Whales, Windmills, and Activism Gone Amuck

 Frank Mundus fished for monsters. Monsters meant one thing: sharks. The living inspiration for Captain Quint, Mundus was apparently a fittingly eccentric individual to be a pioneer of shark fishing charters out of Montauk. According to Mundus, at the time he started, if shark charters were offered, people turned up their noses. But get people on the deck with the selective marketing of a "monster charter" and they have a lot of fun catching sharks... and probably want to come back and do it again. And some of the sharks Mundus brought to the dock in the years prior to the prohibition on fishing for great white sharks truly did embody the monstrous designation with their shear stature alone. Not to mention how some of them were caught. Mundus' largest white shark weighed in at 4,500 pounds and was harpooned next to a whale carcass off of Block Island in 1964. There's a photo of someone, who at least to me doesn't look like Capt. Mundus himself, standing on the floating humpback whale carcass while a white shark gnaws off a chunk of blubbery flesh. That grainy image, which is hard to find online and only as a photo of the framed photo, captivated me for years. The idea of finding massive sharks grazing on the megalithic carcass of one of Earth's largest living creatures was hard to shake. At the time, whale carcasses were far from unheard of, and finding the odd carcass has long been an effective strategy for finding sharks. 

Then, many decades later, whale carcasses started to become a bit more common. In 2016, what NOAA calls a humpback UME (unusual mortality event) would begin that has at this point not met its end. At this time, 229 humpbacks have died along the east coast. That tally is increased when large numbers of other cetaceans, including two critically endangered Atlantic right whales, are added to it. It's a heart breaking statistic that brings a stall to what had been a successful recovery of many cetacean species along the Eastern Seaboard, and a crushing one for anyone that adores whales and dolphins. When I was a younger lad I was drawing whales obsessively... in the time period just before I was drawing tornadoes obsessively. And, if you asked, I'd say that Atlantic right whales were my favorite animal. I'll never forget seeing my first baleen whale in the wild. They are remarkable creatures, and seeing them makes me feel far less important as an individual of the human species.  But it wasn't until after 2020 that I noted the whale strandings starting to make waves in the fishing world, and for interesting reasons. 

A humpback surfaces within sight of the beach at Race Point on Cape Cod, July 2020

"Today, the Biden-Harris Administration is announcing the 10th approval of a commercial-scale offshore wind project. With this approval, the nation has now approved more than 15 gigawatts of offshore wind projects – enough to power 5.25 million homes, and equivalent to half of the capacity needed to achieve the 30 gigawatt goal." -White House press release, September 05, 2024. 

With a high level of climate related anxiety, much of it warranted, and an example set by countries that have embraced wind power, both offshore and onshore, a democratic administration made a fateful decision to lease the ocean floor to both domestic and foreign energy companies in hopes of adapting the domestic electrical grid to a less carbon intensive form of power. That has become an extremely contentious decision and is especially hotly debated in the saltwater fishing world in the northeast. And in  merely engaging in this debate, I put myself in an unfortunate position. The political climate in this country has become so volatile, so contentious, that I know I stand to anger and lose some of my audience with this post, potentially even run off a client or two, shake up friendships, and risk future revenue streams for my business. But, frankly, I can be silent on this no longer. This issue and the way it is debated anger me to the core, and I need to speak out. I have already lost friends over this, lost them of my own accord. I could no longer stand by and watch people make unsound argument after unsound argument, preaching to a choir instead of making claims with a legitimately strong basis of facts and research to an audience that would actually change their minds, if fed the information in a form that didn't come off as unhinged lunacy. If I dared to say anything contrary to their point, even if I was in agreement broadly, they'd deflect to an entirely unrelated note. So I've had enough, I'm coming out with what I know and what I believe about offshore wind on the Atlantic coast. 

"Green energy" is the term often used to describe non-carbon emitting, renewable energy. Immediately that definition gets sloppy, as the existing infrastructure to build any energy source, whether that source emits carbon when up and running or not, emits carbon, as does the maintenance of it. The "green" also invokes a feeling that such an energy source will be good for the environment, despite the fact that developing undeveloped space is, without fail, going to be damaging to the biome it is built upon. So it becomes clear that green, or in fact clean, are relative terms in this respect. Hydropower burns carbon upon it's initial construction, then creates a barrier that both negatively impacts the hydrology of the river in question and prevents fish species from effectively migrating. So despite the carbon free and often very affordable and efficient product ("The levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) of hydropower worldwide has remained relatively stable throughout the past decade, amounting to 0.06 U.S. dollars per kilowatt-hour in 2022. Hydropower had an average cost of around 6.1 cents per kilowatt-hour that year." -www.statista.com) us anglers in particular have come to consider hydropower very un-clean, and dams are coming down all over the US and Canada. Though the product of finished offshore wind facilities doesn't emit carbon, how much damage occurs to get there, and is it worth it? That's the big question. 

The offshore landscape is no stranger to the sort of development and surveying that goes into making a wind farm. The first drilling in saltwater occurred in the Santa Barbara Channel in 1896. Nearshore drilling began in the Gulf of Mexico in the 1930's. Soon the interest in maintaining control over oil deposits was changing the ownership of the ocean floor when President Truman extended the American ownership of the seafloor out to the edge of the continental shelf in 1945. Today, offshore drilling works like this: the government leases out a section of seafloor to a company. That company then surveys that piece of seafloor using seismic blasting, basically using sound to map out the seafloor and what is underneath, looking for deposits of oil and natural gas. If that company finds a profitable deposit, they will likely extract it using some form of drilling platform, some of which are fixed, some float. The crude oil is then piped or transported to shore. Throughout this process, these companies are regulated and observed to prevent potential environmental impacts. Of course, there's no avoiding negative impacts. The seismic air guns used for oil and gas surveys create a sound at up to 250 decibels, and is shown to be potentially harmful to marine mammals. The drilling process, construction of an oil rig, and pipelines to move the oil also disrupt the ocean floor and existing marine life. Personally, I'd argue that this process is disruptive and not worth it's yield (About 14.6 percent of crude oil and 2.3 percent of gas in the United States were produced from offshore drilling in 2022 -nrdc.org). At this point what already exists it isn't removable in the near future, nor would it make sense to, but each presidential administration brings forward a new set of offshore leases for oil and gas, including the Biden-Harris administration (His Interior Department, which oversees the federal oil program, outpaced the Trump administration in approving new drilling permits. At the same time, Biden leased the smallest amount of public land for drilling in his first 18 months in office than any president since Harry Truman. -Politico) So the proverbial whoring off of the seafloor is neither new nor ending, though to those of us looking out into the Atlantic seeing wind turbines it may sure seem new. I, personally, am not comfortable with these offshore leases in any context and have argued against both oil and gas and wind offshore leases. But let's be careful with equivalency before we've got the facts straight.

Here's where the whales dying along the Atlantic coast comes in. The construction of wind turbines offshore also requires sea floor mapping using sound, and the leading argument against the offshore wind leases is that this surveying, as well as the noise created by the construction itself, are responsible for the rapid increase in strandings of marine mammals. The data to indicate that is occurring is quite scant. There are some that would argue that this is intentional, that it is being suppressed maliciously to push an agenda. And this is where I'm going to lose a few people, even though I'm going to try to convince you all that these windmills are the wrong move ecologically and economically regardless of your stance on climate change, whales, or clean energy. Once someone believes the truth is being suppressed, and that that's why there isn't data, it's very hard to dig them out of that belief. But belief not only in the absence of evidence but because of the absence of evidence is problematic, improvable by it's nature. We lock into it with such gusto as humans, almost as though it were a biological imperative. Should I interview a psychologist about that? Maybe. I could also prop up any belief with the same claim if someone disagrees to exactly the same effect. Don't believe in Sasquatch? It's being censored. FACEBOOK IS HIDING MY POSTS! THIS ADMINISTRATION IS LYING TOOO YOUUUUUU!  I'm not impressed by the main stream media, but the online world isn't remotely trustworthy and if you can't back up your claim without resorting to claiming censorship or pointing to extremely questionable sources that have absolutely no provability, I'm going to dismiss your claim and I'm not sorry about that.  

The people that have already dug in their heels are going to scoff at this. But I don't see much real evidence of censorship or hiding the truth. It's too conjectural, and most of the people involved with collecting the data are not partisan enough to bother "hiding the truth". What truth we do have is that the surveying methods used for wind farms have not been proven to be harmful to cetaceans in the way seismic air gun surveys for oil and gas have, though in most areas where offshore wind development has already been underway for an extended time there are very few large whales to effect anyway. So the data isn't there yet. Even boat traffic noise has been proven to have extremely harmful effects on whales and dolphins ("Researchers placed tracking and noise recording devices on northern and southern resident killer whales in the Salish Sea that sits between British Columbia and Washington state between 2009 and 2014. They found that louder ship noise resulted in longer hunting times for the orcas (Orcinus orca). 'Vessel noise negatively impacts every step in the hunting behavior of northern and southern resident orcas: from searching to pursuing and finally capturing prey,' said lead author Jennifer Tennessen, a senior research scientist at the University of Washington’s Center for Ecosystem Sentinels, in a press release." - Boat noise hampers orcas’ hunting ability, September 26, 2024, The Wildlife Society). Add to that the fact that NOAA issued incidental take permits to offshore wind companies for multiple cetacean species. So, though absence of evidence is a concern, it isn't evidence of absence, and the actions of the regulatory body among increasing cetacean strandings are suggestive that even they aren't confident that the projects aren't harmful to these species. I do have a concern that the surveying and construction process is killing some whales. There are some efforts being made to prevent it, but my own personal bias when it comes to industry and protecting the environment says its simply never enough, regardless of whether a project is billed as "green". Industrialization kills, period.

The problem for these activists is that even if the windmills are killing whales it certainly isn't all of them, and many among the crowd claiming to be in favor of the whales turn a blind eye to many known, proven hazards that definitely are killing whales, including the boat noise  they themselves make on their way to fish offshore. In fact, I found an article about the very orca study I shared above because one of the activists I was once friends with shared it. When I commented, they immediately deflected to wind despite the fact that nothing in the article discussed it, nor the study, nor is any wind lease underway where it took place. Now, anytime a whale, dolphin or porpoise floats up dead or strands, hundreds of people jump to the conclusion that offshore wind killed it before any data is available at all. That is completely in spite of the fact that whales have been floating around since the days Frank Mundus killed white sharks with harpoons and well before. If you argue against something on such shaky ground, no matter how passionately, you are going to look like a fool. The totality of the stranding events hasn't lined up completely with the surveying or construction, though some data extrapolation suggests some concurrence. Clearly, many of the dead whales fell victim to boats and lost fishing gear, both of which are proven hazards effecting marine ecosystems around the world. Another confirmation bias exists as well: more cetaceans are present in the inshore waters of the northeast now than 50 years ago. More whales and dolphins total, more whales and dolphins show up dead. There is more at play here than just wind development, and the rest vitally needs to be addressed too as there is no sign of this unusual mortality event stopping regardless of what happens with the wind industry. That is a heartbreaking fact, and I wish I could do a lot more to stop it. I truly do love marine mammals and whales especially, and it hurts me to see them dying due to any human impact. Ideological consistency, knowledge of the many threats to whales today, knowledge of the history of commercial whaling past and present, and arguments against the countless other things killing whales are scarce among many who have made whale deaths their primary calling card against offshore wind. I wonder why that is? An argument made frequently without definitive data, in ignorance of other issues, with clear biases is an argument that turns people away, even if at the core what you're arguing for has validity. 

Whales aren't all there is to the environment. Like drilling rigs, fixed wind turbines have a large footprint on the seafloor and in the largest planned offshore wind farms there are going to be a lot of them. Some are leased on extremely concerning ground. One often contested has been the Revolution Wind project, part of whose lease extended onto Cox Ledge, an area of vital importance to an already struggling cod fishery. ("BOEM, NOAA Fisheries and fishermen have long debated how to protect cod habitat in the region if turbine arrays are built, with NOAA experts specifically pointing to likely impacts around Cox Ledge. The often-bitter debate was one factor in the Sept. 1 mass resignation of the Rhode Island Fishermen’s Advisory Board, whose members charged the state Coastal Resource Management Council is too deferential to wind development interests at the expense of habitat and fisheries impacts." - Activists seek lockdown on New England wind project, April 25, 2024, Work Boat, Kirk Moore) NOAA designated an area including Cox Ledge as an area of particular concern due to it's value as cod spawning habitat on March 6th, 2024. There are also concerns that fish may not cross the high voltage cables that will bring power ashore from the turbines. There is some data that suggests certain fish species have aversions to or are impacted by these cables, but the data is not very complete as the abstract from one Harvard study on multiple fish species interactions with cables indicates: "Despite this concern, few studies have investigated these effects in free-living species." Wyman, M. T. ; Kavet, R. ; Klimley, A. P., 2016. The mere fact that these concerns are being dealt with post-leasing, and without broad study of the potential impacts, is troubling. Environmentally, from my perspective, this is the biggest screw up. Some will tie it to mal intent, everything I see suggests negligence, haste to catch up to other nations, failures of bureaucracy, and failures of industry and it's urge to obtain more capital quickly. This is also nothing new, environmental studies around drilling leases both in the ocean and on land are not taken as seriously as they should be. We don't always know how the construction, operation, or existence of some infrastructure is going to effect wildlife before it is approved, and at times that means well meaning people approve projects without knowing how detrimental they are going to be. That's not evil, it's dumb. It's a kind of dumb that crosses party lines, trades, ethnicities and disciplines all around the world. It's a part of the human condition. Connecticut recently proposed a bill that would allow housing projects to be pushed through regulatory barriers quicker, which sounds all fine and dandy if you're struggling to afford housing and the housing that gets built doesn't immediately get swept up by corporate landlord... but sounds really bad if you're a box turtle, spadefoot toad, or eastern hognose. Thankfully that legislation did not come to pass, yet. Point being, development without fully taking into account environmental impacts is far, far too common across the board. Even when research does exist, it doesn't always mean regulatory action does everything possible to prevent conflict either. 

This adult timber rattlesnake exists in a population that is losing foraging habitat and more and more prone to road crossing mortality due to development, despite years of radio telemetry study and being listed as endangered in the state of CT.

Environmental impacts came to a head in July of this year when one of Vineyard Wind's recently constructed turbines had a blade fail and crumble into the ocean. Beachgoers have been finding debris on the Cape, the Islands, Rhode Island, and Long Island ever since. I've seen debris from this failure myself in both Rhode Island and Massachusetts. For one of what is to be hundreds of turbines to fail and spew debris into the ocean that has lingered for months is not in any way a confidence boost that these projects are in fact "clean" and "green". CNN reported that this wasn't the first time a blade built by the same manufacture failed in this way ("Several GE Vernova blades have broken on onshore and offshore turbines in Germany, Sweden, Lithuania and the United Kingdom in recent years." -The broken wind turbine near Nantucket was ‘highly unusual and rare.’ But it wasn’t the first,  Ella Nilsen, CNN, July 20, 2024). This incident pulled even more people into the advocacy against windmills, and for good reason. It was an unsightly source of pollution and environmental mess. 

It seems to me that wind isn't a step down enough from the negative impacts of carbon-based offshore resource extraction, but how exactly does it scale on a cost effect basis? Wind isn't going away, after all, it is a legitimately renewable resource. But building and maintaining large pieces of infrastructure in the turbulent Atlantic is a costly effort. Vineyard Wind's project is estimated to cost 4 billion for 62 turbines, Ørsted had put 4 billion into two projects in New Jersey that were expected to cost 10 billion. but have now already been canceled, and many billions are being invested into other projects, some of which is being federally subsidized. Offshore wind consistently ranks among the costliest sources of electricity. ("The levelized cost of electricity of a subsidized US offshore wind project has increased to $114.20 per megawatt-hour in 2023, up almost 50% from 2021 levels in nominal terms, according to BloombergNEF calculations" -Soaring Costs Stress US Offshore Wind Companies, Ruin Margins, BloombergNEF, Atin Jain, August 1, 2023). Land based wind, solar, combined cycle gas, and geothermal are all cheaper per mega watt hour and are efficient and may in cases be comparatively cleaner and greener than offshore wind.  As is always the case, consumers are going to foot the bill when costs are high. Connecticut Governor Ned Lamont is already wavering on contracts that Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and Connecticut were slated to enter over concerns of the high cost and how it will impact Connecticut residents ("Lamont said he’s concerned about the price the states will receive from vendors. His decision comes as customers continue to raise frustrations with a July 1 electricity rate hike, but Lamont said his concern goes back longer than that." -State not joining regional wind power purchase amid price concerns, Mike Savino, NBC Connecticut, September 18, 2024).  

