Crippled Caddis

I'm a 'motorhead'. There I've said it. The first step to conquering an addiction is to admit you have one. But I have no imtention of trying to kick the habit. I'll watch anything that has wheels and an internal combustion motor race, from lawn mowers to Formula 1. I started following Formula 1 shortly after the series began in 1950. It is the top rung, the epitome of motorsport with the highest technology, biggest budgets and the best drivers on the planet. But I admit that it also has the most vicious politics and Michiavellian rulebook in motorsport. I don't like a lot of things about it these days but it's still the top rung in the racing ladder. For sheer poetry of motion ballet holds a dim candle to motorcycle roadracing at almost any level. But the top step is MotoGP for the world championship and at that level it verges on the unbelievable. If you've never seen it don't allow yourself to get a week older before treating your senses. Catch the Czech Grand Pric at 5 PM this coming Sunday on Speed channel. Both my wife and I followed NASCAR for many years. Recently however we've both gotten bored with it. TV over-saturation was what burned us out and I think it will be the ultimate ruination of the series as others reach the same point as us. Too much of a good thing is still too much. I admit to having a soft spot for the 'weekend' racers. The working stiff that holds down a job during the day and works on his racer until the wee hours every night so he can compete on the weekend. Whether he races 'jalopies' at his local dirttrack, MotoX, open wheel formula cars or roadraces motorcycles his sport is the purest form of competition because he darn sure doesn't do it for the money! Unlike professionals he needs no press agent to teach him how to put the best spin on every utterance. He has no car owner to keep happy. He, better than anyone, knows that "The way to make a small fortune in racing is to start with a big one". He does it because he loves the visceral excitement of trying to beat his competition through the next corner----whether that corner is on a dirt bullring or a road course. He doesn't need stimulants to expand his conciousness---winning is the greatest high he can imagine. And the pursuit of it his greatest joy. So----how do you like YOUR motorsport? CC

skeeter wrote: <The good guys at Hydrotec in Nixa suggested I start using " Sea Foam " fuel additive> I use it in ALL of my small engines. It keeps them clean AND acts as a fuel preservative to extend the storage life of the junk that comes out of the pumps these days. Two ounces per gallon to clean. 1 ounce to maintain.

As fishinwrench pointed out if your motor is a later model produced after 'gasahol' became common you should be fine because makers changed rubber products and a few other things to compounds that can accept the use of alcohol. But if you're using an older motor be prepared to rekit carbs, fuel pumps and lines with newer components. In my older motors I avoid it entirely. As to the cost of ethanol production it is federally sybsidized if that tells you anything.(

Brian & brownieman: I'm not much of the sort to call public meetings. I'm more the sort to plant seeds when I see or can create fertile ground, but should the occasion arise where I can see an advantage to the resource I'll call on both of you absolutely shamelessly! Thanks for the offers in any case! Rather than attempt to comment on all the points raised I'll just say that I am delighted to see the response to the subject. Whether or not we all agree on methods it seems we ALL agree on the value of the resource and the worth of saving it. While opinions seem to diverge widely I see no less love at either end of the spectrum. That indicates to me that if 'push comes to shove' that we can work together for the benefit of the fisheries we all love. I hope that all who have taken the time, effort and investment of earnest concern to comment see it in the same encouraging light as myself. CC That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons of history.----Aldous Huxley

rps wrote: <With respect, please identify scientific studies that compare the kill rate of single barbless hooks to barbless trebles.> With the same respect I'm speaking about my understanding from 40 plus years of reading and study of the subject so I'm hardly going to back up and do that sort of research for you. The information and studies are readily available on the 'net and elsewhere if you have true curiosity on the subject. In any case <I assert that single barbless hook regulations as enacted now are not based upon scientific fact and that their creation is elitist and serves a small minority at public expense.> it appears that you have already arrived at a fixed position in the matter and I'm not one to beat my head against a solid object to no avail. While I readily agree with some of your statements---<I am careful when fishing bait, but I will acknowledge the risk to the fish is higher with bait.---- You can put a single hook on a spoon or a spinner and catch nearly as many.----Ultimately, anyone who believes fish and game bureaucracies are anything other than political is kidding themselves.> I find that you have a fixed position not amenable to considering the opinion of others. Believe it or not I respect that for even though I will readily consider other opinions my own are dear to me. Human nature at its' most human! CC >

RR wrote: <For me, you can catch more fish on artificials than you can by fishing bait----you will catch larger fish on artificials because most artificial lures resmeble some type of bait fish or forage, as opposed to corn or power bait which resembles nothing that occurs naturally in the stream.> You must never have encountered a true baitfishing artist RR. While you're fishing an artificial that resemble the fishes natural diet the artist is using the real thing and putting it directly into the fishes most secret lairs. A true expert baitfisherman would NEVER consider things like corn and powerbait---those are strictly for amatuers who know no better than to wad it on an oversized hook below a sinker that could serve as an anchor for an aircraft carrier and lob it into just about anywhere that is wet with enough disturbance to flush fish into hiding for hundreds of feet. The expert will approach his quarry with more care than someone trying to stalk turkeys and is more apt to slide his unweighted bait silently into the water far upstream and allow the current to tumble it into his chosen target zone exactly as the fish expects it to be delivered. He knows his target better than you know your own children, their habits, habitat and food preferences. If you know one baitfishing expert in your life you'll be fortunate. They are few and far between and a secretive lot. If he allows you to learn from him you will be incredibly lucky. CC

rps wrote: <Who decided that catch and release areas for trout, especially those seasonal ones designed to protect fish while they go through the spawning motions, need to be single barbless hook?> Fisheries biologists. Too many studies have convincingly demonstrated that a single barbles hook is the safest and quickest way to release fish with minimal damage and time out of water to label the practice as elitest. It's simply better for the fish---and what's the point of having catch and release regulations if they are not implemented in the best interest of the fish? Nor does the practice create a hardship on those who wish to fish with artificials other than flies. It is no more difficult to replace trebles with single barbless hooks than it is to pinch down the barbs on trebles enough to make them pass the ofttimes draconian tests used by some wardens. I'm a flyfisherman as well as any other legal form of fishing and I've enjoyed pricking the bubble of elitism for many years within the flyfishing ranks, but I've also noticed that elitism takes many forms and it is hardly restricted to flyfishermen. Art assumes many forms in fishing and the rare baitfishing expert is as deadly as any predator. His is as much art as the best flyflinger or hardwarec tosser and, frankly, far more effective. Indeed it is fortunate for the rest that the true baitfishing expert is a rare breed!

Brian---as long as we avoid politics you and I are 'preaching outta the same Book'.;o) I think we both can probably live with that! As for your concept of setting aside the stretch from Dam 1 to Dam 3 the 'Old Man of the Norfork', Chuck Davidson, and I had a lengthy conversation about just that sometime in the mid 80s after I bought my property on the S. Fork. It seems he and someone who represented AGFC (most probably Mark Oliver) held a meeting in Mammoth Spring to propose just that in the late '70s/early '80s. His version of the response was that they barely escaped being ridden out of town on a rail AFTER being tarred and feathered. Unfortunately the same mindset seems to still prevail in the local area. For quite a few years I've been attempting to plant the seeds of awareness conserning the benefits of attracting the demographic niche of our society that can best afford the pursuit of trophy trout. Largely to little avail. If I could just persuade the city fathers to take a journey to see the results of marketing the spring creeks of Pennsylvania and Montana then the possibilities inherent in the most fertile spring creek between those two disparate geographical locations would become obvious. At this point I'm prepared to change the thrust of my efforts by appealing to the pecuniary interests of the outfitters and others that profit directly from the river through the benefits pointed out in my previous post. Unfortunately my energy flags as I age and I find myself more easily discouraged and prone to thinking that those who are blind get what they deserve and are unworthy of continued effort. But come cooler weather when my own predatory instincts once more ramp up to meet the season I'll gain new energy. I know the person who is now running the campground at the Gooseneck quite well and I have printed out my own previous post in order to illustrate to him that he's 'leaving money on the table' as currently he leaves the campground open to fisherman without charge in the Winter months. I need help from an energetic young 'go-getter' in interesting the local outfitters in extending their season and increasing their profit margins. Wanta volunteer? CC

