Home Register Today's Posts Members User CP Calendar FAQ

Go Back   Little River Outfitters Forum > Fly Fishing Board > Fisheries Management & Biology

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-07-2010, 07:40 PM
GrouseMan77's Avatar
GrouseMan77 GrouseMan77 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Andersonville, TN
Posts: 681
Default Rainbows in Lynn Camp

http://www.wbir.com/news/local/story...123624&catid=2

I got to help out the fisheries department last Wednesday. It didn't go to well. We got rained out and only had time to shock up one of the two scheduled sections.

In that one section, we got four rainbows up, two male and two female. The fish looked very healthy, one was 12" and another was 14". Mr. Moore and Mr. Kulp were not present that day. One of the other guys mentioned that someone might have brought the bows in. I was astonished and could not believe that some idiot would undermined countless hours of physical labor and thousands of dollars because they like fishing for rainbows in a particular section of stream. Imagine having a stream where 12" brookies could be caught.

Mr. Moore is now stating that he also feels that someone is playing "bucket biologist". If that is the case, I really hope that the "sportsman" that is responsible gets caught. What a piece of trash.
__________________
Jason

jasonkelkins at yahoo dot com

Last edited by GrouseMan77; 06-07-2010 at 07:56 PM.. Reason: Angry
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-07-2010, 08:03 PM
Jim Casada Jim Casada is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Rock Hill, SC
Posts: 992
Default

Jason--How far above the barrier (waterfall) were the rainbows? While obviously they have the ability to move upstream if a bucket biologist planted them, it is unlikely they would cover much water if they found things suitable low down. In other words, I am wondering if it is possible that it wasn't bucket biology but fish which were somehow not killed.
That happened, and in a big way, in Indian Creek (the N. C. one that feeds Deep Creek) back in the late 1960s or early 1970s. It was a different scenario in some ways--rotenone (I think) rather than antimycin--but I can see what happened there being possible today. The problem in Indian Creek, almost certainly, was that some tiny branches which fed the creek had wee 'bows in them. They just moved downstream into bigger water and within two or three years Indian Creek was back just like it had been; namely, a stream full of smallish rainbows.
I've also read or heard of other possibilities, such as egg migration on the legs of wading or fish-eating birds, but to me that seems unlikely.
There's no doubt bucket biology has taken place in the Park in the past, with Abrams Creek and browns being a prime example. As those who have read my book carefully realize, I've always harbored some skepticism about the efficacy of speckled trout restoration (just can't bring myself to use the B word). However, no one would be more tickled than me to see things back to the kind of situation my 100-year-old father talks about, when there were specks everywhere until a given stream was logged, and when he once saw a speck frozen in a block of ice with red spots on it almost the size of a dime. I've actually seen such fish, but they were in Labrador.
If it is bucket biology, it would be wonderful to catch the perpetrator(s) and punish them to the maximum extent possible.
I've read some other information about the recent survey on Lynn Camp Prong--I gather precious few specks were found, especially new recruits, and if so that's a huge setback. Has anyone heard anything recently about Bear Creek and the restoration there?
Jim Casada
www.jimcasadaoutdoors.com
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-07-2010, 08:14 PM
GrouseMan77's Avatar
GrouseMan77 GrouseMan77 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Andersonville, TN
Posts: 681
Default

Jim - The bows were a few hundred meters upstream of the Panther Creek Trail junction.
__________________
Jason

jasonkelkins at yahoo dot com
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-07-2010, 09:27 PM
Jim Casada Jim Casada is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Rock Hill, SC
Posts: 992
Default

Jason--Thanks, and that's not necessarily good news at all. That's an appreciable distance above the cascades, farther than I would have thought it likely for "bucket biology" rainbows to have migrated when there's plenty of fine water lower down. On the flip side of the coin, I don't think a bucket biologist would do illegal stocking while making that long a trip or, for that matter, that trout would survive after that long a hike.
A bit more heartening is that there were only four of them. How long a section of stream did you survey. If there were four in 50 meters or so, that's a dark cloud on the Lynn Camp horizon, but if the area covered was much longer, it's a bit more heartening.
Did your group find only rainbows or were there specks? If there were no specks, there's clearly reason for significant concern.
Thanks for your fine report (and your volunteer work with the Park).
Jim Casada
www.jimcasadaoutdoors.com
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-07-2010, 09:36 PM
GrouseMan77's Avatar
GrouseMan77 GrouseMan77 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Andersonville, TN
Posts: 681
Default

Jim - The section that we were working is four feet from the trail and the trail gets a lot of horse traffic. It would be easy. I can't recall exactly how long the sampled section was but the rainbows were somewhat clumped up in the last third. There were some specs in the group...around 10 if memory serves correct. Anywhere from about an 1" to around 7".
__________________
Jason

jasonkelkins at yahoo dot com
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-07-2010, 10:45 PM
Crockett Crockett is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Maryville, TN
Posts: 700
Default

I saw the story tonight on WBIR. The reporters and officials were insisting that the big rainbows they found were brought in there by someone. My first thoughts were that they just missed some bows somehow when running the poison because it's an aweful lot of water up there it could happen. Seems kind of odd that someone would plant bows in this stream so soon after the project completed and many years before it would even be open to fishing. There are lots of other brookie streams that are already open to fishing they could have "hit" if that was the case. The guy on the news actually said that "someone was planting rainbows so they could come up here and fish for them illegally". I thought that was pretty strange too since there are plenty of spots to fish for bows legally why would someone go through all that trouble. Anyway Jason thanks for your volunteer work with the park. I hope this turns out to not be as bad as it sounds.
__________________
Adam Beal

http://gosmokies.knoxnews.com/profil...=2hvzainc23h5b

Hey Jack (JAB)...
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-08-2010, 07:15 AM
Jim Casada Jim Casada is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Rock Hill, SC
Posts: 992
Default

Jason--Thanks. I hadn't thought about transport by horse, although it is an obvious possibility. I really wish the Park would ban use of horses, although I know just saying that will raise some hackles. Yet anyone who spends much time in the Park has to recognize the undeniable fact that horses do considerable damage, especially on steep trails. There are places, especially on the Tennessee side of the Park, where horses have turned high elevation trails into gullies. Then there's the stink and general mess in horse camps.
At least you find a few specks, and the fact that some were tiny suggests at least a bit of population recruitment. That being said, the overall scenario doesn't look good.
Jim Casada
www.jimcasadaoutdoors.com
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-08-2010, 10:12 AM
Grannyknot's Avatar
Grannyknot Grannyknot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Knoxville, TN
Posts: 810
Default

I think that horses have been "grandfathered in" to the park, in respects to trail rights, because of their initial help in the construction of trails and bridges, or so I have been told.

I agree that they damage trails, streams, & campsites, although I won't place any additional blame on them for trash being left in the woods, as I have been extremely disappointed at the amount of trash i've seen on foot traffic only trails lately.

I'm sorry that Rainbows were found, again, in Lynn Camp. Thanks to everyone who has done work throughout the years in an effort to restore our native fish species. Hopefully everything will work out as planned in the end.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-08-2010, 12:08 PM
Jim Casada Jim Casada is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Rock Hill, SC
Posts: 992
Default

Grannyknot--Interestingly, over the years, I have gotten different explanations as Park officials attempted to justify allowing extensive use of trails by horses. I've heard the explanation you offer, one to the effect that locals had traditionally used horses (only marginally valid but there's some truth to it), and even suggestions they did no more damage than humans (which is unmitigated hogwash).
One explanation which was never offered, but there's appreciable truth in it, is that no one in a position of authority has had the intestinal fortitude to stand up to a pretty powerful lobby which includes some political bigwigs (same sort of situation which left "summer retreats" for the rich and influential intact, let politically powerful folks stay at the Calhoun House on Hazel Creek, and the like). Another thing which frosts my grits is the tremendous amount of noise pollution from motorcycles. There are places you can be five or six miles from a roadway and hear them.
In truth, it's a balancing act for bureaucrats, but they have long turned a blind eye to the deleterious impact of horses.
Jim Casada
www.jimcasadaoutdoors.com
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06-08-2010, 10:12 PM
ZachMatthews ZachMatthews is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 93
Send a message via AIM to ZachMatthews
Default

I gather that the "other identifying characteristics" referred to in the news report were probably concrete-scraped pectorals. While larger trout do suffer the effects of antimycin or rotenone poisoning more slowly, I find it really hard to believe that a fourteen incher would have gone unnoticed by previous shocking crews (unless this was the first time this stream was shocked)?

It's doubly distressing in that it is now June, and that sexually mature rainbow may already have spawned. I am sure Steve and his crew are just sick about this.

My solution to horse traffic is more pragmatic: (1) make them wear bags like the horse taxis have to in every major city (that will cut down on the besmeared trails) and (2) limit them to a handful of routes. They may already have regs on that; I have never tried horsebacking a trail.

As far as stupidity goes, I saw a study the other day. On one wall of a building, researchers posted a sign saying "Please do not write on this wall." On the other they wrote "Writing on this wall is FORBIDDEN!" No one wrote on the first wall; the second got graffitied heavily. Some people will do a thing just because they've been told not to.

Zach
__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:32 AM.



Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.