Largemouth Bass caught on trout stream!

I couldnt believe it,must be someones transplant.It was a very small stream near Preston.Anybody else catch any of these.I’m talking LARGEMOUTH BASS here,am I losing it?

Nope, you are not losing it. I’ve caught sunfish in Crooked Creek near Freeburg MN. Most of those fish like that are from flooded impoundments, private ponds, etc……

Did you let it go?

Do you have any pictures? What were you using?

You never no what your going to catch.In May my brother caught a Rainbow Trout while we were Walleye fishing pool 11.

I have a few questions for the Great Caledonian, and that is his opinion of the proposed regulations on Winnebago Creek. I’m not trying to bait you here, but I have read in the Argus about the county board of commisioners and their letter to the DNR not in favor of any regs. I also read in the Argus about local business owners complaining that the regs (which there are none at this time) have hurt their local businesses. How can they actually prove a statement like that? What about the Heartland Group and their signs they have placed? Why is there such a backlash to a proposal that makes the resource more dynamic in the long run, yet only effects 18% of ALL of the designated trout water in southeast MN?

Sorry to dump this on you, but the Caledonians are not very high on my list of people right now considering their unwillingness to think outside the box on the future of area trout streams. They rank right up there with the Prestonites and their eagerness to build a tire burning facility right in the middle of bluff country.

Caledonia is no obvious tourist destination (you’re not a Lanesboro), but you could be if you played your cards right….which I don’t see right now.

PS I have caught a crappie out of the S Fork of Crooked Creek back quite a few years, and that’s because the S. Fork of the Crooked does have a pond at the headwaters, and I think (I’m guesssing here) that it came down from the pond at one time.

Here’s how he got dubbed the Great Caledonian

Jc dubs Fleck the Great Caledonian My guess is Fleck has never been to the area you’re asking about… could be wrong… but he’s from Dresback.

My bad.

Then maybe someone who uses this forum who lives in the Caledonia area would be willing to answer a few of the aforemetntioned questions from my previous post.

I always like the “Great Caledonian” name and figured Blue Fleck came from Caledonia.Was wondering if anybody went to Eagle Bluff last weekend to the trout regs meeting and what was talked about and proposed,could’nt make it. DA, whats with all the anger… towards Caledonians and Preston people,calm down… People in SE Minn are tired of St. Pauly lawmakers and people coming dowm here and telling them how and where to fish in there back own backyards. Some city people come down here fish wherever they want,litter,leave gates open,then ask to hunt deer and wonder why they get turned down then whine about a .75 cent candybar as they are driving off in there Yukon. Locals DO know more than you think.DA maybe you are thinking of your best interests and not the people that live and grew up there.Laws/regs/proposals do have there place but usually fall in the hands of urbanites most of the time.

Remember that it’s not their streams, nor are the fish that inhabit them. They may own the land, but they don’t own the water. There’s where the problem lies with the locals – THEY DON’T OWN THE WATER!! The taxpayers of this state, the license holders, and those who fork over money for a trout stamp own the streams and the fish that live there, not to mention the streams that are stocked with fish.

It’s not the “city” folk that I run into who litter and leave gates open. I don’t run into any fly fishing related litter, but I see plenty of empty bait containers and dead fish when I’ve been out. I’m sure some of this trash isn’t local, but I’m willing to bet that there’s plenty of it from those who are local.

It’s not the St. Paul lawmakers telling anyone how to fish; it’s a DNR proposal from the southeast area that came up with the proposals through years of angler surveys, creel census, and the likes, not a group of lawmakers. It’s about creating diversity and different opportunites.

If you enjoy catching small fish and don’t want the opportunity to catch larger fish, then have it your way. I for one would rather have more opportunity to fish waters that are protected and hold larger fish.

Locals know more than I think….hmmmm. I forgot that they have the biology degree, do the electro-shocking surveys, and in general know what’s best for the stream.

Keep alienating the anglers and hunters who bring plenty of dollars in tourism dollars to your towns with the “SUV drving yuppie” statements, and then turn around and complain why the hotels aren’t full, and the local businesses are suffering. I’ve already heard this whining from the Houston Co. EDA and County Commsioners. They have no clue that they have a product that could be made better, thus drawing more revenue to their area. They don’t get it.

