Moratorium on Planters

[flyfishinwoman]

I just returned from the Hat Creek area, (had to pick up my trailer and get ready for the season!) and heard that there is a moratorium on planter trout in that area...according to DFG, there are allegedly 7 locations that have been approved for planting (including Hat Creek...) but there are a great many that won't be planted. Something to do with the "tree huggers" and the "red footed hoppy toad" or something. I tuned out when I heard no fish.

Anyone heard anything else? Propaganda? I've been a ostrich...and need to get in the game?

My first post...so if I'm out there...sorry.

'becca

[Darian]

Hmmm.... Maybe so. This sore subject has come up several times in the recent past. What would concern me (if I were you) is that you say this is your first post but the total count for you is 4. :lol: :lol:

[Terry Thomas]

Becca,
Welcome! See you for the opener.
T.

[Larry S]

I encourage you to sign up for Carrie Wilson's weekly newsletter from Ca Dept F&G.
Having trouble accessing the info she recently sent out but you might find it at

http://www.dfg.ca.gov/fish/Hatcheries/FishPlanting/Evaluation.asp

Seems like an EIR has to be done on each resource (lake/stream) before future
plants will be allowed. This might have a big impact on the Eastern Sierra opener.
Crowley, Hot Creek, and the Owens have been cleared but a number of other
popular spots have not. Might be some real unhappy folks up there two weeks from
today.
Larry S

[Bill Kiene semi-retired]

Could it be that the State of California is bankrupt???????

[Ed Wahl]

It could be Bill, but more likely it's a case of DFG's willy nilly planting history
. Several of our native fish, Lahontan and Paiute Cutthroat, our 2 species of Golden trout, and 3 types of Redband trout in particular, are facing serious threats from introduced(by DFG) plants of Rainbow, Brook, and Brown trout.
I'm missing some but these are just off the top of my head.

These threats are from interbreeding(the rainbow gene is dominant over the cutthroat so the more they breed the more the Cutthroat disappears).

Sheer displacement. Brookies can breed like rabbits in rather marginal spawning conditions, thus out producing by a large amount the native fish, who need particular spawning conditions.

Browns survive and get huge just by being harder to catch than other fish. Once they get huge they mainly eat other fish.

Up til now the only criteria DFG used for planting was angler satisfaction.

Not a good rule in anyone's book, and DFG is now required to actually study the waters targeted for planting, to determine if the planted trout will negatively affect native species, be they fish, frogs, insects, or whatever.

'Becca, as for the red legged hoppy toad and tree huggers, you'd be better served looking into the science instead of the slogans. There's a ton of misinformation out there.

If you need some help finding some wild fish, just ask on this board, I'm sure you'll get all the info you'll need.

Ed

[bigfly]

Becca, welcome. One indicator of health for the environment, (just like a canary in a mine) are Amphibians. The yellow legged frog is indigenous to the Sierras. With all the fish stocking over the years, without study, they (the frogs) nearly disappeared in their range. I walked a drainage up to where the lakes were too shallow for fish, lots of frogs. Trout eat frogs/tadpoles,
(go figure), but it turns out the frogs are an important link in the high Sierra food chain, (who knew?) Other reptiles, birds and native fish if any, eat them. No frogs and the system collapses.
DFG now will be forced to look first, then plant. They should have done it years ago (before stocking), but it seems that we are a little slow to think of whats good for the planet, and mostly think what makes us feel good. They just did a quick assessment for the Truckee area lakes, and we are good to go. (Sweated that one).
I do think it is OK to have a few places that are kept, "as it was", and some areas that get planted for folks that like planters. In my experience, wild beats "domesticated" every time, (hatchery steel head come to mind).
Catch and release fishing on a self sustaining fishery, allows people to fish and save stocking $ by the state.

Jim

[Dave Neal]

This is a very interesting topic and one that is rife with emotional opinion. There is also a lot of complicating factors and misinformation out there. It has been on my mind a lot lately.

Bill, yeah the State of CA and DF&G both are in pretty dire straits right now.

