Printable View
I encountered Didymo in the South Holsten river in Tenn last summer. Real nasty stuff. I have been reading up on Didymo and other invasives and to me one of the answers to this problem is real simple. Ban the sale of felt sole waders. There are suppliers that make alternative soles to felt. What do you all think?
Ban felt? How about cleaning your boots and waders?
If we banned everything that someone wants banned for some "good" reason or another we wouldn't be able to fish period.
:( Well, you people really disappointment me. I posted his hoping to get an intelligent discussion started, but instead most of you have decided to
take the Ostrich approach. This stuff (Didymo), is a real threat If you can't think about giving up your felt wader soles, think about fishing in waders with metal golf spikes, because this is what you will need to wade a river infected with Didymo. Like the Sargent in Arms said when getting run down by students in Animal House, " All Is Well"!
I'm sorry you're disappointed in us. Obviously you haven't read everything in the other forums that have been going on for a couple years about didymo and its' spread, both in the States and New Zeland. There's alot of information out there. There's been discussion about felt/stealth soles, and cleaning gear, waders, boots; what to use, and how to do it. There's alot more to it than just banning felt soles.
I saw a bumper sticker a few weeks ago that sort of summed this up sarcastically. It said, "Save the Earth! Kill yourself."
I've been studying Didymo and writing about it...I think even on this here website...for YEARS. Felt wading soles are NOT the problem. NOT CLEANING THEM is the problem.
Most conservation issues are a problem of laziness. A few are a matter of money. For the most part, if everyone would pick up one piece of trash every time they are outdoors, the world would be pristine! If we would clean our boots and waders, not discard our spent leader/tippet material, and stop using lead for weights, AND pick up that one piece of trash someone else left behind every time we fish our streams would also be in MUCH better shape. The gov't is already doing a fair job of cracking down on water polluters and updating regulations and enforcement in accordance with the Clean Water Act. Some states aren't doing enough about ag-based pollution. And there are always folks out there trying to roll it back. But MOST of the problems that impact our fishing experiences that WE can directly control could be solved easily if people gave a hoot.
But when someone comes along with a bright idea to ban felt...or some other similar banning notion...it can usually be traced back to the guy who owns the "alternative" to it and would make a huge profit from the ban.
Greed and laziness. It's the human condition. I've been a conservation activist for almost 30 years. I donate huge chunks of time, money, and energy to it (huge being relative to how much of each I have, not what others contribute). And I've educated myself way more than the average bear on the subjects. You're not likely to shame me into seeing things your way.
Just for grins and giggles...would you mind telling us what your company that you are the VP of manufacturing of makes? You see where I'm going with this? It was a suspicious post.
Don't want to get embroiled in anything, merely would like to add that in New Zealand there has been much discussion about felt sole boots and Didymo. While it is a complex issue as stated, it appears that recent tests have shown that cleaning agents do not penetrate the felt entirely to the base, and that it is possible that this results in poor hygene and spread of the problem. I admit this is only one facet of the issue, and don't know how long the spores could survive etc. It was suggested that aquastealth or rubber "non absorbent" wading boot soles were a better alternative in infected areas. Perhaps this is what was being referred to by Sport.
I'm sure it was, Gringo...something along those lines. But my point and question remain. The man called for a BAN on felt soles. That's pretty extreme.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gringo
:? I may be missing something here, but, why, in the name of anything holy, don't you NOT wade in didymo water?!?!? Simple precautions seem like they'd be a good starting point, at the very least!
Well, Betty, it's getting pretty widespread. So that could have a huge impact. Didymo is present in the Little Red River and White River in the Ozarks...for example. And boats and boat trailers moved from that water to other waters can spread it as well if they aren't thoroughly cleaned. Can you imagine the economic impact? Didymo is an algae. It's pretty darned near impossible to prevent the spread of algae strains from one place to another. We all live upstream. The best that we can hope for is to supress spreading through good hygeine/gear maintenance practices.
Guess I'd have to maintain, it's a personal responsibility. Maintain your gear (boats, trailers, rods, line, waders, boots). Do what it takes to clean them between waters. Save your felt soles for known safe waters. Stay out of didymo waters. Prevention starts with you.
Agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Betty Hiner
Hi folks,
First, I do not represent a company that makes alternatives to felt soled waders, just an Electrical Equipment Manufacturer. OK, maybe banning all felt soled waders is a little extreme, but by your responses to this post you have helped me make my case. People are lazy, irresponsible, and basically don't give a ####. When you enter this country from a foreign destination you are required to fill out a customs form that asks, besides other other questions, if you have fruit , if you have been on a farm etc. What if one of the questions was " Have you entered a body of water in the country you have visited wearing felt soled waders?" If you answer yes, and customs pulls your still damp felt soled waders out our your duffel bag, is it all right to let customs confiscate them? I think it would be ok. Anyone that can aford a $5000 to $10,000 trip to another country to fish should not give a darn about a $300.00 pair of waders. We have to do something, the importation of invasive species into this country is going to ruin this sport for all of us.
