Felt Sole Wading Boots

[fishinwrench]

Guess you haven't seen what happens to a stream with a didymo invasion...it pretty much ceases to be a productive body of water...

That's true, I haven't. I have been to a few places where they were really worried about it.... but I found the fishing to be as good as it had ever been. I have kept checking on the productivity of those tailwaters where didy was said to have taken hold ever since..... and they are still considered destination fisheries, people report stellar catches all the time.

So the doomsday effects are kinda hard for me to realize.

Has it ever shown up anywhere that wasn't a tailwater? And what waterway that was once a productive fishery ceases to be so today because of didymo? Not arguing, just curious.

[exiledguide]

That's true, I haven't. I have been to a few places where they were really worried about it.... but I found the fishing to be as good as it had ever been. I have kept checking on the productivity of those tailwaters where didy was said to have taken hold ever since..... and they are still considered destination fisheries, people report stellar catches all the time.

So the doomsday effects are kinda hard for me to realize.

Has it ever shown up anywhere that wasn't a tailwater? And what waterway that was once a productive fishery ceases to be so today because of didymo? Not arguing, just curious.

There ya go again Wrench, thinking that any logical thought or science would ever enter into any decision that the Mucky Mucks at the MDC would make. Oh yea, all of you who line up to support this rule with no scientific fact, should bend over, grab your left ear with your right hand and your right ear with your left hand and pull your head out of your..........

[Outside Bend]

That's true, I haven't. I have been to a few places where they were really worried about it.... but I found the fishing to be as good as it had ever been. I have kept checking on the productivity of those tailwaters where didy was said to have taken hold ever since..... and they are still considered destination fisheries, people report stellar catches all the time.

So the doomsday effects are kinda hard for me to realize.

Has it ever shown up anywhere that wasn't a tailwater? And what waterway that was once a productive fishery ceases to be so today because of didymo? Not arguing, just curious.

It's been reported from free flowing streams in Alberta, New Zealand, Patagonia and Quebec. Other than that, I'm not sure. I don't know of any streams that have completely crashed due to didymo invasions, but Rapid Creek in SD is suffering a 50% loss of their wild brown trout population due to a drought/didymo combination. The fishery is recovering, but the fish population is much different now than it was before didymo took hold. Whirling disease (another reason to ban felt), has completely eliminated some western fisheries altogether.

There's a lot of evidence didymo alters trout's prey base, creating higher populations of midges and worms and lower populations of mayflies, stoneflies, and caddisflies. There's also some indications it may interfere with spawning activities, although there hasn't been much research in that area.

[Brian K. Shaffer]

Outside Bend wrote; " There's a lot of evidence didymo alters trout's prey base, creating higher populations of midges and worms and lower populations of mayflies, stoneflies, and caddisflies. There's also some indications it may interfere with spawning activities, although there hasn't been much research in that area. "

OK.. I understand that completely.. but Lake Taneycomo already has :

1. An enormous population of midges and planarian

2. Very Low (if any) population of mayflies, stoneflies and caddisflies

3. Little to zilch spawning population (under 2% per MDC)

The benefits for Taneycomo still are not really proven to me. I just don't want to be told to conform .. to ruin a pair of perfectly good felt soled boots or felt soled bootfoot hippers or bootfoot waders (yes, I own all 3) is crazy talk.

Now I understand for any and all of the other Missouri trout fisheries... but for Taney... come on now. Too little too late.

** Why not concentrate more efforts on minimum flow ??? or even better, our horrible oxygen issue ?!?! 2 Parts Per Million is not the 6PPM that was agreed upon years ago. Liquid oxygen costs out the butt for SWPA...and they hardly use it for that very reason. **

ALSO - think about this.. say a guy who fishes Taney once or twice a year is not up on this new regulation and drives all the way to Branson with the intention of seeing a show or two with the family and hitting the river once or twice. If he brings felts, he just plain cannot fish. There is the rub if you ask me. Now he either gives up on fishing entirely for his scheduled trip or decides to buy new boots, yet another expense on his Branson trip.

