Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 38

Thread: killing rainbows..

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    maryville
    Posts
    546

    Default killing rainbows..

    So I was wondering today as I drove up the road at tremont... They used chemicals to kill the rainbows that werent shocked and moved or caught in the catch out up at lynn camp, but how far down from the sascades did that chemical kill the fish?

    Now for any of who say that the stream below the falls wasn't affected I have to say you are wrong.. And Im not debating the restocking of lynn camp. However, if there wasn't non diluted killing chemical just above the cascades then rainbows would have been left to reproduce... so just above the falls there had to have been adequate chemical to kill the fish, now the cascades aren't that big, so the chances of the chemical becoming harmless from the top of them to the bottom of them is slim to none... So, how far down the middle prong did we lose trout? Im sure it wasn't an extremely long distance, but Id love to know..

    Have any of you fished just below the cascades since the kill?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Crossville, TN
    Posts
    2,397

    Default

    Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe a buffer was put in the water below the cascades when the poison arrived from upstream. The buffer countered the poison making it harmless to anything further downstream...Shouldn't have lost many if any fish below there...
    "Then He said to them, 'Follow Me, and I will make you fishers of men.'" Matthew 4:19

    Guided Fly Fishing with David Knapp
    The Trout Zone Blog
    contact: TroutZoneAnglers at gmail dot com

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    maryville
    Posts
    546

    Default

    wow, that would be awsome! I had not heard that, but it sure makes good sense...just add something to neutralize thee killing agent in the waters that were not intended to be affected. I hope that was the case!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Andersonville, TN
    Posts
    682

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Plateau Angler View Post
    Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe a buffer was put in the water below the cascades when the poison arrived from upstream. The buffer countered the poison making it harmless to anything further downstream...Shouldn't have lost many if any fish below there...
    PA, there was a buffer at the base of the falls.
    Jason

    jasonkelkins at yahoo dot com

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Maryville, TN
    Posts
    740

    Default

    If the cascades we are talking about here is the big one about a quarter mile up the middle prong trail then no one could fish below it since that water all the way down to where the trail starts is closed I think right?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,329

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Plateau Angler View Post
    Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe a buffer was put in the water below the cascades when the poison arrived from upstream. The buffer countered the poison making it harmless to anything further downstream...Shouldn't have lost many if any fish below there...
    I think this is right. I know they use a blocker with rotanone (sp?), but not sure if they used that chemical or something else on this project.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Rock Hill, SC
    Posts
    992

    Default

    waterwolf--The chemical is antimycin, I believe. I'm not a scientist but do have to wonder if it is possible to render harmless, completely and irrevocably, something which is deadly above a waterfall after it drops down below the cascade.
    I very much want specks to return, but I've always had some (make that considerable) reservations about killing other wild fish to restore them.
    What I find really interesting, and no one seems to have a real explanation, is that mountain trout have, on their own and in my lifetime, expanded their range appreciably in some streams such as Straight Fork and Beech Flats Prong. This expansion has had nothing to do with management by man, although you have to figure that the best qualified of all fisheries biologists, nature, has figured in the equation in a significant way.
    Jim Casada
    www.jimcasadaoutdoors.com

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Knoxville, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,550

    Smile We really need more math and science in opur schools

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Casada View Post
    The chemical is antimycin, I believe. I'm not a scientist but do have to wonder if it is possible to render harmless, completely and irrevocably, something which is deadly above a waterfall after it drops down below the cascade.
    Jim Casada
    www.jimcasadaoutdoors.com
    That chemistry is hard to explain to the mountain folk

    http://www.nps.gov/grsm/naturescienc...ntimycin05.pdf

    Bottom line is if you see the color change - it's neutralized

    While I have seen many people complain about the use, I have never read anything credible (able to pass peer review) to convince me otherwise, other than the fact that in the past much worse things were used that killed the insects, etc

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Rock Hill, SC
    Posts
    992

    Default

    duckypaddler--Your post reads (at least to this one example of mountain folk) as if antimycin doesn't kill insects. It is my understanding that it pretty well wipes out everything in a stream (crayfish, spring lizards, as we mountain folks call salamanders, Devil's knitting needles, a.k.a. know as snake feeders, and insects in general. Is that a misconception? Also, I mentioned some of the inhabitants of mountain streams by their colloquial names just to make a point that we mountain folk, say what you will about our lack of scientific understanding, have a real knack for using descriptive terms. Even the slowest of woods colts would know that (and if you know what a woods colt is I'll give you full marks, betting, as I mention the term, that there are those of lurk in these precincts who will know).
    Jim Casada
    www.jimcasadaoutdoors.com

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Andersonville, TN
    Posts
    682

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by waterwolf View Post
    I think this is right. I know they use a blocker with rotanone (sp?), but not sure if they used that chemical or something else on this project.
    I couldn't think of the name the other day but it was Rotenone.
    Jason

    jasonkelkins at yahoo dot com

Similar Threads

  1. Rainbows in the CNF
    By Stana Claus in forum Tennessee Trout Streams and Tailwaters
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-13-2013, 08:46 PM
  2. O.K..... had another day this week and Rainbows it was!!!
    By Breck in forum In The Backcountry
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-15-2012, 09:37 PM
  3. Killing Lake Trout
    By Varmitcounty in forum Fly Fishing for Trout in Other States
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-09-2012, 09:48 PM
  4. rainbows and browns on the Little
    By 2weightfavorite in forum Smoky Mountain Fishing
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-20-2010, 09:42 PM
  5. the wait is killing me
    By big irish in forum New Members Board
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-20-2006, 05:50 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •