The fall of felt

[Eider]

Came back to the flyshop today after a hiatus working with my salamanders over in Idaho. Interesting issues coming up involving the flyfishing industry and the spread of invasive species. States in the West are beginning to ban the use of felt soles (Alaska did it, Washington is following) in order to prevent the spread of things like New Zealand Mudsnails, Zebra Mussels, whirling disease, etc. People are coming into the flyshop spewing about the devil living in felt soles and the idea that they need these new rubber soles so that they won't spread invasives. Good for the flyshop business, I guess. For example, a fellow came in today saying that his friend, the conservation director of Colorado TU, would not fish with him if he continued wearing felt soles. At the same time as all of this frenzy, Simms has stopped producing felt soles and Patagonia is following suite.

Here's my issue with this, before I get the Flyaddict Community coming down on my head:
I believe this switch to rubber soles by companies and by legislation misguided and things need to be cleared up.
1) felt soles don't spread whirling disease. The infectious spores (TAMs) are too fragile to survive outside of water for more than a few minutes.
2) Zebra mussel and mudsnail veligers (planktonic larvae) are equally likely to be on the sides of your boot as the bottom.
3) Didymo can be spread in the same manner

Those are the 4 gnarly invasives that come to mind at the moment. Banning felt soles and not producing felt soles does not solve the problem. It will give fisherman a false sense of security that they are not spreading invasives with no effort on their part. The scary part to me is that the CO TU director is pushing it instead of suggesting proper methods to prevent invasive spread.

I'll present what I believe to be the proper method, and it is the one I use as I hop streams doing ecological research.
1) Fill a windex bottle with a 10 percent bleach solution
2) spray it all over your boots and waders
3) let your gear dry fully
4) go to a different stream and catch different fish with less worry about doing damage

My thoughts for the night. Yours?

[Andrew]

Came back to the flyshop today after a hiatus working with my salamanders over in Idaho.

I'm curious as to what you mean by "working with your salamanders" Is that your affectionate pet name for your co-workers, or do you do research?

With respect to your comments about felt, I think you make good points if indeed you're correct that felt doesn't really cause the problems that have been attributed to it. Is there some sort of published research out there that started the 'anti-felt' feelings, or is this just a case of one of those things that "seemed" to make sense, but was never backed by any data?

[Todd K]

Sounds about right if you ask me. Thanks. I would like to hear more data on this.

Any links can be added to this thread.

[Rich Strolis]

Eider,
I heard from one of our DEP guys that the bleach concept of cleaning the bottoms of boots is only good if the solution is over something like a 140 degrees and the boots are in the solution for more than an hour or some crazy facetious thing. The whole bleach thing from what I have been told is a farce, it will not kill the spores, and if there are spores in the felt a simple bleach solution rub down is fruitless. Now I may be butchering this a bit, but it sounds like dumping the felt really is a knee jerk reaction to the problem. I dont know for certain

[Jon]

Eider - your arguments seem sound to me. It is terribly convenient for the tackle industry to jump on this "conservation" issue while making a tidy profit from the new, must-have boots.

I don't know the science, but believe from a safety perspective that felt is best. Refreshingly, Tom Rosenbauer made the same comment on a recent Orvis podcast.

Jon

[DA]

Have any studies been done about water fowl spreading the spores?

[Freeloader]

I am a fan of progression or improvement or new technology or whatever you want to call it but felt soles (although I use them) seem somewhat outdated. I think that anything porous is more likely to spread invasive species. Also the closer a company can get my wading boots to feel like nice merrell hiking boots the happier I will be. So I say the change is for the better.

[Andrew]

I think that anything porous is more likely to spread invasive species.


I think the original argument was that the false sense of security that comes from the new soles could cause more harm that the felt soles, when all is said and done.

[Rich Strolis]

I am a fan of progression or improvement or new technology or whatever you want to call it but felt soles (although I use them) seem somewhat outdated. I think that anything porous is more likely to spread invasive species. Also the closer a company can get my wading boots to feel like nice merrell hiking boots the happier I will be. So I say the change is for the better.

Thats great, and I understand your point, but... What good is a boot that's made to help you traverse a stream a little more safely if it's as slippery or more so than it's predecessor?

