tjm

As I said, no belief that all those streams claimed to fit Elder really do. How? do you do water samples and lab work on the streams you fish? Mo has no laws keeping streams open to the public, just a presumption that most streams would fit a case law precedent if so tested; and as outlined above it is thought that many would not pass that test in court. If there is enough doubt that the courts would rule a stream to fit the Elder standards that we don't want such cases; then it can be presumed that those streams are not legally public thoroughfares. What is fact is that no stream is a public thoroughfare in Mo. until it is tested in court, with the exception of the federally navigable rivers. A number of smaller streams have been tested in court and now are legally public thoroughfares, but on the rest we are there at the landowners pleasure, mostly because they too fear the outcome of a court test. A coalition of anglers and floaters could raise the funds to take one stream at a time through the court process. So what if the county court rules adversely, that is what appeals courts are for.

Thanks for bringing this up @Ham, I won't be over there where you are, but I will try to stop by the one in Springdale.

I imagine that happens a lot and is the primary reason that all Mo, streams have not been in court and opened up. Until someone does take it through the process, the access remains questionable enough that landowners and deputies can restrict access somewhat by various means. If the landowner just once fails to drop the charges, then the court has to do an Elder-Delcour determination. ButI think that they can involve the law a thousand times to remove people that are allegedly trespassing because the stream laws are vague and later drop the charges and the stream stays a "maybe".

I once watched lightening run from nail to nail on partially stripped concrete forms 30-40' inside a building and within inches of my workmate's hard hat, out the window opening and into the sky. It does have a peculiar smell to it. My uncle was opening a barbwire gate in the rain when the unseen lightening juice ran through his bridle reins and killed his horse dead. Unpredictable stuff. @dan hufferd that is pole barn erection machine. Drill the holes, set the poles, and swing the trusses.

So no real belief that the popular interpretation of Elder is legally correct.

Any thing that is suspected as being not legal should be taken to court. Any creek that has not been taken to court can be assumed to not be public access just as easily it can be assumed to be public access. Get up a case and press for a ruling. Do that for any creek that we want to access. Once the courts make a ruling, there is no longer any doubt and the landowners will know where they stand.

104 week end days 8 Federal days 10+ vacation days 5+ personal days 6+ sick days =133 days or about 4.4 months that most Americans have free time off and they still think it takes a time change to allow time for golf.

That's when I'm least likely to visit them as they are closed during the week and crowded on the weekends.

You won't need the trout permit at Bennett or RRSP until C&R during the winter, this time of year it's all daily tags in the parks. Need on Taney year round though. Only need it to keep trout on other waters. I'm an out of stater in Ar and need a trout permit on all the trout waters there. And I need to renew that too, just in case I wander over the state line.

well he does very poorly there, but we don't know if that is his best or just a show, the next ten shots might make one ragged hole. I'm skeptical that anyone carrying a gun would shoot that badly when serious, but then I don't know the guy, so maybe ....

More reason not to laugh at or taunt him, with that poor shooting, folks could accidentally die. Laughing at a man with a gun could be construed as suicidal behavior. Of course the display or brandishing of a gun is illegal, and this guy is lucky that no charges resulted, but in the case of an accident, the dead person won't care that the shooter may be prosecuted, he'll just be dead. It won't matter if alcohol, drug use, or line breeding played a part, accidentally dead is still dead. Guns deserve respect and you should never assume that the user won't accidentally commit homicide. Especially if he is outnumbered or feels threatened.

Griffith's even though some maps get it wrong.

My familiarity with the local creeks only goes back to the early 1950s, but yes there were 'roads' built on the ROW adjacent the bigger bridges and parking under them as well as pullout parking built by the highway department in some areas. MODOT closed, removed, and/or posted all the accesses on the state highways in this area, including areas where the roads and creeks run parallel and adjacent, over the past 30 years or so and back when it first started I was told (by the backhoe operator doing the work) that it was at the request of the canoe rental places, they wanted control of where and how many floaters were on the streams, and the revenue from liveries. I never confirmed that, but I later heard similar from other sources. I've seen deputies ticketing cars on the county roads and I've seen vehicles towed away from a couple of the low water crossings. My family has been in this area for ~150 years and I still find it prudent to knock on doors and confirm that it's still okay to use the land. Not all the current landowners are "natives" that might know the family, and not all are nice, but they do own the land under the creeks and they get taxed for it at the same rate as if were crop land. And, about the "high water mark"; I'm not sure that's in any law, but, on a creek that normally is less than 30' wide, the annual floods (some years several floods) can easily put the high water marks 400'-600' apart and no angler needs to be 200 yards from the water, it might be better to talk about use of the clean washed gravel rather than the high water mark that covers whole fields, if we want to get along with the landowners. @Al Agnew what is your interpretation of Elder as pertains to "intermittent streams" or to streams that have run dry at least once in the past 50-60 years?

USPS is setup for self-destruction by those in charge, enjoy it while it lasts.

