Strategic Planning for Trout and Hatchery Resources

[Lew Riffle]

Check this out. All a part of CDFW's new strategic initiative for its 150 year anniversary besides a great distraction from what they have not been doing and should be.

All in all we need to support Mr Bloom....he is one of the good guys out there. So help out here and give him some input.

https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Fishing/Inland/Trout-Plan

[tcorfey]

Filled out all of the questionnaires.
Glad they are reaching out.

The last two questions on the questionnaire regarding conservation are difficult ones, they asked about eradicating non-native species and about eradicating fish populations in favor of frogs and invertebrates.

I believe that each waterway is different and requires a unique solution. Many of our waterways are not so damaged by species of fish but of man's destruction of the surrounding environment. Any decision to remove a species from a water way must be tempered with "Can we make changes or improve the environment to support all species" before we decide to take the heavy handed approach of removing species which should only be used as a last resort.

Take for example the Sacramento/San Francisco Delta where although there are many species both native and non-native we have seen that improved water flow and water quality will cause all species to thrive. When the pumps in the delta are turned up and water quantity and quality is reduced due to excessive pumping then all species numbers decline and some in to eminent failure.

I also emphasized the need for more knowledgable leadership within the DFW and for increased enforcement of existing regulations including adding more officers.

Finally I suggested that waterways that support native and wild populations of trout should be closed during the spawn as too many people insist on fishing and tromping through the redds. They can leave the waterways that have stocked trout open during this time.

Just my opinions but that is what they wanted.

Regards,

Tim C.

[Darian]

I completed all of the surveys, also. I'm not particularly interested in removing non-native species in favor of protecting native species that might not make it anyhow.

But.... Recently, on either CPR or NPR, there was mention of the decline of native frogs being attributed to introduce tin of non-native Bull Frogs. Apparently, they carry some type of transmittable disease organism (virus???) that infects our native frogs. There wasn't any mention of what DF&W is doing about it, if anything. Seems like this instance would qualify as a valid removal project.

[tcorfey]

I was curious that we are not seeing more posts regarding this initiative and I noticed that Caltrout and TU was not endorsing participation.

I sent emails off to Caltrout and to TU to see if they will take any action to encourage participation.

Regards,

Tim C.

[Darian]

I hadn't really thought about it but you are correct. Doesn't seem like there's much interest....

[tcorfey]

Well I sent emails off to TU and Caltrout to see if they would encourage participation.

No response from TU yet.

Caltrout had a response something to the effect of who did I think I was asking them about encouraging participation in the survey. I responded that I was sorry I bothered them. Maybe just caught them on a bad day? Ironically I received the Caltrout news letter tonight and still did not see anything about it.

Regards,

Tim C.

[Lew Riffle]

Guess you got to take the bad from the good in the very least. Cal Trout does good it's just they way they go about it at times that chafes. Certainly Cal Trout has wandered far from its grass roots origins to become the TU sort of organization they despised in the first place.

[JasonB]

So I did fill out all the questions too, but I have to say that I don’t feel overly optimistic that this will affect policy and practice much. Maybe I am being cynical, but to me the questions seemed overly general to the point of having very little applicable meaning. Maybe the comments offered will carry a bit more weight?
Ultimately, I agree that different waters should be handled with specific management plans. For instance; I would love to see generally lower bag limits and more restrictions on bait and hook choice, but I also support having limited “put and take” type fishing opportunities for those who enjoy them. The other question that I felt a bit hesitant about was whether or not to support regulation changes to simplify things: seems like a good idea in many ways, but I cringe at the thought of moving towards more of a one size fits all approach in order to make things simple. Time will tell if anything comes from this outreach, but I do at least support the effort

[tcorfey]

A brief update, Caltrout got back to me saying that their original email was as I thought the result of a bad day.
Their was a brief apology and an acknowledgment of the survey.
Basically, they said that based on their recent dealings with the CDFW they are also a little skeptical if the surveys will produce any tangible results.

I thanked them for the apology and for all the great work they are doing across the state.

Regards,

Tim C.

[Lew Riffle]

It is arrogant and foolish not to take the 5 minutes or so express your views for this survey. If you give these guys some responses in numbers they will have something to work with.