The Trinity River - Proposed Flow Changes

[ricards]

It might be a short season on the Trinity, just when the bigger wild steelhead, the so-called "canyon fish" start moving up river. The Feds are proposing to raise the flows to 1800 CFS on February 1 through April 22 for the next two years.

https://www.usbr.gov/newsroom/newsrelease/detail.cfm?RecordID=60846

[winxp_man]

I'm curious now if this will improve the fish numbers. Also will the Lewiston lake be able to maintain this flow and still retain water?

[JasonB]

The link didn’t work for me, but I cant help but wonder if this would be beneficial to the fish. 1800cfs is still plenty fishable imo, but I can see where it would put some folks off as it would make some spots no good and it would make the potential holding fish much more spread out. I’ll reserve judgment until I can see a lot more info, but on the surface this doesn’t seem like the end of the world?
JB

[TahoeJoe]

I needed to add https:// to the front of the link to make it work. Looks like ricards has updated the post.

I followed the link from there to the www.trrp.net web pages. The increased flows are part of a plan to restore the Trinity to the pre-dam state. The releases are meant to simulate pre-dam snow melt conditions. Lots of other good stuff on the website - pages of info on gravel bar restoration and gravel replenishment, riparian re-vegetation, etc. I easily killed an hour.

Here's a link to the FAQ on flows, the releases from Trinity/Lewiston won't drain down the lakes as long as the water allocation plan is followed:
http://www.trrp.net/restoration/flows/flow-faq/

Yeah, the higher flows will make it tougher on fishers but, hopefully, it'll make for stronger populations in the future.
--Joe

[Sierra D]

The Smolt migrate out on those spring flows. The bigger and colder they are, the quicker they get out, and the more likely they are to elude predators and survive. I’ve seen amazing charts on the water starved Stanislaus, Tuolumne, and Merced Rivers. They show that every time there are big spring flows, the smolt survival is so much better that in 2 1/2 years there’s a banner run of adults returning. This is mainly about chinook, but if it helps chinook, it’s bound to help steelhead too.

[JayDubP]

The Smolt migrate out on those spring flows. The bigger and colder they are, the quicker they get out, and the more likely they are to elude predators and survive. I’ve seen amazing charts on the water starved Stanislaus, Tuolumne, and Merced Rivers. They show that every time there are big spring flows, the smolt survival is so much better that in 2 1/2 years there’s a banner run of adults returning. This is mainly about chinook, but if it helps chinook, it’s bound to help steelhead too.

Makes too much sense. Recent article on the salmon in the Mokelumne stated salmon smolts are being trucked down river so they avoid the diversion canals and water pumps. plus they are being given a saltier diet for few weeks prior to allow them to quickly adapt to the water in the Delta, SF Bay and the ocean.

It is a good start to a problem that has many causes.

[ricards]

Thanks for providing additional links, Joe. I will not be able to attend the meeting in Lewiston this Thursday, but I would have two questions for Reclamation, if I were there. The first would be: If the biggest threat to salmon and steelhead juveniles is a warming ocean and decrease in food supply, are efforts to restore flood plain and lost habitat on the Trinity, a case of too little, too late? The second question would be: once you have yanked out vegetation and widened the "riparian corridor" what's to prevent seedlings to take hold and new trees (willows) and new vegetation (berry bushes) from sprouting up, if high flows are not maintained? Perhaps the "new norm" for the Trinity should be 1800 CFS and not 300? Anyone out there a biologist, who can weigh in on this?

[ricards]

And, yes, I understand that the increased flows are meant to assist smolt on their way to the ocean. But I believe that the other component of this is to wash out newly-created flood plain.

[JasonB]

Thanks for providing additional links, Joe. I will not be able to attend the meeting in Lewiston this Thursday, but I would have two questions for Reclamation, if I were there. The first would be: If the biggest threat to salmon and steelhead juveniles is a warming ocean and decrease in food supply, are efforts to restore flood plain and lost habitat on the Trinity, a case of too little, too late? The second question would be: once you have yanked out vegetation and widened the "riparian corridor" what's to prevent seedlings to take hold and new trees (willows) and new vegetation (berry bushes) from sprouting up, if high flows are not maintained? Perhaps the "new norm" for the Trinity should be 1800 CFS and not 300? Anyone out there a biologist, who can weigh in on this?

Well as far as the first question, I agree that there are bigger and tougher issues but I don’t see that as cause to not take other actions that would or could be beneficial to our fish. On the second question, you are correct that seedlings would take up root once again if flows were maintained at a steady consistent flow as it was for a few decades. I doubt that the 1800cfs is intended to do much about that, but the May high flow releases are meant as an attempt at a closer to natural hydrograph. Those flows are much higher of course.

I’m certainly no biologist, though I do have a bit of experience chatting with biologists and geomorphologists about the various issues and restoration work being done on the Trinity. While not every singular aspect of each and every decision or action taken by the BOR is unanimously agreed on, they have all been firmly in agreement (so far, of those I have talked with) that the overall restoration efforts were making some very positive improvements in stream health and fish habitat. I have my own hopes and concerns regarding the management of the Trinity river, but overall I always see that the closer to a natural state we get the better nature works; both for reasons we can measure and understand, and for reasons we cannot.
JB

[Fishtopher]

Thanks for providing additional links, Joe. I will not be able to attend the meeting in Lewiston this Thursday, but I would have two questions for Reclamation, if I were there. The first would be: If the biggest threat to salmon and steelhead juveniles is a warming ocean and decrease in food supply, are efforts to restore flood plain and lost habitat on the Trinity, a case of too little, too late? The second question would be: once you have yanked out vegetation and widened the "riparian corridor" what's to prevent seedlings to take hold and new trees (willows) and new vegetation (berry bushes) from sprouting up, if high flows are not maintained? Perhaps the "new norm" for the Trinity should be 1800 CFS and not 300? Anyone out there a biologist, who can weigh in on this?

In response to your first question, it is possible it is too little too late. We can't control ocean conditions though so all we can hope for is restoration to improve juvenile salmonid conditions in the river to better suit them for ocean life. Whether or not that is worth it is a different question.

As for your second question, flows will be variable and designed to mimic precipitation events so most new seedlings will not survive when flows drop and the ones that do would have likely persisted anyways. It should help to alleviate the problems with the thick riparian vegetation that has constricted the river. It will also spread riparian vegetation along a larger area which will create cover for juvenile salmonids at variable flows. Like JasonB said, the spring high flows will scour most of the willows on the floodplain anyways which should also prevent the riparian berm problem on the river.

These new flows should help inundate floodplains which are known to be extremely productive for juvenile salmonids. Studies on the Yolo Bypass have shown this to be true.

[Bill Kiene semi-retired]

I believe that it is possible that the DWR can and will tell you a big lie about why they are doing something with water flows.

I have been to local meeting about the Lower American River flows and felt like DWR was just letting us talk and then they were doing what they planned on anyway.

You are talking about billions of dollars here folks.....that is what counts....not fish or sports fishing.

.

[Brian Clemens]

Dont let TRRP pull the wool over your heads with oh its gonne help this and rearing habitat that.

If you havent had the opportunity to float the river, especially from Evans to Sky, give it a float. Their work is disgusting, its no longer called the River Restoration project but the River Devastation project. This river is designated Nationally Wild and Scenic, how you can legally alter that I still have no idea. Still looking into that.

Its unbelievable what they are doing to this river. If you check out the work recently done on the Lower Sac above the Cypress Bridge, you wouldnt even know any work was even done. It looks natural, they used rip rap (big rocks) to keep the islands and work done together so high flow doesnt blow it out, 80k+cfs this year and still looks great. Until on the Trinity, you pee in that river and it pushes rock all over the place. Back to the Lower Sac work, they didnt clear cut the whole area/islands down to do the work, they kept the trees, grass and brush (which is needed for habitat and holding back the banks) on the area being worked on again looks untouched and natural, they didnt use trees to build rip rap which looks like crap and lastly its not left looking a mess, like someone just threw some wood up in the air and see where it lands. The work on the Lower Sac looks perfect, unlike the work on the Trinity.

Cant count how many projects on the Trinity that no longer work, millions upon millions wasted for what. A few areas include, Sky Ranch, the side channel on river left above school house, then again river right below school house run, all filled in and unusable. How about the Guardrail run above Indian Creek Lodge on river right, that used to have a huge long side channel there, all filled in and unusable. How about the work they recently did above Steel Bridge, again all filled in and unusable, over and over and over again these projects fill in and dont work. With millions wasted on every single one.

