troutfiend1985

Here we go again. I think there is a new invasive species, the forum shark. It comes in to threads and posts new subjects that have nothing to do with the current subject and preys on the native posters. Signs of this species can be noticed in the White Ribbon Conservation thread, posts 22-200. I now fear for all north flowing threads. LOL

I wonder how you guys got one and I didn't. Not that it makes me mad, I don't have any imput on this one. I just wonder if they sent it out b/c of where you live. Tight Lines

Definitley like Galloups flies, even though he is a weird weird guy. I'm glad you added those, I should be down in a couple weeks, and I might just try one out.

While we're on the topic of midges, has anyone tried using Oral B Ultra Floss for gills? I bought some this summer and it is absolutely awesome to tie with and makes for very nice midge gills. Hope this helps.

Tim you have me jealous. Nice fish, hoping to be able to get out and go fishing somewhere in two weeks, until then(and probably even after then) I will be on the computer drooling over these big fish pics I'm seeing.

I'm sinning and I know it because I'm going away from my own topic, but eradicate those SOBs like Yellowstone is doing with lake trout. In yellowstone, you cannot put a lake trout back in the water alive. If you don't want to keep it, you must puncture the air bladder. Inhumane? Yes, but effective, seems so.

Ok, no problem. I can respect that.

What is up with the ad hominem attacks here buddy? You don't know my fishing skill, and my fishing skill has nothing relevant with the idea of a C&R zone on a white ribbon fishery. Anyways, doesn't the fact that I am proposing tighter regulations kill your idea that I suck at fishing? I wouldn't think that I would be sitting here saying that I stink at fishing and oh, by the way, I would like to see an area that you can't use power bait at. Nothing against those who use powerbait by the way, but its had to come out by now that I am a fly fisherman and this guy is criticizing my fishing skills. Enforcement??? Well, your argument seems to suggest that it is better to continue the status qou and have no restrictions on streams that currently could have resident/self sustaining trout than to enact a regualtion and then allow citizens like yourself and I to easily be able to tell if someone is poaching. Anyways, explain to me how a C&R section is a waste of money. If we already have agents and they are supposed to check for daily limits does not the idea of a C&R zone actually aid this purpose by allowing an agent to easily tell if someone is using bait or keeping trout from an area they shouldn't. I don't see any logic behind an argument claiming a proposition that has a purpose of conserving a limited resource would increase the spending of taxpayer money. However, I am always open to hear your opinion.

OK yes, habitat is a factor to how many big trout a stream will have, that issue can be brought up on another thread if you really want to debate it. How about getting back to the white ribbon situation. If the thread is dead, thats fine but I still want to know how a small C&R section offend the local fisherman? I see this as an assumption that fisherman in the area of white ribbon streams only want to be able to take home fish. If a white ribbon stream had the necessary habitat to support resident trout with a small amount of breeding, then would your outlook on the white ribbon streams management change? Would you then be more open to a slot limit or C&R section?

You have one here, only reason I don't go more is because of time constraints and blue ribbons offer better fishing(in large part b/c of their management IMO).

On what questions that I have been addressed and haven't answered?

They aren't always on time at James A Reed. I don't know what goes on but I remember one year they stocked it towards the end of november. I love it, as you said driving 5 minutes to fish for trout is fun, and by that time of the year there isn't too much else to go for. I've actually ice fished for trout before, and that was an absolute blast. I caught three, all on spoons. I guess it was neat because I have never ice fished before and the tug on the end of the line is cool, you have no clue that its coming. I'm looking forward to it, I get to take my daughter to the kids pond and she gets to catch "rainbow fish" as she calls them. This year I'm buying sinking line and seeing if that helps any on the fly rod Tight lines.

So Chief do you not understand that A. I don't have a problem with people keeping trout, or B. that the rate at which the trout in these streams are removed is unacceptable. Again, we're getting back to semantics. I broke down that statement by the MDC on another forum and in order to show my interpretation of what they said. If you can't at least see what I am saying, then I'm sorry but we have to agree to disagree. Drew, I guess that I just don't understand you man. And I don't mean any offense, but you criticize Missouri for having a non sustainable trout population, for stocking trout, then you say you enjoy fishing these areas(Capps), and then you're against a C&R zone where trout might have a chance for repopulation or at least to establish residency. Well. . . Which one is it man? You put stuff on here, show some logic or at least some consistency. Otherwise, why bother? The reason that you supply to support your theory is MDC doesn't have a C&R section already therefore a future C&R zone shouldn’t happen, however is a reason without merit. I won't change because I haven't changed before, great reasoning. I would love to see Crane as a C&R, but Crane's status does not dictate Hickory's status and vice versa. Show me how Crane dictates what should be done with Hickory?

