't, still aren't. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that habitat and forage are what grows big ones... genetics will help but not to the extent that everyone thinks they do. It's just like breeding deer, you can have the best genes in the world, but if they don't have good habitat and good food they aren't going to reach their potential.

Don't get me wrong, I think the stockings do help the number of fish being caught in some lakes... but all I hear about is their goal to produce a state or world record. If that is their goal, then a single 13 lb fish is far from a success.

Remember guys there were two 13's caught on fork that were not turned in last week so we can never know where they came from but we are all aware of the significant involvement in the program with that lake both giving and receiving.

Did you miss the part that said it normally takes 11 yrs for a fish to get to 13 lbs? This fish was stocked in 2006 and here it is 11 yrs later. This is the first. It was one of 6 lakes they used for the program.

And unimproved, Marine Creek is hardly a big fish factory

Program has been going on for damn near 30 years. According to that timeline we should be on our 2nd crop by now.

People are getting the Share a lunker program and this Operation World Record program confused. This was a specific stocking on 6 lakes done in 2006. These fish had implants in them. This one is the first to reach 13 lbs with the implant in it.

Reread the first link and focus on the Operation WR stocking instead of share a lunker and it makes more sense. When I first read this I was surprised they aren't now calling it what they did in 2006. The article was confusing in that aspect

That is so true of Fayette.

RIP Marine creek

Not a lot of habitat or a crazy amount of forage at Marine Creek. Plus it has a ton of urban fishing pressure.

Can anyone explain to me what is so special about a 13 lb. bass that is 11 years old?

I thought the same thing.

I live close to MC. Have only been on it once in 2017 and maybe once or twice in 2016 and did more graphing than anything, just trying out settings, etc. Caught one about 3 lbs offshore working what I think is an old pond dam.

I saw another post a while back where a TPWD biologist noted that the lake was not big enough to support a large BIG shad population, ( I think it may have a small Mini Shad one) so it was not a viable lake to be stocked every year.

With the Grass gone, I would doubt a large population of big fish would exist, but I know of two 10lb class fish caught last year.

All in all, its a great catch and unexpected, even with the share lunker stocking. come on out and try your luck, but remember, its idle only.

Well it's was from a secondary program the state did. An off shoot from Sharealunker

I'd like to jump in here and say.... I love me some TPWD. We are very fortunate to have one of if not the best Fish and Game management entities in the entire country.

Glad to see a SAL come out of Marine Creek, since it was stocked with the SAL fry as a part of operation World Record I would always wonder while passing the lake if it was every going to kick out a giant. Hopefully with some increased fishing traffic on the lake some more will be caught!

See, this has always been my thinking as well. Maybe it's there and I haven't seen it, but I've yet to see the genetic argument for these big fish. It seems like they are just old fish that have lived long enough to grow that size. I would expect an 11 year old fish to be a big fish.

Idk. Used to be a bigger fan. I'm all for trying the genetic angle but sometimes it takes a lot of failures to find success.
Unfortunately, all the other factors (besides just pure vs enhanced Florida genetics) seem to be more important to producing record bass.
Still a huge fan of our stocking in general.

You cannot run a controlled experiment in an uncontrolled environment. Meaning, yes they stock some fingerlings from 13lb+ fish. But, in order to increase the overall size of the gene pool, you have to control the breeding of every fish in the lake. Not every fingerling from trophy size parents will be trophy size fish. You decrease that number significantly when a non trophy size fish is allowed to breed with a trophy size fish. TP&W has already estimated that only 1-3% of the fingerlings they stock each year survive to adults. I'm shocked that it would be this low but that is based on their research. So, the program has brought a lot of notoriety to the State of Texas and I believe has had some benefit in more catch and release. But, IMO, it has done very little if any to advance the overall gene pool of trophy 13lb+ fish in any given body of water in Texas. Introduction of Hydrilla has done more for producing 13lb+ fish then TP&W will ever do.

There was a 13.13 Florida/Native cross caught in Falcon in 2008 that was aged at eight (8) years old by TPWD..

So I don't think they're breaking any records.. Or remaking the mold..