Where are the studies that they are supposed to be doing to see if these projects are working? Phase 1- do the work, Phase 2- study the work, Phase 3- fix as needed. Nope, Phase 1, to next Phase 1, to next Phase 1, project after project after project. It never ends, oh another 11 proposed projects on the list as well.

This new "flow" increase will make the River unsafe to wade, and pretty much call it unfishable. After all my calcualtions, the local economy as well as guides will loose an estimated $850,000 between Feb 1st and April 22nd. This includes what guides will make, what clients pay to get up there as well as your everyday bank angler that doesnt hire a guide. Thats a huge loss of revenue to the local economy. Hard to bounce back from that.

To sum it all up
Aggressive gravel dumps and in-stream projects have severely impacted vital deep water compositions (adult sanctuary, holding-staging waters); transforming the upper reach into a shallow gravel raceway. Oct. 15 TR flows were reduced to the minimum (300 cfs.); fish and boaters literally had to bring their own canteen of water to navigate the shallows. Sadly, current minimum flows, coupled with the upper TR facelift reflect the original post- dam (60-70's) minimum flow allocation (150 cfs.), without deep water compositions.

I think a bump in flows would be a great ideal, but not 1800cfs, a nice 450 to 500cfs would be perfect. 300cfs is just way to low. Again the upper river now at 300cfs is shallower than what it used to be before the projects at 150cfs. Thats all these projects to is fill in the river, and there is less habitat each year after the high water.

I personally noticed more salmon spawning between Big Bar to Hayden Flat, than there was from Old Lewistion Bridge to Pigeon Point. What does that tell you, loss of proper habitat.

Based on TRRP's riddled track record, and how many millions vested, why should anyone believe new minimum flow recommendations (Feb-Apr) will increase juvenile habitats; just another experimental hip-shot to overshadow their inability to achieve restoration goals.

What about reestablishing new minimum flows (July-Oct (800cfs) and Oct to April (500cfs) to help compensate the lack of suitable juvenile and adult habitats? Keeps enough water going down for the fish as well as keeping the water cool when its needed the most

As we all know, normal flows late summer, fall, early winter have always been on the lower side, but come winter and early spring you have rains and snow run off that raise the flows on the rivers naturally. With the amount of secondary streams on the Trinity there is no need to ramp the water up that much. If they are letting 1800 out of Lewistion, by DC below Weaver creek its 2500, by JC below Canyon Creek 3500cfs. Thats just crazy, and all that work they just did in the Evans bar area is going to get washed out. HMMMMMMM isnt that interesting. The work they did was complete crap and thats one way to fix it and move it around, and if it happens it wont be for the better. Plus what a waste of water that will be. TRRP needs to stop playing the river gods game and let mother take its course and do what it does best.
Rivers and their fish goes through cycles, got to let nature do its thing.

Sorry for the rant
Just my 2 cents/opinion

As Bill put it, its all about the money, not the fish or the locals. MONEY always wins

[STEELIES/26c3]

Dont let TRRP pull the wool over your heads with oh its gonne help this and rearing habitat that.

If you havent had the opportunity to float the river, especially from Evans to Sky, give it a float. Their work is disgusting, its no longer called the River Restoration project but the River Devastation project. This river is designated Nationally Wild and Scenic, how you can legally alter that I still have no idea. Still looking into that.

Its unbelievable what they are doing to this river. If you check out the work recently done on the Lower Sac above the Cypress Bridge, you wouldnt even know any work was even done. It looks natural, they used rip rap (big rocks) to keep the islands and work done together so high flow doesnt blow it out, 80k+cfs this year and still looks great. Until on the Trinity, you pee in that river and it pushes rock all over the place. Back to the Lower Sac work, they didnt clear cut the whole area/islands down to do the work, they kept the trees, grass and brush (which is needed for habitat and holding back the banks) on the area being worked on again looks untouched and natural, they didnt use trees to build rip rap which looks like crap and lastly its not left looking a mess, like someone just threw some wood up in the air and see where it lands. The work on the Lower Sac looks perfect, unlike the work on the Trinity.

Cant count how many projects on the Trinity that no longer work, millions upon millions wasted for what. A few areas include, Sky Ranch, the side channel on river left above school house, then again river right below school house run, all filled in and unusable. How about the Guardrail run above Indian Creek Lodge on river right, that used to have a huge long side channel there, all filled in and unusable. How about the work they recently did above Steel Bridge, again all filled in and unusable, over and over and over again these projects fill in and dont work. With millions wasted on every single one.

