ozark trout fisher

Goodness, I just now noticed that Arkansas/Texas Tech result. I have no clue what is going on in Fayetteville. They have the talent to win 8-10 games this year, in an SEC west, that while top heavy, has several weak spots. I even thought that last week was just a blip, much like Mizzou/Indiana in 2014. But teams that go 2-2 in non-conference play (assuming a win over UT-Martin) almost never make bowl games out of the SEC. If there is a team that can do that it's probably Arkansas....but they will have to get way better. And any rally they might have in them almost certainly starts with a win over A&M next week. Mizzou, meanwhile, heads into a long stretch of matchups that are anywhere from slightly favorable to extremely unfavorable. At this point you'd say we'd have slight edges over South Carolina and Vanderbilt, but I expect both to be close games that could go either way. And at this point it's extremely difficult to project wins over Kentucky, Florida, or (most obviously) Georgia. All three teams look a whole lot better than Mizzou at this juncture. I see a good path to 5 wins for Mizzou at this point (the three they already have, plus South Carolina and Vandy) but the 6th for bowl eligibility could be a real challenge. Might come down to that game against Arkansas-for both teams. And if we drop one of the two remaining "should win" games...yeah, that's going to be trouble.

Well I went to the game and the weather was great, and had a good time with some friends... and well, we had more points than UConn after 4 quarters. It was ugly and not the kind I'll be rewatching on bored evenings in the offseason...but life is too short to get upset after wins. For all I know, it might be our last in awhile. The schedule sets up in a way where we could easily be 3-4 before we know what hit us, and trying to salvage bowl hopes out of a season that we once had pretty high hopes for. Or this might be a bump on the road en route to a 10 win season and a trip to ATL. We don't know, and Gary Pinkel makes $4 million a year mostly by proving our assumptions dead wrong. But the relevant statistic, at least for this evening? 3-0.

If you are not a Mizzou fan I would stay far, far away from tomorrow's game against UConn. Chances are, Mizzou will win, but both defenses are pretty good, and both offenses (at least at the moment) are....not. I could easily see something like a 20-10 final score and an eyesore for everyone involved. And it's also within the realm of possibility that they could pull and Indiana. UConn is just good enough that they could beat a Mizzou team that's playing really poorly.But by really poorly I do mean even worse than last week. UConn probably isn't as good as Arkansas State, and this game is at home. I can't get excited for this game, but I plan to be in the stands tomorrow to witness it in all its glory. To top it off is the 11 AM kick...which means if you are going to tailgate you basically need to be up and going by ~7:30 AM. Why do we always seem to get stuck with those? I could use a night game for a change (I know why that's not happening against UConn, but maybe SC or Florida?) Ok, no more whining. Just win. I honestly don't care right now if it's 10-9 or 52-3. Just get to 3-0. Bonus points if we can get some yardage on the ground.

I just don't know what Arkansas was trying to do yesterday. This is a team that runs the ball behind a massive OL and slowly wears you down. They are NOT a team that should be throwing 52 passes under any circumstances. I know their OL was playing poorly and the run game wasn't working...but you can't go that far away from your identity and expect to be successful. If they stuck with it I have to think that Toledo's DL would have worn down. This is why I think they'll be more or less okay long term, unless they somehow can't regain 2014's identity. Wouldn't be surprised if this loss is the difference between a 7 win season and a 8-9 win season, but I still see them recovering as they start to play like Arkansas again. Now Mizzou really can't run the football in their present configuration. The offensive line, while experienced, just isn't playing well. That might change, but for now what should be a strength just isn't. And I have no idea who's going to start at RB next week, but it very well could be someone with zero game experience. I actually don't think Mauk played poorly yesterday despite an awful stat line. With iffy receivers and no running game to speak of he had to do everything. He had nothing to work with and still almost singlehandedly created enough offense to win. It wasn't pretty, but no quarterback would have looked good for Mizzou last night. The defense was very good, and only gave up 20 points because the running game couldn't keep Ark. State off the field. I've seen almost no reason to be concerned about that side of the ball. They should keep us in some SEC games that our offense will try to play us out of.

