Arizona Fly Fishing Forums  

Go Back   Arizona Fly Fishing Forums > Arizona Fly Fishing > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 12-09-2011, 09:05 PM
WMF WMF is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Smith View Post
Thanks for the link Terry. I appreciate your passion. If my livelihood was on the line I'm sure I would be quite active in the discussion as well. I trust you submitted comments to the draft.

My comment was not intended as an insult and I trust you are intelligent enough to admit your own bias.
What's your bias? I mean we all have one. Are you applying for a job with a government pay check maybe N.P.S , US fish and wildlife, AZ game and fish.
As for the rest of us fearmongers, check out the law suit grand canyon trust vs U.S. B of R
__________________
http://www.stolenvalor.com/
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 12-09-2011, 09:18 PM
Mr.Smith's Avatar
Mr.Smith Mr.Smith is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Flagstaff
Posts: 2,174
Right now, I don't care either way. But yes I have applied to a related project. Should I gain employment in that region my position will be to do my job to the best of my ability.

It seems to me that all of the aforementioned management action is taking place down stream of Lee's Ferry and would not have much affect on the fishery upstream of the boat ramp. I could be wrong but from what I have read on it, that appears to be the case.
__________________
Never argue with an idiot, they'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience. -George Carlin
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 12-19-2011, 09:41 AM
fishunter's Avatar
fishunter fishunter is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 949
Deadline: January 31, 2012

Inputs are so important to creating an opportunity to take a great fishery and returning it to a Blue Ribbon fishery. This is a team effort and you are the key member of the team. Please take the time to submit your vision. It is easy and not complicated.


Lees Ferry Rainbow Trout Fishery & LTEMP EIS scoping public comments

The Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) and the National Park Service (NPS) are preparing a Long Term Experimental & Management Plan Environmental Impact Statement (LTEMP) that will guide the operation of the Glen Canyon Dam and affect the Lees Ferry Rainbow Trout recreational fishery for the next ten to fifteen years. There are a number of competing interests of which the recreational trout fishery is one among hydropower generation, water delivery, recreational rafting, tribal cultural concerns and environmental issues.

The BOR and NPS are soliciting public comment and inviting you to participate in the initial scoping process for the development of the LTEMP. More information is available at the project website: http://ltempeis.anl.gov. The public scoping period is open through January 31, 2012.

The Lees Ferry Rainbow Trout fishery has a storied past as a destination Blue Ribbon fishery with abundant trophy trout. That condition was allowed to decline over time and although it remains the exceptional Arizona river trout fishery it has not been managed to be what it could be. Under the existing operating regime the Lees Ferry fishery has not had equal status with the other competing interests. In recent years there has been an increase in both trout numbers and size, but this has been incidental to other management actions rather than the result of planned beneficial actions.

As part of the LTEMP scoping your voice in sharing your goals and aspirations for this fishery as a member of the fishing community is essential in establishing the position of recreational fishing among the other interests. The Federal Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act recognizes the vital contribution of fish and wildlife resources to the Nation and provides that such resources shall receive equal consideration and be coordinated with other features of water resource development programs such as the operation of Glen Canyon Dam when waters of the Colorado River are controlled or modified for various project purposes with a goal to provide for various water delivery, hydropower production, other recreational uses to include rafting and fishing, cultural and other tribal values and conservation of native fish.

Up to the present there has not been a comprehensive fishery management plan for the Colorado River between Glen Canyon Dam and Lake Meade for the integrated benefit of both native and non native fish. The other competing interests have their proponents some of whom may advocate management actions that overlook the impact on the trout fishery or in some cases could be detrimental. Their voices are being heard through their participation in the scoping process. The voices of the fishing community need to be heard. Individual written or transmitted comments are more important than hundreds of copies of the exact same paragraph and words merely signed by a large number of people. Following are some points to consider for putting into your own words.

1 Your personal perspective is important. Share your goals for your future fishing experiences on the fishery (i.e. fish size, catch rate, etc.). Describe what the Lees Ferry fishery means to you and to recreational fishing in AZ and the need for balance between the recreational experience and water delivery, hydropower, cultural values and conservation as provided for under the Federal Fish and Wildlife Coordination act. Include any other thoughts you feel are important to protect, enhance, or improve your recreational experience.