Where are the studies that they are supposed to be doing to see if these projects are working? Phase 1- do the work, Phase 2- study the work, Phase 3- fix as needed. Nope, Phase 1, to next Phase 1, to next Phase 1, project after project after project. It never ends, oh another 11 proposed projects on the list as well.

This new "flow" increase will make the River unsafe to wade, and pretty much call it unfishable. After all my calcualtions, the local economy as well as guides will loose an estimated $850,000 between Feb 1st and April 22nd. This includes what guides will make, what clients pay to get up there as well as your everyday bank angler that doesnt hire a guide. Thats a huge loss of revenue to the local economy. Hard to bounce back from that.

To sum it all up
Aggressive gravel dumps and in-stream projects have severely impacted vital deep water compositions (adult sanctuary, holding-staging waters); transforming the upper reach into a shallow gravel raceway. Oct. 15 TR flows were reduced to the minimum (300 cfs.); fish and boaters literally had to bring their own canteen of water to navigate the shallows. Sadly, current minimum flows, coupled with the upper TR facelift reflect the original post- dam (60-70's) minimum flow allocation (150 cfs.), without deep water compositions.

I think a bump in flows would be a great ideal, but not 1800cfs, a nice 450 to 500cfs would be perfect. 300cfs is just way to low. Again the upper river now at 300cfs is shallower than what it used to be before the projects at 150cfs. Thats all these projects to is fill in the river, and there is less habitat each year after the high water.

I personally noticed more salmon spawning between Big Bar to Hayden Flat, than there was from Old Lewistion Bridge to Pigeon Point. What does that tell you, loss of proper habitat.

Based on TRRP's riddled track record, and how many millions vested, why should anyone believe new minimum flow recommendations (Feb-Apr) will increase juvenile habitats; just another experimental hip-shot to overshadow their inability to achieve restoration goals.

What about reestablishing new minimum flows (July-Oct (800cfs) and Oct to April (500cfs) to help compensate the lack of suitable juvenile and adult habitats? Keeps enough water going down for the fish as well as keeping the water cool when its needed the most

As we all know, normal flows late summer, fall, early winter have always been on the lower side, but come winter and early spring you have rains and snow run off that raise the flows on the rivers naturally. With the amount of secondary streams on the Trinity there is no need to ramp the water up that much. If they are letting 1800 out of Lewistion, by DC below Weaver creek its 2500, by JC below Canyon Creek 3500cfs. Thats just crazy, and all that work they just did in the Evans bar area is going to get washed out. HMMMMMMM isnt that interesting. The work they did was complete crap and thats one way to fix it and move it around, and if it happens it wont be for the better. Plus what a waste of water that will be. TRRP needs to stop playing the river gods game and let mother take its course and do what it does best.
Rivers and their fish goes through cycles, got to let nature do its thing.

Sorry for the rant
Just my 2 cents/opinion

As Bill put it, its all about the money, not the fish or the locals. MONEY always wins

AMEN BROTHER!

DWR has done the same on the American River. Each supposed 'gravel restoration' project has not only NOT provided new and/or improved spawning habitat but it has also ruined the best runs of historical and NATURAL spawning habitat by filling them in during winter flows.

DWR doesn't give a shit. It gives hush money to these half-assed, so-called restoration projects which on the surface seem great but are actually anything but... Anyone with any basic knowledge of river hydrodynamics and/or basic riparian and aquatic ecology... knows that gravel slung in a river and slopped around with machinery is absolutely worthless as it never stays put.

[hwchubb]

Thanks for your input on this, Brian. I’ve fished (well, tried) DC at 800 and Del Loma at 3000,and both those are unfishable if you’re wading. I’ve often wondered how much good the scorched earth policy was doing in some of the “improvement” areas, like all the areas they tore up along the campgrounds at Steiner Flat. They are eyesores-I assumed that there was some method to the madness though.

Your suggestion for slightly raised flows does seem to make more sense. I can’t imagine the 1800cfs flows being sustainable for 75 days during the next drought, not to mention the “all the water wasted on a bunch of fish” argument that it would support.

[Rossflyguy]

Dont let TRRP pull the wool over your heads with oh its gonne help this and rearing habitat that.

