Spavinaw Creek Access Areas Around Benton Cunty

[jdelow77]

I just recently found out that spavinaw had trout in it , has anyone fished it around Benton county ? If so where did you put in ?

[mdrstl]

If you go to the Wild Trout Creeks and Steams section of this forum; Started by yummysmokedham, Sep 17 2009 10:51 AM there is some info.

[cpriest]

There are trout but it is completely private. It's not worth the trespassing, law will be out there quickly. You can pay a daily rod fee through springvalleyanglers.com. A couple years back its was around $100/day.

[Feathers and Fins]

There are two areas of SC people talk about, The Ranch and the Western sections. The Ranch you can pay to play last i checked ( couple years ago ) They are nice size fish and plentiful or were when i was there. The Western Section is completely Private and you cannot fish it without permission or the Law will come say hello and give you a citation. I have accessed the Western Section a few times and caught a few fish but they are few and far between, but they are quality size fish problem is getting permission is got to the point its next to impossible.

[remi74]

There are 2 ways to get in to the creek legally around the "trout" area. These are legally accessed because it's from a bridge which it totally legal and you can be in the stream up to the high water mark. They can not make you leave. There are smallies in there too.

[remi74]

There are 2 bridges I know of. If you acces from a bridge, it's legal and you can be in the stream up to the high water mark. I don't care if they own both sides of the stream. They didn't put the trout there in the first place. Big money = loss of stream access.

[1969Larson]

About 15 years ago (long before anybody decided to start making a profit by putting up fences and keeping others off this beautiful stream) I hiked up from the highway 43 bridge fishing for smallmouth and ended up being surprised by a monster rainbow trout. The highway 102 to 43 float used to be awesome in an innertube.

[marcusearlt]

My brother and I went on a "fact finding" mission not too long ago to see for ourselves about SC. We started as far west as we could under the 43 bridge and worked our way east. We stopped at and tried to access many different locations which I had scouted out on Google maps the night before. Let just say right now, I don't know what the laws are or any technical rules and reg's of the AGFC and stream access but we definitely were uncomfortable being under the 43 bridge. No trespassing and private property signs EVERYWHERE. It was really unbelievable. What a beautiful little piece of river though. The west side of the river at the 43 bridge is the outside turn of the river and has really carved out one marvelous facade, along with other geological events I'm sure. We just didn't feel right so we got out of there. After stopping several places, eyeing the water, and then factoring in our surroundings, we concluded that each spot we were somehow not supposed to be there and kept going. However, on some dirt that turned pretty far from the river, we actually lost the wet part and began to find nothing but empty stream bed. If you look on Google maps you will find a spot that has a house near the river where there is a broken dam and it's not hard to find that same place by car either, we went there too. We suspect this is close to the cold spring that puts out all the water because we quickly found dry stream bed not too far from there upstream. All this was several months ago so details are definitely 100% reliable. Our final decision: we were not wanted there, drive to Beaver or RR. All the mystery about this place makes it hard to ignore though.

[bfishn]

Spavinaw is fed by dozens of springs along its' length, some bigger, some smaller, but no single one responsible for the bulk of flow. The dry area you encountered west of Decatur is merely a feature of a "losing" stream, the water is still there and flowing, just under the rocks and out of sight.

I sure understand the feeling of being unwanted there. When I lived near Gravette in the '80s, some of the LW crossings and bridges were my go to spots for creek minnows for bait. After the trout were stocked and the signs and ringed trees proliferated, I won't even stop along the road anymore.

[1969Larson]

That's how I understand it, but to establish this "recreational use" for navigability, I believe you have to establish that it has been used for canoeing, kayaking, fishing, etc. for some time. If someone put their mind to it, and could dig up the proof - some photos, a mounted 8-lb rainbow trout, witnesses such as canoe rental business owners, bait shop owners, etc., then you could probably argue this in court. But first... I think there has to be a court case and someone with "standing", meaning someone has to have charges brought against them so there is something to defend against. Any volunteers? IF so, I'll take the stand as a witness to having used this awesome navigable waterway recreation-ally from 1996 - 2000.