![IMG_2128[1]](https://theliteraryflyfisher.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/img_21281.jpg)
I am one of many fly fishers who pays intimate attention to snow packs, water levels, air and water temperatures, and so on. Most people do so simply in order to identify the most effective times to wet their flies. However, I have a more general concern about the survival of the very river I love to fish. No doubt, many would consider me alarmist, but I am genuinely shocked by how low the water is in my favorite Montana river this summer. This, coupled with my realization that the river is being “discovered” by a mass of people approaching a “critical” number, has me pretty sad.
Of course, I am not alone with my concerns. A recent article in the June 16th edition of The Economist confirms this fact. When the editors of a financial news magazine based in England address Montana’s low water and its impact upon fish and fishing, you can be sure things are real. Read The Economist’s article for yourself.
The Literary Fly Fisher 
July 27, 2016 at 6:29 PM |
I’ve read that article about our western trout streams and relate the problem, with some variations, to our eastern streams as well. There’s a lot to be concerned about here.
LikeLike
July 28, 2016 at 2:45 PM |
I suspect that if I still lived in PA, I would be obsessing over a few local streams. It is good there are spring creeks, at least, though they are surely susceptible to other problems (and even the aquifers are not always what they were). Good luck out there.
LikeLike
July 29, 2016 at 5:50 PM |
There is quite a difference between being alarmed, and being an alarmist… though society in general seems to have increasingly little patience with such subtleties.
As has been noted, there is a lot to be concerned about.
LikeLike
July 29, 2016 at 6:02 PM |
Yeah. And if one is the latter, he’ll forget why the streams are important in the first place. There are certainly plenty out there like that.
And thanks for verifying that I am in good company, AJ.
LikeLike