Home QLinks New Posts Members User CP Calendar FAQ

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #111  
Old 02-12-2007, 11:15 PM
RuningWolf's Avatar
RuningWolf RuningWolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 147
Wink RF some answers and additional thoughts pt 1

RF

Do not take this reply as directed at you, it is not, nor is it directed at anyone on this board. It is thoughts in general incorporated in with some answers to questions you asked and a few other thoughts

If you want to change the rules for my back yard you need to do so based on fact not on what is perceived or desired by others, especially a minority. Lots of political implications there as well. A lot of problems in doing any work in the watershed were a result of overzealous special regs. It hurt conservation efforts and created an unneeded atmosphere of mistrust. That is a long story and not for today or the board. There is too much potential for he said she said that would only open old wounds or poor salt in them.

First it is called catch and harvest and is legal, by applying the same logic to rhetoric we can come up with release and kill or release and maim. Maiming occurs because of the high incidence of injures from hooks. A study of this issue can be found here http://www.absc.usgs.gov/research/Fi...nd_release.htm

I have used 10% mortality for FF as several C&R articles I read on some prominent studies supported that figure. That is under ideal conditions.

Per the Management Alternatives Report for the Clinch River 01-04 by Phillip Bettoli, PhD hooking mortality may be as low as 3% for ideal conditions and as high as 30-50% for less than ideal For bait the ideal number was as low as 16% I did not see the high number as I just rescanned the report and did not read it all. (Very interesting it discuss the possible alternatives for the Clinch with pros and cons based on science – I recommend it for all who are interested in science based management).

Catch and Release Box Score FF:
12 trout caught, 12 trout released. Success Rate: 100% (Perfect)
Real Box Score FF:
12 trout caught, 2 trout killed. Success rate: 84% (16% mortality) note this is based on ideal conditions
(From another mortality study - sorry I have misplaced the link at the moment)




If you have a slot limit of 16-22 in which all the fish in that range is released using the above stats you can see that sizable percentage in that range that will be killed by all types of anglers. This is a size range that there is a substantial population of fish. Bait fisherman generally keep what they catch.

TWRA’s studies are done in accordance with accepted practices nation wide. What about them is a fallacy? They take a cross section across time of day, different days and parts of the river. Having fished sun up to sundown many times I can tell you the make up at one spot varies greatly throughout the day. However take a census anytime you feel like it. Now how would it be accurate as it represents one trip of a few hours duration in one spot?

There can be no clear proof of what a change will do to the economics of the area without an economic impact study. However one can draw some obvious conclusions if you take 2 miles of the public access and make it a Special Reg, say C&R you would knock out ~ 80% bait and spin fisherman from accessing it. As there are no other trout waters near by and the other 4 are already overcrowded to the point it is combat fishing. The lakes are at full pool so bank fishing is limited and with some of the wakes the boats are throwing being washed off the bank is a real possibility. Now if 200 people do this type of fishing there each week on average and 30% of them spend $15 a trip at Betty Joes whose profit from that is $5 what type of impact does that have on Betty Joes?


Suggest looking at the some rule changes

1. Once a trout is placed on a stinger he cannot be let go you kept it is part of your limit
2. Make the use of game fish as bait illegal
3. Based on some of the stocking vs catching numbers (I am not sure of other factors that may be involved here/the numbers for stocking vs total catch for the Clinch are in the Creel survey for last year I have linked many times) in conjunction with the impact of reduced creels have, perhaps the Clinch and maybe other trout fisheries would benefit from a reduced creel limit. This needs to be looked at more thoroughly and with more complete data than what I have seen. For the Clinch making the limit 6 is projected at a 4% harvest reduction, to 5 makes it 11 %, 4 reduces it 20%.

