ozark trout fisher

Sometimes I fear that while illegal ATV usage on public land is extremely harmful, at least on the larger tracts, it might be a bit of a lost cause. Trying to vigorously enforce that at ONSR/COE land, etc is wothwhile, but it will never be enough to stop the practice and it will take A LOT to make a significant dent. It's a different story entirely (at least to me) when you are talking about a private landowner that is willingly allowing folks to use their land to a more than reasonable degree. They are already allowing us to hunt, hike, camp, and generally do anything we want to on their land. I want to emphasize exactly how unheard of that is for private landowners in this state. So their payback is vandalism, releasing feral pigs, and generally mucking up the place? I would say it's unbelievable, but unfortunately it's really not.

Pioneer Forest Responds to Vandalism, Illegal Activity http://www.thesalemnewsonline.com/news/article_0d8d6c4c-0ea8-11e5-a02c-eb3f8b229590.html This isn't directly related to fishing (except for the part about the ATVs in the creekbed) but I know we all hunt/hike/etc, and this one pisses me off about as bad as anything I've heard of in awhile. The lands owned by the L-A-D Foundation (and formerly, the late, great Leo Drey) are truly some of the most special (if not the most important) in the Missouri Ozarks. Not only does this kind of crap make me extremely angry in it's own right, but given this, who would really have a right to blame them if they started restricting access to their land at this point? I just thought I'd post this just so there is a general awareness of what is going on. If you are in that area and see this any hint of this kind of stuff going on please report it and help the folks who manage this land. The last thing we want is to be punishing a great land-holding entity who is both conservation-minded and recreation minded for letting us use their land.

The thing I love about smallies (especially compared to trout or largemouth bass) is that you can basically just fish for them on your own schedule. I think the very best time is twilight (maybe that's just what I like) but mid-afternoon is just fine. If anything, it's the early shift that can be disappointing, although again, I've caught plenty then. It just doesn't seem to matter much most of the time. The largest Ozark stream smallie I've caught came at 3PM on a triple digit day out of a deep hole on the Big Piney. I was somewhat miserable (I stopped to wade so much to get out of the heat that I barely covered any water, and had to make up for it with a brutally long day the day after) but it was the best smallie fishing I've experienced this side of the north woods.

Yep. I wasn't going to say that (I go back and forth on how protective I think I need to be of the Parker Hollow area) but that's where I'm referring to. Based on anecdotal evidence, you'll give up something like 50% of the trout population you've got up in the Baptist area. Certainly you'll catch fewer. But if you want to get a feel for what the river is really like without dealing with a circus on Memorial Day weekend it might be your best bet.

I'm not sure about the slow part...

The whole blue ribbon stretch is good. Around Tan Vat and up, it's mostly rainbows, easy fishing, not that different from the trout park, honestly. Baptist and below (all the way down to around Cedar Grove) the fishing is somewhat less easy, browns are a little more dominant, and crowds (at least in terms of wade-fisherman) are lighter. You're right to want to get away from the accesses to whatever degree possible. It will be crowded at Tan Vat and Baptist Camp but if you are willing to walk a long ways you can find some open water. In some cases it will take bushwhacking around deep holes through thick brush. But that's what you're gonna need to do if you don't want a bunch of company on Memorial weekend. Another thing to consider is that the river doesn't end a mile or so below Baptist Camp. There's about another 5-6 miles of Blue Ribbon water below there. It all holds trout and you can get on it if you are willing to search it out on gravel roads. Think slower fishing, more browns, and the possibility of some elbow room, even on Memorial day weekend.

I've heard so many conflicting things on whether corn kills trout that it makes my head spin. I have zero problem with using canned corn/powerbait/marshmellow's or anything else colloquially referred to as "grocery store bait." But unless you're really good at setting the hook quickly, it should probably be in a "get in, get your limit with the first four you catch, and get out" scenario. Nothing wrong with that kind of trout fishing in the right setting. I will say that (having spent a good deal of time bait fishing in the past) C&R with corn and other similar stuff would be a pretty high mortality game, digestion problems or not.

Seeing as I'm down with pneumonia at the moment, time is something I don't currently lack for.

I will say three things: 1.There has been some good, rational discussion in this thread about guides, and what can be a thin line they walk between an an advocate and someone who is protective of the resource vs. someone who exploits that very resource, intentionally or not. It's interesting. I think about 95% of guides want to be the former, but greedy clients/desperation to be successful can draw them to the other side of that. 2. This happened despite the fact that this thread was either started by a blatant troll, or someone who looks so much the part that it doesn't matter if he isn't. Look at the "interests" section of his profile. Actually, if he's dead serious, that would be a lot more concerning. 3. I'm getting tired of members who have been here for years and contributed a lot getting called "trolls" for expressing opinions, by others who have been here for less time and contributed a lot less. Trolls are the folks that never contribute anything while only starting threads with the clear intention of starting a fight. They are not the people that consistently express their opinion and sometimes annoy you in doing so.

I'd challenge that assertion. Certainly spring-fed rivers often are excellent smallie habitat...but not the type of "spring-fed" water that stays at a more or less constant temp (high 50s to low 60s) year-round. Unless I'm mistaken those areas are not nearly as amenable to successful spawning or growth of bass that do end up in the area. Of course these areas form a nice thermal refuge (in reverse of the way that term is usually meant) during the winter, but other than that my guess is that populations were always marginal in most sections of river that are currently good trout water. It's been mentioned a few times, but the stretch of the Current between Akers and Pulltite serves as a nice "control" meaning that it's water that is heavily spring-fed, maintains a relatively constant temperature, yet is not stocked with trout. Sure enough, you have the poorest fishing anywhere along the river there. That's not conclusive proof that smallies never did well on other stretches of trout stream, but it's a decent indication that we're not suppressing a ton of high quality water by stocking trout. One could make an argument that our current trout streams should be like that....quiet stretches of river with not a whole lot going on in terms of fishing. There would almost certainly be some native species (not to mention the ambiance) that would benefit. I'd be okay with that. But I don't think we're suddenly going to add miles of good smallmouth water by getting rid of trout. The (admittedly limited) evidence we have doesn't support that.

Your story reminds me of certain members of my family. There are several people in my extended family that I've told simply to not tell me about their fishing/hunting expeditions...because if they do I'm gonna have to turn them in. Or rather, I won't have to. I'll want to. You can only listen to that kind of bragging (even by family/close friends) before you have to act. I can come around to forgiving the ignorant ones if they change once they understand the situation. It's the ones who are proud of bending/breaking the rules and getting away with it that make my blood boil. And there are more like that than you think.

Funny that you mention that. A much more vigorous version of this debate is going on in reverse both in the Northeast and in areas of the mountain west. In those cases, non-native smallies are the ones outcompeting trout. It's gotten to the point where there is an active smallmouth removal program on one western Colorado stream (much to the chagrin of the angling subculture that built up around them in the area.) In another body of water (or more accurately, a remote network of streams and natural lakes) I fished in the Adirondacks, a mixture of smallmouth and largemouth bass (introduced illegally) are outcompeting a rare, native strain of brook trout, to the point where it is hovering dangerously close to extirpation and anglers are encouraged to load up all the bass they can catch. I can attest that was (from a pure numbers standpoint) both some of the best bass fishing I've ever had, and also the worst. It's just funny how these things can work in reverse sometimes, though I'm not necessarily implying this is relevant in the Ozarks. It goes without saying the conditions are radically different here than either of the locales I was just talking about.

I don't know the North Fork River very well, so it could be an exception...but in almost all cases, any water where trout are going to grow and survive in high enough numbers to seriously impact smallmouth bass populations are probably not very good smallmouth bass habitat anyway. There is certainly SOME overlap between trout and smallie habitat, but it's primarily in stretches of river that are marginal for both. If anything, I find there is often a stretch of stream below good trout water and above decent smallmouth water that is relatively dead in terms of game-fish. The most dramatic example of this is on the Current River, where there is a long stretch from Akers down to about Pullltite that is anywhere from bad to decent for smallmouth, but still a bit too warm for trout. It's less obvious on most other rivers, where you have a fairly gradual transition zone-but I think while there is some overlap, it's not enough to be a systemic issue. I share your concern for native species being displaced by trout, especially large browns which can turn into an apex predator. I think it's worth looking into.My guess is that there are impacts, but smallmouth bass would not be near the top of the list in most cases. If you're looking for a reason not to continue the brown trout program, I've heard some discussion on their potential impact on Ozark Hellbender, of all things. I don''t have a clear idea how credible/big of a deal that is in reality. In a broader sense, trout in the Ozarks are an ethical quandary I struggle with. I am pretty much driving the "native species should get the priority" bandwagon, but trout have long since stolen my heart to a degree where rationality is a lost cause. My solution is to quietly keep fishing for them until someone decides to stop backing the hatchery trucks up to the river. Then I'll get a lot more serious about the wild ones.

When I saw a recent post in a thread called "Meramec Dam Project"....I figured it was regarding the one from years ago, but I can't say my heart didn't skip a beat.

No you won't. You fly off the handle plenty but I know how much you love smallmouth bass. Killing smallies/letting others do so illegally to prove a point doesn't fit into that.

Yeah, that's pretty accurate. In the state of Missouri, I know that in MOST places, you are allowed to keep fishing (catch and release, of course) after boating a limit. But on others (ie the trout parks), you are done when you hit a limit, no questions asked. Not sure of the rules there on the Ark. tailwaters.

None of what you're talking about is the type of "cheating" I'm referring to. I have no problem with the guide fishing if it's okay with the client. If there is a law regarding that I've sure as heck not seen it. And I certainly don't have a problem with you helping a young client have success when it otherwise wouldn't be possible. That's just being a good guide. What I mean is this:A lot of guides (again, it doesn't sound like you) will see three clients in the boat, and that means a total of 15 fish end up in the livewell. And it doesn't matter who catches them, only that the total=15. Based on my limited experience, that tends to be a somewhat accepted practice, but it's illegal if any one angler has more than 5 they caught in there. Are you going to get caught doing that? It's extremely unlikely. But it still rubs me the wrong way. And that kind of behavior is why I always have my concerns when I see a line on a guide's website like "Limit catches, or your money back."

Here's one issue surrounding the "help them get their limit" message that isn't being said but is a really pervasive issue. On guide trips in The Old Days when I had every intention of keeping fish (and sometimes a limit) I almost invariably had to explain to the guide that I wasn't cool with the idea of "pooling limits". Often as not I got a glance in return about the same as if I'd just told them I arrived at the guide shop in a space-ship. I'm not accusing you (I don't even know if you're a guide or not) of this, but it's something worth bringing up if we're going to discuss this. If you are going to market yourself as getting clients a limit catch, fine, but make sure it's their limit, and not the daily limit multiplied by the number of people in the boat. It seems to be an unfortunately well accepted practice in many areas...but it's poaching.

Yep, the wild ones fight harder. From a fishing perspective (how easy it is to catch them, how they fight, what they look like) wild rainbows and stocked rainbows might as well be two different species. The oddity is that doesn't extend to all other species of trout, to the same extent. A freshly stocked brown is as dumb and gullible as a green sunfish. But they tend to wise up in a hurry, fight hard, and generally act wild if you let them stay and grow in a river for awhile. It's why it's not rare at all to catch a stocked rainbow-who is large and clearly been in the river awhile-on an orange egg pattern in mid-July. But (though it certainly does happen) that's a pretty rare occurrence for a brown that's been a stream-resident for any length of time. I have no scientific explanation for this but I definitely believe it's a thing.

Wading is going to be tough on the Meramec/Big Piney right now. Those rivers are never totally ideal for walk/wade fishing, but it would really be pushing it at current water levels. I might look at the lower stretches of the Little Piney. You'll be able to find some access in the Newburg area. Chances are you pull a few smallies out there and wading would be considerably easier than bigger rivers. Normally I'd recommend Huzzah Creek in Huzzah Conservation area...nice water that's full of smalllies. But it's a somewhat challenging wade due to depth in the best of times, and right now, you'd have a tough time finding enough water to do anything. Edit: I just kinda assumed the Meramec system would be way up because it's been raining like it's going out of style. But looking at the gauges that may not be accurate. Wading might be okay up on the Huzzah unless things change. The Big Piney is pretty high, though. Little Piney doesn't appear to be up at all.

IF this is a troll job, it's a solid A-. The choice of topic was strong (lots of fishing guides or friends of fishing guides sure to fight back) and the mention of paying taxes was a solid addition. However, the "interests" section of your profile (if I'd read it before responding) seems like a bit of a dead giveaway. I will say, with 157 posts, if you are trolling us, you're persistent, and I'll give you bonus points for that.

In most cases, I have no problem with fishing guides and the way they interact with the resource. A good guide encourages their clients to release some or all of their catch, or at the bare minimum, insures they stay within the law. Also, a good fishing guide does a heck of a lot more than help people catch fish. The ones I've really enjoyed have spent dang near as much time explaining the natural history of the place, what the river is like other times of the year, what it's like to live in that area (if I'm somewhere I'm unfamiliar with.) What you hope for is that you're paying for a friendly local who can clue you into the area and also help you catch a few fish. As a side note that has nothing to do with this thread, I find I have both a better time and tend to catch more fish when I take the pressure off a guide by telling him that upfront. You'll get a lot less out of it if your guide thinks he needs to put you on 50 fish in 8 hours to get a decent tip. It gets a little touchy for me when a guide service (and there are plenty that match this description) markets itself primarily on every client "getting their limit." Then it's hard to make the argument that you aren't just paying for fish, not much different from a pay-to-fish trout farm. Only in this case the outfitter doesn't own the fish he's selling.

Okay. Still needed to say that, though, so I'm glad you (accidentally) gave me the opening.

I did not post a "tirade". My first response to you was respectful in the extreme, though obviously we had a disagreement. When you started referring to my posts as "flowery bs" every 2nd line (and asking me "do you ever read your posts"), you were making this personal. To quote you, how am I supposed to respond to that? That "it sounds like you want to sit it out anyway" comment was probably ill-advised, but also less than a 1:1 response to a pretty fierce personal attack.

I would posit that the lack of positive response to this thread is mostly due to the fact that the legislative session is over with no major damage done. There isn't as much to talk about now. When there was a lot on the line, I think you'll find they got plenty of positive responses-and likely lead to a lot of letters getting written, and maybe, formed a tiny part of the reason why no major damage was done.