New Zealand Mud Snails and felt sole boots

F

flyfish1955

New member
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
28
One way to help eliminate the spread of New Zealand Mud Snails and other invasive species is for PA to prohibit felt soles on wading boots. Many states have been proactive and done this in the past several years. Perhaps it's time for PA to join the movement to prevent the spread.
 
Will it be enough?

Can you send me a new set of boots?
 
I always think this logic is idiotic. If you let felt dry it poses no more danger than ,say, the laces on rubber soled boots.

I do remember in the 90's when people had felt sole panic.
 
How about the invasives that stick to your legs, from ankle to knee? Are they big enough to see on your soles/souls? then knock them off. If not, then you'd better be soaking your entire wader-- or at least so much as is below the low water mark.
 
a lot of states are dropping that because they have found no substantial evidence to support the fact.
 
And maybe they should prohibit spring creek ducks from flying to other waterways. How about prohibiting flies that are fished on the bottom and aren't frozen, boiled or de-greased before fishing elsewhere?

Seriously - anyone have any idea where this came from?
Just read about a guy from colorado that wants to start a professional fly fishing tour like bassmaster. Worried that Spring crk might be on their list to fish - like other competitions. Who knows who brings what to the PA creeks - do they have the same concerns for the fishery that residents have? Are there more invasive organisms coming here in the future? (probably - regardless of the level of concern)
 
And maybe they should prohibit spring creek ducks from flying to other waterways. How about prohibiting flies that are fished on the bottom and aren't frozen, boiled or de-greased before fishing elsewhere?

Strawman argument, ducks don't have a choice, we do.

Why not make the small effort to do what we can to preserve the resource vs doing nothing?
 
Knee-jerk reaction at its finest. Each angler is responsible for making sure they don't spread invasive species. My personal thought is that there are dozens if not hundreds of infected waters in the commonwealth....they just haveny bee identified / recorded. Rather than ban felt soles which is a pointless gesture, close the waterway to all fishing and boating. That will be more effective than banning boot soles.


It's the same weak argument that is used for gun control. Take the guns and there won't be any murders. The only minor oversight is the people doing the murdering aren't typically legal gun owners.

To respond to tomi's post........."why not make the small effort?". That effort is the responsibility on the lunkhead wearing the gear. Check your own gear, wash your own gear or dry it for a month between trips like I do. I don't need 'big brother' to remind me to wipe my arse. As an adult, I can do it all by myself.
 
One reason I don't join groups that advocate for the environment is the great many knee jerk reactions to hyper inflated Eco threats. Banning felt soles is nothing more then making people feel like they did something. No it's not better then nothing. It's worse then nothing because what it does is make people sit on their hands and say "well at least we did something."

I also believe that conservation has to be in balance with quality of life. In other words if your not living in a cave, making clothing from animal skins, fishing with a pointed stick, and walking barefoot to work then I don't want to hear about how the sky is falling because of gasoline, air conditioning, and all the creature comforts (like say graphite rods, cast aluminum reels, some kind of plastic fly line, etc) that we all enjoy.
 
I'm always shocked on this board by the number of "flyfishermen" who will offer literally any excuse or reason to circumvent statistical evidence on certain issues. Send me new boots, felt is not the only carrier, or basically it's too much trouble. MD, VT, New Zealand, many others and TU have either banned felt sole or advised against them. A recent quote from New Zealand, "Felt soled waders are believed to be an important vector in the spreading of microscopic aquatic pests, including didymo. Restricting their use may well inconvenience some people in the short term, but the potential benefit – decreasing the further spread of these pests, is surely worthwhile." My fishing days are drawing to a close but Good Luck to those whose future may be impacted by the don't give a damn attitude of some.
 
"Felt soled waders are believed to be an important vector in the spreading of microscopic aquatic pests,

Many people "believe" in Bigfoot too.

Where's the science ??
 
Hey, look at that.....common sense.

For those that believe in global warming and felt soles being the reason for blah-blah, why isn't your displeasure directed at the manufacturer? Maybe someone can craft a suit aagainst Simms, Chota, Patagonia, William Joseph and others for the spread of rock snot. I'd have to think that pressure from the consumer as well as data returned from studies has given the boot companies the green light to put the felts back in production. The only thing that upsets me is that it's nearly impossible to find felts with studs built into the soles anymore.

Do grass carp stick to felts? If so, guilty!
 
