Outside Bend

Welllllll.... One of the probable causes for the hellbender's decline is chytrid, a fungus which has been linked to amphibian declines across the planet. We know wading boots can transport organisms such as didymo and whirling disease, so it's not unlikely they could also be spreading this fungus. To my knowledge it hasn't been investigated, but that's different than saying felt soles have nothing to do with the decline of the hellbender.

Not measurably. Otters eat whatever's easiest to catch- usually crayfish, suckers, and minnows. Trout are pretty fast, and on a big system like the NFoW there aren't many places otters can herd them, unlike smaller wild trout streams. Most folks agree the drought during the late 90's was the main reason the trout population declined so drastically.

A lot of the difference comes from labor as opposed to materials- a rod wrapper stateside is going to expect better compensation than a rod wrapper overseas. Add in the costs of R&D, ad space in every fishing mag, posters, banners, Hardy girls...it all adds up. It's not necessarily so that high-end Sages and Winstons are of dramatically higher quality, they're just more pervasively promoted in the sport than the St. Croix's, TFO's, Batsons, etc.

For what it's worth, there are two hellbender species in Missouri- the Ozark is native to south-flowing streams like the NFoW and Current, the eastern is native to north-flowing streams like the Gasconade and Meramec. Neither is doing well in the state, but the eastern species has a much broader native range. Listing is a double-edged sword- it's nice to know there will be more funding to understand why they're declining, but it's also a shame that funding didn't kick in sooner, when chances were higher of recovering the species. It's cliche, but hellbenders really are a canary in the coal mine for our Ozark streams. As amphibians, they're extremely sensitive to pollution. They're long lived critters (20-30 years), and they occupy the same trophic level as many of our gamefish species- my guess is if folks saw an 80% or 90% in smallmouth or rock bass numbers in our Ozark streams, there'd be outrage, not just a shrugging of shoulders. If you get to see one, of either species, out in the wild- cherish it. They may not be around for your kids or grandkids.

Cutthroat are tougher to raise in hatchery conditions- more prone to disease, less resilient to crowding, stuff like that. For whatever reason, a 20" broodstock Yellowstone Cutthroat just won't produce as many eggs as a 20" broodstock rainbow in a hatchery- they just haven't been domesticated to the degree rainbows have. The joke out west is that a cutthroat does just fine in a torrential mountain stream or muddy irrigation ditch, but put them in a hatchery with all the food they could eat and no predators, and they go belly up Another probable reason is that different rainbow strains spawn at different times of years- some in early winter, some in spring, meaning you have a year-round supply of catchable fish. To my knowledge they haven't worked that out with cutthroats- you only have spring spawners.

OTF (and probably others, I just sorta glanced through this thread) really made an excellent point. The point of the Riverways isn't to provide one demographic with an ideal recreational experience. It exists to protect an outstanding natural resource. Even if all the floaters, horse people, ATV/ORV folks, hikers, campers, RV'ers et al behaved themselves 100% of the time, it's still still too many people using one resource. You can single out one group if you'd like, but the truth is everyone using the resource is contributing to the problem. The solution isn't reducing the number of drunken canoers and replacing them with family canoers, the solution isn't replacing the arsehold jetboaters with responsible jetboaters. The solution, as I see it, is to either spread crowds across other watersheds, or limit access through fewer campgrounds/access points, permitting systems, etc.

Mine are finished, going out this afternoon.

You don't need alcohol to be loud, belligerent, and obnoxious. Just look at our political leaders A jetboat flying up or down river can be just as loud and irritating as a group of drunken rubes, a church group or cub scout pack can deposit litter just the same as a guy passed out in a tube. I took a college buddy from Hong Kong on a float trip a few years ago, and heard some awfully ignorant things coming from the mouth of a teenage girl in another canoe. It's not about how you choose to enjoy the outdoors, it's about having enough respect for others and the resource you're using to act in a responsible and considerate manner.

You could double or triple the number or stocked trout in our Ozark streams- that doesn't mean they'll survive. It's carrying capacity- you can stock 1000 fish into a system, but if the it can only support 300, you're not doing anyone any favors by stocking more. At best it's a draw- instead of going home in angler's creel the surplus fish become mink and turtle food. At worst, the stream fishery may be worse off due to increased stress, crowding, depleted prey base, etc. I agree that the state's coldwater trout fisheries should be priority 1 for MDC. But if they're producing more fish than they have coldwater streams to stock them, I have no problem with the fish being put in urban lakes to provide a winter fishery.

Seven down, I'll finish the rest this afternoon. Thanks for hosting Leonard, I'll drop them in the mail tomorrow morning.

I wonder if there's a sewing circle somewhere, full of angry grandmothers, upset that fly tyers keep horning in on their supplies of craft fur and doll eyes.

There's a pretty good article on ONSR in the latest Fly Rod & Reel mag, the gist being the park managers seem pretty content with maintaining the status quo. You're going to have tension any time you're managing a resource for more than one user group, but ONSR's mandate is pretty clear: maintain the integrity of the aquatic ecosystem and ensure recreation occurs below the point where the ecosystem is impaired. You look around the Riverways and it isn't difficult to come up with a slew of examples where things could be improved. Ignoring the issues won't make them go away, and IMO there's no time like the present to deal with them, before the situation further erodes. Pun intended Is anyone heard much about the NGO's involved (MO Coalition for the Environment, et al)? I'm wondering if there's been any suggestion of forcing the Fed's hands with litigation or some other means.

An 8 weight is generally overkill for tailwaters (and even most MO bass, unless you're only targeting bruisers or fishing very weedy/brushy structure). I have a fast 7 weight that works well fishing for largemouth and smallies, as well as pitching big streamers for trout during the fall. It'd be my recommendation- a little more responsive, and won't wear out your arm nearly as fast.

Mouse is fine by me. I'm about half done, may be able to finish them up this weekend.

As far as the shocking itself goes, you're typically only netting a small fraction of the fish that are out there, often only 10 or 20%. Many fish avoid the electric current, shoot through it, become hung up in rootwads, undercuts, etc, or otherwise aren't netted. Of the ones that are caught, mortality is typically less than 10%, but just like C&R it depends a lot on who's handling the fish and how, and how careful they're being. But overall, trout are often more durable than we give them credit for.

Yep, I've seen multi-color packs of them at Lowe's and a few other places for 8 or ten bucks. They don't seem to color Puglisi fibers as well as Prisma markers, but in my experience they've worked just well for coloring foam, bucktail, craft fur, mylar, and other synthetics. Worth a try!

Most craft stores carry them- Hobby Lobby, Michael's, the like. They are pretty pricey no matter where you go. Sharpies come in a ton of colors, are waterproof, and quite a bit cheaper. Not as many colors available as the Prismacolor markers, but still a pretty wide selection.

Bummer about the fish, but these things happen. Glad to hear you had an excellent trip!

It'd probably be more constructive to contact your regional conservation commissioner, I imagine their information is available on the DC site. I come from a family of cattle farmers, and I agree livestock owners should have some ability to protect their animals from depredation,-be it by coyotes, feral dogs, foxes, or other predators, including mountain lions. But I also think we've moved beyond the period where proactively shooting every animal that may possibly do harm to our livestock is irresponsible as well. MDC has to strike a balance between giving farmers a way of protecting their animals, while also protecting our native species, even if they're native species we're not particularly fond of. Why not handle mountain lions the same way MDC handles other nuisance wildlife? If a farmer's grain is being ravaged by deer, he doesn't get to mow down every deer on his property under the guise of protecting his livelihood- they have to apply for depredation permits. Couldn't the same thing be done for mountain lions? If you have evidence of a lion on your property and feel endangered, you call MDC and the lion response team evaluates the situation, then determines whether to issue a depredation permit to the landowner. Why not leave the discretion of whether to kill a lion up to the conservation agent or law enforcement officer, folks who are trained to deal with nuisance wildlife? Why not encourage landowners to contact MDC BEFORE a lion is shot, that way it could possibly be relocated as opposed to killed (move it back to NE, CO, wherever, or Peck Ranch, our state wilderness lands, etc). Plus live mountain lion specimens could probably help us better understand where they're coming from and what they're doing here than necropsy-ing dead specimens. At the very least, you can collar a live kitty and see where it's going and what it's doing, all information which would help understand and manage this species in the state.