All waders, fishing gear, boots etc are inspected at Quarantine entry and exit points in both Aus and NZ. Regulations and requirements re cleaning are posted on brochures, and signs at all NZ affected river access points. Sterilizing solution is supplied to anglers free at tackle shops in NZ.
The point was made though that not all of the solution penetrated the felt.
Even if a totally sterile environment could be created, some natural critter would spread the algae on feet or feathers. Best we can do at this point is whatever we can to slow its spread from one river, or country, to another, and one part of a river to another.
It is way too devestating and serious a problem to trust anglers (and other river users) to do "the right thing". That would be disastrous.
I don't think you have to go through customs when you travel in/out of Arkansas.
I tend to think of fly anglers as the cream of the crop of sportsmen/women. There are more good conservationists among fly anglers than any other group of hunters/fishermen I have encountered.
But I saw something yesterday that made me remember that there are still a lot of jerks out there in straw hats and breathable waders carrying fly rods.
I was fishing a blue ribbon stream in MO. In blue ribbon water, you can keep one trout/day and it must be over 18". This very polite, clean-cut looking gent in a panama hat toting a Sage rod comes wading out of the stream as I was going back in for some evening fishing. He said hello and complimented my Weimaraner. I said thanks and then noticed his stringer. I asked how he did. He hoisted his stringer containing 1 Brown Trout over 20" and 2 Rainbows over 15". I said that was sure a nice Brown, but what are those other 2 for? He laughed and walked away. I walked upstream just a bit and here comes a woman about his age, well outfitted, carrying a single 16-17" Rainbow on a stringer. She too complimented and played with the dog. Very polite. Then she walked on downstream to join her companion...the guy I just met with 2 fish over limit. And hers was under length. (no cell service in that area) They chatted for a bit about my dog and then walked up to their car...
...which was parked RIGHT IN FRONT OF the blue ribbon sign at the access that specifies the creel and fishing regs for that stream. :(
Supports my point about not trusting people to do the right thing?
Saying you have a point, but not that it carries the argument.
I have a fundamental problem with the whole notion of government "not trusting people to do the right thing." WHOSE "right thing?"
OK I certainly wouldn't want to argue this... Just having seen the absolute devastation that didymo causes in NZ, I am prepared to cut the authorities a little slack if they overreact. In this country we have been complaining for a long time about underreaction from Fisheries on several important issues. I think that when they finally do show an interest and try to protect us from something bad, who cares if it is a bit draconian. We can put up with that, but I'd sure as hell hate to have didymo in any of my precious streams. I'm sure you would agree with me, and I was only making the points about Sports intention of the original post, and that you cannot afford to trust the integrity off all anglers on an issue like this. It only takes one out of a million to totally destroy a fishery for all of us and our descendants. Remember there is no cure for didymo.
Yes, but you act like it only exists in NZ. Not true at all. We have it in many of our famous trout waters now here in America. And it isn't ruining anything. It's a minor problem that seems to come and go. It's not DDT...then again, neither was DDT according to the science. Our biologists are worried about a LOT of things, but the d-word ranks pretty far down most of those lists even where it is present.
And here's a thought: if draconian rules are put in place to "save our fisheries," will we still be able to fish there? And if not, what's the point?
This stuff all has to be weighed and balanced. Knee-jerk reactions to "boogey men" NEVER work out very well. And if folks weren't still going to NZ chasing high quality trout fishing adventures, the big D would still be stuck in NZ for the most part. So it must not have done such terrible things to the fishing there, or folks wouldn't still be ponying up thousands of dollars to fish over there for a few days.
AWWWWWWWW to bad you didn't have cell phone service! :(
They needed to be caught :D
Hey guys Didymo may be a minor problem in the states as stated by silvermallard ( "We have it in many of our famous trout waters now here in America. And it isn't ruining anything. It's a minor problem that seems to come and go.") but I can assure you it is a major problem in the rivers and streams of New Zealand. Didymo loves - and thrives in - clean clear water and that is exactly what we have here in N.Z. It has truly ruined a number of rivers and streams in the South Island. The conservation dept are currently trialing a copper based poison to get rid of it and it seams to help but it is not a cure.
However getting back to the original point the research here sugests that Felt soles are harder to clean but as long as you soak them in a bleach and water solution they should be O.K. so why ban them? It seams to me that felt soles are only a small part of the problem, a bigger part at least here in N.Z. is the lack of awareness among non fishing users of the rivers such as Kayakers, Jet boaters and trampers who do not clean there gear between watersheds.
Anyway please do not risk it, even if you think there is no Didymo in the stream you normaly fish clean all your gear before fishing somewhere else, it is only common sense after all.
All the best.
Mike.
Sounds like a really, really BAD idea for Americans and Europeans to go to New Zealand to fish. Maybe we should just ban New Zealand fishing trips instead of felt soles? 8)
What and leave all those fish for me? :lol:
Exactly - too many Americans fishing those streams now, better if we scare a few off eh?
considering didymo was present in both eurpoe and north america before it was introduced to nz 8)
As Ive said in another thread tonight on FAOL I think there is a lot America can learn from nz's mistakes in our dealing with didymo. Personally, of several didymo affected rivers I fish, I only think its really been a problem in one of them, a very stable, clean, fast flowing tailwater. and in other cases you'd hardly know it was there bar the occasional bloom.
In saying this, I would not wish it on anyone, so urge you to look at the situation here in NZ, follow that which has worked, and improve on where our reactions to didymo were lacking. ad live didymo cells present within
Desite thorugh soaking, freezing and boiling of felt soles, testing revealed that many still had live didymo cells present within. They are near on impossible to effectivly clean. Wear felt soles, you are highly likley to be transferring didymo.
Also look at neoprene booties, trout flies etc as a source of transfer.
Through the special fiordland rivers license fish and game nz were able to ban felt soles from the fiordland region, and I dont think it will be long until they will be banned full stop in general here. Many retailers no longer stock felts.
In saying that - we can ban felt soles - but it takes only one person to forgo proper cleaning proceedures to spread this algae. It needs to be 100% complience or its not worth trying at all (Mike - surveys over the past two seasons showed consistently that only 33% or so of anglers surveyed were cleaning gear between rivers - This, plus with knowledge of the initial incursion points of affected rivers, Id say anglers are the main cause of transfer)....
Maybe a 'clean gear certificate' like we have on fiordland rivers may help? NZ's proved that voluntary compliance with cleaning does nt work, maybe regulation will?
Chris
There has been algae in water since the dawn of time.
"An electric fishing survey was carried out by the Minist?re des Ressources Naturelles et de la Faune (MRNF), in the Matapedia river in Quebec, in early September 2006. Large D. geminata blooms had been observed in the river. The MRNF was not able to measure impacts on the abundance of juvenile salmons. The MDDEP-MRNF (2007) states that a similar observation had been made by fisheries experts and managers from France, Iceland, Ireland, Scotland, Finland and Norway. No impacts had been recorded on either adults or juveniles of Atlantic salmon or any other salmonid species." - ISSG.org, GISD page on Didymo, last updated May, 2007.
Everything else I find about deliterious effects is PURE SPECULATION couched in words like "might, may, or could."
We have it here in our Ozarks tailwaters where I fish. It's no worse than any other algae we've always dealt with except that it's a bit uglier when the water drops.
So didymo is bad. But why? Because it is ugly? Do we know how it really affects wildlife?
Limiting spread is good. But in a "free" country you can only limit so much.
Everyone is not going to do their part, either they don't want to or they don't know any better.
We don't have a cure, and it's too late for prevention.
How can we live with it?
After the initial shock to the ecosystem will it become part of it?
The fragile web of life can change, it has since the dawn of time.
How long will it take? No one knows.
Will some organisms thrive while others perish? Yes
Will the ones we like to see and use thrive?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverMallard
i run into similar situations pretty often.. where people will be talking about how excellent the fishing was/is here and there. "i caught 5, you're only supposed to keep 1, i kept two huhuhhuuhuhhu". then theres also the people that fish often and never ever write down their catch on their tags.... those that catch fish just for the sake of catching fish and keep them anyways.. that have 15 fish in their freezer already.
i think the fines should be considerably higher for breaking these laws. make it cost them over a grand per violation and reward the informer with half the fine.
with things like didymo taking over, we're learning that fish are not sustainable in all water. especially when its covered in rock snot.
2 years ago i had the "pleasure" of encountering didymo and it is not a pleasant sight.
it really does affect wildlife, and this is how, it causes waterways to increase in temperature, it sucks the oxygen out of the water, and it also blooms on valuable nutrients used by other species. it basically suffocates a system. just like a home aquarium that gets too much algae.
a possible solution would be to find some species that can eat it, spread rapidly, and quickly die off due to some other circumstance.. like temperature.
just jake,,, nice post, thanks. I can say for a fact that you will see this behavior for the rest of your life. You can try to help, we all do. Forgive me this once. I will defend the couple. Somewhere there is an explanation. It is for sure not good that it happened, but, I bet there was a good reason. I say that in my defense as once I put a few trout on a stringer in C & R water.There were two other with me,,, none of us knew about the C & R.
MAN ! That P###es me off, not being very PC, I have and will continue to get in the face of these type of people, of course in the kindest way, with firm but friendly talk of conservation fairness etc, BUT all the while getting names and lic plate #'s and calling report a poacher.. that is what they are and the most evil kind the kind that will smile in your face and play with your dog KNOWING, KNOWING what they have done is wrong...Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverMallard
I am sorry for sounding (if you could hear me now you would cover your ears) off on this but it is not fair... there is no one from the Prime minister or President on down whom is excluded from the laws.. and rules.. they have stolen from you me and anybody else who fishes legally and honestly .. it saddens and maddens me to no end...
Sorry JCQuote:
Originally Posted by J Castwell
I understand if it is not signed or the regs have just changed, then it only happens once and yes you feel real bad, maybe pick up extra litter next time you are C&R'ing on the river.
BUT by the sounds of the males laugh he KNEW he KNEW, and that is what gets to me, I am not a total hardA##, but somethings get me going, and I can usually read the sit.... I like to educate more then punish.... when the situation calls for it...