Diquat Madness & The Proliferation of Fear-Based Rhetoric

 In April 2024, while pulling my canoe after a mostly unsuccessful day, I ran into a few environmental scientists that were curious about water levels and asked if I'd been out a lot recently. "We take it the river has fallen a lot over the last week," one posited. "Oh yeah," I replied, "quite a few feet". "Yeah, we're not always used to seeing the species we're surveying for six feet up in the trees." he said. These scientists were from a team working with the Army Corps of Engineers, and the species they were surveying for was a highly invasive aquatic plant called hydrilla. Hydrilla's presence in the Connecticut river is relatively new, with first confirmation coming in 2016 in Glastonbury. It is especially noxious, because any time a piece is broken off, it can sprout new roots and make a new plant. This makes it uniquely hard to control as manual removal is not longer an option once density reaches full blown infestation. Control is important, both ecologically and socially, because hydrilla is so prone to rapid spread that it has significant negative impacts on water quality, fish, native aquatic plants, and outdoor recreation like boating and swimming. So control in some form or function is paramount. And this crew was doing preliminary study for herbicide treatment. Work has been done for a number of years studying both the plant itself, monitoring it's spread, and testing possible methods of mitigation and control. This new project sought to determine the efficacy of herbicidal treatments, and the water body I was leaving was to be one of the first test sites on the first year. One of the herbicides in question is called Diquat, and though it's use and application at one site went without major public backlash in 2024, the same cannot be said for 2025. 

FOX61 interviewed protesters they described as "environmental activists" at the state capital as they voiced their concerns on the use of Diquat. One of those interviewed was Selina Rifkin, whose sentiment isn't an uncommon one currently "Spraying horrible chemicals that kill everything into our lakes and rivers. It isn't necessary." A Change.org petition headed by a photo of a handful of dead, floating fish, evidently European species- it looked like crucian and barbel to me -got the messengers point across. Diquat is going to kill everything, these folks firmly believe that. If this were true, there'd certainly be reason to protest it. How could the Army Corps so brazenly poison out waters, and why would CT DEEP sign off on it? 

Way back before I ever put pen to paper about fishing, or knew almost anything at all, my best friend and I dumped a bucket of Diquat is his farm pond. I kid you not, I have real world experience with this poison that kills everything. Young, dumb, and frustrated with summer weeds making it hard to fish the pond the way we wanted to, we sought weed control as a way to better our fishing. His dad got is a big ol' container of Diquat. We read the directions, didn't wear any safety gear of any sort, and did our best to distribute the whole jug's worth across the tiny bass pond. Memory serves me that it did kill off a fair bit of the heavy vegetation, and to our untrained young eyes, nothing else. There certainly was no fish kill, the pond still to this day is loaded with bass, sunfish, bullheads, and all of the wonderful creepy crawlies that those fish eat. We also didn't die, despite definitively doing it all wrong. Hearing and reading a lot of comments about this same herbicide "killing everything" seemed a tad strange. Of course, my experience is anecdotal at best, though perhaps of higher value than much of the commentary currently circulating because at least I have some actual first hand experience... but that isn't enough, not for me. So let's dig into everything we can, shall we? Let's start with the basics. How does this Diquat stuff work?

Diquat is short for diquat dibromide, or 6,7-dihydrodipyrido (1,2-a:2',1'-c) pyrazinediium dibromide. Now that sounds scary... but I'm not a chemist, and if it sounds scary so might this: β-D-galactopyranosyl-(1→4)-D-glucose. That's lactose, that's in natural milk... not scary at all, you just aren't a chemist, most likely. Chemicals always sound scary if you aren't hugely familiar with chemistry and reading chemical formulas. That's fine, neither am I, but we're going to have get a little cozy with chemistry here to understand what 6,7-dihydrodipyrido (1,2-a:2',1'-c) pyrazinediium dibromide does. Basically, it binds to photosynthesizing cells and inhibits that key processes of plant function- turning sunlight into energy. The chemical accepts electrons from Photosystem I, one of a plant cell's two photosynthetic systems. That electron is used to create a reactive oxygen species (ROS), which damages the cell and prevents NADPH and ATP production by that cell. NADPH helps make glucose, lipids, and nucleic acid, and ATP provides energy. It also destroys the cell membrane. Without these things, the cell dies. And when all of an aquatic plant's photosynthesizing cells die, it dies. That's how Diquat kills hydrilla and other plants. It than binds with particles of soil and sediment, usually leaving the water column free of detectable levels within a day or two, though it remains undegraded in sediment indefinitely.¹ Diquat is also used as a desiccant on potato crops and some seed crops used for feed. A desiccant, if you aren't familiar, is something used to dry things out or keep them dry. 

