The trouble with rock chucking

[Chaz]

The trouble with rock chucking is that no one has ever proven it works, particularly on an outside bend, where the water is try to go anyway. Cut banks are one of the best hiding places for trout and to "stabilize a cut bank with rock, is only going to ruin good habitat.
The only thing that should be done in the case of cut banks is if there is a threat to a building or bridge. In such cases then if the bridge or building can't be moved you do some "bank stabilization."
What should be done with all sewer lines, power lines, and gas lines is get them all out of flood plains they don't belong there.

 

[JackM]

This fellow thinks it works just fine: Short Article About "Rock Chucking"

 

[Chaz]

Unethical!!!

 

[Christian]

I don't see anything wrong with it. What raises it to the level of unethical? Jim Teeny has an entire chapter about pool stoning in one of his steelheading books, and he believes it works as well. If he spots a fish in a lie that is "unfishable," he will use the stoning tactic to "move" the fish into a more attractive position for presenting a fly. Sometimes it spooks the fish completely, sometimes it results in a strike. What's the big deal? The fish take the fly intentionally, after all.

 

[RLeeP]

Actually, I could see where I'd be in favor of stoning Jim Teeny.

As I recall, he was one of the first "name" tiers to patent, or attempt to patent his patterns.

But I think maybe Chaz was talking about stream bank modifications and that he doesn't approve of rip-rapping stream banks.

I'm kinda in the middle on this. I see Chaz's point, but in the real world, people are going to choose to save their bridge, highway, hardware store or whatever before they choose to save some fish.

This can be unfortunate for the fish, but I don't necessarily think that it *has* to be unfortunate. Some pretty creative stuff can be done with rip-rap that (at least in my view) will not cause it to have an overall negative impact on habitat.

 

[pete41]

I would say in a stream with any size that riprap along railroads,hiways,and other places are better trout holders than undercut banks.They also tend to be favorite spots for rattlers,in the west anyway.Learned to walk on top of the rocks,not in between.lol

 

[JeffK]

I am generally cynical about placing rocks in a stream - although there are special cases. My experience is that a stream responds to everything in the watershed, particularly the spread of hard surface. "Rock rolling" just treats the symptoms and not the causes of stream degradation.

 

[tabasco_joe]

So if you chucked the rock towards the bank that needed stabilization you would be killing two birds with one stone. Or is that two stones with one stone?

 

[Chaz]

Bob,
Actually the unethical part was aboutstoning a pool. If a person needs to stone a pool to catch trout he ought to find another hobby. It is as unethical as dynamite.

 

[RLeeP]

>>Bob,
Actually the unethical part was about stoning a pool. If a person needs to stone a pool to catch trout he ought to find another hobby. It is as unethical as dynamite.>>

Geez, yeah...

I'm with you on that one. I'd think a required hour or so in the creek wearing a life jacket and being the stonee would get some of these people ironed out...

I see now how I got it fouled up. Jack was doing his puckish thing and I didn't separate the 2 matters.

 

[Chaz]

YEah, that's right!

 

[overmywaders]

Chaz,

I am always in need of correction -- so what about the waking of a fish with a stone do you folks find unethical? I know that I like my sleep, do you have anything I can use to convince my wife not to wake me?

Thanks.

Best regards,
Reed

http://www.overmywaders.com

The Contemplative Angler

 

[tomgamber]

I think this is a stupid topic but as long as that ad remains on the left side..i'll be back.

 

[jayL]

Aw man, tom. The curiosity is killing me. Should I disable ad-block or not? I guess I will. I do every now and then to help support Dave and the site anyway, so what better time than this?

 

[Will]

Until this thread, I had never heard of stoning a pool, and it doesn't sound like anything I would try, but I want to make sure I understand the issue. Is the idea to "wake up" fish that are lethargic, or is it to get a fish to move to a more accessible lie, both or neither? If the idea is to stun a fish and scoop it up, then I can see how it would be "as bad a dynamite." If not, I am not sure what the harm is. I am aware of people braining steelhead with large rocks, which of course is unethical and unlawful, but that does not appear to be what is going on in this example.

 

[jayL]

Chaz posted about placing rocks in a pool to create habitat. Jack jokingly changed the subject to something like "throwing rocks at the fish to move them to a more fishable lie".

 

[Will]

Thanks. I understood how the thread started and got shifted. I was, and I guess I still am, hazy on why people consider the actual rock throwing part unethical. If, as you put it, the idea is throwing rocks AT the fish, then I agree. If the idea is throwing a big rock into the pool so that the noise of it scares the fish into moving around, then I am not so sure. The latter certainly doesn't sound "as bad as dynamite" to me.

 

[JackM]

Will, my "if I recall correctly" understanding is that in Europe (maybe England only) it was considered not just acceptable, but a normal technique to wake the pool up by stoning it. The idea is, I think to aggitate the fish slightly and make them more active, hopefully so they will begin feeding. When I saw Chaz' thread title, it was immediately brought to mind, so I googled "stoning the pool" and came across that article. If you are planning to fish a pool with dries and there are no risers and no other anglers around to be disturbed by your antics, I see nothing unethical about trying "stoning." If nothing else, it may cause the trout to show their holding lie (once they settle back down again).

 

[jayL]

I have found that, especially over stockers, the occasional misstep while wading can spook the fish and give one cause to sit on the bank and have a sandwich. Often, shortly thereafter, the fishing can be pretty good. I don't have any ethical issues with this, and it seems to follow the same basic principle. And I'm not one to argue with an excuse to eat, either.

 

[tomgamber]

Take a 5 year old with you sometime. Stoning the pool is not only effective, but no matter how many times you say stop, he'll keep on doing it.
:lol: :lol: