Not Good News as to the Health of the Rivers

[Crippled Caddis]

John wrote:

<I was also amazed by the raw honesty in Davy's post.>

It does represent a 'turning of the worm' within the guide community. But apparently you too have recognized it as indicated by your activities on other waters. I feel it wise of you to steal a march on others by transferring a segment of your trips to waters with a better future.

<I also feel that there are possibly more problems than we can handle. At the present, it looks like a bleak future for our fishery.>

I'm going to use your statement to point out a few disagreeable facts John. Please, under no circumstance should you feel it a reflection or attack on you. You have quite obviously taken a peek into the future and recognized the truth in the matter. Your post has merely given me entre' to shine some light on a sore subject.

There are two organizations that have failed their own goals and their duty to the resource in the case of the Norfork. Both have inescapably reminded me of 60s era 'love children' sitting around a campfire holding hands and chanting woefully about the inequities of the world rather than taking up the cudgel and doing something of substance.

Under the leadership of Chuck Davidson the North Arkansas Flyfishers was a pro-active group that was very effective in various activities that both bettered as well as defended our waters. Their current newsletter effusively praising the foot-dragging response from ADEQ in the Overlook Estates fiasco tells better than I how effective the club is in this era.

But the Friends of the Rivers seem the poster child for fraternizing with the enemy as they pursue a course of 'co-operative effort' with the Corp of Engineers and Southwest Power. Those two entities ARE the enemies of our tailwaters and they will be very happy indeed to sit around coffee klatching and smoozing with any group while they continue to bring down ruin on the fisheries. They will hold 'meetings' and do 'studies' forever if allowed to. While decimating the resource. The only thing that will change their policies are court orders with teeth in them. In short the only thing they understand is "Sue the bas**rds". Anyone who thinks otherwise is woefully ignorant of their history or, at best, simply disengenuous.

After editing I find myself hoping you're not associated with either group John.;o)

[Crippled Caddis]

Hey Crip.

Send a link to this thread to Joanne the staff writer.

Hey Dano! Can you do that? Sounds like an excellent idea to me.

[Danoinark]

Yep, done.....

[Davy Wotton]

Hi guys,

My original post as read here was in response to another post that grossly exaggerated the real situation here on the White and Norfork rivers, frankly l have no time for that kind of BS or any other that in some way promotes a belief that all is well and we have rivers swarming with trophy fish.

As many of us know, that is far from the truth.

I was not fishing here in the hay days. But many of my friends were. Such stories have been told of the fish that were found here in those times.

No doubt the issues of water quality were not then as they are now, neither was the pressure of fishing through the 100 miles system as it is now.

Interesting that the record Bow for the White was caught way below Calico at that time.

As the now President of the Friends of the Norfork National Fish Hatchery, l have had plenty of opportunity to discuss with Ken the manager ,how the hatchery was managed in the past, which interested me, such as the stocking policies by fish weight or numbers way back.

Which by to days numbers were way less.

I have in my life time seen the demise and the resurrection of fisheries to become what they are to day, and l have also seen waters l used to fish disappear for ever, due to water abstraction.

And l know many of you who read this would have also, be they warm or cold water environments.

On the other side of the coin we also have man made environments that are stable and those that are not.

And the essence of that is due to having both good water quality, a sufficient food base and regulations related to conservation in which ever direction they are required for all species that thrive within that environment.

The sad state of affairs here for the White river system is that the causes of the problems are well known, they did not appear last year, with the exception for the past few years of didy. Despite one individual who maintains it was here 20 odd years ago. It was not. There may well have been some other algae on the substrate, but it was not didy, for if it was the effects would have been well documented and known about way back.

It will be very interesting to see the outcome in the law courts so far as the Overlook estates issue is concerned. Will he be made to pay, who knows at this point in time, that remains to be seen.

In so far as the rivers suffering from the continual effects of bad water quality, here again l fail to understand why, given that the folks at AGFF are well aware of the situation why something is not done in some way to correct the problems, other than l realise the political BS and all else that is related.

Something is screwed up here when you think about it.

Chain of command, who gives a s---, deal with it by what ever means is necessary, at what ever the cost is.

If this is considered to be, which it is, a valuable resorce for tourist and community activty.

W

[Davy Wotton]

Lost my post.Continued.

Why on earth is something not being done.

Why should it be that concerned citizens have to front organizations to bring the issues to public attention, and even then what percentage of the public at large really does care.

I know l have said this before and l will say it again. Remove from the Rivers all fish stocked within the past 6 months and see what you have left.

You will have a rude awakening, certainly there will be some fish out there, but bear in mind, at least for the BSD tailwater and Norfork we are talking some 100 miles or more of water.

What are we left with, 2/3/4 100 fish per mile !!

A good fishery would be well able to support 3000 or more per mile, in some cases 4 to 6000.

That number of fish could not sustain long term life here. It is the constant harvesting and restocking that largely maintains the fishery, at least so far as making it worth while to go fish and cast a fly or by what ever else means you choose to fish.

It is unable to sustain good fish growth and long term survival, at least for the Bows, we all know that a large Brown can use the food base of stocked trout, they are the minority by far.

For myself, not only have l made a living from fly fishing for near on 40 years, l also have great concernes for the enviroment that those fish need to survive within.

Like l say, it is a sad state of affairs, and to say the least the approach to deal with the on going decline is pathetic. At least that is the way l see it at this time, at least so far as water quality issues are concerned. Certainly we have some forward direction so far as developers are concerned, it remains to be seen the out come.

Davy.

http://davywotton.com

[Davy Wotton]

Just had my friend here Kelley Galloup, he reminded me of something l had forgot.

Fishing by rod and line and by legal methods is not the reason for the demise of the fish species for the body of water in question if it has the resources of water quality, food base and means to allow those fish to propagate and survive.

It may well of course reduce the numbers of fish !! But it will not wipe them out total.

Davy.

[Snow Fly]

Dano/Davey:

Is there Didymo in the Norfork tailwaters? If so what should fishermen do to keep from carrying Didymo to other waters?

I started to fish Norfork tailwaters about 6 years ago with a group of 7 that hits the tailwaters for 5 days every year. I love these waters as if I lived next to them. It hurts me to read about Overlook Estates and the damage it has {continues} caused to this fishery.

Now there seems to be many other issues which over the years have finally started to show up in this fishery. How Sad!!!

[Davy Wotton]

Sadly that is the truth of the matter.

The incidence of didy is not so apparent at Norfork, and to be honest here it is only the upper sections of the White below BSD for around 20 miles that it is a problem.

By far the trophy zone at BSD has the worst incidence.

So far as what you can do to avoid spreading this, very little to be honest.

I cannot for one do much about the fact that l trailer my boat from one river to the other and move possible contamination from one system to the other.

It can attach to the trailer for one when l leave the White, and then float free again when l use it at the Norfork ramp.

It would largely enter the river from Norfork lake to start with.

But you can of course, after fishing and when you get home wash off your waders and net. And allow for them to dry off.

At least you are one of those that does have some consideration for the issues we have here, many thanks.

Davy.

[Danoinark]

Snowfly

As Davy says hot soapy water seems to be the best. Wash down your wading boots and waders especially. Not much else is effective. I have heard a diluted solution of bleach is good but I am not sure I would use that on waders. Dano

[RiverRunner]

I started fishing the Little Red more this year and it reminds me of what the White & Norfork once were. Fat, healthy fish, and an abundance of forage and aquatic vegetation. It seems more of the fish in the White & Norfork that I've caught recently are mainly the silver fresh stockers instead of the brightly colored fish that have had some time in the river. Like someone was telling me yesterday, the powers that be just don't know (or care) how fragile this resource is. I just hope its not too late to do something to save it.