If I caught a 13lb bass it would be pretty special to me at least.....

Another piece of (anecdotal) evidence that the genetic aspect of big fish is way overblown.

It could be argued that this selectively bred fish (when confirmed by genetic testing) is not more special than any of the 565 13-plus-pound non-selectively bred bass submitted to the SL program. In the press release it said, "Can we selectively breed these fish to make them grow bigger and faster?’” The fish from Marine Creek didn't grow faster than a regular Florida bass. And, it remains to be seen whether it will grow bigger than a regular Florida bass.

What's special about this fish is that it is the first data point that can help answer the question in the press release. As more data comes in it should be possible to see if the selectively bred fish do/do not get bigger on average and/or grow faster on average.

Ok, I'll give it that. But wasn't the non-SAL (12+) caught at Naconchie a couple years ago the first data point? There was also a 14.12 caught there last summer, though outside the SAL acceptance window.

Here's Naconchie's recent stocking history of SAL bass.

Bass, ShareLunker largemouth 2012 173 Adult
Bass, ShareLunker largemouth 2011 2,020 Fingerling
Bass, ShareLunker largemouth 2009 95,389 Fingerling
Bass, ShareLunker largemouth 2009 173 Adult

The Naconichie fish was not a pure Florida.. Its mother was caught out of Falcon.. It was a cross..

In regards to SL fish growing faster than pure Floridas.. PAW allegedly started a growth rate test on these two different fish, under exact same conditions for both fish, about five years ago.. The results of which have never been shared with the public.. Which I was promised a long time ago..

I ain't holding my breath..

Thanks, James. I guess the hoopla at the time was over her being a SAL offspring, but not a pure Florida SAL offspring.

It's really about timing of stockings. You can stock all the amazing genetically superior fish you want but if the lake is low and void of cover, you're feeding the white bass and crappie.

Must have never been on Marine Creek. The bottom of the lake is a vast wasteland with no cover, since they killed the hydrilla 20 years ago.

True that. The baitfish population is also fairly poor for Marine Creek. If I'm not mistaken, the size and water quality make it difficult for forage species such as shad to be abundant. Plenty of sunfish but no shad and no cover isn't a great recipe for growing monster bass. There are some good ones in Marine Creek but I view them mostly as anomalies. just my 2 cents.

The question has never been if the program works- it's that it has been misused and people have been lied to about their intent- did you forget about the large political donator getting all those fingerling and then charging over 1000 a day to fish or what they did to the man in Athens who donated his lunker and then he returned all the things they had given him- it's the people not the program and the list is very long and I only mentioned a few of happenings all in the name of the program

If you're gonna make accusations, please have the manhood to name names. I'd like to know the "political contributor" you speak of is. I have an idea you're talking about La Perlia in South Texas. If so, that's far from the accurate story.

But... a fish that size on that lake has plenty to eat, like all the 12-14" bass that seem to have been the only thing I could get in the boat.

On a side note, there were 9s and 10s being caught out of there 3 or 4 years ago, it's good to see that some of that class has made it to the teens. A buddy of mine caught a 9 there in 2012 that was about as pretty a fish as you could imagine, looked like a Fork fish from the 90s.

1 over 13 doesn't make it the next fork. There have been plenty of random 13's caught from small lakes and ponds all over the state.

Longer growing season at Falcon compared to Marine Creek.

I don't think anyone said it's the next fork. This is a couple hundred acre bowl with no cover and almost no forage. I think it's amazing one made to the teens.

Since the frame of reference is 13 pounds, in my opinion, if a 13-plus-pound bass can be confirmed by genetic analysis to be the offspring of a SL then it would be a data point. Since the 14.12 was caught outside of the season I suspect no fin clip was taken. So while the fish could have still been the genuine article I believe there was no scientific proof. If that was the case, it wouldn't be accepted by the scientific community.

I just think you should let nature be natural.

