I am almost certain there were trout throughout the west and mainstem before the reservoirs. I have also heard that way back when, before all the logging took place on the D, the banks were full of tall trees overhanging the river which kept the temperatures way down, holding quite a large brook trout population. Can any one confirm this?
Give us a try!
Welcome back to the new NEFF. Take a break from Twitter and Facebook. You don't go to Dicks for your fly fishing gear, you go to your local fly fishing store. Enjoy!
Before it's banished to the back room(or at least, a side room)...
- Thread starter Future Fanatic
- Start date
I am almost certain there were trout throughout the west and mainstem before the reservoirs. I have also heard that way back when, before all the logging took place on the D, the banks were full of tall trees overhanging the river which kept the temperatures way down, holding quite a large brook trout population. Can any one confirm this?
Bruce,
I'd try like hell to maintain the fishery. However, there is one main difference. The Beaverkill and the Willowemoc were trout rivers along their entire lengths. As I understand it, the west branch and main stem were not!
Additionally, no one is picking up on my point which is, until such time as the fishing crowd and the local economies have something to offer in a negotiation, the overall well-being of the population and industries downriver could care less and have no reason to change.
__________________
Allan
Allan,
The WB and Mainstem are now a trout (wild I might add) fishery, regardless of what they were. The Beaverkill was not originally a Brown trout fishery, but it certainly is now. What they originally were is not a reason to abandon them now. You even stated that you'd fight like hell to maintain the fishery (BEA-MOC). I see no difference here with the D (Main and WB and EB) Would you fight for the BEA-MOC for cold releases (if it had become a tailwater) even though the millions of people and billions of dollars were against you?
Bruce
I'd try like hell to maintain the fishery. However, there is one main difference. The Beaverkill and the Willowemoc were trout rivers along their entire lengths. As I understand it, the west branch and main stem were not!
Additionally, no one is picking up on my point which is, until such time as the fishing crowd and the local economies have something to offer in a negotiation, the overall well-being of the population and industries downriver could care less and have no reason to change.
__________________
Allan
Allan,
The WB and Mainstem are now a trout (wild I might add) fishery, regardless of what they were. The Beaverkill was not originally a Brown trout fishery, but it certainly is now. What they originally were is not a reason to abandon them now. You even stated that you'd fight like hell to maintain the fishery (BEA-MOC). I see no difference here with the D (Main and WB and EB) Would you fight for the BEA-MOC for cold releases (if it had become a tailwater) even though the millions of people and billions of dollars were against you?
Bruce
JOE.T
Dry Flies Only
The main stem was actually stocked in the late 1800's with rainbow trout.There has been fishing on the D for trout just as long as there has been on the Bkill and the Wilo.
Alan get your facts straight.
As far as your "question".
A few facts for.
The water that has been released since the resevoirs where built, has been for the purpose of keeping the Montaque target at 1750 cfs.This is to insure that the salt water does not come up to far into the Delaware.So,basically the water that has been released is for the down river states.
The avg flow because of the montaque line has been about 625 cfs since than as well.So we are not asking for any more than what we have had since the 60's.
Dont confuse the released water with the drinking water.The drinking water is run dow to the roundout via pipes.Than off to NYC.
Alan
Here's a couple of question's for you?
Whats so wrong with a gruop of guys trying to enhance and preserve a wild trout fishery??Please explain in detail.
Why does this seem to bother you so much?
Ok now for the funny stuff.
Alan you say that because of the bridges and over passes from rt 17 that the fishing is actually better under these bridges?(bkill and Wilo)
So basically what your saying is that rt 17 and the over passes have created an optimium habitat for the stocked fish?
Now thats hilarious!hahahahahahahahahaha
Did you ever think that maybe the fishing is so good under the bridges and over passes due to the FACT THAT THE HATCHERY TRUCKS DUMP ALL THE FISH THERE!!!!!!!!Year after year after year.
HOLY COW!
Alan get your facts straight.
As far as your "question".
A few facts for.
The water that has been released since the resevoirs where built, has been for the purpose of keeping the Montaque target at 1750 cfs.This is to insure that the salt water does not come up to far into the Delaware.So,basically the water that has been released is for the down river states.
The avg flow because of the montaque line has been about 625 cfs since than as well.So we are not asking for any more than what we have had since the 60's.
Dont confuse the released water with the drinking water.The drinking water is run dow to the roundout via pipes.Than off to NYC.
Alan
Here's a couple of question's for you?
Whats so wrong with a gruop of guys trying to enhance and preserve a wild trout fishery??Please explain in detail.
Why does this seem to bother you so much?
Ok now for the funny stuff.
Alan you say that because of the bridges and over passes from rt 17 that the fishing is actually better under these bridges?(bkill and Wilo)
So basically what your saying is that rt 17 and the over passes have created an optimium habitat for the stocked fish?
Now thats hilarious!hahahahahahahahahaha
Did you ever think that maybe the fishing is so good under the bridges and over passes due to the FACT THAT THE HATCHERY TRUCKS DUMP ALL THE FISH THERE!!!!!!!!Year after year after year.
HOLY COW!
Last edited:
Joe,
"Whats so wrong with a gruop of guys trying to enhance and preserve a wild trout fishery"
- Absolutely nothing!
"Did you ever think that maybe the fishing is so good under the bridges and over passes due to the FACT THAT THE HATCHERY TRUCKS DUMP ALL THE FISH THERE!!!!!!!!Year after year after year"
- You know that's only partially true. I don't know, or care to know the stocking schedule or locations but I'll guess that the trucks dump fish where it is convenient. In all likelihood that means where the river is easily accessed from 'Old 17' not the overpasses. Do the trucks actually throw the fish from the overpasses? Not likely. Regardless, trout do not stay where they are dumped. The DEC did a monitoring of this and found that fish move up and down the entire Delaware system. C'mon Joe, you know all of this.
You mention that, "Dont confuse the released water with the drinking water.The drinking water is run dow to the roundout via pipes.Than off to NYC." I totally agree. Why then does everyone(or close to it) blame NYC for the flow situation?
"Whats so wrong with a gruop of guys trying to enhance and preserve a wild trout fishery"
- Absolutely nothing!
"Did you ever think that maybe the fishing is so good under the bridges and over passes due to the FACT THAT THE HATCHERY TRUCKS DUMP ALL THE FISH THERE!!!!!!!!Year after year after year"
- You know that's only partially true. I don't know, or care to know the stocking schedule or locations but I'll guess that the trucks dump fish where it is convenient. In all likelihood that means where the river is easily accessed from 'Old 17' not the overpasses. Do the trucks actually throw the fish from the overpasses? Not likely. Regardless, trout do not stay where they are dumped. The DEC did a monitoring of this and found that fish move up and down the entire Delaware system. C'mon Joe, you know all of this.
You mention that, "Dont confuse the released water with the drinking water.The drinking water is run dow to the roundout via pipes.Than off to NYC." I totally agree. Why then does everyone(or close to it) blame NYC for the flow situation?
They shouldn't and they are not going to. What we are talking about doesn't take anything away from them.
Thats the bottom line. They wont lose any water based upon the FUDR release plan.
It adds to the states and local economy.
Ask those people that dont give a hoot about the recreational desires of several thousand fly fishermen (the number in 1996 was 31,390 fisherman, not a few thousand and they fished a total 265,970 days) , if they give a hoot that their tax moiney is going to scientific studies, 3/4 million dollars to stidy the Dwarf Wedge Mussel and 247,000 to show what we already know.
Last edited:
Future Fanatic
Nirvana
So is now the argument that there have always been trout there, so NYC must maintain it?
What would you say if we just said to hell with it and knocked down the dam and let old Mother Nature take care of the Delaware for us, just like in the good old days...
1913 was a good year on the West Branch: Monthly flows (cfs): Jan. 2,978, Feb. ---, Mar. 3,242, Apr. 1,371, May 464, Jun. 373, Jul 65.3, Aug. 49.6, Sep. 65.6, Oct. 249, Nov. 1,141, Dec. 745. How many trout do you think made it that summer?
Joe is this the late 1800's you mentioned?
"Rainbow trout were first introduced into the Delaware River by accident in the 1880's. As legend has it, containers of trout were being transported by rail and there was an accident. Quick thinking on the part of the trainmaster salvaged the cargo. He dumped the trout into Callicoon Creek, a tributary of the Delaware, and these rainbows have naturally reproduced since then. "
I wonder if any of them made it through the summer of '13?
Why are the Beaverkill and Willowemoc the "storied waters of Catskill Fly fishing" and not the Delaware?
That dwarf wedge mussel, might be your blessing in disguise.
John
What would you say if we just said to hell with it and knocked down the dam and let old Mother Nature take care of the Delaware for us, just like in the good old days...
1913 was a good year on the West Branch: Monthly flows (cfs): Jan. 2,978, Feb. ---, Mar. 3,242, Apr. 1,371, May 464, Jun. 373, Jul 65.3, Aug. 49.6, Sep. 65.6, Oct. 249, Nov. 1,141, Dec. 745. How many trout do you think made it that summer?
Joe is this the late 1800's you mentioned?
"Rainbow trout were first introduced into the Delaware River by accident in the 1880's. As legend has it, containers of trout were being transported by rail and there was an accident. Quick thinking on the part of the trainmaster salvaged the cargo. He dumped the trout into Callicoon Creek, a tributary of the Delaware, and these rainbows have naturally reproduced since then. "
I wonder if any of them made it through the summer of '13?
Why are the Beaverkill and Willowemoc the "storied waters of Catskill Fly fishing" and not the Delaware?
That dwarf wedge mussel, might be your blessing in disguise.
John
Future Fanatic
Nirvana
Fly Tier, do you have any idea about the Pennsylvania economy and how the fishery affects it? It seems that quite a bit of the money spent on guides and such is spent there. What is Pennsylvania doing to protect its fragile local river economy? What concessions might they make to NYC to protect it? What might Pennsylvania residents that are members of FUDR do to make the point to their elected officials? Just a thought...
The Montague target is there for what purpose? Somebody downstream must need freshwater...
John
The Montague target is there for what purpose? Somebody downstream must need freshwater...
John
Last edited:
Guys, the past is the past,regardless of how the fishery was started it is here now.
If we use mayflies thought process, we will all be standing on the beaverkill and instead of 20 guys fishing a pool for stocked fish, there will be 50.
It seems like some cloning has gone on over the weekend at the huge gathering of a few/
I think the infamous two headed trout has surfaced.
If we use mayflies thought process, we will all be standing on the beaverkill and instead of 20 guys fishing a pool for stocked fish, there will be 50.
It seems like some cloning has gone on over the weekend at the huge gathering of a few/
I think the infamous two headed trout has surfaced.
Last edited:
Future Fanatic
Nirvana
Oh, don't worry about that everybody. When the Delaware is killed off as some predict, we can stock it every year just like the Beaverkill and Willowemoc. There will be plenty of room for all of you to fish.
Jeez...
John
Jeez...
John
Mayfly (Allan),
I may have missed your answer, I'll re-post.
Bruce,
I'd try like hell to maintain the fishery. However, there is one main difference. The Beaverkill and the Willowemoc were trout rivers along their entire lengths. As I understand it, the west branch and main stem were not!
Additionally, no one is picking up on my point which is, until such time as the fishing crowd and the local economies have something to offer in a negotiation, the overall well-being of the population and industries downriver could care less and have no reason to change.
__________________
Allan
Allan,
The WB and Mainstem are now a trout (wild I might add) fishery, regardless of what they were. The Beaverkill was not originally a Brown trout fishery, but it certainly is now. What they originally were is not a reason to abandon them now. You even stated that you'd fight like hell to maintain the fishery (BEA-MOC). I see no difference here with the D (Main and WB and EB) Would you fight for the BEA-MOC for cold releases (if it had become a tailwater) even though the millions of people and billions of dollars were against you?
Bruce
I may have missed your answer, I'll re-post.
Bruce,
I'd try like hell to maintain the fishery. However, there is one main difference. The Beaverkill and the Willowemoc were trout rivers along their entire lengths. As I understand it, the west branch and main stem were not!
Additionally, no one is picking up on my point which is, until such time as the fishing crowd and the local economies have something to offer in a negotiation, the overall well-being of the population and industries downriver could care less and have no reason to change.
__________________
Allan
Allan,
The WB and Mainstem are now a trout (wild I might add) fishery, regardless of what they were. The Beaverkill was not originally a Brown trout fishery, but it certainly is now. What they originally were is not a reason to abandon them now. You even stated that you'd fight like hell to maintain the fishery (BEA-MOC). I see no difference here with the D (Main and WB and EB) Would you fight for the BEA-MOC for cold releases (if it had become a tailwater) even though the millions of people and billions of dollars were against you?
