tjm

The article states that they did-

All that reel cranking, all that time loading and unloading a boat, driving miles from where the fish are to find a ramp, boating from ramp to fishing area and back are things that I don't have patience for, but I can fish the same pool or run for hours or until it seems that I've caught most all of the fish in it at least once. I can fish the next hole on another day. Perhaps patience is expressed in different ways.

I'm sure you are doing it just fine. I've been around enough people to know that my definition of "very patient" is way shorter than most other people's. So perhaps we have different interpretations of what constitutes patience. Or perhaps I'm doing the swing wrong, I've never seen it demonstrated. Perhaps my ADD is higher than yours. I'm good for about 10-15' of swing or or that many seconds, whichever comes first. If the stream is narrow enough and fast enough, I can get a full sweep, before the need to "do something" kicks in. The reason that I quit spinning tackle all those years ago was because of the time lost reeling in line after the lure passed the productive water, I had no patience for that, with the fly rod that line can be rolled or flicked right back to the starting point when there is still 20, 30, or 40' of line out. But, I'm posting way too much on your thread, thanks for showing us your flies and that is great photography.

I'd say that's a caddis pattern and should produce anywhere caddis are present. I guess as a generality tailless wets would all resemble caddis if in the right size range. I'd have to cast that one up and across in fast pocket water and let it tumble with the current, leading it with the rod, kinda like euronymphing. Of course it could also be taken as a fry or as a terrestrial or who knows what fish think. I seldom swing wet flies, just don't have that bait fisher's kind of patience, More often than not I fish these flies pretty much like a spinner or spoon, often casting beyond or behind the suspected lie and retrieving with short strips or hand twist. Diagonally up or down or straight across. Occasionally casting the fly within the fish's vision and letting it sink with no line movement and after a moment or two give it a couple of six inch strips then a pause. Sometimes I get to repeat this strip and pause. If I am trying to swing a fly, it will get a time to sink and then an up steam mend to bring it back up in the water column, (essentially Lessingring's lift where the current forces the fly up against the line tension) and after a moment or two a downstream mend will allow the fly to sink again. I might repeat that a few times. To make full long swing from across to dangle, like I read about, is just beyond my ability to stay focused. I also cast these wingless wets several feet upstream of visible trout so that the fly has time to fully sink below the fish before reaching the fish and then tension the line to cause the fly to rise and cross in front of the fish. Again a variation on Lessingring's methods. His book "Art of Tying the Wet Fly & Fishing the Flymph" was one of my primary text books back in the '70s. Recommended reading if you can find it in a library. Because it's been out print for a while the price has become a bit high. Another highly recommended book on wets is by Dave Hughes "Wet Flies" and it is offered on Kindle as well as being readily available in print editions.

The way that Carey Special was in the books I had it would have appeared to be more of a streamer because the hackle was called out to be pheasant rump and the long soft fibers would blend with the tail. I found an image of that on FAOL. Story about the fly's invention there too. I've seen it listed as pheasant saddle too, but as I said before variations on this type fly are endless. The availability of feathers leads to substitution. And time or location can change what is used or preferred.

AGM batteries ain't a new thing, they came out back in the late 1970s or maybe ~'80, and the first brand (can't recall which) to be widely marketed was not very good, about a 65% return according to the parts store guy that I talked to. One distributor ended up getting the warranty returns from lots of sellers and I counted 7 pallet loads of bad batteries a few months into the sales campaign. They got better with time and are pretty good now. I think GM cars all came new with them since the mid '80s.

How do you fish them? I've not really noticed that tails caused rejections, although some patterns don't lend them selves to tails.

I think it could be a wet fly, or wingless wet, or soft hackled fly or flymph, or spider; kinda depending on who is talking. They all mean more or less the same thing, although most patterns of the type use smaller hackle, in some the hackle is more flared, I don't see a great distinction of the patterns and the variations are endless. This pattern is said to imitate a dragonfly nymph, but I think of this type fly as representing small baitfish or crawdads as much as being representative of nymphs. But that is kinda in whether they are fished on a slack line or a taut line. Dead drifted or fished as a semi dry fly in the film, they would represent a nymph or emerging insect, but on a taut line either swung or retrieved, as most fish them they seem more fish like than insect like. Tied on #18-#14 they are great trout flies, on larger hooks bass and chain pickerel like them.Soft hackles have been my go to flies for about 50 years .

