Al Agnew

If you fish Ozark streams at night from a boat, chances are you'll have a fish jump into the boat, or against the side of the boat, or completely over the boat, at some point. I've had all three happen. If you crowd a bass against the bank when it is in shallow water, as is common at night, it panics and jumps. The old timers even used that tendency to catch bass; they'd hang a couple big blankets lengthwise down the middle of their long johnboats, and motor along the banks slowly. Bass would jump, hit the blanket, and fall into the boat. They called it "jumping bass".

It's not quite that simple. The landowner on small streams owns everything but the water and fish and other wild organisms in the water. The water, and those organisms in it, are owned by the state. So where does the public's right to utilize those resources stop? And it's a little bit different from, for instance, deer and other game animals on private land. In order to reach those critters to hunt them, you have to venture onto that ground. But it is certainly POSSIBLE to float a stream and never touch the bottom or bank, in order to reach the fish in it. As for wading streams where you DO have to touch the bottom to wade them, every state is different. But we accept a LOT of public use of private land. If you live in the city, you own the land under the sidewalk that goes across the front of your house, but the public has a right to use the sidewalk. Some, not all, states, consider the rivers and streams to be such important resources that they grant the public the right to use them. Montana, my other home state, for instance, has more permissive stream access laws than Missouri; in Montana, as long as you can legally get onto any stream that holds fish, you have the right to go anywhere you can reach on that stream in order to pursue those fish. You can't get out of the stream and up atop a high bank, but as long as you stay within the stream or along the banks, you're perfectly within your rights to be on private property, because the state has decided that the trout which are a public resource are important enough to give the public access to them.

I totally agree with you on the value of designating a stream a Blue Ribbon stretch. Regulations have TWO purposes. Supposedly, their main purpose is to protect the resource. But a very real purpose, or at least an effect, of a special regulation is to guide public perception of the resource; if it's designated as "special", with more restrictive regulations, it tells people that there is something there of value, perhaps more valuable than other places or things. And please understand, in the final analysis, I didn't say anything about keeping quiet about small creeks in order to protect their fisheries. I'm saying to keep quiet about them, or we ALL stand to lose ACCESS to them. While keeping quiet DOES in most cases keep the fishing better because fewer people are fishing it, the fishing comes and goes. A creek gets publicized, a bunch of anglers show up and pound it, fishing declines, and pretty soon they go on to the next hot creek and the fishing recovers at least to some extent. But the best fishing in the world doesn't much matter if you can't fish it. Pinhead landowners are a whole different thing. And they are a problem that can only be solved with education and incentives for them to treat the creeks better.

No, not ticked at you, and I wasn't particularly speaking of Barren Fork. After all, unlike all the little smallmouth creeks I fish, it is a somewhat publicized wild trout stream. However, parts of it are certainly private land, so in a way I AM talking about it. Please understand...wading size creeks flowing through private land ARE private. We fish them only because the landowners don't mind (or possibly don't know that they can shut them down). But the landowners most certainly CAN shut them down. In my part of the state, I have lost access to several creek stretches just in the last five years, because people were flocking to the accesses (which are invariably bridge crossings) and trashing the place, and the landowner got fed up with it. County officials in most counties are perfectly willing to side with the landowners when they complain about litter and vandalism and drunken, drugged up parties at the bridge crossing next to their land, and shut those places down even if the landowner doesn't. A couple guys we all probably know are even making Youtube videos of fishing some of these small creeks, though mostly they don't name the creek. Some HAVE named the creek they are fishing in the video. I'm sorry, but it is the absolute height of stupidity to name small wading size creeks other than the ones MDC already publicizes. It most certainly does attract people to those creeks, and like I said, a certain percentage of them are going to be pinheads. I've heard the excuse dozens of times that "we need to bring more people to these places so that they will have more advocates to protect them." Bullcrap. If it's private land and CAN be shut down, it doesn't matter that a few more people actually care about it, the landowners have the right to shut it down and the more people visiting it, the more likely they are to exercise that right. In today's political climate, the landowners pretty much have the right to do whatever the heck they please on their land anyway, and a few more advocates for protecting these small creeks aren't going to make a darned bit of difference.

That's usually the case on small streams. And it's kinda the rule I go by...if there is a place to park and a lack of purple paint and "no trespassing" signs around that place to park, it probably means the landowners are okay with you being on it (as long as you don't do something to make a nuisance of yourself). Unfortunately, a whole lot of pinheads DO make nuisances of themselves, or worse, which prompts landowners that used to be okay with it start putting up the purple paint and signs. And another access is lost for all of us because of the pinheads. Which is why I get so completely ticked off at the people who insist on publicizing small creeks and enticing more people to them. Invariably, some of the people they bring to the creek are pinheads. MDC has a vested interest in a LITTLE bit of publicizing a wild trout creek like Barren Fork, but even they should be a little circumspect about talking it up.