The Florida stain is cool but trying to brood a new world record dilutes the title. IMO

From what I understand, the study consists of four lakes. Each lake was stocked once with SL fingerlings and Florida bass fingerlings over a four year period. So if the first lake was stocked let's say in 2011, then the last lake would have been stocked in 2014. Since the growth comparison is made when the fish are 4 years old, the last sample should be collected from the last lake in 2018. Give them a couple of years to write it up, and you should have the results by about 2020 at the very earliest.

Never heard that one

Where did you get the details on this trial? That is not the way I understood it to run at all.. Why would you need to do it over a four year period of stocking? And why all the mystery from PAW? Maybe this was a different "Test"..

They're about as transparent as the Obamma administration..

Has the average size of bass caught increased over time? Last I looked at Rayburn and toledo it stays pretty constant. Driscoll puts out a report yearly based on big tourney results. I admit I haven't seen one that goes back past a few years, but that's why I ask. If the program was working the average size of fish would be increasing. With a 1-3% survival rate I would think our money would be much better spent on increasing that number. I know, I know, it's a sponsored program and all that b.s.

Have you seen Marine Creek lake? I agree the growth rate is not that special but for a bass to get to 13# in that mud hole is pretty special.

Rayburn is a new lake every 5 years or so when it floods for a couple years then gets really low that's the one saving factor it has going. Without those drastic water levels it would suck with the immense tournament pressure. The stockings help but they mean nothing without the flooded cover allowing both bass and forage to thrive

I agree totally. It amazes me how some seem to have an axe to grind against TPWD. If it wasn't for TPWD, we wouldn't even have Florida strain bass here in Texas.
"Negativity abounds on the Forum"
Next month, I will be setting a fifth wheel on the shore of Mother Fork, I will do all I can to catch my 13# bass before I croak. If I don't, no big deal!

I think it is safe to say that the Sharelunker program has more opposition now than it did ten years ago. This can't be for no reason.

Hmmm... well if your goal is to catch a 13+ I'd recommend Lake Austin... oh wait, TPWD destroyed the ecosystem there and the lake that once produced numerous fish over 13 lbs every year and numerous bags over 40 lbs has been reduced to one of the worst lakes in Texas in the span of 1 year.

I talked with Greg Binion at TPWD - 361-547-9712.

According to the published article on the first selective breeding program evaluation, age-4 is the best time for making growth comparisons. If the bass are younger, the differences in growth will be less distinct/meaningful, and if the bass are older/bigger it is harder to pick them up by electrofishing. Here's the article on the first study: http://www.seafwa.org/publications/journal/?id=402025.

I didn't hear about a different test.

Agree.

Makes one wonder why that lake was selected for OWR.

You'd think they'd have selected remote lakes far away from any metroplex, with good annual rainfall totals, and more southern locals (less chance of deep freezes)

Jaret's assertion made me want to look at some statistics and, sure enough, of the two lakes I researched, black bass were much more heavily harvested on Toledo Bend than on Lake Fork.

Why did I compare to Lake Fork? Well, I sort of thought that it might be considered more of a sport fishing lake, that, and being near D/FW. Toledo Bend, on the other hand, sort of ties back to the idea that more rural areas likely rely a bit more on lakes for a food/protein source.

Here, though the tables aren't exactly formatted the same (???), it shows that for legal fish (those you'd have a right to harvest based on their sizes) caught on Lake Fork, all but a percent or two are returned to the water. On Toledo Bend, the numbers of legal fish released are much lower across several different studied periods.

First chart is Lake Fork, second is Toledo Bend.

Brad

And Toledo has an 8 fish limit with a Louisiana license I believe also. Lots of 5+ fish go to the grease over there.

I have a hard time giving much credit to a table that has "basses" in the title. LOL

It does sound funny to most ears; but, it is technically correct when referring to two or more species of black bass.

Sounds to me like they may refer to all of them as "yummy" down near Toledo Bend!

Brad

That test was SL fish versus native fish, was it not?

It probably was but they didn't like the outcome so it got pushed to the side. They can't let go of all that sponsor money

The Naconichie fish wasn't pure florida but it was in a group that was release in 2009 that weighed 2.2 to 3.3 pounds. When I caught her in 2013 she was 12.54. So in 4 years she gain 9 to 10 pounds depending on her weight in 2009. Yes she was the first data point.

"That test was SL fish versus native fish, was it not? " - NoWeighers

The published study was about comparing age-4 selectively bred SL offspring with age-4 resident LMB. By resident fish, they meant any other LMB in the lake at that time, regardless of genetics. I believe most of these resident fish had some degree of Florida bass influence in their genetics because all the study lakes had been stocked with pure Florida bass in the past. They found that on average, the SL fish were about 1/2-pound heavier at age-4 then the resident age-4 LMB.

The ongoing new study is comparing the growth of age-4 selectively bred SL offspring with age-4 pure Florida bass.

Absolutely. I'd be ecstatic!

Some selectively bred bass can get to 8 pounds by 4 years old, so I don't doubt the very fast growth rate of the fish you caught (I'm guessing it was verified by genetic testing or had a pit tag, correct?). Also, as far as I'm concerned it shouldn't matter if it is pure Florida or not, it obviously was a special fish to grow that fast. However, in my opinion, when we're talking about the Marine Creek fish, it is the first data point because it crossed the 13-pound mark. That is a significant milestone according to many bass anglers (even when they don't submit the fish to the SL program). There was a 10+ caught from Marine Creek a few years ago and was confirmed by DNA testing to be a selectively breed LMB. It could be argued that this fish was a data point too. However, I don't think that counts because it was less then 13 pounds. You've got to set the bar somewhere and in my mind the frame of reference should be the ShareLunker qualifying weight.

The main goals of the Sharelunker program is to increase awareness of catch and release, caring for big fish, and spreading the popularity of bass fishing to boost economic output. Says it right there on their website.

All the science about genetics and whether or not this or that bass was a descendant of a SAL brood fish, along with the "Operation World Record" program are all ways to promote the program to achieve the above goals and they achieved them very effectively. Not to mention the free replica and lifetime fishing license incentives for donating. They achieved their goals whether or not the breeding program actually "worked" or "failed" or whether or not the program resulted in damage to the 13+ pound fish population. It drew attention to the sport and still draws attention and that is what TPWD wants. Attention to the sport is also what tackle dealers, fishing guides, gas station owners, and hotel/resort owners want.

There is certainly far more awareness now of catch and release in our state, fish care, and more money spent on bass fishing than there was 30 years ago and the Sharelunker program has played a part in that so in that respect, the program is a success irregardless of your standpoint on the science projects they conduct. And say what you will but the bass fishing in Texas is pretty damn good if you ask me.

AgSellers04^^^^+1

To those of us that have watched this program from its inception, it is clear to see that the goalposts have been moved on several occasions.

All programs evolve with time.. Rightly so.. This was an experiment after all..

SL has done a lot to promote fishing in the state of Texas. No one has said differently..

But when it comes to growing more big fish faster.. Well the facts are there.. It ain't happening..

It's all about having the most Florida genes in place possible when we get lucky enough to have good conditions for an extended period of time that leads to a batch of big fish.. That's a fact..

Mix in a few scandals, kill a bunch of big fish, blame the public for it, and suddenly it is easy to see why the program can loose popularity with the fishermen..

Especially when you look at the disappearance of truly big fish, mostly caused by the bounty on the thirteens..

I have spent hours looking at the data and the numbers.. And I hate math.. But the numbers don't lie..

Summed up my thoughts perfectly

My issue at the end of the day is the amount of money that can be better allocated to other resources to improve the fisheries. This genetic flim flam has such low odds when compared to all the other factors which mainly have to do with the environment.

Lake Austin is a great case, look at all the monster bags coming out of there because the environment had all the right factors in place for years to allow those bass to grow. Weather patterns have a HUGE effect on the growth rate of these fish.

We cannot control the weather but we can control to an extent the environment. I would rather see more money allocated to habitat management. Native grasses, soil control, water quality testing and baitfish improvement. Genetics doesn't mean a hill of beans if the other factors aren't there.

