Not Good News as to the Health of the Rivers

[Crippled Caddis]

Davy wrote:

<Motor or chain, either way both do have a downside.>

The solution seems obvious from my perspective but I'll bet it would be about as well recieved as was Chucks no chain dragging initiative.

Simply make it law that 2 cycle outboards cannot be used on the river along with imposing the anti chain dragging ban.

Make the no chains effective immediately and allow a 5 year moratorium on the motors to give guides and docks the opportunity to amortize their investments. At the end of the moratorium only 4 cycle motors allowed on the tailwaters in the White river system.

While it would discommode some and they would scream like a pig caught in the gate they would ultimately benefit by the improved health of the aquatic ecosystem. As would we all. CC

[Crippled Caddis]

Made my first trip to the White twenty five years and I made my last one five years ago. The White just isnt the same river it once was----It could also be natural decline over time. Table Rock, LOZ, and Bull Shoals arent what they used to be either.

Everyone seems to pass lightly over the fact that a lake is a settling basin in the effect it has on the river. In operation it is little different than a settling basin in a sewage plant. It filters out the chemicals, pesticides, fertilizers, heavy metals and other man-made as well as natural sediments. The lakes in the White River system are getting old. Norfork is over 60 years old, backed up behind a dam that was engineered for 50 years. Bull Shoals is slightly, very slightly, younger as are the other dams in the system. Is it then any wonder that the lakebeds might well be extremely toxic by this stage? I have enquired of the biological staff of both AGFC & ADEQ if there has been any studies conducted on the lake sediments to determine toxicity to no avail. All say none have been made. I find that passing strange. Without a baseline of water quality how are they to manage the fisheries for maximum benefit to the sportsman and the taxpayers of the state of Arkansas? Reason dictates that waters passing over and through toxic sediments has to pick up a part of that toxicity. The cold, clear waters issuing from the dams cannot be considered pristine at this point. I am left to wonder if it can even be considered safe to drink after processing. One even wonders about wet wading in light of all the insults to the land in the past 6 decades. CC

[Davy Wotton]

Two stroke motors are no longer produced as of about 2 yrs ago. I would buy a 4 to morrow if they allowed for a shallow water drive system which the 2 stroke does.

Navigation on the river without that is not at all easy to say the least when we have low water flows.

So far as jets are concerned l have no use for those either way too noisy, very limited degree of manouverability when running at low speeds.

And they cause way more damage to the substrate than a chain due to the fact they draw water in and push it out, and that includes vegetation and gravel.

In fact they will quit on you at times because of that.

In the event they did ban chains on the White, l would not protest that.

So far as the vegetation from BSD down. Certainly at the dam zone it is sparse, as you move downstream gastons zone you will see way better.

The sections below Cotter to Crooked creek do contain very good vegetation. From there to Norfork there is little. From there on down not too bad. More so moss covered rock and not dense weed growth.

More or less from Redds down to Sylamore you will have both large expanses of gravel and sections that do have good vegetation.

Certainly from CC down to Norfork there is a great deal of substrate movement that would preclude good hold for vegetation.Blame the gravle mining for that one, and of course natural run off from the Buffalo.

In so far as its comparison of the past, wish l knew that one myself Tom.

Davy.

[RiverRunner]

It would be nice if Mercury would use the same shallow water drive on their 4 strokes as they do the 2-stroke 9.9 & 15. I have a 15 merc that is 10 years old and I hate to look down at the oil slick that thing puts out at times, but the shallow water drive is unmatched as far as I'm concerned. As far as drag chains, it wouldn't bother me that much if they are banned. I use a bow mounted trolling motor on the Norfork and I could do the same on the White.

I fish the Norfork to Calico section more than any other and I think that there was more vegetation in the river last year than usual, due to the lower flows, and I do think that it helped the fish somewhat. The fish I caught there looked better than other areas of the White. But there are long areas of flat gravel bottom that are devoid of vegetation and fish holding structure in that area, esp just above and below Red's.

[Fox Statler]

I would like to clear up some misconceptions about some things said on this forum on the fate of the White River system.

First the Corp of Engineers and the Southwest Power Commission are not really the enemy. They did not create the problems with our water quality, and Minimum Flow will not solve the problem either. MF just puts more bad water into a good river. The more water that is run carries the pollution downstream further into the areas that are least affected by pollution now. We can improve our rivers by passing better water standards and inforcing them. The COE and SWPC won't care at all if we do this because it will not affect them.

The AG&FC can't solve the water quality either. You can urinate in the river while they are checking your license and they can't arrest you. If they won't arrest you because they would have to arrest Forrest L. Wood for letting his cows dung in our rivers.