I think the rubber technology is only in its beginning stages. The problem is this, the rubber when warm is more pliable, but once submerged becomes more rigid and thus more slippery, at least thats my guess. I own a pair of both felt and the new vibram soles, and even though those "progressive" anglers may pitch a fit over this, I still find myself wearing the old felt with spikes over the new vibrams as I take less spills with them.

[aljack]

It's amazing the number of anglers who are not aware of invasives; and even fewer who make an effort to clean their boots or other equipment. I did get a new pair of non-felt cleated boots this spring after taking that last ski ride down a steep slope of a trail to a river's edge. I've never tried cleated felt soles but I find my new boots to be just as good if not better than my old felt bottoms.
A sign of the times, I guess, but I find myself becoming more distrustful of those sitting behind desks. I think the industry (boot mfgs) is motivated, to a certain extent, to promote non-felt boots for business. Retailers like Orvis and Bean won't take a stand while they still have felt boots in their inventories. Which leads to ethical and legal arguments about continuing to sell a product that is supposedly harmful to the environment. If there were good facts based on research and studies that proved felt soles are responsible for the spread of invasives, I think those 2 retailers would have taken their products off their shelves. I'm sure they have had their lawyers look into it.

[millerbrown]

I think that it's safe to say, especially after reading studies from New Zealand, that felt soles are a problem especially especially for harboring didymo. I've gone without felt for four seasons. My boots are hard soles work boots that I studded. They don't have the solid traction of felt but are much better for the hikes that I take to get to my "spots" and on steep slopes where felt is a problem.

Studies show that a 5% solution of common salt kills didymo in a few minutes. A solution of potassium chloride kills the snails and mussels. It's a simple immersion process using a bucket and the solution can be used over and over. The solutions will not harm the environment or your equipment and it beats boiling and freezing. Check the web for instructions.

Millerbrown

[SloNDeep]

...I think that anything porous is more likely to spread invasive species....

You mean porous like shoelaces, gravel guard elastic, the nylon material that covers your neoprene feet (or the waders themselves), wading boots, or flies?

That kind of porous?

Why not ban wading? :mad:

[Andrew]

Exactly. Which is what I think the original poster was getting at. He wasn't suggesting that we should be cavalier about invasives, but rather, that felt might be giving a false sense of security.

If you put on rubber-soled boots and then assume all is well, you might be doing more harm in the end than if you'd used felt-soled boots, but took various precautions after wading to eliminate the invasives.

I don't know if the data support this perspective or not, but it certainly strikes me as a problem that needs real data.

[nealmarl]

Just a quick gut check, Do you want Didymo? It is in the Esopus now and I know some of you do the two step in a day (once in the Esopus and once Farmington on your way home.) If you read the New Zealand Studies you will see that nothing gets inside the felts where the Didymo is without a lengthy soak. All the other surface can be cleaned with the salt or bleach solution in a few minutes. At the DEP we are required to work in a single drainage for a day, salt down all equipment nets, buckets, feltless -boots between sites and do a bleach clean at the end of the day.
There are alternative,
1)a pair of boots for every drainage.
2) there are boots with removable felts. Some groups are using boots with a spare set of 4-5 felts that are kept in a container of salt solution until needed. they change felts with each water body. They say these work great.

The bottom line is you can get almost every surface clean (and that means the inside of your wading boot also) with a spray solution, but you can't clean to the interior of the felt without a long soak (min 1 hour with heat)..

FYI zebra mussels are now in the upper hous. in Mass. I hope you like walking on shells because in two-four years it is estimated we will be seeing them.

[MuddlerMinnow]

I think this is a good thing. It is not a replacement for good 'hygene' between watersheds, but it will help. I can scrub out the eyelets of my boots and the stitching, but I can't scrub beyond the outer layer of felt.

Think of it as analagous to the addition of turn signals to your car. At the time they were mandated, people complained that they raised the cost of cars and were unnecessary because hand signals work just fine. This argument is a short term one. While they raised the cost of a car purchase, they lowered the cost of driving by reducing accidents. Turn signals were not a replacement for good driving, but they did help things.

This seems like a pretty small thing considering there are reasonably priced alternatives to felt available.

[Z Fisher]

I'm leaning towards the pair of boots for every drainage.

There are some small streams that I fish where I only use my rubber soled hipsters. It's all I need and they don't go anywhere else.

I have a pair of boots that I use for my Housy/Farmy trips and they're the ones most likely to never dry out and thus harbor nasties so as long as the Housy and Farmy drainages remain clear that approach should be fine.

And then I'll have to invest in a pair of "travel" boots which I expect will be felt-less -- not because I believe the propaganda about felt -- but because they'll be easier to clean. As suggested, laces, gravel guards, etc. will still need attention.

I think what we all need to learn, and what we need to teach the next generation of fisherpersons, is that these nasties exist and we have to be vigilant and take reasonable precautions.

Just like the state agencies post signs at boat launches re: checking and cleaning boats, they should probably start providing similar guidance at popular fishing holes. There are probably a dozen places along the Farmy and Housy TMAs that should have large signs educating users about the menace and precautions. Especially because those drainages get so many out of state visitors.

[Andrew]

Just a quick gut check, Do you want Didymo? It is in the Esopus now and I know some of you do the two step in a day (once in the Esopus and once Farmington on your way home.) If you read the New Zealand Studies you will see that nothing gets inside the felts where the Didymo is without a lengthy soak. All the other surface can be cleaned with the salt or bleach solution in a few minutes. At the DEP we are required to work in a single drainage for a day, salt down all equipment nets, buckets, feltless -boots between sites and do a bleach clean at the end of the day.
There are alternative,
1)a pair of boots for every drainage.
2) there are boots with removable felts. Some groups are using boots with a spare set of 4-5 felts that are kept in a container of salt solution until needed. they change felts with each water body. They say these work great.

The bottom line is you can get almost every surface clean (and that means the inside of your wading boot also) with a spray solution, but you can't clean to the interior of the felt without a long soak (min 1 hour with heat)..

FYI zebra mussels are now in the upper hous. in Mass. I hope you like walking on shells because in two-four years it is estimated we will be seeing them.


Neal,

If the data are out there, is it possible to provide links to the studies or at least references to where they were published? I'm not entirely sure who your post is directed towards, but my point in my post was certainly not to suggest that abandoning felt was the wrong way to go, but rather that if we were going away from felt in favor of something else, we'd need to know if that was having the desired effect, or if it was backfiring.

If the data exist - and I'm not disputing that they do, I simply don't know since I do not fish for trout but once every 15 years - then this has real bearing on this discussion.

Andrew

[nealmarl]

The studies haven't been done on the effectiveness of the new gears that I am aware of. Nationally fish and game agencies had discussions with Orvis and others wader makes about positive alternatives over a year ago. Only the older studies on lug soles and felts exist, the new gear hasn't been evaluated. I guess my view is we know what a lug prevents, we know the problems with felts. Where do people decide they want to go from here?

[SloNDeep]

The studies haven't been done on the effectiveness of the new gears that I am aware of. Nationally fish and game agencies had discussions with Orvis and others wader makes about positive alternatives over a year ago. Only the older studies on lug soles and felts exist, the new gear hasn't been evaluated. I guess my view is we know what a lug prevents, we know the problems with felts. Where do people decide they want to go from here?

None of this (discussion regarding composition of sole) addresses the fact that Didymo will get in/on your waders, shoelaces, flies, furled leaders, gravelguards, oars, flip flops, anchor rope ...

More importantly, we will need 100% of all river users to thoroughly clean all gear that comes in contact with the contaminant in order to prevent its transmittance between watersheds. I have no faith that this will occur.

It's here; we need to figure out a way to live with it or to specifically kill it (that's highly unlikely too).


...Nationally fish and game agencies had discussions with Orvis and others wader makes about positive alternatives over a year ago....

I suspect the only thing this does is create the need to lobby for legislation banning felt so that manufacturers can re-outfit the wading population.

If banning felt soles would certainly prevent the invasion of Didymo, I'd be the first in line - but it wont (I suspect).






