hank franklin

Yeah, we use that boat to pick up babes. Works every time!

A couple other cowboys on the river, and us.

How to post three pics at once?

My bad. These also....

Current produced some more good memories for a few of us recently. Not to mention a few fish. None of the fish particularly photo-worthy, and none of the guys either. But a few pics nonetheless.

Second that. The Bourbeuse is my home stream.

Beautiful. Thanks for the info.

I'm familiar with the Current between Cedargrove and Akers and there's basically footpaths all along the river through there. What about above Cedargrove? Could a guy walk in at Cedargrove and find his way on foot to say Parker Hollow? What about walking in at Parker Hollow and heading up or down river from there? Appreciate the input. Hank

I've been killing spots on the Meramec and tribs since 1998 or so. They are very good eating. Anyone who knows the Bourbeuse well can attest to how spotteds have overrun the river and how the smallmouth is in decline. Sad. For the Bourbeuse, I would like a no kill reg on smallmouth and a kill all you want reg on spotted. That's how I fish it. I haven't taken a smallmouth off the Bourbeuse since I was a kid.

Nice report Matt. Glad you're on the board. My parents and friends used to have a clubhouse between Reiker's and Mayer's on the Bourbeuse. Haven't been on that stretch in quite some time however. These days I mostly fish the Bourbeuse above Peters Ford, or even higher.

FWIW we hit the Huzzah in mid-Oct and got skunked too. More a recreational outing since we had our little boys along but we still had lures in the water. This was downstream of H Valley, taking out at Onondaga. What sections of the Bourbeuse did you float?

Dano, thanks for that. I hadn't seen it. It appears legit. One thing that's so ironic is in the Lower 48 you got people everywhere hurting from high gas prices. But in Alaska you got the government handing out cash because oil revenues are (excuse the pun) gushing! Incredible. Obama is a stuffed suit long on vision. His choice of Biden was comforting to me, as Biden has been in the game a long time. McCain on the other hand needs economic expertise. Phil Gramm was his man but Phil calls us all "whiners." I wasn't a big Mitt Romney fan but I do think he had some upside. Pawlenty was probably more my style. Palin is just all politics. If McCain was a little younger and Palin wouldn't be so close to the Presidency I might view her a little differently. But the circumstances pretty much require that you evaluate her in terms of actually being president. And right now that just seems INSANE, I'm sorry. I know a few GOP operatives and in the primary they were complaining about McCain's erratic, loose cannon, borderline crazy behavior. (These were mainly Romney supporters.) Talk to them now and they'll grant Palin's choice helped politically but on a pure decision making level they think it was just crazy. More evidence of McCain's erratic nature, which believe me is a major source of discomfort among the GOP operatives. It still remains to be seen what McCain's organization in Missouri will look like. I kind of made a vow this season to not talk politics online. Oh well, couldn't help myself.

I'm going to vote for Hulshof, and after last night I am leaning toward McCain. I need to know A LOT more about Palin before I will vote for McCain however. Palin might prove herself yet, and believe me I'm open. But this willingness to jump on her bandwagon after one speech is just incredible to me. People see a good looking woman with five kids who governs a small state and immediately say "That's it! That's who I want to help lead my country!" I mean really, what IS that? I just don't get it. McCain is a great American and he inspired me last night to "do better." I've always liked him and after last night he has a real claim to be President. An awesome speech from an awesome man. I would be happy to vote for him. But Palin? She just turned me off. Yuck.

Awesome speeches by Mr. McCain and Mr. Ridge. Sophomoric crap from Ms. Palin. I've always liked John McCain and would like to vote for him. He's complicated the issue considerably with Gov. Palin however. She has a lot of work to do. McCain at the top, with Obama his running mate. I'd take that deal.

Are you sure, Al? I wouldn't hire a guy to weed-eat in the time it took some to proclaim Palin's fitness to lead.

A couple years ago I hiked in at Cedargrove and went downstream, past Medlock Cave. Camped a couple bends above Welch Spring and walked back the next morning. This was in winter however so you might have to bushwack a few sections. However, you can find horse paths, ATV trails or other paths all throughout the upper stretch. Shouldn't be a problem finding your way.

Wow, Illinois website looks great. I appreciate the work Mo Smallmouth Alliance does and realize it's all volunteer. But their website is obsolete, basically, and their newsletter in recent years hasn't been so great. If they need to hire computer help to improve their web and commmunications it would be money well-spent in my opinion. I'm not a big computer guy or I would help.

