A few weeks ago an extended family member asked me why I waste my time reading fly fishing blog and even more time writing one.
The question was meant to be just what it sounds like (an overt expression of disdain among other things), though if I had to guess, I’d bet my answer wasn’t what they expected to hear.
While I can’t recall exactly what I said in response, my point was this – unencumbered by the constraints of keeping advertisers happy, being politically correct and the other burdens of selling paper fly fishing mags, there are a handful of fly fishing (and outdoor) bloggers out there who can really write, often with a candor that is startlingly refreshing.
I further explained to my taunting kinsman that while readers of fly fishing blogs do indeed have to ‘sift through the chaff’ a bit, there’s more cutting edge, heartfelt, media-rich fly fishing content on the web than ever before.
Finally, I added that, despite said family member being an occasional fisher (as long as a guide is handy to show him where to stand, cast and pee), he probably would never understand the passion that captures some folks in the fly fishing world.
I wish I’d had this post from Wayne over at Will Fish for Work to show him as an example. Wayne’s been doing a bit of digging into the Bitterroot – Mitchell Slough diversion issue that’s shown up on the fflogosphere’s radar lately, and knocked a couple of points out of the park in Another Look at Channeling on the Bitterroot.
False Casts and Flat Tires added more images yesterday on the story they broke a few days back on some man-made channeling work that was diverting water to the head gate of the infamous Mitchell slough. Predictably, a fairly big uproar has ensued and it has become an over night “who done it”, probably more so given it’s proximity to one of the most contentious stream access battlegrounds in recent memory. While reading blog posts, comments and emails (some solicited) from several people; conservation group leaders, guides, and every day fishing folk it got me thinking about our role as watch dogs of our streams and rivers and protecting our access rights.
There’s nothing natural about putting a bulldozer, a track hoe, or an army of pick and shovels in a stream bed, making alterations and diverting water from one place to another. I don’t care what the studies show, anyone says, who mitigates, oversees the permits or whatever; that’s going to have an impact. What is that impact worth, what is gained and what is lost? Who benefits, who does not? Whose water is it and who decides how it’s divided among potential users? My guess is that I am not the only one thinking along these lines and they appear to be the heart of this particular issue.
And this…
“We have met the enemy, and he is us”. Ok, so that’s quotes been beat to death but like it or not, I think it applies. Changing Montana water law and the attitudes behind them is unlikely and may not even be necessary because the open forum instituted in the 301 permit process gives everyone a voice in the matter- if they choose to use it. It’s not enough to have organized entities like Trout Unlimited represent us, we can’t hide behind them and let them do our dirty work. While they are a great organization they can easily be portrayed as having an “agenda”. One voice is an opinion, many voices; a consensus. When you have a big enough consensus, you get the decision you want. Don’t believe me? Look at the pictures at False Casts and Flat Tires or the old Supreme Court chambers in the Montana Capitol during the last battle over stream access.
Great stuff. Work loads and a possible near term move will keep Jake and I sidelined on this issue for a month or so – keep it coming Wayne and the FCFT boys.