I don't see why you would even think this is what the heart of the issue is. I have no problem with people keeping fish, I do have a problem with depleting a resource. If someone wants to keep fish, as long as their legal go ahead. However, if regulations allow an entire stream to be effectively wiped out within a couple of weeks of fishing, then we have a problem with the regulation. You see my point? It's not that I have a problem with you, or people who keep trout. That's fine with me, the problem is that the current regulations provide no "safe harbor" for the hopes of consistent fishable populations of trout in the small white ribbon streams. I'm not better than you, nor any other angler on this forum. I'm sorry if you think fly fisherman are all jerks/snob/pompous individuals. I'm sure there are a lot of fly fisherman who fit the stereotype. However, that is just a stereotype and not an accurate description of everyone who fishes with a fly rod. And just to note, I didn’t see any posts saying “Gavin, you slob, keeping a trout, how could you?”

Or worse. I'm not sure intentionally hitting someone with a streamer shows good etiquette. It's one thing to go and talk to an individual about the fact they're screwing up your fishing, but actually trying to hurt another person is a whole different category. If I'm at a trout park and I'm getting "crowded" I don't make a big deal about it. Why? Because it is a trout park and I expect a lot of people to be there. Now, if I'm on a backcountry stream and have some dumba** following me, then I'll talk to him. My best example of this was two years ago at Crane when some guy kept wading right down the middle of the stream in an effort to follow me. "I haven't seen a fish all day" really? I wonder why? I ended up losing him for the rest of the day until I went back up to the park. I told him about wading techniques and how his wading not only affected his fishing, it was hurting mine as well.

Bikini hatches are great, but you always have to worry about the one who shouldn't be wearing a bikini, or anything that shows cellulite or anything that shows her legs or that tatoo with some guys name which resembles bud light. . . this could go on for pages. I am really ruining this topic

That is one sweet 'bow there. I'm glad that you shared the pic. Tight lines

I think what OTF and I are trying to say is that there is nothing wrong with bait fishing. Big rivers can handle more pressure than small creeks, and there is no secret in that at all. Bait fisherman should be allowed to fish in small streams, but there should be a small C&R zone for streams who can support resident trout. That's it, no criticism of bait methods, no looking down in disgust, none of that "holier than thou" attitude or excluding a person because of bait.

That samonfly hatch is harder to catch that it seems. Just went to Yellowstone this summer and spent a few days chasing it. Saw a few adults and alot of shells from where they crawled out of, but never did really get it. I hope you have better luck than I did stl, but I will be back up there in a couple years chasing them again. My favorite hatch of Missouri? Probably the Caddis hatch. I love to fish hoppers, but give me a caddis hatch any day and I am a happy guy. Or, the canoe hatch. I'm pretty happy with that as well

I always buy my tippets all at once, and it's about time for me to replace them. I've been an Orvis guy for tippet and leaders(mainly because Bass Pro carries them and its close to my house) but I'm considering looking into other brands. Anyone have any suggestions?

And this will be my last say(although I have said that before) I think communicating over a forum is tough, and sometimes it takes a while to flesh out the real issues and what the other person really has in mind. I really like OTF's post there, and I think that is something very similar to what I was thinking. I know that white ribbons have been managed this way for a while, and by no means do I want to re-create this management. We are mainly talking about two streams and two small C&R zones, although I would like to see a C&R zone on any white ribbon stream which could support resident trout that does not have a Blue/Red ribbon area close in proximity (but I digress). I have only fished three white ribbon areas, and only two, Hickory and Capps, fit the description that I am looking for. C&R is a great thing, and I know people want to catch and keep. Both can coincide in one stream, we just have to find a good balancing point. And it’s not like people who want to keep trout have nowhere to go. Even if this proposal would take place, people who want to keep trout and use bait would still have: Trout parks, Lower Taneycomo, and all White Ribbon Areas which are not C&R. That is still a lot of places, and no stream would be effectively removed through this idea. By all means, let those fisherman who want to keep trout to do so. But I think a small C&R zone, if done right, would really open up some potential to these streams that we may not yet realize. I have enjoyed this discussion, I think all that needs to be said has been said. Tight lines,

"I don't really give a darn about increasing trout angling opportunities in Missouri. Let's focus on the native species and conserve them as best we can, rather than diverting our attention elsewhere." Then go start your own thread.