2 There presently isn’t a comprehensive fishery management plan for the Colorado River between Glen Canyon Dam and Lake Meade. As part of the LTEMP a plan needs to be developed and implemented for managing the total fishery in a coordinated manner. That fishery management plan would include the recovery and maintenance of a Blue Ribbon trout fishery in the Lees Ferry reach along with the restoration, recovery and maintenance of native fish throughout the River while addressing the threat to both from invasive non native warm water fish. It also should include experimental management actions based on comprehensive, measurable, and defined objectives rather than continuing the well intentioned but disjointed efforts of the past.

3 The Lees Ferry/Marble Canyon area is economically dependent upon recreational activities of which fishing is a large component. The LTEMP should recognize that the recovery and maintenance of the Blue Ribbon fishery has a direct effect and a major impact on the economic livelihood for that community.

4 Glen Canyon Dam operations include fluctuating water releases impacting fishing experiences. Currently typical daily flows vary from around 9,000 to 15, 000 cfs. These flows are determined by both hydropower and water distribution requirements. This year the river has experienced equalization flow to boost the water content of Lake Mead. These flows have been around 23,000 cfs. A major component of the LTEMP will be a determination to continue the present flow regime or adopt some alternate. The LTEMP should recognize and consider that flows over 16,000 cfs restrict or eliminate the opportunities for wade fishing.

Your comments must be received by January 31, 2012

Comments on the scope of the LTEMP EIS are important contributions from citizens. The public is encouraged to communicate information and comments on issues it believes the Bureau of Reclamation and the National Park Service should address in the EIS. Accordingly, comments should be clear, concise, and relevant to the scope of the EIS analysis. Take the time to organize your thoughts and edit the document before it is submitted.

The following web site provides additional information: http://ltempeis.anl.gov/involve/index.cfm

Type your recommendations, comments or suggestions, edit them and use one of the following methods to make the submittal.

Electronically, using the online comment form (the preferred method):
http://ltempeis.anl.gov/involve/commentintro/index.cfm

Written comments or suggestions on the scope of the EIS can be mailed to:

Glen Canyon Dam LTEMP EIS Scoping
Argonne National Laboratory
9700 S. Cass Ave. – EVS/240
Argonne IL 60439
__________________
Many men go fishing their entire lives without knowing it is not fish they are after.
-- Henry David Thoreau
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 12-30-2011, 10:38 AM
T Gunn's Avatar
T Gunn T Gunn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 468
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy V View Post
I have not heard of environmental groups that realistically want Lees Ferry trout fishing eliminated (well, excpet for those in favor of complete elimination of Glen Canyon Dam - but this EIS is to formalize operations of the dam, considering all of the options).
Here are two very powerful environmental groups who have gone on record against rainbow trout in the Colorado River.

From: Living Rivers Press Release on LTEP EIS

Cease to Support the Competing Objectives
Attempting to preserve this nonnative trout fishery (Lees Ferry) stands in direct conflict with a principle requirement of the AMP: to implement the selective withdrawal program to increase the water temperature being discharged from the dam. Nonnatives have thrived in the cooler waters, while the natives continue to decline.

Such counterproductive objectives and stakeholders must be removed from the AMP process.

Remove nonnative fish

The EIS should evaluate any and all reasonable mechanisms for nonnative fish suppression as necessary to improve habitat conditions for native fish. The EIS should recommend that all stocking of nonnative trout cease below Glen Canyon Dam and that dam operations not be modified in any way to intentionally benefit nonnative fish habitat.

John Weisheit, Conservation Director
Living Rivers & Colorado Riverkeeper

Michelle Harrington, Rivers Program Director
Center for Biological Diversity
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 01-08-2012, 12:07 PM
cedar cedar is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 7
I'm still really hoping people are making comments during the time made available for public "scoping", which was expanded to January 31.

This LTEMP EIS process is the only one we've got and therefore by default a good one, but I feel a real disadvantage for viewpoints in opposition to the momentum already in place, and being planned, by the federal resource management agencies.

