JKB � Currently I don�t plan to have Remote Access Services, I originally thought about making it a web-based program because of the ease of programming and it would cost me considerably less to produce. However I felt that this would be less valuable to the end user. Not everyone will have internet while near the pond and personally I like to buy something and then after that I own it, period. I never liked subscriptions and the like when it comes to software. Now magazines, like PondBoss, that�s a different story, and I do subscribe.
I do plan to make a simple Excel spreadsheet or something of that nature that can be used to import data. That way if you have Quickoffice or something similar on your phone you can use that to log data in the field and simply upload it to the program without duplicating your efforts. That also allows users to upload past catch records etc.
Esshup � The program is in no way region specific, however it is specific to Largemouth Bass. There are certain things that we know to be true of LMB, regardless of where they reside. For example if a LMB has a WR of 74% we know that he�s not getting enough to eat. Furthermore the program will automatically categorize your LMB into industry standard size categories, (stock, quality, preferred etc) calculate proportional stock densities and average the WR of each size category. This lets us take a look deeper into the problem. Following the example above, let�s say this bass that had a WR of 74% was in the quality size range, 12-14.9� and quality bass accounted for 40% of LMB capture and averaged 75% WR. Then we know that there is a disproportionate amount of LMB in the quality size range and they are all underweight. There are simply too many mouths to feed and not enough forage to feed them. So, what do we do about it. Well we start by increasing the harvest rate of this size fish and then we might want to add some forage fish of the appropriate size or implement a feeding program etc etc. It�s a lot easier to understand when you�re looking at the data.
I have it set up to output graphical data so that is easy to visualize. In the Sneak Peek above I�ve circled in red the areas of interest. Point #1 the color coded data shows the % distribution is high and the WR�s are low. Point#2 the graphed data shows a distinct dip in this size range. The solid line represents 100% WR so any point below that is underweight, the red line is a trend line. Point #3 Another visual aid to show the low WRs of this size range. And Point#4 illustrates the high percent distribution of �quality� bass. You may also notice that preferred bass are also a higher percent than the standard but their WR�s are in the 90�s so it�s not of major concern at this time.
Computer programming can only do so much, it�s not a 100% replacement for a biologist and I don�t think that there ever will be. But it will give the average pond owner a way to evaluate and track the health of their fishery. Another good thing about it is that it�s all based on industry standards. Meaning that you can use the printout or email data option to send your data to any biologist in the United Sates and they would be able to make sense of it, be it Texas, Florida, New York, California etc we all use the same �language� to evaluate a LMB fishery. I�m sure your biologist would be willing to review your data for a small fee and make further recommendations and certainly that would be far less expensive than an electroshocking survey. Not to say that this ultimately will be better than electroshocking because it does have some limitations but let�s face it, a lot of us can�t afford a shocking survey. Even those of us who can could go longer periods between surveys with the use of a program like this. But at the same time even you professionals who do shockings could use this to help visualize your data. Truth be told that�s why I started making the program, so that I could quickly interpret data and make recommendations. Electroshocking reports used to take me a full day to prepare and I found myself making the same calculations over and over. Thus DataBass was born.
Some of the limitations, especially for you northern guys is that it currently doesn�t account or calculate for additional predator species, walleye, pike etc. But if your primary focus is LMB and they are the most numerous predator DataBass can help you, regardless of where you are located. And if this is well received I�d be willing to work on a Northern edition, if I could find the right biologist to help. Being from Texas I don�t have any experience with most of those other species.
I do truly value the opinion of everyone here so if you have criticisms or questions please feel free to voice them.
