For those who don’t fish around here, the Pit River recently underwent a FERC hydropower relicensing, which saw flows increased to benefit the fishery, but maybe not the fishermen. Last year was the first for the new flows, and fishermen — who had heard some pretty hard stories about what was going to happen — stayed away in droves.

For example, Art Teter usually books somewhere between 60-75 guide days a year on the Pit.

Last year he booked only 18.

No Easy Answers

It’s a complicated issue — one that defies easy answers. For example, last year’s flows were condemned by many fly fishermen as being unfishable (even dangerous in the case of Pit #5), yet it turns out they were consistently 50 cfs – 150 cfs above the target flows.

In addition, campground construction made access to some reaches very difficult, further eroding angler satisfaction.

This is an issue that CalTrout and the California TU Chapter have taken a lot of heat over, and it’s an excellent example of the bind conservation organizations sometimes find themselves in when the needs of fish and fishermen collide.

Expect to hear more about this one.

Adaptability

One bright spot is that CalTrout and TU insisted on an adaptive management process, so if the new flow regime’s goals aren’t being met, there’s a chance things could change.

For example, fly fishermen apparently comprise better than 90% of the recreational use of the Pit River, and if the new flows significantly erode that number, than it’s just possible they might be altered.

And the reason for increased flows in Pit #4 and Pit #5 was too-high water temperatures, which left Pit #4 supporting half the biomass of Pit #3, and Pit #5 another 50% less. If the increased flows don’t result in lower temperatures, adjustments could be made.

If it only seems confusing to you, then rest assured it’s actually worse than you think. Fortunately, Teter does a good job of stating his perspective in the interview, which I hope will go up relatively soon on the CalTrout site.

Anyone who knows Art Teter knows he’s not one to pull punches, and his perspective as someone who fishes the Pit as much as anyone is sometimes surprising (and yes, I did manage to wheedle a couple of fly fishing tips out of him).

See you doing that whole keyboardy writerish thing, Tom Chandler.

(click to see it online)

He tells us why few people fish it, why that’s a shame (hint: it’s great for swinging flies and two-handers), and how much better he thinks it could be — if we can get the Klamath River dams out.

It’s a short-but-interesting interview (he opened my eyes to a few things), and worth a few minutes.

If you don’t know why the Klamath River dams should come down, here’s a CalTrout article making a case for dam removal — and also a recent update on the status of dam removal (and the KBRA).

Despite the quality of the Klamath’s fishery — and its potential — the Klamath isn’t really on the radars of a lot of California and Oregon’s steelhead fishermen, but it probably should be.

It’s going to be a big year in California on so many fronts; the Klamath thing might be decided, we’ll see if moves to raise Shasta Dam acquire any momentum, we’re supposed to see good salmon returns, and, oh yeah — because of the drought, the water wars should prove especially interesting.

I still owe the Undergrounders a pair of posts about those wacky Sisikiyou Board of Supervisors, including a look at their attempts to “prove” the coho salmon isn’t native to the Klamath Watershed.

It’s like a satirical TV sitcom, only they mean it.

See you hammering the bad guys, Tom Chandler.

Perhaps the leading light in fly fishing photography since the early 1970s, Atkinson remains the pinnacle fly fishing photographer; he shoots in a very classic, painterly style that evokes a certain romanticism about the sport.

Plus he knows how to have a little fun:

My favorite Val Atkinson photo (click to read his interview at CalTrout)

I interviewed him for CalTrout, an organization that’s been lucky enough to enjoy the use of Atkinson’s images for its website and promotional work (as has the Fall River Conservancy website).

Read the interview and you’ll learn:

• The story behind the famous Drake/Guinness photograph
• Atkinson’s feelings about digital photography and fly fishing media
• A few tips on taking better pictures of your own

See you drooling over the photographs, Tom Chandler.

Author Anders Halverson

Halverson wrote the surprisingly riveting An Entirely Synthetic Fish– the story of the spread of the rainbow trout across the United States. Despite it being the winner of the 2010 National Outdoor Book Award, I expected the book to be dry and lifeless, but Halverson’s an excellent storyteller, and I gave it an excellent review on the Underground.

I like doing interviews with interesting people, and in this one Halverson touches on a handful of subjects, including these two startling factoids about interbreeding of frogs and fish:

Q: Are hatcheries less harmful than they used to be?**

Yes. They’ve gotten much smarter about the genetics and and other aspects of fish culture. For example, they’ve gotten much better about collecting and using wild fish in their spawning operations.

Nevertheless, whenever you raise something in a hatchery, it’s an artificial environment with very different selection pressures. The fish that come out are very different from the fish that are spawned in the wild.

My graduate work in frogs taught me that these systems are far more complex than we realize. We don’t have any real idea what’s happening out there.

For example, in one of my experiments, I put fences around these ponds and captured every frog that was coming into breed. I took a tissue sample from everyone. Then I used DNA fingerprinting to identify all their offspring, and it was clear that the frogs had somehow recognized their close kin and avoided breeding with them.

It was also clear that the more inbred the tadpoles were, the less likely they were to make it out of the pond.

Q: Wow.

The tools we have — we’re just wandering around out there with a bludgeon.

As another example, I recently heard a talk about a study in the Smokies (ED: Great Smoky Mountains National Park); they removed rainbows from a stream and stocked brookies from three different tributaries, and 15 years later, their offspring show no signs of interbreeding. Nobody knows why.

When we approach these problems, we need to recognize our limitations, and structure our solutions accordingly.

Let’s just ignore the fact that I responded to an award-winning author’s insightful answer with “wow” (clearly a career highlight). Instead let’s focus on the fact that frogs and brookies know enough not to interbreed with kin, but apparently many humans don’t.

In a less cynical vein, there’s his exploration of the now-infamous poisoning of the Green River, the location of the first hatchery on the McCloud River (currently under 300 feet of water), and even rubber vs felt.

Read every word of the interview’s essential goodness here.

See you on Charlie Rose, Tom Chandler.

CalTrout’s sponsoring the broadcast of the multiple-award-winning documentary Rivers Of A Lost Coast (Underground review here) on San Francisco’s KQED TV station, and every weekday until the first broadcast (9/24), they’re giving away two copies of the DVD.

To learn how to enter the contest, click here (hint: follow CalTrout on Facebook or Twitter or join their email list).

Click here to view the embedded video.

In case you missed my review, Rivers Of A Lost Coast is a riveting documentary about the rise and rapid fall of California’s steelhead fishery, over which is laid the story of the ultimately bitter relationship between two fly fishing legends.

Simply put, it’s not to be missed.

(If you can’t wait to win your own copy, you can buy the DVD here.)

Broadcast Times

September 24 @ 2:30 pm: KQED (Channel 9)
September 25 @ 8:00 pm: KQED WORLD (Comcast Channel 190)
September 26 @ 2:00 am: KQED WORLD (Comcast Channel 190)

See you watching the good stuff, Tom Chandler.

CalTrout just issued a TroutClout Alert asking its members to write California Governor Jerry Brown in support of AB120 — a bill which enforces reasonable regulations on suction dredge mining (including a fee structure that doesn’t burden taxpayers with the cost of enforcement).

You can read CalTrout’s email here, or skip to the pointy end of things and send an automated, ten-second email to your close, personal friend Jerry Brown here.

Click to read the Trout Clout for yourself

And it turns out, it’s maybe for a good cause (ridding salmon of parasites):

Flows will rise from from base of 1600 cfs to 5000 cfs and back to 1600 cfs between noon and midnight Wednesday. These flows are designed to flush fine sediments that harbor polycheate worms—the intermediate hosts for fish parasites such as Ceratomyxa shasta. As most of you are aware, a large percentage of outmigrating juvenile salmon are infected with parasites which can be lethal.

This flow change is a result of the Klamath Settlement Agreements and in particular the ability to more flexibly manage the river.

If you believed them, the McCloud Hydropower relicensing process was about to deal the McCloud River a death blow: “eliminate up to two and half months (April to July) of our licensed fishing season in order to create an amusement park for whitewater kayakers.”

Worse yet, the relicensing process was going to “damage the 24 miles of near-perfect aquatic habitat throughout the McCloud below the reservoir and will destroy what is a unique, world-renowned and historic fishery.”

Then – to my growing astonishment – I “learned” that the CalTrout and the state TU reps were “closet” whitewater activists working in the service of a shadowy whitewater lobby with more juice than the Trilateral commission.

Fearsome stuff.

Which happened to be almost wholly false.

[sigh]

Don’t Make Me Pull This Blog Over To The Side Of The Road…

Major dams undergo a relicensing every 50 years, and flow regimes are a part of that process.

It’s an impossibly complex process whereby every stakeholder on the planet has a say (including utilities, irrigators, state water board, forest service, user groups [like anglers & whitewater types], extraterrestrials, etc), and a cynic might suggest that nobody will ever really get what they want.

Where the McCloud’s concerned, the stakes for fly fishermen are high; the McCloud remains one of the most scenic – and popular – rivers in the “real” west, and things can get a little heated.

In this case, somebody went way, way over the top.

In a nutshell, CalTrout, California’s Trout Unlimited chapter and FFF have been deeply involved in the relicensing process for almost four years.

