Hatch Outdoors
Page 7 of 18 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 LastLast
Results 73 to 84 of 216
  1. #73
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    New York (Ulster County)
    Posts
    556
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Chats
    0
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 0 Times in 0 Posts


    Jim,

    So after 6/15, under the previous plan is when the 160 CFS minumum release took place? That being true, my bad. New plan is better than old plan, but to me neither is good enough when the temps are allowed to go as high as they have been.

    So we need more studies for the WB and Mainstem? How come the EB increased from 95 CFS to 175 CFS (84% increase) and the Neversink increased from 90(?) CFS to 115 CFS (27% increase) without 3 year studies? How did these numbers get arrived at? How come the WB couldn't have been increased similarly percentagewise?

    Bruce


  2. #74
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Hancock
    Posts
    1,962
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    84
    Thanked in
    58 Posts
    Chats
    0
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 0 Times in 0 Posts


    Hale Eddy was at 79 cfs at this time in 2001. The new plan would have prevented that travesty. The river is finally recovering from that terrible flow regime.

    The new plan helps.

    The new plan is a temporary measure.

    600 release as proposed by FUDR may or may not be best for the system. I think not. I prefer to wait to see what the new science tells us. I cannot support a release that would harm the EB and Neversink. The new plan helps those rivers tremendously.

    The 600 release does not retain the flexibility for the system. We have been here before and I will not beat a dead horse.

    We should all be fighting to increase storage at Cannonsville and Pepacton to be used for fisheries.

    We should all be fighting to use a Montague Target that is better for the system. This should include a minimum flow at Callicoon or somewhere up river.


  3. #75
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Unadilla, New York
    Posts
    5,206
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    688
    Thanked in
    489 Posts
    Chats
    683
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 24 Times in 22 Posts


    Good questions, Jonboy. How can that be addressed? Are all the groups involved "equals" or does the authority of one hold sway?
    John

    John
    Some circumstantial evidence is very strong, as when you find a trout in the milk.--Henry David Thoreau

  4. #76
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Hancock
    Posts
    1,962
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    84
    Thanked in
    58 Posts
    Chats
    0
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 0 Times in 0 Posts


    Hi Bruce,

    Under the previous arrangement when there was a 325 release:

    The release was 325 cfs on the WB from June 15th to August 15th. The rest of the year the release was 45 cfs.

    The problem was early June, late August and early Sept.

    The attempted solution was to spread out the 325 release to a release of 160 cfs starting June 1st and going until September 15th. They also put into the thermal bank the extra 3200 cfs days that this created. IN my opinion this attempt was not successful.

    I think we are all agreed that what we have now is not sufficient. In my opinion, the best way to get what is best, is to help all the parties come to workable solutions. For the fish, this will mean adding storage to the reservoirs and manipulating the Montague Target. If the rivermaster needs 1400 from Cannonsville, I think fishermen and biologists can agree that 800-1000 is enough for the WB. Let the Montague Target drop to 1350 and only release 1000 cfs. Save the water for a day when river master needs only 200, but the fish need 600 to stay cool. The tough thing about this is you need to convince the down basin states that this is a good thing. Remember also that in the future if we can balance that 1000 release to (this is just an example) 800 on the WB and 200 on the EB, you can now cool the WB, upper mainstem, EB and even some of the EB below the Beaverkill. How great would that be. I am not suggesting these exact numbers. The new science will tell us what the best solutions will be.

    The East Branch and Neversink releases have not been increased. The East Branch is still 95 cfs release in the summer. It is a minimum flow at Harvard that has been increased. There will be times when the release will be more than 95 to hold up the Harvard 175 minimum.

    This is very confusing stuff, but if we keep the questions simple and concise, I will try to answer any more that anyone has.


  5. #77
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    New York (Ulster County)
    Posts
    556
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Chats
    0
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 0 Times in 0 Posts


    Jim,

    Thanks for answering. I just don't like to see the temps we've been having lately. 70+ at Fish's Eddy, about 66 at Hale Eddy and Harvard, and 75 at Callicoon. This means that the whole mainstem is currently 70+ or will be this afternoon. I won't be fishing the mainstem possibly 'till September now. With Montague running sufficiently high, there won't be a need to release anything to satisfy it's target. The only threshold I see coming shortly is the 75 degree max at Hankins. And that would probably not be much water released to get the Hankins temp below 75. Unless Mother Nature comes to the rescue and gives us a stretch of cool weather, but I'm not counting on that one.

    Well, we'll see.


    Bruce


  6. #78
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Sullivan County
    Posts
    1,809
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    78
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    106
    Thanked in
    66 Posts
    Chats
    1
    Groans
    4
    Groaned 2 Times in 2 Posts


    Jonboy


    The FUDR is well aware that the management of the System is very poor,and they understand that the only way to change that is by having statutory regulations in place.


