A State Record bass in Texas ?

Is it possible to grow a state record if you take every 13 pound plus fish out of the lake?
Now this fish has the potential to
Grow to state record if it has made it to 13 it can make it to 19 plus but not if it is gone,
Just thinking out loud and would like to hear your thoughts
Along with this I have had a client donate a 13.07
And she spawn and was released back into the lake
And I have released a 13.25 I caught right back in lake


just would like to see super giants again this year is on a roll

Curious as to what "No Weighers" has to say. I dont know the answer but I bet a lot of 13LB bass dont get caught!

Doesn’t share-a-lunker program release the fish back into the lake they were caught after they are breed them and assuming they survive?

And I don’t think every 13lb plus Bass in Texas lakes gets caught. But after what I saw at Fork in Texas fest and what Millikan did on OH Ivie last week I believe we will see several new records in the years to come.

Not many have ever fished for suspended fish above trees in 40 feet of water like that or did what Walters did in Fork. Forward facing sonar has changed the game for good or bad.

They better be feeding them well in Athens if they are going to get them to state record size.

What if all those giants are there because of ShareLunker fry being put in the lake from donated fish? It’s a double edged sword. Would Ivie have the numbers of giants showing up without it? Super curious how many of these have genetics that tie back to the SAL program.

Good thought it would be nice to know

They are mostly returned to the lake (minus the very few that die) but I have often wondered what kind of trauma they might endure when transported to and fro?

We will know in time whom they share their genes with!

The 13.07 that was caught by Dale Washington in 2007 had been caught donated and released the year before
So some fish make it thru but made no weight gain

TPWD does check the fish genetics to confirm if the SAL is an offspring from another SAL, They might even have that info published. I saw somewhere where a sal was caught and they did trace the gene pool back to one as well.

I think it is not a good program for the lakes that these fish are being taken out of. Maybe good for the state.
I agree if these fish are taken out it makes it harder to grow a state record.
And unlike some I think about 90% of the 13 plus fish are donated to the program. Not many get put back in.
Most everyone wants their 15 minutes.

There was a report many years ago about the C & R at Fork.

They had many tagged fish that were caught multiple times and the weights recorded.

Most all of them seemed to be stunted by the repeated C & R as their weights over a couple years or so didn't change much.

Ok, so let’s say that 1 in every 50 has a tie back to a momma SAL, so far it seems to be way lower numbers than that. I can think of 2 that have been traced, could be more that I missed though.

I’ve learned that the Internet is a lake killer, unless I caught a state record (which isn’t gonna happen) it’s not getting reported to the state.

It is my opinion that the record would be broken by now if they would stop removing SAL from lakes.

What if those 13 plus pound fish spawn in their home lake ?
Would that help the genetics in that lake

I would think it would for sure. Obviously a lake like Ivie or Fork has good genetics so keeping those fish in the lakes natuarally would do good.

So the share a lunker program started in 1986, Barry caught the state record in 1992, so it most likely was not a share a lunker offspring.
Since then nothing withing a couple pounds has been caught and virtually every fish caught over 13 has been taken out of the lake. It doesn't take much of a leap to figure taking these fish out the lakes hurts it.

I'm as over the sharelunker argument as I am the MLF vs BASS argument. Clearly most bass anglers in Texas don't support it, so I'm not sure why they keep this thing going. I've always supported the program in the past, but TPWD has yet to prove that the Sharelunker program has made a single contribution toward improving the likelihood of catching a State Record giant bass in Texas lakes. Or if they have proved that point, I have not seen it. The reality is that the answer to the OP's question is that no matter the genetics, we likely no longer have the proper ecosystem to grow a state record bass. No matter what genetics we stock.

Personally, I'm to the point that I wish TPWD would just go back to stocking native northern bass in our lakes again. Especially the lakes in the northern half of the state. Most of the literature I read these days leans toward the fact that our Texas lakes have aged, become silted in, and have become devoid of aquatic vegetation. Those factors plus increased pressure lead many to believe that no matter how good the genetic are, our lakes simply will not ever be able to grow the State Record giants that the sharelunker program and the Florida Genetics stocking program aim to achieve. So why even deal with the negative attributes of Florida genetics when the environments we are putting them in are not capable of supporting the desired goal of State Record giants? Why waste the time and money on the Sharelunker program when we are putting those bass in the same environments? Seems to me that all we are accomplishing with the Sharlunker program is wasting money. Likewise, all we are accomplishing with stocking of Florida genetics is breeding a group of fish that are harder to catch and hate anything that resembles cold water. Like the OP, I'm just thinking out loud. I'm sure someone way smarter than me will tell me where I am wrong here.