<I'm a little outnumbered here being the pig> I don't think so mpc---just a cursory reading of the thread indicates a general approval by the majority. In point of fact many have been pleading for enforcement for years and are puzzled by why it took so long to address the problem. <As for over-zealous cops, yep they're out there. There's usually some in every department with a mile long blue flame shooting out of their butt! Most however, most are honest hard working folks (like me laugh.gif ) who want to do their jobs and go home after their shift alive. Don't let a bad apple that you've dealt with ruin the whole bunch. Yes, we should probably do a better job of "policing" our own personnel. We try! In my experience the 'problem children' in your ranks are those who desperatey WANT to be cops. They seem to be the ones who allow the power to go to their heads. Seems like the psych profile test could weed them out up front doesn't it? Most, like yourself, are just trying to do a concientious good job and I'm never offended by them. It's darn sure a job I never wanted! I noted on another thread that even fishingwrench isn't as far from majority opinion as his posts on this thread seemed to indicate: <Be kind to the river, polite to others, and remember that it is YOUR river too.> I suspect he was smarting from recent burns incurred in the presence of a 'blue-flamer' when he started this thread. If so I can certainly sympathize with him if he was innocent of wrong-doing. Frankly I see no reason we can't ALL share and enjoy our rivers if we abide by his thoughts in the quote above. I'm definitely guilty of the curmudgeon classification but I really enjoy seeing everyone having a good time enjoying the outdoors so long as their good time doen't adversely impinge upon my own. I might even offer them a cold one at the end of the day.;o) CC

Regarding spawning on the Spring: The jury is still officially out on the matter. Water quality above Dam 3 is very questionable. Downstream is a different matter. Personal observations over almost 40 years indicate to my own satisfaction that some successful spawning does take place. In my mind the only question is to what extent and in which parts of the river the successful efforts take place. But it all becomes a moot point if the bulk of the bigger spawners are taken home to be eaten. While I would be pleased if the entire river were made a catch and release zone for the duration of the spawning season it simply isn't going to happen for practical political reasons as Terry has pointed out. But it would be highly practical to make both sides of the river from the tail of the hatchery island to the face of Dam 3 C&R, single-hook, barbless, artificial only from Nov.1 thru the end of Feb. That is the area where as much as 95% of the slaughter takes place at present and setting it aside would go a very long way indeed to give at least a part of the trophy size fish an opportunity to spawn or at least survive. If the campgrounds just realized it that would be far better for business than allowing the slaughter to continue unabated. The rest of the year with the exception of the spawn the big fish are scattered up and down the river giving campers a chance at catching a 'lifetime' fish. That's far better for campgrounds and rental agencies than the slaughter of the fish during the spawning season which does NOT correspond with the camping season. Removing them during the Winter is actually highly counterproductive for those whose business is predicated on success rates during the Summer months. It's only common sense. To really improve business an all-out effort to turn the river into a true trophy fishery would yield the greatest benefits. Those who pursue trophy fishing represent a different demographic group than those who kill everything caught for food. In general their disposable income is much higher and they readily spend it for the opportunity to pursue their fantasies. They are far more likely to rent motel rooms, eat in restuarants, hire guides and patronize antique shops and other businesses than are the can of corn and a 6 pak group. Crass? You betcha! Practical? Extremely! CC

fishingwrench wrote: <what's the big deal with a 19y/o sneakin' a few beers ? Or even---smokin' a joint---don't go out hunting them down, and then slapping felonys on his record that will screw up his future for many-many years.> Er---ever heard of responsibility for your own actions? <Don't act so self-rightous.> I doubt that there are many of us here who don't thank their luck for having survived the ignorant arrogance of heedless youth without scars---legal or actual. But our own survived stupidity doesn't imply in any fashion that we must condone in others illegal or immoral acts that we regret in retrospect in our own past. <I am totally out of my league here.> At last! A point on which the majority can agree!

<do you beleive this is "Mother Natures" way of culling the weak out or is this partially an incured event produced in part by man and modern methods, climate change> I think it part and parcel of the natural cycles of an ecosystem. I don't think mans' effect on the natural world has been an improvement. IMO we still have the mindset of 'conquering' the natural world rather than living in harmony with it. It will prove our eventual undoing when 'Mother Nature' execises the same culling of our specie that we wil see in the coming winter take place with the 'lesser' species that will starve. Taking without giving back has the same eventual effect on the land that it does on a bank account. Ultimately the survival of all species is tied to that of the earth itself. <can you CC or anyone explain the lack of Catalpa worms...they were thick when I was young, I have a huge Catalpa tree in my yard and have seen no worms on the tree for several years now> While no expert since I've never had a Catalpa tree nor been around them much my understanding is that the worms pupate in the soil underneath their nursery tree. If so then I suspect that the fertilizers, insecticides and plant poisons spread wholesale on lawns and pasturage have worked exactly as advertised. CC

At least where I live in N. Ark the bumper crop of acorns last year produced a bumper crop of wildlife this year. The squirrel crop in particular was heavy and I've been seeing more twin fawns than normal as well with reports of triplets trickling in. There can be little doubt that the late freeze this year will have a deleterious effect on the mast crop---the only question is the extent. So yes---I fully expect to see some additional squirrel migration. If it is as massive as the year cited @ a decade ago remains to be seen. But I do expect to see a lot of desperately hungry wildlife this winter and early spring. If, like myself, you enjoy feeding the wildlings at your home plan on putting out more than you normally would this year. It is usually the very early spring before new food sources appear and after leftovers from the previous year are long-since exhausted that the 'starving season' takes place.