Your post is typical of the fodder that I hear from those who aren’t in favor of the proposed regs. I am thinking of my own best interest, as well as the interest of the future of the resource. It’s in my best interest to have a wider diversity in the streams that I fish as to how they are managed. Who wouldn’t want that?

Just Because you don’t “see” litter from fly fisherman…and only discared bait containers…doesn’t mean that the dead fish are from “bait fisherman” I’ve seen plenty of fly fisherman “Chunke” a worm in my time…not to mention the amount of “flies” …fly fisherman lose….”A LOT” that contain lead…..and just one last thing that strikes me here is …DO you Want the Regs for you…Or to increase your guiding Buissness…And What do you really bring to the local Buissnesses when you Provide A lunch?Snack? from home…?…you provide everything..What good is that for local buissness?….GAS?……really…It sounds as if What ever is good for me…Is good for me…..Thats the definition of a Purest…

You can attempt to play the guide card all you want – I could care less what a harvest oriented non-conservationist thinks of me. Being a guide has nothing to do with potential regs. changes. It has to do with making fishing better in the long run. I’m an angler first and foremost. The business aspect has to do with promotion by the smaller communities to make non-residents feel welcome. My point was that Lanesboro has it figured out more so than the rest of the communities combined. As a guide, I get lots of requests from people who travel to the area and stay. They want lodging and meals, so I obviously point them in certain directions (I doubt Caledonia is not one of them). Being on the water 70 times a year creates lots of situations where I do more than buy gas at a local store in a small town. It’s not necessarily the locals who drive the tourist economy.

Do your homework here. There’re a ton of studies that point to the high mortality rates regarding bait anglers versus artificial lures. There’s no question that even the fly guys kill some fish; it’s inevitable. My point was that it’s not the fly anglers out there littering (intentionally) and killing fish. I don’t run into so many discarded flies that they are in my way. Hell, I’d love to find my “garbage’ flies left on the stream. I don’t see lots of lead (you’re assuming here that every fly angler fishes with nymphs in the first place and that they use lead). I have yet to run into a discarded fly line, but I’ve found plenty of yards of monofilament, nice heavy stuff too – 12 to 15 pound stuff. Is my point made, or should I keep going?

A definition of a purist (you’re spelling it wrong by the way) according to you is someone like me who apparently is only interested in himself. I’m interested in creating more opportunities to fish in areas where bait is not allowed, areas where there are more slots, areas where there are more no kill regulations, areas where the 14 inch hatchery raised fish do not exist, and areas where the potential to catch larger trout exists. As it stands, if ALL the proposed regs passed (which is probably doubtful), that would affect a whole 18% of all designated trout water, leaving the other 82% under the same regulations we’ve had for years.

I wouldn’t get too hostile; you’ll still have plenty of water to fish. It’s all about compromise….which it doesn’t sound like you’re willing to listen to.

I have to agree with D.A. People in Caledonia and Houston County need to open their eyes and not be so one sided. The LTM plan consists of more than these people are seeing. A better quality fishing experience for everyone benefits everyone. Business owners, land owners, and most important anyone fishing the streams. Think about it, really sit back and think about it. There are over 700 miles of designated trout streams in Southeast Minnesota. The DNR wants to take a small portion of them and improve the quality of trout in them. They are doing this based on all Minnesota trout anglers. ALL of them. I am sure that the DNR will not implement all of the proposed regs. but they will do most of them. Maybe in the future when the people that are so strongly against the changes will have a change of heart as they look at the picture they have with a larger trout they caught in “their back yard”. Look at the rivers out west and you will see what special regulations can do for tourism and fishing quality. I don’t remember which post it was about fly anglers and litter. Yes fly anglers lose flies, but your comment about lead is not accurate. The amount of lead on a single fly is about 1/100th of the amount of split shot it takes to sink a crawler in a stream. 95% of my flies do not have lead. As far as litter, most of the litter I pick up is empty worm cans (light blue plastic ones) cigarette butts, beer and pop cans, plastic bobbers, mepps, rooster tail, and panther martin packages. And honestly one time I did pick up an obviously lost fly box.
Keep up the great work D.A.