The Northern California Fly Fishing Board

Yeah, Charlie, but the problem is that in the past these decisions were entirely made by the government (not just the liberal namby pamby ones, but by some of the manly well-hung god I can't keep my ball sack in my briefs Republicans) and the power companies. And if they had their way there'd have been a new 50-year license, without any monitoring, without any mitigation, without any increased flows at any time, for fish or rafters, with no riparian habitat left. But there'd be power production just as there'd been for the previous 50-year license. Honestly, how do you have the balls to complain about liberals and the impact on insects on the North Fork Feather and not scream your head off about what George W. Bush has done for the last 7 years and eleven months, and what he's trying to do to screw the environment in the last 60 days of his administration. Your post about liberals was undoubtedly a troll to get a reaction, but man, it was plain dumb.

CharlieS:Do pulse flows harm the existing environment? Of course they do, otherwise Mother Nature would have year-long pulse flows on rivers that don't have dams.


Yes everytime there is a rain event .

Andrew Weiner wrote:
Yeah, Charlie, but the problem is that in the past these decisions were entirely made by the government (not just the liberal namby pamby ones, but by some of the manly well-hung god I can't keep my ball sack in my briefs Republicans) and the power companies.

I didn't say that the decisions were made by liberals, I said that Compromise must have been a concoction developed by a namby pamby, etc......... and you rose to the fly......but I agree we have a gross problem but I also assert that we cannot allow committees to determine the course of action. It has to be by law and now by golly.

MarcP wrote:
Yes everytime there is a rain event .

And, hmmmmmmmm, when was the last rain event on the Feather River that raised the river more than maybe 1/4" ????????????????????????????????????????

Exactly my point. Rivers with dams are not subjected to the natural pulsed flows that would occur with rain events.

MarcP wrote:
Exactly my point. Rivers with dams are not subjected to the natural pulsed flows that would occur with rain events.

And, Marc, you obviously completely missed my point. But that's OK, we're on the same page anyway.

So you're in agreement that rivers with dams need pulsed flows to mimic the natural process ?

MarcP wrote:
So you're in agreement that rivers with dams need pulsed flows to mimic the natural process ?

HMMMM....you must need to speak more clearly. No, that is NOT what I want. There are no pulse flows on natural streams during normal summer time flows, at least in this part of the country. The Feather gets plenty of wash out time during heavy winter rains and does not need any pulse flows to mimic natural flows.

Who writes the law? Who is the one who decides that insects and fish take precedence over power or whitewater? Power companies want one thing, anglers want another, rafters want one more, etc. Now if we had a natural untouched environment on California's rivers maybe you could get a law passed that said this habitat must be left in its natural state. But since that's not the case and there are lots of interest groups, you're left with your dirty word: compromise. Because if it came down to interest groups, anglers are going to be bringing up the rear in terms of influence.

Hey, Charlie, I'm on your side about the rivers, that's for damn sure. And if there were compromises made, and there is an obligation for follow up and research and corrections to made if things got more screwed up than promised, then somebody better flippin' step up and get it done. And if CalTrout doesn't live up to that obligation everyone on this board who is pissed at them is justified.

There are no pulse flows on natural streams during normal summer time flows, at least in this part of the country. The Feather gets plenty of wash out time during heavy winter rains and does not need any pulse flows to mimic natural flows

You win! I forgot that I'm in sunny CA now. Maybe they should buy dry suits and raft in the winter. Seriously though, I do think that pulsed flows are important if they mimic the natural flow regime.

MarcP

I read something a while back put out by the Central Valley Ag water users that basically bemoned all that river water being "forced to the ocean." They guy was saying that any water not taken out of the river and put on a field was being wasted. There are RADICALLY different views of what "beneficial use" is depending on where you sit, where your paycheck comes from and your view on man vs. nature.

We should all be on the same page... we might not all be sitting in the same place, or get our paychecks from the same place (I get mine from my pole dancing gigs) or have the same world views, but we all stand in the same rivers and want to save those places and the things that swim in them. Believe it or not, but the folks at Cal Trout want that too.

Bjorn, that philosophy is clearly illustrated in a book on the history of California water. Check out "Cadillac Desert," by Marc Reisner, published in 1986, but still in print. A classic.

"Conservation" to the BLM and the Ag Lobby did indeed mean that any water reaching the ocean was "wasted."