What that article shows me is that an old fish with superior genetics grew to monster size. Maybe a fish with inferior genetics doesn't get that big in an ecosystem with limited habitat and forage. But I can guarantee you one thing, an inferior genetics fish will get to very large proportions and sometimes monster size in the right habitat with the right forage.

If all the other fish of that same class year are 8lbs and this fish is 13lbs it could indeed be a very special fish. There needs to be a controlled experiment here. Somebody on here with deep pockets and some time on their hands should do us all a favor and conduct this experiment. Step 1: Build two identical ponds roughly 1 acre each. Stock them with bluegill and let them do their thing for two years. Catch a two pound female largemouth from a body of water that has not been stocked with FL strain bass. (I'd think there are still a few left). Next buy a 2lb female from Mike Frazier out at bell. Let these bass loose in the separate ponds. Drain them a year latter and see what the results are. Repeat this a half dozen times and the answer to the question on genetics has been answered.

Ready go.

I don't know how many SALs have died due to the program, but I seriously doubt if it's over 100. Obviously that number is not out of one single lake. I think it would be a valid statement to say not more than 1 lake has had more 5 13+lb fish permanently removed from it. In the big picture, does this really make a big difference in a lake?

As said above, Mother Nature and some of the smart people calling the shots have way more influence on the quality and quantity of fish in a fishery.

Then you'd be wrong. Very wrong. Do you really believe that Lake Fork has had five or less 13+ pound fish permanently removed from it since the 1986 inception? I won't do the research for you, but it's readily available online.

Also of note.. All of the fish, with the exception of one, after being released back into the wild after surviving the Sharelunker Spawning Experience, have lost weight the next time they were caught and re-evaluated.

There is not a big number of these fish.. I can't remember how many there are, a handful or so, but going thru the SL program seems to put a stop to their growth cycle..

For whatever it's worth..

Are you sayin the TPWD SAL program is nothing more than a Bigbass Brothel Fatcamp

Turns out the fish was an offspring of a Share A Lunker caught from Lake Conroe.

CONFIRMED!!
The recent entry into the Toyota ShareLunker Program from Marine Creek Lake by Ryder Wicker, was just confirmed to be the daughter of previous ShareLunker 410! This new catch is evidence that ShareLunker offspring have greater growth potential and ultimate size than non-ShareLunker bass!

ShareLunker 410 was caught on 3/22/2006 from Lake Conroe, donated to the ShareLunker program by angler Edward Reid, and paired up with a male ShareLunker offspring at the Texas Freshwater Fisheries Center hatchery in Athens, Texas. One of the 5,000 (or so) fingerlings produced by that pair and stocked into Marine Creek Lake grew up to 13.07 pounds in less than 11 years and shattered the previous lake record of 10.78 lbs when it was caught last Friday!

The stocking that included ShareLunker 566 and her siblings was done as part of a ShareLunker evaluation research project, designed to compare growth of ShareLunker fingerlings to growth of the resident bass population in several Texas lakes including Marine Creek. The catch of ShareLunker 566 from Marine Creek Lake not only validates the success of TPWD’s selective breeding program at producing ShareLunker-size bass, but also demonstrates how anglers can help others by donating their ShareLunkers for breeding purposes. Mr. Wicker can tip his hat to Mr. Reid for making this moment possible!

#ToyotaShareLunker

That's a stretch of a statement. That is based on one fish that grew to 13lbs in 11 years. To make the statement that proves that ShareLunker offspring have greater growth potential than non-sharelunker is very suspect...........

Genetics schmemetics........... Most bass don't even live to 11 years old, so genetics won't mean squat if it can't get that old because of habitat, forage, and water quality.

Most bass will grow to 2 lbs within the first year, after that it's about a 1/2 pound a year. It is impressive that this fish beat the odds and grew at almost double the average to about 1 pound per year. But it still fails the big experiment of producing a new World Record, much less a Texas State Record. The Texas state record as we all know as 18.18 pounds. We don't know the age of that fish either. However..... we know the Lake Fork was impounded in 1980. So potentially that fish was 12 years old since it was caught in 1992. So that fish grew at a rate of 1 1/3 lbs per year, better than the Operation World Record Fish, just an ol' Florida.