It is entirely reasonable to have concerns about how a chemical compound that completely kills a photosynthetic cell might effect other cells, including outs and the species we care about. This is especially true given that Diquat is banned by many countries and the European Union (many of the people I've seen bringing that point up are also the sort to suggest that the European Union is an overbearing, freedom less hell-scape, so that comes off as a little rich. Sorry, I call it like I see it... you can't have this both ways). Let's start with humans, since we tend to be a selfish lot....

A 63 year old landscaper in Florida admitted himself to the hospital about 90 minutes after drinking a gulp of herbicide from a Gatorade bottle. He would die soon after from multi organ failure. The medical professionals involved in his case did a brief case study highlighting it, as well as the need for further study on diquat poisoning. It doesn't read pleasantly. Upon admission, he was having uncontrollable urination, diarrhea and gastric emesis. By his fourth and final day is the hospital, effects had reached his brain. "On day four of hospitalization, the patient was noted to have new onset dilated pupils and was taken to receive a CT scan of his brain, which showed diffuse cerebral edema and toxic encephalopathy with cerebellar tonsillar herniation and mild hydrocephalus." ² Basically, in the body, the ROS previously mentioned makes hydrogen peroxide. Normally the body detoxifies hydrogen peroxide, but this reaction from the Diquat cycles over and over, overwhelming any chance of that. The case study notes that Diquat poisoning is quite rare, hence the need for further study it sites only 30 cases from 1969 to 1999 with a 43% mortality rate. It also sites that nearly all similar cases in which more than 12 grams of Diquat were consumed result in death within a few days. The same ROS that causes a photosynthetic cell to die leads to multi organ failure. Scared now? It's important to consider concentration. Of course, drinking a full gulp an herbicide that makes a reactive oxygen species and spurs cellular havoc is a potentially deadly proposition. So far no study I can find indicates health risks from exposure to a water body treated with diquat within just a few days of treatment, and that comes down to Diquat's affinity for organic molecules. After dispersion in a water body, it binds with with plant cells it kills, but also with tons of organic particles in the water column and in the sediment on the bottom. It becomes a more or less inert there, no longer present in the water column and allowing aquatic plants (hopefully the native ones, replacing the invasives killed by the diquat) to grow unabated. This is what I watched happen in that pond all those years ago. There was no noticeable evidence of a herbicide in the water just a short time after treatment. Sunlight also degrades diquat based on numerous studies, one citing a photodecomposition half-life of 1.6 weeks.³ So, without too much time passing, the science says there shouldn't be much to worry about so far as swimming, contact with the water, or consuming fish goes. Diquat is dispersed at low comcentrations compated to the fatal dose and is largely undetectable in just days. It isn't recommended to drink water treated with diquat within three days, but, speaking as someone on and around it all the time, you don't want to drink from these Connecticut River backwaters anyway. It might kill you on a good day, Diquat or not. 

Onto other species... that Wisconsin DNR fact sheet makes mention of study on fish, all very Wisconsin. Walleye showed signs of poisoning when contained in diquat treated water, other game and panfish did not. Some fish kills have been recorded in diquat treated waters, especially small ponds. This is most likely a result of oxygenation, as rapid vegetation death and decomposition can use a lot of dissolved oxygen. This shouldn't be a significant problem in the Connecticut, where tides cause a significant amount of water exchange day in and day out. The bigger problem comes with macroinvertebrates, which are indeed vitally important. The same fact sheet states "...certain species of important aquatic food chain organisms such as amphipods and Daphnia (water fleas) can be adversely affected at label application rates." The Army Corps project isn't dismissive of the potential impacts on wildlife, as anyone who cares to sit and read available drafts and proposals for this project can find. Pretty plainly though, labeling Diquat a "poison that kills everything" is more than misleading... its just plain wrong. There is validity for concern with both human and environmental impacts, but most of the posts making the rounds on social media lack rigorous research, citations, or anything that would make them trustworthy. And that's just where the problems start. 

That same environmental activist interview by FOX61 than I mentioned earlier, Selina Rifkin, later on said "There could have been an educational campaign about what this is. There could have been a call for volunteers to pull it out by hand. There could have been some kind of examination of the other possibilities for getting rid of it is, this is, this is a financial option, and it's the easy solution." This is the point where I must admit, I get a little bit pissed off and say... are you kidding me? Every single thing she lists there has been done already, it takes just seconds to find that it has been done, and if anyone actually cares one iota about this issue these words wouldn't leave their mouth. There's a sign at just aviation every launch and put in on the lower Connecticut that tells me what Hydrilla is, how to prevent the spread, and has a nice little picture of what it looks like. The education is there. The Connecticut Rover Conservancy regularly holds manual water chestnuts pulls funded in part by grant money from the state's AIS program I've already written about that. The volunteer effort is available. Information on why manual removal can in fact worsen hydrilla is immediately readily available with a Google search. Manual removal alone will not work. And this entire Army Corps hydrilla project has been about finding the best option to control the hydrilla through multiple means (read here). CT DEEP has also been exploring management options since at least 2021. In hours of research prior to and while working on this cursed blog post that I shouldn't have to write, I found sourse after source after source that partially or wholly refutes every argument being made by the Jonny-come-lately diquat protestors. We are a lazy, triggerable, reactive society that absolutely fails to find the forest through the trees time and time again. I'm not even here to say there isn't some merit to suggesting diquat shouldn't be used, I'm not convinced that it will be an effective treatment on its own. But it also doesn't take much research to make sense of this Army Corps project, why it's underway, and why they're using Diquat on a limited number of waters. Unfortunately, if you've made it this far, I doubt you're the sort that is causing this outrage. If you are though, thank you for sticking around. Please, go to your next argument, make your next comment, attend your next protest, or donate to your next cause armed with legitimate arguments instead of reactionary social media posts. Spend some time researching the topic with actual doctors, scientific papers, and as many different sources as possible. 

Media (both social and mainstream news) failed us on this one, as it has in the past and will continue to in the future. Facebook and Instagram made it easy for people to pass along inaccurate posts. FOX61 and others did a poor job of pointing out inaccuracies in the demonstrator's statements. A petition circled with a blatantly fear-mongering header image, with thousands of signatures and counting. I'm sick and tired of this; if all of these people could have put this energy and effort into being informed and taking action on invasive species, there'd be no need at all to apply herbicide on the Connecticut River. But here we are, fighting a government that's desperately trying to undue the problems we cause, then complain about, then complain about the potential solutions to, then complain about the cost of. It's all very tiring. I have very little hope anymore, but if so many as one person walks away from reading this less inclined to hop on the disinformation train, I guess I've done my part. Read as is spoken through clenched teeth while smashing my mouse to smithereens against my desk: Now its time for me to go clean, drain, and dry the canoe after another day of pulling water chestnuts on the big river, trying to beat a problem that could one day hit me right in the wallet the same way hydrilla has been.

Currently, the Diquat treatment has been postponed till 2026, reportedly for funding issues. 

¹ Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2012. Diquat Chemical Fact Sheet, 

² Daniel M Aloise, Adam Memon, Ana Zaldiver. 2022.  Diquat Herbicide Organophosphate Poisoning and Multi-Organ Failure: A Case Report

³ Smith, A.E. and Grove, J. 1969. Photochemical degradation of diquat in dilute aqueous solution and on silica gel. J. Agric Food Chem. 17:609-613.

More: https://www.nae.usace.army.mil/Portals/74/docs/Topics/CTRiver/Images/Fact%20Sheets%20-%20updated/FACTSHEET-CTRiverHydrilla-ExecutiveSummary-May2023.pdf

https://www.nae.usace.army.mil/Missions/Projects-Topics/Connecticut-River-Hydrilla/

FOX61 Article: https://www.fox61.com/article/news/local/hartford-county/hartford/protestors-voice-concerns-over-diquat-use-in-rivers-lakes-connecticut/520-e3bc1018-b506-4f04-9795-f1c8b9d91079

Video overview of Florida landscaper case: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xmu48JYFTBc

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, Hunter, Gordon, Thomas, Trevor, Eric, Evan, Javier, Ryan and Dar 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. 

Guiding Updates: The Dog Days are Here!

 Summertiiiiime, and the living is....

Muggy. The living is muggy. We've got one gnarly heatwave in the rearview and have settled into more typical summer weather, with most days in the 80's, high humidity, and lows in the high 60's. On trout streams across the state the fish are either posting up in their coldwater refuges, or just dying. It's time to give the freestone trout a rest, and I've got the fix! June was a predictably good month for the warm fishing, especially with bowfin, carp, and some fun topwater bass fishing. It featured a couple great carp days as well, including a second crazy pound-down for Dar (he had a killer day with me in May as well!) 

He got in on the bowfin bite as well with two really good fish. Then, the next day, Michael from Tennessee finally got his bowfin redemption. Last time he fished with me in 2022, we lost a nice bowfin boat side. Then there's Peter with a nice female, and Kathryn with one site fished on a chunk!

The catfish bite has been on the modest end so far, with a lot of smaller fish. I think this is owing to a later than normal spawn, and we're just now starting to get some scratched up post spawn fish. I anticipate July and August to be peak for catfish on the fly as per usual. 

John Kelly bending the rod on a channel catfish

Here's friend and DEEP CARE program instructor Noah Hart with a nice topwater bass and a channel cat from the Connecticut River with me last week: 

Summer can be a glorious time to be a flyrodder. Really, there's plenty more of the above to come. July will be our better month for bowfin as weed growth will eventually get thick enough to make some spots difficult. August has been a peak for channel catfish on the fly but July is good too, and the carp train just never stops. If you're going to book for carp I recommend an early morning half day. 

We're also entering prime time for bass floats, I offer both daytime smallmouth float trips on a number of rivers (including the Connecticut, lower Farmington, Quinebaug, and Shetucket) and evening/nighttime canoe trips for topwater bass. If you'd like to experience summer's best, give me a holler! brwntroutangler@gmail.com

Entitled Recreation

The puritan tiger beetle lives its larval stage in the sediments of a small number of sites along the banks of the Connecticut River. They live in vertically oriented burrows, which may at any time be submerged by flooding. That's fine, they can handle it. In fact flooding is a key to the maintenance of the sandy substrate these beetles need, and the disruption of the flood cycle be dams is one of the reasons there are only a small number of sites that hold these species left. The puritan tiger beetle is a federally threatened at the federal level and endangered in both Massachusetts and Connecticut. I've never seen a puritan tiger beetle, though I've long adored the tiger beetles in general. They're quick, alien looking, and often brilliantly colored insects that pique the "shiny thing" impulse in my brain. Ellipsoptera puritana has a wonderfully patterned back of tan and brown that may have a green sheen, and reflects almost white in the right sun. It fits the sandy habitat they hunt. And with long, slim legs, hunt they do. Tiger beetles are active and effective predators. I'd love to see one of these animals in the wild, but it's a bit hard given there may be fewer than 1,000 left in New England. And in Massachusetts, their plight isn't just being progressed by the dams and flood control that started the process, but by default of their habitat being appealing to people. Because clean sand isn't terribly common on the banks of the Connecticut, the very remaining places that are suitable for puritan tiger beetles make for a pleasant beach day for recreators that are likely blissfully unaware and careless of the imperiled species whose larval burrows they trample underfoot. 

All along the Connecticut River,  recreation has other negative impacts on insects. Odonata species (dragonflies and damselflies) are notably vulnerable. Many species emerge at the river edges on calm days, crawling to the edge and anchoring in place to shed their nymphal shuck and take their winged form. They're sensitive at this time, as it takes time for their wings to harden before they can take off. Sometimes, the wake of a passing boat full of anglers, partiers, or other recreators drowns them before they ever get the chance to take off. These wakes wash the shorelines of the river on a daily basis, even within the slow no wake zones, which were established to protect marinas, not dragonflies. The corpses of these insects and others wash into the silty water, floating lopsided and slightly mangled.  That muddy, silty wash has it's own repercussions. In Idaho, wake boats are being shown to be at fault for water quality issues in Payette Lake. Scientists testing for phosphorous, which stimulates plant and algae growth, found that levels were stirred up more on average by boat wakes than by natural wave action from.¹ My good friend David Gallipoli has been battling for legislation to regulate wake boat use on Payette. It's striking, to David and others, that recreation is as stubborn and detrimental and adversary as it is. "Out of all the extraction industries in the west- mining, logging, drilling -recreation is actually becoming the larger issue in some cases," says David. Living in McCall, he's had a front row seat to the impacts of over-use on the lake. And traveling and recreating all over the mountain west, he's seen other damage and change as well. "Part of it is just education", he says, alluding to the fact that most resource users simply aren't aware of how their activities can cause damage. And who can blame them? It isn't exactly widely available information. 