Bruce
JOE.T
Dry Flies Only
Fanatic
You know dam well that the arguement is not about- trout always being on the Delaware and that nyc must maintain it.
When the resevoirs where built a wild trout fishery was born.Period.If your not for preserving and enhancing them than why dont you join mayfly on the Bkill.
As far as knocking down the dams,well thats just as silly as the fishing is better on the bkill due to rt 17 and the bridges.
Fanatic
As some have told you already,maybe you should get on a river more often?
You know dam well that the arguement is not about- trout always being on the Delaware and that nyc must maintain it.
When the resevoirs where built a wild trout fishery was born.Period.If your not for preserving and enhancing them than why dont you join mayfly on the Bkill.
As far as knocking down the dams,well thats just as silly as the fishing is better on the bkill due to rt 17 and the bridges.
Fanatic
As some have told you already,maybe you should get on a river more often?
Future Fanatic
Nirvana
With all due respect Joe, what does this "As some have told you already,maybe you should get on a river more often?" mean? I mean, what are you trying to say?
John
John
Bruce,
I thought I had given you an answer. When I wrote, "I'd try like hell to maintain the fishery", I was refering to any of the waters within the Delaware River basin. However, I am in no position to judge the doom and gloom prognosticated for the Delawares by some of the voices. Seems as if those waters are none-the-worse in spite of low flows, temperature shifts, etc.
I thought I had given you an answer. When I wrote, "I'd try like hell to maintain the fishery", I was refering to any of the waters within the Delaware River basin. However, I am in no position to judge the doom and gloom prognosticated for the Delawares by some of the voices. Seems as if those waters are none-the-worse in spite of low flows, temperature shifts, etc.
WB Catechumen
Square Tail Chaser
FT
LMAO
DRC Campground?
I heard that was the place that hosted a "near death" experience?
LMAO
DRC Campground?
I heard that was the place that hosted a "near death" experience?
Bruce,
I thought I had given you an answer. When I wrote, "I'd try like hell to maintain the fishery", I was refering to any of the waters within the Delaware River basin. However, I am in no position to judge the doom and gloom prognosticated for the Delawares by some of the voices. Seems as if those waters are none-the-worse in spite of low flows, temperature shifts, etc.
__________________
Allan
Mayfly,
When you wrote "I'd try like hell to maintain the fishery", that was in response to my what if the BEA-MOC had been a tailwater. If the Beaverkill was hitting temps in the mid 70s in the Spring and was preventable (if tailwater), I would expect you would fight it. But that's what we are experiencing on the D and you don't think that's a problem.
Yes, the fishing was great last week and the fish "were" healthy, but that was last week. Those same fish are under stress RIGHT NOW! There was a temporary increase in RELEASED water yesterday but it wasn't based on the NEW PLAN and it wasn't enough to prevent Callicoon from reaching 76 degrees. The Delaware is a very good fishery, but it could be better protected against a collapse (one bad year will do that) and it could be much better (what a concept). You send mixed signals, you claim to be for the fishery but you post a lot of negativity and it sounds like you don't think there is a problem on the WB or the Mainstem, or even the EB. Enough talk.
Bruce
I thought I had given you an answer. When I wrote, "I'd try like hell to maintain the fishery", I was refering to any of the waters within the Delaware River basin. However, I am in no position to judge the doom and gloom prognosticated for the Delawares by some of the voices. Seems as if those waters are none-the-worse in spite of low flows, temperature shifts, etc.
__________________
Allan
Mayfly,
When you wrote "I'd try like hell to maintain the fishery", that was in response to my what if the BEA-MOC had been a tailwater. If the Beaverkill was hitting temps in the mid 70s in the Spring and was preventable (if tailwater), I would expect you would fight it. But that's what we are experiencing on the D and you don't think that's a problem.
Yes, the fishing was great last week and the fish "were" healthy, but that was last week. Those same fish are under stress RIGHT NOW! There was a temporary increase in RELEASED water yesterday but it wasn't based on the NEW PLAN and it wasn't enough to prevent Callicoon from reaching 76 degrees. The Delaware is a very good fishery, but it could be better protected against a collapse (one bad year will do that) and it could be much better (what a concept). You send mixed signals, you claim to be for the fishery but you post a lot of negativity and it sounds like you don't think there is a problem on the WB or the Mainstem, or even the EB. Enough talk.
Bruce
Last edited:
dcabarle
Administrator
Allan / Future,
Your questions such as, "Why should anyone care about a few fish/fishermen" although legit, I think they are improperly worded. How about asking something like this; What can we do to make them care, and, What are we presently doing to make them care.
Most of these answer's can be found on the FUDR website or even under the main menu on this website.
Don't you guys want a 6+ month cold water wild trout fishery as opposed to the current 3 month one that we've had for at least as long as I've been fishing this system?
I'd like to know what some of you who do not support the efforts of the FUDR, are supporting, to enhance the Upper Delaware, West / East branches. By the wording of your questions, it sounds like you're advocating for the DEC/NYC rather than for the fish / fishermen. How about making a few suggestions regarding this post.
What can we all do to work together on this rather than bicker?
Your questions such as, "Why should anyone care about a few fish/fishermen" although legit, I think they are improperly worded. How about asking something like this; What can we do to make them care, and, What are we presently doing to make them care.
Most of these answer's can be found on the FUDR website or even under the main menu on this website.
Don't you guys want a 6+ month cold water wild trout fishery as opposed to the current 3 month one that we've had for at least as long as I've been fishing this system?
I'd like to know what some of you who do not support the efforts of the FUDR, are supporting, to enhance the Upper Delaware, West / East branches. By the wording of your questions, it sounds like you're advocating for the DEC/NYC rather than for the fish / fishermen. How about making a few suggestions regarding this post.
What can we all do to work together on this rather than bicker?
Dennis,
The question "Why should anyone care about a few fish/fishermen" would be legit if it were true. We are talking close to 20 Million dollars broght into the local economy and tens of thousands of fisherman each year, fishing hundreds of thousands of days. This is just for Delaware County alone.
How can one help? What is FUDR doing?
FUDR is taking the political approach. Do strategists reveal their strategy before its put to work? no! FUDR is looking for more membership support and volunteers to help with its cause.
From here on out, if anyone has a legitamate question, I will respond but I am not going to respond any further to the rediculous comments. All this needs to be directed in a more useful way.
The question "Why should anyone care about a few fish/fishermen" would be legit if it were true. We are talking close to 20 Million dollars broght into the local economy and tens of thousands of fisherman each year, fishing hundreds of thousands of days. This is just for Delaware County alone.
How can one help? What is FUDR doing?
FUDR is taking the political approach. Do strategists reveal their strategy before its put to work? no! FUDR is looking for more membership support and volunteers to help with its cause.
From here on out, if anyone has a legitamate question, I will respond but I am not going to respond any further to the rediculous comments. All this needs to be directed in a more useful way.
dcabarle
Administrator
Fly Tier said:
I know the 20 million is a substantial amount of money for these towns. I wonder if any one of the FUDR protesters have driven through these towns just to see that 20 million actually does help. I think the only thing many of the protesters know is the big house located at River Road, and they think every house is just like this one. Maybe we need to rent a bus and take them through Deposit / Long Eddy / Hancock... to show them what 20 million means to these people.
On another note with regards to the infamous question, "Why should anyone care." It's not anyone, it should be, "Why should NYC care?" I think we're going to have to convince the people in these small towns to take some time out of their lives to realize that they need the fishermen because the fishermen help their economy. The problem with this is that they don't even realize what the fishermen bring to their economy. Try to educate them about this income generated by the fishermen. The people in these communities should be our backbone, instead, they are in the dark. I believe this is where we need to start. Knowledge is power, spreading the knowledge is even more power. Let these people know that A). Their towns will benefit by another 20 million (my guess) from the additional 3 months of fishing and B). Their towns will lose money and whatever taxes they pay now will go up when the fishermen are gone due to warm water and fish kills.
So, starting at the top with politicians who are only worried about lining their pockets with our cash might help us out, but the politicians need votes to line their pockets. If the local level is not educated about the money in the towns, they have no reason to vote for one politician over the other. There are no questions to ask from uneducated people, because they don't know left from right with regards to this topic. I'd be willing to bet that the majority of the people in these towns don't even fish! I wonder how many of them vote? I wonder how many of them know about the money brought in by fishermen each spring! 20 million for 3 months is a lot of money for these small towns.
Gotta get the word out, everybody wins.
Future Fanatic
Nirvana
Dennis,
You wrote, "Your questions such as, "Why should anyone care about a few fish/fishermen" although legit, I think they are improperly worded. How about asking something like this; What can we do to make them care, and, What are we presently doing to make them care." I’m not sure what it means that it is not “true”, as stated by FT but, although the my questions along that line are somewhat rhetorical, the sentiment rings true. I reread the FUDR materials and noticed them mention something about the lack of hard negotiating with NYC that has taken place. Negotiations involve compromise or trade in order to reach an agreement. What do we have as a group to negotiate with? What can the millions of people in NYC see as a tangible benefit of giving up ANY of the security of having THEIR reservoirs as full as they can possibly be?
I hear you... there's plenty of water... Well how about I tell you that you have plenty of money in one of your bank accounts, so give me 1/4 or 1/2 of it every year... I mean, you are going to spend it on something anyway… If you take it seriously, you then would probably ask "what do I get in return?" So what does NYC get? The warm fuzzy feeling of knowing they are helping some fishies have a nice life? That some businesses are floating full boats or selling pancakes or filling gas tanks 150 miles away? If water=money for NYC, as some have stated here, why should they give up their money, just to let upstate people make money? I don't know how we get them to care about our fishing industry. NYC could fart 20 million dollars. If you go to them with “the local economies” as the argument… watch them laugh. In fact, they currently pay millions of dollars into the local economies NOW, because of the watershed agreement, to keep the water clean before it hits the reservoirs. Looking through the FUDR and DRF websites, I could find nothing that addresses the question of how to get the support of NYC’s residents either (if I missed it, then point me to it).
Although I hear what you are saying about 20 million being a lot of money, it certainly is not EVERYTHING. I would not be surprised that if you added up just what is spent at the fast food restaurants in Deposit, if that would be more money than all of Deposit brings in from fishing each year. Please don’t believe that the towns NEED fishing money to exist. They would be different without it, but by no means would they turn into ghost towns. There are plenty of towns up here in NY that don’t have a Delaware running through them or don’t have industry. Another example is the school system in Hancock, which has a budget of over 8 million, and brings in over 4 million in money from the state to be spent in the local community.
FUDR wants 600cfs, what is their strategy to get it? How do they hope to make that happen? Are they going to try to win over "the hearts and minds" of the NYC populous (go from the people at the bottom up to the politicians at the top) or go straight to the elected officials to sell THEM? It’s a secret? That should make us all feel good about what goes on behind closed doors. I agree that many of the locals don’t know all that is going on. I know they don’t.
Dennis, you know that there is concern over the perception that the financial ramifications of the plans are taking precedence in the fight for flows. You read that on “the other” trout forum. How is FUDR going to convince people outside of the ff community if those that are in it, are not convinced that monetary gain is not (at least in part) the impetus for wanting 600cfs? All I can think of is science. Determine what IS best, not a “we think this…”. Base it on environmental concerns, not just “it’s good for business”. Get other environmental groups to agree with the proposal, not just other fishermen with pockets to fill or fish to catch. If the group can get others to agree based on science and environmental concerns, then that might convince others and allow for broader support. Don’t forget about Pennsylvania residents. They have local economies, too. They have the Lackawaxen and the new PP&L proposal that they can discuss with their elected officials.
It seems that it will take politicians at the state level to make the deals with NYC. They may have something that the NYC politicians want. Maybe that endangered dwarf wedge mussel will bring in the Feds. Who knows where that would lead, but the clam might turn out to be a trout’s best friend.
I’m sure that much of this might seem disjointed and I apologize. There are many of issues and each has many facets.
John
You wrote, "Your questions such as, "Why should anyone care about a few fish/fishermen" although legit, I think they are improperly worded. How about asking something like this; What can we do to make them care, and, What are we presently doing to make them care." I’m not sure what it means that it is not “true”, as stated by FT but, although the my questions along that line are somewhat rhetorical, the sentiment rings true. I reread the FUDR materials and noticed them mention something about the lack of hard negotiating with NYC that has taken place. Negotiations involve compromise or trade in order to reach an agreement. What do we have as a group to negotiate with? What can the millions of people in NYC see as a tangible benefit of giving up ANY of the security of having THEIR reservoirs as full as they can possibly be?
