“FORWARD CASTING” Important Dates - See you there!

Feb 4 (Sat) Annual Planning Meeting, 8 am, Breakfast Meeting at the Dillard House

Feb 7 (Tues) Fly Tying, 7 pm, with Terry Rivers at his home near Persimmon; Call or email for directions (706) 782 7419 tlr1121@alltel.net

Feb14 (Tues) Valentine’s Day You decide which activity for today will be best for your 2006 fishing season.

Feb 21 (Tues) Chapter Meeting, 6:30 pm, Clayton Presbyterian Church

Program: Mike Crane - Explaining the Plans for User Surveys on the Upper Chattooga River

Feb 28 (Tues) Board of Directors meeting, 7 pm, followed by Fly Tying at Terry Rivers’ house.

Mar 4 (Sat) GA TU Council Meeting, 9 am, Location TBD

Mar 7 (Tues) Fly Tying, 7 pm, with Terry Rivers at his home near Persimmon

Mar 11 (Sat) Hoot on the Hooch, 6:30 pm, Black Bear Dinner Theater off Hwy. 75 between Helen and Cleveland; Bar-B-Q, Bluegrass, and more

Mar 14 (Tues) Fly Tying, 7 pm, with Terry Rivers at his home near Persimmon

Mar 21 (Tues) Chapter Meeting, 6:30 pm, Clayton Presbyterian Church

Program: Kyle Burrell & Duane Stalnaker – Small Stream Tactics

Mar 28 (Tues) Board of Directors meeting, 7 pm, followed by Fly Tying at Terry Rivers’ house

REMEMBER - GEORGIA TROUT CAMP! June 11-16th!

We need you to mentor our campers – put it on your calendar!

FLY OF THE MONTH

by Terry Rivers

GOLD RIB HARES EAR

This fly will represent the March Brown mayfly nymph. Pounding the bottom with this pattern can provide constant action from mid-morning into the early stages of the hatch. However, nymphal color tends to adapt to the color of the streambed. During February, March, and early April have some of these tied up from a light brown to almost black.

Hook: 12 to 14 Std nymph hook

Tail: Deer hair or squirrel tail

Body: Rabbit dubbing – color of choice

Abdomen: Same as body or shade darker

Wing Case: Turkey tail – burn ends with lighter

TU Chapter ‘Website-of-the-Month’: http://goldrushtu.org/

(Take a look at their ‘photos’)

Q & A

(Continued from January Issue)

Q. What do you mean by “River Ecosystem Conservation - Wildlife and Resource” as an Upper Chattooga user group?

A. Butch Clay of South Carolina ForestWatch expressed this very well in his written comments to the Forest Service:

Part 2 of a 3 part Series (Editor’s note: Our thanks to Butch Clay for permission to reprint here.)

Message Subject: Recreation Use Form, Visitor Capacity Analysis, Upper Chattooga River

Resource conditions: (i.e.: an understanding of environmental settings, characteristics, and potential impacts.)

With all due respect to all parties, to my mind what is getting lost in all this talk about “visitor capacity” and “use” is, precisely, the resource itself. It was a unique, probably unrepeatable combination of historical, topographical and managerial factors that bequeathed to us the rare treasure that is the rugged, wild, upper Chattooga. It’s wild and fine to this day only because it has been mostly hard to reach. Say what you want to about this boater initiative, it will throw the baby out with the bath water. If the boating initiative goes through, the wilderness and solitude are substantially compromised for all “users.”

The beginning of ANY discussions of possible Limits of Acceptable change to that unique resource should rightfully begin with the possible changes in the wild river resource itself that ANY increase in floater use would bring about. That’s paramount, in my view, to considerations of an understanding of environ-mental settings, characteristics, and potential impacts.

In other words, though this discussion so far is being mostly framed as an issue of possible “user conflict” and the “allocation of resources” across user groups and stakeholders, we should nevertheless not lose sight of the fact that the Chattooga headwaters area has value in and of itself as a unique natural watershed that is far wilder and more intact than most rivers of its size and proximity to urban centers. First consideration of acceptable changes to this state of affairs must be: What makes the Chattooga headwaters unique, how did it get this way, and what will happen to those unique values under even a partial implementation of this new initiative.

