Is Clear Lake Capable?

Greg_Cornish · Post by **Greg_Cornish** » Sat Sep 08, 2007 1:45 pm

Does Clearlake have a 20 pounder in it? I've seen so many photos of 12s, 13s, and 14 pounders. I find it strange that the largest this fishery has yielded is a 17.10. I had my photo taken with the lake record when Ross England worked at Tackle it.

aNNieNsaLTIE · Post by **aNNieNsaLTIE** » Sat Sep 08, 2007 6:12 pm

A few years ago, I was told a story of some guys netting shad scooped a 25lber and dunked it back in.........But who knows... Fish Chris also made a graph of what he thought produced a larger bass, Clear Lake or Berryessa. It showe Berryessa producing a bigger toad!

I dunno...I do hear alot of 5-11 being caught and 12 or 13 once ina while but I really do not know. Maybe Clear lake is so big that it is hard to prove. Too much ground to cover. If we were wondering about a smaller body of water, this question would be easier to answer!

saLTIE-

mac (Doyle McEwen) · Post by **mac (Doyle McEwen)** » Sat Sep 08, 2007 6:41 pm

To start with a 20 pound lmb has in all probability already passed their expected lifespan..The way the prime forage comes and goes in Clearlake I have my doubts if a lmb would survive that long..Sure, it is possible, but I do not think it is really all that likely..I think there is a much greater chance of a 20+ pounder being caught on the Delta..And even there I have my doubts if it will actually come about..

mac

Fishin' Dave · Post by **Fishin' Dave** » Sat Sep 08, 2007 7:59 pm

sTony · Post by **sTony** » Sat Sep 08, 2007 8:14 pm

Now this is strictly an opinion and not based on any data or study but I believe that Clear Lake can produce a 20 lb bass. I believe they've been there and just never got caught but then that's just me talking. There is a tremendous forage base at Clear Lake as anyone who's ever fished it knows. There are also areas at Clear Lake that aren't as commonly fished that I believe have all the characteristics of what could possibly hold a larger then normal fish. Again most anglers aren't fishing areas like the narrows and what not where a bigger bass population just might be lurking. Who knows for sure. Berryessa likely does have a better chance but I wouldn't rule out Clear Lake. And I certainly wouldn't discount Don Pedro either. I've sen some absolute monsters lurking int he depths in that pond, it's a large impoundment and has a healthy forage base also. Obviously our lakes in the southern half of the state have a much better chance with an extended warm weather pattern then what exists at either Clear Lake or Berryessa or the Delta for that matter. It's the forage base that makes all three destinations so good for those bass 7 pounds and up to the mid teens that we see so frequently coming in to the scales at local tournaments.

Anytime anyone asks me where's theres best chance to catch a double digit fish I also say Don Pedro but lord knows 20 pound fish don't get to be that size being frequently caught.

I wouldn't be surprised if someday someone pulled a huge fish out of Clear Lake. I don't believe anyone really knows how to catch the super huge fish on that pond but I do believe they could be there.

Again, just an opinion and take it for what that's worth, hahaha.

sTony

Hollywood · Post by **Hollywood** » Sat Sep 08, 2007 8:24 pm

tony, dont forget all the trout stockings in so cal, can you imagine what some of the north would be if there was weekly trout stockings for them big largies you got up north!

Steve · Post by **Steve** » Sat Sep 08, 2007 9:14 pm

Clear Lake no way, Berryessa maybe, Don Pedro yes.

Clear Lake bass, based on peered reviewed scientific literature, are all purely hybrids with the northern gene dominating. Its also got a much shorter growing season (growth is a function of temperature, its very cold in those mountains), and maybe most important it does not have trout (at least not enough to make a difference). Couple this with the intense fishing pressure and the very few numbers of fish over 15 caught, and Id say no way. All the rumors of 25 pounders being netted are an absolute rumor. You cant beat Clear Lake for the number of 5-9 pounders though.

Greg_Cornish · Post by **Greg_Cornish** » Sat Sep 08, 2007 9:44 pm

Steve wrote:Clear Lake no way, Berryessa maybe, Don Pedro yes.

Its also got a much shorter growing season (growth is a function of temperature, its very cold in those mountains), ......

The water temp has dropped to 48 but is mostly in the 50s in winter.

Fish Chris · Post by **Fish Chris** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 8:41 am

....what Steve said.

Fish

PS, But a genetic fluke can always break the rules..... in which case, it still wouldn't say much about the lake in question, but rather, about 1 VERY special fish.

Greg_Cornish · Post by **Greg_Cornish** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 8:59 am

Steve, I've never fished Berryessa and I know very little about the lake. When our bass club goes over there they don't get very big fish. usually 6 to 15 pound limits.

http://www.clearlakebassmasters.net/200 ... ember.html

Very small fish. I don't undertand. Are there some lunkers taken there I don't know about? What's the lake record?

Fishin' Dave · Post by **Fishin' Dave** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 9:15 am

I think the record is 18lbs and change. Anyone know the exact number?

Steve · Post by **Steve** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 11:09 am

Greg:

Berryessa is a very cool place because you have all types of cover and structure available, and you have all three black bass species present. You can fish for what you want and you can do it utilizing just about every technique you can think of. However, the one odd thing about the lake is there seems to be a lack of mid-sized quality fish. Well, at least I should say, I dont seem to be able to consistently stick those 3-6 pound bass. Ive got no problem with fish above and below that range.

An internet search regarding size of fish out of Berryessa will provide an answer to you question regarding big bass in the lake!

Greg_Cornish · Post by **Greg_Cornish** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 11:24 am

From what I can find the Berryessa record is....

The Lake Berryessa record bass, a 17.5 lb'er, was caught by an angler who was fishing for bass....... with live night crawlers.

Just 5 oz shy of the Clear Lake record. With seven fisherman taking over 100 lbs of fish in the 4 day tourney this spring i am unconvinced that Clearlake won't yield a 20 pounder in the coming years. Berryessa could easily too from the looks of it. How is Sonoma for Big Largemouth?

sTony · Post by **sTony** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 11:29 am

Hey Steve,

It's cool getting a guy with your perspective on things posting about such stuff. Thanks so much!!!

sTony

Jason C. · Post by **Jason C.** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 11:57 am

Im not sure but I think Rod Martin caught an 18lbr out of Barryessa. Im not sure if it was out of Berryessa but I know he caught an 18lbr about 2 or 3 years ago! You might want to ask him though

Matt Moreau · Post by **Matt Moreau** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 3:49 pm

Its funny how soooo many people think that you need "TROUT" to feed big bass. While they do provide a great food source it not necessary to produce big fish... Now granted, you do need a food source that gives the fats and protien that trout does, but it doesnt have to come from trout! Our biggest problem in the west is the "WEATHER". While Clearlake has Hitch and Dadds for food it gets very cold in the winter and does not allow a bass to grow in optimal conditions. Thats wy you get a lot of 10lb fish. The delta is the same way.... it has an abundance of food but the growing season for our fish just isnt adequate. The next State record will come from down south but the northern record = who knows.... I would bet on the delta! But 20lbs i just dont see it for us northern guys! We will get close though!

Just my 2 centz!

Greg_Cornish · Post by **Greg_Cornish** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 4:04 pm

It would be interesting to find out whats the farthest north a 20 has been caught and the avg temp of winter water there.

Fishin' Dave · Post by **Fishin' Dave** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 4:56 pm

Rod caught his out of Pedro.

Slippy · Post by **Slippy** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 5:04 pm

do you think th deth of Clear Lake keeps the fish from getting bigger? im not sure of this stat but the average depth of CL is 12ft?

seesm like Berryessa being a deeper lake would have a better change of producing a big fish.

biteme · Post by **biteme** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 5:22 pm

I'd say the south end is plenty deep enough.

ken · Post by **ken** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 7:09 pm

What is the name of the fellow who has the Clear lake record?

ken · Post by **ken** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 7:10 pm

What is the name of the fellow who has the Clear lake record?

Fish Chris · Post by **Fish Chris** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:05 am

Although Clear Lk. doesn't kick out the biggest top-end size monster bass in California, it does kick out TONS of very nice 5 to 8 lb'ers.

Back in the day, fishing mostly with night crawlers and tiny live crawdads on micro light gear, it was totally normal for my biggest 5 fish of any trip, to go somewhere between 25 and 30 lbs. Usually 1 to 3 fish in the 7 lb range, and when I was lucky, maybe an 8..... or if I was really lucky, a 9. It's just the "legitimate" 10 lb plus fish that were so tough. {Q: Ya' know why Clear Lk. kicks out so many 10 plus bass ??? A: Because so many guys go fishing without scales

}

I did get a decent number of fish on swimbaits too, which were also usually between 5 and 9 lbs.

Anyway, as far as absolute top-end size bass in Clear Lk. go, their are a whole long list of reasons why this is not the best place for giants. For a long time, I have specualated that one of the biggest reasons is that over a period of many years (after the primary stockings of Florida bass nearly 30 years ago), the gene pool has reverted back to primarily Northern strain. I don't have any scientific evidence to back this up, although I would love to see some genetic testing done, of the bass in Clear Lk.

Anyway, Clear Lk. is an AWESOME LAKE for what it is..... and what it is, is a big lake with TONS of nice 5 to 8 lb'ers. But if your looking for a 15 plus, their are a whole long list of better choices.

Peace,
Fish

Fish Chris · Post by **Fish Chris** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:14 am

Hey Greg, Berry is my home lake too. What you will find in Berry, is a ton of 1 to 2 lb'ers, then the numbers drop way down, to the point that 5 lb'ers seem darn near as rare as 8's, and 8's seem darn near as rare as 11's.....

Yes, Berry has a good handful of GIANTS, but you have to be willing to ignore those dinks, and just fish swimbaits all day, even though there is a good chance you will get skunked.

I guess if your fishing a tourney, it might be good to stick five 1 to 2 lb'ers real quick, but after that, you need a pig, and the odds are 50 to 1, swimbaits to anything else. Even when I hear of "that giant that was caught on a jig"...... Yea ! I believe it ! ......and this is my first day fishing

Peace,
Fish

ash · Post by **ash** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:45 am

Chris,

My first fish out of Berry was a 8.5lb fish cought on a brown purple jig. Sorry, bro maybe just cause you arent getting the jig fish doesnt mean they are not there to be had.

Greg_Cornish · Post by **Greg_Cornish** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:59 am

ken wrote:What is the name of the fellow who has the Clear lake record?

I'll find out for you. I think he died.

Greg_Cornish · Post by **Greg_Cornish** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 7:01 am

Slippy wrote:do you think th deth of Clear Lake keeps the fish from getting bigger? im not sure of this stat but the average depth of CL is 12ft?

seesm like Berryessa being a deeper lake would have a better change of producing a big fish.

There's vast areas of CL that are 36-52 feet deep The north end has vast areas of 23 to 30 feet

Caudawg · Post by **Caudawg** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 7:30 am

I believe Jerry Basgal owns the biggest bass record at CL. It was 17.52 lbs caught on his own tube bait invention called a Hex-it. Jerry passed away 10 or so years ago

Johnny C · Post by **Johnny C** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 7:32 am

Ther are lots of giants in the Mother Lode Lakes..Quitely McClure has been kicking out some monsters..There is a 17 plus being mounted through Escalon bait and Tackle that is a skinny fish over thirty inches...This lake has all the ingredients and a lower elavation than Melones and Perdo.With the huge spawn the past couple of years they also have plenty of small bass to eat. Look for some giants to be caught this winter..