If you havent had the opportunity to float the river, especially from Evans to Sky, give it a float. Their work is disgusting, its no longer called the River Restoration project but the River Devastation project. This river is designated Nationally Wild and Scenic, how you can legally alter that I still have no idea. Still looking into that.



Its unbelievable what they are doing to this river. If you check out the work recently done on the Lower Sac above the Cypress Bridge, you wouldnt even know any work was even done. It looks natural, they used rip rap (big rocks) to keep the islands and work done together so high flow doesnt blow it out, 80k+cfs this year and still looks great. Until on the Trinity, you pee in that river and it pushes rock all over the place. Back to the Lower Sac work, they didnt clear cut the whole area/islands down to do the work, they kept the trees, grass and brush (which is needed for habitat and holding back the banks) on the area being worked on again looks untouched and natural, they didnt use trees to build rip rap which looks like crap and lastly its not left looking a mess, like someone just threw some wood up in the air and see where it lands. The work on the Lower Sac looks perfect, unlike the work on the Trinity.

Cant count how many projects on the Trinity that no longer work, millions upon millions wasted for what. A few areas include, Sky Ranch, the side channel on river left above school house, then again river right below school house run, all filled in and unusable. How about the Guardrail run above Indian Creek Lodge on river right, that used to have a huge long side channel there, all filled in and unusable. How about the work they recently did above Steel Bridge, again all filled in and unusable, over and over and over again these projects fill in and dont work. With millions wasted on every single one.

Where are the studies that they are supposed to be doing to see if these projects are working? Phase 1- do the work, Phase 2- study the work, Phase 3- fix as needed. Nope, Phase 1, to next Phase 1, to next Phase 1, project after project after project. It never ends, oh another 11 proposed projects on the list as well.

This new "flow" increase will make the River unsafe to wade, and pretty much call it unfishable. After all my calcualtions, the local economy as well as guides will loose an estimated $850,000 between Feb 1st and April 22nd. This includes what guides will make, what clients pay to get up there as well as your everyday bank angler that doesnt hire a guide. Thats a huge loss of revenue to the local economy. Hard to bounce back from that.

To sum it all up
Aggressive gravel dumps and in-stream projects have severely impacted vital deep water compositions (adult sanctuary, holding-staging waters); transforming the upper reach into a shallow gravel raceway. Oct. 15 TR flows were reduced to the minimum (300 cfs.); fish and boaters literally had to bring their own canteen of water to navigate the shallows. Sadly, current minimum flows, coupled with the upper TR facelift reflect the original post- dam (60-70's) minimum flow allocation (150 cfs.), without deep water compositions.

I think a bump in flows would be a great ideal, but not 1800cfs, a nice 450 to 500cfs would be perfect. 300cfs is just way to low. Again the upper river now at 300cfs is shallower than what it used to be before the projects at 150cfs. Thats all these projects to is fill in the river, and there is less habitat each year after the high water.

I personally noticed more salmon spawning between Big Bar to Hayden Flat, than there was from Old Lewistion Bridge to Pigeon Point. What does that tell you, loss of proper habitat.

Based on TRRP's riddled track record, and how many millions vested, why should anyone believe new minimum flow recommendations (Feb-Apr) will increase juvenile habitats; just another experimental hip-shot to overshadow their inability to achieve restoration goals.

What about reestablishing new minimum flows (July-Oct (800cfs) and Oct to April (500cfs) to help compensate the lack of suitable juvenile and adult habitats? Keeps enough water going down for the fish as well as keeping the water cool when its needed the most

As we all know, normal flows late summer, fall, early winter have always been on the lower side, but come winter and early spring you have rains and snow run off that raise the flows on the rivers naturally. With the amount of secondary streams on the Trinity there is no need to ramp the water up that much. If they are letting 1800 out of Lewistion, by DC below Weaver creek its 2500, by JC below Canyon Creek 3500cfs. Thats just crazy, and all that work they just did in the Evans bar area is going to get washed out. HMMMMMMM isnt that interesting. The work they did was complete crap and thats one way to fix it and move it around, and if it happens it wont be for the better. Plus what a waste of water that will be. TRRP needs to stop playing the river gods game and let mother take its course and do what it does best.
Rivers and their fish goes through cycles, got to let nature do its thing.

Sorry for the rant
Just my 2 cents/opinion

As Bill put it, its all about the money, not the fish or the locals. MONEY always wins


Unfortunately $850k is pennies compared to a $5 billion a year cash cow.

[Bob Laskodi]

YIKES Brian! As of today, 640 guide permits have been issued for the Trinity River. And that number only represents permits, not the number of guides (since some well known fly shops have many guides operating under their single permit). And you're trying to convince me that the TRRP is doing bad things and hurting the quality of the fishery and it's all about the $$$$$??????

[ycflyfisher]

Dont let TRRP pull the wool over your heads with oh its gonne help this and rearing habitat that.

If you havent had the opportunity to float the river, especially from Evans to Sky, give it a float. Their work is disgusting, its no longer called the River Restoration project but the River Devastation project. This river is designated Nationally Wild and Scenic, how you can legally alter that I still have no idea. Still looking into that.

Its unbelievable what they are doing to this river. If you check out the work recently done on the Lower Sac above the Cypress Bridge, you wouldnt even know any work was even done. It looks natural, they used rip rap (big rocks) to keep the islands and work done together so high flow doesnt blow it out, 80k+cfs this year and still looks great. Until on the Trinity, you pee in that river and it pushes rock all over the place. Back to the Lower Sac work, they didnt clear cut the whole area/islands down to do the work, they kept the trees, grass and brush (which is needed for habitat and holding back the banks) on the area being worked on again looks untouched and natural, they didnt use trees to build rip rap which looks like crap and lastly its not left looking a mess, like someone just threw some wood up in the air and see where it lands. The work on the Lower Sac looks perfect, unlike the work on the Trinity.

Cant count how many projects on the Trinity that no longer work, millions upon millions wasted for what. A few areas include, Sky Ranch, the side channel on river left above school house, then again river right below school house run, all filled in and unusable. How about the Guardrail run above Indian Creek Lodge on river right, that used to have a huge long side channel there, all filled in and unusable. How about the work they recently did above Steel Bridge, again all filled in and unusable, over and over and over again these projects fill in and dont work. With millions wasted on every single one.

Where are the studies that they are supposed to be doing to see if these projects are working? Phase 1- do the work, Phase 2- study the work, Phase 3- fix as needed. Nope, Phase 1, to next Phase 1, to next Phase 1, project after project after project. It never ends, oh another 11 proposed projects on the list as well.

This new "flow" increase will make the River unsafe to wade, and pretty much call it unfishable. After all my calcualtions, the local economy as well as guides will loose an estimated $850,000 between Feb 1st and April 22nd. This includes what guides will make, what clients pay to get up there as well as your everyday bank angler that doesnt hire a guide. Thats a huge loss of revenue to the local economy. Hard to bounce back from that.

To sum it all up
Aggressive gravel dumps and in-stream projects have severely impacted vital deep water compositions (adult sanctuary, holding-staging waters); transforming the upper reach into a shallow gravel raceway. Oct. 15 TR flows were reduced to the minimum (300 cfs.); fish and boaters literally had to bring their own canteen of water to navigate the shallows. Sadly, current minimum flows, coupled with the upper TR facelift reflect the original post- dam (60-70's) minimum flow allocation (150 cfs.), without deep water compositions.

I think a bump in flows would be a great ideal, but not 1800cfs, a nice 450 to 500cfs would be perfect. 300cfs is just way to low. Again the upper river now at 300cfs is shallower than what it used to be before the projects at 150cfs. Thats all these projects to is fill in the river, and there is less habitat each year after the high water.

I personally noticed more salmon spawning between Big Bar to Hayden Flat, than there was from Old Lewistion Bridge to Pigeon Point. What does that tell you, loss of proper habitat.

Based on TRRP's riddled track record, and how many millions vested, why should anyone believe new minimum flow recommendations (Feb-Apr) will increase juvenile habitats; just another experimental hip-shot to overshadow their inability to achieve restoration goals.

What about reestablishing new minimum flows (July-Oct (800cfs) and Oct to April (500cfs) to help compensate the lack of suitable juvenile and adult habitats? Keeps enough water going down for the fish as well as keeping the water cool when its needed the most

As we all know, normal flows late summer, fall, early winter have always been on the lower side, but come winter and early spring you have rains and snow run off that raise the flows on the rivers naturally. With the amount of secondary streams on the Trinity there is no need to ramp the water up that much. If they are letting 1800 out of Lewistion, by DC below Weaver creek its 2500, by JC below Canyon Creek 3500cfs. Thats just crazy, and all that work they just did in the Evans bar area is going to get washed out. HMMMMMMM isnt that interesting. The work they did was complete crap and thats one way to fix it and move it around, and if it happens it wont be for the better. Plus what a waste of water that will be. TRRP needs to stop playing the river gods game and let mother take its course and do what it does best.
Rivers and their fish goes through cycles, got to let nature do its thing.

Sorry for the rant
Just my 2 cents/opinion

As Bill put it, its all about the money, not the fish or the locals. MONEY always wins

I'll be responding to this in the near future. None of these criticisms are remotely legit. Mr. Clemens opinions however are shared by many and have been since the beginning of this project and I think are worthy of discussion.

There have been few major ecosystem battles that have actually been WON in my lifetime and the 2000 ROD and the resulting flow and geomorphic restoration efforts are at the top of the list.

[Brian Clemens]

Hey Bob
The actual number of permits is 100 per year. For the 2017/2018 season not all permits were given out. Each guide that guides the Trinity must have a permit. 1 guide 1 permit no more and no less. Now the tahoe national forrest permits allow more than 1 guide under it. However it is limited to a specific number of guide days. Where as the Trinity permit has no limitation of days, but each guide is required only limited to pay and up front fee for the permit and a 3% fee on each paid trip.

Looking forward to your response ycflyfisher.

Sorry for my rant. Just sick and tired of the fish getting the short stick. They take their native water sheds by installing dams, they take their water to send down south and left with a tickle of bath water now destroying the only home they have left. For what some money in their pockets they have to be stopped. It's getting old. Time to put our foot down and fight

[ycflyfisher]

I can’t imagine the 1800cfs flows being sustainable for 75 days during the next drought, not to mention the “all the water wasted on a bunch of fish” argument that it would support.

First, if anyone wants to make the argument that water is being wasted on fish, let 'em make that argument. They lost this battle 17 years ago. No amount of arguing is going to change that.

Second, I think you're making an assumption that they're going to run the river at a constant 1800cfs 24/7 for the duration of the period. That alone would account for 75% of the total flow allocation for a critically dry year. Not gonna happen. 1800cfs is the proposed peak. Much like the proposed peak for this year's spring hydrograph (highest of the 5 water designation classifications) was 11,000cfs. We ran @ peak for 5 days this year.

I think that everyone else might be making the same assumption because there is WAY too much trepidation about what should obviously be nothing but good news.

The total flow volumes in the ROD simply cannot change. The only thing that can change is the release schedule.

[Bob Laskodi]

Not according to my source, Brian. And I checked this morning with someone who has access to that info and looked it up. The number was 640 permits. As for the 1 guide 1 permit thing, I did not confirm that this morning and am going from previous info which may (or may not) be current. I do know that in the past that multiple guides were allowed under a single permit on the Trinity and the older info I have is that those operators were "grandfathered in" and allowed to continue that practice. And my same source told me this morning that when he pulled into the Topps parking lot this morning guide boats filled up all the spaces between Topps and Burger King waiting for their clients. He also told me that it was a "freakin' zoo" out there today with boats on some stretches and some stretches were relatively quiet. Funny, how the "freakin' zoo" stretches are the popular guide floats. But I tend to avoid those stretches myself so it really doesn't impact me. I do agree with the notion that the rampant damming and water diversions in the past have seriously harmed the fisheries. I also know that the RoD discussed previously has taken a positive step to restoring some of that previous wrong doing and we're better off now than we were in the 1970's/80's when I first started fishing the Trinity. And I also agree with the notion that the incredible guide traffic on the Trinity is having a significant effect on the quality of the fishery and yet I don't see many guides talking about the negative effects they bring. But I sure do hear a lot of B&M from guides about how the TRRP has filled in their best fishing holes with spawning gravel (and yep, that's happened) and how the restoration efforts are "wrecking" the river. But yet, that spawning gravel supports wild reproduction that we all want without (hopefully) having to resort to more hatchery clone fish. And hopefully, the restoration efforts will bear fruit in the future, but right now it's anybodys guess as to if they will. I guess it's a pick your poison thing. I'm kinda willing to give up a few holes to support more wild fish production but that's just me. Good fishing and good luck out there Brian, and I'm really not trying to pick on you or single you out, but your rant struck a nerve and I was a bad boy and responded with my views on the current problems with the Trinity. And I personally don't consider the TRRP to be the problem that you do.