Stop the birds and animals from poop'n in the waterways. I guess they don't carry the problem...? Stop all boating traffic from going from one watershed to another. Then we can talk about how felt soles were just fine on boots for how many decades and are now the reason for the spread of this. I agree that there should be something done but, why is it what was just fine for 40 plus years, now the trouble? I would imagine a lot of people not being able to go fishing until they can float a 2nd mortgage and get the new and improved boots. Don't worry, just about the time we all have the new ones it'll be found that they carry some funky fungus also and then there will be a newer better anti funky fungal boot for us to buy to save the day. Commercial shipping brought this all on? Now it's up to the lowly fisherman to stem the tide. Little like closing the barn door after the critters have run out already. What about the kids swimming in the dozen creeks throughout a given area of watersheds that are wearing cutoffs with this crap in there pockets and seams of the old jeans. Tell me the new boots will stop the problem... It won't. It may slow it a bit but it won't stop it. That barn door was left open a long time ago. Clean you're boots in the prescribed manner, be it the new anti fungal or the old felts. The new ones will be out dated eventually too.

Oh, Merry Christmas to all! And to all a good Mud Snail.
 
While I believe that banning felt soles is indeed a knee-jerk reaction to a much larger problem, in that it probably only eliminates a small percentage of an invasive attack vector on our streams, it is still important to take a look at all possible ways that invasives spread. My current batch of wading boots are all rubber soled, but, it would be extremely ignorant of me to not be concerned about invasives tagging along. There are many nooks and crannies on the boots where some mud snails could get caught and hitch-hike from one drainage to another. I do fish Spring Creek and it would be irresponsible for me to do any amount of wading there, and then hop over to a small mountain freestoner and fish there, without doing something to try and make sure my gear is as clean as it could be.

Sometimes, you don't need science to show you the proof. Sometimes, common sense is all you need, to know that you COULD be a carrier for invasive, meaning it's possible that they do hitch-hike on your gear, be they felt soles, rubber soles, or bare feet. I think felt soles are a lower threat to spread mud snails, then they are something like didymo.

As noted, the spread of invasives occurs over a much larger attack vector than fishing gear, and the use of a bilge pump to empty a bilge can be responsible for transporting an invasive from one continent to another. However, we, as anglers, can have a much more localized effect, by transporting invasives from one drainage to another. Ultimately, I am pessimistic that we will ever control the spread of invasive species, because there are much larger factors that influence their spread than us anglers. But we can still do our small part to help slow their spread. Just because we can't control the ducks or geese, or the water in bilges doesn't mean we get a free pass to not take a look at our own boats or waders or boots.
 
So regulate my exhaust pipe and let the steel mills pump soot into the air? My objection is that anyone thinks that banning felt soled wading shoes will make a difference. We already know to clean them when moving between waters. This makes us who use them no worse than someone wearing rubber.
 
If there were any evidence that well dried between trips felt was worse for the environment,I would stop using felt.

If you have two or more pairs of shoes ,it easy to dry them between watersheds .
 
What quantity of science is needed to stack up on the invasives' movement vectors measuring stick?

It's not like there are no studies that support felt as a mechanism for moving microscopic invasives.

http://www.stopans.org/Science_of_felt.php

With the "prove it to me first" attitudes that seem to prevail in this thread, I'll venture to say that we are assured of angling gear continuing to be an invasive movement vector in PA waters. I continue to believe that banning felt is a knee-jerk but it's also a whole lot easier and cheaper to go on a globetrotting fishing spree today than it was 40 years ago. If you want to ignore the science, at least don't ignore the unpublished common sense that you as an angler are a potential carrier of invasives. Whether there is a scientific paper that documents it or not, there is Didymo in the Delaware and Pine Creek (and elsewhere) and there are New Zealand mud snails in Spring.
 
salmonoid wrote:
...it's also a whole lot easier and cheaper to go on a globetrotting fishing spree today than it was 40 years ago. If you want to ignore the science, at least don't ignore the unpublished common sense that you as an angler are a potential carrier of invasives.

This.

Didymo is not native to New Zealand, but it is to North America.

There is now didymo in some New Zealand trout streams/rivers.

There is New Zealand mud snails in a PA trout stream(s).

Let's blame the ducks. :roll:
 
The kiwis are mad and trying to get even with us. That all.
 
.....They present the complete results of their work in a scholarly article published in Fisheries http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wat/wq/studies/didymo-blooms.pdf. In the course of their research they noted a significant relationship between the presence of didymo and the presence of anglers. They particularly note rivers in which didymo is not found upstream of angler access points and rivers that are closed to fishing that are surrounded by didymo but remain free of it. They reference a number of other well documented examples from around the world that illustrate the connection between wading anglers and the spread of didymo.

Why Focus on Felt?

With overwhelming evidence that fishing boots are spreading invasives the attention has turned to how to minimize the risk that anglers are transporting didymo. Research has shown that there are some practical options for killing didymo on fishing equipment http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/files/pests/didymo/didymo-decon-feb-05-rev-aug-06.pdf. Heat, cold, drying and exposure to chemicals are all effective at killing the algae so the issue becomes, how does an average angler achieve the lethal levels for any of these methods?