I hear you... there's plenty of water... Well how about I tell you that you have plenty of money in one of your bank accounts, so give me 1/4 or 1/2 of it every year... I mean, you are going to spend it on something anyway… If you take it seriously, you then would probably ask "what do I get in return?" So what does NYC get? The warm fuzzy feeling of knowing they are helping some fishies have a nice life? That some businesses are floating full boats or selling pancakes or filling gas tanks 150 miles away? If water=money for NYC, as some have stated here, why should they give up their money, just to let upstate people make money? I don't know how we get them to care about our fishing industry. NYC could fart 20 million dollars. If you go to them with “the local economies” as the argument… watch them laugh. In fact, they currently pay millions of dollars into the local economies NOW, because of the watershed agreement, to keep the water clean before it hits the reservoirs. Looking through the FUDR and DRF websites, I could find nothing that addresses the question of how to get the support of NYC’s residents either (if I missed it, then point me to it).
Although I hear what you are saying about 20 million being a lot of money, it certainly is not EVERYTHING. I would not be surprised that if you added up just what is spent at the fast food restaurants in Deposit, if that would be more money than all of Deposit brings in from fishing each year. Please don’t believe that the towns NEED fishing money to exist. They would be different without it, but by no means would they turn into ghost towns. There are plenty of towns up here in NY that don’t have a Delaware running through them or don’t have industry. Another example is the school system in Hancock, which has a budget of over 8 million, and brings in over 4 million in money from the state to be spent in the local community.
FUDR wants 600cfs, what is their strategy to get it? How do they hope to make that happen? Are they going to try to win over "the hearts and minds" of the NYC populous (go from the people at the bottom up to the politicians at the top) or go straight to the elected officials to sell THEM? It’s a secret? That should make us all feel good about what goes on behind closed doors. I agree that many of the locals don’t know all that is going on. I know they don’t.
Dennis, you know that there is concern over the perception that the financial ramifications of the plans are taking precedence in the fight for flows. You read that on “the other” trout forum. How is FUDR going to convince people outside of the ff community if those that are in it, are not convinced that monetary gain is not (at least in part) the impetus for wanting 600cfs? All I can think of is science. Determine what IS best, not a “we think this…”. Base it on environmental concerns, not just “it’s good for business”. Get other environmental groups to agree with the proposal, not just other fishermen with pockets to fill or fish to catch. If the group can get others to agree based on science and environmental concerns, then that might convince others and allow for broader support. Don’t forget about Pennsylvania residents. They have local economies, too. They have the Lackawaxen and the new PP&L proposal that they can discuss with their elected officials.
It seems that it will take politicians at the state level to make the deals with NYC. They may have something that the NYC politicians want. Maybe that endangered dwarf wedge mussel will bring in the Feds. Who knows where that would lead, but the clam might turn out to be a trout’s best friend.
I’m sure that much of this might seem disjointed and I apologize. There are many of issues and each has many facets.
John
Hey John,
Your premise is completely wrong here. FUDR is not taking a drop of water away from NYC when asking for a constant release of 600 CFS. Your bank account analogy therefor is incorrect and to get support from NYC residents, well, support for what? Taking nothing from them? As far as negotiations are concernced, the required releases of 325CFS which were part of 671.3 werenegotiated away
In addition, All water sent down the river is not carried away in buckets by the fish, it is all there for downstream use. Montague target, etc.. It doesn't just go away.
NY wants to hoard and keep back all the water they can, incase of a drought watch, because in drough watch, they can't sell it.
If NYC residents get into such an uproar about saving water, they should be making noise and fixing the aqueducts that are leaking as much water in one day that the entier city of Rochester uses in one day. This has been going on for 20 years. How much water is that? It would be telling every single person in rochester, they could not have one drop of water for the next 20 years.
FUDR is not taking a single drop of water away from NYC. Or anyone.
You dont have to take my word for it, everything I have said above is a matter of Public Record. Some long division on a calculator confirms it as well.
-FT
I just wanted to share with you a letter written by Bob Bachman. It was sent to quite a few people. It is from FUDR's Lead Trout Scientist. Just for the Record, Bob is well known throughout the country as one of the top trout scientists out there. He has been involved in many issues throughout the country, just like the one on the Delaware. Look at what he did in Maryland with the tailwaters in that area. Do a search for Bob Bachman on the internet, read about him and you will see, no one will argue, he is one of the best there is.