So offshore wind is expensive, may be being built without enough environmental scrutiny, and already some turbines are crumbling into the ocean. What do we do, then, if someone doesn't think offshore is detrimental, what's the best way to convince them? For me, it was political sycophancy, and that's what I watched a whole slough of fisherman settle into. Some reading this who don't know me well could possibly be working backwards from a conclusion. I'm against offshore wind. Donald Trump is vehemently against offshore wind. So I must be voting Trump. 

There are people who are doing that; that's one of their biggest reasons for voting and publicly advocating for the republican nominee. For me that couldn't be further from the truth. Conservation is indeed one of the biggest issues I vote on- without healthy ecosystems, clean water, biodiversity, and so on we are screwed. Almost every detail I see doesn't paint the potential future republican presidential administration in a very pro-conservation light at all. Those voting based on the candidate's position on offshore wind apparently are blind to the fact the he has out-rightly advocated for rendering species extinct. A "tiny little fish" as Trump once said at a rally in 2016, the functionally extinct delta smelt is a signifier for the health of the vitally important and endangered Sacramento–San Joaquin River Delta. Water diversion from the delta to agriculture and cities in California puts the ecosystem, and restoration efforts for the delta smelt, in jeopardy. With reintroduction efforts struggling, the small species became a talking point for Trump, who essentially argued that sucking the Delta even drier for the sake of feeding the water-starved industries and people of California was much more important than a species on the brink. This rhetoric revolved around the idea that water was being let out to sea instead of used, failing to take any consideration for exactly how the existing reservoir system works or how the delta itself functions. If less fresh water were allowed to flow through the delta, saltwater would back-up into the tidal estuary, rendering a lot more of it less usable by agriculture. So it's kind of rich to see anyone hitching their anti-wind car to the anti conservation train of a pro-extinction, completely science illiterate candidate whose platform has included fully eliminating the EPA and NOAA as well as landmark environmental protections like the Clean Water Act and Clean Air Act, and who already eliminated protections for vital sea-floor habitat in the Atlantic not far from where these wind leases. There's inarguably more at stake from the expanding of oil and gas drilling, mining, selling off public lands, ignoring climate change, and putting lobbyists and businessmen in positions of authority in government agencies controlling environmental regulation than in offshore wind alone. There's some reasons to support Trump that I understand (but don't agree with), but conservation? It's laughable, and it's one of the reasons many of those fighting the fight against windmills struggle to gain ground among those that don't already agree with them, aside from just making bad arguments unjustified by data and just being outrageously despicable to the people that disagree and even threatening the marine biologists that work on examining stranded marine mammals and saving those that are still alive. 

By the same token, I won't be a sycophant for the Democratic Party's environmental failures. Though the Biden administration made some significant improvements and provided funding for some projects that will preserve the sanctity of some habitats and species, it wasn't enough. In the case of offshore wind I do believe its a step in the wrong direction. I long ago understood that under any administration I'll be fighting a hard- often even losing -battles to protect habitat and species. It's just a matter of who will make things measurably worse across the board for that battle. That leads me to the solution... if it isn't wind, how should we modernize our electrical grid, to diminish reliance on carbon based energy and preserve as much habitat as possible, while also keeping the cost to the population down? Obviously any solution is going to be complex and multi-facetted, but I'd argue that solar power should be a huge part of the equation. Specifically, solar on existing developed infrastructure instead of solar fields on what could otherwise be preserved woodlands, meadows, or farmland. There are acres upon acres of land that we've already paved or built on. Somehow, we need to integrate solar energy production into that already developed land ("This is how it typically goes with solar arrays: We build them on open space rather than in developed areas. That is, they overwhelmingly occupy croplands, arid lands, and grasslands, not rooftops or parking lots, according to a global inventory published last month in Nature."-Why Putting Solar Canopies on Parking Lots Is a Smart Green Move,  Richard Conniff, Yale Environment 360, November 22, 2021). The infrastructure would blend well into the modern landscape anyway, and could likely be integrated into the grid in a way that is less susceptible than to both damage from severe weather and foreign interference. Strong, modernized nuclear power, though it has a wide cost range and can be very expensive, does have a place in filling the void given the intermittent nature of solar power. Geothermal energy also has a fitting place despite some complexity issues. We also need to be advocating for less energy intensive development and simply be using less as much as possible, moving away from suburban sprawl, adapting cities and towns to walkability and public transportation,  and so on. These are workable goals, and if more of the electorate were informed and advocating for them we could be in a far, far better place across the board with environmental issues, energy efficiency and safety, cost to the public at large, traffic, jobs... the list is extensive. I think the fishing community, which is predisposed to activism in many way, has a real potential to make positive impact. The problem is we keep falling pray to the conspiracy ridden world of being chronically online. Information is spread quickly and without forethought or real insightful skepticism. Nuance and complexity is also often thrown aside. Many view these issues and the world as black and white, which they absolutely are not. That mindset and the bad arguments it breeds taints the conversation, scares away people that would otherwise be great advocates, and results in losing ground that didn't need to be lost. My advice is simple: get the hell of social media, read scientific literature, get involved hands on with real conservation groups with proven track records of in-field work, take steps to mitigate your own impacts, actually listen to people that have something to say that is contrary to your own opinion, but be critical of whether something is factually based or just an opinion. It's also okay to be wrong. In a world where ignorance is used as an insult and everyone is ignorant to most of the vast swath of knowledge there is to know or not know, we need to change the perception of ignorance. You definitely are ignorant. You reading this... you are wrong about something. You might even be very, very wrong about something. That's okay, as long as you're willing to allow room for your mind to be changed. It's when ignorance is willful that it becomes problematic. I'm definitely wrong about things, no question. But I'm also entirely willing to have my mind changed and will do so when the facts dictate it. We need to be less certain as individuals. And just fucking be kind for God's sake. I ended my last post with this sentiment and I mean it: We can do better. We need to do better. 

