Without apology, I sing the praises of the smallmouth bass. It is aggressive, feisty, tough, aerially-inclined, and a fish with lasting power. By the time a smallmouth bass tires, you could have easily landed a couple (or more) walleyes of the same size. So how is it many Dakota anglers hold this fairly recent introduction in such low esteem? A difficult question, though a fair one and the only obvious answer might be a comparison of the two fish in terms of flavor. I can’t judge that because I’ve never eaten a smallmouth bass. But the walleye is a decent tasting fish, though somewhat bland, and no match for the flavorful northern pike, the un-fishy bluegill, sweet yellow perch or almost any fish out of saltwater.
So let us revert to the first argument.
Some say the carp is a terrific fighter. I’ll agree that it is, but about as stylish as your average nose tackle. Its finest attribute is that it takes a long time to subdue one. The runs are strong, though slow, and a carp rarely takes to the air, except for that brief period around the spawn when it jumps often and apparently just for the hell of it.
The musky conducts a spectacular fight, often punctuated with leaps, but like a prize fighter, has a difficult time going more than three minutes without a rest, but we do not customarily offer rest periods to hooked fish. And while I dearly love these long, green, toothy fish, as well as their slightly smaller cousins in the pike family, I admit that it takes one of more than average size to compare with a decent smallmouth. As my friend and colleague, Paul Lepisto, says, “What’s not to like about a fish that hits hard and fights even harder?”
But unfortunately, some Dakotans do not like smallmouths, and especially in South Dakota, fishing guides seem to be the most vehement opponents, presumably because many of them believe it competes with the walleye for forage. To be sure, the smallmouth will often eat the same prey as the walleye, but biologists say that if that species isn’t available, the bass will readily key on invertebrates. It just isn’t a fussy eater. And, say they, no one can produce a study that shows smallies have displaced (or threatened) walleyes, anywhere in America. But Dakotans aren’t alone in their willingness to seek scapegoats. On Green Lake at Willmar, MN, the local controversy is now about the same thing. Ironically, Rick James, a Willmar policeman and top angler, used to invite me to fish smallies in the fall on Green Lake more than 20 years ago. There have always been a lot of smallmouth bass in that lake. But now walleyes are down, and smallmouth bass get the blame. Why is it that we walleye fishermen seem to willing to blame any other factor for falling walleye populations; cormorants in some cases, and smallmouth bass, without ever considering the fact that we remove limit after limit catch from walleye lakes, and assume Mother Nature will automatically replace them?
I suspect many guides who are, indeed, good anglers, and who sometimes spot trends before biologists, use their version of empirical evidence to support their beliefs. I am catching more smallmouth bass than walleyes; therefore smallmouths must be winning the survival battle, and are eating walleyes out of house and home. That argument is wrong, mostly because smallmouth bass are more aggressive, and considerably easier to catch, which is precisely why in most quality smallmouth waters, smallmouths need protection for many to reach a quality size.
Let’s use the Missouri River reservoirs as a case in point.
It’s fair to assume that nearly all anglers fishing these giant impoundments are usually fishing specifically for walleyes. And they keep what they catch, within legal limits. After all, you rarely hear the term, “catch and release,” in the same sentence with “walleye.” Bragging rights accrue to those who come in at the end of the day and say, “I got my limit,” the Dakota fishing equivalent of “I got my buck.” If 200 walleye fishermen limit each day, we’re talking the removal of a lot of fish. With a four fish limit, how long does it take to reduce a population? Pick up a calculator and play with the numbers for a while. It’s a sobering exercise. Too often, most of us are willing to call walleyes a renewable resource, which would be completely true IF we could guarantee a spawn each year, control water levels and quality, and persuade more of our brethren to practice a nominal amount of catch and release.
Lake Sharpe in central South Dakota provides a good example. I have often described this as the best walleye lake on the Missouri River system, primarily because it produces a huge amount of fish each year…except for the last couple of years.