Oh, I have a vague idea what caused the lake condition, but I don't understand why a hatchery of that size and importance didn't have an O2 monitoring system and a way to oxygenate and chill their intake water if necessary. .

The water quality issues belong to a different branch of the government, Department of Energy and Environment, DEQ. Asking AGFC to fix the water problem is like asking your dentist to overhaul your car engine or asking the mechanic to remove you appendix. I'm sure AGFC is just as frustrated as you are with the situation, but even knowing exactly what went wrong and why, there is nothing AGFC can do about it. In general the low DO2 in reservoirs type situation comes from rain and generation. Rain effectively reduces the oxygen levels in lakes through a few actions, and generation sucks the cool water oxygenated out of the reservoirs and when combined the result is low dissolved oxygen in the remaining lake water. Happens to some extent every year in every reservoir as far as I can find out. Did that area get more than usual early summer rain over a longer than normal time period?

The park shouldn't have any biologists. Should be mostly admin and maintenance with a ranger thrown in. They shouldn't have anything to do with the hatchery management. The hatchery is MDC's and can be thought of as an inholding of the park, kinda like BillBob's house in the middle of national forest. Any improvements that BillBob makes to his house or land or his access easement have nothing to do with the Forest Service other than cooperation as neighbors. I guess that I see that distinction as important because MDC belongs to the people and DNR belongs to the Governor and the politicians. And in many other states the politically controlled DNRs are the overseers of fish and game; where all hunting, fishing and trapping regulations depend of the day's flavor of politics and may change with each election, but are often enough controlled by antis. Mo.'s MDC is almost unique in it's (somewhat) political independence and it's source of fiance not being through the politicians. From my view the Parks suck, and that is because they are apparently run by PETA types that would prefer no fishing there; just as they have no hunting or trapping on any DNR owned lands. Their biggest interest in the parks seems to be in monetizing them. The fact that the hatcheries still exist within the parks is a marvel to me. But perhaps my view of DNR is biased by the employees that I have talked to.

If you did well, why do you think there is a problem? When I was there last spring, the work on the hatchery didn't seem to be having much effect on anything else. Of course at that time it didn't seem that much work was being done either. Scuds make trout meat turn pink/red/orange, but hatcheries and farms usually feed synthetic carotenoids, often canthaxanthin or astaxanthin. I'm not sure that such color would significantly change the taste of the fish. It certainly makes the meat more attractive and possibly has some health benefit for humans if they eat enough trout. So, this prompts a question, what is in the spring run that trout eat after stocking? Is it an insect factory? loads of scuds ? do they continue to feed them pellets?

That would be a great improvement over the paved parking lot look that it has in my memory.

Just north of the Walmart on US71, not too far from Bella Vista they used to cross 71 by the dozens/hundreds going up the hill to the former glades in fall and down to the creek in the spring. Fall movement was more obvious and lasted for a couple weeks each year. Then 10-15 years ago the government put that concrete barrier down the center of the highway and I haven't seen them since. My assumption is that they couldn't pass the solid barrier and died out. I bet most people didn't even realize what they were seeing. Curiously the tarantulas that used to live in my "yard" seem to have disappeared in recent years as well, probably been 5-6 years since the last time that I saw one. For over 70 years they just been "tarantulas" or "Ozark Tarantulas" to me, with no reference to color. Your comment caused me to look it up and the interweb says the common name depends on what state they are found in. So I guess we should have been calling them "Missouri Brown Tarantulas" all these years. I took a few to school as "Show and tell" pets back in the '50s. At that time they were common enough here that a kid could likely find one on any summer day. Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation calls them "Oklahoma brown tarantulas".

Exactly and if you fish, then don't claim to be superior to any other angler in regards to fish welfare.

Studies don't show that. But ultimately it is up to the individual doing the release, I've watched as C&R fly anglers attempted to kill trout at RRSP numerous times. Mishandling is a trend. Three minute photo shoots don't help a fish recover nor does dropping on the dirt a couple times trying to handle net, rod, fish and camera. I've also watched as anglers cut the line as close to the mouth as possible, leaving the fish to choke later just to save a foot of cheap tippet, when leaving the line dangle might allow passing of the hook. The more I saw C&R practiced in the park the more I became convinced that every angler should be required to eat every fish they catch.

