robc22

As the river goes.......

Rate this topic

20 posts in this topic

Maine has done an outstanding job improving and cleaning their rivers........Much more so than many, many states.........

 

They deserve to have their elver, smelt and sucker comm. river fisheries.......A nice reward for hard working peps...... 

 

https://revitalization.org/article/spawning-tomcod-return-to-restored-brook-in-maine-for-first-time-in-50-years/?fbclid=IwAR1zFWqQw0mqIkBBOLoFmMVBXTGFgLDGijxm3Y3Xt7uljTs0hTHdRJ4Q088#.XFiNvWjYo3F

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

That story keeps showing up in my FB feed as people reshare it. Not sure why the tomcod story is so popular. 

 

I see a lot of these types of posts from my non-angler fish geek friends. 

Quite a bit of good stream conservation going on in Ma. too, especially around herring.

In the Merrimack valley the press is focused on scaring the public in order to force the wastewater public notification bill.

You don't see the stories about the work accomplishments, habitat improvements, species comebacks, etc.

 

In other areas of the state, there is some sort of grant money going around that is tied to climate change that is being used to knock down small dams. Some are in the Ct drainage which helps several migratory fish.

I'm unclear how the little dams affect climate change as I only see press, haven't researched. 

Generally speaking I'm happy to see the dams come down when possible. 

If invoking climate change gets it done, oh well.

Edited by mikez2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mikez2 said:

That story keeps showing up in my FB feed as people reshare it. Not sure why the tomcod story is so popular. 

 

I see a lot of these types of posts from my non-angler fish geek friends. 

Quite a bit of good stream conservation going on in Ma. too, especially around herring.

In the Merrimack valley the press is focused on scaring the public in order to force the wastewater public notification bill.

You don't see the stories about the work accomplishments, habitat improvements, species comebacks, etc.

 

In other areas of the state, there is some sort of grant money going around that is tied to climate change that is being used to knock down small dams. Some are in the Ct drainage which helps several migratory fish.

I'm unclear how the little dams affect climate change as I only see press, haven't researched. 

Generally speaking I'm happy to see the dams come down when possible. 

If invoking climate change gets it done, oh well.

Mikey the dams you speak of are they man made or by the critters ? One can only suppose if a dam is across a river system that it would impede herring migrations and  smelt in some cases. If that was the case then that should be a priority removal I would think

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To my way of thinking, dams are a minor problem to fish compared to polloution…………..Out here in the central and western  part of the state there are a few small dams that are not being used but the majority of the dams are being used for flood control and hydro-electric power generation.  There are at least three major dams on the Ct. river in Mass and at least one in CT.  how is it one can catch stripers all the way up to the Vt. and N.H. border?????  One must also remember that when a dam is breached, the sediment behind it contains all kinds of nasty polloutants and where does that all go, downstream of course and it then contaminates the rest of the waterway...…………...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any dam that might impede migratory fish, whether alewives, herring, sturgeon, eels etc that connects to the sea should be a priority. 

 

Dams on stream systems that may have wild native brook trout should get priority. 

Not only can taking down dams restore sections of stream too warm for trout as an impoundment, it allows trout to move from stream to stream to search for cooler water in summer. 

 

The climate change part I haven't figured out yet.

Here's a link which I only skimmed so far.

I'll read more later. 

 

 

https://climateactiontool.org/content/restore-habitat-connectivity-remove-obsolete-dams

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, robc22 said:

Maine has done an outstanding job improving and cleaning their rivers........Much more so than many, many states.........

 

They deserve to have their elver, smelt and sucker comm. river fisheries.......A nice reward for hard working peps...... 

 

https://revitalization.org/article/spawning-tomcod-return-to-restored-brook-in-maine-for-first-time-in-50-years/?fbclid=IwAR1zFWqQw0mqIkBBOLoFmMVBXTGFgLDGijxm3Y3Xt7uljTs0hTHdRJ4Q088#.XFiNvWjYo3F

 

 

Nothing Maine does justifies the elver fishery. Unsustainable in its legal form, the crooked side has the potential to be devestating. Too much $$$$$, too poacher friendly. 

Just my opinion. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 mins ago, b-ware said:

To my way of thinking, dams are a minor problem to fish compared to polloution…………..Out here in the central and western  part of the state there are a few small dams that are not being used but the majority of the dams are being used for flood control and hydro-electric power generation.  There are at least three major dams on the Ct. river in Mass and at least one in CT.  how is it one can catch stripers all the way up to the Vt. and N.H. border?????  One must also remember that when a dam is breached, the sediment behind it contains all kinds of nasty polloutants and where does that all go, downstream of course and it then contaminates the rest of the waterway...…………...

For migratory fish dependent on access to freshwater from or to the sea, dams are everything. Clean water don't help if they cannot get to it.

 

The failed federal  Atlantic salmon program I believe is largely responsible for the fish ladders and improvements to fish ladders that allow striped bass, shad and alewives to reach Vt.

If not for the dams, the salmon program might not have failed.

Share this post


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

For migratory fish dependent on access to freshwater from or to the sea, dams are everything. Clean water don't help if they cannot get to it.

 

The failed federal  Atlantic salmon program I believe is largely responsible for the fish ladders and improvements to fish ladders that allow striped bass, shad and alewives to reach Vt.

If not for the dams, the salmon program might not have failed.

As far as the failure of the salmon program, I think a lot more than the dams figured in.  The biggest reason In My tiny mind (and a lot of others also) is how do you change instinc in these fishes minds, how many generations of stocking is it going to take and then there is the issue of water quality, temps, velocity and on and on.  We as humans, do not understand fully the natal urge and the whole breeding spectrum...………….

 

My .02

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

10 mins ago, b-ware said:

As far as the failure of the salmon program, I think a lot more than the dams figured in.  The biggest reason In My tiny mind (and a lot of others also) is how do you change instinc in these fishes minds, how many generations of stocking is it going to take and then there is the issue of water quality, temps, velocity and on and on.  We as humans, do not understand fully the natal urge and the whole breeding spectrum...………….

 

My .02

Yes.

All that enters into it but ultimately the salmon program would have failed anyways because there was not access to enough adequate spawning grounds because of dams.

Since few returning adults ever made it that far, the spawning grounds somewhat a moot point.

 

I only wanted to respond to the question about why stripers make it to Vt. Fish ladders is how.

For the most part, salmon restoration drove fish ladder. A ton of alewife and some shad are getting far up river to spawn because of that.

Edited by mikez2

Share this post


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

Any dam that might impede migratory fish, whether alewives, herring, sturgeon, eels etc that connects to the sea should be a priority. 

 

Dams on stream systems that may have wild native brook trout should get priority. 

Not only can taking down dams restore sections of stream too warm for trout as an impoundment, it allows trout to move from stream to stream to search for cooler water in summer. 

 

 

 

 

https://climateactiontool.org/content/restore-habitat-connectivity-remove-obsolete-dams

So this included beaver dams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 mins ago, bob_G said:

So this included beaver dams.

If beaver dams hurt brook trout, brook trout would be extinct.

That is so wicked obvious,  so elegant in its simplicity, so logical and such common sense, I don't have any more energy to go down that road again. 

 

Bob, I will never change your mind. I know. I have done this before. A few times.

Google is your friend. Use it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, excessive beaver dams inhibit water flow, impede trout from freely moving up or down stream, and cause water temperatures to rise. 

Again, the operative word is, excessive. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 min ago, bob_G said:

Well, excessive beaver dams inhibit water flow, impede trout from freely moving up or down stream, and cause water temperatures to rise. 

Again, the operative word is, excessive. 

Never mind the damage they have spread through residential areas. 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.