Sharpe hasn’t had a good walleye or gizzard shad spawn in several years, and when Oahe’s populations dipped in 1998, fishermen crowded Sharpe. And they took an incredible toll, and before long, walleyes were becoming harder to catch, likely because there were fewer of them. Those same fishermen were hooking plenty of smallmouths. Therefore, they conclude, in true Flat-Earth thinking, there must be many more smallmouths than walleyes. Lord, it’s a good thing scientists don’t operate that way.
Sharpe has plenty of environmental problems though over fishing might be it’s biggest. A tremendous amount of livestock-caused siltation pours into the lake with each rain or snow melt from the Bad River and a variety of other smaller tributaries, most a direct result of overgrazing in the watershed. The truth is, once a tiny trench begins in the highly erosive soil of western South Dakota rangeland, unless you stop it immediately, it will become a deep, gash-like gully. And in recent years, as more grassland has been plowed west of the Missouri River, water quality has further suffered. There was a time, say around two decades ago, when I often slaked my thirst with a drink of Lake Oahe water. Not anymore. But even then, I’d never have considered drinking water from Lake Sharpe. Truth is, I’d be afraid to look at a water quality sample from Lake Sharpe.
But let us go back to the question of whether or not smallmouths are out-competing walleyes. When you talk with some who hold that point of view, it does little good to suggest that fishing pressure had something to do with smaller walleye populations, for it is difficult to deal with a mind that’s made up. That’s the beauty of making judgments based on selective facts. You throw away the evidence you don’t wish to consider, and use that which supports your belief.
Can these problems be solved? Probably, especially if fishermen recognize that ALL fish have worth. Bullheads are responsible for starting more Dakota kids in fishing than any other species. Do you think bullheads should be eradicated? How about carp or freshwater drum?
If I were a guide interested in a long term career, I’d learn everything possible about smallmouths because they might well be the fish of the future. Outside our borders, there are many people who really love fishing them, and I’m guessing that in future years, they’ll discover the Dakotas. And since most avid smallmouth anglers practice catch and release, what remains could become a very sustainable fishery. By contrast, walleye fishermen have become efficient. Their southern counterparts, bass fishermen, and their stream brethren, trout fishermen learned a long time ago that intelligent and sophisticated fishing pressure can take a terrible toll, and if you wish to continue fishing, the only logical answer is some form of catch and release. I’ve long maintained that because the walleye is so highly regarded as a food fish, the only catch and release program that will work is one that is mandated. Will walleye anglers practice catch and release with only a limited amount of kill? I don’t know. But I am confident that the future of walleye fishing depends on it. And if they do not choose to take it upon themselves to work toward a sustainable fishery, fisheries managers will have to step in with more restrictive measures. Meanwhile, smallmouth bass are available in good numbers, fairly easy to catch, and they’re terrific fighters. So, why not?
Smallmouth Presentations
When smallmouths are in shallow water, 7 feet or less, and the surface is calm, topwater lures provide terrific action. I remember fishing Wisconsin’s Chequemagon Bay with Roger LaPenter. It is a big warm water embayment, and one of the world’s premiere smallmouth bass fisheries, on Lake Superior at Ashland, WI. We were fly fishing, using 7-weight fly rods, 7-foot leaders tapered to about 2x, tied to Sneaky Pete poppers. This is a popper that doesn’t chug or gurgle, and its bullet shape is more than overcome by the three sets of rubber legs that protrude from the sides. We’d fish them with little more than an occasional twitch and it wouldn’t take long before a smallmouth would explode on it. I’ve used that tactic on several occasions on Lake Sharpe, and find that smallies don’t respond to topwater presentations quite as well as they do on Lake Superior, and further, that the water must be very calm. It’s fun to catch them on top, but only a fool would call it the best way to fish them.
Interestingly, Roger and I elected to fish for fun when our TV show was completed, so we headed to a stump-filled area, and each time either of us would take a fish or two on poppers, Paul Lepisto, our camera man, would come in behind us, pitch a 4 inch plastic worm and take two or three more off the same stump. Point is, surface lures are fun, but even during the best of conditions, you catch more fish beneath the surface.