Appalachia

 Winding roads swung through the hilly back woods of the American South, taking me closer and closer to a land I'd dreamed about for years. North Georgia sits at the southern end of the Appalachian Mountains, a range often sneered at by westerners for being hills rather than mountains... and maybe that's true, but these old hills sure are special. And you can still get lost here, whether you want to or not. At this moment I was trying to get lost, temporarily, in a drainage that held fish species that I'd never caught before, black bass and shiners isolated from even relatively nearby drainages long enough to evolve into something distinguishably different. Because the Appalachian Mountains effectively divide many watersheds, draining in almost all directions, the region has incredible diversity of freshwater fishes. From various redhorse, to a broad variety of darters, to minnows, to the redeye bass complex, it seems the deeper you dive into Appalachia the more interesting it gets. The diversity goes beyond fish of course. From Georgia to New York, the variety of salamanders, dragonflies, mushrooms, and trees is striking. From the small and slim Southern zigzag salamander of the south to the robust and vibrant Northern red salamander, it's remarkable what critters have evolved here. And the diversity of peoples reflects here too. Isolation has meant that odd little cultural pockets exist in Appalachia. The dialect of Southern Appalachia is distinct enough to be the source of mythology, some claiming it to be a relic of Elizabethan English. You can certainly hear odd twangs of Scottish here and there, though plenty of other dialectic influences have played into what you'd hear today. The seemingly quirky way Appalachians speak is, unfortunately, often pegged as uneducated or crude, ignoring the history of language in favor of looking at the often subsistence living and poor population of the region as backwards hillbillies. But when an Aussie uses "reckon", do we think them a backwards moron? Of course, some place names don't help... who the hell named the Left Fork Right Fork Little Kanawha River? The people that live in these hills aren't stupid though, you can't carve out an existence here and be dumb. They may be left behind though, of no fault of their own. 

Dropping into the valley carved by the Chattooga River, the natural border between Georgia and South Carolina, I said goodbye to cellular service and pulled into an empty parking lot to rig up and get ready to catch fish I'd never seen before. The water was both familiar and not. Once you've seen enough freestone rivers you get how they work- hydrology changes very little. The bedrock here was from a formation I'd never tread on, and it wasn't recognizable stone to me. But it broke and tumbled and formed the shape of the land much in the same way as plenty of rock I had seen, so reading it was no struggle. I fished my way though boulder strewn pools picking off small Bartram's bass and warpaint shiners. The bass were a little bit like creek smallmouth bass, but not quite. They held in similar water, and were aggressive, but very much one hit wonders. I think they fought harder than smallmouth of the same size. The warpaint shiners were a little bit like spottail shiners, but not quite.  They held in small schools, though in somewhat different water, and they ate small flies with impunity just like spottail do. 

Though those were new species to me, both one's I'd wanted to catch for years, what struck me most was a species I'd caught plenty of in other states. In fact I've caught redbreast sunfish everywhere from Maine to Virginia. But the redbreast in the Chatooga River? In my unprofessional opinion, that's a different fish. And it's a prettier fish too, I think. The coloration on each redbreast I caught, with vibrant deep red bellies crackling harshly into a turquois blue, was just astonishing. 

I didn't expect to find that, those redbreast sunfish were a very pleasant surprise. After having my fill of gorgeous redbreast sunfish, fiery Bartram's bass, and elegant warpaint shiners, I packed it in to meander through parts unknown to me. My time in southern Appalachia has been limited, and I'd never yet been to Tennessee. I decided to meander through North Carolina toward Johnson City. 

A funny thing happened as I went. The winding, steep roads and their hairpin curves were drawing me out of the country I'd idealized and wanted to see. Small plot farmsteads, tight communities perched on the edges of hollers, and robust mature forest began to give way to huge homes scattered across hillsides, wider roads, golf courses, and progressively more and more traffic. The infrastructure was new and shiny and unfitting. No Trespassing signs pocked with bullet holes began to be replaced by large "For Sale" signs. A clear, tumbling spring paralleling the road gave way to a muddy ditch running silt out of a cul-de-sac still under construction. 