Improvements needed

1. Flows changed back to allow late afternoon access at Hwy 61 so fathers can take their children fishing there again
2. Flushing flows establish to blow silt out of the river when necessary
3. Studies to see if the new flow regime affected the spawn, if it has had a negative impact on it find away to return to the flows that promote the spawn and protect it by special rules
4. Studies to see if and what kind of spawn is occurring in all tributary streams, find the problems, then institute fixes and protect the spawn
5. Better law enforcement (A special agent for the Clinch was discussed with TWRA numerous times, the shear cost alone for training, equipment, doing it for one river an not others with the resulting increase I license fee’s could be viewed as discriminatory – if a group put up the money then there could be charges of favoritism, etc. makes it unreasonable, they had numerous other objections most where grounded in sound logic. If this is what you want take it up with them)
6. Encourage reporting of fishing violations
7. Work with local canoe groups to establish rules of etiquette for fisherman and boaters to improve better sharing of the resource
8. There is much steam bank restoration on the Clinch and along the creeks in its watershed

Questions

1. Is it more ethical to keep a fish that is not going to make it or to let it go?

2. As to the Holston it is my understanding at worse it is 19 miles and maybe as much as 26 miles of trout water. Besides the Dam and Nances Ferry there are numerous pull offs. Property could be found along this river for TWRA to develop more access well. The inveterate population is very abundant and varied. Some of the hatches of caddis and mayfly’s even in the fall have been described as being so think that it is nearly impossible to see to navigate a boat. It is expected to develop into a outstanding trout fishery. This is per a TWRA biologist. There are already many reports of 20+ in trout coming from this river. I also know other biologist who have fished the river and given similar reports.

There is no reason unless a overwhelming majority of the fishing public and residents oppose that special regs could not be applied here. There is plenty of other streams to support those who wish to harvest as well. The river is of sufficient length to support multiple types of regulations

So why not have special regs? It will encourage improvements and public access and there are plenty of other places for the harvesters to go as well

3. For those who wish total exclusionary types of rules and fishing again the Crosseyed Cricket is for sale where those types of rules will not affect the common public and those who desire them can have their own private paradise. Self policing is possiable as it is private property so rules enforcement would be fairly easy-the violator is not allowed back his membership is revoked) Is this not a win-win for all concerned as we use to say.

4. As guides are more and more on our rivers. Why should we not start pushing for a state licensing of the guides? Some states are already doing this for multiple reasons. After all if we want a tourist industry should not our guides be certified to insure the paying public is getting ethical guides, who obey the law, respect others, the fishery, etc?


5. What about the 80+% bait and spin fisherman’s license fees TWRA is not funded by state tax dollars.), his son’s, his cousins, his buddies, then is their opinions just as important as yours? Might they be of more importance, as they are more what most politicians would say constitute a super majority?

6. How many miles of artificial lure fishing is there in the state of Tenn.? What if they decided they wanted something like a bait fishing only area? Would it not be fair that they have one? After all how many miles of single hook artificial lure water is there in East Tenn? How many miles with other special regs that is exclusive of what they are looking for in a fishery? Is it not fair they should be allowed the same?


7. Should we manage everything based on what some people think is correct or science?

8. When you get down to it what is the purpose of special regs. Create bigger fish? Artificially create trophies? If the majority of the users do not want that why should it be forced down their throat?

9. How does anyone have the moral authority to impose the will of a definite minority on a definite majority? Why should the Clinch be singled out with no other available waters near by? Look at the other rivers with special regs. you had landowner and user buy in. There are adequate streams open to all types of fishing near by. There is not the case for the Clinch

http://www.state.tn.us/twra/gis/trou...routindex.html
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 02-12-2007, 11:15 PM
RuningWolf's Avatar
RuningWolf RuningWolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 147
Default RF some answers and additional thoughts pt 2

10. What is going to happen the next time TVA has to have a large release over a period of time, and the river is blown out? What about the next terrorist event that closes off the 1st mile below the dam?


11. Excluding anyone from special regs has been discussed and it was quickly put down as to much of a nightmare for law enforcement. It could also be challenged as discriminatory.

12. How can you call a fish a trophy when the size has been artificially increased by management plans? For example I deer hunt. Under the old management plan in most areas if I wanted a true trophy I went out and scouted most weekends away from the places most people hunt, which sometimes is 2-3 miles from most roads, crawl through thickets, etc. I go to extreme measures to leave no scent or do anything to spook the big boy. Finally the time to hunt arrives. I take extreme caution in going in and setting up 2-3 hrs before first light, making no noise, making sure I don’t sweat and leave a scent and going to the perfect place due to wind and other weather conditions to set up. If I do everything right I might get a shot I might not. Deer of trophy size have been hunted; they did not get this big by being stupid a real challenge. Now in some places the rules re such that artificial trophies are created, you can sit in your stand and have several 8-10-12 pt deer come by you. They have not been shot at, they have not been culled for due to their stupidly, they are not as prone to be alerted do to the scent of man or the noise you make. It is a kin to choosing your trophy at the local stock barn. Similar analogies could be drawn for fishing and are equally true. The increase in numbers artificially of trophy animals lessens the value of the trophy IMO makes them much easier to acquire. The stats show the Clinch is full of trophy fish. I see them caught on numerous occasions without special regs artificially increasing their size. Why do you want to create trophies that are meaningless to skills or the time-honored meaning of a trophy?

+++++++++++++++++++

I cannot place enough emphasis on calling the Poaching Hotline 1-800-831-1174 and report violators, suspicious behavior etc. program your cell phone, take a camera and take pics of violators anything to help TWRA’s law enforcement efforts.

I also appreciate everybody’s love of the river, we disagree on some issues, but we do all love he tailwaters and streams. My personal philosophy is there is more to fishing than just the fishing, there is much that can be done to make the area you fish in a better place bother environmentally and in dealings with fisherman of other types. The war on the Clinch between the different angling communities is old and very unproductive to relations with river residents, the different anglers and the words that are said by both groups can sometimes ruin a otherwise pleasant day.

Have a good day


PS RF you mail box is full it will not let me PM you
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 02-13-2007, 12:18 AM
Rockyraccoon's Avatar
Rockyraccoon Rockyraccoon is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Knoxville
Posts: 257
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RuningWolf View Post
4. As guides are more and more on our rivers. Why should we not start pushing for a state licensing of the guides? Some states are already doing this for multiple reasons. After all if we want a tourist industry should not our guides be certified to insure the paying public is getting ethical guides, who obey the law, respect others, the fishery, etc?
I wish! There's actually a whole lot of guides in east TN who'd love to see a guide licensing program that had requirments set to insure clients saftey and well being (CPR + First Aid + Insurance + Whitewater Rescue), Ethics (Business + river ettiquette), and resource conservation.

I know several of the folks who guide in NE Tenn and I've heard a lot of complaints about rude out of state guides, shady fly by night guides, etc. If all were required to have a license it would probably cut down on those complaints.

We're required to be permited through the forest service on the Hiwassee. They have a pretty strict set of rules we must follow as well as possesing required credentials (CPR, Insurance, First aid etc). They also have requirements that we must carry on the boat at all times.

This system has helped a lot on the Hiwassee. YEt we still see folks running pirate trips quite often.

Not sure, but I believe the GSMNP require commercial guides to be permited as well. Requirments are probably about the same.
__________________
Goo Goo Ga Choob!
Rocky Top Anglers
East Tennessee Fly Fishing Forums
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 02-13-2007, 12:38 AM
RuningWolf's Avatar
RuningWolf RuningWolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 147
Default Guides

" There's actually a whole lot of guides in east TN who'd love to see a guide licensing program that had requirments set to insure clients saftey and well being (CPR + First Aid + Insurance + Whitewater Rescue), Ethics (Business + river ettiquette), and resource conservation.

I know several of the folks who guide in NE Tenn and I've heard a lot of complaints about rude out of state guides, shady fly by night guides, etc. If all were required to have a license it would probably cut down on those complaints."


I could tell a few tales, but I won’t today.

Of all the guides I know who post here I have not seen any problems with them nor have I heard of any.

Most I have dealt with ,never fished with one but I have had many conversations both on and off the water with them are decent people. However some well maybe over a cold beer fishing one day
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 02-13-2007, 04:19 PM
RFowler RFowler is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Nomad
Posts: 240
Default

RW,
I think most legitimate guides would be all for a permit system from the state.

