If we accept that fish are subject to conditioning, is it such a leap to surmise that a small population in a small pond will become hookshy after a few years of C&R?

If I recall correctly, and pretty sure I do, that was the entire reason Stubby Steve's was created in the first place....to try and entice conditioned, hookshy HSB.

I'm all for scientific trials and tests, publications and research. But I'm beginning to wonder if we, those of us here on PB, might be encountering instances and scenarios not fully explored in academic circles. Maybe we're ahead of the curve a little, and by having held, raised, fed, fished for, examined, aged, tagged, and caged, many thousands of one specific fish over the years, we begin to question the status quo. A few years ago the idea of HSB in ponds was dismissed by academia. The notion that you could damage a BG population by angling was laughed at, yet now we know better.

And right now, today, we still advise against stocking crappie in a small BOW, but there are some here who are apparently seeing success with this idea. I'm not convinced stocking crappie is a good idea, yet....but I'm watching, just in case a new chapter gets added to the "next edition" of the final word already in print.


"Forget pounds and ounces, I'm figuring displacement!"

If we accept that: MBG(+)FGSF(=)HBG(F1)
And we surmise that: BG(>)HBG(F1) while GSF(<)HBG(F1)
Would it hold true that: HBG(F1)(+)AM500(x)q.d.(=)1.5lbGRWT?
PB answer: It depends.