Sounds fun, I'd be game. Are we tying one fly per participant, or two?

Pretty stream, I've never been there. As far as rod selection, I'd pretty much echo what stlfisher said. I'd be looking for something in the 5 to 6 weight range with a matching weight-forward floating line- something that can handle poppers, buggers, leeches and the like. Invest some time in casting practice, and try to see if you can find someone willing to teach you some basic casting maneuvers, and you're set. Good luck!

You may want to browse YouTube and see if you can find some decent casting videos there, as some others have said, it's often tough to articulate how to double haul without any graphics present. If you're near one of the FFF and TU Chapters in the area, you may also be able to hook up with a casting instructor for some real-time demonstrations. It's a great skill to have, and definitely worth perfecting.

Didymo affects everyone. Banning felt soles only affects the folks insisting on their right to infect streams with didymo. We keep going around and around in circles on this JD. It's impractical to ban tourism. It's impractical to monitor every stream in the state that could harbor didymo, much less every stream in every other state and country which could potentially harbor didymo. Even if you could, it's a pretty adaptable organism, and it's already shown an ability to turn up in places we didn't think it could persist. The most effective way of managing it is to keep it from spreading in the first place, and while it's true that more draconian measures could be used to prevent its spread (eliminating boats, fishing gear, etc), those too are impractical. Why not simply take reasonable precautions? You're right, which is why states have instituted gear disinfection programs. MDC employees have to clean their gear just the same as any angler should be doing. MDC employees have to wear rubber soled boots in order to protect our streams, just like anglers ought to be doing.

Drew, I really don't understand why you're so defensive. You never likened didymo on the white to a disease, and I never said you did. I did, I was using the similarities between invasive species and germ theory to demonstrate that your assertion: Isn't true. It still isn't true. And while you're right that a compromised immune system can increase the odds of an infection, you don't get the infection because of a compromised immune system. It's not the wound that causes the infection, it's the pathogen. The White River doesn't have didymo because it has dams, the dams just allow the didymo to exist there. The White has didymo because people brought didymo into the system. Assertions like these seem pretty libelous, do you have any evidence MDC is acting with any interest other than the protection of our resources? You don't typically spend 4-6+ years obtaining advanced degrees to be paid 55K a year if your primary motivation is money. From most every MDC person I've met and talked with, they're folks absolutely just like us, who grew up fishing and hunting and enjoying our state's wild places, people so passionate about those places and features that they're willing to forgo some pay, some benefits, even some job security, in order to maintain, manage, and protect those resources. They're doing it because they see some genuine value in the work, they're banning felt because they genuinely believe it's a threat, and claiming they're motivated by anything other than a deep passion for Missouri's biological diversity, without any sort of evidence to back up your claim, seems awfully insulting, and disrespectful of the work they do.

While it's true tourists brought didymo to the system, it's not true that every tourist brought didymo to the system- you're basically punishing everyone for the actions of a few. Not to mention the economic impact banning fishing tourists would have on our state's rural economies. MDC owns hundreds of conservation areas and fishing accesses- creating, putting up, and maintaining hundreds of signs in perpetuity is easier than adding a few lines to the Wildlife Code? It doesn't even address private landings, boat docks, etc. You're right Kevin, and I'm notoriously bad at math. But if no ban goes into effect, and 800 anglers a year are moving between Bull Shoals and Taney, aren't the chances of spreading didymo to Taney greater than if you have a ban and only 100 anglers in violation? Ignorance of the law is no excuse, pure and simple. It's your responsibility to read and understand the regs, if you don't, that's your own choice, and their are consequences for that decision. It's already been addressed- boats and trailers and most other fishing gear can be cleaned and disinfected without much effort. That just isn't the case with felt. To give anglers adequate time to prepare for the change in regulations. It's simply a matter of compromise. And Troutfiend- I completely agree that MDC lacks the enforcement manpower to enforce the ban at every trout park and access, much less in streams statewide. But simply putting the regs down on paper will push some folks to make the switch just to stay legal- no one wants to come back from a fishing trip with a ticket. If nothing else, the reg (and all the ensuing education and outreach) will help illustrate to anglers just how seriously didymo can affect our ecosystems, and help set the framework for an extension of our conservation ethic.