Lastly, I believe that we should look closely at the changes brought about in the lower reaches of the Chattooga by steadily increasing float traffic, building over the years. If this measure goes through, a similar if admittedly less intensely intrusive regime of human pre-occupation will become established above Highway 28, just as it has below. The result will be a changed—and substantially diminished--ecological “carry capacity” in the headwaters.

The final segment will be in the next issue of TIGHT LINES:

“Social conditions: The upper Chattooga as a wild “sanctuary” and as a place of wilderness instruction.”

"When I go fishing I ... want to get away from it all, for it is silence and solitude even more than it is fish that I am seeking ... As for big fish, all is relative. Not every tuna is a trophy."
William Humphrey

The Sixth in a Series:

Stream Habitat Protection and Enhancement

Q. What is Large Woody Debris (LWD) and why is it important to trout waters?

A. The Forest Service defines LWD as any piece(s) of dead woody material [e.g., dead boles (the main stem of trees), limbs, and large root masses] on the ground in forest stands, or in streams.

The below explanation was written by Andy Dolloff, Ph.D in Fisheries and Wildlife. Andy is a researcher with the USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station at VPI. This summary is from an article titled: Large Woody Debris - the Common Denominator for Integrated Environmental Management of Forest Streams. (Reprinted with Dr. Dolloff's permission) For more info, click on: http://www.riparianbuffers.umd.edu/manuals/dolloff.html or http://www.srs.fs.usda.gov/pubs/ja/ja_flebbe002.pdf

A variety of aquatic species depend on the natural accumulation of trees, branches, and root wads known as large woody debris (LWD). LWD slows the flow of water, dissipates energy, traps sediment and organic matter, and creates microhabitats for fish and macro invertebrates. LWD in the form of overhanging logs, debris jams, and especially root wads forms pools and provides complex cover. Removal of LWD typically results in habitat simplification and fewer, smaller fish. Habitat simplification resulting from timber harvest and subsequent decreases in residual LWD loading and input has been linked to long-term changes in the species composition of fish communities. LWD is a major feature of refugia across a multitude of habitat types and spatial scales.

Most LWD enters streams from a relatively narrow band on either bank. Debris can be introduced from more distant sources on floodplains and hill slopes, however, when transported by floods or debris torrents. Rates of LWD input vary depending on factors such as size of receiving stream, age, species and health of trees in the surrounding riparian zone, and historical land use. The greatest inputs of LWD can usually be traced to specific catastrophic events.

The particular arrangement of instream LWD is influenced by the dynamics of the addition process, stream size, and geomorphic characteristics of the site. Once in the channel, LWD may persist only until the next high flow or for hundreds of years. The highest loads of LWD usually are associated with coniferous forest types in undisturbed riparian zones adjacent to streams in the Pacific Northwest. Estimates of LWD loading tend to be lower in southeastern streams, owing in part to the long history of settlement and land clearing in the East.

Centuries of forest and river management worldwide have changed the composition and appearance of most forested watersheds so that it is difficult for most people to appreciate the importance of LWD. As was true in other parts of the country, log driving and splash dams were common in parts of the southern Appalachians.

Riparian zones are now being managed for their ability to sequester nutrients, filter sediments, grow specific agricultural and forest crops and provide recreation as well as LWD. Criteria for LWD management should be based on input from many different disciplines, including morphology, hydrology, silviculture, and engineering. Management of LWD will be most effective when approached from an entire watershed rather than an individual reach perspective.

Engineered stream and direct additions of LWD can be effective stream improvements but are costly in both labor and time. Many disturbed riparian areas if allowed to recover on their own will regain the ability provide LWD, given enough time. A mix of techniques is necessary to address both specific current conditions and long-term goals for natural LWD recruitment.

The diversity of riparian zone functions and values suggests that advocates for LWD must compete for their future raw material (trees) with components of other uses. Width of streamside management zones (SMZs) should be based on objective criteria including the probability of LWD recruitment. Because of the different values associated with individual tree species, riparian species composition can be manipulated to meet specific management objectives.

Large woody debris is an effective model for implementing integrated environmental management.

All Pictures of Upper Chattooga – Above the Iron Bridge (Bull Pen Rd) photo credits – Joe Gatins

Editor’s note:

Excerpts from an American Whitewater (AW) article states: “Logs are the predators of paddlers and we treat them how our ancestors in this country treated wolves and mountain lions. They are generally disliked, their importance to the ecosystem is completely misunderstood, they are removed whenever possible, and if one is ever implicated in the injury or death of a human it is ceremoniously destroyed.” The AW article goes on to explain “that logs have incredible ecologically importance in many river systems.” AW urges boaters to let “rivers functioning up to their potential.” For the complete AW article: http://www.americanwhitewater.org/content/Wiki/stewardship:woody_debris

Unfortunately, some otherwise environmentally ethical boaters don’t agree with this AW stream stewardship position. A few boaters believe they are performing a “volunteer service” by removing LWD from headwater streams such as Overflow Ck, Holcomb Ck, Big Ck and Green River narrows in NC after natural input (i.e. wind, ice, fire, & disease).

On the Other Hand

Forest Service streams are managed in a manner that emphasizes and recruits LWD. The desired condition is approximately 200 pieces of LWD per stream mile (Sumter NF L&RMP, page 3-41). During 2005 alone, Rabun TU volunteers worked in 5 different NE Georgia trout streams enhancing habitat and making direct additions of LWD. All of the LWD additions were designed by fisheries biologists and installed under the supervision of the USFS and/or GA DNR professionals.

Editor’s note: Rabun TU volunteers have never installed, anchored, relocated, or removed LWD and/or rocks in designated “Wilderness” areas nor in the “Wild” or “Scenic” sections of the Chattooga or West Fork Rivers. In these areas the management is focused on protecting the Outstandingly Remarkable Values of the river and preserving the natural environment and natural processes from human influences. By law, the landscape character in these areas is naturally evolving. Disturbance is primarily caused by natural process (floods, wind storms, insects, diseases, ice, and fires) or prescribed fire. The hemlock woolly adelgid and the southern pine beetle should provide additional natural LWD recruitment for these streams.

Watershed Restoration - Embrace-A-Stream

Reprinted from the National TU website http://www.tu.org/site/pp.asp?c=7dJEKTNuFmG&b=1063941

Embrace-A-Stream (EAS) is the flagship grant program for funding Trout Unlimited grassroots conservation efforts that advance TU's mission of conserving, protecting, and restoring coldwater fisheries and their watersheds. Overseen by a committee of TU volunteers and administered by its national office, Trout Unlimited annually raises money from TU members, corporate and agency partners, and foundations to distribute as small grants to local TU projects. Since its inception in 1975, EAS has funded 812 individual projects for a total of more than $3 million in direct cash grants. Local TU Chapters and Councils contributed an additional $5.4 million in cash and in-kind services to EAS funded projects for a total program investment of more than $8 million.

The goal of EAS is to conserve coldwater fisheries through innovative grassroots conservation projects. Successful projects are based on sound science, benefit the resource, strengthen

the local TU chapter and council, and help build the constituency for protecting trout and salmon. TU volunteers are actively involved in project work and are expected to provide matching funds. An Embrace-A-Stream Committee comprised of TU volunteer representatives and scientific advisors evaluates all proposed projects.

In the most recent 2005 grant cycle, EAS provided approximately $170,000 for 32 projects. Native trout were clearly the winners in this round with the most number of awards. Golden trout in California, sea-run brook trout in Rhode Island, and Gila trout in Arizona all benefited from TU chapter efforts. Stream habitat restoration from North Carolina to the state of Washington also made a strong showing, as did several research and public education efforts. Click here for a list of all projects funded by Embrace-A-Stream in 2005.

The program has undergone a number of changes in the last two decades. For the 2006 grant cycle, the EAS program will continue to focus on projects that address issues outlined in the National Conservation Agenda and 2003-2008 Strategic Plan, while allowing TU chapters to use their judgment and creativity to design projects that have the most impact locally. Any changes or additions to the program are detailed in the Memo to 2006 Applicants and 2006 Instructions and Application forms.

Editor’s note: In the past, Rabun TU has received two EAS grants for “challenge cost-share” projects with the Forest Service for in-stream trout habitat enhancement projects (including installing LWD in tributaries of the Upper Chattooga River).

Inspired To Post Comments To Forest Service

I just want to say that your essay in the January newsletter was superb. It inspired me to post my comments to the Forest Service. Thank you for taking the time to so eloquently create the end result of public boating in our little piece of heaven.
Don Thomson - Marietta

Taken Out of Context

“Fishermen and women, hunters, hikers and backpackers complaining that there [sic] solitude will be lost. - - Little selfish if you ask me!” - - They used one sentence to portray a negative image of boaters, when if they would have used the comment as a whole it would have put a different perspective on the whole thing. (Excerpts from a posting on the Sumter NF Bulletin Board by Brian from Winston Salem on 1/11/06).

Editor’s notes: To read both original postings in their entirety, click on: Bulletin Board Scroll down to posting by carolina yaker on Dec-03 05 titled Compromise??? or lack there of!!! The other posting was by Brian on Jan-11 titled opening up the whole can of worms! And below Brian writes to the Editor:

These Activities Do Not All Coincide

I would like to discuss the ongoing debate over the headwaters. I am not representing any group other than myself. I believe with a little cooperation by all parties involved can lead to a better understanding of each other and maybe deflect some of the animosity towards each other’s different views.

These Activities Do Not All Coincide (Continued)

I am an outdoorsman; I enjoy the entire outdoors as a whole. I fish, hunt, hike, ect. And I also like to boat on whitewater. These activities do not all coincide with each other. Mother Nature does not see fit to give us enough rain anymore to do much boating during the better of the three seasons. Without the dam-controlled rivers that are dispersed throughout the area, there would be little boating during these said seasons.

I look forward to hearing from you, and hope that you can make it to the "cleansweep" on the 29th of this month. Thanks for your time. Sincerely, Brian Sutphin (a.k.a. carolina yaker) - Winston Salem

If You Know Any Paddlers Like That

If you know any paddlers like that I will choke them for you: away from the river so as to keep down noise pollution. Your strong interest in keeping paddlers away from the area is justifiable for the authenticity of nature, but by classifying all paddlers as inconsiderate pricks is a little overboard.

I also understand that you probably didn't write the story, but since no one's name is tagged below it: you're the person that gets the fodder. This story has remarks that are irresponsible and spread a contempt of groups that should share the beautiful river. The power of two groups working together have more political power than splitting the groups into one that "has what they want" and another that "wants want the other has." By doing this, it becomes a battle over one river.

By combining the interest to see all rivers restored to their natural value, maybe the Tallapoosa in Alabama will one day see the dams that stopped up beautiful waterfalls. The massive shoals that once lended their names to Muscle Shoals will be undamed. It's my [groups] interest as well as your [groups] interest to free the many strangled rivers of the United States.

Please, instead of mud slinging, extend a hand to paddlers. There are folks on both sides that we would care not to deal with, and the best thing to do is keep them within the natural order of things.

Thanks for listening. Good day, Christopher Winslett - Birmingham (I am not a representative of the entire paddling community, just a single paddler.)

Editor’s comments: I don’t know them, but I have encountered them. Should boaters gain unrestricted access (as American Whitewater is requesting), both 'experienced' and 'non-experienced' boaters would likely put-in at Burrell’s Ford.

During medium to high water level conditions I’ve had backcountry encounters with groups of obviously experienced boaters “poaching-a-trip” with all the proper safety equipment, whom I’m sure also practice good stewardship towards the environment. However, the brief passage of these boaters conflicted with fishing experiences, the sense of remoteness, and invaded personal “envelopes of solitude.”

The views of “easy water” from the bridges at Burrell’s Ford and Highway 28 are deceivingly inviting for the non-experienced “Bubba Boaters.” During low to medium water level conditions I’ve encountered two guys (one wearing only shorts, a cowboy hat, and cowboy boots) dragging their aluminum canoe (with a beer cooler inside) over the rock ledges of The Steps. They wouldn’t listen to reason, so the rescue squad had to go in and get them out the next morning. I’ve seen several aluminum canoes busted or wrapped around rocks in the Rocky Gorge. I’ve seen a piece of a fiberglass canoe lodged underwater near Salt Trough. I rescued two doctors below the Sims Fields in a K-Mart plastic raft, after dark, wearing only wet shorts, tee shirts and flip-flops. I’ve encountered a wooden johnboat with 3 occupants between Big Bend Falls and the Sims Shoals.

(Note: User trials would not represent the true social impacts without these Bubba Boaters. The good news is that Bubba Boaters don’t do it in the winter months, - - and they usually don’t do it a second time.)