More recently, another group of anglers have become involved, and while I’m all for participation in conservation issues, I’m unwilling to sanction the fearmongering, misinformation and personal attacks offered up by the McCloud Riverkeepers (MRK). In fact, I’m even unwilling to give them a link to their site.

On their website and in a series of increasingly apocalyptic emails, the group – led by Dennis Amato – have sounded increasingly shrill alarms about the McCloud’s imminent demise, and continue to tar and feather the state’s conservation groups with some absurd charges.

Finally, I investigated for myself, and discovered a reality was far from the one painted by MRK’s emails.

In simple terms, McCloud definitely needs the help of every fly fishermen who fishes it (or wants to).

But the dire predictions, alarming emails and character assassination have almost no grounding in fact.

In fact, I’d suggest a lot of California’s anglers were the targets of an over-the-top fearmongering campaign.

So what’s really happening?

What’s Going On With The McCloud?

Several flow proposals have been tendered during the McCloud relicensing process, including one from American Whitewater, which in fact would have rendered the McCloud unfishable for big chunks of spring.

Fortunately, that proposal was Dead on Arrival, and it now appears that American Whitewater – the seemingly omnipotent Bad Guys according to MRK – have abandoned it, throwing their support behind the more reasonable US Forest Service proposal.

That hasn’t stopped the MRK from using that original proposal, raising the specter of scouring flows, a dead fishery and scores of happy kayakers paddling past frustrated fly fishermen.

In truth, the group’s dire predictions are beyond the scope of even the most harmful whitewater proposal. And just to be clear, pulse flows and the like simply aren’t on the table at this time.

Meanwhile, CalTrout/TU/FFF have submitted a flow proposal that recognizes the “90% users” of the McCloud (that’s you and me – fishermen), and tries to rectify the more glaring problems with the existing flow regime.

What’s astonishing in all this is that MRK’s stated goal is to maintain flows at the status quo – a fairly reasonable stance, though given what I’ve learned about the relicensing process, a largely impractical one.

Which truly makes me wonder why it’s being propped up by so many lies.

I’m willing to debate the merits of the CT/TU/FFF proposal vs status quo flows vs the Forest Service proposal (and we’ll do that someday soon).

But I won’t debate anything in a toxic environment charged with invective and misinformation.

And though I’m unwilling to dignify the personal attacks with a lengthy rebuttal, I will suggest MRK’s charges are absurd, serving only to sink the credibility of MRK into the realm of negative numbers.

So Why The Fly Shops?

Almost as painful as the emails has been the willingness of several of California’s biggest fly shops to hitch their drift boat to this particular anchor.

MRK’s emails tout the support of Bob Marriot’s (Southern California), Leland Fly Fishing Outfitters (San Francisco), and The Fly Shop in Redding (which manages the old – and still seriously private – Bollibokka club for Westlands Irrigation District, who bought it to remove another obstacle to raising Shasta Dam).

You only have to read the Background/Positions section of the MRK website to get a sense for the bombast and personal attacks involved, and why the shops didn’t perform that due diligence – when even a local (and tiny) fly shop managed to do so – reflects poorly on somebody.

So Who Am I Backing?

So after wasting time writing this post (the kind of post I’d happily avoid), I’m supporting the CT/TU/FFF proposal over the “status quo” flows (the gist of the CT/TU/FFF support request is placed at the end of this post).

The CT/TU/FFF flows appear to fix many of the problems that plague the McCloud, including the springtime dewatering of the first mile below the dam, and the too-rapid fluctuations (hard on insects and fry).

Local Shasta Trout guide/outfitter Craig Nielsen actually fished the McCloud during the flow regime testing, and also supports the new CT/TU/FFF flow proposal on his website.

We spoke on our way to and from our alpine lake fishing trip, where Nielsen asserted said that higher flows (up to a point) will actually open up more water to anglers, increasing the “carrying capacity” of the river and improving the habitat for trout.

In simple terms, he thought fly fishermen would “lose access to a few spots, but gain many more new spots in the process.”

That’s not a bad start.

Summary, and More Information

These issues are rare easy or clear cut, but nobody’s served when the facts are obscured under a heaping mound of fear, exaggeration and character assassination.

You can advocate for a status quo on the flows without any of the above, which is how I wish this was playing out.

It’s clearly not. Still, perhaps it can, if we stick to the facts at hand.

Excerpt From the CalTrout/TU/FFF Letter

We have proposed an alternative flow regime with the intent of protecting, if not enhancing, the McCloud River fishery and improving its world class angling. Our recommendation calls for increased flows in the late-winter and early-spring during the critical time that rainbow trout are spawning and fry are rearing. Our proposal provides a more gradual down ramping of flows compared to how the river is managed now and will decrease the risk of rainbow trout fry stranding and reduce fish mortality.