For a short time a couple years ago, the internet seemed insistent on advertising real estate in North Carolina to me. I don't know what algorithmically made any sense about that, but it got worse, because at least for a little while I engaged with it out of curiosity and a not insignificant degree of disgust. It was all about horridly ugly McMansions on large land plots, many a significant commute out away from the larger population hubs. The selling points were a mild climate, mountain views, and a quiet setting. My disgust came from a place of knowing what that land was, or in some cases still was, as the advertising was for whole tracts to be subdivided, and just how insanely and unnecessarily impactful this development was. Instead of leaving these lower hills intact and biodiverse and building convenient, architecturally sound multi-family homes closer to where both work and necessities exist, these developments were sprawling out into what was some quite wild land not that long ago. Disdain is the appropriate description for how I looked at all that real estate advertising, the people profiting from that land development, those who were moving into it, and the powers that be that fail to prevent land waste from occurring.  All of that advertising had made me aware that this sort of rural gentrification was happening, but seeing it in person was brutal. I clenched the steering wheel and gritted my teeth more and more as I continued Northeastward toward Asheville. 

Asheville itself is a small city, sitting at a population of 95,056 in 2023. The whole metropolitan area totals over 410,000 people  It's growth has been more or less steady and has been predicted to continue. Asheville has seen a few booms and busts through its history. Tucked up into the hills at the broadest part of the Appalachian chain, the town was a perfect outpost location. The first real boom that pushed Asheville toward being the city we see now occurred in the 1880's as rail travel made it accessible and it became a safe and beautiful escape and started to attract exceptional wealth. George W. Vanderbilt's famed Biltmore Estate occupies a 120,00 acre piece of land in Asheville. In the image of the huge estates in England, Biltmore is a striking piece of architecture. In  1916, Asheville thrived off of its textile production and other industry until the Great Depression, which hit it like a ton of bricks. The town stagnated into the 1980's, with the lovely side effect of much of the historic architecture remaining. That history, the tolerable climate, and a reputation for being quirky and weird in a wonderful way have lead to the cities revival and economic improvement in the time since. 

On Friday, September 27th, 2024 around 6:00pm EDT, the French Broad River in Asheville peaked at 24.67 feet according to USGS. The previous record from the same gauge was 23.1 feet. Around the time rivers throughout Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Tennessee were breaching their banks and sweeping away roads, bridges, homes and business. Rain from the dissipating Hurricane Helene, all moisture picked up by the monster storm in the Gulf of Mexico, was pounding the landscape mercilessly. It completely overwhelmed standing infrastructure, blowing out culverts and embankments that were never constructed to handle such volume. In the more developed area like Asheville, improved surfaces exacerbated runoff rates, and land that had once been mature forest turned into sheet-flow, worsening what would have been a dire situation anyway. Roads- everything from major highways to dirt tracks -electrical infrastructure, and water mains crumbled, cutting off some small communities. Hundreds would die. Those left in the wake of the floods stand in towns forever changed. Some of them had lost everything to the turbid waters. As we stand now, time estimates on vital infrastructure repairs, even including major highway bridges, extend out a decade. 

This devastation was in stark contrast to years of Asheville and some other similarly situated towns being dubbed "climate havens"- places immune to devastating severe weather and harsh seasonal temperatures. The media push to label such places certainly didn't discourage their growth, and many areas have seen population and development booms in turn. Nowhere is really immune though. I'm not here to suggest that Helene and a major Appalachian flood event couldn't happen without human-caused climate change- it certainly could, the gulf of Mexico has been spinning up violent hurricanes forever. Asheville experienced a similar but slightly less impactful flood in 1916 from the remnants of another dissipating tropical cyclone. But the idea that any place is a haven from dangerous weather? All it takes is one storm, and the more people and their dwellings, businesses and infrastructure are distributed about an area, the worse the toll will be. Failing to take into account possible extremes is human nature. We build in ways we shouldn't in places we shouldn't... like covering an entire slope of a mountainside with huge mansions, long paved driveways, and barren, open grass lawns. The land can't take this, and neither can we.

 As I curved back west out of the pre-Helene, busy and prosperous Asheville and the landscape slowly lost signs of recent development, I began to relax again. Crossing the border into Tennessee, the landscape was breathtaking. 

There's a haunting beauty about the wooded East, in more ways than one. The history stretches back plenty far to build up centuries of lore, much of it steeped in fear. From serial killers stashing bodies back in the hills, tales of UFOs and aliens, ghosts with malicious intent, perhaps the most wonderful regional name for sasquatch (wood boogers), and a number unsolved disappearances and solved but gruesome murders, there is a lot to capitalize on in the weird and disturbing realm when it comes to Appalachia. And ragging on how spooky and even dangerous the region is has become quite popular among the click bait riddled realms of modern social media. Throw some clips of foggy woodlands, run down shacks, and sepia tone AI generated images of moonshiners together with foreboding music and you're sure to please the masses. Just days ago I heard some creator's narration "we all know how dangerous Appalachia is" at the start of some TikTok video while my partner was scrolling. It makes me chuckle a little with its absurdity. Dangerous compared to what? We seem so keen to make everything scary. Crime is up in the cities! Move out to the country, where a hillbilly will dismember you and feed you to his pig while he's talking to the demon that lives in his well. Everywhere is dangerous, really. There are indeed be some back hollers in West Virginia where the locals are none too thrilled at the idea of outsiders showing up. But can you blame them? A lot of that demonization revolves around poorness, as it so often does, and nobody likes to feel looked down upon. People, no matter where they live, are neither a novelty nor something to be treated as inferior. It seems to me much of the media revolving around Appalachia doesn't take that to heart at all. 

