Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Dave588

Road salt that destroys fish hatching areas

Rate this topic

49 posts in this topic

32 mins ago, b-ware said:

..... As far as the perceived shortage of native brook trout, they are plentiful out here in the western part of the state where we are fortunate to have many clear cool streams and rivers....

Shhh, don't tell anybody but there are way more tiny secret streams, waaaay east of there that have secure native populations.

I have been wading, fishing, netting, observing and counting redds in the 'burbs since '85.

I know streams that have lost their trout in my lifetime (100% development and H2O extraction from seeps for drinking water).

I know streams a short distance away which are owned by towns and/or conservation groups which are so secure, a group of land owners, state n federal entities and grad students are officially doing studies there.

That land has no development, beautiful flowing seeps and **** LOAD of uncontrolled beaver.

 

Part of the volunteer work I have done includes walking those properties, locating redds (clean runs below beaver dams:howdy:) and actually locating new springs with trout breeding populations. 

I would include links but WAY too much spot burn for 2 foot wide brooks.

 

I say all that so I can talk Massachusetts brook trout from proper perspective. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 mins ago, mikez2 said:

Shhh, don't tell anybody but there are way more tiny secret streams, waaaay east of there that have secure native populations.

I have been wading, fishing, netting, observing and counting redds in the 'burbs since '85.

I know streams that have lost their trout in my lifetime (100% development and H2O extraction from seeps for drinking water).

I know streams a short distance away which are owned by towns and/or conservation groups which are so secure, a group of land owners, state n federal entities and grad students are officially doing studies there.

That land has no development, beautiful flowing seeps and **** LOAD of uncontrolled beaver.

 

Part of the volunteer work I have done includes walking those properties, locating redds (clean runs below beaver dams:howdy:) and actually locating new springs with trout breeding populations. 

I would include links but WAY too much spot burn for 2 foot wide brooks.

 

I say all that so I can talk Massachusetts brook trout from proper perspective. 

I hear you loud and clear...…………..

 

I love hearing from our fellow sportsmen how our brooks and streams are to hard to fish because of brush or natural debris in the water or I can't hunt there because there are no trails or paved parking areas...……………...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From '10.

Wild native brook trout collected by hand and documented under state permit (not hook n line). Two different streams, same complex.

The last pic is a killer spring coming out of the bank (couple hundred yards downslope from beaver pond) which flowed true in the nasty drought in the '15 - '17 seasons.

 

If you climbed a tall enough tree, you could see the Boston skyline from that spring. 

IMG_0689.jpg

tbtrout.jpg

cranberryspring.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 mins ago, Dave588 said:

The impact as i have read is the temperature and salinity effect on reproduction cycles. 

My thoughts exactly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 mins ago, Dave588 said:

The impact as i have read is the temperature and salinity effect on reproduction cycles. 

Right.

Google will give me 20 media stories that all make those general claims without referencing any data.

Certainly that is conventional wisdom with fishermen and opponents of road salt.

 

So far I have only read abstracts to the first two scientific papers I could find.

Both said the same things;

No fatalities in environmentally representitive concentration. 

No interference with development. 

Only one or two types effected growth.

Nothing suggesting smoking gun.

 

This is what i would expect from a species that moves in and out of ocean water at will and has been documented breeding in tidal water.

 

Temperature is always mentioned in regards to brook trout, for good reason of course, but current practice is to emphasize anything temp related because it's the tie in to bring up climate change. 

There was some chemistry reason temp might be influenced in some miniscule way by salt, I forget.

A huge stretch as smoking gun for brookies decline.

 

What is significant, salt harms invertebrates and can reduce available food in areas where salt concentrates.

This is not significantly an issue in streams with any kind of flow, imo, as salting is of short seasonal duration and quickly diluted and washed away.

 

The real harm Im aware of is the pulse of high salt concentrations that can result from sudden melting of a large snow pack.

This wouldn't hurt trout, be the same as a moon tide flooding the tidal stream.

It can be hard on inverts and especially amphibians that breed in snow melt pools.

Pretty sure there is data for that.

 

Too much salt is bad, don't get me wrong. There are other reasons too not mentioned. 

