View Single Post
  #27  
Old 01-08-2010, 02:13 PM
JoeFred's Avatar
JoeFred JoeFred is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Russellville, TN
Posts: 949
Default Risk of increased poaching?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Plateau Angler View Post

...I really like where you (PeteCz) said that maybe some streams should be mentioned while others are kept quiet. Streams like Little River, the Clinch, South Holson, Watauga, and Caney are not some well-kept secret. On the other hand, small streams in the park are easy to poach and mentioning them on the internet just gives dishonest anglers the idea to go catch a bunch of specs. I've talked to people that have all kinds of stories about poaching brookies out park streams....

...If I'm fishing a Little River trib somewhere upstream of Elkmont, I'll simply say I was fishing above Elkmont. This is plenty of information and if someone really wants to explore for themselves they can...
Having re-read David's and others' posts, I'm having some misgivings about continuing my Back of Beyond Streams Log project as-is if this type publicity might lead to increased poaching. Take, for example, the Little River tribs I list upstream of Elkmont (Fish Camp Pr, Grouse Cr, Kawahi Br, Meigs Post Pr, Rich Br & Rough Cr). If I were to log someone having caught a spec, etc., on one of them, would that increase the risk of the stream being poached? Should perhaps certain of these steams be omitted from the log? (My policy is to not include in the log the reported number or size or fish caught nor to divulge any particular stretch of a stream fished.)

2/1/10 Update
I've decide to postpone this idea indefinitely.
__________________
“Joe” Fred Turner :: SaintClairMapping.com

Last edited by JoeFred; 04-07-2010 at 12:12 AM..
Reply With Quote