I have a hard time thinking the SAL program doesn't help the overall size and productivity .
Here's an example regarding " SAL " sized bass being left to breed and size themselves within the lake .
Lake Amador , Stockton Calif . Had Florida strains brought in early 70's ( might have started in late 60's ?) . Within a few short years , the lake record is caught 17.4lbs . They stopped stocking the Florida's and eventually those " pure strain " Florida's started breeding with true " Northern " strains that were already in the lake , nothing close to 17 has been caught since . You can imagine this lake was absolutely pounded with bass guys for years after the 17lber . This particular lake is deep ( 250+ feet ) , has TONS of food , including stocked trout . This lake still kicks out lots of 10+ bass , but nothing like a 17lber .
Is there another 17 in this lake = YES , is there as many as previously = NO . The Florida strains " breed " down in size with the smaller Northern's .

Good point!

I think the SAL program is and has been a waste of resources.

Would the state be better off disbanding the program, stocking tons more Florida bass , and maybe trying to develop a higher grade of forage fish. Certainly in the 3 decades of the SAL program we should be seeing a better return for the money invested.

To be certain in the early days the theory of growing giant bass sounded great. It works in the farming/ranching world. but after this long a period isn't the proof in the pudding? there's about a 16% mortality rate of brood fish and last year of 4 Legacy Class ShareLunkers donated 2 died. Stress !

I'm no longer a fan of the SAL program.

Good points
Maybe efforts should be how to grow Hydrilla and better the water quality and forage base

SAL program is a Gimmick, it's just for publicity, I had a marine biologist tell me this 25 years ago.

The 13.07 that was caught by Dale Washington in 2007 had been caught donated and released the year before
So some fish make it thru but made no weight gain [/quot
I was happy for Dale when he caught that fish. But damn I had to hear about it for months. Lol

I heard that when they die, they stop growing. So...as long as they make it back to the lake, I guess it’s possible.

They need to shoot those fish up with trenbolone acetate

It baffles me and lakes like Fork, Toledo Bend, Rayburn etc. do not have TPWD full attention regarding grass growth. Its supper easy.... Grow grass you grow bass every lake that used to have grass is now worse without it. Every dang one of them, fork doesn't have wake board boats or massive amounts of party cruisers. It doesn't have large marinas that would petition for the grass to be sprayed. There is no reason why TPWD shouldn't be focused on growing hydrilla is every lake that receives most of its public used from fishing.

Lots of good theories here. I live in Kansas and they don't do much of anything for bass here. You guys are truly lucky....

Those 13+ fish do spawn in their home lakes. Many, many times. Thousands upon thousands of fry. Their genetics are the same when they are 3 pounds vs 13 pounds.

I think the value in the SAL program is the DNA studies that are ongoing with the fish.

The minute number of fish going to the SAL program have next to zero adverse effects to the lake. They are just one (or a few) of many in that lake.

If camelot bell can't grow a 17-18 it'll be very difficult on a public lake. Even California struggling to put out giants with perfect genetics, perfect forage, and temps since the stockings got cut.

ive had many SAL's under my care for years and only 3 got over 15lbs. IMHO an 18lb+ lmb is a freak of nature compareable to a 7ft+ tall person. just doesnt happen hardly at all. i would guess less than 1% of any bass over 13lbs has the capability of reaching over 18lbs.

Lol,,, true

True, guess point was to keep the spawn /fry in the lake natural for the life of the fish

+1 Steez. Totally agree with you and believe removing the fish does not help at all.

I think it will happen because we now have the ability to stay 75 feet away and put our lure in front of these giants multiple times. In John hope’s book tracking trophy’s he found the giants he tracked would bail if they heard any boat noise. Forward facing sonar in the hands of a very experienced angler searching for that one fish I think is the formula. We have the ability to know what is swimming in Fork and what is following our lures. TX is already showing 15 and 16 pound bass. No has even been fishing fork since snowmageddon until bass champs. Those guys were not focused on giants. It will happen in the next few years maybe this year. Maybe the youtubers will show up at fork for megabass at the end of March, full moon 3/28. Should be epic. See if anyone uses forward sonar to find giants on beds you can’t see otherwise and catch them.