I'm just not convinced it's on the list of smoking guns causing brook trout decline.

Even though most fishermen and media believe otherwise. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Multiple kinds of fish will move in and out of saltwater. Physiological  conditions supposedly create the cycles. 

Regardless, the road salt and other ingredients does not have any indication of helping. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For what it's worth, these are the parameters we are required to sample for from our storm water permit. 

In its wisdom, using guidelines from federal EPA and best available science, Massachusetts does not require us to sample for sodium.

This with the understanding that the water comes from huge heavily treated parking lots. 

 

I have run small wastewater plants where the town health department required sodium testing above and beyond ma law.

Never ever heard one word back on sodium results.

20190131_161430.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was reading some report where to much salt in the system is absorbed by the road plants causes more moose to be killed . They get attracted to it and it is like having a salt lick out for cows. The report also stated that it disfigured some type of wood frog , nothing about trout . To much salt has its bad affects I am sure , just look in the mirror with many of us humans that have blood pressure problems , that causes heart attacks . If it applied under the formula that is used , one would expect not as much damage to our aquatic friends 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, mikez2 said:

For what it's worth, these are the parameters we are required to sample for from our storm water permit. 

In its wisdom, using guidelines from federal EPA and best available science, Massachusetts does not require us to sample for sodium.

This with the understanding that the water comes from huge heavily treated parking lots. 

 

I have run small wastewater plants where the town health department required sodium testing above and beyond ma law.

Never ever heard one word back on sodium results.

20190131_161430.jpg

Thats cool for a controllable system. I want to know about runoff where there is no collection pond.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

14 hours ago, Angler #1 said:

I was reading some report where to much salt in the system is absorbed by the road plants causes more moose to be killed . They get attracted to it and it is like having a salt lick out for cows. The report also stated that it disfigured some type of wood frog , nothing about trout . To much salt has its bad affects I am sure , just look in the mirror with many of us humans that have blood pressure problems , that causes heart attacks . If it applied under the formula that is used , one would expect not as much damage to our aquatic friends 

Supposedly, beet juice does same thing for attracting animals into the road because the residue is sugar

Edited by Dave588

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 mins ago, Dave588 said:

Thats cool for a controllable system. I want to know about runoff where there is no collection pond.

I'm not aware of any required testing from the environment in general. 

 

Volunteer "Riverwatch" type organisations such as Nashua River Watershed Association

 

 https://www.nashuariverwatershed.org/what-we-do/protect-water-and-land/river-water-quality-overview/monitors-corner.html

 

run field tests on various rivers across the state.

They mostly do simple field tests like temp and PH and get free ecoli tests at local WWTF.

The only "salt" test they typically do is conductivity which is a simple, free field test.

Conductivity measures more than just salt but salt, especially excessive salt would influence the result. 

Sodium and chlorides are not typically tested for. At least they weren't when I used to run the ecoli tests for NRWA.

Other groups might test for road salt.

Google the river or area you are interested in with "water monitoring", you might find a group similar to NRWA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 mins ago, Dave588 said:

we need more data than what the state says

Yaaaah, not going down that road here.

Eagle Tribune got an ax to grind, being driven by individuals in "watershed" group with personal/financial stake feeding not quite fake but super dishonestly misleading stories to drive an unnecessary bill into law.

Giant waste of $$$$$$, needless burden on professionals and zero gain to environment or health/safety. 

 

But, please, spare me the part where you splain that my grade 6 license and 30 years in the field can not be more valid than the article you read in the eagle Tribune. 

 

If you want any tiny, minute, obscure water quality parameter that IS tested for by the state; drinking water, wastewater, groundwater, storm water etc, by trained licensed professionals, go online and get it. It's always been there. 

 

If you believe the conspiracy theories that we hide the truth, join a watershed group and go take water samples.

Or just buy a combo pH/conductivity meter for $100.00 and go solo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mikez2 said:

 

But, please, spare me the part where you splain that my grade 6 license and 30 years in the field can not be more valid than the article you read in the eagle Tribune. 

 

 

No reason to be defensive. There's nothing wrong with actual measured oversight. 

That state is the largest polluter in the state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.