fozzie.

I'd invent a monster before I devoted a show to piranhas in LOZ.

They're very common at fish sales, and are used (with mixed results), as a biological control for aquatic vegetation such as coontail. They could've escaped from farm or golf course ponds during a flood, or may have been stocked intentionally by someone worried about weeds in the lake.

I was down last week- only a few caddis out. Lots of little pale-yellow mayflies were coming off when the clouds were overhead. Pretty sure I saw one very lonely Hendrickson (about a #14, dark gray body, solid gray/slate colored wings). Caught a couple on Elk Hair Caddis, X-Caddis, cracklebacks, and caddis emergers. Several more took dead-drifting and swinging mohair leeches and buggers, size 6 and 8. Friend caught one on a Pat's rubberlegs. Another friend caught one on a cricket imitation. A few hits on San Juan worms, caddis pupae, and small pheasant tail nymphs (16-18). Overall it was fairly slow, and very few consistently rising fish.

Just to play devil's advocate- The thing about chronic poisoning is that it requires multiple exposures. You may not be affected the first time, even the 35th time. But all those little poisonings eventually add up. Ask the radium girls, or the folks in Minamata, Japan. Still though, I don't think there's any evidence eating fish in Springfield Lake would be detrimental to your health.

I'm not sure what (if any) bait shops carry them live, but we used to catch them by tossing out a big chunk of beef liver on a line into some suitably nasty water, and leaving it out overnight. Positively covered with leeches, and a good way to catch crayfish, too.

I think you'd be fine. Springfield Lake seems to have made it onto DNR's proposed list of impaired water bodies this year, but it seems like that's the result of too many nutrients and algae in the system. So long as the fish are properly prepared, you ought to be fine. Smallmouthjoe brings up a good point, though. Most sewage treatment plants don't remove organic compounds such as hormones and antibiotics from the water they treat. The science hasn't caught up with the chemicals, and no one seems too sure as to what effect those chemicals have on aquatic organisms. The USGS got a lot of press last fall for the release of data indicating the incidence of intersex black bass has increased throughout the US in recent years, although I don't believe they answered the question as to what was causing the change. If you're worried about hormones and antibiotics in beef, pork, poultry, etc though, you may want to reconsider eating the fish you catch out of Lake Springfield. And IF you are worried about heavy metals or mercury- bottom feeders such as catfish, carp, sturgeon, and suckers seem to accumulate the greatest proportion of toxins, as a result of their feeding habits and the proportion of fatty tissue on their bodies. Larger fish (the big flatheads you mentioned), also tend to have higher concentrations than smaller ones.

Pretty fish, and it'd be neat to get a photo with one. But for my money, I bet this thing fights harder:

If the body of the fly is covered in epoxy, do you need to use the inside of the can? You could just use the outside of a Stag can if you wanted a gold colored one..

And a million people seems like a lot. But a million people...can be wrong. A lie is still a lie, no matter how often it's repeated. And the voices speaking loudest aren't always the voices of truth, or even reason. I enjoy saltwater fishing fishing too, but in order to pursue that pastime, I need to have fish. It's no secret that numerous oceanic fish stocks are on the verge of commercial and/or biological extinction, many due to overharvest by commercial fishing interests. And it's not as though the proposals being made don't have any historical basis- I see a valuable analogy to the market hunting and the decimation of game populations in the 19th and 20th centuries. Game populations were in dire circumstances, but with intervention and proper management (including restrictive regulations and even bans on sporthunting), those game populations bounced back dramatically. Certainly some jobs were lost in market hunting and other sectors, but my guess is they've been more than made up by the service and retail sectors- from guides and mom-and-pop outfits to the big guys like Bass Pro and Cabela's. In the same light, the regs being evaluated at the moment seem to be designed to protect and enhance oceanic fisheries, to bring them back from the brink of commercial and/or economic extinction. IMO that's a heritage I can get behind. I'm not saying it'd be easy..but if I had to forgo keeping my saltwater catch so that my kids and grandkids can have more and better saltwater fishing opportunities...I think I'd probably do it.

I honestly don't know which Ford models are made in the US and which are made elsewhere. It's a moot point (not all "foreign" cars are made overseas, and not all "domestic" cars are made here in the US), and your question doesn't answer my question. If the idea is that I should be invested in my community, that I should want to see my neighbors employed, how can I justify buying a Ford brand car built in Mexico over a Honda brand car built in Indiana? If the idea is buying a car made in the USA stimulates jobs and the economy..why should I buy a Ford product built overseas instead of a Honda product built here? If the idea is I shouldn't be paying Japanese businessmen instead of American businessmen...why should I be paying Mexican assembly plant workers over American assembly plant workers? IMO Ford isn't any sacred cow- they use the same business model as many other American (and international) corporations- outsource jobs to the cheapest labor pools, thereby maximizing profit.

Not to completely hijack the thread, but along the vein of made in America vs elsewhere... I'm due for a new vehicle in the near future, and have been researching my options. Which is better for the American economy: buying a Honda built in the US, or buying a Ford built in Mexico?

Personally, I'm not too worried about Obama outlawing sportfishing. In the run of things, it really doesn't matter, seeing as how the world will end Dec. 12th 2012 and all. It has to be true, because I read it on the internet.