Now is where it get's really interesting. In the top 20 bass caught in Texas only 4 have been caught since 2000 and to make the top 20 you must be 16lbs or bigger. Number 2 on the list is a 17.67 caught in 1986 on Lake Fork......Odd that fish was only 6 years old 'IF' it was one of the original Florida's stocked in 1980. That's insane growth rate! (more likely that fish was in an old pond that got flooded when the lake was impounded) At 6 years old that fish put on 2.61 lbs per year! Virtually any fish on the top 6 from Lake Fork beat this one fish in growth rate.

Habitat and Forage folks.......

Ray Sasser thinks the program needs to be changed Click here for article

I think people talking about poor genetic fish who get good nutrition will grow into giants is like saying the son of a 5'6" man and a 5' woman given the right nutrition will grow to be 7 ft. and play in the NBA. Good nutrition will allow the boy (and fish) to reach its genetic peak but nutrition will not allow them to exceed their genetic code. To deny that genetic makeup is the primary driver to extremely large growth goes against everything scientific and belongs in the Marvel comics.

And while I have a lot of respect for Ray Sasser and his writings thru the years I think he went to extremes with his comment he would not "donate a 13lb + to the program because they stocked some fingerlings in private lakes". Instead of blasting the program in its entirety he should have went after the issue of using public funds to put fish in private waters. He took one small issue and condemned the program in its entirety. I do agree with changes need to be made to the program to bring it more into the common mans realm. Like he says in his article an 8lber is most peoples dream fish. SAL has to bring this realization into their program to recover the public opinion they have lost.

What pure and total bull [censored].. Writing [censored] like this by PAW is embarrassing..

Everyone knows that Pure Florida fish grow faster than native fish..

And growing a thirteen in eleven years is by far no feat..

And to add to the story, was this one of the fish that was raised to a size a lot bigger than a fingerling before stocking? I'd like to know.. It would not be an issue to me if they decided to grow them to twelve inches before they stocked them in all lakes.. It's a hellova jumpstart for a fish to be pond raised like a fatted calf before stocking..

Was it?

Joefishin

Below is from the Texas A&M AquaLife Extension Aquaculture website. As you will read most Fishery Biologists do not use lbs. to measure growth, but use inches instead. We have all caught 12" fish that might be 1-1/2lbs or bigger, but that is the exception.

Largemouth can grow to more than 2 pounds their first year under ideal conditions, but in nature about 0.5 pound is normal. Females are normally larger than males. The maximum size of the Northern largemouth is about 10 pounds, while a large female Florida largemouth may reach 20 pounds. In Texas lakes, typical size at year 1 is 8″, year 2 is 12″, year 3 is 15″, year 4 is 17″, and year 5 is 18″.

Should have read inch instead of &#8243. Didn't cut and paste well

James. Could some of your hated for the TP&W be because you think they have abandoned Falcon Lake. That you are mad because TP&W (who made the initial stockings of Fla. into Falcon that got it where it is today) will not stock Strippers and Largemouth in the lake anymore because they were tired of seeing them caught in some Mexican's net. Do you think the Fla's you are catching now swam over from Fla. and stocked themselves.

Why don't the people who live on Falcon Lake do like the ones who live around T-bend. Buy your own fingerlings and stock them yourself. Yes this has been an ongoing project of the Toledo Bend Landowners association for at 10yrs. I know of.

This the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. I've never commented on this before because it was told to me in private. But now that it's out there, the purpose of the program was and still is "a beacon of light" on Texas bass fishing.

All of the other genetic modeling and attempts to grow a WR came later.

Folks get rubbed wrong when TPWD and many of their supporters (of which I'm one) put out other info to make the program seem more sexy. Just call it what it is and be done with it.

As for public funds being used to stock private waters, that's BS. The program is funded entirely by Gulf States Toyota and federal grants. Those grants would not be available to the program were it not for GST footing the majority of the expenses. Additionally, the TFWFC in Athens was built with private donations. No public funds were used.

So know that your contribution of a SAL to the program is primarily for PR purposes. You decide if that's right for you and act accordingly, should you ever be fortunate and lucky enough to boat a SAL. The SAL program has certainly helped to build recognition but, were it not for Mr. Bob Kemp, none of this would have been possible. He is solely responsible for the introduction of Florida bass to Texas waters.

thanks

I believe we all have our own opinions on this subject. I just don't understand the objection to this organization. They do not take money from us to try and help bass fishing in Texas. I can understand everyone having a difference of opinion but when at worst they take a fish out of our home lake to try and help the generics of other lakes for us to fish or others home lake. I have a hard time believing we really do not want others to enjoy a big fish breed from fish from our home lake. I just wish we could get past the my lake is better then yours and all of us let the TP&W do the best they can for us and our lakes. I hope we can have great lakes in Texas for many years to come with or without TP&W help. I can only think Toyota for at least trying to help us in the bass fishing industry. I know a lot of people get mad at the SAL being removed and breed to help other lakes because they think it is hurting their home lake. I am guessing if we really were worried about the fish in our home lake being in better shape we would stop bass fishing tournaments to save the fish killed in those tournaments. This will let the bass grow up to be a big fish that came from the very SAL we are talking about. I do not believe that either is hurting the lakes as much as some believe because nature has a way of taking care of over population on its own. just my .02

Long time state record was over 10lbs and it was not Florida strain, the use of the word "maximum" might have been a bit much.

If you don't think politics are involved you live in a very small shoe. Politics are ALWAYS involved in any state or ferdeal run agency. I can hear them now...We're gonna grow the biggest largemouth bass in the country maybe even the world and fisherman will come from everywhere to spend their money here. The truth is it hasn't worked. Search the top 50 largemouth bass caught in Texas and look at the dates. Enough said.

Fouz.. I am going to have to disagree with you on one point.. The city of Athens contributed 4 to 5 million to the construction of the TFFC.. Last time I checked, cities get their revenue from the citizens and that indeed was taxpayer monies..

I personally want no stripers in Falcon, but that is just my opinion and I have no control over whether it happens or not..

If you would have done your homework you would have known that PAW has stocked near a half million Florida bass in Falcon every year for long time now..

Many people think.I don't like PAW.. Nothing is farther from the truth.

But many people on this site are ignorant and have not taken the time to objectively examine the SL program. .

Before any of you get offended, look up the definition of ignorant.. You'll find it means uninformed. .

Do you work for TPWD or have any business ties with them? It seems no matter what they say, do or survey they release, you are in love with whatever they say. What's the special meaning of this fish having a partial genetic gene from another fish. Heck, how many fry does a bass have every year and it's happened 2 or 3 now in a billion years. The program is a joke, but if it is truly tax free money (doubtful), then whatever..waste away.

No, I do not work for TP&W. No, I do not have a business relationship with TP&W. The Texas state record for largemouth bass was 13 pounds and 8 ounces caught at Medina Lake in 1943. How many fish over 13.5 pounds have been caught thanks to TP&W selective breeding and stocking and how many lakes have given up larger fish since TP&W started breeding and stocking large mouth bass? That record speaks for itself. Look at how many lakes and water bodies TP&W manages, then add the saltwater management and then try to convince me TP&W is not doing a great job.

James, I'll always welcome a healthy debate. I've been proven wrong many times before. Learned a helluva lot in the process. This may be fouz's mockingbird mouth overloading his humminbird arse. Once again.

The "Athens community" doesn't mean the tax base, in a literal sense. The funds came from BIG landowners in the area. Most of them old time oil money from Highland Park and the east Texas oil fields. Some of the same folks that are founding members of Koon Kreek Klub.

The state of art fisheries facilities in Athens are named after Edwin L. Cox for a reason. And it isn't taxpayer dollars, amigo. If Athens gave anything directly, it was undeveloped city property which has long since been depreciated off their balance sheet.

http://tpwd.texas.gov/spdest/visitorcenters/tffc/sharelunker/history/

ChuChu, the 1943 state record was a Northern Strain Largemouth. Every single giant largemouth bass caught since November of 1986 have one thing in common, and it's not the SAL program, selective breeding or anything other than alleles. Specifically alleles from pure, Florida largemouth bass. Those came from Bob Kemp in 1974. Everything else since is window dressing.