As far as the Clinch goes, and my own personal observations for a slot limit, no, it's not scientific but a slot has proven to be beneficial to many other waters around the country. The size range wouldn't have to be totally excluded from someones creel. How about making it one fish per day in that size range? I just hate to see a stinger full of fish in the 16-22" size range leave the river in big numbers like I've seen before.

I never said anything about closing any part of the river down to anyone.

As I said before, the Holston has thermal problems in the Fall. It's not a good candidate for special regs if most of the fish are going to die from year to year.

I guess the majority (not economically) will still dictate what the rest of us do on the Clinch. After all, they know whats best for us. I very seriously doubt the mortality rate is the same for C&R as it is for baitfishing.

Let me reiterate for anyone coming into this discussion late. I have no problems whatsoever with baitfisherman. As long as they follow the laws. I'm not bashing on anyone for their prefered method of fishing. I'm just simply trying to get a slot limit on the Clinch. One similar to the South Holston. To think it won't benefit from such a thing is a little confusing to me.

Any reg has the potential not to be honored. Dishonest people like that are going to do as they please, regardless. So I guess we souldn't even bother because of a few putz's out there?
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 02-13-2007, 04:48 PM
RuningWolf's Avatar
RuningWolf RuningWolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 147
Default

RF

“I think most legitimate guides would be all for a permit system from the state.”

I have seen and dealt with some dishonest one’s. Another story for another day. I like Rocky’s idea about being required to be trained in CPR, 1st aid as well

“As far as the Clinch goes, and my own personal observations for a slot limit, no, it's not scientific but a slot has proven to be beneficial to many other waters around the country.”

I understand that and might support some trial and error if the Clinch was bigger or other trout waters where near by

“I never said anything about closing any part of the river down to anyone.”

Sorry I was not talking to you or about you there.

”As I said before, the Holston has thermal problems in the Fall. It's not a good candidate for special regs if most of the fish are going to die from year to year.”

The thermal problems are only in effect so far down and may be very fixable in part of the rest pf the river with some cooperation

”I guess the majority (not economically) will still dictate what the rest of us do on the Clinch. After all, they know whats best for us. I very seriously doubt the mortality rate is the same for C&R as it is for baitfishing.”

Many variables are involved, but it is still mortality

”Let me reiterate for anyone coming into this discussion late. I have no problems whatsoever with baitfisherman. As long as they follow the laws. I'm not bashing on anyone for their prefered method of fishing.”

I agree you have not

“I'm just simply trying to get a slot limit on the Clinch. One similar to the South Holston. To think it won't benefit from such a thing is a little confusing to me.”

Main differences being majority of stake holders buy in, several other trout streams in the vicinity, among other reasons that other interested parties have that have to be considered

”Any reg has the potential not to be honored. Dishonest people like that are going to do as they please, regardless. So I guess we souldn't even bother because of a few putz's out there?

Again I cannot place enough emphasis on calling the Poaching Hotline 1-800-831-1174 and report violators, suspicious behavior etc. program your cell phone, take a camera and take pics of violators anything to help TWRA’s law enforcement efforts.
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 02-13-2007, 08:36 PM
Flat Fly n's Avatar
Flat Fly n Flat Fly n is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: East TN
Posts: 533
Default

RW,
I'm throwing in the Wooly Bugger of Peace!

Whatever I will say, you will disagree. So this gets old, and we don't agree on anything and nothing gets done. Heck, it doesn't matter what you or I say, TWRA has and will do whatever they want to do, or what is agreed to with a good old boy handshake, with some science thrown in to make it look good. They are appointed "officials"........Agreed?

Now about that mortality issue. Both you and I know that "figures lie..and liers figure". Ok, are we good with that? So for every article you can find on high mortality, I can find one on low mortality. That's why there are things like mean, mode, p values, and the likes. Agreed?

On the River Keeper issue. Those words were uddered from the head TWRA fisheries biologist himself, not me, years ago when TWRA had the last public meeting in Clinton I believe at a school. I was there (as opposed to trying to catch fish at the CC...enough of that comment). I am sorry I don't remember names well, flys, runs, insects, no problem.. Now I am paraphrasing for you, but he said "if the public was to come up with the 30-35K required to hire a RIVER KEEPER that there could be increased coverage on the Clinch. This was after there was a show of hands in a PACKED room of people that had had a license check in the past. One person raised their hand, of which began the discussion of short of help, logistics problems for the officers....too few to cover too much territory.

I bet we could raise the money with duel of 3wt at 60ft with a #26 barbless Griffith's Gnat at Miller's Island. Wait,that might not work, because someone would want to get released....HA! Bet I could take you into your backing!

OK so TWRA doesn't do anything.........probably. We are still left with 4-5 great tailwaters that some folks would give certain parts of their anatomy to fish on. But deep down, admit it RW.....you would just love to see the Clinch the way it was in the late 80's and early 90's again...Come on....admit it...no one will think less of you if you agreed with something just once.

Much Regards,
Flat Fly'n
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 02-17-2007, 12:47 AM
RuningWolf's Avatar
RuningWolf RuningWolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 147
Default

FF

”I'm throwing in the Wooly Bugger of Peace!”

If yours are anything like the ones I tie, they are classified as deadly weapons for the amount they weigh, they are guaranteed to get to the bottom or raise a knot if they hit you. I like them with one gen or a pulse

”Whatever I will say, you will disagree. So this gets old, and we don't agree on anything and nothing gets done. Heck, it doesn't matter what you or I say, TWRA has and will do whatever they want to do, or what is agreed to with a good old boy handshake, with some science thrown in to make it look good. They are appointed "officials"........Agreed?”

No I don’t I have read the data and know several people who helped take it. It is not been tampered with, it is what it is.

”Now about that mortality issue. Both you and I know that "figures lie..and liers figure". Ok, are we good with that? So for every article you can find on high mortality, I can find one on low mortality. That's why there are things like mean, mode, p values, and the likes. Agreed?”

I gave several different ones and stuck with the more reasonable lower numbers, which is close to ideal. We know that does not happen often in real world conditions. There are lots of reasons for the different results and it begins with conditions the data was taken.

”On the River Keeper issue. Those words were uddered from the head TWRA fisheries biologist himself, not me, years ago when TWRA had the last public meeting in Clinton I believe at a school. I was there (as opposed to trying to catch fish at the CC...enough of that comment). I am sorry I don't remember names well, flys, runs, insects, no problem.. Now I am paraphrasing for you, but he said "if the public was to come up with the 30-35K required to hire a RIVER KEEPER that there could be increased coverage on the Clinch. This was after there was a show of hands in a PACKED room of people that had had a license check in the past. One person raised their hand, of which began the discussion of short of help, logistics problems for the officers....too few to cover too much territory”

I have been in three different meetings where the idea was presented in a community meeting at the Rec Hall in Clinton, a local chapter meeting and at the Coldwater Fisheries meeting. Those numbers are low for salary and do not include training and equipment. That is before you even get into political considerations and guaranteed long term commitment. Perhaps yours was a earlier meeting and they had more time to consider the idea and saw it was not a viable solution. Could that change yes. I can only reference my past conversations with some of the TWRA officials

I bet we could raise the money with duel of 3wt at 60ft with a #26 barbless Griffith's Gnat at Miller's Island. Wait,that might not work, because someone would want to get released....HA! Bet I could take you into your backing!

LOL

OK so TWRA doesn't do anything.........probably. We are still left with 4-5 great tailwaters that some folks would give certain parts of their anatomy to fish on. But deep down, admit it RW.....you would just love to see the Clinch the way it was in the late 80's and early 90's again...Come on....admit it...no one will think less of you if you agreed with something just once.

Actually I would prefer the late 60’s or early 70’s and know what I know now. No body else was really fishing then and the young ladies where much more inquisitive about Fly Fishing young adults. We will not discuss this issue anymore in depth on this board, Paula might object

RW

Note trying to give an equal humorous response (In parts) and just not into it.

Maybe we will meet on the river some day

Have a good one
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 06:34 AM.



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