<Does the land owner own the land under the public roadway if he owns the land on both sides of the road?> Chief: I'm NOT an attorney so please take my opinions with a full shaker of salt! I think in the case of attempting to compare the public waters with the road right of ways that you are making the classic mistake of equating apples with oranges. The streams of the state are in the 'public domain'. That is they belong to the people through universally accepted common law. The people, through the entity of 'the state', hold title to the road right of ways through grant, fee simple or by exercise of emminent domain. That may be completely wrong, vastly over-simplified or only confusing---it is simply the way I have long understood the smokescreen of legal verbiage.

The &^%$ of it is that I traded it for a utility trailer that I never used but thought I needed at the time.(

<CC, maybe you should design a retractable keel? Best of both worlds.> It's already been done. A foot pedal controlled kick-up rudder commonly used on touring kayaks. I did fabricate a pedal controlled trolling motor system for a small one man fishing 'kayak' @ 25 years ago that worked great! Wish now I hadn't traded it away.

Fs wrote: <Floating a lot of small streams and on one of my favorite floats you have to walk a flat canoe a lot. It's a 4 mile section and when the fishing is good you can plan on wading at least 2 miles of it.> Then you'd better plan on double glassing the bottom and finishing the bottom and 3-4" up the side with a triple coat of resin with graphite and collodial silica mixed in because it sounds like you're gonna be hitting or draggung it over a lot of rocks. As much as I hate to say it that sort of useage is where the plastic boats shine. <The canoe is just there to carry the gear. I've always thought a keel would make this worse. But I've been lucky where I don't think I've ever needed one. Waht do you guys think about keels?> The same as you! If primary use is on windy lakes then a keel is a blessing, but on winding streams and skinny water keels are a curse.

brownieman wrote: <Would sure enjoy your "take" on this... once again> Since I don't have a dog in this fight I'm sitting on the sideline trying to be an impartial observer. Having been a big supporter of the same 1/8 % tax initiative here in Arkansas I'm learning about things to watch for in our own program. Like many on the thread I think the concept is good and some wonderful things have been done in Missouri with the monies generated by the tax, but being highly cynical concerning governmental agencies I think that those who want a complete accounting are wise to do so. No governmental agency should ever go unexamined. To do so breeds complaisance and the arrogance of power. Civil servants should be reminded at every opportunity that they ARE servants and the people are their masters. CC

Fs wrote: <Gotta get more beer too. The plans said nothing about the amount of beer this was going to take.> Sorry! I should have pointed that out earlier. ) But look on the bright side----at the scrap price of clean aluminum cans you can defray a large part of the material cost by recycling. Heck---it's virtually patriotic! More boatbuilding=more recycling. One of those all-too-rare 'win/win' deals! ;o) CC

Websters New World Dictionary cynical-Denying the sincerity of peoples motives and actions. Er----well yes, that describes my attitude towards politicians and government quite well in fact. ,o)

<But, to "throw a Basturd out",simply allows another Basturd in. Only the name and face changes.> Please read post # 44 above for the reasoning.

fishingwrench wrote: <With all due respect: How can ANYONE "vote intelligently", when all you have, to base your decision on....or to "inform yourself with" as you say...is what you hear, or percieve through the media. Or our personal impressions based on our own self-proclaimed "supurb judge of character"?> Sorry---I was implying that the USE of intelligence is required to become informed. That certainly does not infer dependence on media for that belies the exercise of intelligent research. The ability to 'judge character' from historical evidence IS one of the marks of intelligence. <The cards are never on the table....so any "intellegent vote" is simply a crapshoot...at best. A candidate may be completely honest in their intentions....but once in office they probably LEARN A FEW THINGS, that change their stratagy, and their direction in a big way. They get enlightened, so to speak. At least that is the way I see it.> I understand your cynicism well. It is based on historical evidence---the only benchmark worthy of intelligence. And exercising the option to 'throw the Bastard out' at the ballot box is exactly what I advocate. <Besides, what confirms the accuracy of a vote count in any election anyway, a government agency ? PFFFFT ! How do we know that the whole voting process isn't simply a staged nationwide crock of bull ? Like everything else.> I share your cynicism in spades. CC