Last, just wondering:

How far into the felt soles do the cells travel, and once they get in, how easily can they get out while retaining viability? This question is to ask whether scrubbing felt soles with a hard bristle brush in a salt solution is sufficient to kill all (or nearly all) potentially extractable viable cells.

[Rich Strolis]

I agree with Slo,
there are way too many other things in the anglers outfit that are porous and will spread invasives, so ya maybe a nonpenetrable sole is a step in the right direction but all those other things he mentioned will further contribute to the spread. More so, good luck as he stated in getting everyone to conform to thoroughly cleaning all those items mentioned as well. Maybe the next best thing as he stated is finding a manageable way to deal with them now that they are present. I know that those who frequent tailwaters with these didymo claim that biweekly flushes from the dam help keep things under control. Maybe that is one of many options to think about but I don't know for certain.

[French_Nympher]

Rich and Slo,
I also agree with you. The best thing about the felt ban is that it has raised awareness to the problem. I am a real fan of studded felt, so my personal solution is buying multiple pairs of shoes and labelling them for each watershed. Since the felt ban, you can find really good deals on older felt-soled products.

[HOMER]

They make clothing that is treated with bug repelant and they seem to work fine imo. Why can't the treat felt bottoms and wader material to resist those harmful organisms. I'm kind of fond of my felt bottoms.There is a lot of new technology out there!

[Rich Strolis]

Rich and Slo,
I also agree with you. The best thing about the felt ban is that it has raised awareness to the problem. I am a real fan of studded felt, so my personal solution is buying multiple pairs of shoes and labelling them for each watershed. Since the felt ban, you can find really good deals on older felt-soled products.


I would probably do the same, but for some including myself it's not cost effective for to do so with the many rivers and streams I fish each year. Besides, even if I clean them as indicated, the bottoms aren't the only porous part as slo indicated so really what difference does it make?

Just wondering

[onafly]

This is one of the best and easiest way to do what you can to help stop the spread.

http://www.kennebecvalleytu.org/media/washingstation.wmv


There are thousands of ways that this stuff moves around in the ecosystem, I don't want to be the one of a thousand ways that it got to my favorite spot!

[millerbrown]

Onafly,

It's good that TU is promoting their cleaning station with that video BUT that bucket is way too small to make things easy. It is a good idea to go to Walmart and buy a large, WIDE, plastic storage bin with a lid. You'll have no problem sinking the boots and you can do the waders at the same time because you'll have more room. It takes more water and salt but those commodities are cheap.

Millerbrown

[onafly]

Sure a big tub is better, ideally you walk into the house climb in a bath tub full of solution, and you get it all done in one fell swoop. :rolleyes:

The idea of the 5 gallon bucket with a sealed lid is the portability. Do you plan on refilling the tub as you go from watershed to watershed?

[millerbrown]

"watershed to watershed"??? portability?? Do you plan to pack joint compound buckets on a flight to Montana?? I fish three rivers within an hour from where I live. Almost all of my trips are day long or evening trips. I probably represent over 95% of the fly fishing "trips" out there. We come "home" after hours on the stream and can deal with the didymo concerns as I mentioned. There's no reason for portability for the vast majority of wading anglers and we know that. If you go on a fly fishing vacation (I have one planned) then take the TU bucket and try to work with it but if you are a day tripper go with the scenario that I mentioned.

[onafly]

Ever gone from the Millers to the Swift in the same day? Farmington to the Housey? Upper Connecticut to the Magalloway? Willimantic to the Fenton? Penobscot to Rapid?

Come on, of course going home and using a tub is the easiest, what's important is getting it done.

The quote below is yours Millerbrown,
"Studies show that a 5% solution of common salt kills didymo in a few minutes. A solution of potassium chloride kills the snails and mussels. It's a simple immersion process using a bucket and the solution can be used over and over. The solutions will not harm the environment or your equipment and it beats boiling and freezing. Check the web for instructions."

[Rich Strolis]

Guys,
thanks for the solution, will do my part and make some up to clean my stuff.

[millerbrown]

Onafly,

Actually, I can't remember doing two rivers in the same day in 40 years. It's one river a day for me with boots and waders getting the salt treatment in a WIDE container at days end. Yup, you'll need to pack a bucket for a trip.

Millerbrown