    Take a look at there fact sheet and you will see what there concerns are regarding this issue in particular.

    http://www.fudr.org/facts.htm


  7. #79
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    West Milford, NJ
    Posts
    172
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Chats
    0
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 0 Times in 0 Posts


    Joe-

    I've read the fact sheet a few times, thanks.


  8. #80
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Hancock
    Posts
    1,962
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    84
    Thanked in
    58 Posts
    Chats
    0
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 0 Times in 0 Posts


    Hi Bruce,

    You are right about the high temps. I hate to see them too. I hope that we get a dry and cool couple of weeks. Then the river master will start calling for water and keep the river cool all summer.

    Hopefully the bigger habitat bank will carry us through this next stretch until the rivermaster needs water.

    We have drakes on the river by the way and the weather is supposed to break tomorrow!

    See ya,

    Jim


  9. #81
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Sullivan County
    Posts
    1,809
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    78
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    106
    Thanked in
    66 Posts
    Chats
    1
    Groans
    4
    Groaned 2 Times in 2 Posts


    John

    You ask why is this new plan so horrible and why is it worse than what we had.

    In my opinion:

    What we had in the past where minimum releases.At one time we had a 325 min on the west branch which at least helped part of the upper main stem.

    I dont know of anyone(well most anyone) that wouldnt take a 325 minimum release as opposed to a 225 min flow on the west branch.Unless of course your nyc and your trying to save all the water you can.

    Ok now we have this new plan so to speak.That requires studies to be done for the next three years at least.

    Out of left field however the Neversink and the East branch HAVE BEEN GIVEN A SIGNIFICANT amount of water added to there minimum flow targets

    Keep in mind that his was done with NO STUDIES!

    Yes no studies where conducted on either river yet they recieved all of this water?

    WHY?

    If thats the case than why didnt the west branch recieve the same increases??

    OK heres where the new plan is goes real bad.


    The plan states that there will be studies done on the three rivers mentioned, but NONE WILL BE DONE ON THE MAIN STEM!

    WHY?

    Essentially the plan(nyc,dec,drbc,) has written of the main stem as a wild trout fishery.In fact they know that at 225 cfs the wild trout of the upper D cannot survive ,let alone flourish but yet THEY WENT AHEAD WITH THIS NEW PLAN ANYWAY.

    The bottom line nyc wants to save water at any cost.

    Something is terribly wrong with this picture.

    If 600 where being released from the cannonsvile res than you would have about a 750 cfs flow on the west branch this would include various feeders coming into the west branch.The largest being oquaga creek at an avg of 30-40cfs during the summer.

    Main stem.I dont know.


    BTW

    Looks like you got some nice fdish there.

    JOE


  10. #82
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Hancock
    Posts
    1,962
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    84
    Thanked in
    58 Posts
    Chats
    0
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 0 Times in 0 Posts


    Joe,

    Read my previous post about the 325 release.

    There is only so much water allocated for the fishery at this time.

    This new plan allocated more water than we had previously. I think that makes it better. No, it is not enough, but it is more and better than we had.

    The real problem is to find more water for the fish. One way to do this is to increase reservoir storage. I think that this will a viable plan for future storage for fish.eries and habitat.

    I agree with you that Main Stem studies should also be done. THe USGS stuff includes many main stem sites. Hopefully, DEC or FUDR or DRF can also fund the study for the main stem. This would be one simialr to what DEC is doing on the other rivers. I don't think it will be that much money. DEC feels that it is more difficult to work on the big river and that results would not be meaningful. I say, lets do the study and get the data and then determine how meaningful they are. I do not want to look back three years from now and say, "darn, I wish we had main stem data". Lets figure out how to get it done. Thats what the DRF would like to do.

    Good day fishing today. Some very nice fish!


  11. #83
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Mid Hudson valley
    Posts
    1,518
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Chats
    0
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 0 Times in 0 Posts


    Jim and Joe T. This is one of the items I have trouble with

    History shows that the releases during the times we all speak about have been over 600CFS average. So, there has been and is enough water. IF these releases were steady and not 1500 / 60 / 125 / 1200 ("yo-yo" releases), we wouldnt be discussing this. Further, there is nothing in the plan now that guarantees any release of water regardless of what the habitat banks, etc.. are.

    --FT
    Nothing grows faster than a fish between the time the fish takes your fly...and the time he gets away.

  12. #84
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Unadilla, New York
    Posts
    5,206
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    688
    Thanked in
    489 Posts
    Chats
    683
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 24 Times in 22 Posts


    Aside from all the other issues, shouldn't there be a stipulation that NO water should EVER spill from the top of the dams?!? Maybe, just certain months of the year? There should be no difference as far as NYC is concerned, and bottom releases would at least provide cold water to the river WHENEVER there were surpluses.
    John

    John
    Some circumstantial evidence is very strong, as when you find a trout in the milk.--Henry David Thoreau

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Thread Participants: 21

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •