# Buck Creek in Springfield



## Chuck P. (Apr 8, 2004)

Well, I heard about them taking out two dams and installing "whitewater areas" for canoes and kayaks.

I've been fishing parts of this creek since I was old enough to fish by myself and today I went down to see the "progress" of this project.

Needless to say, my heart sank when I seen my favorite bait catching spot behind the train trestle has been completely redone and my hole is gone.

Someone thought this would bring income to the Springfield area, but in all my years of fishing this creek, I can honestly say I've seen about 3 canoes in about 35+ yrs.

If anyone is familiar with this area and the work that has been done, what are your thoughts about all this?


----------



## BlueDun (Feb 21, 2007)

As an avid kayaker, I can tell you that the word hasn't gotten out yet about this project. When the whole project is complete, it should bring a lot of kayak traffic and more income to the city than it will in its previous/current state (only two of the drops are finished). Kayakers in Ohio are desperate for whitewater type locations. If you don't believe me, check out places like Paint Creek, Rocky Fork, or the Olentangy any time the US Army Corps of Engineers releases water from those dams. Kayakers know the scheduled releases and they come in cars, vans, and buses hauling trailers full of kayaks. A year-round site closer to home than WV is a dream come true for many kayakers.

The kayakers I know who've been to Buck Creek say that the work completed so far is first rate and they plan to return as often as possible. Whitewater parks in other parts of the country have attracted kayakers from other states, so they do draw tourist dollars to their local areas. The group that designed the Buck Creek site previously created other successful whitewater parks in other parts of the country. Parks like this are becoming increasingly popular because of the financial and environmental benefits. Scroll down to page 7 of this article for info about why other cities are making parks like this:
http://www.kent360.com/files/EconomicDevelopment/SportsTourism/WhitewaterResearch.pdf

BTW, I am also a fly fisher and understand the loss of a treasured fishing resource. When I first heard about the Buck Creek project, my first thought was "Oh, man! The poor people who are used to fishing there lost their local stream!!!" If there is a positive side for those folks, it would be that the river downstream of the whitewater area will be cleaner because of the removal of the dams (and related cleaning of the site), the water will be better aerated (b/c of the whitewater features), and thus the river should be better for fish downstream.


----------



## Chuck P. (Apr 8, 2004)

The water aeration aspect makes sense, but in Springfield, I can't see this project being used as it is suggested it will. 

I honestly hope I'm wrong, but when the hype dies down, I think the spray painting of the nice rocks and the broken glass, beer bottles, shopping carts, etc, will just be another eye sore for the city. 

I'm not trying to be doom and gloom but the area this project is taking place is not the ideal area if you know what I mean, and I just cannot imagine the newly constructed areas to remain nice looking for very long.

I have to agree, the rocks that were places in place of the old dams do look nice and I can only hope the fishing for the multiple species found in this creek will remain or improve.

Time will tell I guess.


----------



## spfldbassguy (Mar 23, 2009)

i am a lil disappointed that they done it but if it helps our economy a lil then so be it.


----------



## imfisherman (Sep 23, 2008)

I also have fished Buck Creek alot over 40 years- got alot of small and some Nice ones and all kinds.
IM mixed about the new work but in the end I think it will be better for the fishin
and-like the Mad-avoid the fiberglass hatch and enjoy it 8 months of the year!


----------



## dinkbuster1 (Oct 28, 2005)

it seems the whole SW part of the state has this "Kayak" fever running through the veins of the park districts. i like canoeing, and actually may own a Kayak someday, but dont like the idea of changing local fisheries to cater to one group of people, especially to those who arent from the area and arent spending THEIR tax dollars to create these projects. 

on the GMR they have made many boat access spots over they years but they have made barricades just so only "carry in" boats can be used, even though these areas are navigable with motorized boats! we who own "motor boats" have been complaining about access for years now and were promised these ramps only to see them made as "kayak ramps".


