tjm

Famous people start out as just people and nearly all of them are related to someone real.

TV person will end up borrowing money too probably.

a configuration or server error EX-100 is what I get

Some pdf maps here http://forums.ozarkanglers.com/waters/rivers/james-river/james-river-maps-r276/ Mile by mile description here https://www.floatmissouri.com/plan/missouri-rivers/james-river/

The "can't put it back" comment says exactly that Devon S, if Beaver is full and beaver gets rain but Table Rock isn't full or getting enough rain to flood then Beaver can dump all; but if they dump Beaver just prior to or during a rain event on T.R. that doesn't hit Beaver, they have a storage unit at Beaver that can't be used.

Long time ago my Mom went to a nation wide family "reunion" (her grandmother's family) and a famous mother-daughter singing pair with that last name showed up. Go back to the Revolutionary War days and almost every family in the colonies were related either by blood or marriage, many by both. All the old kings and queens of Europe were cousins, even into the 19th century. If the name is highly unusual I'll bet that either you are related or that the TV person is using an assumed name.

yeppers, just wash all those down stream flood plains clean, FEMA needs a project to piz money into. People ought to live on hills anyway, eh?

As it reads there is no reason to buy a Trout Permit. It says needed if you keep the fish but that keeping the fish is not required nor are pictures. From the requirements stated, the only thing they can "verify" is that you filled out the application correctly and that you have a fishing permit or exemption, and your Conservation number. Open invitation for the liars club types.

P size contests never involve a conspiracy, always just between individuals. Nobody else cares how big either one is. FERC shouldn't have any control over river levels, but they would have power over generation and that would affect downstream levels. Flood control and avoidance (river levels) would fall to ACOE primarily. If USACE srt new regs over the Mo. River level at or down from the junction of the Osage to prevent a recurrence of the St Charles flooding, that would indirectly regulate the water Ameren could pass. In the same way regulated levels on the lower Ms. River could determine the flow though the Chain of Lakes. The common factor that LOZ, Beaver and Grand Lake share is the flooding of the lower Mississippi.

Who instituted the new guidelines? Is that where the money is?

Maybe a better question, if someone at Ameren is on the take to mismanage the water and generation, how does that relate to Beaver or the other ACOE lakes? Are we looking at multiple conspiracies?

Does the Corp have any/much control over what Ameren does with that private lake on a day to day basis?

I think power generation is secondary to water depth at NOLA. It is never about upstream conditions unless the dam is in danger, there are flow gages on every major stream and the combined info gives a good guess of flooding levels at all downstream locations. Hundreds of thousands of miles of streams all feeding the mouth of the Mississippi. Table Rock has more drainage area than Beaver, including all of Beaver, so it stands to rise faster if extraordinary rain occurs; in the case that only Beaver drainage is rained on there is always the chance to dump water. But a conspiracy does have more excitement. So, who is benefiting from all this water mismanagement enough to make bribery worth while? I can't think of any way that anyone could make money from higher lake levels, unless that leads to eventual dam failure and devastating flooding, I can see millions of millions of $$ in construction and cleanup in that case. Is that what we think is being set up?

I have fished bead chain Clousers for black bass, in swifter water they swam basically on the top and the eyes caused disturbance. Smashing hits. So, the white bass are not surface feeders? don't think I've ever seen a live WB

https://www.homedepot.com/p/Arrow-Fastener-Revolving-Hole-Punch-GRHP/302859233 https://www.amazon.com/Speedy-Stitcher-SEW110-BRK-Sewing-Awl/dp/B0049W6XRE/ref=pd_sbs_200_t_0/133-8940655-5037201?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B07X7J95JS&pd_rd_r=3d0861c3-16bd-4b82-a33b-13b453bdd204&pd_rd_w=vWJkj&pd_rd_wg=LOERf&pf_rd_p=5cfcfe89-300f-47d2-b1ad-a4e27203a02a&pf_rd_r=VZ63J26QRSWTXHM03FBH&psc=1&refRID=VZ63J26QRSWTXHM03FBH https://www.weaverleathersupply.com/catalog/item-detail/30-1758/saddle-string-bundle-/pr_32343/cp_/shop-now/harness-saddlery/saddlery/saddle-strings-things https://www.outfitterssupply.com/Leather-Saddle-Strings-6-72-minimum-length/productinfo/WSA152/ I'd use a liquid glycerin to soften the leather and raw-linseed/flax-seed oil to stiffen it. When making a knife sheath, I always like the sheath to enclose at least half of the handle, in the old style, it makes the knife harder to lose; and if the belt suspension is near or above the top end of the handle the sheath will hag better. I also like my sheath inside the belt.

if you look back to the 11th the gage was ~21' and discharge was ~16,000 cfs- so based on my creek still being high from that and subsequent rains my guess is 7-800 is likely correct. Prior to that storm the creek was very near median flow. At 13' the water is well over the low water bridge there according to the charts. https://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis/uv?cb_00045=on&cb_00060=on&cb_00065=on&format=gif_default&site_no=07055607&period=&begin_date=2020-01-03&end_date=2020-01-28

http://forums.ozarkanglers.com/topic/15384-crane-creek-map/ http://forums.ozarkanglers.com/images/crane/crane_map.pdf https://nature.mdc.mo.gov/discover-nature/places/wire-road-ca https://nature.mdc.mo.gov/sites/default/files/downloads/conservation-areas/8307map.pdf https://huntfish.mdc.mo.gov/sites/default/files/downloads/area/CraneCreek.pdf

I have short legs too, but the thing is gage height is not absolutely the water depth- it is the water depth as measured from some unknown (to me) level. Usually a tube in a stilling well fastened to a bridge and the zero point might be higher or lower or at the low water level found in that bridge hole. Kinda like a float in a toilet tank it has limits of travel and it doesn't account for changes in bank width or bottom fill-in/erosion; in essence it measures the water relative to the bridge structure. By frequent surveying of the bridge hole and measure of velocity, hydrologists can calculate what volume of water that gage height means today and compare that volume with measured volume from past days/years. If the stream bed changes significantly, the change is accounted for by the surveying and calculation, while the gage continues to read the same relative to the bridge. Most every stream I have ever been on had a channel that was fairly defined and as the water gets lower the water becomes confined to that channel, so that while a drop of gage height by 6" might expose gravel bars, the cut channel may still have 4' deep water or 1' deep water and this is where volume of water counts regardless of bridge height. CFS tells me about how much water is flowing in the cut channel. 30-150 CFS is wadable fishing everywhere I've been. Less or more might still be fishable in some places but perhaps not so wadable, and I can picture that volume having never seen the stream. But more important is the comparison of today's flow with historical volumes, the 25th, 75th percentiles and the median flows- median is probably ideal and 75th is stay at home, for me at least.

I think this is the answer.

We never did figure out what that mooning stuff was called, did we?

I can understand that a 2' pipe and a 6' pipe both having gate valves 6" open won't discharge equal volumes of fluid. Gage height is kinda like a gate valve. Familiarity with a stream certainly enhances the meaning of the USGS data, but so does standing on a bridge and looking down. As the gage rises in my local creek the velocity also increases and that is reflected in the CFS, I think. If the river bed fills in or is cut deeper or widened at the gage location that will also be reflected in the CFS graph eventually because the USGS checks those things out periodically. Anyway March is usually too dang much water in these creeks. outside reading for the bored https://www.usgs.gov/special-topic/water-science-school/science/how-streamflow-measured?qt-science_center_objects=0#qt-science_center_objects

I pumped ~1000 gal one day at Warsaw, started 18-19 cents/gal and closed at 9.7 cents. Can't recall what year it was but I worked there "66-'68 so that time frame, our usual price was about 18-21 cents. Most of that 1000 gal. was at about 11 cents and the boss called the Company three times over the day to get authorization for more drops. I remember seeing gas wars at 3-6 cents several times in the early '60s for short time periods, prices dropping tenth of cent at a time because the pumps back then didn't calculate smaller than tenths.

In any gauge, the gauge height is the measure of discharge rate, so in essence they tell the same thing. Trouble is that not all streams are created equal- one might be 3' wide and another might be 300' wide, width x height are the limiting factors to how much volume can pass in given time. So, a 6" difference in height might be a slight increase on one stream or it might be a major increase on another stream. The USGS keeps data on the discharge column in CFS for many years and the median flow in CFS is recorded on their graphs so that it is easy to compare with the recent instantaneous value. Because over time width of the stream or the flow speed may change, they don't report historical gauge data, so there is no way to guess how current gauge height relates to "normal" from 2 or 10 years ago. It's not so much the current reading of CFS that is important to me , it is how that compares to historical readings that tell me if the river is out it's banks.

in 1916 gas was 21.5 cents/gal and up union brick layers got 65 cents/hour-$30/week; today bricklayers get ~$26/hour; for gas to be equivalent it would cost ~$8.96/gallon. Of course there was a shortage of gas that year and a war in Europe cutting off supplies from German and Austrian refineries, and a revolution in Mexico that cut off any fuel from there. I recall Dad and others talking about 20 cent a gallon gas when wages were a $1/day, maybe in the '30s.

In the early 1900s gasoline was likely a novelty in it's own right. Moonbows on a puddle would have been rare. I'm not even sure they had slang words back then.