Hey Bob
The actual number of permits is 100 per year. For the 2017/2018 season not all permits were given out. Each guide that guides the Trinity must have a permit. 1 guide 1 permit no more and no less. Now the tahoe national forrest permits allow more than 1 guide under it. However it is limited to a specific number of guide days. Where as the Trinity permit has no limitation of days, but each guide is required only limited to pay and up front fee for the permit and a 3% fee on each paid trip.

Looking forward to your response ycflyfisher.

Sorry for my rant. Just sick and tired of the fish getting the short stick. They take their native water sheds by installing dams, they take their water to send down south and left with a tickle of bath water now destroying the only home they have left. For what some money in their pockets they have to be stopped. It's getting old. Time to put our foot down and fight

[JasonB]

Where are the studies that they are supposed to be doing to see if these projects are working? Phase 1- do the work, Phase 2- study the work, Phase 3- fix as needed. Nope, Phase 1, to next Phase 1, to next Phase 1, project after project after project. It never ends, oh another 11 proposed projects on the list as well.



TRRP needs to stop playing the river gods game and let mother take its course and do what it does best.
Rivers and their fish goes through cycles, got to let nature do its thing.

Sorry for the rant
Just my 2 cents/opinion

As Bill put it, its all about the money, not the fish or the locals. MONEY always wins

Just to address those two point: first off there are actually a lot of ongoing studies of various sorts, and quite a pile of data on just exactly what sorts of effects the restoration work is actually having. I have worked on the sidelines of some of these, and I can tell you that all of the folks I have worked with are VERY much in the pro fish camp. I can also tell you that they have all agreed that the data we have so far has been pretty clear that much of what is being done is indeed helping.

As for your comments about “playing god”, the BOR has been doing that since the dams went in. I would be all for letting nature take its course, but until the dams come out that ain’t happening. I think we call all agree that the dams have been a severe blow to the health of this, and many other rivers. Most of the efforts by the TRRP have been an attempt to mitigate some of these losses by addressing some of the worst issues created by the Trinity dam, though it is a tall order indeed to fix these issues. When I hear comments like yours, I can’t help but wonder; would you prefer to leave it up to agricultural interests to decide what the rivers flow regimen should be? The efforts by the TRRP may, or may not be perfect, but I am pretty encouraged to see that there are some good people in the fight whose interests are pretty closely aligned with our own.

I think it’s also important that when we debate issues like this, we make clear the distinction between what is good for the fish versus what is easy or convenient for fisherman. Those two don’t always align perfectly for us, and I can understand people getting frustrated if say their favorite fishing hole is longer accessible or productive. When push comes to shove, I personally am pretty much always in favor of going the route of what’s best for the fish, even if it comes at some personal detriment.

Granted, I am not trying to make a living as a steelhead guide, so perhaps that is an easier position to take. I imagine it’s not an easy job, for all kinds of reasons, so in no way am I trying to make light of the financial side of things by those in your position. Just consider for a moment though, that the financial impact argument is one that is often used against us for the very things that have substantial negative on our fisheries.
Regards,
JB

[Brian Clemens]

Bob
Your contact is probably talking about our stickers on our boats which is our guide # for the year. Thats a progressive number from season to season,
The last time I looked 93 guides on list plus shuttle operators
This is all public info with all the names numbers and info on every guide on the river. It's never more than 100. This year my numbers are 509 and 510, i think last year was 370 and 371.

I'm with you on boat hatches, I try to stay away from them as much as I can as well. As you can tell when you and Chris are out, we usually float by each other. Cant stand the crowds and same boats fishing to the same fish day in and day out. Those fish get hammered.

I'm very much for the fish, without the fish we wouldn't be able to enjoy what we all love doing.

In order to have a healthy river you have to many diffeeent types of habitat for the fish. Adult sanctuary, spawning habitat, holding staging water like deep holes and pools below spawning habitat and juvinelle habitat. When gravel is dumped in a river, carelessly, it fills the river in and kills the dynamics of a healthy river. Hence why we get upset when we see these holes filled in.

As always opinions and buttholes
We all have them and they all stink

I will say this I'm not the only one that feels this way.