----------



## crittergitter (Jun 9, 2005)

dinkbuster1 said:


> it seems the whole SW part of the state has this "Kayak" fever running through the veins of the park districts. i like canoeing, and actually may own a Kayak someday, but dont like the idea of changing local fisheries to cater to one group of people, especially to those who arent from the area and arent spending THEIR tax dollars to create these projects.
> 
> on the GMR they have made many boat access spots over they years but they have made barricades just so only "carry in" boats can be used, even though these areas are navigable with motorized boats! we who own "motor boats" have been complaining about access for years now and were promised these ramps only to see them made as "kayak ramps".


Yes, heaven forbid those pesky kayakers and canoe folks have a place to go that is devoid of a 225 HP outboard roaring throughout the day.


----------



## dinkbuster1 (Oct 28, 2005)

crittergitter said:


> Yes, heaven forbid those pesky kayakers and canoe folks have a place to go that is devoid of a 225 HP outboard roaring throughout the day.


this part of the state has COUNTLESS miles of canoeing/kayaking water on rivers and streams where there is no worry of Dams or even motor boats. the same thing cant be said about motor boat access, and bank fishing access. for example look at the entire length of the Great Miami river.....i only know of about 15-20 miles total of it that has ramps with pools open to motor boats, even though that number of miles could be much larger. the rest is all open to kayakers/canoers.
also the ENTIRE lenghts of 
Mad River,
Stillwater,
Whitewater,
Twin Creek,
Little Miami,
are free of motor boats. 

both bank fishermen and "motor boaters" are losing access every year at an alarming rate.

once again, why the obsessive catering to ONE group of outdoorsman?


----------



## Tin Guppy (Mar 20, 2007)

Well guys I work for the outfit thats putting the rapids i, I also have mixed feelings about the project. But last friday there were 9 yaks playing in the pool as we worked. Mike you have the same thing at Kiser Lake with the horse trailes the don't pay to use them and ride wherever they want, thats Ohio for you.


----------



## Fish-N-Fool (Apr 12, 2004)

I've fished this stretch for over 20 years and caught many species. Chuck P. - I pulled a stringer of walleye from your hole area back in the early 90s that would have made an Erie angler envious - seriously! Lots of smallies, chubs, carp, sunfish, and channel cats.

I'm in favor of the project as I am both an avid kayak boater and fisherman. The fishing will be fine when it is all said and done. I was down there yesterday and saw a smallie from the bank. I won't spend my money driving to Dayton and even out of state to paddle.

As far as the argument about catering to one group - I agree it isn't good policy. However, statistics show these projects increase revenue. A project like this on a creek that is not appropriate for motorized boats I am behind 100%. 

However, as an owner of a large motor boat in OH as well, I know full well the lack of water and access for motor boats in this state. I wouldn't support projects like this on waterways suitable for motor boats and would rather see the funds spent opening the water way for motorized boats.


----------



## Whiskers (Aug 11, 2004)

Well, haven't been out there to see it firsthand, not a kayaker, and not sure how much I believe springfield will see $ from this, but...the kayak message boards are going crazy right now. Do a quick search on Springfield Kayak Park on google. You'll find tons of photos, youtube vids, and enthusiastic post on kayak message boards. 

I guess the opening day is 4/15 for full completion. The info I have indicates 6 drop offs. 2 pretty close together by the art museum and then 4 on down stream in the park.


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

I have also fished this creek from one side of Springfield to the other off and on since the 70's, I don't think this will be a big money maker for Spfld but I know it will benefit the water and fishing, we need more projects like this one and the structure being added by fishermen in CJ. I'm for anything to make fishing better for our children.


----------



## 82bassman (Jun 21, 2006)

Maybe the increased revenue will lead to a tax break, ha ha ha. I have fished buck creek since the late 70s, and rode my bike to Yellow Springs as well to fish the Miami, Chuck P you have seen three more canoes then I have on both water ways. Going to a creek to run a Kayak from point A to point B does not, in my opinion, lead to increased revenue. I go to many rivers and creeks throughout Ohio and never once have I increased the revenue of the towns where the waters are located, I pack lunch and fill up before I leave. Kayaking the water will not lead to tourist staying in Hotels, eating at restaurants or visiting the many other great and wonderful things in the area (much sarcasm). Running the short stretch of rapids is a day trip for anyone in the State, no overnight necessary. If Springfield had more to offer tourists to see or do I could see a correlation between the creek and increased revenue. They are also going to have to do something about the homeless, and drug users hanging around the bridges on Fountain and Limestone, both are also stops for local spray paint Artist.