Deceptive view of ‘easy water’ above Highway 28 Bridge

Essay Underestimated the Long-term Effects

Your article on the Chattooga River significantly under estimates the long-term effects of creek boating to all visitors of the headwaters.
     Just thirty-five years ago the total number of floating trips down the lower Chattooga was less than a few hundred.   Today, the frequency of boating trips is approaching 100,000 trips every year.
    Advancements in boating equipment helped fuel the growth in white water boating. These advancements will continue to increase floater frequency far beyond the simple rate predicted by population expansion. First, imagine the effect of 10,000 headwater-floaters in a few years then imagine 100,000 floating trips in thirty years.  This will be the effect of opening the Chattooga Headwaters to boating without strict controls or monitored limits. Boating has slowly displaced fisherman from the lower Chattooga and the lower Nantahala. The long-term effects of boating are very clear from recent history.
    A day will arrive when the last few anglers are fishing a mud puddle remembering the good old days. Their boots will be splashed by some kid on the latest water riding gizmo.   Don’t react. Don’t say a word. It is his right to also use that puddle.   Mike Bamford - Cashiers

Together We Can Make a Better Stand

There has been conflict in the past between the different user groups of the Chattooga Headwaters. In my opinion, although it may not be very credible, the different user groups are not the greatest threat to the Chattooga River. In fact, the threat the different user groups pose to the Chattooga River is insignificant compared to the amount of damage poised through development often called sprawl. We should refocus the direction of protecting the Chattooga by investigating the building and development of the surrounding areas to determine the impact of those things on the river rather than spending so much of our resources on resolving a solution between user groups. If the user groups can be focused on one common goal like protecting the resource, we can make a better stand. By this, I mean we should ban the user groups together to restrict development of the area. Apparently, golf courses are the biggest contributors with their pesticides, weed killers, and the like. One place that we can see the devastation of development and building is Florida. I am aware of many situations in which this has occurred and research will show this ultimately. Another such area is the Metro Atlanta area close to the Chattahoochee River. Sincerely, Roger Huff - Kennesaw

Must Work Together to Address the Real Threats

Your story of kayakers destroying wilderness solitude is a well-written, mix of truth and biased fantasy. But let’s deal with reality. Kayakers and fishermen must work together to address the real threats to the Chattooga head waters. The threats are 1) Overuse by all groups 2) Poor Forest Service management and 3) Encroaching development. Both kayakers and fishermen appreciate wilderness and water quality. But, uncontrolled camping along the river, litter, random use trails, loud music, free roaming dogs, untended fires, trail/campsite erosion, human waste, dish washing and bathing in the river, heavy use, etc. are increasing yearly. Poorly planned developments and weak, erosion control laws in the watershed are lowering water quality and adding users. Watching the Chattooga turn into another muddy, polluted river is a very sad experience for all. With continued growth, problems will get worse without a comprehensive watershed management and user plan that includes private, city, county, state and federal involvement and cooperation. Fighting over use rights while the river dies is pointless.

One kayaker question, your thermometer says trout don’t bite in winter when paddling is good (that section is too low in late spring, summer and early fall). Can there be a boating season and a fishing season? (kayaks do scare trout) Is there another

approach? There are some great minds out there. Surely there is a solution.

And Doug, from a former scoutmaster, when has a Boy Scout troop ever been tranquil in the woods except when sleeping?

Take care and catch your limit! Marshall Wilson – Atlanta

Good Fences Make Good Neighbors

I wanted to let you know how effective your essay was for me. Prior to reading your essay, I had difficulty in supporting our (GA TU Council) position. You have eloquently shown how not just fishermen but many other groups as well as the environment are affected by brief encounters with boaters. What is more important is that you accurately represent what actually happens, not what the boaters and everyone else wishes or hopes would happen when one group’s activities are intruded upon by another. I know from personal experience that regardless of how brief the contact the negative effect and hard feelings last. I may be wrong, but I believe it was Robert Frost who wrote, “Good fences make good neighbors”. After reading your essay I realize that the Highway 28 Bridge has been a good fence for 30 years and has served all interested parties well and should continue to do so into the foreseeable future.

