tjm

any stocking in the 1800s wasn't by train

For future, here is a list of Fenwick dates (that someone else compiled and y'all should save)- A--1960-61 B--1961-62 C--1962-63 - first Feralites previously back to '55 they used Sizematic aluminum ferrules with the O-rings D--1963-64 E--1964-65 F--1965-66 G--1966-67 H--1967-68 I--1968-69 J--1969-70 K--1971-73 Used for two years. The transition from two to three digit model numbers occurred at this time. Early HMG rods had a separate series of numbers starting with 00001 L--1973-74 M--1974-75 N--1975-76 O apparently not used (too hard to tell from a zero?) P--1976-77 Q apparently not used R--1977-78 S--1978-79 T--1979-80 U--1980-81 Serial numbering ended

The three digit model number "805" places it between 1972-1988 when they became Woodstream, it tells us it's length is 8'0" and it's rated as a 5wt. The letter "M" in the serial number dates it's production to the 1974-75 manufacturing year which was approximately Aug '74-July '75. Give or take. From the accounts of former workers that I've read they weren't exact on dates. Still Fenwick is one of the best documented of the production fiberglass rods. Quite a few users say their FF805s are 6wts, other users disagree, saying theirs are just as rated. on the other hand I have a couple of Fenwicks that I down line one weight from the rating, so take the line rating as a suggestion and experiment. I think the resin used changed from batch to batch and the rods from any one run might be different from the run before or the run after. In the Fenwick line I prefer the two digit models made from '63-'71. You'll have fun fishing that rod if you keep the casts under ~50'. One caution, and it applies to all glass to glass ferules, if you roll cast a lot check that ferrule about every 10-15 casts, because the torque of roll casting does twist them loose. I recommend the canning paraffin (or candle) be rubbed on the male ferrule per Fenwick's instruction until it's coated in wax then rubbed off with a clean cloth or paper towel until just a slight film of wax remains, barely enough for lubrication. I usually have birthday cake candle in a vest pocket for this, because it seems to help keep those joints together. I have an FF807 about the same age that I'd sell and an FF75 and FF85 a little older that don't get much use that I should sell. With something like two dozen fly rods I surely don't need all of them.

I imagine a lot of that kind of stuff was contracted for prior to the war's end and if the contract was for 1,000,000 widgets and if with war over there was no need for widgets, the contracts still got filled and delivered. It's why lots of surplus was still available into the '80s. We would have hard time doing that kind of supply work today.

I'm not sure the military had any made after the war, the design was originally Bantam's and the Army brought in Willys and Ford to help produce enough of them for us to use and to give all our allies as many as they could use, so with multiple manufacturers and post war Willys trying to claim credit for all of it including the design; the facts get a little murky. But perhaps the Army units would have been produced 1940-45. I believe Russia got ~60000 of them during the war and I was told that there several hundred (he may have said thousand) of them brand new still pallets on a Pacific island as late as 1971, by a shipmate who had spent a year standing guard over them. I saw a new one being unpacked about '85-6 that was a WW2 surplus buy. Of course the military being the military they may have continued to buy more even while selling off new unused stock.

If you come across his "Wet Flies" you might want to get it also.

I think they can but don't want the extra work.

Sheriffs, other Police etc. would not have the training to recognize/differentiate fish species and training them would be just as costly as training new Agents. I doubt that without special training that their testimony would stand up in court. I think that is why they trained wildlife cops separately in all states and at the Federal level. I don't think there is an obvious solution other than education or the wildlife authorities in the 50 states (and other countries) would have come upon them. The most effective solution to poaching of game might be to prohibit all hunting and fishing with a cash reward for turning in violators and I don't think that we want that. I think that conservation education in the schools could help. But I also think that as time passes the old poachers die off and the younger generations have more interest in other things. Who be fishing in 50 years? Will past and present conservation efforts matter then? For now we can keep on as we go?

I think that stricter regs or more regs is generally the wrong approach to wildlife management, especially when we don't have funds nor manpower to enforce existing regs. Full enforcement of currently existing regs would likely need to have about ten times as many Agents, enough that each agent had only 50 miles or so of stream to patrol, a small enough sector that each agent could walk all of the assigned area regularly rather than make random parking lot checks. Since the 1950s I have never seen more than accidental enforcement of any fish and game regulations. Even if the agents try hard, they can only be in one place at any given time and can usually be seen coming before they get there. I asked the spawning question because some years ago a biologist had told me that he thought some stream reproduction possible there but had no real evidence of it being successful. I've caught dozens/hundreds of fingerling RBT out of Hickory Creek, some years more than other years, and presumed they were National Hatchery escapees, so when talking to a bio, I asked about in steam reproduction and he didn't rule out reproduction in either of those streams. There was a stream back east that I caught fingerling brown trout in for about 6 years before the fisheries people "made the discovery" of natural brown trout reproduction there; I had reported such catches a few times and my info was pretty much dismissed, until one of their "inventories" turned up lots of young browns. I have the notion that any stream capable of holding trout year round has the potential of natural reproduction, but also thing that our huge rainstorms with the accompanying floods make all but the shortest drainages marginal in that respect. Capps gathers a lot of runoff in a two or three inch rain and the change in temperature and water quality would be traumatic to baby trout, I would think.

I believe the stream through Haskins' field changed after the new bridge was built but long before the old bridge fell down, but that being in the water didn't help anything. I also recall that years ago there was a lot more water in the stream above the mill pond than I've seen in recent years and that must have an effect. On the baby trout, has there been any evidence of spawning below the dam? or anywhere that you've noticed?

you can go all the way to Shoal Creek, must be about two miles or a bit more, but the stockings are mostly off the two bridges and the locals get on them before the truck is out of sight. It was better fishing, imo, about 25-30 years ago when the farms were still active, but that could be simply that I fished it often enough back then to be familiar with it. It seems to me that when they built the new bridge near the mill that they changed the water flow at that point and caused a lot of erosion in subsequent floods, holes filled in banks got higher and the long weedy runs diminished. Those weeds were hard to fish but they gave the fish a lot of protection and held countless crawdads for them to eat.

Above (D) is the definition you want. I included the other portions because they are referenced. doesn't have to be barbless, unless you want it that way, and it's basically anything except scented or natural bait or soft plastic, so long as it permanently attached to the hook and per section (52) you can rig up to three flies at a time I've caught a few hundred fly rod fish there over the years and most often use 6# nylon as my tippet, even on the small flies. I can't remember the last time I even used 4#, probably back when I could still tie #22s. So, I always get a smile when the spin guys say one must have 3# test or 2# test, more so when they say it needs be fluorocarbon, so thanks for the smile.

I don't like kiosks for anything, avoid them whenever I can. But, the alternatives might be a much higher day pass charge to pay for the manning of a booth, or closing the access when the booth is not manned. Might not be worth the $40 if time is also counted, but, I'd probably make a fishing trip out of it.

There should be an office in Branson on or near the dam, look up "Table Rock Project Office" Springfield, Stockton and KC are in a different District and a different Division than Little Rock, Bull Shoals, Table Rock and Tulsa. Little Rock office- General Questions 501-324-5551, recreation 501-324-5418 a phone call could solve your problem. or

we used to have a female agent that spent more time in court than in the woods, she checked everyone she saw on the creeks and wrote lots of citations, check me three times in one day as she left and came back a couple times, she got transferred and the next guy I saw once in 6-7 years, Recent years I've seen agents checking others and walk right past me. I prefer they check everyone even if i get checked more often, but they are understaffed and one guy can only be in one place at a time.