In upland forests back home in Connecticut, other recreational vehicles are causing all sorts of trouble. ATVs, dirt bikes, and off-road vehicles aren't a rare sight in some larger state forests, and it seems to the riders on them have a taste for the disruptive. On a warm April day I was out to monitor endangered wildlife in some arid upland habitat. The area had a handful of trails frequented by off-roaders. Alongside the trail in one spot was a vernal pool, a spot where I'd observed spotted salamander eggs, wood frogs, marbled salamander larvae, and once even a spotted turtle. Not many years ago off-roaders had left the adjacent trail and taken to the pond, turning it into a muddy, worthless bowl drying in the late spring sun, killing many of the delicate critters that relied on it. I was happy to see that it hadn't been disturbed yet this year. While I was off the trail doing my round, I hear dirt bikes and ATVs pass a few time. On the hike out, I gave the pool a glance again. No disruption. But before I reached the end of my walk out, I came upon a pool in the existing trail. Deeply rutted off road trails create unnatural pooling, and because water is a premium resource in these arid uplands amphibians gravitate to these anthropogenic vernal pools. The riders had ripped through this pool, and sitting next to it was a spotted salamander egg mass, high and dry and left to die in the sun. It hadn't been long though and it was still wet, so carefully I picked it up, made the last strides to my vehicle, and drove that dirt road like a tree-hugging madman to the closest pool. A dozen or so unhatched salamander larvae may be a drop in the bucket, but we're fighting a war of attrition against amphibians and reptiles. So many die in the road year over year, and it's just a matter of time before they lose the battle. I wasn't going to let these ones go without a fight. Whether they actually hatched or not I don't know, but I tried. 

Off-roading directly kills fauna, but that's far from it's only impact. It causes erosion, facilitates the spread of invasive plants, crushed out native ones, and can contribute to pollution. I've seen off-roaders in Connecticut run right up the center of a beautiful spring creek containing brook trout, slimy sculpin, and tiger spike-tail dragonflies. I've watched them rip up gravel bars and cross riffles on rivers that were part of the Atlantic salmon restoration project. I've seen new, unauthorized paths pop up in just a weeks time, right through land that timber rattlesnakes still inhabit, often going just feet within vital geologic structures, or crossing frequent travel routes. Beyond anecdotal examples such as these, this is a well studied topic. Texas biologist Richard B. Taylor compiled a review of literature of the subject, and it's a short and concise indictment on unmitigated off road vehicle use. The studies cited are thorough, from plant impacts ( "Hall (1980) concluded that ORVs reduce perennial and annual plant cover and density, and the overall above ground biomass. The degree of loss is dependent on the intensity of use, although the terms moderate and heavy use are relative and may vary from site to site")², to direct pollution ("Oil has been observed on the gravel beds of the Nueces River and many vehicles frequently ford areas deep enough to dislodge or wash off engine fluids into the river."), to wildlife health and stress ("Havlick (2002), cites numerous investigations that indicate wildlife including birds, reptiles, and large ungulates respond to disturbance with accelerated heart rate and metabolic function, and suffer from increased levels of stress"). This isn't just a recreational vehicle problem though, even mountain bikers or on-foot hikers can have significant negative ecological impacts. How do we justify these negative impacts? Is it really worth threatening endangered species and sensitive habitat just to have fun? 