I agree Al, the regs send a message. Right now the general message is smallmouth are "black bass" and keep a big stringer full if you want. In the trophy areas the message is "hey, smallmouth are important here" but the trophy areas are pretty small. Compare the smallmouth "message" to the trout, which has white and blue and red ribbon designations and separate zones and differing length limits, etc. I don't fish for trout much so I don't really pay attention to the regs, but the message is clear: "Trout are valued." Missouri for the most part does not "value" the stream smallmouth in its regs.

I tend to disagree a bit. Enforcement is important, of course. But I really feel the great majority of people are going to respect the regs. And while enforcement is lacking, the penalties are pretty significant and are a pretty decent deterrent. Also, MDC routinely takes action to revoke fishing and hunting privileges of offenders. The important thing is education. If people know the regs, the great majority will follow them. Often they just don't know the regs.

We used to catch a fair amount of spots on the upper Meramec, including the Scotts Ford to Riverview stretch. I have notes from a trip in 01 in which we caught 15 spots and just a few smallmouth. This year in three trips below Scotts Ford I didn't catch one spotted. Two of those trips were kind of slow for smallies too, but one trip in particular was pretty hot for smallies, but no spotteds. Also, we floated above Maramec Spring in June and caught just a couple spotted out of a few dozen or so fish. Further down, between the Huzzah and Meramec SP, spots have seemed a bit more common in the last couple of years but smallmouth still have dominated, at least in my experience. I agree, the Bourbeuse is the problem. Had a spring trip last year below Wenkel Ford where spotteds dominated. In fact the only smallmouths I caught may have been a kind of hybrid, similar to the kind you discussed in a post last year. I haven't been on the Bourbeuse as much this year. From my experience on the Meramec, it certainly appears the "kill all spotteds" reg has had some effect. I know I've killed my share. The Bourbeuse is in trouble though.

I'd love to have time to get involved directly with Mo Smallmouth Alliance and any others working for better regs for the smallmouth. They've had some success in the past, but progress has been slow. I guess that's just the reality of it. The 12 and 6 limit on the Huzzah for example is antiquated and just bad management. Push for a change there and on similar streams and go from there. One thing Mo Smallmouth Alliance hasn't been real good at (at least in the past) is their web and online activities. If someone could help in that regard it might make organizing their group and focusing their efforts a little better. If I could help I would. Not a big computer guy.

All asian carp in Missouri must die.

Why would the Regs Committee not like the 18 inch one fish limit? Biology? Politics? I'm not arguing, just wondering. I agree there are some streams where you could thin out the smaller classes and maybe not do much damage. But I'd fear that over time a 10-12 slot would basically clean out all but the select few who live past 12, making the majority of fish even smaller than they are now. I only know of a few catch and kill smallmouth anglers. These people generally fish live bait and can take dozens of fish out of the stream in a season. It doesn't take many of these folks to really harm a fishery. I don't understand why the regs would continue to favor these folks, at the expense of the C & R crowd.

Al, would you agree that the spotted invasion has slowed, or possibly even retreated? I really haven't noticed as many spots on the Meramec and tribs in the past couple years. Wondering if you've had the same experience. I've been keeping spots since the regs were first changed BTW. Good eating.

I would favor a statewide 18-inch, one fish limit. The message to the general fishing public would be that smallmouth are now protected. Unless you catch a really big smallie, don't keep him. I know MDC wants to keep the regs simple. I think this would be the simplest. I would hate to see Mo Smallmouth Alliance and others get with MDC and go through this long review process only to reach some kind of compromise. It's time Missouri protects the smallmouth. The 18-inch one fish limit I think would be the best way to do it. I personally would favor all C & R, but that ain't gonna happen. I know that there are those who keep whatever they catch, which is why in my mind a slightly higher length and creel limit (14 inches and 3 fish for example) would make just an incremental improvement. People won't know the difference. An 18-inch one fish limit, heavily promoted by the MDC, fishing orgs and the outfitters would have a much better chance to catch on. It mainly comes down to policy: What is the intent of the regs? As Al says, the intent right now is more or less to protect tradition, and grow a lot of 10-12 smallmouths. In my mind, the intent of the regs should change to make growing big smallmouth a priority. It seems Missouri has focused heavily on trout and the lake largemouth. Those are two species Missouri has heavily promoted, and fishing is generally excellent. The stream smallmouth has been mostly left to fend for itself; the 12 and 6 limits are ridiculous when viewed in this regard. Protect the Missouri smallmouth!