Do have an opinion of current Trinity river restoration efforts?

[donkeyhunter007]

Im very curious if any biologists, fluvial geomorphologist, fish habitat experts etc... have any opionions good or bad on current Trinity river restoration efforts?



if you dont want to post...........please PM me with your feedback

thanks for your time

Mike

[JasonB]

Mike,
I hesitate to respond as I certainly possess none of the above mentioned titles. Since no one more qualified has responded, I'll weigh in with some observations and opinions, as I do have a bit of experience working with the TRRP. I've worked for a subcontractor focused on measuring sediment transport, so my own experiences are limited in scope, but very much "hands on". I have also had many educational conversations with various people involved with all levels of the project; conversations centered on science and data, as well as conversations based on opinions and theories. What I can say that I have gleaned from my own questions, and observations, is that there is a good amount of data to suggest that the efforts are overall a very good thing for the fish. It is, of course, pretty hard to compare those gains to what was lost when the dam was built.

There remain some big questions for me, mainly: how sustainable are these efforts, and are the gains sufficient enough to warrant continued work/expense. For instance, the 2011 flow pulse in May were higher than in previous years; while the data suggested that higher flows were desirable from a habitat perspective, the landowners within the floodplain in the Lewiston area were understandably upset and I don't think that there is any reasonable way to raise flows very much above 10,000 cfs (2011 peak was ~12,000 cfs). Overall, for me personally I'm happy to see that the BOR is being made to do restorative work on an ecosystem that was severely impacted by one of their dams; this should hopefully affect (to some degree) the design and cost/benefit analysis of any future dams.

I do see some validity in some of the concerns/complaints that various landowners and some fishing guides have raised. The level that this has become politicized, however, has made some of the arguments utterly removed from the confines of reality (imo). I find it odd, for instance that one of the common complaints heard is one of "playing god with the river again"; yet these same folks don't seem to have a problem with diverting huge amounts of water from the Trinity river through tunnels to the Sacramento river.
I don't think that the project has been perfect by any stretch, but I do see it as a big positive overall, and would hope that we might see more and more similar kinds of efforts to make better and better efforts of restoration.
JB

[Darian]

donkeyhunter,.... I'm, also, not a professional, however, it's not often anyone asks such an open ended question on this BB. Kinda seems like a more specific question would get a better response.... Altho you don't owe me a reply, I'm curious about the objective involved. Are you evaluating the project???

[SeanO]

Im very curious if any biologists, fluvial geomorphologist, fish habitat experts etc... have any opionions good or bad on current Trinity river restoration efforts?



if you dont want to post...........please PM me with your feedback

I'm not too familiar with the decision, but in general, more flows are better for our fish.