Yep. Both MO and Arkansas have a ton to work on. I think both will be fine long term, but it's a long road back from performances like today to being able to win big-time SEC games.

What an awful (but imminently enjoyable, from a purely neutral perspective) weekend for the SEC. Auburn nearly goes down to Jacksonville State, Missouri narrowly avoids disaster in Jonesboro.Tennessee loses a big lead against an Oklahoma team that was last seen getting hopelessly turned around on the way to their bowl game and never quite showing up. And Arkansas...well, Arkansas was off this week, right? We'll go with that. At least Georgia and bama won. And LSU looks good. It looks like those three may have to carry the torch this year. If that's not boring I don't know what is. And all of this will be moot in three weeks when Arkansas and Auburn are tied atop the SEC west. Because almost nothing you say in mid-September makes any sense by midseason. If I've learned anything it's that.

I think one of the big misconceptions in CFB is that a strong non-conference schedule is a benefit in terms of making the playoff. It's not. A lot of people point to Baylor as an example of a team that didn't make it because of a poor non-conference schedule. There maybe a little truth to that, but I'd say it had a lot more to do with Ohio State playing so well in the B1G title game that they gave the committee essentially no choice. If that score (OSU/Wisconsin) was 31-24 instead of 59-0, we're almost certainly flipping a coin between TCU and Baylor for that #4 spot. The best thing you can do if you're in a major conference is schedule the worst power 5 opponent available (since most conferences require one p-5 non con game per year) and three absolute joke, cupcake games. You are much better off with a poor non-conference SOS and 12-0 than a strong SOS and 11-1. We saw that with FSU last year. If there was ever a power 5 undefeated getting left out, it would have been them. They (according to the computers) played like a borderline top-25 team most of last season, had a terrible SOS, and ended up in the #3 spot just because they never quite got around to losing. And the idea of scheduling games for the "good of college football" of the fans is silly IMO. You do whatever you have to to make the playoff, or, failing that, at least crack bowl eligibility. As a fan (not of the game of college football, but of a specific team) I care way more about that than having another exciting game in September.

Eh, early season college football is really just the buildup for when the "real" games start towards the end of September. Of course games against SEMO don't mean anything (unless you lose) but it's important to get players experience and confidence before the games that matter. This is not unique to college football. The NFL has a 4 game preseason to serve the same purpose. College basketball teams usually play a couple D-2 teams in exhibitions and then keep warming up against the dregs of D-1 for a few weeks after that. Speaking of cupcake opponents, Arkansas State is NOT one. Maybe at home (just ask USC, who beat the heck out of them Saturday) but a road game is different. They have a new stadium, and somehow got a ranked SEC team to come to their place for the first game there on a Saturday evening. It's safe to say it will be a tough atmosphere. I think Mizzou wins, and relatively comfortably by the end...but it's close for three terrifying quarters. Give me something like 31-14.

Sure, Mizzou looked a little sluggish offensively. But I struggle to get worked up about that. The game plans for these FCS foes are intentionally vanilla. They aren't going to be giving teams a chance to get film of their best stuff in advance of matchups that are actually losable. The two groups I most worried about (WR and DL) both looked pretty good. I feel like most of our fans would have been happier if we won by the same margin, but the score was 51-20-just because it's more fun to watch good offense than good defense. But the ONLY thing that matters in this kind of game is taking control early on and winning easily. Missouri got that done. What could be a concern is Boehm and/or Hansbrough miss time. Right now it seems neither is seriously injured, but it's definitely within the realm of possibility both could miss the game in Jonesboro on Saturday. That's still probably a win, but it would suddenly get at least a little bit interesting. Ultimately, we should be okay as long as we have them back for the Kentucky game near the end of September. You'd think (or at least hope) we can beat Arkansas State and UConn even without our top two offensive players.

Yep, Hansbrough needs to stay healthy. He gets forgotten, but he's probably our best offensive player (it's either him or Evan Boehm right now.) We could see a major drop off at the position if he goes down, unless guys like Ish Witter are further along than we think.

