fozzie.

I used to fish the Jacks Fork 2-3 times a year, sort of fell off the wagon with the whole trail rides/e. coli issue and watching folks misuse ATVs. It was decent fishing, caught plenty of 10-14 inch fish, and each trip caught one or two fish from 15-18 inches. Fishing always seemed more consistent very early in the morning, and well after sunset, from what I remember. Stow your rods and enjoy the scenery during the day (especially this time of year, with all the trees flowering), and bust them out when you get to the campsite

That's not including some of the poultry operators and other CAFOs in the area. I can't recall the precise statistics offhand, but some of those facilities can produce as much sewer as a decent-sized town.

Sounds like you guys had a great day spending time together. Congratulations!

Not sure how they physically get the mussel off wherever it's attached, but drum have big crushing teeth in their throat and strong mussels to crush the shells.

If it's just during the early and mid spring, it may just be seasonal blooms of algae/diatoms/bryzoans. They tend to grow quickly and produce large, slimy masses for a few months in spring, before the leaves shade them out. Not only are the septic problems an issue, but this is the time of year when everyone's putting down fertilizer, too. When that stuff gets washed into the reservoir, you can expect to see a lot more algae growth.

I dunno, I've heard of folks being labeled sex offenders after public urination on float trips and at St. Louis' Mardi Gras. May just be urban legends, though.

Hey folks, Thinking about heading down toward Poplar Bluff this weekend and fishing Tenmile Creek. Never done it before, was wondering about access. Is it an easily wadeable stream? Anything else I need to know before going down there? Thanks! Tom

As for the immediate future, it's unlikely you'll see much difference. The big issues for now will likely be damage to boats, docks, and beaches. In the long-term though, it's likely the zebra mussels will be competing with gizzard shad and other forage fish. Lower populations of those species (due to zebra mussels), could have a negative effect on bass populations.

I'll be parked in front of the Bennett Spring webcam. I'll wave

That's wild, anyone know how big it was?

Wouldn't the state just have to up the tax rate in order to pay for all the new security equipment? Say...the tax rate on handguns, handgun ammo, and license fees for CCW permits? Seems like they're just.....shooting themselves in the foot! PUN INTENDED! Happy Easter.

Same here, the family farm pond needs thinning

Tough call- to me it looks more like a channel, albeit a helluva big one. Was it in the river, or a smaller impoundment? Most folks don't stock blues in small impoundments as they tend to eat everything else. Either way, I'm sure it was a blast! Last Easter I caught a channel, about six pounds or so, in a family farm pond. I was very confused until I got a good look at it, but man was it fun!

I've gone the expanding foam route before- it works, but it's pretty expensive.

Gorgeous fish! The replica program sounds like a great idea, too. Very cool!

I've noticed that too, the last few trips. I've been catching fewer fish than last year, but the sizes are definitely larger. I'm wondering if last seasons wet/cool conditions provided more optimal conditions and better growth. I guess we'll see...

You may want to contact some of the canoe outfitters down there or the ONSR folks directly- they close the river to canoe traffic if the water's too high, and they may be able to tell you at what discharge the river closes. So long as it doesn't rain much between now and then, you'll probably be alright- though it may be tough finding gravel bars to camp on, if you're going that route. You may also look into floating the 11 point instead- from the graphs it's looking like it may be in better shape. As far as crowds, they shouldn't be an issue.

I've never caught any that big, but a few years ago fishing for white bass I wound up catching a dozen or so drum on little cleos, biggest five or six pounds. Ugly things, but surprisingly fun, and I've heard they're pretty good eating, too.

What an excellent way to start off the weekend : )

As for the whooping thing, I guess I just don't care. I think it's silly, but to each their own. I do silly things on the river, too. As for the C&R-ish thing, I figured it may help to illustrate my point, too. That's a fish. I was hungry. I bashed his head on a rock, set him on said rock, and took a picture. No qualms there. Later, I ate it. It was delicious. No qualms there. I didn't want to eat this one, so I saw no reason to screw with it any more than necessary. No, the pic isn't going to grace the cover of Field and Stream, but it works for me. I'm not arguing for C&R vs. anything else, or the welfare of worms, or the existential consequences of baiting a hook, or the rights of Mr. Darbee's chickens. My point is: What's better for a fish you intend to release: handling it more or handling it less? If the object of C&R is to release a fish to grow larger, it makes no sense to me to handle it in a way which increases its likelihood of dying. It seems like if you wanted the fish to survive and grow, a better approach would be to take measures to limit the negative effects of stress, limit handling of the fish as to protect its slime layer, and minimize its exposure to air. That's it. Am I wrong? It's certainly not a huge deal, and I don't mean to seem like I'm blowing things out of proportion. I'm not going to be walking up and down streambanks ostracizing people for their release techniques- I just don't care that much. The thread was, in part, about the ethics of the sport we all participate in, and I figured I'd share my thoughts on one issue. Thom-If I landed a 30 inch brown, I'd be shot. Shaking too bad to even consider taking a decent picture. I'd be more worried about whether I had an extra pair of drawers in the car than where my camera was. ness- Great point. If nothing more, hopefully it'll get people thinking.

It's like herding cats...

I'm not sure I follow that argument. Should we quit turning in poachers because they're having fun? Should a flasher not be prosecuted because we're not supposed to judge their actions? Frankly, I'm sort of surprised the position has been met with so much criticism. If the object of C&R is to release a fish so that it will survive and grow, why subject it to more stress and damage than you absolutely need to? Why decrease its chances for survival any more than necessary? That's all I'm saying, and I don't think it's a terribly radical position.

What can I say, I'm pro-life. You guys are attacking strawmen again. This isn't about PETA. It's not about catch and release vs. catch and keep. It's not about torture, or animal rights. To me, it's about being a responsible custodian of the resource. The action of fishing certainly stresses the fish we target, there's no argument there. But there are ways we can minimize stress to the fish we catch. Hucking 'em on the bank to take a picture isn't one of those ways. Numerous studies have shown the longer a fish is exposed to air, the more damage done to it's slime coat, the less its likelihood of survival. It's also been shown that the effects of stress aren't always immediate- a fish may swim off fine, then succumb to mortal stress later. So now back to my question: can anyone explain to me how the fish on the gravel/bank/grass/dirt/leaves photos are improving fishing? How they're stressing the fish less than minimal handling and quick release? How they're benefitting our resources?

Sounds like he got exactly what he wanted: attention. Think of all the money that'll go to lawyers that will fight this. Money which could be spent on....conservation!

Uh, then don't take the picture? If you couldn't take a picture without stressing or damaging the animal, did you really need to take the picture in the first place? Personally, I'd rather hear in a post that a fish was released unharmed then to have photo evidence it was mishandled. I mentioned this on another thread, and it always makes me wince. I think we can all agree hucking fish up on the rocks/gravel/grass/dirt/dead leaves isn't doing them any favors, and certainly not enhancing its likelihood of survival. I've done it before, and reflecting on it, realized it wasn't a particularly smart thing to do if I wanted to see that fish survive, so I quit. If you're gonna kill it, smoke it's head on a rock and be done with it. But don't kid yourself that you're releasing that fish without a lot more stress and damage than was needed. I guess the whole thing bugs me the same as people taking pot-shots at wildlife or skyblasting waterfowl- you may get lucky and bag something (or in this case get a decent pic), but you're also dramatically increasing the likelihood those animals will be unduly stressed and damaged. IMO, that's not respecting the resource.