Future Fanatic
Nirvana
I read this news story (AP) in my local paper this morning (The Daily Star out of Oneonta,NY) and thought that many of you might be interested. I could not find it on their website, but i found it on the Mercury News website, I think out of San Jose. it is here:http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/sports/9084703.htm?1c
I will also post it below. But before I do, I want to comment about one quote of Al Caucci's. Do you think he really said this?
"New York City likes to beef a lot," Caucci said. "But they have the whole Hudson River running right in front of them and they don't use it, so they like to come up to the Catskills and rape all the rivers." Can he be serious? Would he drink water out of the Hudson? Would you? And raping the rivers...? I don't know, it's been a long time, but maybe he has forgotten that NYC by building those dams (and I guess raping the rivers) has produced the very resource that he exploits and provided him years and years of income. Is that comment just supposed to make this an us vs. them fight? A rallying cry for the locals? Well, maybe locals is the wrong word. What percent of the businesses that directly make money from fishing are owned and operated by people that were born and bred locally...?
AND now for the whole article:
Anglers, small town businesses fight Big Apple over trout waters
MICHAEL GORMLEY
Associated Press
Fishing was good in the early spring where an elbow of the upper Delaware River in the Catskills jabs Pennsylvania. Seventeen to 20-inch wild brown trout were pulled out of the winding, chilly waters, twice the size of a good catch in most streams.
But those who know well that stretch of prime trout water knew it would be short-lived.
Local business operators and anglers in and around Hancock, in Delaware County, N.Y., blame a three-year experimental state program started in May.
The program reduced the flow of the river's West Branch, one of the best trout fisheries in North America and a key drinking source for 9 million New York City residents. The lower flow - accomplished by releasing less water from dams upstream - means higher temperatures, which the sensitive trout hate. The water could warm to more than 73 degrees before the state would trigger a reserve flow from a reservoir to cool the branch, New York City officials said.
"We had a wonderful spring," said Al Caucci, a flyfishing outfitter in Starlight, Pa. "Now they've practically dried it up and we've been living like that for 20 years ... the potential for this river is three times the amount of bugs and fish and we'll never reach that because we have these mini fish kills each year because of what they do."
After more than 20 years of pleading at public hearings, the locals are taking on Congress, the states of Pennsylvania and New York, and New York City. Letters outlining their counterproposal to increase cold water flow in the West Branch will be mailed this week to members of Congress and the states' legislatures. The letter includes a strongly worded explanation of the jobs, economic benefit and by extension, votes that hang in the balance.
"Yeah, we're a thorn in everybody's side and that's what we want to be," said Caucci, one of the volunteers in Friends of the Upper Delaware River taking on the battle. "We want to make this fishery the best it can be. It could be in the top three or four in the whole country, in your back yard. Isn't that something? I don't understand it."
The main concern of state and city officials is the 9 million New York City residents, especially in times of drought.
New York City would get plenty of water because the flow of the East Branch and Neversink River would be increased by dams into the Delaware River. That would even the flow through all three branches, assuring the water supply to New York City.
Further complicating the issue, however, is the needs of industry. The Pennsylvania Power and Light Corp. based in Allentown, Pa., plans to release large volumes of water to generate electricity - but from a dam downstream from the West Branch.
New York City could use that flow to meet a 1954 U.S. Supreme Court order mandating adequate flows for drinking supplies to Trenton, N.J., and Philadelphia without having to release more water from its reservoir that normally provides greater flow of cool water to the West Branch.
"From a big-picture standpoint, this plan will make things a lot better during a drought," said PPL spokesman Paul Wirth.
"New York City likes to beef a lot," Caucci said. "But they have the whole Hudson River running right in front of them and they don't use it, so they like to come up to the Catskills and rape all the rivers."
The government plan and action were the result of an extensive New York state environmental study done in the 1980s, said Michael Principe, New York City's deputy commissioner of the Bureau of Water Supply. It sought to balance drinking water needs and fishing interests.
New York state Department of Environmental Conservation officials contend that fishing will - over the long haul - improve even in the West Branch under the three-year pilot program. That's because under the previous system, an especially dry summer common every three or four years could wipe out gains in fish population. The pilot program that takes more control of flows avoids the frequent damage by droughts, said the department's spokeswoman, Maureen Wren.
"We tried to be as flexible as possible," Principe said. "There really isn't enough water available to set up an optimal condition for trout fishing ... the goal is not to have optimum conditions. Otherwise there wouldn't be enough water."
I will also post it below. But before I do, I want to comment about one quote of Al Caucci's. Do you think he really said this?
"New York City likes to beef a lot," Caucci said. "But they have the whole Hudson River running right in front of them and they don't use it, so they like to come up to the Catskills and rape all the rivers." Can he be serious? Would he drink water out of the Hudson? Would you? And raping the rivers...? I don't know, it's been a long time, but maybe he has forgotten that NYC by building those dams (and I guess raping the rivers) has produced the very resource that he exploits and provided him years and years of income. Is that comment just supposed to make this an us vs. them fight? A rallying cry for the locals? Well, maybe locals is the wrong word. What percent of the businesses that directly make money from fishing are owned and operated by people that were born and bred locally...?
AND now for the whole article:
Anglers, small town businesses fight Big Apple over trout waters
MICHAEL GORMLEY
Associated Press
Fishing was good in the early spring where an elbow of the upper Delaware River in the Catskills jabs Pennsylvania. Seventeen to 20-inch wild brown trout were pulled out of the winding, chilly waters, twice the size of a good catch in most streams.
But those who know well that stretch of prime trout water knew it would be short-lived.
Local business operators and anglers in and around Hancock, in Delaware County, N.Y., blame a three-year experimental state program started in May.
The program reduced the flow of the river's West Branch, one of the best trout fisheries in North America and a key drinking source for 9 million New York City residents. The lower flow - accomplished by releasing less water from dams upstream - means higher temperatures, which the sensitive trout hate. The water could warm to more than 73 degrees before the state would trigger a reserve flow from a reservoir to cool the branch, New York City officials said.
"We had a wonderful spring," said Al Caucci, a flyfishing outfitter in Starlight, Pa. "Now they've practically dried it up and we've been living like that for 20 years ... the potential for this river is three times the amount of bugs and fish and we'll never reach that because we have these mini fish kills each year because of what they do."
After more than 20 years of pleading at public hearings, the locals are taking on Congress, the states of Pennsylvania and New York, and New York City. Letters outlining their counterproposal to increase cold water flow in the West Branch will be mailed this week to members of Congress and the states' legislatures. The letter includes a strongly worded explanation of the jobs, economic benefit and by extension, votes that hang in the balance.
"Yeah, we're a thorn in everybody's side and that's what we want to be," said Caucci, one of the volunteers in Friends of the Upper Delaware River taking on the battle. "We want to make this fishery the best it can be. It could be in the top three or four in the whole country, in your back yard. Isn't that something? I don't understand it."
The main concern of state and city officials is the 9 million New York City residents, especially in times of drought.
New York City would get plenty of water because the flow of the East Branch and Neversink River would be increased by dams into the Delaware River. That would even the flow through all three branches, assuring the water supply to New York City.
Further complicating the issue, however, is the needs of industry. The Pennsylvania Power and Light Corp. based in Allentown, Pa., plans to release large volumes of water to generate electricity - but from a dam downstream from the West Branch.
New York City could use that flow to meet a 1954 U.S. Supreme Court order mandating adequate flows for drinking supplies to Trenton, N.J., and Philadelphia without having to release more water from its reservoir that normally provides greater flow of cool water to the West Branch.
"From a big-picture standpoint, this plan will make things a lot better during a drought," said PPL spokesman Paul Wirth.
"New York City likes to beef a lot," Caucci said. "But they have the whole Hudson River running right in front of them and they don't use it, so they like to come up to the Catskills and rape all the rivers."
The government plan and action were the result of an extensive New York state environmental study done in the 1980s, said Michael Principe, New York City's deputy commissioner of the Bureau of Water Supply. It sought to balance drinking water needs and fishing interests.
New York state Department of Environmental Conservation officials contend that fishing will - over the long haul - improve even in the West Branch under the three-year pilot program. That's because under the previous system, an especially dry summer common every three or four years could wipe out gains in fish population. The pilot program that takes more control of flows avoids the frequent damage by droughts, said the department's spokeswoman, Maureen Wren.
"We tried to be as flexible as possible," Principe said. "There really isn't enough water available to set up an optimal condition for trout fishing ... the goal is not to have optimum conditions. Otherwise there wouldn't be enough water."