The ADEQ would like to solve our water quality problems, but every law that they suggest to be passed on upgrading our water standards must be approved by the Evironmental Pollution Control Commission. The EPCC is 13 people that are appointed by our governor and don't know a rat's butt about fisheries, biology, or water quality. All they care about is the dollar bill. Just think how many land developers are helping hold up anything being done on Overlook Estates.

Your greatest enemy is the cattle grows, chicken producing companies, land developers, construction companies, and the realator association. Minimum Flow was financed by these people and companies. It is called "Pollution Dilution" instead of Minimun Flow. Several of my articles on the pollution problem were pulled because the paper would have all of their "full page ads". Guess who buys those??

The River can totally die. First there will be cyclic die-offs (like we are having now), then there will be steady die-offs (more and more fish dying every day) which we are seeing a little of now, then finally we will see repeated crashes of the ecosystem and massive die-offs.

What are the tattle-tail signs of the total demise of our rivers. The largest fish of all species will die first except for the meat eaters like the browns. Because there are more suckers in the river than trout, large suckers will be the first to die. Suckers do not, I repeat, do not eat weeds and scum. Suckers eat the same things that trout do, nymphs, snails, worms, small fish and so on. Our large suckers will be the first species to have massive die-offs because of the lack of food and the poor water quality. Then our trout are next. If you think that we will always have fish in these river I suggest you visit the Illinois River Drainage downstream from Washington County, Arkansas. Some areas are so decimated that nothing, not even leeches or worms, live in the stream.

How bad are the rivers. Dano's nose told us, they stink. They stink of sulfur and ammonia. When the rocks are dry they are white for all the phosphate. When you wade wet you get a rash on your skin. Our midges are getting smaller and smaller. An acidic environment kills midges and ours are dying. Our right-opening snails are all dead. Every bug we have are disappearing. This is more evident because of the negative and extremely low growth rates or our trout. Sure we are going to have some big brown because they don't live on bugs. They are carnivors and eat other fish. But small browns don't eat all meat, they need bugs to survive. So our population of browns will become very high ended with large fish and no small fish. This will last until the big ones are killed and caught out.

Every month I get a letter or a call from an organization that wants to help guide us with making our water better. They will lead us in our fight. But lets get it straight right now, we will have to sue the state of Arkansas, maybe Missouri and several cities to force them to raise their fertilizer, chemical hazard, and effluent standards. We should be joining Oklahoma right now in there lawsuit against the chickem produces, the phamacutical and chemical producers. I am sure that I have just put half of you back into denial because of this paragraph. I am sure you are not willing to sue, but it is the only way to save the lakes that will save our rivers. We have to save the lakes then the rivers will come back to what they once were. We can't save the rivers unless we improve the source water and that is our lakes.

Fox Statler

[Davy Wotton]

Fox,

I do not disagree with anything you have stated here, as l have seen same results in other places, along with water abstraction being consequential to the demise of a fishery.

And l for one am very well aware of the long term consequences to this fishery as it stands now.

However, the questions begs to be asked. I am all in favor of setting up some kind of organisation and l know many others also who would be well involved.

The reality is, at least the way l see it as of now, is that such a organisation would have to have considerable funds to be able to proceed with

a law suit, lawyers cost money as you well know.

OK, that said. If you were your self in a position to forward such a law suit, how would you propose to do it ?

There is also one other question l would like to know the answer to, if there is one.

We all know that AGFC are well aware of the situation here, and they do make public the fact that there is a decline with fish growth in this system

As a State organised body as such, why do they themselves not seek via the legal channels to enforce EPCC to do something.

I am well aware of the fact the the standards for water quality here in AR are way less than OK.

But am not aware of what exactly they are and how they are related to animal waste, as a example.

Does AGFC themselves just accept the situation as it is or not.

Davy.

[tippett]

Davy and others commented on ADEQ and Ark GF which are State Run agencies. What I think is the Federal Govt has been given way to much power to regulate not only our waters but just about everything else that is Public. State Govt has sold us out for $$$.

The Norfork and White Rivers are owned by the People of Arkansas. Business, guides, outfitters, bankers etc, have got to understand that it will take some money and political influence over our State and Federal officials to get anything done.

Army Corp and SWPA are large bureucratic agencies with pertinant mission statments. They don't care about the health of the river or the number of fish within it. There concern is either flood controll or hydroelectricity. The statement I heard regarding Studies etc, is true. These agencies will study your butt to death, the love to look like the guy helping you but really it just gives them more money to burn as well as maintaining a power position.

The agricultural business have their "dung" in together. They have a very strong lobby which is well greased. Water quality has to come from the State first and then the EPA. If ADEQ isn't properly motivated, the EPA won't be either. I would suggest that all of the busnisses who depend on the water sources get with their local state representative for this area. If he or she sees that you have a strong coalition who VOTE they will get your message. This is strictly politics and politics is a dirty business. The one who threatens, spends, votes and minupulates Wins.

I have said enough. But if you really want things to change you can't talk about it you have to do something about it.

Stinnetti/Tippett

[Fox Statler]

Dano & Tippet,

Anyone can sue for better water standards and cleanup monies under the Clean Water Act. You cannot sue for personal gain like monies because your business failed.

Their are lawyers that might take a case like this "pro bono". Lets face it, if they win anything at all, the advertisement from this would be worth more than gold.

When I started out I was contacted by the Waterkeeper Alliance. They have about 129 group and they have 129 success stories. Everything from the Hudson River to small no-name streams. Lakes, bay, any kind of water they are involved with. The two basic requirements are: one, you have to buy the right to use the their name (about $250)and two, you must employ a full time waterkeeper. In our area because of all of the retired people, getting a waterkeeper may cost no more than his monthly gas.

Don't expect any department of the State of Arkansas to come to our aid or to solve any of these problems. They are in someone's pocket. They are owned by the polluters of this state. They are the ones that financed Minimum Flow and the White River Siphon. As far as getting our politicians involved - forget it - until it becomes popular and advantageous to them to join us they won't be there. Marty Davenport is one such example. His "Chicken dung Exemption Law' for Crooked Creek is killing that stream quickly. His law is polluting the water supply for every community in that is in it's drainaage and it won't be long that these communities will turn into another Praire Grove, Arkansas. But Marty Davenport is in the pocket of the chicken producers and likes it. I am sure they pay him well.

Maybe it is time to see if the resort owner association, chamber of commerce, and others are concerned yet.

[Crippled Caddis]

Wow! Just let me go to bed early one time and look what happens.

Fox wrote:

<But lets get it straight right now, we will have to sue the state of Arkansas, maybe Missouri and several cities to force them to raise their fertilizer, chemical hazard, and effluent standards. We should be joining Oklahoma right now in there lawsuit against the chickem produces, the phamacutical and chemical producers. I am sure that I have just put half of you back into denial because of this paragraph. I am sure you are not willing to sue, but it is the only way to save the lakes that will save our rivers. We have to save the lakes then the rivers will come back to what they once were. We can't save the rivers unless we improve the source water and that is our lakes.>

And that, my friends, is the true bottom line.

Fox is 100% correct. Without clean water ALL else becomes moot. And so long as the industries he listed have powerful lobbies and politicians in their pocket the waters of the state will continue to decline. Both ADEQ & AGFC biologists know what the problem is and would do something about it were they not shackled by politics. The ultimate answer I think has to lie in a Political Action Coalition composed of every organized group in the state interested in clean water. Until a charismatic leader emerges that isn't going to happen.

Where is that leader?

[RiverRunner]

I have to agree with Fox on this one for sure. You only have to drive from Yellville to Harrison and see all of the recently constructed chicken houses and cleared land for cattle production to see who the real enemy of clean water in Arkansas is. Clean water and agriculture can co-exist, but they cannot under current regulations. The corporate farming lobby has every politician for the most part under their control. This is a result of arcane laws that allow corporate interests to "own" members of the legislature. So someone like Mr. Davenport is not really a representative of the people of his district in Marion county but a representative of big poultry and cattle interests that will fight tooth and nail to keep from having to do anything that will cut into their bottom line, such as proper disposal of chicken and cattle waste.

Some people and politicians who do not care about our fisheries will simply say that the White is a stocked system and that if their is a die off they will simply stock more fish. While I disagree with that statement, it is at least headed in the direction of some kind of truth. Crooked Creek however is a completely natural system that should be a jewel for the state of Arkansas. It is (and has been) an excellent smallmouth stream with national acclaim. It is a darn shame that the people who could care less and doing the most damage are those who own it banks and watershed and only think of it as a sewer ditch or source of cheap gravel. Arkansas is my home, and I love Arkansas, but the actions of my fellow residents and elected officials infuriate me when it comes to the way our natural resources are used and abused for the sake of the almighty dollar. Like was mentioned before, we need leadership on this issue, from people who are respected in the community and whose fortunes depend on clean waters and a healthy fishery.

Good to have you chiming in on this Fox, your reputation on these matters precedes you.