In the wake of Helene, the residents of Appalachia are picking up the pieces. They're resilient people and community oriented, but it can't be easy. Places they've known and loved don't look the same and may never again. They've lost family and friends. The scope of the damage in both severity and area, as well as the rugged and remote nature of some of the mountainous southeast have made recovery and response an exceptional challenge. And on top of that, in a brutally contentious election cycle, they've been used as political pawns as conspiracies spiral over FEMA funding and weather control. None of it helps put back the pieces. If you'd like to actually be a good participant in the community and can spare a dollar, look to donate at local charities, the closer to the endpoint the better. Here are a couple region-wide relief funds to consider: East Tennessee Foundation, North Carolina Disaster Relief Fund. Another good move is just patronizing businesses throughout the region that were impacted. Recovery efforts are at a point now that many areas are re-opening, and visitors aren't so much in the way. Don't go to gawk at the damage and people's misfortune, go to appreciate one of the most beautiful parts of this country, it's history and culture, and some of the incredible fishing that exists there. Book a trip with a guide in Western NC, Eastern TN, or Southwestern Virginia. You can also search the hashtag "fliesforappalachia" to find some tiers auctioning off flies and donating the proceeds. Kudos to Ryan Waldrep for getting the community involved. 

We can do better. We need to do better.

Thank you to my Patrons; Erin, David, John, Elizabeth, Brandon, Christopher, Shawn, Mike, Sara, Franky, Geof, Luke, Noah, Justin, Sean, Tom, Mark, Jake, Chris, Oliver, oddity on Display, Sammy, and Cris & Jennifer, Courtney, Hunter, Gordon, Thomas, and Trevor for making Connecticut Fly Angler possible. If you want to support this blog, look for the Patreon link at the top of the right side-bar in web version.

Gierach

 Many things set me on the path I follow today. One such thing is a copy of a book titled No Shortage of Good Days, by John Gierach. That copy sits on a shelf next to a number of pieces of literature, now far more tattered and worn than it was when it came into my possession. Actually I think I'll grab it now so it sits next to me while I finish writing this short post. The page and cover corners are folded, some torn, and brownish stains mar the lovely illustration on the cover. This collection of stories from Gierach's fly fishing adventures was an introduction into non-fiction fishing writing that wasn't a how to. The stories within weren't there to tell me how to tie knots, or read water, or cast a fly rod. Sure, there were little bits in there, but only to further the stories. The stories were to entertain. They were true, apparently, but laced with humor and were about more than fishing. This goal wasn't unfamiliar to me as I was on an atypical path compared to the other kids my age in school. I was reading mostly nonfiction novels at the time, spanning a broad range of my own interests from geology (John McPhee's Anals of The Former World) to exploration (Alvah Simon's North to The Night). I enjoyed reality but through someone else's perspective, true things told from a specific voice. No Shortage of Good Days was my first introduction to that with fly fishing. That novel means rather a lot to me. It's a not insignificant reason why this silly blog exists, and how the words running across this page exist at all. It steered my course as a writer, and it's one of many things that resulted in me being where I am now. 

So, thank you John Gierach. You will be remembered fondly. 

Thank you to my Patrons; Erin, David, John, Elizabeth, Brandon, Christopher, Shawn, Mike, Sara, Franky, Geof, Luke, Noah, Justin, Sean, Tom, Mark, Jake, Chris, Oliver, oddity on Display, Sammy, and Cris & Jennifer, Courtney, Hunter, Gordon, and Thomas for making Connecticut Fly Angler possible. If you want to support this blog, look for the Patreon link at the top of the right side-bar in web version.

Water Ghosts

 Emily called them "little water ghosts". Dozens of jellies floated and pulsed in the hazy green bay upon we floated on a warm, breezy mid September day. They were ghostlike but tangible, lingering in view for extended time and existing their extraordinarily simple little lives. Jellies waft with the ebb and flow of the tide and other currents. This means they're plankton, which may buck a traditional sense of the word. Planktonic animals are often though of as microscopic, or at least very tiny. But jellies aren't strong enough to fight the tide, the ride with the flow, and that makes them plankton. 

These jellies were mostly Sea nettle, Chrysaora quinquecirrha. Smaller, more transparent, and perhaps more elegant than the often seen Lion's mane jellyfish that are also numerous in long island sound. They were so numerous that some drifted into my anchor line, losing bits of their long and delicate tentacles as they did so. Though just a minor irritant to a human swimmer, these jellies are death incarnate to tiny fish and crustaceans. Passive as they are though, it is very much up to the prey to make an error. The jelly is not going to chase it down.

As I pulled up my anchor line, it tugged through a Sea nettle, breaking bits off of its long tendrils. This seemed to upset me more than it did the jelly as it continued pulsing away as though nothing had happened. I never like breaking bits off of a living thing needlessly, even if it's a mindless little water ghost. 

Thank you to my Patrons; Erin, David, John, Elizabeth, Brandon, Christopher, Shawn, Mike, Sara, Franky, Geof, Luke, Noah, Justin, Sean, Tom, Mark, Jake, Chris, Oliver, oddity on Display, Sammy, and Cris & Jennifer, Courtney, and Hunter for making Connecticut Fly Angler possible. If you want to support this blog, look for the Patreon link at the top of the right side-bar in web version.