The biggest waste of resources are the trout stockings. Best would be cormorant control.

With the small per cent that they remove what can it hurt, there's probably 30 over 13 in Ivie.

Growing big bass is SIMPLE. Genetics + Forage + A long lifespan = Big bass.

The problem is if you screw up any of these variables you don't get big bass.

You can have the best forage in the world, but if you have poor genetics you are not going to get a giant. Feed your kid as much as you want, they aren't going to be a seven footer. It's not genetically possible for them. Talk to the old timers who have said time and time again on here an 8lber USED to be a RARE fish in Texas.

You can have the best genetics in the world but if you have lousy forage you are not going to get big bass. So you guys saying our reservoirs are old we don't have grass you are RIGHT, the age of our reservoirs is absolutely working against us.

Lastly, you can have the best genetics and the best forage, but if you don't have a long runway (life span) you don't get giants. Fishing pressure and our climate are the biggest issue here. Northern Texas is generally too cold, the fish grow too slow to get big in their allotted life span, southern Texas is too warm, metabolic burn out causes them to have a short life span. Same reason you don't see 15's caught out of South Florida. Same reason Gary Schwartz has an uphill battle at La Perla. And then you have fishing pressure. Every time a fish is caught and handled the chance of increased mortality goes up. We have the same acres of water today as 15 years ago, yet we have millions more bass anglers. Pressure is working against us. Camelot Bell faces this problem.

So anyway... The ShareLunker program only addresses 1/3 variables needed to grow big bass. Genetics. The ShareLunker program is spreading big bass genetics all over our state. That's a great thing. One variable right is better than zero variables right. I fully believe our state is far better off with this program than without it. The guys arguing it's not a panacea are correct as well. We would be wise work on forage, vegetation, and fishing pressure (tournaments, slots, and limits) as well. If we don't do the later in conjunction with the genetics new records are going to be tough to come by.

I’m fine with the SAL program, even if it never produces a state record (and I think there is a state record in a Texas lake somewhere). The data the program generates is worth it. Stocking SAL offspring helps a lot of lakes around the state.

What id like to see is forage stocking at a higher rate. I feel like a lot of lakes are suffering with poor baitfish and other forage for bass. Secondly, some sort of middle ground can be achieved with the grass issue. But I think an increase in stocking shad would help a lot of lakes out.

2 of the above mentioned can be helped by aquatic vegetation, forage and lifespan. Giving baitfish and bass cover from grass only helps the fishery...I still don't understand why the powers that be don't get that.

Obviously you would never get a state record if "every" 13 lb fish was taken out of the lake.

However, only a small fraction of the 13 lb fish are even caught in the first place.

A few other things, among many others factors to consider about teen sized bass is that they are near the end of their lives and their genetics have been produced during their prime for many years. There are hundreds if not thousands of private waters like La Perla or Camelot Bell all over the lower 48 with millions of dollars spent to produce a new world record. Its just doesn't work that way or the record would have been raised years ago. I still remember calls to my office offering up to 6 figures to smuggle "Flo", the largest bass ever caught by a female angler in Texas, from Bass Pro Shops. Always just laughed thinking ok, I'll just walk out with a 16lb bass down my pants? Still wonder how many of those calls were from Springfield trying to test my morals. So many variables have to line up just perfectly for a new record to be caught. And I hope it happens in Texas. I also hope most will realize what our reservoirs were built for. Fishing is not on top of the list nor should be imo.

or just maybe they believe in the program.............

I for one feel lucky and fortunate to live in Texas where our parks and wildlife programs shine way above most, if not all of the rest in the country.

How do you know that? I understand you are assuming this but we don’t know that.
It seems a lot of big fish live in Wolfpack type schools when in the deep open water.
What’s to say that a large percentage of 13 lb plus bass are not taken from the lakes year after year.

very true

This could happen

I thought TPWD did some tracking devices on some of the big bass. Whatever became of that data ?

Ken Smith has some videos on YouTube, nothing posted lately about those results.

Livescope will see some biguns in the next few years. They have been out swimming in no mans land. Now they can’t hide. Your going to see some 15#+ fish.

It’s also going to drive a bunch that spring for it crazy. Not the easiest to master. Rode with Walters on Fork on day 2. Crazy how he could make the fish bite. Most of what he caught followed the bait a pretty good distance.

Best I can answer this is maybe but I do agree that the fish needs to stay in the lake.

Here is the Fact at this time....... NO SAL OFFSPRING FISH HAS EVER MADE THE TOP 50 IN TEXAS !

This program began in 1986 !

Still waiting to hear the result from the 16.40 from IVIE. It maybe the first.

I double checked the FACTS before I posted just so I had the FACTS right.

post your facts

I did post the facts above. ^^^^^^

Call TPW and talk with them I did.

I spoke with them before I posted !

Fact is correct

I speak with the biologist on a regular bases.

The SAL program has been going on for years and years!
I don't know exactly how long, but 13+ bass have been weighed in way back since it started and if those fish made it and were put back into the lake why haven't we seen the records falling after all these years?
There has to come a point where the experiment has to be deemed a success or failure you would think?

As discussed, some fish only get so big. It's been shown that 16lbs is pretty much the threshold for bass in Texas.

Deeming SAL a success or failure seems to be based on what you deem a success. Admittedly, I have not researched the original purpose of the SAL program, so I am asking for clarification not to be a smart a** - Was SAL created for the purpose of creating a state record? Or, was it created to improve the overall genetic pool (e.g., to generate larger bass in general)? Or something else? If the first, then I can understand talk of failure, but if the second I would be hesitant to call it a failure. The second seems extremely hard to quantify, especially given all of the variables - most importantly increased fishing pressure. Also, I don't know the genetic survey results, but does anyone know if the shock survey / genetic testing shows a percentage of the quality fish taken (e.g., 4#+) are genetically linked to a SAL. Regardless of everyone's views, I hope we can agree that (once caught) a trip to Athens is better than a knife and frying pan.

SAL was created to enhance awareness and marketing. Any improvement in the genetic pool is miniscule when compared to the vastly greater power of nature. There is an offshoot of the SAL program; the OWR (Official World Record) program designed to grow the biggest possible in hopes of achieving a world record.

Do I think the SAL program has worked?
Yes, I think Texas fishermen are more knowledgeable and manage resources better than most anglers.

Personally, I'd like to see the harvesting of more smaller fish--In many lakes there are too many smaller fish competing with the larger ones.

Can we add habitat to this? Habitat certainly enhances forage and lifespan!

I think the last week or so showed that there are a lot of big bass that may not have been accessible or catchable (and not everyone can do it). There are fish who never see lures their entire lives, let alone get fished for heavily, because they’re in places that are hard to fish, suspended in tree tops, and in water 99.9% of bass anglers drive over at 70 mph.

The law of average says yes. There has to be at least 1 bass out of a million over 18.18 swimming around. I think we would have a better chance of seeing one in the future if we didn’t take every 13 plus out of our lakes.

Definitely, but it doesn't show any of them are particularly bigger. But I'm ok knowing there are a bunch of 13-16lbers in some of our lakes

I think the last week or so showed that there are a lot of big bass that may not have been accessible or catchable (and not everyone can do it). There are fish who never see lures their entire lives, let alone get fished for heavily, because they’re in places that are hard to fish, suspended in tree tops, and in water 99.9% of bass anglers drive over at 70 mph. [/quote]

I'm not buying that part about never seeing lures in their life. I think when they were young they migrated into the shallows like most bass do, probably got hooked a time or two. When they reached say 12 lbs or so, they discovered they could live out deep with less threat to their life.
My two cent theory.

I'm not buying that part about never seeing lures in their life. I think when they were young they migrated into the shallows like most bass do, probably got hooked a time or two. When they reached say 12 lbs or so, they discovered they could live out deep with less threat to their life.
My two cent theory.

[/quote]

Except the guys catching these giants are also catching 50 or 60 smaller bass a day. In the same deep water

What is the yearly average of Share a Lunker's caught. Lets just throw out a number. If 20 are caught a year. Is that really going to hurt the chances of a state record. The real question is how many do not get caught ? Will live scope increase the amount of big fish caught. To many unanswered questions. I have faith in TPW that they are doing whst is best for Texas fishing.

I hope the new state record is out there somewhere. If I can ever get away from work maybe that fish will decide to eat the bait I'm casting at the time. I feel like the record is there because this is alot like deer. There are deer caught on trail cameras that are never killed or seen except on camera. Think of the amount of water on lakes that are never touch by a fisherman. The advancement in electronics is leading in the direction of this untouched water.