Chief, I have no clue what or why your posting this. Look, a small C&R section, or an idea of a new management area does not mean someone is a bad fisherman. It's not all about me or OTF or any specific individual, it is about an idea of conserving the resources we put out there. Why don't we reserve 25% of the land as C&R zones on White Ribbon areas and let the other 75% stay as "put and take." There are other users of this resource indeed, and I guess we all need to learn how to share. As far as I know, C&R is the best way to share a resource. I'm not sure that all white ribbon areas would qualify under that. And again I don't think anyone here wants stocking to absolutley stop, I want to keep the stocking as it is but add a small C&R section. I know of at least one white ribbon stream that was listed as a wild stream in Chuck Tryon's first book. I also know of a few people who have caught fingelings in this creek and another creek. Maybe we would find that the main thing holding some wild reproduction back is not the stream itself, but the fact that trout don't last long enough to spawn. Just my opinion though.

I have never proposed that bait would be allowed in the catch and release zone, that was stated earlier in one of my posts, why would we allow bait in a C&R zone :rolleyes Yes, I pay to fish for trout as well, I pay my 7$ even though I don't keep trout(so I can fish Taney). MDC does not release trout solely for those who want to keep trout, that is illogical. Why not just drop a bucket of fish on your door then, or call it refrigerator creek? About grocery stores, that is one of the worst comparisons I have ever seen. MDC primary purpose is to serve the State, and in that comes conservation, since we're throwing around quotes of law "Protection does entail destruction of the protected." Grocery stores. .. . Well, I don't even have to justify a response to this, get a better analogy and I'll show you the difference Look for a substantially similar entity as the MDC and we'll talk. Minority does not necessarily mean low population, minority could entail the lack of legal protection a specifically identifiable group of individuals faces (i.e. women). So my view of minority here is not that there are less bait fisherman, but there are more regulations against the group of bait fisherman as a whole. Again, my position is that MDC serves more than a purpose of "feeding the fisherman." A policy that allows for the most quality angling opportunity is a policy that serves the best purpose, and one that continues to allow fisherman to keep fish is a "win win." How would a small C&R zone, where artificial baits and flies only are allowed, kill of the fishing of the rest of a white ribbon area? Again, I think you should read the rest of my posts before criticizing one. I'll be honest, I think your quoting a line that was about national faction. Believe me, your issues of mole hills and mountains do not warrant the idea of national faction.

Chief, I have done that, and the fishing does not compare to Blue ribbon fishing. If it did I wouldn't be so persistent about new regulations. Further, Blue Ribbons and White Ribbons are not similarly situated in that the regulations of the two are so vastly different that comparing the two relies on broad assumptions of equality, which is simply not true. Look no further than the amount of people fishing at a white ribbon area and the amount at a white ribbon area. However, I do recognize that bait fishing is an acceptable way of fishing, but it is expressly conditioned on whether the stream can support the practice of bait fishing. Anyone who has fished Hickory or Capps knows that the trout population depends on the amount of stocking along with the length of time from the stocking. A C&R zone does not have the effect of banning bait, so let that opinion die out. I am not the bait Gestapo, and I don't care if you are using bait at a winter trout area or trout parks. However, and this is the last time I'm going to put this on the forum, fiscal responsibility dictates that some of the stocked fish should not be swept up by broad nets of anglers who plan to keep. Thus, a C&R zone combines the best of both theories, one that allows for quality angling and bait fishing, without sacrificing a relative minority, the bait fisherman. Yes, this could create faction among the trout anglers in Missouri, however I find it very odd that we are using faction in the sense of fishing. I hardly doubt this would create a situation of epic proportions, one faced by our fore fathers who really had to deal with faction. i.e. Marbury v. Madison. If we're going to throw those fears of faction out there, what about the principle of the most good for the most people? That is exactly what I am proposing, and yes it does alter the status quo. I am officially done with posting my opinions on this topic. I will post my letter, aling with any letter I recieve from the MDC on this forum.