Greg_Cornish · Post by **Greg_Cornish** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 8:11 am

Caudawg wrote:I believe Jerry Basgal owns the biggest bass record at CL. It was 17.52 lbs caught on his own tube bait invention called a Hex-it. Jerry passed away 10 or so years ago

Yes thats correct. I zoomed in on the plaque and thats the name. The length is 28.5 and the girth is 25.5. Can't read the OZ but I thought it was 10.

On the fish weight calculator that puts it at 20+ but they weighed it accurately I believe.

aNNieNsaLTIE · Post by **aNNieNsaLTIE** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:58 am

I have seen a numbered of hammered crappie and bluegills in clear lake. i wonder if the carp get hunted by those big bass too? Carp , bluegills, crappie, and crawdads do not produce the same amount or enough nutrients as trout?

Just wondering!

saLTIE-

SHAFT · Post by **SHAFT** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 10:26 am

Had the same thoughts myself in regards to the Clear Lake record here is a link to the post .

http://www.westernbass.com/forum/viewto ... highlight=

Greg_Cornish · Post by **Greg_Cornish** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 1:59 pm

From another thread wrote:half mile off shore.......They were going along and looked down at the flasher (that gives you and idea how long ago it was) and noticed a depression. They found it and it was stacked with big fish.

I've been over that spot but can't find it lately. There are 2 deep holes out there and if you find an old geo map the coords are there.

Joe W. · Post by **Joe W.** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 2:13 pm

aNNieNsaLTIE wrote:I have seen a numbered of hammered crappie and bluegills in clear lake. i wonder if the carp get hunted by those big bass too? Carp , bluegills, crappie, and crawdads do not produce the same amount or enough nutrients as trout?

Just wondering!

saLTIE-

I think it's also the fact that planter trout aren't the smartest fish. They are not only a good meal but an easy meal.

bassrman · Post by **bassrman** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 5:09 pm

I believe that planter trout ! or, "Vitiman T" as we call it, is the key to heavywieght bass,they are so high in fat content!,that they act like steriods for bass,as for the cold winter time temps at C.L !,that is the time that the trout stockings happen!,the DFG plants are generally from Oct till june,those fish will key in on those planters in no time at all & will be waiting with there mouths open ,no matter what the water temp is !.......

Caudawg · Post by **Caudawg** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 7:17 pm

They don't plant trout in Clear Lake although I'd be glad to see the the DFG plant some each year as soon as the water is cool enough. But don't hold your breath!

I believe there is a chance that CL could kick out a world record. It has one of the strongest food chains from the bottom up of any of the lakes in CA. This is a huge differentiator that has not been spoken about. From the Algae level on up....CL is one fertile lake! The sun exposure to the bottom of the lake is crucial.

We've seen the shad population grow exponentially fast...and shrink just as fast. If history repeats itself...they'll be back in a year or two in huge numbers. Mean time...the Silversides are thriving with less competition from the shad. This is a classic case of dynamic equalibrium. The crawdads are happy campers either way...kind of like when Wimpy held up his plate in the middle of the street while Popeye and Bluto were having the infamous "hamburger battle (foodfight)".
Oh dang...did I date myself again?

Anyway...it is my opinion that CL's fertility outweighs the fact that the temp's get a bit cold during the winter. There's still plenty of easy forage that does not take a great amount of energy to eat. That's what it boils down to IMO...calories in vs. calories out.

Cesar L · Post by **Cesar L** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 7:25 pm

Does anybody know why they dont plant trout during the winter months?

Caudawg · Post by **Caudawg** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 7:29 pm

I believe CL gets no trout plants because the summer water temps in the summer almost guarantee a near 100% mortality rate. It is not a good "put & take" scenario. All IMHO.

bassrman · Post by **bassrman** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 7:52 pm

what I ment to say, was, "if", they planted trout @ C.L. !,I believe you would see a possible record class fish in the future !

SHAFT · Post by **SHAFT** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 8:34 pm

I read somewhere that years ago they did plant trout .