Ed Wahl and Big Fly, you each raised some very good points, thank you!

Larry, Hot Creek is managed as a C&R wild trout fishery so DFG does not stock it with planters. So it should not be on “the list”.

Personally, I’m a supporter of native trout, in their respective drainages, and I believe it is important for us to do everything we can too protect, preserve, and conserve their habitat from future degradation.

Further, I’m a huge fan of wild trout, especially where self-sustaining populations thrive in areas with high carrying capacity. I personally would rather target wild trout any day… even though most of these WILD trout are not NATIVE to the waters in which they live now.

Finally, I’m also a supporter of a hatchery program wherein the release of stocked trout does minimal or no impact to the native species in that fishery.

Bottom line is there are hundreds of thousands of anglers in this sates who may not fish the way I choose to. And I like that! I guess it really depends how far we should take the planter program. There’s a lot of data showing stocked trout do harm native species, especially when competing for food and habitat. This is something our current laws won’t allow us to ignore…

However, we shouldn’t forget that many of us, even the died in the wool bamboo wielding dry fly only to native trout purists, got our start “fishing” by soaking worms and eggs to stocked trout. Especially in Sierra Lakes. Stocked trout are an important part of angling history in CA and that continues to this day. Paved roads and asphalt parking lots are not native to our ecosystem either!

I guide hundreds of kids and first time beginner adults each year that hook their very first trout (sometimes a stocker) and go on to become lifelong anglers. Many of these folks, are now “anglers” joining the legions of supporters of our natural resources. They make up the voters that influence legislation protecting such things as clean water, clean air, and public lands. They also become the anglers who contribute to DU and CalTrout etc etc…

I guess my problem with the current lawsuits by CBD against the CA DFG (Willow Fly Catcher, EIR for planters etc) is:
1. How far are they going to take it and when are they going to stop?
2. Where do we draw the line?

Many of our great fisheries along the Eastern Sierra NEVER contained any trout to begin with (native or wild). Famous places such as: Upper Owens, Crowley, Hot Creek, the Gorge, Lower Owens, and nearly all of our HUNDREDS of local lakes, were at one point “stocked” with non-native trout species. Some of these fisheries sustain fantastic wild trout populations to this day, while others are still dependent on regular stocking of trout to sustain them and/or provide catchable numbers of fish.

Furthermore, the majority of our “put & take” fisheries are TOTALLY dependent on hatchery stocking to sustain fish populations and the demand for those fish. Thousands of anglers visiting Inyo and Mono Counties each year spend millions of dollars in our local economy. While a growing number of these anglers come to C&R wild trout, the majority of anglers come to catch and keep trout. I would rather they eat hatchery fish, than wild or native trout.

Maybe this lawsuit will do some good in respect to studying the impacts on stocking trout in sensitive areas they don’t belong. Or perhaps it will spell the end for stocking all trout in CA. But without other management strategies in place (maybe more C&R fisheries?) this lawsuit, if taken too seriously, may have devastating short-term affects on rural counties that depend on summer tourism and fishing.

I probably just opened a can of worms, so have at it!

[Darian]

Well thought out statement. Altho I don't share the need to fish for native Trout, I concur with the concerns/questions you raise on this subject. To add a couple of thoughts, I'm wondering:

What is the definition of waters to be studied for an EIR (individual creeks, rivers, streams, lakes and ponds or a watershed) :?:

How is DFG going to be able to perform all of the required EIR's, given the current state of the budget and resources :?:

What will the quality of these studies amount to given the same budget/resouce issue :?:

Finally, how do these requirements (from the suit) stack up against current state law requiring specified funding for the Trout stocking program (remember AB 7) :?:

There're many more questions but these are the primaries for me. Well, maybe the state will cease the stocking program, sell all of the hatcheries to private interests and turn them into fish farms.... :roll:

[huntindog]

For some clarifcationt, they (DFG) do not need to do a full blown EIR for each body of water, they need to do an assessment. There is pretty big difference in terms of the amount of time, money and level of evaluation that would be required.