Actually that's not quite what Elder v Delcour said, but essentially correct. Elder v Delcour basically said that if you can get a "small boat" down it, it's legal to do so, as well as fish, wade, and camp on gravel bars. Which, presumably, means that if it's too small to get a boat down it, it's private. Federal law does not enter into it, and that's my only quibble with what you said. ALL states have their own stream access laws (or in the case of MO and AR, state case laws). None go by any federal law when it comes to streams that are not federally navigable. You're absolutely correct that both MDC and DNR have thrown out incorrect information, and you're correct about Danforth's ruling. Basically, though, since Elder v Delcour was based upon the stretch of the Meramec from just a few miles below the Short Bend Access (the ford on Delcour Road to Cook Station, to be exact), a stretch that gets too low to float easily for more than half the year, presumably any other comparable stretch of stream should be covered under it. But it can be a big gray area, and you're also absolutely correct that it's landowner and local sheriff's department and prosecutor's call. Indian Creek in Franklin County, which HAS been ruled to fall under Elder v Delcour, still has several landowners that are notorious for hassling floaters, even though county officials have warned them not to in the past. So bottom line...if you can legally get onto the creek, you MIGHT be okay, but on a creek the size of Barren Fork, if a landowner wants to run you off it, he probably legally can, since it's definitely too small to float except for in really high water. That doesn't necessarily keep me off small creeks, but I try to keep a VERY low profile when on them.

Yeah, that spring with the big sycamore is cool. You don't often see a spring come out and go over a waterfall formed by tree roots! The ENTIRE Bourbeuse gets too low for easy floating. It was down to 40 cfs at the Union gage a couple days ago. You need at least 100 cfs on any given stretch to float it without expecting to scrape bottom a lot and walk some of the widest riffles, or riffles with split channels. But it has so many long pools and short riffles that you can get down it at less than 30 cfs if you're willing to work a bit.

It's actually surprising how the trout so quickly dwindle to almost none below Akers. You'd think that, even though they aren't stocked from Akers down, Welch Spring would keep the river cold enough to support a lot of roaming trout on downstream for at least a few miles. After all, it's cold enough that the smallmouth apparently don't do well in that stretch. And it's certainly as cold as the stretch from Cedargrove to Welch Spring, in which trout are doing well. (Also, some years the Cedargrove to Welch Spring stretch has MORE smallmouth than the stretch from Akers to Pulltite.) Of all the floatable stream stretches in the Ozarks, the Akers to Pulltite stretch is probably the WORST fishing. And at the same time the most popular with the get wet and giggle crowd (used to be called the aluminum hatch, but nobody rents aluminum canoes anymore). Sure is gorgeous, though.

The only way it would be any different temperature would be if the hole was quite deep and the flow going into it was VERY small. As long as there is visible movement of water in the hole, it would stay mixed well and almost uniform in temperature. Bass don't necessarily "go deep" in streams to reach warmer water. They gravitate toward deep, slow water in the winter for security reasons. They do not want to be visible to overhead predators, and also the deeper they go, the less visibility there is in water that is anything but extremely clear. Plus, the bigger the pool, the more room they have to flee and evade predators like bigger fish, or otters. They evolved to seek such shelter in winter when their metabolism makes them slower. One of my winter fishing rules of thumb is that the fish will be just deep enough that you can't see them, IF the water has some color. If there is four feet of water visibility, they will be at least 4 feet deep, but if they are in the least active, they won't be much deeper than that, because the deeper the water the less food there is. The problem comes when the water is very clear, as it often is in the winter. If you can see the bottom everywhere, the fish are doing one of two things; they will either be hiding under overhead cover, like under ledges and big rocks and logs, or they will be continually (if slowly) moving in open water, like moving along the edges of dropoffs or moving up and down a bluff pool where the rock debris on the bluff side meets the gravel or sand bottom coming off the other side. Here's the other thing I'm convinced of...smallmouth aren't monolithic. They don't all do the same things or move to the same places. SOME of them move out of smaller tributaries into larger streams. SOME move many miles to certain wintering pools. But SOME stay put, as long as the water where they live contains places to hide out of sight and out of the stronger current. Under typical winter conditions, the ones that stay in smaller streams become tougher to catch, because I think that they spend much of their time being pretty dormant in their hiding places, especially in the clearest, coldest water. But give them a 40 degree rain that raises the creek a bit and puts some color in the water, and they may come alive and do some serious feeding for a while. So winter creek fishing (assuming the creek isn't too heavily springfed) is kind of a feast or famine type thing, almost impossible under typical conditions but can be so good you swear that all the fish that were there in the summer are still there. On larger rivers, winter fishing is more consistent, with fewer times when the fish are totally inactive.