Gotta Be a Mango Tree Here Somewhere

 The rumble of the Honda 2.3 disturbed the cool, foggy south Jersey morning as Joe Cermele navigated his Clackacraft up a winding, murky river. In the front was Drew Price, wearing the weary, somewhat tired, but a little bit hopeful mask that anyone has on after three days of doing little other than fishing. I had the same mask on. We'd fished hard in my neighborhood for two days leading up to this. It had been pretty good, too, and I'd managed to get Drew on 11 new species and hybrids on the fly in all sorts of water, from mile long jetties to tiny cemetery ponds. There were some notable chunks of inactivity but there are pretty much any time you voluntarily fish for about 14 hours straight two days in a row. 

Fishing that hard can be a bit of an unfamiliar concept to many folk that call themselves fisherman. Even avid fisherman aren't frequently fishing that hard. There's probably the healthier way to fish anyway, here and there for a few hours throughout the week or some long hard trips scattered through the year. Drew and I beat ourselves up, this wasn't the first time. Last fall I drove up to Vermont to fish with Drew on a boiling hot day after he had a client, pounded big bowfin that afternoon, beat up drum the next day, floated for musky the day after that, I went out on my own and stuck a nice one on foot the day after that, drove to Saranac Lake the next day, I slept in my 4Runner next to the Ausable that night and fished in the Adirondacks all day the next day, then went back to Drew's area to microfish....

Fishing hard this way isn't great for the body or the mind, and I'm not quite sure we do it. A focused angler may not drink as much as they should, or will miss a meal here and there. When we do eat, it isn't infrequently absolute garbage. We may apply sunscreen at the start of the day, or wear good protective clothing, but there's always something exposed that gets singed. On this trip it was my lips. They felt and looked more or less like a desert watering hole in a drought. I was applying chapstick prodigiously but it wasn't saving it. As I type this some cracks and cuts are still there. 

All that hard fishing was the lead in to this river, and a highly intriguing target species. The catch that started it all happened in Crofton, Maryland in 2002, tipping of fisheries biologists to the start of an invasion. Soon the media was running with it, building a mythical reputation around the species, one that almost matches fear mongering in current events. No, Channa argus won't climb out of the Potomac and eat your pet Chihuahua. Invasive fish are certainly not joke, and the northern snakehead should never have ended up in the waters of the Mid Atlantic states. But the media ran with it and ran hard, while other arguably more impactful invasives didn't get nearly the amount of press. I wasn't hearing rumors about blue catfish climbing into people's lawns with evil intent.... 

Northern snakehead did spread, and certainly hurt native species, but along the way they've attracted quite an angling following. Joe Cermele is one such devote of the snake, as evidenced by his profile image image as Fishing Editor for Outdoor Life and in the many media forms he's presented over the years, from video to articles to podcasts. Cermele is ate up with the snakeheads. And he really wanted Drew and I to see just why it was he was so taken with these invasive fish.

We had completely unearned hope in the boat that morning. As anglers, if we can't be optimistic what do we have? The mist rose off the water in cool tendrils as the light of the new day shot across the sky in yellow and orange. Piscivorous birds lingered on the banks and dead trees until the rumble of the motor was too loud for them to abide. Gentle ripples and swirls emanated from surfacing gizzard shard. Carp bubbled, rolled and tailed along the banks. It was quiet but lively away from the main artery of the turnpike and the grime and garbage that lined it. This all felt very Apocalypse Now, though we cracked lines from a drift boat, not a PBR, and instead of Colonel Kurtz the foe we hunted with extreme prejudice was a fish with an elongate dorsal fin, narrow face, and ornate, python like patterning along its flanks. 

 I flexed my fingers as I watched a great blue heron take off from its morning hunting spot. My hands didn't quite feel all there after one day of making cast after bank pounding cast, and looking down I flexed each finger one at a time. I regretted fly line choices, as the floating line I'd brought wasn't quite short and punchy enough in the head for this sort of fishing. It had made me work harder and both my callouses and muscles felt it. I acknowledged this with some indifference and looked back up to the bank, eyeing bits of structure that could hold what we were looking for. Some edges held an almost clover like vegetation that stuck up from the water's surface on short one to four inch stems, bright green and tightly packed, looking like the perfect place for a notorious predator to lurk. The streaking, out-of-nowhere strike of an angry snake was hard to picture but easy to want in that moment. The day before we'd seen but two fish, and only one of them had bothered to move to a fly and had done so only tentatively. Their lack of interest in all of our offerings and seeming absence from most of the water that should have held was a source of frustrating bewilderment for Joe, and Drew and I just had to follow the lead given our lack of experience. Yet we were still optimistic as we started again... why? We always are, each fresh start makes a fisherman feel like things are new and fresh. And they are, to some extent. But if we'd really thought about it, this day wasn't so different. The night was about as cool, the forecast high was the same. The barometric changes were there but minimal and the wind would kick up from the same direction. The moon was only a day advanced and the flow and water clarity was the same. The only real change was an early start, which Joe admitted rarely factored into snakehead success. 

When he'd gotten where we needed to be, Joe cut the motor, got in the rowers seat and Dre and I began pounding banks with loud topwater flies once again. Signs of life were positive and it wasn't long before a few largemouth bass showed interest. 

But that was just a tease. This day would beat us into submission too. We torture ourselves sometimes. I'm not quite sure why. 

 Thank you to my Patrons; Erin, David, John, Elizabeth, Brandon, Christopher, Shawn, Mike, Sara, Franky, Geof, Luke, Noah, Justin, Sean, Tom, Mark, Jake, Chris, Oliver, oddity on Display, Sammy, and Cris & Jennifer, Courtney, and Hunter for making Connecticut Fly Angler possible. If you want to support this blog, look for the Patreon link at the top of the right side-bar in web version.