White Ribbon Conservation Issue

[troutfiend1985]

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?

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?

[drew03cmc]

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?

I am asking why habitat limitation is the first place someone goes on that topic rather than predation or somewhere more logical than just saying that a stream with a bunch of young trout is limited by habitat. How is it then that other small streams in the Ozarks routinely produce wild 13" and larger trout? A stream can only handle so many big fish. The rest of the population is invariably dinks and YOY of the past two or three spawns. Every year, the amount of fish surviving from a particular year class is going to decline almost exponentially due to predation from otters, raptors, etc. There are more small fish than large fish and if you think otherwise, you are living in a dream world. If you want to debate this, go ahead and tell me I am wrong.

There are resident trout already in the White Ribbon streams, but it is up to you to use your angling skill set to find them. If you cannot, perhaps the park atmosphere is better for you. A C&R stretch on a stream like Capps would almost have to be in an inaccessible location such as below the last bridge all the way to Shoal Creek. That would be okay with me, but there would be no way to enforce it. The agents are not going to wade down the stream to check if ONE angler has a fish on the stringer. Rather than put unenforceable regulations on the books, how about wasting our money to pay the agents to enforce the ones that are currently there. Then, we can move on slowly as our trout program (as against the stocking system as I am) is currently managed well. That is not to say that I am pro-hatchery-provided fisheries, but I enjoy catching trout in wild looking streams too.

[Buzz]

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.

Not at all. I'm actually talking about creating a new stocking area. The section I'm thinking of would be small enough and yet large enough to work as a C & R section that is mostly only accessable by wading. It would be the section above the middle stocking point. It's seriously wild, it has some really deep holes and several good fast water runs. In all of my years fishing that particular area, I have never seen a bait fisherman wading there. It is still accessable to the stocking trucks, just not as easy as what they already have. Don't get me wrong, I know there are already trout in this section, but it would also be the least offensive to the bait fisherman. This would be an area no more than 30%, if that, of the entire creek.

[Outside Bend]

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

Haha alright, although I'm not sure why. I despise brussel sprouts, so I avoid them like the plague. I've never gotten into midget wrestling, so I'm not heartbroken if I don't see it on TV. I'd rather have a Boulevard than a Budweiser. I've fished several White Ribbon streams, but I like the Blue Ribbon waters more. They're just my preferences, and I'm not saying they're better than anyone else's. If you'd like to pop brussel sprouts as you watch midget wrestling on your iPhone while cracking a Budweiser on a White Ribbon trout stream, by all means go for it. I'll have a beer with you. We all ought to do whatever it is we love, and bickering about it doesn't interest me.

Not everything's an argument Drew. Many things affect fish growth, one of them is habitat. Big streams have more habitat than small streams- big streams aren't as prey limited, they're more productive, they offer more volume to occupy, more places to spawn, more places to hide. Yes you can catch big trout in Mill Creek, but there will be more large fish in Little Piney, and even more large fish in NFoW. Part of that equation is habitat.

Troutfiend- I don't think the C&R idea is a bad one, especially a C&R section which only exists from something like Nov 1- March 1, leaving plenty of time for the trout to get fished out before water temperatures get too warm. If you can get some of the local folks signed on though, I really think that's the way to go.

[KCRIVERRAT]

Just wondering you eastern Missouri boys... What could have been done to prevent the spots from "invading" your waters? And whom do you fault for this travesty? Was it the MDC for lack of foresight? Do you believe they've done enough to start any eradication at all of spots? Such as liberal limits and such. And do you believe that's helping? Are you content with the funds MDC has spent to fix the Meremac or any other stream over there that have been "decimated" by spots?

Trout were put here and ain't goin' nowhere... correct? Cash crop period. Times have changed and this is the way it is.

Spots made there way to our eastern watersheds. But if not on there own, why wasn't anything done to keep them from here? And why is there not a more aggressive program in place to get rid of them? Outside of guys on forums having all the answers...

By the way, I've caught lots of spots on TR that are at least 16" from time to time. But... were they there before the White was dammed? I have no idea... and I realize lake fish grow bigger than river fish.

