Wild fires rip the smokies and how will it affect trout streams and wild life

[foxtrapper1972]

rrt said ""Amen" for all."

----------------------------------------------

agree

 

[FarmerDave]

reds wrote:
I just returned, on Thanksgiving Day, from fighting fires in North Carolina. I would think the biggest concerns to fish would be the additional silt load and the mortality of Rhododendron and trees along the stream. I would think the additional silt load would clear out quickly due to the high gradient of most of the streams in that area. The loss of shade may be a bigger issue as many of these streams have already lost a huge shade source with the loss of hemlock down there.

As for other wildlife this will likely be a benefit to most of it as periodic fire is what established most of the timber types that burnt down there and these fires should help to begin the regeneration process in the oak/hickory stands they are burning. I do feel for the people down there, as there is a feeling of real helplessness when wildfires blow up like these did. The people in the areas I was at were extremely thankful for our efforts and were constantly thanking us and trying to buy our dinners etc....

Reds, I want to thank you for your service to the people of that area.

 

[FarmerDave]

ryansheehan wrote:

pete41 wrote:

bikerfish wrote:
at times like this, who gives a damn about the trout, people are dying and losing their homes and livelihoods, losing everything they have. I dont' think they care about the trout right now.
BTW, the fish will eventually return, nature is tough. [/quote this is a fishing forum---please don't insert unwarranted negativity about our thoughts and feelings about unrelated subjects.thanks

So bikerfish talks about people dying and losing everything, you respond with don't insert negativity about your feelings???? He is expressing his thoughts and feelings just like you. Yes its a fishing forum but a little perspective is a good thing.

I agree 100%.

My first thought was similar to Bikerfish's, but he had already responded. I might have tried to be a little nicer, but believe me, I agree with him 100% on this. Key words were "might have." I thought it was a good reality check, nut with people criticize him for it, I decided to speak up.

At least 7 confirmed dead (last I heard). Houses and businesses destroyed and the local economy took a major hit for years, if not decades to come. And I am supposed to worry about the impact to the trout?

Sorry, all we have to do is leave the streams alone and they will recover a lot quicker than the economy. The wildlife will most likely recover with a vengeance (meant in a positive way). VERY doubtful that the root systems died off, especially along the streams.

No false dichotomy here. I've been praying for rain for the people and the trout never entered my mind until this. If the trout get a minor boost from the rain I am praying for, that's good. But I don't see how that logic works well from the other perspective. Trout are not people although I have hooked a few of those, too.

Pass me a beer Al, as long as it isn't a nasty IPA.;-)

 

[boychick]

I think everyone can agree that this fire is tragic. My heart goes out to all who are impacted by the fire. I think the fish will come back, wildfires are a natural occurrence in most places where trout live. I think a lot of places in yellowstone burned in 88, approximately 30% of the park, most trout streams and their tribs were impacted. The fish came back. I read somewhere the fish will recolonize so long as stream connectivity is maintained, which should be the case in gsmnp.

 

[Foxgap239]

I have some recent first hand experience with this condition but let me first say that I cannot express enough my heartfelt sorrow to the people impacted by this incredible tragedy.

That said, you all read about the California fires last fall. One of those fires was in a set on mountains that I fish when out there. I heard from a guide friend out there that even though the fire was miles away from the stretch we fish, there seemed to have been a fish kill. The cause was not directly the fire but the enormous amount of silt that was washed into the stream during the snow melts. I have gone there prior to the fires and never failed to catch 20 plus small wild browns. June being a banner month up there but this June I went there and spent several hours not only getting skunked but not even seeing fish scurrying about. I recently had to spend 2 weeks out there in early November and had a free weekend so I figured hey even if I don't catch anything it's still beautiful up there. Well less than 5 months after not even seeing a fish, I got plenty of fish in areas that seemed barren in June. Now the numbers weren't what they were pre-fire but a very nice comeback in such a short time. Obviously the fish kill must have been over estimated and the fish just went elsewhere until fall rains washed some of the silt out. Also saw signs of spawning activity.

So based on that evidence, the fish will probably make a comeback before some of the human lives that were impacted by this horrible fire.

 

[Jessed]

Trees and vegetation are much more use to less rain in the west also. On the east coast it doesn't take long before everything is super dry

 

[Jessed]

There was actually a fire on the mountain above reading last week too! The wind played a big part

 

[Chaz]

FarmerDave wrote:
Reds, I want to thank you for your service to the people of that area.

AMEN!!!

 

[reds]

Thank you guys. I usually get to go on one fire a year, out of the state of Pennsylvania, but due to the extreme conditions in the south this fall I was allowed to go on a second trip. They were really hurting for resources to fight fire down there with many of the western crews done for the year. It was a good opportunity for me to gain experience for the future while helping out down there

 

[pete41]

I just resented the insinuation that it was insensitive to stick to the subject ...