[Dave Neal]

Darian, sorry I cannot answer question #1.

As for 2 & 3 it will probably just halt stocking those waters all together, or possibly bankrupt the DFG!! DFG is so strapped right now, performing these things along with the myriad of other duties. Our fish and wildlife and the agency created to manage them are in terrible shape right now. I feel badly for all the good biologists and wardens just trying to do their jobs. Furloughs and budget cuts are making it tough for them right now.

#4 I cannot answer as well, although, given the State budget situation I doubt any $$ from AB-7 is even making it to the hatcheries right now. CA politicos raid the DFG accounts so heavily, it's a shame that more of our license revenue doesn't go where it is should go...

It is easy to be frustrated with all the negative things going on in our State, this is just one tiny issue. All we can do is take one day at a time and try and get involved with the issues we hold dear.

[Dave Neal]

Huntindog, thanks for the clarification, that is an important point. Hope others "in the know" will speak up, too.

[bigfly]

I thought I should come back and say, I'm not against stocking. Hell, with many thousands of people taking fish home, alot of fisheries would be cleaned out in a season.
I started with planters as a kid, and I would like to see others get the same opportunity.
It's just that an ecosystem needs all it's parts to work, (even frogs). We just need to balance our desires, against the planet's. We can't live anywhere else!
On an semi-related topic. The budget problems seem to be driving higher enforcement pressure, the warden up here is definitely earning his keep. Just a thought. Citations can ruin an opening day. Check the regs, they change every year.
Enjoy.


Jim

[flyfishinwoman]

Thank you everyone for your comments and info. It's very interesting to have access to such a vast pool of knowledge and information by just throwing out a question. Honest...I wasn't calling names to the hoppy toads or the tree huggers. I love them both. I just was relaying information that I had heard.

One thing I didn't notice in the replies was comments on the impact to all the little towns that will be affected by the lack of planting, which will reduce to the point of eliminating the non-purists...face it, if the novice/average fisherman doesn't get a grab (especially the newbies), they're not so likely to buy a license next year. No fish...no fishing...at least for most. I ache for the small businesses that depend on the "season". I believe all of us are having a tough time, but I would hate to be totally dependent on how good the fishing is for my livelyhood. I don't have an answer, just more and more questions. Anyway.

To clarify, this is my first post that wasn't in the classified section. (And thank you Bill for such a wonderful resource...I sold the pump and bought a spool...just like ebay only without the pressure.)

Hope to meet/see you all at the Show on Saturday. Thanks so much for the info.

'becca

[Darian]

Becca,.... The point of AB 7 (statutes of '07 [:question:] ) was to insure that $$$ for hatcheries/stocking of Trout in the eastern/southern Sierra's was not eliminated by DFG budget constraints. The author of the bill took recognized the economic impact that action would have on communities in that area.... Your sentiment is shared by many on the BB (including me). :cool: :cool:

[flyfishinwoman]

Like I said...you all have a ton of information. Thanks for the education. I am retired Air Force so am not a local. Love it here though...Not leaving anytime soon. I've met so many wonderful people flyfishing. Wish I would have started years ago...but glad I learned when I did.

Thx again.

[Dave Neal]

Becca, welcome to the Board (late on that, sorry) and thanks for bringing up this topic...

Darian, I believe a portion of the AB-7 funds ALSO get contibuted to the DFG Heritage & Wild Trout Program. So the $$ is not just for hatchery trout...

If I recall correctly, 2 previous versions of the Bill failed - until other stakeholders (CalTrout?) got involved and the Heritage & Wild Trout Program was included to receive a portion of funding, as well.

Cheers.

[Tracy Chimenti]

The Center for Bilogical Diversity for biologicla diversity is currently suing CDFG over planting at this time.

All a broke state needs... to spend thousands of dollars and staff hours on this revolving door. Like the water grabbers in the south, they will keep coming back, long after I'm gone.

[Larry S]

More info at -


http://thetroutfly.com/fishreport.html

Larry S