Man. Snakes, cougars, bears, poison ivy, wader-eating brush, and now CAMERAS!??

Weather will be the biggest factor, the Jacks Fork is well known for rising rapidly during rain. Flooded campsites are not uncommon, especially in the spring. Be aware of the weather, and plan accordingly. As for lures, I've had my best luck on Slider jigs (white, pumpkin, and some funky color- I guess pumpkin with a purple/grape colored tail). Rebel Crawfish, wiggle warts, little cleo's, roostertails, and a basic assortment of soft plastic jigs. Senkos and flukes kill there, too. Good luck!

Looks better and more productive than what's been going on here....

I think an underwater camera would be pretty cool- several states have cameras on their fish ladders, and you can watch salmon/shad/striped bass/whatever move through them. It's pretty cool. I'm not sure what maintenance would be involved (scraping the lens of algae, etc?), and the potential for damage during floods and other events. Cool idea though.

Can't help you with any job leads Jeff, but good luck with your search. It's tough out there- I've been out of work for a few months now, but the positive is that things are beginning to look up. I wish you the best of luck.

No pink thong then? I was looking forward to putting on Girls Gone Wild- The Bennett Springs Edition I wonder if they'll move the webcams to the Niangua mainstem Memorial Day weekend. That may be worth watching

No worries Cricket, sorry if it came off as something other than goofiness. Just different opinions, and there's nothing wrong with that. It's all in fun. And fishinwench, I can certainly see your point. A couple years back I was fishing Yellowstone...pretty meadow stream, I was absorbed in fishing, and all of a sudden I notice a tourist fifty or so yards away with a telephoto lens, taking pictures of me. Nice guy, and meant nothing by it, just wanted some pretty pictures of a guy fly fishing in a big western meadow, mountains all around, a postcard-type thing. Nothing sinister about it, but it certainly did make me self-conscious, and did have an effect on my fishing that day. Even if it's an innocent act, it can still have a profound effect on your experience. I dunno, I guess I'm a bit wishy-washy on the whole thing, how I feel about it depends on the context of the situation. Bennett's a very public, very social place, and I'd probably be less upset having a picture or video of myself taken there than if I were alone or with a few friends on a quiet, less well-known stream. To me the latter would be more of an intrusion...psychologically, I suppose. That's entirely subjective, though, and I'm sure there's folks that have the same feelings fishing Bennett as I do fishing other places. To each their own. Sorry if that wound up as incoherent rambling, I just wound up sort of thinking out loud...

A voodoo with doctor down south taught me how to make amulets to keep away all sorts of nasties- bears, panthers, catamounts, rattlin' snakes and copperheads, wild pigs, wild women, wild women the size of pigs, meth addicts, Deliverance types. I'll sell 'em to you guys, $20 bucks apiece. I'll even attach a little look so you can clip 'em on your lanyard or fishing vest. Any takers?

You're right, and that'd be an issue if the cameras were pointed into the woods. Call me modest, even a prude...but if someone is dropping trow and dumping brown trout in the parking lot at Bennett Spring State Park, I'd sort of expect them to be hauled out of there in handcuffs and crappy pants. And the parent analogy only works if you're spending your life camped out in front of the Bennett camera. DNR isn't filming what you did at the bar last night or who you went home with, it's filming people (who I'm not sure could be identified due to the picture quality), fishing, walking around, etc in order to potentially draw people to the state park. I guess I don't see it as surveillance as much as a video postcard. No I wouldn't like my parents watching me and every aspect of my daily existence. But if they want to film me fishing for a couple hours with a camera I got them for Christmas, I'm not going to get bent out of shape over it.

The most important thing about advertising is to know your audience. I think the following would be more successful: Powerbait Reynold's Wrap Budweiser/Miller Durkee's

I think you guys may be making a mountain out of a molehill. Maybe a few of you should cut back on the CSI I've glanced at it a couple times today, pretty underwhelming. Grainy video of the dam with a few folks fishing off it. Couldn't tell who they were or what vehicles were in the parking lot, even in full screen mode. I'd challenge anyone to discern the difference between Powerbait and a glo-ball at that resolution. What surprises me most is that a lot of you guys so concerned with privacy/surveillance have no problems posting reports and stories here, broadcasting to the world where you fished, when you fished, who you fished with, what you fished with, how deep you fished it, how successful you were, and even providing photos of yourself, your catch, and your location. Far more information than can be provided by watching that video stream. DNR doesn't need to put up a camera to spy on you guys, you provide all the information they'd need voluntarily on here. It just doesn't seem like a big thing- an ad, comparable to the photos of trout anglers you see slapped on the cover of Conservationist or in your local newspaper. Do I think it's necessary? No. But I don't think it's so sinister as to make me question whether I should fish Bennett in the future.

Haven't you heard? MDC parachutes them in out of their black helicopters. Rattlesnakes too. And I've heard there's a clandestine cobra project going on at some stream accesses on the Current River. Best the neophytes hang up their gear during the warmer months On a serious note though- the rainbows in Crane have already spawned this season, right? It'd be a shame if all this new found popularity for this resource resulted in the destruction of redds and larval/young fish, thereby reducing its productivity in the future...

The area was closed last time I was down, in early February, I'm guessing it'll be closed until warm weather, late March or April.