Most of the time, we have typical Dakota winds, and that’s when you seek rocky shorelines, gravel bars, or rocky humps. A jig tipped with a twister tail can work wonders. But so will a spinnerbait or a small crankbait. One dynamite presentation involves Texas-rigging a 4-inch plastic worm and employing a straight retrieve. If you’re fly fishing, a Woolly Bugger is a tough act to follow, but if the fish are deeper than a half-dozen feet, tie on a Clouser Deep Minnow.
When fish are on the shoreline, I like a shallow running crank, something on the order of a regular Rapala, a Salmo Hornet or a Shallow Rap.
In the fall, live bait works best. And the fishing really gets better after the first good, hard frost. If you’re fishing a natural lake, look for rock-capped sunken islands surrounded by deeper water. Once the water turns cold, smallies occupy such places in incredibly large schools. That’s when it’s hard to beat a Lindy Rig with a short snell of about 20 inches, a large Kahle style hook, and a big chub hooked through the lips. Two close fishing friends, Dave Genz and Dennis Kassube, agree that wild chubs out fish those you buy in a baitshop by about two to one. Where do you get wild chubs? You catch them, of course. Make that chub a big one…at least 4 inches long, and 6 isn’t too big.
The Best Dakota Smallmouth Waters
Right now, Roy Lake in northeastern South Dakota tops my list. It’s full of fish in the 2 to 3 pound range, but there are many in the 4 pound class too, and a 5 pounder is a realistic goal. Early in the season, any rocky shoreline can produce fish, but come fall, the long bar in the center of the lake, along with several rock humps in the same area, will hold incredible numbers of fish.
Cottonwood Lake, just west of Lake City, SD and along US Hiway 10, is fished by most locals for walleyes. But it’s a good largemouth lake in spite of the very clear water. However, the first fish I landed there on a sunny July day, my first time on the lake, turned out to be my biggest South Dakota smallmouth, a fish that went slightly over 5 pounds. There are more there.
From Roy, it’s about 5-minutes east on Hiway 10 to Clear Lake, a shallow lake with lots of rocky shorelines, and like Roy, also a decent population of largemouth bass. Head south for about 15 miles to Enemy Swim Lake, another top smallmouth fishery. Enemy Swim also boasts the best bluegill fishery in South Dakota, has some largemouths, plus walleyes, white bass and pike. Other good bets include Lake Kampeska at Watertown, Lake Thompson near Desmet, Buffalo Lake, and Cattail-Kettle Lakes. In fact, smallmouths are showing up in a lot of lakes where they were not stocked, probably the result of interlake transfer during high water periods.
In North Dakota, the best waters include the entire McClusky Canal chain, especially New Johns, Park, East and Hekker Lake, north of Bismarck and just east of US Hiway 83. There are also largemouths, walleyes and some very nice muskies, especially in New Johns. In addition, two North Dakota rivers boast good smallmouth fisheries; the Heart River, my boyhood fishery of choice, and the Sheyenne River in eastern North Dakota.
The Missouri River System offers fair to superb fishing. Lake Sharp, Lake Francis Case and Lewis & Clark Lake all vie for the top honors. In Sharp and Francis Case, smallmouth fishing is best from the mid to lower reaches of each reservoir. Lewis & Clark is a great fishery, but you have to know the water due to the tremendous siltation problem, and the fact that the upper portion now is a big marsh. It’s not hard to imagine getting lost in that maze of channels and marsh grass. This lake also offers a terrific population of largemouths.
Sharpe is at the top, followed closely by Francis Case and then Lewis & Clark. And each, along with any of the previously mentioned natural lakes, has the potential to develop into world-class fisheries.
I’ve saved the three biggest for last. Oahe, Sakakawea, and Fort Peck all hold fair to good smallmouth populations, though Oahe and Sakakawea probably hold more fish of decent size. I suspect smallmouths grow slower in these bigger, deeper reservoirs, because the water stays colder, longer. Even so, I’ve seen fish approaching 5 pounds in each of these giant inland seas. However, in my opinion, they don’t rank with the smaller reservoirs.
I consider smallmouths a welcome addition to our fisheries. And once more fishermen give them a try, they’ll help alleviate some of the heavy pressure on walleyes.
