By Jim Sauter
Greetings from the TCTU Streamkeepers.
"I am haunted by waters." Norman Maclean
Strategic Planning for TCTU Streamkeepers
As winter advances and we begin preparing for the 2024 stream monitoring season, we are organizing a Streamkeeper Strategic Planning Committee to help us determine future directions. This gives us an opportunity to evaluate our successes and help develop future directions for our program. Specifically, we will address:
Committee members include:
If you have any thoughts or suggestions about improving our Streamkeeper program, please feel free to contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org or any of the other committee members.
Rush River Bio/Macroinvertebrate Testing
I was privileged to be part of the Rush River Bio/ Macroinvertebrate Study. Basically, this group took bio samples from 16 sites on the Rush River in early October. Thirteen of the sixteen sites correlated with the testing that was done in 2004. We had to slightly move one of the sites from the earlier study since there were no longer riffles there!
There were three teams collecting data. Two teams consisted of members from the Kiap-Tu-Wish TU Chapter, and one was composed of Minnesota TU members. Those representing Minnesota TU included myself, Mitch Abbett, Mark Peerenboom, and organizer Carl Nelson. We were happy to provide support for this monitoring effort since many of our members fish these waters, and we gained valuable knowledge of the invertebrate sampling protocols that could be useful in monitoring some of our Minnesota streams.
So far, there appears to be an abundance of mayflies, scuds, caddis, and beetles. The stonefly numbers were low. On the 6 sites that we tested, we found only one very large stone fly. Sculpins, a vertebrate, were also found at several sites.
We hope to correlate our data with the previous study done about twenty years ago. Another team also completed a macro study using the same protocols on the Kinnickinnic River this fall. We look forward to comparing the bio/ macroinvertebrate data makeup of the two streams in the future. Both studies used the same WAV 1 and WAV 2 protocols.
The data from our Rush River study is beginning to trickle in, and I have attached some of the preliminary results below. More info will follow in the coming months as we get more of the results from various sites.
True or False: There are more anglers trout fishing on the Rush River in Wisconsin from Minnesota than Wisconsin.
Typically, whenever I go fishing, I like to check out the license plates at a site to find out where folks are from. Frequently, when fishing the Rush River, I notice plates from Minnesota.
So, an interesting question arises. Are there more anglers from Minnesota on the Rush than from Wisconsin?
To answer this question, I asked Kasey Yallaly, a DNR official from Wisconsin. Here is what Kasey had to say...
"During our 2021 Rush River creel survey approximately 56% of anglers surveyed during the harvest season were MN residents while 39% were from WI with the remainder from other states. I've attached the creel survey report if you need more information, let me know if you have questions about it." She added, "I would assume it would be similar or possibly be an even higher percentage of MN residents on the Kinni because of the proximity to the border."
Based on Kasey’s response, I would venture to conclude that the statement is TRUE. A link to the creel survey report on the Rush River from 2021:
Write something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview.