removing the dams off elkhorn

[MrSplitshot]

I believe there are 6 dams on the North Fork if I'm thinking right...

All I can say to these folks from NC is "Good luck with that." I'd say it's a big undertaking with plenty of obstacles and I don't see them getting it done. (Flood control, farmers along the North Fork that use irrigation lines from those big pools to water their crops, money, etc.)

I'm not advocating it here, but personally, I think it might make the smallmouth fishing better on the North Fork...the faster flowing riffle/pool/riffle/pool areas are loved by the smallmouth. The dam areas and boat ramps are convenient, and floating larger boats above them are nice...but myself, I always catch more smallmouth in the mile or so below each one. (Faster water, more of a riffle/pool deal like the main stem in Franklin County or the South Fork.) Sure, we catch some smallmouth in the deeper water too, but it doesn't seem to be as many to me...

Again, not advocating removal of the dams, but I'm not sure it would be the total kiss of death for the Elkhorn. It would change it substantially, agreed. The South Fork is a heck of a fishery though, and I could see the North Fork being the same way.

[agreynolds]

My family owns one of these Dams on North Elkhorn. We have been approached by these people. They are in the business of providing polluters in North Carolina set aside restoration to make up for the land they are destroying in the Carolinas. Luckily my family owns both sides of the creek all the way around the Dam there. The Scott Co. Fiscal Court owns one side of the creek at Great Crossings, where there is another Dam. The fact of the matter is that most of these dams where built or repaired by the KDFW in the fifties and they still help to maintain them. George Lusby is the Scott Co. Judge Executive, he is a fisherman and good man who has worked to protect Elkhorn Creek. I am sure that if you contacted him he could provide more info. As to the people from North Carolina we told them to stay off our land.

[SlopFishin]

It's highly illegal to do that to a "blue line" stream. Without the proper permitting from the state and USACE, they'll get in deep doo-doo.

[psprowler]

At least 2 dams on the South Fork that I can think of.

There's no way these dams are going to be removed.

[catdaddy863]

Agreynolds you have a pm

[etcfishin]

Smallmouth thrive in ripple pool combinations in creeks and rivers that run relatively clear. Dams on creeks tend to build up silt that is not condusive to their habitat. I know that fish can be caught in the dammed up section, but I personally have had better luck below the dams in the ripple pool sections. I understand that these sections can't be fished in periods of low water due to drought. However, I've often thought that the best thing for the creek would be to take those dams out. There's a new effort going on around the country to restore native habitat by removing dams. The only problem I see with this is that there is so much silt that is built up behind these dams, that there could be water quality degradation for years. Imagine taking 50 years of mud and having that wash down the creek into the good sections below the dam. That could have unintended consequences. I'd like to see a fisheries biologist weigh in on the subject. An expert I'm not, but I am familiar with the habitat that these fish prefer. Interesting topic.

I would also like for others to weigh in on whether they've had better luck fishing the dammed section or the undammed sections. I prefer undammed.

I agree nothing can happen without the proper authorization here.

Personally I think they should remove the dams on the Kentucky river instead. It would have been an awesome smallmouth fishery before the dams and pollution. We've spent millions of our taxpayer dollars repairing those things over 100 years.

[Tim_T]

I think the reasons that you catch more fish in riffle areas is because they move to these areas to feed. There still needs to be deeper water for the fish to winter over and to survive hot summers.

[etcfishin]

I think the reasons that you catch more fish in riffle areas is because they move to these areas to feed. There still needs to be deeper water for the fish to winter over and to survive hot summers.

Agree with what you're saying for small creeks. Elkhorn has enough natural pools for fish to survive.

[redneckshadrap]

I, personally, don't see it happening. I definitely wouldn't want the one gone behind my house.

[agreynolds]

I think that you missed my point etcfishin. This effort has nothing to do with improving a resource that has proven to be on of the finest smallmouth stream fisheries in the south. The people who would like to remove these dams are using this action as a payback to excuse the fact that their clients have destroyed wetland habitat in other places. A ridiculous loophole created by developement loving congressmen allows these people to ustify the destruction of irreplacable wetland habit by saying that they have restored some somewhere else. Apparently the cheapest way they have found to do that within the regs is to tear out a dam somewhere. You can imagine how quick a Cat D-9 doser could knock down a 100 foot long five foot high dam. I would guess it would take longer to get it off the trailer. As to the silt deal there isn't any siltation behind these dams if you dont believe me come and wade up the solid rock bottom.

[etcfishin]

Yeah, I would never want something like this to happen by some loophole being used by some out of state group. Agree with your point.

[thepoorehouse]

I think if you check with Fish and Wildlife folks they will tell you -- off the record -- that removing those dams would be one of the best things you could do for smallmouth on the Elkhorn. The Elkhorn is a great smallmouth stream. Remove the dams and it would be an AMAZING smallmouth stream. F&W folks haven't "waded" into this one, I'm betting, because they don't want to get into the politics of it. But when Scott County Judge Executive George Lusby was pushing for the rebuilding of a dam, he did so for political purposes and I guarantee you F&W folks were trying quietly behind the scenes to keep it from happening. Smallmouth love moving water over rocky bottom. That's the definition of the Elkhorn -- except where there are dams. If you like catfish, carp and undersized largemouth, you should be for keeping those dams. If you love great smallmouth fishing, you ought to do some research. If you did, you'd learn that bringing the old Elkhorn back -- by removing some useless dams -- would make for some of the best smallmouth fishing in the world.