This was written after a meeting back about a month ago. Sent to numerous people following the issues.
Your premise is completely wrong here. FUDR is not taking a drop of water away from NYC when asking for a constant release of 600 CFS. Your bank account analogy therefor is incorrect and to get support from NYC residents, well, support for what? Taking nothing from them? As far as negotiations are concernced, the required releases of 325CFS which were part of 671.3 werenegotiated away
In addition, All water sent down the river is not carried away in buckets by the fish, it is all there for downstream use. Montague target, etc.. It doesn't just go away.
NY wants to hoard and keep back all the water they can, incase of a drought watch, because in drough watch, they can't sell it.
If NYC residents get into such an uproar about saving water, they should be making noise and fixing the aqueducts that are leaking as much water in one day that the entier city of Rochester uses in one day. This has been going on for 20 years. How much water is that? It would be telling every single person in rochester, they could not have one drop of water for the next 20 years.
FUDR is not taking a single drop of water away from NYC. Or anyone.
You dont have to take my word for it, everything I have said above is a matter of Public Record. Some long division on a calculator confirms it as well.
-FT
I just wanted to share with you a letter written by Bob Bachman. It was sent to quite a few people. It is from FUDR's Lead Trout Scientist. Just for the Record, Bob is well known throughout the country as one of the top trout scientists out there. He has been involved in many issues throughout the country, just like the one on the Delaware. Look at what he did in Maryland with the tailwaters in that area. Do a search for Bob Bachman on the internet, read about him and you will see, no one will argue, he is one of the best there is.
This was written after a meeting back about a month ago. Sent to numerous people following the issues.
Last edited:
I have never met Mr. B.B. at the many Trenton meetings that I have attended..he needs to understand that NYC has provided a 20,000cfs Habitat bank, and not an ounce more (except for the extra from the PPL deal) I don't see where the insight is in claiming that 600 cfs is the answer...we all want that. But what is the plan to get it?? I doubt that there is sufficient political clout in the counties (Derlaware and Sulliven) of interest to achieve much in that approach...and so far I don't see anybody with the $5 million or so that it will take to win in the courts...and what is the legal issue anyway??
If the courts were used..I guess that NYC would give us the requested 600cfs average release...1200 cfs this year...and zero cfs next year...and then we could all take up golf.
I'd support any plan that would improve the fishery..and so far the only plan that has been accepted is the three year plan being studied by the SEF. Where can I view and alternative??
If the courts were used..I guess that NYC would give us the requested 600cfs average release...1200 cfs this year...and zero cfs next year...and then we could all take up golf.
I'd support any plan that would improve the fishery..and so far the only plan that has been accepted is the three year plan being studied by the SEF. Where can I view and alternative??
Oasis man,
Before you say what BB need to understand, you should check out what he has done for the cold water fisheries across the country.
There's no insight to the 600CFS. its science.
Where are you coming up with a 5MM figure?
You say something intresting here: " I guess that NYC would give us the requested 600cfs average release...1200 cfs this year...and zero cfs next year"
There has been a historical average of more than 600CFS for 40 years. it geting them to release it consistanly, not yo yo. FUDR is not asking for anything more than what has already been given.
If you want to view the release plan FUDR is proposing, www.fudr.org.
For everyone to just sit back and play a wait and see game, and not push for something better, something that science already shows would be better, than I can not say anything more. ome people just have to be a little teeny bit openminded to understand whats better for everyone and whats not taking anything away form anyone.
Before you say what BB need to understand, you should check out what he has done for the cold water fisheries across the country.
There's no insight to the 600CFS. its science.
Where are you coming up with a 5MM figure?
You say something intresting here: " I guess that NYC would give us the requested 600cfs average release...1200 cfs this year...and zero cfs next year"
There has been a historical average of more than 600CFS for 40 years. it geting them to release it consistanly, not yo yo. FUDR is not asking for anything more than what has already been given.
If you want to view the release plan FUDR is proposing, www.fudr.org.
For everyone to just sit back and play a wait and see game, and not push for something better, something that science already shows would be better, than I can not say anything more. ome people just have to be a little teeny bit openminded to understand whats better for everyone and whats not taking anything away form anyone.
