[env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting

Mon Apr 23 08:27:48 PDT 2012

Enough BS I think the time is coming to take the gloves off, pick a side and quit playing nice. After dealing with the TRRP and the BOR for a couple years now, from my point of view, they tell you what you want to hear, then do what they want. I feel strongly about what is happening to the river, and think it is time to get ready to fight for what you believe. Peace and love???? Save it for a BBQ or something!! Travis
 From: dpa4 at sonic.net
To: pcatanese at dhscott.com; trinityjosh at gmail.com
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 09:34:07 -0700
CC: env-trinity at mailman.dcn.org
Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at	Lewiston meeting

Gentlemen please do not exhale yet. The fish are not in the 
river..yet.
Parky

From: Paul Catanese 
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 5:47 AM
To: Joshua Allen 
Cc: Trinity List 
Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share 
views at Lewiston meeting

Whoever Joshua is I have to say you have hit the nail on the head and 
confirmed everyone's fears. That fear that man himself rather than nature would 
dictate what transpires on this river. Moreover, a few select men who by and 
large do not live here or own property here would decide what's good for others 
based on the little knowledge they actually have about restoring a river. This 
year we will have close to a record return return of salmon having little to do 
with any restoration effort other than water. Seems to me that plenty of 
spawning has taken place in spite of man made efforts. 

Whatever caused this should be duplicated over and over because it worked. 
Bulldozers and gravel or man did not create the huge run we are predicting 
mother nature did along with restricting commercial fishing.i will bet you 
curtailing tribal fishing will also lead too more fish. There is not enough time 
in the day to address what should or shouldn't be done on this river and frankly 
the less that's done the more success will be achieved. Keep in mind we are 
going to have a record return of fish with no connection to bulldozers and 
gravel, just water. Peace love I am going fishing. 

On Apr 17, 2012, at 
11:35 AM, "Joshua Allen" <trinityjosh at gmail.com> 
wrote:

  Ok, just for discussion related purposes; I'm going to play devil's 
  advocate for a moment. A lot of people keep complaining about the gravel and 
  holes being filled in between Lewiston and Douglas City. This has a lot to do, 
  as I see it, with  a lack of fishing areas, and the river drastically 
  changing from what it was in the past. Like it was reported, "...need to stop 
  man-ipulating the river" and "what time period is the program trying to 
  capture". 

  Though as I see it, it is not possible to not stop manipulating the 
  river, because there is no period in the river's history that is trying to be 
  captured. Instead a brand new section is being created that never existed 
  before. The river has already manipulated to death since the dams were put up 
  in the first place. 

  ~ Is not the whole point of the program is to create a stretch of river 
  between Lewiston and Douglas City that mimics upstream spawning conditions 
  lost by the dams? 
  ~ If so, isn't it then required that the holes and areas between those 
  two communities be filled in flat with smaller pools behind them to provide 
  spawning habitat so redds can be laid and juveniles have shallows to be raised 
  in? 
  ~ If the area in question does not have uniform flat areas for natural 
  spawning of salmonids, instead has huge holes like it did in the past, then 
  spawning can not occur, areas to raise juveniles is limited, and what is left 
  is a dependence upon the hatchery for production? 
  ~ Since this area is meant for spawning and raising of juveniles, does it 
  also not make sense to provide shade cover, like the upper reaches, for said 
  juveniles? 
  ~ Would it also not make sense to limit access to that stretch of river 
  for sport fishing/recreation and instead move such areas out of redds and 
  habitat areas to more appropriate places downstream where there are holes for 
  holding? (i.e potential for Douglas City and Junction City to become the "new" 
  fishing and financial resource areas of the county, while Lewiston focuses on 
  dam related recreation activities.)
  ~ Should not people be the ones that must adapt to these changes since 
  the fish have already had to adapt to huge changes in their environment with 
  the installation of the dams which provides positive benefits to humans that 
  are negative to natural salmonid production? 
  ~ Isn't the whole point of the program to increase natural production 
  while reducing man-ipulated hatchery production? 
  ~ Can't anyone associated with the program just come out with this 
  "secret" to the public through the participatory process in a way they can 
  understand? 

  I know, blasphemy! But to me, it seems like no one will be happy, because 
  humans are unwilling to adapt to necessary changes, and instead are more 
  focused on the human concepts of recreational use and money. Just my two 
  cents. Though I would be interested in hearing from someone more knowledgeable 
  about the needs of fish, who can answer these questions, and how humans can 
  adapt to these requirements of a changing environment.  

  2012/4/12 Tom Stokely <tstokely at att.net>

    http://www.trinityjournal.com/sports/outdoors/article_dcf01834-83e8-11e1-9634-0019bb30f31a.html 
    River 
    dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting
    By 
    Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 8:15 
    am
    Appreciation 
    of the Trinity River and its wildlife was a common theme last week at the 
    second in a series of outreach meetings, this one held in Lewiston, to get 
    public input on the Trinity River Restoration Program.
    A 
    small group of about a dozen people attended the meeting April 4 at One 
    Maple Winery put on by the Trinity County Resource Conservation District, 
    under contract with the restoration program. The meeting was run by RCD 
    employees Alex Cousins and Donna Rupp, and contractor Jeff Morris, who made 
    clear they were not representatives of the restoration program but were 
    there to bring concerns and questions back to agencies involved in the 
    program.
    >From 
    Napa, Al Lilleberg said he has been visiting Lewiston four to five days a 
    month since he was a teenager, and the river was basically his biology lab 
    in college majoring in biology. The river has declined since construction of 
    Trinity and Lewiston dams in the early 1960s, according to Lilleberg.
    "I 
    quit fishing because the river is dead," Lilleberg said. "I know people fish 
    in it all the time, but it's dead by comparison."
    Lilleberg 
    said when the sun went down and fish were jumping for food, "you couldn't 
    count fish fast enough … You might not see one now."
    Several 
    residents expressed concerns about restoration program activities.
    Tom 
    and Diane Gannon questioned the planting of willows which make the river 
    less accessible.
    "Somebody 
    -- in my estimate -- is insane," Tom Gannon said, noting that at one time 
    the program goal was to push the vegetation back.
    "They 
    did that," he said, "and now they've replanted where they pushed it 
    back."
    "Pre-dam 
    there weren't all the willows they just planted," he said.
    Describing 
    herself as a "river lifer," Lewiston resident and County Administrative 
    Officer Wendy Tyler said, "The river is the lifeblood of our county."
    She 
    spoke of the importance of the river for recreation and economic 
    development, saying, "restoration is important – but it must be 
    balanced."
    Her 
    husband, Bob Tyler, shared a concern that has come up repeatedly over the 
    past year – that spawning gravels added to the river have filled in holes 
    adult fish use.
    Bob 
    Tyler said he's fished along the river since childhood (the late ‘70s to 
    early ‘80s), and "you'd come home with five salmon or two or three 
    steelhead."
    Below 
    the Lewiston Bridge the hole was so deep, he said, "you used to be able to 
    jump off the bridge into that hole. You can't do that anymore."
    Others 
    said the river is "not dead" and continues to support a variety of wildlife 
    — particularly in comparison to other rivers.
    "This 
    is one of the best rivers left. We have a chance," said Dale Davey, who 
    lives part time in Lewiston.
    Davey 
    said the Trinity River Record of Decision which increased Trinity River 
    flows is the most important way to restore the river.
    Under 
    the Record of Decision river flows are determined based on water-year type, 
    but over multiple years 49 percent of inflow to Trinity Lake is to be 
    released to the river and 51 percent available for diversion and Central 
    Valley Project use.
    "That's 
    the thing we can never let bury," he said. "That's what's helping recover 
    the river and recover the fish."
    "Let 
    the water flow do it," Davey said. "Eventually, we've got to stop bulldozing 
    and injecting gravel and say, 'We're going to stop man-ipulating the 
    stream.'"
    Regarding 
    the river flows and the Record of Decision, Lilleberg said, "We are facing a 
    challenge. The four biggest farms in California can crack that law."
    Supporters 
    of the river must be "rabid" about how rivers function, he said.
    The 
    audience also asked about goals of the program, what time frame the program 
    is attempting to recapture in the river's history, and if there will be an 
    endpoint to the mechanical restoration projects. County Sup. Judy Pflueger 
    requested that the answers be "in terms we understand."
    >From 
    the RCD, Morris said written answers to the questions would be provided 
    within 30 days.
    Also, 
    several more outreach meetings in communities along the river are planned. 
    The locations, dates and times will be announced.
    The 
    outreach meetings began after the Trinity River Guide Association and 
    California Water Impact Network requested a moratorium on channel 
    restoration projects until a scientific review of earlier projects is 
    complete. Gravel injections were of particular concern to the guides, and 
    the restoration program has since announced that no gravel injections are 
    planned for this 
    year.
_______________________________________________
env-trinity 
    mailing list
env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us
http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity

  _______________________________________________
env-trinity 
  mailing list
env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us
http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity

_______________________________________________
env-trinity mailing 
list
env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us
http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity

_______________________________________________
env-trinity mailing list
env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us
http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/env-trinity/attachments/20120423/b9142b36/attachment.html>