Trout were introduced long before tourism became an industry. And if you class them as an invasive species you'd want to eliminate all restrictions and encourage wanton waste of them. But if managing trout strictly for tourism, you'd want to make them more available by having less restrictions not more. Guides using live bait can reach more tourists than guides using only barbless circle hooks on flies. Killing of the trout should be of no concern and there should be no attempt to legitimize the exploitation of the trout by saying that one method benefits the fish more than another method. Make the Feds supply their contracted number of fish even if they have to buy them from some fish farm. Aren't the tailwater trout mitigation for loss of native fish?

I would say that not ;leaving the line dangling from a deep hooked fish should be criminal. I'm not going to look them up for you but over the past 30-50 years at least three studies have shown that fish have better chance of survival when the line is cut a foot from the mouth and allowed to drag. All the studies that I read said that when the line is cut close the hooks tend to turn crosswise to the gullet and prevent swallowing of food resulting in starvation, the hanging line keeps the hook aligned with the throat and allows food to pass. Here is a cut from a North American Journal of Fisheries Management article that has some numbers indicating bait may not be all that evil. Granted it may not be fully applicable to tailwaters where trout do much better than in the wild, where natural mortality can run 50-70% in some years. Now I am a fly rod only fisherman and have been for most of the past 40-50 years and if there were any science to support fly only as better for the fish I'd be yelling for such regulations on all waters.But there doesn't seem to be any. Never mind that no one anywhere can define what constitutes "Fly Fishing". Or even what is or isn't a fly. And the science supporting C&R is kinda thin and tends to gloss over the fatalities from C&R as being within the range of natural mortality, skipping the part about it might be in addition to. As to the barbless hook argument, several studies in several places also show that barbed hooks result in exactly the same mortality that barbless hooks do, so we can say that barbless are no worse than barbed for C&R. Barbless have one great advantage over barbed and that is when the angler hooks himself, it is much easier to turn him loose. I decided years ago that AGFC regulations don't even look to science, but are strictly political and based around generating money. Fish welfare and welfare of the fisheries always take back seat to the tourist dollar.

I would not necessarily restrict the areas, but if I had my way all boats would be restricted to 15mph, or no wake speed whichever is less. That might keep the bass from being hauled 50 miles before "immediate release" and it'd make it safer to wade or swim or use paddle craft. Save the speed for the highways. I like seeing boats doing 80mph on the interstates, not so much when they create a wave. But if any restriction is placed on one type boat the same should apply to all boat types, be it power, speed, size or areas of use. I' could get behind restricted power/speed within 300 yards of shore, for all boats.

L.Sugar is now down to 1560 CFS after peaking ~3550 and the low water bridge will reappear at ~500. We might need rain again in 3-4 weeks.

Put a mink in the boat it will kill and eat the muskrats.

Yeah we had plenty of rain by a day or two ago, all that has fallen in the past 48 hours is wasted runoff. That creek is up to 2,580 CFS from 48 CFS

In my mind all modern trout are artificial. In the few places where indigenous trout remain, I think most species have been contaminated by stocking of other species or subspecies. Hard to justify protecting a fish that exists only to be stocked for recreational use. If my memory serves, there were no native trout east of the Mississippi, only the two chars; brook trout and lake trout. Rainbow Trout and the char Dolly Varden were native only to the streams draining directly into the Pacific. The Great Basin and the Rockies had only Cutthroat trout and and the char Bull Trout. Browns were strictly European. As were the common carp that were imported at the same time. I was going to refresh my memory but apparently the USGS no longer has a website.

If the Federal stocking is in mitigation of the lost native fisheries, as I think it is, the Feds would be legally obligated to furnish trout from some other source. A certain number of trout annually is typically a part of the negotiations when the Army wants to build a dam that has out flow cold enough to kill the native fishery. I'm not sure that is true on the White and the Northfork, but presume that it is.

From here in the rocking chair, it sounds like time to install a cooling unit and an air compressor. Might cost a bit but if this is an ongoing condition of the lake, then the alternative would be to convert the hatchery to producing crappie. It does sound like the tailwater itself is marginal for trout survival though if it is getting water at the same depth and conditions.