White Ribbon Conservation Issue

[drew03cmc]

I asked the biologist about how they came up with the Red, White & Blue designations when they proposed them several years ago. The main driver for Blue, Red, & White designation was habitat....but other factors were considered as well. Geography, local input, nearby trout fisheries, etc..

Streams were wild reproduction occurs & most of the best habitat is under blue ribbon regs now. But there is some great habitat in the Reds & Whites too. Current from Cedar to Akers or Pulltite might make a great blue, red, or white ribbon area...but..lots of hurdles to jump through with the Naional Park Service. The Meramec has good habitat from the Park down to Suicide Hill....and poor habitat below....but its a popular float stream...and splitting it into blue & red would make it hard to regulate...therefore red...The Niangua...has summer time temperature & other issues...Not sure about issues at Hickory or Capps...but I've never visited, and probably never will.

It would be wonderful to have enough wild trout to allow a slot limit in this State....not likely though...We are truly dependant on the stocking truck in all but a select few locations....

I'd consider the North Fork of the White to be the most productive wild trout fishery in this state, and youd be surprised at how low the fish counts are....Maybe 400-500 rainbows per mile in the Blue Ribbon area....Sometimes its been allot less. When the 11pt was under wild trout management...the counts were often less than 200 rainbows per mile and quite a few of those were feral fish that swam up from the stocked waters below...Not enough trout water to go around in this state that is for sure, but what we have is pretty good and it appeals to a wide variety of anglers. Cheers.

Gavin, isn't the NFOW also fed by the stocking trucks? I know there is some natural reproduction, but there is not sufficient reproduction to be entirely free of the trucks.

Just to make it clear, I admire your passion and your ability to keep it civil. Good on you! We oughta get together and fish for them Neodosha smallmouth things sometime

Ness, I am down for some local stream fishing anytime. In fact, I know you have a MO license too, so the Blue River just past State Line is good fishing some of the time. I would also be up for a trip down to Shoal Creek with a bit of notice. Let me know.

It only took 155 posts to get to the real heart of this entire subject. Really people, what is wrong with the idea of inserting a small stretch of water that can hold fish between stockings???????

The premise for this idea is that within a 2 week period the trout are mostly wiped out. I will attest to that. The idea of having a section that can and probably will hold fish for an extended period of time is exactly what you are going to need in order to determine if the stream is capable of supporting a somewhat larger resident population of trout or natural reproduction. Not to mention the fact that given the time and opportunity trout WILL and DO spawn in our Ozark streams. Ideal stream scenarios really don't have as much to do with it, IMO, as just giving them a little bit of time to get the job done.

I personally would like to see Capps go to the same regs that Hickory has gone to for the last few years, which is C & R from Nov. 1st through the last day of February. The problem is that Capps has historically been put and take with no other limits except for Brown trout. It would not sit well with the people who are the ones who do the majority of the keeping on the stream. That's OK with me. I do think that they would more likely accept a small stretch of water that is C & R than the entire stream.

Eric, I'm not familiar with all of the trout water in your neck of the woods, but I can tell you this, Capps is a much wilder creek than what most think. It has a very large area that is in no way manicured. It actually resembles Crane in a lot of ways. It's just not as long of a creek.

So, this proposal would actually, if considered, be more of a test than anything. If it shows promise, then some regs might be changed permanently. If not, I would assume the regs would go back to the originals.

I could not agree more Buzz. I like that about Capps. If I had to pick an area to keep as C&R, or a slot or what have you, it would be from the bend in the creek with the huge pool down to Shoal, or even from the lower access down to Shoal.

[Chief Grey Bear]

It only took 155 posts to get to the real heart of this entire subject. Really people, what is wrong with the idea of inserting a small stretch of water that can hold fish between stockings???????

I personally would like to see Capps go to the same regs that Hickory has gone to for the last few years, which is C & R from Nov. 1st through the last day of February. The problem is that Capps has historically been put and take with no other limits except for Brown trout. It would not sit well with the people who are the ones who do the majority of the keeping on the stream. That's OK with me. I do think that they would more likely accept a small stretch of water that is C & R than the entire stream.

You have had plenty of opportunities to bring this up. You didn't have to wait 155 post.

On paper it does sound like a great idea. But Capp's is only stocked in 3 areas. In the park, at the lower bridge and in one spot in between. For the C&R that you want to establish, you are taking away over 80% of the stream and 2/3 of the stocked area. I just don't think that is fair to those that come there to take home some fish since that is why the creek was established in the first place. And then if you put a C&R season on there like at Hickory, you have now shut out those that want to keep trout as it is only stocked 5 times per season and that would only be during the C&R season.

The bait fishermen only hit two of those spots with any regularity. That being the park and the lower bridge. Pretty much everthing in between is just as you want it. As well as from the lower bridge to the concfluence with Shoal. That is still the vast majority of the creek.

[Greg]

Gavin, isn't the NFOW also fed by the stocking trucks? I know there is some natural reproduction, but there is not sufficient reproduction to be entirely free of the trucks.

I'm pretty sure that isn't correct. I think the NFOW has been entirely self sustaining for quite a few years. I think I read somewhere that it hasn't been stocked since the 1940's. I'm talking about rainbows. I do think certain areas are still stocked with brown trout.

Greg

[laker67]

I'm pretty sure that isn't correct. I think the NFOW has been entirely self sustaining for quite a few years. I think I read somewhere that it hasn't been stocked since the 1940's. I'm talking about rainbows. I do think certain areas are still stocked with brown trout.

Greg

Seems like I recall brian or justin saying 1964 on the rainbows.

[ness]

Ness, I am down for some local stream fishing anytime. In fact, I know you have a MO license too, so the Blue River just past State Line is good fishing some of the time. I would also be up for a trip down to Shoal Creek with a bit of notice. Let me know.

Funny -- I was just eye-balling the Blue River the other day at lunch (down by Holmes; I work pretty close to there.) But, there are always a few cars in the access parking lot and they don't look like they're there for the fishing.

I'd love to get down to Shoal someday. It's just tough getting out at all right now.

[drew03cmc]

Funny -- I was just eye-balling the Blue River the other day at lunch (down by Holmes; I work pretty close to there.) But, there are always a few cars in the access parking lot and they don't look like they're there for the fishing.

I'd love to get down to Shoal someday. It's just tough getting out at all right now.

I hear you on that one, but that is why I try to plan things out as far as trips go. Shoal is a nice creek and we would need Chief as a guide to show us some of the upper accesses as I couldn't find them again if I had to.

[Outside Bend]

My enjoyment of trout fishing doesn't hinge on the raw numbers of trout in the stream, but the challenge those fish are. I've found fish which have spent a season or two in stream are more challenging for me than the ones which were dumped 20 minutes ago, and that the Blue Ribbon reaches tend to have more of those resident fish than the White Ribbon reaches. So I focus more of my energies on the Blue Ribbon areas. Not saying the White ribbon shouldn't appeal to some folks. Not saying White ribbon streams don't have resident, or even wild fish. Just saying the White Ribbon regs don't generally appeal to my demographic.

I guess I'm pretty ambivalent about the regs some folks are advocating- I don't fish White Ribbon areas very often now, but I'd probably spend more time there if there were more holdover fish. In the grand scheme of things I think a half mile of C&R water won't make much difference, especially in areas its unlikely to be enforced, and that we ought to think long and hard about the ramifications of shutting local anglers out of their local waters.

NFoW is only stocked with browns, its rainbows are self-sustaining. I've caught wild rainbows up to 17" out of there, and many of the 10-14" fish still had parr-marks, even gravid fish. They do tend to fade as the fish get older, although they can still be visible. One of the reasons you see predominately 6" fish in most MO wild trout streams is likely habitat limitation, the other is the simple fact that in most populations juveniles are just more prevalent than adult fish.

[Gavin]

The NFoW is self sustaining for rainbows...but the browns are stocked. The last time it was stocked with rainbows was in the mid-1960's...and they are still there. Its the best opportunaty to catch a 20" wild rainbow in this State, IMO. Most run in the 6-12" range, but the 15" bows are real bruisers.

The 11pt seems to have better size and numbers of rainbows, but many of those are stocked fish. There is a bit of natural reproduction on that river, but the biologists have told me that it is allot less than what they find on the NFoW. Its heavilly stocked these days and stocked fish will grow their fins back & look wild in a short time....Sometimes you catch one with no sign of a visable fin clip but your never certain on that river. Our other wild trout fisheries usually hold an abundance of small 6" trout, some 10-12", and a few bigger ones. They are fun fish to stalk, but you dont go there to catch big fish. You go their to enjoy catching wild trout from small waters.

I like to float more than most, so I do fish the White Ribbon Areas occassionally. Cedar to Akers on the Current is always a fun float...great scenery, fair trout fishing & some smallmouth. The White Ribbon on the 11pt is even better. I'd fish it more often, but its a real haul from St. Louis so I tend to head to the Blue Ribbon area on the 11pt when I visit. I dont mess with the White Ribbon on the Niangua very much...The scenery is nothing to write home about, and the fish dont seem to have a chance to spread out from the stocking locations..Makes for allot of unproductive dead water in between places were a stocking truck can drive to the water.

[ColdWaterFshr]

Just saying the White Ribbon regs don't generally appeal to my demographic.

Alright, thats a 20 point deduction for full-frontal snobbery.

[drew03cmc]

My enjoyment of trout fishing doesn't hinge on the raw numbers of trout in the stream, but the challenge those fish are. I've found fish which have spent a season or two in stream are more challenging for me than the ones which were dumped 20 minutes ago, and that the Blue Ribbon reaches tend to have more of those resident fish than the White Ribbon reaches. So I focus more of my energies on the Blue Ribbon areas. Not saying the White ribbon shouldn't appeal to some folks. Not saying White ribbon streams don't have resident, or even wild fish. Just saying the White Ribbon regs don't generally appeal to my demographic.

I guess I'm pretty ambivalent about the regs some folks are advocating- I don't fish White Ribbon areas very often now, but I'd probably spend more time there if there were more holdover fish. In the grand scheme of things I think a half mile of C&R water won't make much difference, especially in areas its unlikely to be enforced, and that we ought to think long and hard about the ramifications of shutting local anglers out of their local waters.

NFoW is only stocked with browns, its rainbows are self-sustaining. I've caught wild rainbows up to 17" out of there, and many of the 10-14" fish still had parr-marks, even gravid fish. They do tend to fade as the fish get older, although they can still be visible. One of the reasons you see predominately 6" fish in most MO wild trout streams is likely habitat limitation, the other is the simple fact that in most populations juveniles are just more prevalent than adult fish.

Habitat limitation? What are you speaking of? Are you saying that the smaller fish are limited in growth by their habitat? Funny, I have heard of 20+" rainbows out of Crane and Mill Creeks, along with 15+ from most every other smaller wild trout water in the state. Could it not be that the larger fish are more wary than these smaller fish and didn't get big by being dumb?