I agree with you about the WR corps. Yes, we lost our top three guys from last year. But because they were among the most "visible" players on a good team, I feel like folks might be going just a little over-board when they act like those guys were irreplaceable. Even the cream of the 2014 receiving crop (Sasser and Hunt, and Darius White, some of the time) were buried pretty far down the depth chart in 2013. Bud Sasser was the classic "circumstantial" star. A few months before the season, he was looking like the best of several secondary options, another solid veteran to take some pressure off the undisputed star (DGB.) With his dismissal, and the periodic disappearing act of White and Hunt, he suddenly became THE guy. He was good enough to take that label and run with it, and it got him an All-SEC spot. But it's worth mentioning that the same guy, with presumably about the same skillset was buried pretty deep on the depth chart, and the only thing casual fans knew about him was that epic double pass against UGA. Jimmy Hunt and especially Darius White were basically unknowns. It's easy to forget that the worries we are having right now are basically identical to those we had a year ago.

Yep, no reason to redshirt Lock. I think he's gone after 3 years no matter what. I expect him to get quite a few reps against SEMO, and in any other game that gets out of hand. I'd love to see Pinkel put him in for at least one series per game, even in SEC play. It will be worth it. As important as Mauk's play is this year for Mizzou, it's a lot more important to him. Right now, he's a perfectly average to slightly above average SEC starter. That's not a bad thing, and there are a number of teams in the conference that would love to have him...but it probably won't be enough to hold off Lock past this season. I still think we are better off with Mauk in 2015. I'd love to let our young receivers get some experience before we hand off the offense to a freshman QB. Talented youth is great, but if there was ever a season we needed a veteran QB, it's this one.

I think this Mizzou season is a real mystery. In a vacuum, they have a bunch of returning starters from a team that won 11 games and the schedule isn't too bad. But almost all of the important losses came from just two units (WR and DL), the latter of which was the teams biggest strength the last two seasons. So it's going to be those two units that either limit Mizzou or allow them to defend their division title, in all likelihood. I could see it going two ways. The receiving corps has looked really good so far in camp, and guys like Nate Brown and DeSean Blair could end up breaking out and preventing much of a drop off. The defensive line is young, but really talented. Any unit with guys like Josh Augusta and Terry Beckner Jr. at least has a chance to be among the best in the SEC. The upside is there. On the other hand, one thing Pinkel is NOT necessarily known for is having freshman and underclassmen in general come in right away and be dominant. So there's a real possibility that this could cause Mizzou to play their way out of the division race pretty quickly. In all likelihood, the reality will be somewhere between the two extremes. There will be growing pains, and frustrating losses, but there is enough talent and experience on this roster in enough important areas (O-line, QB, secondary, RB, LB) that they look like one of the best in the east more or less by default. I'll say they win 8-9 games and finished tied for second with UT. I think the Bulldogs are just too good this year for Mizzou to win the division again, but I don't think they fall off a cliff, either.

Dang, looks like an amazing trip. I live for places like that. Thanks for taking the time to post those pics.

There's being passionate about a fishery that you love, and getting angry about that, and there's burning bridges with everyone that should theoretically be on your side, and threatening to harm the thing that you love for....reasons... Why you are choosing the latter strategy is something that baffles me, but whatever. None of my business. What you shouldn't assume is that you have a lock on the conversation because you have done a lot of good things for the watershed. You don't know what anyone else here does, day in and day out, in the realm of conservation, and if you did, you probably would be less inclined to hold everything you've done over the head of anyone who disagrees with you. There are a whole lot of us out there sweating and giving up a whole lot in the hope of conserving the things that we love. It's something that every true sportsmen (by my definition) feels to be a duty. It does not give us the right to shut everyone else up.

Yep, and I'd hate to see a legitimate conservation interest group go that route even if somehow I thought it would work. Using legislative pressure to bully what is supposed to be a non-political conservation department is a really dangerous road. We've seen people take (or try to take that path) but it's mostly been to deregulate game farms, or, as you mentioned, noodle catfish. I wouldn't say that I'd like to model my tactics after people pursuing those causes. The worst part is by using those tactics you surrender the moral high ground. And the next time some greasy politician decides that Tyson or game farms or catfish noodling is more important than the science-based work at the MDC, well, you kind of lost the ability to say anything.

Just to be clear, this has nothing to do with congressmen and little to do with politics. That's why we have the MDC, who actually bases their decisions on real science, and is not at mercy of the general fund. In most states, what you said is relevant. Here, thankfully, and at least for the moment, it hardly is. You may not like the decisions the MDC makes, but at least they come from the right place. Sure, public opinion molds the regulations. You see this with the "less restrictive to more restrictive language." But it's still FAR better than what most sportsmen in other states have to deal with.

I don't have anything further to say, Smalliebigs. By your own admission, it's clear you've stopped thinking in terms of solutions and only in terms of the demise of the resource. That's a real bummer, and I say that with totally honesty. I see that from a lot of people who care about various aspects of natural resources (and yes, there are issues that make folks just as angry and bitter as smallie regulations) and who otherwise would be valuable assets. It always makes me sad, and to a certain degree I get it. Any effort involving conservation, in any arena, is usually thankless, and maybe, given climate change and other factors we can't control, hopeless. But I can't think of any other way I'd rather spend my mental and physical energy. But at the end of the day you can't pay attention to that kind of talk. You have to go on.

Yeah, that sounds right. I got the sense that the Maries might be one of those rivers that would be awesome if you really got to know it, but occasional visitors would never get the full benefit of. I have a few rivers like that myself. So I know you can't tell much of anything by going to the most obvious, easiest access, and fishing for a short time. I'm sure I'd like it if I ever got the chance to do it justice.

I'm not suggesting that the MSA proposed this. I just know that some will never be happy until that happens, which is going to be never. I of course have some issues with the "catch my limit" crowd, but I'm starting to become almost equally troubled with the extremes on the other side. Not the MSA folks, but the "nothing will be good enough until no one can keep a smallmouth, ever" crowd. It's a fine ideal, as it goes. Most of us would never keep one ourselves, and it baffles the mind to imagine someone else doing so. But it's also totally unrealistic, and makes smallmouth management way harder to discuss than it should be. There is a lot of middle ground that can't even be broached by those too far on one side or the other. I like the last sentence of your post. I think it's totally fair to believe that this could go further. I am thinking of several river sections that I wish had been included, and I don't doubt there are a whole host. I think recognizing progress is important while still continuing to work to expand it.

This is a pretty big step in the right direction. It may not be the sea change that some desired (along the lines of a 15/1 or 18/1 regulation statewide) but that probably isn't realistic at this time, and I think you'd have to consider if it's even desirable. As it stands, this adds a decent measure of protection to a whole lot of the better mileage for smallie fishing in the state. There are some additions I could see in the future, but this seems like a good start. I think the scale is really impressive. This is not one or two more 8 mile SMAs. We are talking about much tighter regs in what adds up to hundreds (or at least well over a hundred) miles of good habitat, and dozens of miles on each one. If nothing else, it should demonstrate one way or the other the impact of more restrictive size and bag limits on long stretches of Missouri's best smallmouth water. If it works there expansion only seems more likely.

Yep, Al, I love to plan out a good trip to perfection, and that's what I'll do when I have a chance. It just so turns out that my last few trips have been of the "hey I suddenly have a few days to play around in the Ozarks" variety. That has led to an extreme lack of planning and all the fun (and not so fun) things that go along with it. In all, I've found some cool new places, fished a few old, familiar ones, and yes, had more than a few outright duds in just the last week. But as a whole it's been a better way to spend a few days than most.

After an epic (by my standards) four day run through the Ozarks last (long) weekend, I thought it might be awhile until I found myself waist-deep in clear, spring-fed waters. But as it so happened, an unexpected break led to me being free early on Thursday, and a good part of Friday as well. I did the only sensible thing and jumped in the truck. My rush would betray, me as it turned out, because I totally spaced on bringing the fly-fishing tackle I wished I had in case I found my way to some trout water (I would.) But details aside, it was good to get back to it so soon. On a whim I headed to an out of the way access on the lower Current River on Thursday afternoon, somewhere between Two Rivers and Van Buren. This was a rushed evening on the water, with no kayak and not much hope of covering water on what turned out to be really big water. Nonetheless I had to try, and I don't think I could have made much more than an effort. OF COURSE I saw a fishy looking blowdown on the opposite side of the river, and a little downstream. It was the only water around that got me excited so I dove in, figuratively, and as it turned out, literally as well. The water at the access was a riffle (a shoal may be more accurate a term on a stream of this magnitude) but it was still chest deep and powerful. I did an ungraceful wade/swim/dog paddle across the more challenging parts, but made it there with little incident. A couple unsuccessful casts followed, but I was just beginning to awkwardly move my way downstream when I spotted a cottonmouth swimming nearby. It showed no interest in me, but it was closer than I liked, and I decided that now was as good a time as any to find my way back to the other side. After another awkward scramble across the river I fished a bit more, got thoroughly skunked, and got into the truck both defeated and happy to have gotten to spend the evening in an undeniably pretty spot. I drove my way Northwest to Eminence, picked some basic camp supplies that I hadn't gotten in my rush, and headed to lovely and secluded campsite in a conservation area not far north of town. The stars being bright, I didn't set up the tent and opted to look up at the stars. That became problematic when thunder and lightning rolled in at 4 AM, but what is the back seat of a truck for if not a spot to sleep in the occasional pinch? I woke up the next morning feeling exactly like I'd split time sleeping outside unprotected from the chiggers and cramped in the backseat of the truck. It''s either the best or worst way to start a morning. Without much of a plan but knowing I needed to be generally headed north, I eventually ended up at Lane Spring.. It felt like a minor abomination to be there without a fly rod, but then, the whole Panther Martin thing had worked in the past and I hoped it would again. And it did, even starting at 10 AM in the building heat. The water was flowing strong for early August, and cold. The fishing wasn't anything special, but any wild trout caught in this month almost feels like you're cheating the system. The fish I landed topped out at no more than 7-8 inches, with many of what I call LP minnows, aka 4 inch fingerling rainbows which simultaneously annoy you and tell you the stream is holding up okay. I switched to a rebel craw (not wanting to bother the minnows any longer) and hooked and lost a couple fish that were probably in the 10-11 inch range. That felt like a good place to leave the creek. It always gives me enough to make me happy without actually ever giving up that lunker that I know is in there. Anyway, I'd rather take him on a Hare's ear than a rebel craw. That was it. Well, not technically. I saw a "Fishing Access" sign just south of Jeff City, decided I needed to see more flowing water without even knowing what river I was headed towards, and ended up flailing the water on the Maries River for a few minutes and catching a couple of sunfish in the process. Not anything against what might be a lovely river in some stretches, but I came away wishing that I'd left off after LP. Anyway, it was another good time and here's to hoping the next is not far off.

I hate to say it, but the local landowners are one of the biggest problems, not only in terms of access, but also in how they impact the river. The stretches of that creek that are not public often have cattle right down to-or even in-the stream.. The banks are eroded, the water is shallow and warm, and wide. I call those the "frogwater" stretches, and they are basically pointless to fish, even if you wouldn't yelled at for having the gall to fish the mud-banked, gravelly wasteland of a "stream." That much of this is "blue ribbon" trout water makes it all the harder to get over. It's tough, because the public stretches (and a several areas that flow through better managed private land) are lovely, and have great fishing for both trout and smallies. Right now the LP is a decent trout and smallmouth stream. But, given it's spring-fed nature, and what we can see where it's on Mark Twain, there is no excuse for it to be anything but one of the best in the state. It pains me to see it's potential go untapped in all but a few relatively short stretches.

Now there's someone I can relate to. I've actually had to branch out a bit this year though. For whatever reason the crawfish crankbait either isn't working as well in some of the streams I fish or I'm getting bored. But it's still my favorite "go to" if I don't have a better idea.