Part of Elder v Delcour, and it may be the most important part, is that per an old Federal case, each and every stream must be judged on it's own merits to find if it meets the public thoroughfare requirements. that means that unless a particular stream has been in a Court and determined to be a public thoroughfare, it can be argued that it is not one. I don't think any of the Elk drainage has been adjudicated in a Court, but I'm not sure of that. On another note, I'm not sure there are any " legal bridge accesses" in McDonald county as most of them are posted "No Parking" and at all that I can think of the road easement is no wider than the road. The county road that I use has only a 30' easement/row, and in most places the fences make that smaller. The degree of harassment encountered seems to vary a little with who is the county sheriff at the time, and also who is the prosecutor; and what they will take to court.

He's absolutely right with this. There are about vaguely worded 20-50 questions that they ask every time I visit the VA and all are to prove you are a danger either to yourself or to others. An intended humorous answer is taken as being serious and will require followup questions. The correct answers are (if you want to walk out at the end of the session) 'I feel great' "my pain level is manageable'' " I sleep well" I'm not afraid of my spouse or family" I feel safe" "75 ain't old"

I'm not a lawyer but as long as they have that video on how to put rubber over the felt on their website coupled with the instruction I don't think they could give anyone a fine. To me that says that it without a doubt is still legal. However I understand your caution and am curious that they haven't replied to you yet. In my past inquiries I've gotten replies the next day.

"only about a fourth of the stocking down there was like that." So yeah that sounds like the live, the dead and the almost dead fish would be mixed in the same truck tank and in the same dip net full, best course is to stock them all before more die. The dead fish in the stream won't hurt a thing, feed for turtles and crayfish. About 10-20% of all C&R fish die and we don't get excited, so this is just a few more than normal. And in that fishery the ones that live will be gutted and fried in a short time anyway. I've there when MDC was stocking a couple times and within 1/2 hour of a passing car seeing the stocking truck 4 or more local cars showed up and before the hour had passed that many more, telephone spreads the word. Probably even faster with cellphones. @ollie thanks for the report and for the follow up. Wonder if MDC will try to make up the loss with an additional stocking or just let it go. Likely just let it go. I believe that is scheduled for five rainbow dumps per year and one of browns. O^2 shortage is reason enough for dead fish. I would not suspect "shock" from the drop during stocking, I've seen trout dropped from taller bridges and go to feeding within minutes of the stocking. And I've seen fingerling trout dumped from a passing airplane into an alpine lake in Idaho, and they grew up, that must have been a 150'-200' at probably 100mph or faster travel. I've watched as trout were tossed off that particular bridge and went to feeding almost immediately, it always surprises me how little the flight through the air affects the fish.

"Not specifically didymo." I think that satisfies any apparent contradictions. Some mammals can eat fesque grass and flourish, other mammals either cannot eat grass or suffer from eating fesque; I would not expect all algae to follow the same rules. However I would not be surprised if the next study did show all previous studies to be wrong, that's usually how these things work. I don't think that I've read all of Bothwell's writing of the subject, I think that it became a career for him and if you look for them a few/several universities have also made didymo studies in the 15 or so years since the first one. I used to have some of them bookmarked, just as I used to have many CWD references bookmarked, but recently my interest in both has faded. As Reinhold Niebuhr said " ... and wisdom to know the difference" between things I cannot change those I can.

Was this Didymo? Actually I did not do the study, Bothwell and some other scientists did, and it may have been lack of P causing the extra growth of snot rather than the blooming. One report coupled lower P with lack of snowpack, if memory serves, and the leeching of P into the runoff caused by melting snow. And in truth it really does not matter because I don't wear felt.

It's kinda like backing up one the pivot axle horse trailers of the 1950s or a farm wagon, it can be done and even trains of three with enough practice, but my experience is that very few accomplished it. These trailers could be pulled behind a Cadillac though.

I don't suggest not adhering to the rules. I do suggest changing the rules, or finding science to support them. Bothwell found that lack of phosphorus caused the excessive blooms; put the phosphorus back into the waters and the problem should be solved. He kinda blamed the lack of phosphorus on climate change, and that could well be, but it seems that the problem arose soon after the ban on phosphorus in detergents and that always made me wonder. I have not seen any study any where that showed felt soles were involved in any way. Bothwell's original paper was not a study, it was just a speculation. I've not seen any study that showed felt had a better chance of carrying microorganisms than wool socks have. Are there such studies?

The stuff is native all over the globe, found in fossils and core layer samples from eons before felt was invented; the initial report of the theory of boots spreading it refuted by the author himself after investigation. The states that banned felt did so based on Max Bothwell's initial speculation and never bothered to read his later work. Since MDC abandoned or removed all the boot wash stations decades ago, it seems obvious that they only maintain the ban because they can't admit to being wrong. Not that it matters to me, I was never a felt fan, but I do think that if they claim to be scientists that they should use science. When I asked years ago about all those micros getting into pants legs and porous shoe tops of wet waders and being transferred to other waters, the answer was something along the lines of "yeah that could happen, but we are only concerned with soles". So they were fine with me getting my muddy sneakers full of all those scary things and transferring them to any other water, in truth they didn't care about the spread, just the ban.

Not I.

I have opinions about the didymo, but, as to the question, the thing to do is fill out this form and submit it to the "experts" at MDC https://mdc.mo.gov/contact-us Then report back and share the answer with us.