brownieman (don't dare abbreviate your user name!) wrote: <will not the chined edge be harder to draw sideways due to the drag created by the form itself?> Absolutely! But the drag is little different, in practical terms, to any displacement hull of similar volume. Light loads, inherant to the design, normally dictate that the flat-bottomed hull doesn't set quite so deeply in the water column as would a more sexily curvaceous hull of the same displacement so, in the end, most things come up near even. <seems to me being keeless in combination with the flat bottom would be subject to wind also, lessened somewhat when loaded heavy> You would be correct were it not for the low wind profile of the minimal freeboard hullform which doesn't present as much area to be affected as do deeper designs. As for being keelless I can only refer you to your first point above. <in slow or flat water one will have to keep a paddle in the water much more...will not track very well?.> In truth I've only owned one pirogue to date, and that when MUCH younger and far less experienced. At the time I was far more impressed with the tenderness (tippiness) than I was with tracking, but I do recall mentally remarking how well it tracked when paddled properly. <lighter the load, better the maneuverability in tight water, less draw...heavier the load will track in the flat water better but will take more propulsion?> All true! <to me this design is much more applicable to lakes or swamps as you stated...would have to say this boat is a hybrid...pointed bow and stern on the body of a jon??> That's pretty much the way I see it too. Are you familiar with the "Red-horse Runner' gigging boats of the Current and Jacks Fork? In my own mind they are neither more nor less than extended pirogues or as I term them in my own thinking 'plank-built dugouts'. If you aren't familiar with what I'm talking about I'll see if I can impose on Dano to post a pic. <I don't think this would be my choice of design for river applications but would say is probably quite easier to construst. I would much rather stand up in this boat above any canoe...will be much more stable even if the seats are mounted high...sitting on the bottom being the most stable as you mentioned.> Nor can I truly think of them as a craft for swift water even though they are surprisingly agile for the type of hullform. Even though the 'Red-horse Runners' were designed for rivers such as the Jacks Fork and Current I highly suspect that their main role was on the long 'holes' that were both relatively free of the effects of swift currents and, resultingly, more conducive to gigging. I equally suspect that manuevering them through shoals was fraught with hazard and, as a consequence, they were more often lined than navigated. In his 1818-1819 report of his survey of the mineral deposits of the region (first published work of any sort on the area) Henry Schoolcraft recounted broaching the 20-24' dugout, for which he and his companion had traded their horses in order to facilitate getting to Poke Bayou, (the current Batesville, Ar) on a boulder in Bull Shoals which they had been warned to not attempt under any circumstance. Youthful 'Daredevilishness' and a certain urgency to reach their destination caused them to try their hand at Bull Shoals. Apparently only Gods' amusement at their foolishness spared them and allowed them to free their craft without suffering terminal hypothermia in the January chill of the White River. The Ozarks has its' own rich boating heritage that I find an on-going interest and subject of research. I've often thought that the jonboat could well have been a logical developement of the 'Red-horse Runner' altered to carry a greater load with more stability, but the jonboat form is that of the scow, an answer to a neccessity almost as old as the history of men and boats. CC

mcp633 wrote: <It's like any other L.E. agency, publically funded = a lack of adequate resources on the ground. Determined by someone who hasn't ever done the job, or has been behind a desk so long they've forgotten how.> And the personnel increases always seem to be more paper-pushers while the 'soldiers' on the frontline suffer from ever greater workloads without enough 'warm body' additions to eliminate the problems for which the agency was originally created. Indeed, solving the pre-existing problem is the very last thing that bureaucracy wants----were it to do so then the very reason for its' existence would become moot. Bureaucracy is the curse of 'big government' and is in virtually every category inimitable to the public weal. Bottom line: 'Bureaucracy' is both a French word and a French 'invention'. Is it surprising that it is inefficient, expensive and a burden to the citizenry? CC

Don wrote: <The pirogue is described to be effective on still water and mild rivers. Since the bottom is flat, how well would one track and maneuver through a twisted winded set of strong riffles?> They track well and manuevering is mostly dependent on the skill of the paddler---about equal to a keelless canoe. But remember they are designed for the swamps so it isn't even close to being a whitewater boat. Any hard chined boat will always hit objects harder than will a hull with more rounded contours which tend to deflect force at a greater tangent. Fly wrote: <Tonight there will be some progress (I hope). I would really like to get all the main panels cut out this weekend. Possible start the glass work as well.> Dang it! You're gonna wind up making me resume work on the one I started a couple of years ago if I'm not careful. CC