Interesting Day On The Lp

[mdrstl]

I had an interesting day on the LP Thursday. I got to the Lane Springs gate before 6am and was happy to see it open. The web indicated it “could be closed between 10pm and 6am”. I spoke with the camp attendant as I was leaving and she informed me she typically doesn’t lock it at night unless needed to deter late night beer runs.

The fishing started out good, two decent rainbows on an olive bh wooly. Things stopped for a while which might have had something to do with the bunch of otters and a bald eagle I saw cruising the river. I caught a couple LP little ones on hare’s ears a bit later. After losing my fly to a hard strike (weak knot?), I tied on a sparkle olive bh wooly and caught a 15+’ rainbow a bit downstream where swift water entered a deep hole. The fish tail-walked twice, something I last saw on the LP from another large fish I hooked last June but didn’t land. That was in a different hole so if the otters, eagles or meat fishers didn’t get her, there are at least two very nice rainbows in the LP willing to take a fly during the summer.

I headed out around noon and decided to try downstream from the gravel pits. No luck there during about 30 minutes of fishing but I picked up some interesting information. First thing I noticed was someone had placed some trailers and fencing with “Posted” signs around the property which contains the water filled pits. This included strands of wire across the river. A real nice guy who owns some property further downstream stopped to chat and he said some religious group bought the land and had fenced it in. He indicated the primary reason was to keep out other’s cattle and driven by an interest to deter fishermen or garrote giggers. He provided other bits of information readers of past postings may find interesting. He named the lady who owns the property around Vida slab, saying she’s real nice but has had some problems with some of the fishermen. When I asked him about public access, he said that the LP is a Creek, not a River, which means those who own land on either side own the ground below, though folks can legally canoe through. I have no idea how accurate he is about this, but he’s owned his property for quite some time and the matter of fact manner of his statements indicate that is what one land owner believes. Another tid-bit he passed on; many years ago there used to be a hatchery on her property which was washed out during a flood, and that's why he figures you see different types of trout in this strech of the river (creek).

I stopped by Maramec Park and fished down from the bridge on the way home. I saw a bunch of trout but could only get a few smallmouth to take my fly. The thing I found amazing were the canoes I saw on the way out around 4:00. There were about 4 canoes with dads and little kids or husbands with plump pale wives just down from the park. They were obviously all happy folks and must have been oblivious to all the miles and that long stretch of slow water between them and Scotts Ford. A remote camera in those canoes would probably provide good fodder for another painful reality show.

Not the world's greatest day of fishing, but a great day on the rivers.

[Al Agnew]

The landowner is wrong, of course. Creek or river, makes no difference what it's named. Just because he said it like he knew what he was talking about doesn't make him right. The landowner owns the stream bottom no matter what it's called. They own the stream bottom on rivers as big as the lower Current and as small as the trickles coming off the hills. But if the stream is big enough to float, the public still has the right to float it, wade it, picnic on gravel bars, etc. whether it's called Little Piney Creek or Bryant Creek or Beaver Creek or Jacks Fork or Meramec River...and by the way, it's still Meramec "River" a couple miles north of Salem where it's nothing but a dry gravel bed ten feet wide most of the time.

[ozark trout fisher]

Glad you had a good day on the creek.

I do really believe that the Vida Slab stretch should be considered a floatable stream and in theory there shouldn't be any legal difficulties wading there with or without permission...But if you are talking about the pits upstream from the 63 Bridge (there are several places on the LP that would meet your description) it's marginal at best. If I was fishing above 63 I'd definitely be asking first. The trout fishing is pretty spotty upstream from Yancy anyway, as there's just not really enough spring water up there to keep temps down in the summer.

I encourage everyone to tread lightly as possible on the Little Piney trespass issue that has come up a lot as of late. You should certainly not hesitate to fish a stretch of the creek if you believe that you are legally in the right, but just be as responsible, polite, and as "invisible" as possible. The Little Piney is a fragile resource that has been abused a lot more than it has deserved by gravel mining, cattle, and poaching, and I think that it's possible that certain landowners are wanting to protect it from more of that-even though I believe some of them are going about it entirely the wrong way.

[mdrstl]

I probably shouldn't have referred to these as pits. the area i was referencing is quite a bit downstream from Lane Springs, just down from the low water bridge and the land with the long narrow body of water you can see where CR 237 and 235 split. This fairly large body of water (1,000'x250'?) looks to me to have started out as a former gravel surface pit.

Based on what i've heard in the forum and seen from the road, I've not fished up from 63.

[ozark trout fisher]

I probably shouldn't have referred to these as pits. the area i was referencing is quite a bit downstream from Lane Springs, just down from the low water bridge and the land with the long narrow body of water you can see where CR 237 and 235 split. This fairly large body of water (1,000'x250'?) looks to me to have started out as a former gravel surface pit.

Based on what i've heard in the forum and seen from the road, I've not fished up from 63.

Okay, sorry for the misunderstanding.