[troutfiend1985]

I am asking why habitat limitation is the first place someone goes on that topic rather than predation or somewhere more logical than just saying that a stream with a bunch of young trout is limited by habitat. How is it then that other small streams in the Ozarks routinely produce wild 13" and larger trout? A stream can only handle so many big fish. The rest of the population is invariably dinks and YOY of the past two or three spawns. Every year, the amount of fish surviving from a particular year class is going to decline almost exponentially due to predation from otters, raptors, etc. There are more small fish than large fish and if you think otherwise, you are living in a dream world. If you want to debate this, go ahead and tell me I am wrong.

There are resident trout already in the White Ribbon streams, but it is up to you to use your angling skill set to find them. If you cannot, perhaps the park atmosphere is better for you. A C&R stretch on a stream like Capps would almost have to be in an inaccessible location such as below the last bridge all the way to Shoal Creek. That would be okay with me, but there would be no way to enforce it. The agents are not going to wade down the stream to check if ONE angler has a fish on the stringer. Rather than put unenforceable regulations on the books, how about wasting our money to pay the agents to enforce the ones that are currently there. Then, we can move on slowly as our trout program (as against the stocking system as I am) is currently managed well. That is not to say that I am pro-hatchery-provided fisheries, but I enjoy catching trout in wild looking streams too.

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.

[jdmidwest]

Just wondering you eastern Missouri boys... What could have been done to prevent the spots from "invading" your waters? And whom do you fault for this travesty? Was it the MDC for lack of foresight? Do you believe they've done enough to start any eradication at all of spots? Such as liberal limits and such. And do you believe that's helping? Are you content with the funds MDC has spent to fix the Meremac or any other stream over there that have been "decimated" by spots?

Nothing short of filleting them to the point of extinction would have or will still curb this problem. Eat more spots or learn to enjoy fishing for them, they taste and fish like largemouth bass, only smaller.

They invaded thru the Mississippi River, same way the Asian Carp is. They were not stocked, so you can't blame the MDC. MDC has encouraged catch and keep on this species on the infected rivers in check with an increased limit. Problem is, people seem to have an aversion to eating fish lately.

[drew03cmc]

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.

I never said you sucked at fishing. Re-read what I said, but I realize I might have been out of line. I had a bad day, I will admit that and I will bow out.

Anyway, I do understand that a stream can only support a fixed amount of fish of any size based upon habitat and forage availability.

[Chief Grey Bear]

Not at all. I'm actually talking about creating a new stocking area. The section I'm thinking of would be small enough and yet large enough to work as a C & R section that is mostly only accessable by wading. It would be the section above the middle stocking point. It's seriously wild, it has some really deep holes and several good fast water runs. In all of my years fishing that particular area, I have never seen a bait fisherman wading there. It is still accessable to the stocking trucks, just not as easy as what they already have. Don't get me wrong, I know there are already trout in this section, but it would also be the least offensive to the bait fisherman. This would be an area no more than 30%, if that, of the entire creek.

So basically it is, for all intents and purposes, already a C&R area, you just want more fish put in it to pump your numbers? You are right about how wooly it is. Short of building access to the area, I don't think there is any way the trout truck could get to it. Which brings up another point. After Coldwater stated that the blue red and white ribbon areas were picked based on habitat, I then thought of the area from the new bridge to Shoal and there is no reason this is not Blue Ribbon territory. You can't find better habitat quality water for trout. That is just text book water for trout! In fact it is so darn wild the locals will only hit it near the two access points.

And you know, the more I think about it, how about a White Ribbon section from the mill dam to the new bridge and Red Ribbon from the new bridge to Shoal????? Bet you never thought I would post that did ya! Is there any other areas that have to color codes back to back??? Maybe this could be an experimental area??? We could still have good stockings near the mill and get some roamers down stream. And red ribbon still gets a few stockings per year. And that would be better in my book than blue ribbon.

[troutfiend1985]

I never said you sucked at fishing. Re-read what I said, but I realize I might have been out of line. I had a bad day, I will admit that and I will bow out.

Anyway, I do understand that a stream can only support a fixed amount of fish of any size based upon habitat and forage availability.

Ok, no problem. I can respect that.