We also believe that by releasing more water in the winter and early spring months we can minimize the amount of uncontrolled spills from the dam that create unexpected blow out conditions. These rapid increases and decreases in flow are detrimental to both fish and anglers.

While today some think the McCloud is as good as it can be, we believe that by addressing some detrimental flow issues we will both protect and improve the health of the famous McCloud River for years to come, and maintain wading access and fishability of the McCloud that anglers have come to expect. And, ultimately protecting the fish will enhance the overall fishing experience.

To understand the impact on anglers we reviewed over 30 years of McCloud River flow data. Our proposal would have impacted wadability in only the early weeks of the season in only five of those years. We believe that is a reasonable compromise in providing an even healthier fishery. We have consulted with dozens of anglers and guides who agree our proposal is the best for the fish and anglers.

Bottom line:
1. Our flow proposal will maintain world class angling conditions in the Lower McCloud River.
2. Our flow proposal will improve rainbow trout spawning conditions during early winter and
spring.
3. Our flow proposal will minimize flow fluctuations that can strand fry.
4. Anglers that know the McCloud best agree with our proposed flows.

Yes, we need your support. It’s easy to make your voice heard directly to Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission. Click here to comment and make sure you file under the McCloud project number which is P-2106-047.

Tell them how important the McCloud River’s angling heritage is. Tell them you support the CalTrout, Trout Unlimited, and Northern California Federation of Fly Fishers proposal to improve the way the river is managed and protect McCloud River’s fishery.

Your voice can be heard (and yes, FERC is listening (sorta)).

Like many things in government, the process is easy, but convoluted.

1. Go here.
2. Click on the “eComment” button.
3. FERC will ask for an email address, then send an email with instructions to that address.
4. Click the link in the email.
5. Paste this project number in the space (it’s there): P-2106-047
6. Write, or copy & paste your comments in the text box.
7. (I told them I supported the CalTrout/TU/FFF proposal because it protects fisheries and supports the biggest recreational use of the river.)

See you on the McCloud, Tom Chandler.

I suspect many of you have been hearing rumors about Pit River road closures and other activities in the Pit 3,4,5 area.  I placed a call to PG&E to get some information.  Here is what I know starting with a little background.

The Pit 3,4,5 project when through relicensing and a new license was issued in July 2007.   A new flow regime was negotiated—new summer baseflows beginning in no later than July 2010 will be—Pit 3:  300 cfs, Pit 4:  375 cfs, and Pit 5:  400 cfs.   I heard Pit 5 would be the first to get these new flows in November or December 2009, the other two reaches in 2010 by July 2^nd.

Current construction work on the dams is to retrofit the outlets to meet new flow standards.  PG&E is also applying to FERC to put new turbines at Pit 3 and Pit 4 outlets to generate power off of the increased flows from the dam outlets—though this is just getting started.

I attached the Pit 3,4,5 license from FERC. It is a bit dense but it has the entire flow schedule and additional terms and conditions.

In regards to the road closure my understanding is that car traffic over Pit 3 dam will be closed from July 6- December 1.  From Pit 3 dam to Pit 4 dam at least one lane will be open at all times. But the road will be closed at Pit 4 dam, so if you want to fish Pit 4 or 5 reach you have to access from Big Bend up.   Road closures are in place while road improvements are done—my recollection is the Forest Service wanted more turnouts for safety.

According to the Forest Service, campground improvements are not scheduled until next year.  I don’t recall the extent of those but I recall there were not major.  One issue CalTrout and TU made clear during the relicensing negotiations is that our constituents generally liked the rugged flavor of the Pit River and drastic improvements to campgrounds, trails, and access points were not necessary.  Still, I think the agencies are identifying this once in 40-year opportunity to have PG&E to pay for some long-needed upgrades.  But it needs to be done in way that doesn’t ruin the Pit River experience.

Still, for the Undergrounders whose annual income exceeds mine (basically anything above four figures), it’d be a good time – and all for a good cause.

California Trout Gala: May 8 (click image to visit their site)

Over the past year, CalTrout has suffered the same depredations as any other nonprofit caught in the grips of a recession (though if they’d wake up the online marketing program a little bit, I think they’d be a happier organization), and they’re certainly worth supporting.

If it weren’t for them, we might not have any real McCloud Redbands left, and their comprehensive “SOS” report on California’s disappearing native fish species was a landmark production (download your own copy by clicking the image):

The cover is pretty, but the news for California's Natives isn't great... (click image to download a copy)

So sign up for the gala, slip on the ritzy duds, check out the hot babes in their evening wear mingle with other fly fishing geeks, and have a good time.

This concludes today’s public service announcement.