I'm not immune to this in my own recreation. Fisherman sometimes love the resources we use for recreation to death, and I myself am guilty. We often demand more of fisheries than they can easily give- numbers, diversity, time... fisheries have capacities, and we over fill them. Angler hours, or the time spent by fisherman on a given fishery, are increasing in many places, and it often shows in the quality of the fishing. We've long taken the approach of replacing or inflating fish populations artificially rather than accepting what natural reproduction will provide, to sometimes disastrous ends. Thinking we can bolster wild numbers by making fish in concrete raceways just doesn't meet the evolutionary standard, as generations of fish are made to survive better and better in the hatchery, while wild fish evolve to better and better survive in actual waterways. One of many studies on the efficacy of hatcheries on fish populations focused on the Cowichan River, and the survival of chinook salmon in general was studied, both wild and hatchery raised. The study was performed not to see if the hatchery was working, but because it wasn't. "The hatchery on the Cowichan River has not only been unable to increase the abundance, it has also not been able to sustain the abundances that existed at the time the program started."³ It was a post mortem, of sorts... they were looking to figure out what went wrong. This wasn't an isolated event, either. Time and time again, hatchery programs fail to do what nature could do on its own, or are simply an extremely expensive way to keep fisherman believing that fish will always be there. It saddened me deeply to see that in recent days, as it becomes clearer and clearer that the Chesapeake striped bass spawning stock is failing to produce enough fish to support a strong coastwide fishery, that many anglers have started to push for hatchery supplementation. We are failing the striped bass, and adding more of our own creation will not save the fishery. But people continue to beat up the species, hesitant to adopt less damaging tackle as treble hooks become a clearer contributor to mortality, and unwilling to give them a break when and where they're most sensitive. Are we that entitled? Do we need to fish everything to extirpation? Do we need to ride four wheelers every place we see? Do we need so badly to have fun on the lake that our boat wakes cause a toxic algae bloom? Are we really willing to trample endangered beetles just to enjoy a beach day? These seem to be a very easy list of things to simply avoid doing for the sake of healthy, bio diverse ecosystems. If we can't actually see that the value of those species and habitats exceeds the value of just having some fun... I'm not sure that's a society I want to take part in. I find that despicable. We need to be accountable in our interactions with the natural world, and aware of the fact that every action has and impact. We need to lessen that impact as much as we can, especially when that impact comes from something as expendable as activities like boating, fishing, hiking, skiing, rock climbing, or off-roading. Even as a guide and someone who makes their living off of outdoor recreation, I realize that this is expendable. My job should not exist if it is doing so much harm as to be unsustainable. I do everything in my power to keep it sustainable, and I think my viewpoint on how it is or isn't is a fairly realistic one. I won't leave with remorse if it becomes clear that it isn't possible without undue damage, either, at least not for my own financial situation. My remorse would be for the resources I selfishly damaged in the name of having fun. We aren't entitled to unmitigated recreation at the cost of species and habitats, we are privileged to have access to wild places at all in a world where they are increasingly rare and degraded.

¹ Wakes Worse Than Weather , Max Silverson, McCall Star News. July 18 2024

² The Effects of Off-Road Vehicles on Ecosystems,  Richard B. Taylor, Texas Parks and Wildlife

³Wild chinook salmon survive better than hatchery salmon in a period of poor production, Beamish, R.J., Sweeting, R.M., Neville, C.M. et al.  Environ Biol Fish 94, 135–148 (2012). 

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, Hunter, Gordon, Thomas, Trevor, Eric, Evan, Javier, and Ryan 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. 

The State Record Brown Bullhead

 I called Noah with a fish flopping at my feet next to an old fiberglass spinning rod. It was a rather exceptional one, and also one I wasn't terribly concerned about being out of the water for a little bit. "Dude I just caught a huge brown bullhead. You've gotta see this thing. I'm sending a photo, give it a sec."

"Oh my GOD!"

"Yeah, this thing is f****** monstrous."

And it was. I didn't foresee this, exactly.  The spot was one that had given up some small bullheads on previous attempts the year prior, and a few channel catfish the previous visit. But it was a slow pick spot and had been underwhelming on the whole, never producing more than four fish in a session, and never anything large enough to be of note. But I wasn't convinced, there's always something to figure out. When my rod had bent over about ten minutes prior it didn't seem like anything notable. There was about nine minutes of undoing a gnarly tangle, as the fish had picked up an tracked to the side going right into my other line one rod had ten pound mono, the other had fifteen pound braid, so it was a bit gnarly. Then there was sixty seconds of cranking in the fish which had gone right to the bank and came back right along it. It felt like un insubstantial channel catfish so I was neither hard pressed to land it nor all that excited about it. Then I saw it, and my first thought was that it was a decently sized white catfish. Then it rolled and I saw yellow....

"You uh, might have a state record there" said Noah. "Yeahhhhh this is pretty outrageously big, I'm going to check..." I said. "Yeah, the standing record in under five pounds. I think this fish could be six, it's so f****** heavy."

In a few moments I was calling another angling friend at 9:45 at night... this time John Kelly. "Hey, do you have your certified scale handy? I've got a huge bullhead that I think may be a state record and I want to be sure before I keep it." Groggily, John replied "Yeah, I've got it, where are you?" I explained. "Good, I'll be there in twenty minutes" John replied. Then I was calling Garth. "Dude, I've got a huge bullhead. I think she might be a state record, and I really want to keep her alive". Garth is an aquarist, and I figured he'd be able to help me avoid killing this bullhead for the record. Connecticut has two categories, harvest, for which the fish is retained and weighed on a certified scale. Then the specimen may need to be checked out by a biologist to confirm the species identification. The other category, catch and release, is length specific. I wanted that weight record and was sure this fish would crack it, but I also wanted to try to keep her alive. Because this was a bullhead, which are some of the more durable fish there are, this couldn't be too difficult. They're said to be able to survive dissolved oxygen content as low as .1 part per million. Oxygen isn't the only concern though, and that's why I called Garth. After those two calls I had two friends on their way with things I needed to confirm the record. In no time John was there with the scale, and sure enough she went 5.5 pounds. It was settled, I was holding onto her for a little while. Garth would be a little while, and I soaked bait with John while I waited. Another much smaller brown bullhead came to hand, a tiny white cat, then an average channel catfish. It was getting cold, and I made a few water changes in my small bait bucket to keep the fish lively. She was still full of piss and vinegar then. Any time I grabbed her by the mouth she bit the ever loving crap out of me. Bullheads are hard biters, but I was fine with letting her get back at me a little. 

Garth arrived just as John left, and we quickly transported the bullhead into a cooler. Her fins were red and she was clearly stressed, but not enough so that I was worried. We lingered a while and Garth fished with me, but the bite was poor by that point. So I drove home the flattest way I could, trying not to slosh my new friend in the back around too much. 

The next morning, I got up and took a look. She was swimming around in the cooler, still washed out but fins looking a little better. I rang up Noah again and asked him if he'd like to come up and see her and help me haul the fish to get it weighed. While waiting for him I drove down the road to do a water change to make sure she stayed lively. I then called the closest shop to see if they had a certified scale, and when they didn't double checked the next closest. We rolled into Fishin' Factory III not long later with a cooler. Andrew said he'd had people come in with bullheads before that never made the grade. This one though, she did. And in good time too, Noah fired off a photo of the scale at 5.45 pounds and not soon later she pooped and lost .05. So I had everything I needed to fill the application, and just after getting home I did so. At that point, I felt I needed to name the fish and decided to call her Angela. Angela would be with me for a bit yet, I suspected. As I hit send on the application I recalled a slight debacle a few years prior where a misidentified channel cat was briefly listed as the record. It had been eaten and no biologist got a chance to examine the specimen. Since this beast was a bit out of the ordinary not only in size but subsequently in many identifiable traits, I figured it would need close inspection. sure enough, it wasn't long before I got an email from Mike Bucheane at DEEP asking for more photos of the animal. I took as many clear photos of the fish showing important color and meristic parts: the jaw, the barbels, the anal fin, and the tail. As these photos circulated between the folks at DEEP I got word from Garth that they were confident that it was a brown bullhead, but doing everything possible to be sure. In the meantime I kept Angela's water clean, changing it every few hours while I was awake. Late in the day I got another update from Mike to expect to hear from Andrew Bade, that he would inspect the fish in person. I didn't hear from Andrew until the next morning, but Angela was still swimming strongly at that point and had actually regained her pigmentation. "We didn't realize you were keeping the fish alive!" Andrew told me over the phone. I told him that the monster bullhead was just fine and we made plans to meet where I'd caught her. A couple hours later we were both marveling over the fish as fish nerds do. Andrew Bade is working on smallmouth bass in Connecticut and does a good job of breaking the of-held stereotype anglers have of biologists not actually being all that fishy. He confirmed that my big fish was indeed a brown bullhead, and finally she got to go back where she'd come from. 