Buck creek has always had many an unknown honey hole for those of us that have fished it. I have caught many 2 and 3 pound smallies from it, white bass, crappies and some really nice walleyes (also near the railroad trestle), all of them put back to grow. By the museum there was a damn removed after a young man drowned. This was an excellent spot for crappies and white bass and some smaller smallies. After the damn was removed the fishing there was only good for some rock bass. I have tried some of the other areas that used to hold fish since the project started and they too have not produced the way they used to. So Bluedun how far downstream am I and my boys going to have to go to find the better fishing? And why should we have to make the extra trek? Chuck P is right about use. We pulled trash out of the creek on every trip; bags, clothes, cups, cans and even a set of good license plates, not to mention feminine hygiene items. It is amazing what people will throw off a bridge. So Tin Guppy is there plans for fencing on the bridges to avert the throwing of items at Kayakers? I can see this happening knowing firsthand the youth of Springfield and what they believe is fun and exciting (not Kayaking or fishing). Crittergetter, there are many many places for kayakers to go without 225 HP motors. Ohio is full of HP limited lakes, electric only lakes and numerous streams creeks and rivers with no access for motor boats. No one is forcing them to go to unlimited horsepower lakes, but those of us that fish the Buck are being forced to go other places. 

Fish N-Fool, I can do the same research and find numerous projects that failed and did nothing to increase the revenue. It all depends on your position with the intended project. Why show that there is a chance that no money will be brought in? Any person who wants to gain a following for their idea is only going to show you the sunny side never the bleak. I was at a funeral today at Ferncliff cemetery, which borders the creek to the north and I walked down to check the area that they are working on and I find it hard to believe it will be done on the 15th. We then drove over by the museum. It was the first time my boys had seen the area and their comments were Where are the rapids? and Is that all they are going to do, I thought it was suppose to have some really rad rapids. They were under the impression that it was going to be like the ones they had seen online, even tried to talk me into buying some kayaks. I believe lame was the word my youngest used. I guess time will tell if fishing returns to pre-construction days.


----------



## Lovefishing (Jul 10, 2009)

I agree with most of what you said 82bassman. 
The big thing to remember is it didn't cost the us tax-payers anything. This was all/is being done on Private donations. So if you get a few "out of state rs" that want to run it during the fall when they drop the lake..so be it. It's free money for for the city. Plus they're finally fixing up Snyder park.
As for the fishing..I have to agree..it's REALLY going to Fubar it for awhile, but i think it's for the better. Buck-Creek is going to carve it's self out again and I bet with in 2 years we'll be catching bigger walleye and smallies then we ever did before.


----------



## dinkbuster1 (Oct 28, 2005)

well, i hope it all works out in the end but i still have a problem with the obsessive catering to the kayak crowd. folks who own yaks in this area, as well as canoes knew what was available to them before they purchased their watercraft and now complain about access and motor boats. i myself own a canoe and am thinking about a Yak purchase but i know my limits in the area. 

from what i have seen this kayak craze as of late is the latest "Fad" by the "more affluent" part of our society, as well as environmental wacko's (see gasoline powered boats) and they seem to stop at nothing to influence local decision makers to swing things towards what they want (see "private donations"). 

there was a "Kayak parK" planned for downtown Dayton which required the removal of the Monument lowhead dam which would have cost in excess of 2 million dollars, i just couldnt see the city justifying the cost of that and thankfully in the end they decided against it. it would have been maintained by Five Rivers Metro Parks, and knowing from experience how they operate things the Kayakers would surely have gotten "special treatment".

as far as "bringing in revenue", how does a "yaker" bring in that much revenue? do they buy a new yak and paddle every time they go?

more fishermen (as well as "motor boaters") would bring in WAY more revenue locally by purchasing bait, pop, snacks, beer, tackle, liscense, etc etc. why not cater to them by making more access if revenue were the case?


----------



## iam20fan (Jan 15, 2006)

people with canoes and yaks have their own state park. its called kiser lake.