Cryptozoology is an interesting subject (it's the study of unknown to science and seemingly scientifically impossible or improbable critters). I wonder what the explanation really is for animals like sasquatch, black panthers, the Loch Ness monster, or the White River monster. Is it all just delusion and bad observations? Are a lot of sightings hoaxes? Or is there really an element of truth there somewhere? I am a skeptic about all of it, but I never completely dismiss it. If you want to be imaginative about it all, maybe all these critters actually reside in a different universe but occasionally push through the veil and temporarily reach our own universe, but they are not completely here, so if by some chance one gets killed in this universe, it fades back into its own.

No, a medium light power rod wouldn't necessarily be too heavy for trout. But far too many people choose rods based upon either the size of fish they are targeting or their presumed advantages using light line in very clear water. In my opinion, there should be one overriding reason for choosing a certain rod power, and that's the size and weight of the lures you'll be casting with it. Casting with any rod means "loading" the rod; the bend the lure puts in the rod at the end of the backcast is what helps propel the lure with distance and accuracy on the forward cast. The lighter the lures you plan to throw with it, the lighter power the rod should be because it will load better with light lures. In my opinion, ultralight tackle should only be used for casting extremely light lures (like 1/32 to 1/64th ounce), or when fishing for smallish panfish like bluegill or crappie. It has no place in my bass arsenal, nor really in my trout rods. Why? One, I don't like nor want to "play" a good size fish for too long because it's unhealthy for the fish if I plan to release it. Two, a light (not ultralight) or medium light rod will cast a wider range of lure sizes better than an ultralight. Of course, I very seldom use a spinning rod for trout, but if I do, it's because I'm targeting big trout like big browns using some decent size lures. So my advice...go for a medium light rod.

Not renting out bedrooms, but could be persuaded to rent out boat space for a nice dinner or a bottle of good scotch whiskey

Well, I have experimented with a two fluke rig...small fluke in front, Superfluke about 12 inches behind it like it's a predator going after a smaller fish. It works!

Well, unlike some of the others, I usually use two flies, unless I'm stripping streamers. Hopper-dropper? I don't much care what the "correct" terminology is, to me that means a hopper or other big, high-floating dry fly with a nymph dropped off it. To be honest, I don't use it much. I prefer using the hopper as my easy to see fly when I'm wanting to use a really small dry fly. When it's hopper season out here in Montana (and this year it's been exceptionally warm all autumn so far, and there are STILL hoppers around and a trout willing to take one now and then), I usually use a hopper with a small Adams dry off it, because there are also usually some kind of mayflies appearing now and then. A couple weeks ago, there was a pretty decent hatch of big brown drakes, so I tried the hopper with a good imitation brown drake. But only tiny trout were taking the drakes and nothing was taking the hopper. Foam hoppers are big out here, but the trout are quick to get used to seeing them and start avoiding them. I prefer a Parachute Hopper or even an old school Joe's Hopper. And for the dropper nymph if that's the way I want to go, I really like a small (size 16) beadhead soft hackle. Earlier this summer, I started using a larger soft hackle as a dropper fly off a streamer. I mostly use my own rabbit hair streamers, and I had the idea with murky water to use the streamer slightly like a big nymph, dead drifting it and the soft hackle beneath a Thingamabobber for a bit, and then stripping it in. It worked the first time I tried it to the tune of a 22 inch and a 19 inch brown, so I used it a couple other days with excellent results as well. Most of the bigger fish took the streamer when I'd begin to strip it, but I caught plenty of smaller fish on the soft hackle dead drifting.

Chief is still Chief. He and I often have our little arguments on Facebook these days. All in fun, we can pretty well predict ahead of time how it will go.

I agree. Water temperature might have a little to do with it, but it's mainly photo period. I suspect that when it comes to fall migration, photo period tells them when they should start "thinking" about moving, and then if a bit of high water comes along, they opportunistically move. Otherwise, they move when the pressure to move becomes great enough. But I have found that movement in the spring starts in March. By mid-April, most of the fish are in the spawning areas, whether it be in smaller tributaries or in the main rivers. I have seen good-sized smallmouth migrating up Courtois Creek and Huzzah Creek in late March. They will be swimming up the middle of the pools and not interested in anything you throw at them.

Gavin has it right. But it all depends upon several things: first, in the winter, they instinctively "know" they need one thing above all else; a place to hide. This can mean deep water. It can mean an undercut bank or rock or mess of logs they can get UNDER. They are more sluggish in the winter and escaping predators isn't as easy, so they want refuges where they aren't visible from above, and also room to evade underwater predators. So that's the first requirement of a wintering spot. Second, they will seek out "thermal refuge" if it's available. That means spots where significant springs enter the stream...not because they feel more comfortable in warmer water, but because it keeps their metabolism moving better so they are faster and better escape predators. Third, they also know they need refuge from the occasional big wintertime flood. When a fish is sluggish, they can't fight heavy current, so they need spots to get out of the current. So think about your favorite small stream...how many places on that stream fulfill these requirements? Not many. So they move to places that do fill the requirements. Some may remain in the creek, finding smaller spots where they feel secure. But many move downstream to larger bodies of water, whether that be a larger river or a lake. But here's the kicker that I think might be true, though I can't prove it...I believe that smallmouth in these streams winter in the same spots every year, and very possibly in the same spots where their ancestors did. Because tagging results have shown that migrating smallmouth often pass up a bunch of very good wintering pools that other smallmouth are happily using, and end up traveling a lot farther downstream than they need to, while others end up wintering in less than optimal spots that USED to be better wintering pools. And they crowd into good wintering pools, a few I know of in such numbers that some of them spill over into pools immediately nearby that aren't good wintering spots. Meanwhile, some pools that to us anglers look like perfect wintering pools are almost devoid of fish.

They do start moving this time of year, and they apparently can make it down some pretty skinny riffles when they start to move. I suspect they move through the riffles at night. By October a lot of the smaller creeks will just not have many fish left in them. Those that don't move to wintering pools downstream will move to pools with undercut banks or large rocks that they can get under.

Yup. Hybrid.

Yup, great answer! Autumn leaves and the often extremely clear, low water really limits the lures you can use in the fall. It's not a good time to be experimenting with different lures. But a lot depends upon the weather conditions and water temperature. Windy days are the worst, because they put great masses of leaves on the water. You can try spinnerbaits if the leaves aren't TOO bad. They may or may not work. On the fly rod, a popper or slider with a weedguard on the hook can work well if the water temps are still above 60 degrees. The Flukes, rigged weightless on a lighter hook with hook point under the skin of the lure, are very versatile and won't be affected much by leaves. I like to throw them atop masses of leaves washed up against obstacles and drag them off the matt of leaves, then let them sink and be carried under the leaf mass by the current. But basically, until the leaf fall is about done, any lure with treble hooks is going to be frustrating to fish.

Last winter sometime I parked at the Union Access and paddled downstream two or three miles. There wasn't anybody there when I parked. Coming back up the river, when I was a couple hundred yards below the bridge, somebody with a semi-auto rifle decided to fire off a dozen rounds or so into the water under the bridge. I hung back for a bit and waited to see if they were going to do any more shooting. Nothing else happened so I paddled on up to the ramp. As I was walking up to get my truck and bring it down the ramp, a county cop pulled up. He asked me if I'd seen anybody shooting. I said I'd seen the shots hit the water but hadn't seen the perpetrators. We talked for a bit and then he got out of his car and wandered around the edges of the lot for a bit. So I guess somebody quickly reported the shooting.

Well, since the smallie limit on most special management streams is 1 fish, 15 inch minimum, you don't need to catch many to catch a limit! You just need one nice one. Sorry to say I haven't fished all the special management sections; still missing the Elk and Tenmile Creek. But...as near as I can remember, I've caught 18 inch plus smallmouth from most of those I have fished. Don't think I caught any good ones from the Osage Fork, the biggest I caught on the James was maybe 16 inches (though I did briefly hook a much bigger one), and the biggest from the Eleven Point was also about 16 inches...but have caught 20s from Gasconade, Big Piney, Mineral Fork, Big (of course), Meramec, and Joachim.

Nice strategy, and certainly has more than a grain of truth! The messier your house is, the more recluse you'll have to deal with. Stacks of cardboard in the basement are the worst. We used to keep a lot of flattened cardboard boxes and sheets for shipping art prints in the basement, and every time we'd grab a box to start to pack a print, we'd have to kill a recluse that was hiding behind it. Along with brushing off a couple of carapaces of the males that female had stuck to some webbing and killed after mating with them.

Bowfin are just really cool fish! Especially in spawning colors with all that neon lime green on fins and body parts. I caught a few pirate perch in a small creek in the SE MO Ozarks one time, and kept them in my aquarium for a year or so. Only ones I've ever come across.

Yeah, I kill every brown recluse I come across, but it's a losing battle. The only thing it accomplishes is making sure that particular recluse doesn't bite me. Probably every household in Missouri and Arkansas has at least a few brown recluses. Pest control people, if they are honest, will tell you that treatment for them actually kills their food sources (along with their predators), and not the recluses. Want to find out how common recluses are in your house? If you have baseboard around your floors, especially hardwood floors, wait until the lights have all been off for a couple hours, get up, turn on the lights, and look around the baseboards. Chances are you'll see some; they love to hide between the baseboard and the floor during the day, and come out at night to hunt. Or, you can just put sticky traps in the corners and see how many you get.