Photo Courtesy Andrew Bade

There are perhaps more glamourous records to be held, but I'm glad the first state record I actually secured was a native species. And a commandingly large one at that, not just beating the previous record by an ounce or two. I've got my sights set on other fish though, and this one likely won't be the last. 

Guiding Updates: Rolling Into June

 May has been a pleasant little mixed bag month for me. I was away for a good third of doing non-fish things but catching fish anyway (see my last post for that tidbit). I'll probably write a little more about that trip soon, and possibly some on Patreon. But I guided a good number of trips this mo th while I was around and things were productive on the whole. The floodplain continued to spit out carp, in fact the water finally peaked while I was away and is up at a pretty good level even now if anyone wants to squeeze in one last go at my best selling type of trip. This year wasn't as good for numbers, on the whole, but was pretty darned good for size....

Dave Nguyen wins best of the season- unless something dramatic happens in the next two weeks -with two stud commons including the long 20 pounder above, and a gorgeous mirror as well!

We've been light on the morphs this season, with only one fantail/longfin, one mirror, and no ghosts. Though a bit of everything has been seen, it does seem to take a plethora of six plus fish days to get a good number of those odd ones. Other than the carp, of course, I've been floating the marginal rivers as often as I can. This has been a wonderful extended, wet, cool spring to hold the trout fishing out. This could break at any time and we could pop into high water temperatures at any time, so it's very much a "get while the gettin' is good" proposition. Eric's brother got him a trip for his birthday and he made good of a decent nymph bite and got a good smallmouth eat on the streamer as well! Those double digit days seeing hardly a soul out on some of Eastern Connecticut's best rivers is why I needed a raft and it's been great getting to work many of my old stomping grounds in a new way. 

Going into June, thing look very promising! Here's my guiding agenda for the month: 

Carp are far from over, as always that's still very much on the agenda. June is more of a classic mud flats fishing scenario, and the river can't stay high forever. It'll also eventually transition to more of a morning bite. It already had, but this cooler weather had them going all day again for a bit there. 

Bowfin are the next headliner, one of my favorites and a really engaging sight fishing target. I struggle to sell trips for them for whatever reason, but it certainly isn't the quality of the species of the fishing... people just haven't caught on yet. Don't be late to that party, they're awesome!

Because it looks like the water will stay pretty decent for a while, I'll keep doing trout trips going into June. Dry flies will be the main focus with some streamer fishing when the water levels permit. I'll also do some night time floats on a couple of the big eastern river as well if anyone is interested in that! 

Lastly as far as freshwater goes, pike... the cooler weather and rain has also extended the post spawn pike fishing, so that is yet another good option. 

On the salt, it's already sight fishing time. I've got a handful of dates on the calendar for sight fishing trips already on prime tides, and if sigh fishing for striped bass is something you'd like to learn I recommend  reaching out soon. Last year was pretty darned good when conditions were amicable, and it made up for what would end up being a very poor fall run. I'll take the flats fishing over blitzing schoolies any day, anyway. Of course I'll do multispecies salt trips as well, though that hasn't kicked off just yet, including scup, fluke, weakfish, black seabass, and whatever else wants to play, both of fly and light or ultralight spinning gear. That's been a crowd pleaser the last few years, and as far as fly and light tackle for that game goes I'll confidently toot my own horn and say no other local guides do it as much or as well as I do.

Last but not least, I'm planning on organizing a couple water chestnut pulls locally on the Connecticut River backwaters. I wrote about water caltrop here, and after seeing a few patches pop up in new places over the last two seasons, where they should be manageable with some low-impact hand pulling, I hope to keep the places that pay my bills free of this nasty aquatic invasive species. If you have a small personal watercraft like a canoe, raft, or kayaks and would like to help, reach out to via email at brwntroutangler@gmail.com and I'll keep you updated on when I'm planning of doing pulls. 

Happy almost summer everyone, thanks to all my clients and readers, and stay healthy and safe! 

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, Hunter, Gordon, Thomas, Trevor, Eric, Evan, and Javier 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.