When researchers looked at this question it became obvious that felt presented disinfection problems that other materials did not. The main reason for this is the nature of the felt material. Felt is constructed as a dense mat of randomly woven fibers. It has large interstitial spaces that can be a perfect trap for any small material. Gates, in the study referenced above, did extensive work to determine the relative ability of various wader materials to trap WD spores. In her experiments, felt trapped 100% of the WD spores that it was exposed to while rubber trapped none. This is dramatic evidence that felt soles present a much greater risk of transport than rubber soles.

However, as already noted, there are effective methods for killing didymo and it is logical to assume that felt can be disinfected using these techniques. Unfortunately, research from New Zealand shows that disinfecting felt soles is much more difficult than might be expected. Quite simply, the nature of the felt material is such that live didymo cells could easily penetrate the interior layers of the felt soles but treatment methods for killing didymo are ineffective at disinfecting these inner layers. Thus, even after following recommended decontamination procedures, it was likely that felt soled boots were still spreading didymo.

In their paper titled Studies on the survivability of the invasive diatom Didymosphenia geminata under a range of environmental and chemical conditions, http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/files/pests/didymo/didymo-survival-dec-06-rev-may-07.pdf the researchers fully document their results. In their experiments felt soled boots that were examined 5 hours after use in infested waters contained nearly 3,000 times more live didymo cells than rubber soles (11,000 on felt vs. 3.9 on rubber). At 36 hours, a second careful cleaning yielded significant numbers of live cells from the felt soles and no live or dead cells from the rubber soles (290 on felt vs. 0 on rubber). We should note here that both leather shoe uppers and neoprene materials also held live cells at 36 hours but at much lower levels than the felt.

Careful experiments were then conducted to judge the efficacy of the various treatments for killing all of the live cells that might be trapped on waders. The results showed that most of the recommended treatments were effective at killing all of the cells found on most parts of the boot but that felt soles were an exception and it was difficult to achieve a complete kill of didymo trapped in felt soles. Specifically, the authors concluded:
• Felt soles present a greater risk of transfer than the other materials tested.
• Soaking in a disinfectant solution is far more effective than spraying (spraying was deemed to be totally ineffective)
• Even after 20 minutes of soaking, the disinfectant does not fully penetrate all areas of the felt sole
• Complete drying of felt soles is very difficult – soles can remain damp for weeks
• Heating the boots to 45°C (113°F) for at least 20 minutes will disinfect the soles

Based on the results of this research New Zealand determined that felt represents a unique threat that could only be adequately addressed through a complete ban. That ban is now in place and all New Zealand anglers are now felt free. With an Alaskan felt ban already approved and other US felt bans being considered we can expect that the move to eliminate felt will grow quickly.

What Does This Mean for Anglers

There is well documented scientific proof that felt represents a special problem in wading boots. Although many boot parts are capable of trapping and carrying aquatic invasive species (AIS), the difficulties of disinfecting felt make it very different from the rest of the boot parts. While the elimination of any boot part that could trap or transport AIS is beneficial and should be encouraged, the move to eliminate felt is a prudent and appropriate response to the threat it poses.

We need to recognize that much of the motivation for eliminating felt is focused on didymo. An argument can be made that felt only matters when the invasive species is microscopic and that any larger invader will be on the surface of the felt where it can be removed or killed. In fact, this is true. If the organisms are on the surface of the felt they can be eliminated. However, didymo is only one of our microscopic invaders. It has already been demonstrated that felt can easily trap and transport whirling disease spores and we must be realistic and recognize that there are likely new microscopic invaders still to come. Thus, it is only prudent that we move away from felt.

[color=FF0000]The debate over the effectiveness of rubber soles verses felt will continue to rage and there is no doubt that some anglers will insist that their recreational desires should take precedence over the resource issue.[/color] However, the move to eliminate felt is based on conclusive scientific proof that it represents a special threat. Companies, organizations and agencies are all accepting of this and the move away from felt will continue to grow. Anglers may not like the change and some will be vocal in their opposition. However, we should all make sure that any argument is based on sound science. [color=FF0000]The science shows that felt is a special problem and anyone disputing that has nothing to back their claims.[/color]

Finally, we must realize that felt is only one part of the problem. As already mentioned, there are many other places where invasives can be trapped and transported in our boots and other gear. [color=CC0000]We must adopt new habits that include careful cleaning after each use. While switching to felt-free waders is a good thing, it is just one step in the process of becoming a clean angler. Any one of us could be the person to carry an invader to a new water and none of us wants to be that person. Inspect, Clean and Dry your gear after each use and you will help to protect the resource that we all depend upon.[/color]

[color=CC0000]Unfortunately, increasing numbers of anglers are hearing the argument of no science and angler manipulation and some are passing it on as truth to others. This provides an excuse to anyone who wants to avoid switching to felt-free boots and erodes public confidence in fishery managers and science[/color]


Link to source: http://www.stopans.org/Science_of_felt.php
 
Back
Top