[Outside Bend]

Outside Bend wrote; " There's a lot of evidence didymo alters trout's prey base, creating higher populations of midges and worms and lower populations of mayflies, stoneflies, and caddisflies. There's also some indications it may interfere with spawning activities, although there hasn't been much research in that area. "

OK.. I understand that completely.. but Lake Taneycomo already has :

1. An enormous population of midges and planarian

2. Low (or no) population of mayflies, stoneflies and caddisflies

3. Little to zilch spawning population (under 2% per MDC)

The benefits for Taneycomo still are not really proven to me. I just don't want to be told to conform .. to ruin a pair of perfectly good felt soled boots or felt soled bootfoot hippers or bootfoot waders (yes, I own all 3) is crazy talk.

Now I understand for any and all of the other Missouri trout fisheries... but for Taney... come on now

I suppose I'd argue that ruining a perfectly good pair of perfectly good felt soled boots is pretty minor compared to ruining a perfectly good fishing/floating/recreational stream. But they're not my boots

For the anglers who fish Taney exclusively, 100% it probably is an inconvenience, but I'm betting the number of folks who fish Taney to the exclusion of all else (RR, Crane, NFOW, etc), is pretty small. Most folks would have to buy another pair of boots anyway (even if Taney was excluded from the ban), so IMO it's sort of a moot point.

Plus there's the hatchery- if didymo was introduced to Taney and got into the hatchery, infected water could be shipped with browns to trout streams all across the state, effectively defeating the whole point of the felt ban.

ALSO - think about this.. say a guy who fishes Taney once or twice a year is not up on this new regulation and drives all the way to Branson with the intention of seeing a show or two with the family and hitting the river once or twice. If he brings felts, he just plain cannot fish. There is the rub if you ask me. Now he either gives up on fishing entirely for his scheduled trip or decides to buy new boots.

It's a bummer, but it's no one's fault but his own. The regulations are out there, they're not difficult to find, and it's the responsibility of the angler to know the rules on the water they're fishing.

[Outside Bend]

There ya go again Wrench, thinking that any logical thought or science would ever enter into any decision that the Mucky Mucks at the MDC would make. Oh yea, all of you who line up to support this rule with no scientific fact, should bend over, grab your left ear with your right hand and your right ear with your left hand and pull your head out of your..........

1.) Didymo is an invasive diatom which has adapted to systems and conditions well outside its native range: Here, Here, Here

2.) Didymo alters aquatic food webs and stream hydrology- Here, Here, Here, Here, Here, Here, Here, Here.

3.) Didymo infestations cost local recreation and tourism industries, not to mention fish and game agencies- Here

3.) Anglers have been implicated in the movement of didymo and other invasive aquatic organisms- Here, Here, Here, Here,

3.) Angling gear- specifically felt soles- has proven to harbor aquatic invasive species, and provides a means of transporting critters between streams- Here

Now, looking at the scientific facts, why is it you think banning felt soles is a bad idea?

[fishinwrench]

Halting the manufacture of felt boots and basically allowing felt to "phase out" is understandable, but a full out ban with a future effective date just seems retarded. If it's that big of a deal then how can they afford to wait until March ?

I just dunno, the whole thing is as rediculis to me as the ban on lead, and the ban on 2-stroke engines.....except THIS ONE is actually going forward. Whatever.

And of course farmers are still allowed to let their livestock do their business in the streams, and various other DEFINATE dustructive acts are overlooked and never acted upon.

[Brian K. Shaffer]

fishinwrench wrote; " If it's that big of a deal then how can they afford to wait until March ? "

Nice. I laughed out loud. Just for pure comedies sake. That was funny.

[eric1978]

I just wonder why someone can't come up with a non-porous alternative to felt that still keeps you from busting your arse. You know the technology is out there. I bet NASA could knock it out in twenty minutes.

[Mitch f]

I just wonder why someone can't come up with a non-porous alternative to felt that still keeps you from busting your arse. You know the technology is out there. I bet NASA could knock it out in twenty minutes.

Like Bismuth and Heavy Shot, it will cost you up the kazoo