A recent Fox River fishing post I made ended with the following paragraph:

Oh yeah, once beautiful Fox vistas are being ruined by bright yellow signs telling people people how long it takes for a smallmouth bass to get to 12 inches. And please don’t eat them. Useless info.

This was in reference to the signs that the Illinois Smallmouth Alliance puts up along waterways throughout Illinois. To me, they are no better than billboards along a highway. Visual clutter that nobody reads.

Apparently criticism isn't taken lightly by the ISA. Based on some recent email, my comment was met with a bit of disdain.

Funny part is, some recent conversations I had regarding this shows that there are quite a few people out there, including current ISA members, that think the signs are a waste of time, for various reasons.

A few years ago I was actively involved with the ISA and spent a lot of time and energy promoting the organization.

While with the ISA I didn't think much of the signs, water willow plantings and cleanups along the Fox River. These were all things that could be done after all the water quality issues of the Fox were addressed. Back then there were numerous studies under way to determine what effect dams were having on the river. Other studies regarding point source pollution were also under way in order to begin to determine if there were ways to minimize their impact on the river.

These are issues that to this day still need attention.

If the ISA were to spend as much time and energy on Fox River water quality issues as they spend on these secondary issues, a number of things may have happened by now . . .

The Dayton Dam would have been removed. The Yorkville dam probably wouldn't have been rebuilt. The North Batavia dam would probably be gone by now. Montgomery and North Aurora dams may have had a chance of being removed. More discussions on the Geneva and South Elgin dams would have occured by now.

Mill Creek, Waubonsie Creek, Blackberry Creek and Big Rock Creek may be almost all dam free by now.

At a dam removal meeting years ago the head of the IDNR Office of Water Resources said that if one more person died at the Yorkville dam, the dam would be removed, not rebuilt.

When 3 people died at that dam a couple of years ago, a few days before construction began to rebuild the dam, where was the ISA? If they have the clout they say they have, and I know they have the ear of the Lt. Governor through Marc Miller, why was that dam rebuilt?

Imagine the impact removing all these dams would have had on the overall water quality of the Fox River. How many more miles of free flowing water would there be. How many more miles of free flowing creeks would there be for their beloved smallmouth bass to go up and spawn.

Instead, we have these intrusive yellow signs begging anglers to preserve and protect just one species in the river. I guess the other species don't matter. Add a few hundred yards of planted water willows along a few shore lines, a couple of trash clean ups and that's about it.

After all I said regarding water quality is accomplished, then talk of fish species protection can begin. After a few years of returning as much of the river as possible to a free flowing state, then shore line restoration can be discussed.

I pushed for this as a member of the ISA and basically got nowhere.

I don't believe for a second that actual pollution levels have decreased and water quality has improved due to the posting of these signs. Based on the fact that I fish miles of the river every year and never run into anyone, posting them in out of the way places makes no sense. Concentrating them around a dam might help, but there are no hoards of anglers out there trying to wipe out the smallmouth bass population. And the handful that might keep one from near a dam has virtually no impact on the rest of the river.

At the height of the dam removal controversies a few years ago I was out walking along a bike path on the Fox River and ran into an IDNR fisheries biologist that was actively involved with Fox River water quality studies and all the dam removal issues.

I asked him what he thought the real chances were of getting some of these dams removed. His answer stunned me.

I don't think removing them matters anymore. After an upward spike in the quality of the river a few years ago, we're already seeing a downward turn. If you took out all the dams tomorrow, it may be too late. The downturn may be irreversible.

It's called big picture.

The ISA needs to get a grasp on it, otherwise their signs will become more useless than they already are.

I said this in an earlier post...but I'll go ahead and say it again here.

The problem with the signs...other than placement of some of them...is that they only appeal to the "like-minded" individual.

If I were a poacher...going to the river to take fish illegally..I would laugh at the signs.


This is just my opinion but I feel it reeks of common sense.


I consider myself an open minded individual...so if anyone would care to make the effort to convince me otherwise...I would eagerly listen.

Ken I wholeheartedly agree with the idea of dealing with water quality 1st.

I think I'm finally starting to figure out what bothers me about conservation issues in general.

When you think about it, every thing regarding rivers has been studied, restudied, analyzed to death, over and over again.

Now multiply all this data collected in Illinois times all the DNRs of probably all the states.

It seems to me that it is no great mystery as to what needs to be done regarding dams, point and non-point pollution, stream restoration and on and on.

Now decisions need to be made and implemented. But that seems to be where things just stall. No one is willing to commit and make a decision.

So, what to do about that? I'll come up with something.