Those federal agencies, and I mean the National Park Service (NPS), the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and the US Geological Survey (USGS), are powered by science, but the science seems to think about native fish only, to the exclusion of all other issues.

I can understand this with the NPS, which is the most conservative of the land management agencies. The NPS is mandated to preserving a snapshot of a perfect frozen moment from the past in natural landscapes or historical events. And I guess I can partially understand it with the FWS, which does its honorable best to preserve populations of wildlife. But what about the USGS?

Memo to the USGS: your motto is "Science For a Changing World" - why the heck aren't you doing some science about the positive value of trout in a changed river? Instead of the fixation with nativism, why not look at productivity? The trout are an integral part of the food chain. If you would just let them be, nature adjusts and adapts. Look at the bald eagles that showed up to feed on the trout! The trout belong in the river. And their economic and recreational value to society is of high value. The USGS has research money, come on, be original, even controversial in your studies!

If a magic wand could be waved and so-called "non-native" fish magically removed, does anyone believe the chubs (both kinds), the pikeminnow, and the razorback sucker would come roaring back? No. We would have a cold, clear, impoverished river. The dam came, and the river itself changed radically. Everyone interested in this issue knows the changes to the river after the dam, no need to detail them again here. The dam presented a problem: how to establish a productive river ecology in the face of dramatic changes. Decades of time have gone by, and the river ecology is adjusting, it is becoming productive, but the federal agencies seem determined to fight nature. It is costly and of marginal benefit.

Folks, mechanical removal of trout, through electrofishing and weirs, is going on now, everyday, in tributary streams to the river in the Grand Canyon. As more money and strategic plans develop, the fight against trout will continue and expand. Please don't let this happen at Lee's Ferry.

Also, one big point of the negotiation will be an offer to "help" the Lee's Ferry fishery by reducing trout recruitment in the Lee's Ferry reach, I think by some combination of spawning disruption and mechanical removal. The promise will be fewer and bigger trout to catch. But I would really beware this, and fear unintended consequences, and what further measures might open up once started.

As I said before, thank goodness the river is so big the trout are here to stay.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 01-08-2012, 12:53 PM
Jeremy V Jeremy V is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 178
While USFWS has a mandate to work with threatened and endangered species, we also recognize the huge economical impacts of angling. Recently, we rolled out a publication called "Net Worth" which talks about the economic value of the nationwide USFWS Fisheries program.

http://us.vocuspr.com/Newsroom/Query...ase&Cache=True
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 01-23-2012, 01:02 PM
fishunter's Avatar
fishunter fishunter is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 949
Bump because the deadline for comment is the end of the month.
__________________
Many men go fishing their entire lives without knowing it is not fish they are after.
-- Henry David Thoreau
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 01-28-2012, 01:58 PM
stoneflynut's Avatar
stoneflynut stoneflynut is offline
Orbiting Flagstaff
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,385
Submitted my comments last week. If you're gonna make a statement, time is running out.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 01-30-2012, 10:30 AM
T Gunn's Avatar
T Gunn T Gunn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 468
Today is the last day for comments. The Marble Canyon Business Interests submitted our comments and they can be viewed here:

http://www.leesferry.com/main/area-i...ltemp-comments
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 01-30-2012, 10:46 AM
invasionqt's Avatar
invasionqt invasionqt is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 354
Quote:
Originally Posted by T Gunn View Post
Today is the last day for comments. The Marble Canyon Business Interests submitted our comments and they can be viewed here:

http://www.leesferry.com/main/area-i...ltemp-comments
Terry, I was glad to read your comments as they very much reflect mine that I submitted a couple of weeks ago. I have not yet visted Lee's Ferry, but do intend a trip at some point and would like to experience the Blue Ribbon fishery you describe in its past. I don't think it is that vision is too far away with proper management. Let's hope that our words matter and that can be worked into the overall plan.
__________________
The finest gift you can give to any fisherman is to put a good fish back, and who knows if the fish that you caught isn't someone else's gift to you? -- Lee Wulff

Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Logos, Trademarks are property of their owners. Other content Copyright 2006-2015 azflyandtie.com . All Rights Reserved.