Greg_Cornish · Post by **Greg_Cornish** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:34 pm

Caudawg wrote:I believe CL gets no trout plants because the summer water temps in the summer almost guarantee a near 100% mortality rate. It is not a good "put & take" scenario. All IMHO.

Yes, I think it needs another 40 feet of depth

Steve · Post by **Steve** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:58 pm

Hey Caudawg:

Clear Lake without a doubt is the most fertile lake there ever was. Ive always said its fertility was scary. However, the thing you are missing is bioenergetics; water temp is everything. Growth is a direct function of water temp; or more to the point the amount of time that a lake stays within the optimal temp for growth. And, you can talk all you want about this and that, crawdads this crawdads that, shad this and shad that. Without trout a lake as far north as Clear Lake, with a relatively short growing season, will never produce a 20 plus. Chris will tell you about genetic freaks, but IMHO even that far north (and in a place with no trout) a freak aint going near 20. A freak is probalby going to go somewhere around 17.

If anybody disagrees that growth (i.e., maximum size of bass) is not a function of water temp, then do this. Go figure out the 50 largest bass ever verified. Plot the location on a north to south plane of each fish. Look at the pattern. What you will see is that as you move south, there will be more dots. Then do the same thing with average air temperature (air temp is representative of water temp). You will see the same pattern. As we all know, average water temp increases as we move south. You can even do this by only including lakes with trout, or do it only including lakes without trout. No matter how you do your little laymens analysis, the pattern of dots will always be the same. What never changes is the variation in water temparature on a north to south plane. Water temp is everything when it comes to growth POTENTIAL.

Chris, Ill provide you with some genetic data confirming Clear Lake bass are dominated by northerns.

Greg_Cornish · Post by **Greg_Cornish** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 11:24 pm

Okay Steve, I guess we need to write a government grant to get water heaters installed in the lake. Hey if we can find the right politicians...

Thompsons out - he's far to honest.

Caudawg · Post by **Caudawg** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:50 am

Steve: my "little layman's analysis" is non-scientific as you point out. But CL is an anomoly and I guess instead of getting into a pissing match....I'll just agree to disagree.

I spent lots of time discussing CL with a DFG fisheries biologist Larry Week...plus spent several days in the boat with him. I learned a lot from him but funny thing is he made the same points as you...which I disagreed with him on too at the time...LOL! But what a great guy he is anyway! And I guess I'm just stubborn.

Time will tell. Scientific theory has it's place in this world but has been proven wrong from time to time. And again...CL is an anomoly.

Oh, and BTW...I'm headed to CL today to find her!!

Steve · Post by **Steve** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 9:47 pm

Dawgiedog:

I hope you catch her! Id be totally stoked for you, and I would love to be the first person to step forward and say "damn, I was totally wrong on that one." CLear Lake producing a fish on the top 25 list is something I think most of us would be tickled pink to see happen.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 10:01 pm

In my opinion it is pretty far fetched that anything over 20 will ever come from Clear lake. For a number of reason..

#1 These bass aren't pure florida strain.

#2 They don't stock trout in these lakes to fatten these fish up with very little expenditure of energy.

#3 Mike Long doesn't fish here often enough to catch her!

Fish Chris knows about as much about big fish as anyone in Northern Cal (heck anywhere for that matter) and if he says it would take a genetic fluke---- then I believe him. I know this lake has been fished harder than ever before this year and I haven't heard of anything even near 20.. I think a 14 is the biggest I have heard of.

Just my .02
Tom

bassindon69 · Post by **bassindon69** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 4:12 am

TomLeogrande wrote: Fish Chris knows about as much about big fish as anyone in Northern Cal (heck anywhere for that matter) and if he says it would take a genetic fluke
Tom

With it taking a genetic fluke that means it could happen any place that is rich in food.

Two storys always told are the divers seeing giant cats when they checked the dam (every lake)
and DFG shocking up a bass that is a world record (every lake)
LOL!!

The longest bass out of all my big fish came from lake Mc Clure 8 years ago at just over 29" long, it only went 11 lbs.

Don.