Oklahoma fly fishing...

wrote:

On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 09:48:23 -0600, Conan The Librarian
wrote:

It's the trout who are dying out whenever there's a drought or
flood, and thus have to keep being re-stocked in an effort to maintain a
"self-sustaining" fishery. The other guys have been surviving just fine
in times of low-water levels or flooding.

OK, if THIS doesn't convince folks it's a bad idea, what possibly could:
Chuck and I are apparently in complete agreement...and we're both trout
fishermen who, I'll go out on a limb and speak for him, would both very
much like to have trout fishing closer to us if it were appropriate.

Absolutely. In fact, I have tried to get into fishing for trout on
the Guadalupe. (Really, I have.) It's just that the whole thing is so
artificial. And every year I hear the poor TU guys bemoaning some sort
of natural "disaster" (read: regular weather pattern or even competition
from a warmwater fish species) that has befallen their poor precious
trout. (And don't get me started on their lease program.)

When it comes right down to it, I am reminded how much more fun it
is to hike the Pedernales (or any number of other Texas streams) and
catch fish that are in their natural habitat; fish who seemingly manage
to survive despite whatever Mother Nature throws at them.


Chuck Vance

On Feb 23, 9:08 pm, wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 13:04:10 -0600, egildone

wrote:
Looks like Oklahoma Wildlife Department is developing a first rate Trout
fishery in Oklahoma.

Yeah, maybe next, they'll start a marlin fishery in Optima...little
bitty marlin that can swim in a few inches of water...



http://www.wildlifedepartment.com/streamrest.htm

What do you think?

I think if God/Mother Nature had thought a "first-class trout fishery"
in Oklahoma was a good idea, he/she would have placed one there...and I
also think that every time man attempts to put fish where they don't
belong, ...

....and who decides where they do and don't belong?

cheers

oz, in the middle of bass lakes and trout rivers.

On Feb 26, 8:03 pm, "MajorOz" wrote:
On Feb 23, 9:08 pm, wrote:





On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 13:04:10 -0600, egildone

wrote:
Looks like Oklahoma Wildlife Department is developing a first rate Trout
fishery in Oklahoma.

Yeah, maybe next, they'll start a marlin fishery in Optima...little
bitty marlin that can swim in a few inches of water...

http://www.wildlifedepartment.com/streamrest.htm

What do you think?

I think if God/Mother Nature had thought a "first-class trout fishery"
in Oklahoma was a good idea, he/she would have placed one there...and I
also think that every time man attempts to put fish where they don't
belong, ...

...and who decides where they do and don't belong?

I'm afraid that would be me.

Wolfgang
well, who else is qualified?

"Conan The Librarian" wrote in message
...
Actually, the little hatchery trout are the nuisance. Gawd put the Guads
in that stretch of river.

If I read your responses correctly, immediately downstream from the dam.

Look I am no big fan of tailwater fisheries tho I have fished them and even
traveled to fish one (San Juan). I have always considered the Guadalupe as
Texas's way of saying let there be trout but thought that it was a little
too far south, bottom draw dam or not. I'm kind of surprised you didn't
bring up the fire ant hatch on the Guadalupe either. IIRC, there was a
pretty good fish kill there in the 90's when the trout gorged themselves on
ants, which stung/poisoned them on the the ants way into the trout's inards.
Me thinks the Striped Bass aren't native to that watershed either and
remember the talk in GA when the stripers used to migrate upstream on the
Chattahoochee from West Point Lake (though the DNR said they didn't and if
they did they didn't eat trout).

But your original supposition was because of the Guadalupe, the OK thing
wasn't going to make it either. Not that I would travel to fish it either
and i have some debates on another internet area with some OK fisherman who
thought it was a crime for folks to take any trout from their tailraces (not
sure if it was the one referenced or not).

Right or wrong, trout have been introduced into some places where God never
intended (Argentina, New Zealand, Chile, San Juan Dam NM) which come to mind
and bass have been stocked in lakes created by dams on trout streams. The
Bass guys travel miles to run their boats on those artificial fisheries just
like some folks lay down big bucks to catch sea run browns in Argentina. At
least in the OK case, its in the Southeast part of the state not toooooooo
far from the Ozarks where there are some spring creeks supporting self
sustaining trout populations (which were of course-introduced).

I doubt the folks put those dams there with the intent of making an
artificial trout fishery, it's just the by product. Just because there are
issues with the Guadalupe, doesn't make it so everywhere else.

wrote in message
...

Snob...

And don't you forget it either.

There is plenty of native (and appropriately-stocked) fish in
Texas and Oklahoma, and IMO, stocking trout is just as bad as would be
an attempt to stock pelagic species in the often large, deep lakes the
dams create.

I don't know the fish politics in either state other than what I read or
hear. The Guadalupe thing always intrigued me that some thought it could be
self sustaining. SE Oklahoma is a different geography and it might work, or
it might not. Not that I nor anyone else think it shouldn't be done, they
did, now lets see what happens ten years or so down the road.

Wayne Knight wrote:

"Conan The Librarian" wrote in message
...

Actually, the little hatchery trout are the nuisance. Gawd put the Guads
in that stretch of river.

If I read your responses correctly, immediately downstream from the dam.

I'm not sure what you mean with this comment.

Look I am no big fan of tailwater fisheries tho I have fished them and even
traveled to fish one (San Juan). I have always considered the Guadalupe as
Texas's way of saying let there be trout but thought that it was a little
too far south, bottom draw dam or not. I'm kind of surprised you didn't
bring up the fire ant hatch on the Guadalupe either. IIRC, there was a
pretty good fish kill there in the 90's when the trout gorged themselves on
ants, which stung/poisoned them on the the ants way into the trout's inards.

Yeah, they lost a lot of fish one year (1998?). Supposedly they
died from a toxin in the ants' bodies rather than stings.

Me thinks the Striped Bass aren't native to that watershed either and

No, they're not native. But they seem to co-exist with the natives
and survive just fine despite the droughts and floods. Trout don't
without the constant efforts of the folks who are trying to create the
fishery for them.

Yes, I have been known to wax poetic about the native fishes down
here, but I'm not against non-native species. I just prefer the
environment where some of the natives live. The Guadalupe bass in
particular seem to be found in water that is clean and cool and fast,
and in settings that are among the prettiest I have found.

remember the talk in GA when the stripers used to migrate upstream on the
Chattahoochee from West Point Lake (though the DNR said they didn't and if
they did they didn't eat trout).

But your original supposition was because of the Guadalupe, the OK thing
wasn't going to make it either.

IIRC, I commented that it didn't look promising. The pictures that
were referenced showed improvements that made the area look like a nice
stream, but if they have floods in that area like we have, that
structure wouldn't last long. (It's not uncommon for the flows to go
from less than 100 cfs to over 10,000. And a quick Google check shows
rates of 167,00 in 1997, over 100,000 in 1998, well over that in the
flood of 2002 when water came *over* the spillway.)

I assume they have droughts in that area as well, and I know the
effect they have on the trout down here. (Despite the agreement with
the river authority folks to keep the flow at about 150 CFS throughout
the summer, this last year it was below 100 for much of the summer.
Given that we have droughts every few years, I expect the same thing
will happen again soon.) So from a purely practical point-of-view, I
questioned the logic of it.

Not that I would travel to fish it either
and i have some debates on another internet area with some OK fisherman who
thought it was a crime for folks to take any trout from their tailraces (not
sure if it was the one referenced or not).

Right or wrong, trout have been introduced into some places where God never
intended (Argentina, New Zealand, Chile, San Juan Dam NM) which come to mind
and bass have been stocked in lakes created by dams on trout streams. The
Bass guys travel miles to run their boats on those artificial fisheries just
like some folks lay down big bucks to catch sea run browns in Argentina. At
least in the OK case, its in the Southeast part of the state not toooooooo
far from the Ozarks where there are some spring creeks supporting self
sustaining trout populations (which were of course-introduced).

I doubt the folks put those dams there with the intent of making an
artificial trout fishery, it's just the by product. Just because there are
issues with the Guadalupe, doesn't make it so everywhere else.

Well, the original poster asked for comments, and I gave him my take
from having seen firsthand what can happen when people want to play
gawd. Maybe it can work in OK, and if it does, I'll be happy to say I
was wrong.

But if it "works" by them having to re-stock to replace the fish
because they are getting wiped out on a regular basis by normal weather
happenings (as it does down here), and take extraordinary measures to
try to control waterflows for their survival, then I question their
judgement.


Chuck Vance (so, you planning any trips to the Smokies soon? It
looks like I'll be heading that way in early May if all goes well)

On Feb 27, 8:17 am, Conan The Librarian wrote:

(so, you planning any trips to the Smokies soon? It
looks like I'll be heading that way in early May if all goes well

Trying to plan one right now. Tho I think mine will have to be either
later April or late May. I would prefer April but we'll see.

Conan The Librarian wrote:

Well, the original poster asked for comments, and I gave him my take
from having seen firsthand what can happen when people want to play
gawd.

Genesis 1:26

26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and
let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over
the livestock, over all the earth, [a] and over all the creatures that
move along the ground."


That tells me God gave us permission to do whatever we want with them.

Ed

(The flames are dying down, so I thought I'd rekindle the fire)

egildone wrote:

Conan The Librarian wrote:

Well, the original poster asked for comments, and I gave him my
take from having seen firsthand what can happen when people want to
play gawd.

Genesis 1:26

26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and
let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over
the livestock, over all the earth, [a] and over all the creatures that
move along the ground."


That tells me God gave us permission to do whatever we want with them.

My Mother Nature can beat up your god.


Chuck Vance

On Feb 27, 12:27 pm, egildone wrote:

That tells me God gave us permission to do whatever we want with them.

Sheesh, you had to go and post that. That's the same line of thought
some "men" use to beat their women and dogs. I believe He meant
stewardship.

Enjoy your tailwater.


(The flames are dying down, so I thought I'd rekindle the fire)

Thankfully no one as of yet seems to want to add fuel.