----------



## Fish-N-Fool (Apr 12, 2004)

A few items to ponder:

It didn't cost anybody here, nor any resident of spfld anything - it was a *fully funded free project*

Long term it should increase water quality and fishing - it screwed up for the short term, but it will get better in the future.

My thoughts:

Believe it or not - it will draw interest and traffic. The kayakers are already chomping at the bit to come run it. It isn't the next tourist destination or anything..LOL But, you'll see traffic on this stretch and even some scheduled events.

Kayakers often spend money on the same items as fishermen - gas, snacks, they eat out while in the area.....I do all these things regardless of fishing or kayaking (not everybody brown bags it)! Does a fisherman buy a new boat and motor each time out? Same logic. Most fishermen drive into town directly to the lake and fish. When they are done they leave...maybe they buy gas on the way out (if they need it). This ain't Erie and nobody stays in town for a week to fish.

82bassman - you won't see any rapids until the project is complete and they begin a scheduled flow out of CJ Brown (or we get a good rain, etc). If it is anything like the other sets I've seen - your kids will change their mind when the dam is open @ CJ & it is flowing.

Dink - You and I have met; you've been to my house and bought a freezer. You seem like a nice enough and resonable guy. I think you must have a personal beef with kayakers (or a specific incident with a kayaker) to have such strong opinions. I owned a yak and a canoe long before I had motor boats. Most of the yak and canoe owners I know that fish own these because they don't have enough money to own a motor boat - they aren't rich people doing something "trendy". I know a few that only paddle for the enjoyment of getting on the water, but they don't fit your description 

We can all agree there just isn't enough water in OH for everybody. These tiny little 2000-3000 acre impoundment lakes built here don't really help. In the grand scheme, these tiny little rapid run stretches are barely a fraction of 1% of the miles of streams/rivers/creeks runnning through the state. This one in particular is on a stretch not suitable for a motor boat anyway. If everybody on the water was a little more curtious it would go a long way.


----------



## Tin Guppy (Mar 20, 2007)

82bassman I don't know if they plan on putting up a fence, but there is going to be another section go in up by the skateboard park after the fish spawning season.


----------



## dinkbuster1 (Oct 28, 2005)

Fish-N-Fool said:


> Dink - You and I have met; you've been to my house and bought a freezer. You seem like a nice enough and resonable guy. I think you must have a personal beef with kayakers (or a specific incident with a kayaker) to have such strong opinions.


Sorry if i came off that way. i have met quite a few kayakers whom where very nice and polite, but have had run ins with just as many whom were very disrespectful just as you would find with any "watercraft crowd". 

my main beef is with totally changing a waterway, and spending tax dollars (i know this is not the case at CJ) to fit 1 group of people while ruining/restricting it for others who have enjoyed it the way it was for years. 

i know this was a thread about CJ and buck creek and i guess i did stray from that for which i am sorry, but i see a see a co-operative effort accross the SW part of this state to turn MANY waterways into "Kayak water parks" and know that will greatly effect boaters as well as fishermen in the future.


----------



## Fish-N-Fool (Apr 12, 2004)

Dink - fair enough; there are plenty of jerks in any group 

I did head down there Saturday afternoon and there was 2 SUVs with 7 kayaks down there about to put it and look around. 

It sure looks strange around there - the entire area of town!


----------



## Chuck P. (Apr 8, 2004)

I had to post an update to this thread.

We took the girls fishing there today and I was AMAZED at the water clarity! I've never seen the creek with water that clear, EVER..

Didn't see any canoes or anything but there were about 10 other people fishing and they started spraying the rocks with concrete and making small ramps and a walkway.

Seems the fish are moving back in, we caught a lot of creek chubs and one guy had "something" nice hooked while fishing a twister tail but it came off.

Glad to see I was wrong about a few things. Now the City needs to put up some "No Swimming" signs to keep the kids out of the creek. The way they dug it out and the undercurrent in those pools, someone will drown down there without question.


----------



## BlueDun (Feb 21, 2007)

I think most kayakers were at Rocky Fork this weekend for the spring water release from the dam. 

Glad to hear that the water is clearing so quickly. Have to admit that even I did not think things would improve so fast. Thanks for the update.


----------