Bruce Rickey – Marietta

“Flailers share one thing in common: They rarely raise, much less ever catch, a trout. Watching one at his devotionals swiftly reveals why. After resolutely stomping up to the water he will so shortly rid of all trout, your typical flailer strips out line like an overworked barber whipping up a cold lather. Then suddenly he braces himself and lifts the accumulated mass and blindly flings it out yonder as far as he can. Then, before his fly has fairly landed, he retrieves the whole whirling mess and whales her out again. This goes on all day.”

from “TROUT MAGIC” by Robert Traver

“BACKCASTING”

Jan 13 (Fri) Doug Watson’s USFS Retirement Party at Jaemour Farms in Alto was attended by 15 Rabunites. Jeff Durniak has said “If any of you has enjoyed the fish and wildlife resources on National Forest lands in northeast Georgia, join me in thanking one of the folks who likely helped make your forest trips better. After 32 years, US Forest Service Wildlife Technician Doug Watson of Clarkesville is retiring. Doug was the first FS staffer I met when I started for GA DNR, and he's always been among the best, one of those folks who could always, always be counted on. He maintained wildlife openings on non-WMA forest lands, shocked the Chattooga and mountain streams with us, collected brook trout genetics samples, installed thermographs, helped with copter trout stocking, started and maintained the two-decade-old tradition of the Nancytown Lake Kids Fishing Rodeo, and built one heck of a lot of trout stream structures! We will miss his smile and his productivity. “

Jeff Durniak made a presentation from GA WRD Tom Landreth made a presentation from Rabun TU Kathy Breithaupt made a presentation from GA TU Council

Jimmy Harris said “Doug Watson has had as much if not more effect on the quality of trout fishing in north Georgia than any other one individual I know of. It was great to see over 120 people in attendance at his retirement party last night and I'm proud to know him. As someone said last night, he's the epitome of a conservationist. Foothills TU is also proud to claim Doug as a charter member and a driving force behind the Soque River Outdoor Classroom.” Tom Landreth said “After 31 years with the Forest Service he will now be able to enjoy some of the fruits of his labor....silt free streams, improved turkey and grouse habitat, and, yes, time to stop and smell the wild flowers. Thanks, Doug. You have made a difference.”

Jan 16 (Mon) Program for Oconee River Chapter (Athens) – Doug & Eedee Adams, Charlie Breithaupt and Terry Rivers attended. Doug presented the program at their Chapter meeting. Subject: Visitor Capacity Analysis, Upper Chattooga River

Jan 17 (Tues) Chapter Meeting - About 23 folks attended the monthly Chapter meeting. Charter Rabunite Jeff Durniak presented a memorable program that kept everyone totally entertained, - - and we also learned a lot. Jeff told us WHERE, WHEN, & HOW to catch the really big’uns in GA. I took lots of notes but they may be a little scrambled – here they are, I’m sure you can figure it out. “IDBIS #1; Big and ugly deep; Low and Clear; Nov, Feb-Apr; Nightcrawlers, crayfish, crickets & camera!; Chuck and duck like that Yankee boy’s been a-preach’n; IDBIS # 2; Troll lures or drift bluebacks 40 feet deep near dam;

Clayton Presbyterian Church (Located behind the Post Office) - Clayton, GA 3^rd Tuesday of the Month 6:30 pm – Social & Yarn Spinning 7:00 pm – Program & Meeting (you don’t have to believe the yarns - - if you don’t want to)

At every regular chapter meeting there will be a raffle for fishing or camping items to help pay the cost of mailing the newsletter to members without E-mail. Bring an item to donate and a dollar or two for raffle tickets - you might win something.

On the Other Hand

Watershed Restoration - Embrace-A-Stream

CORRECTION

Clayton Presbyterian Church (Located behind the Post Office) - Clayton, GA 3rd Tuesday of the Month 6:30 pm – Social & Yarn Spinning 7:00 pm – Program & Meeting (you don’t have to believe the yarns - - if you don’t want to)

At every regular chapter meeting there will be a raffle for fishing or camping items to help pay the cost of mailing the newsletter to members without E-mail. Bring an item to donate and a dollar or two for raffle tickets - you might win something.

On the Other Hand

Watershed Restoration - Embrace-A-Stream

CORRECTION

Clayton Presbyterian Church (Located behind the Post Office) - Clayton, GA 3^rd Tuesday of the Month 6:30 pm – Social & Yarn Spinning 7:00 pm – Program & Meeting (you don’t have to believe the yarns - - if you don’t want to)