We (state) can buy pure florida LMB. Many more than we can raise for the same $. Why don't we?

Chu, they manage some areas better than others. South and Central Texas are not taken care of very well, maybe that's why I don't feel the love for them that you do. Your area might be better taken care of.


Something else and I'm most likely in the minority here, but I go fishing to go fishing, I don't have to have every bass in the lake be a Florida strain. I'm just fine catching northern strain, in fact we all know they floridas are hard to catch in colder weather. I want easy dumb fish to catch, stock more of the dumb fish.

This reminds me of a political debate. One side wants the bass to have the freedom to make it on their own. The other side thinks it's best to take the offspring and distribute it to the less fortunate lakes.
Just kidding... kind of. I realize that a majority of the offspring go back to the original lake. As well as the fish.

This is an excerpt from a story titled "Stock Market" I did for the March 2017 issue of Texas Fish and Game Magazine.

"No one can deny that Kemp knocked a home run by bringing Florida bass to Texas at a time when the state was teeming with robust, new reservoirs. Interestingly, however, the Kemp bass may not have been the very first Floridas introduced to Texas waters. In fact, scientists discovered through genetics testing in the early 1990s that Florida bass may have arrived in Texas decades earlier.
 The evidence surfaced after TPWD biologists obtained scale samples from the original skin mount of the former 13.50 pound state record bass that was caught from Lake Medina way back in 1943.
 According to Todd Engeling, TPWD's freshwater hatchery chief, the analysis showed that there was some level of Florida influence in the Medina fish and that the bass presumably found its way to in the 5,400-acre Hill Country reservoir via an "undocumented" private stocking."
Very interesting. Not many people are aware of this. I certainly wasn't until I dug into the story. You can read the full story in the Feb. 2017 issue of Texas Fish and Game.

The Texas Freshwater Fisheries Center is an $18 million facility built without the use of state funds even though it belongs to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, an agency of the state of Texas. Many public and private entities worked with the Texas Parks and Wildlife Foundation to raise this money.
Much of the money came from the Sport Fish and Wildlife Restoration Fund, a federal program funded by a tax on purchases made by hunters and anglers. The City of Athens provided a financial package worth $4,063,000, the largest single gift ever made to a conservation project in the state of Texas. Additional support came from the ShareLunker Foundation, Inc., the Athens Municipal Water Authority, the Athens Economic Development Commission and a number of private corporations.

Call it what you want.. But if it came from a government entity, a municipality, or the or the Sport Fish Resto fund, then it is tax payer money.. You can call it what you want.. But that is just spin to me..

IMHO..

Well, as always I enjoyed reading this month's debate on the ShareLunker program. I'm still a fan, but even after countless forays into this topic, there is always some ancient bit of forgotten knowledge that still surfaces. That makes it worth the read. Good stuff gents.

Donate and sponsor the Share A Lunker program and you will get appointed to the TPWD Commission. This is very typical in most Texas agencies

T. Dan Friedkin is a prime example, I see he is part of the Gulf State Toyota, I would assume part of the SAL sponsorhip

http://tpwd.texas.gov/about/tpw-commissioners

That is interesting indeed.
And wow! All you guys are having a good debate. I'm also learning a lot just reading. There is a whole lot more to it than meets the eye.

I live and fish right in the middle of Texas. That is a poor argument. As far as Share A Lunker, it brings in a lot of needed money for TP&W. I don't fish for trophies, I fish for fish and fun.

Good for TPWD, now if they can start stocking trout in our lakes

Measurements or Weight do not invalidate the data that I put forth. Why are the Fork fish more impressive then then genetically altered fish? They are just Florida bass......... That's my argument, put in some good ol Florida with good habitat and you achieve the same thing they achieved with their million dollar genetically altered fish.

SAL may be largely privately funded, but Operation World Record is not. They are two different programs and OWR has been around longer. My whole point is I would rather see some of the money spent on Habitat and not all on Genetics.