IFC_mail: Re: Effects of scheduled whitewater releases

From: "Vadas, Robert (DFW)" <Robert.Vadas@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: "IFC_mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <IFC_mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 18:23:27 +0000

A week late but hopefully not a buck short. There's some discussion of
whitewater-rafting flow needs in my past VA & ME pubs.:

Vadas, R.L. Jr., and D.L. Weigmann. 1993. The concept of instream flow and its
relevance to drought management in the James River basin. Virginia Water
Resources Research Center Bulletin 178: 78 pp.
(https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/handle/10919/46625).

Vadas, R.L. Jr., and R.L. Vadas, Sr. 2005. The West Branch of the Penobscot
River, Maine, is overrated for fishing. Trout 47(4): 11 (full article formerly
online and since published in 2008; The Fishing Line [Trout Unlimited, Olympia
Chapter] 202: 6-7).

Fortunately, angler/rafter relationships have improved since the '05 article,
albeit the fishing has gone further downhill in this ME river.

-Bob

"The West Branch of the Penobscot River, Maine, is overrated for fishing"

Awhile ago (i.e., the last 2005 issue), my father and I published a short note
in 'Trout' about how a 2002 article in this same magazine had overstated the
landlocked Atlantic salmon fishery in the Penobscot River, Maine. This was with
the help of the Trout Unlimited member (P. McGurren) who wrote the original
article, who was more of an advocate for our response article than the editor
of 'Trout' (Beth Duris). Unfortunately, Beth didn't include the full article in
this magazine, instead relegating it to the supposedly permanent 'Trout
Magazine' blog that has since disappeared without a trace from the Trout
Unlimited web site. For that reason, I'd like to include the article below.
Since 2005, my father, son, and I have continued to fish this river, with no
major improvement in fishing success. I wonder how many other 'Trout' articles
about salmon rivers, including those in the Pacific Northwest, have exaggerated
angling benefits?

Besides my angling experience with the Penobscot River, I once (when I was a
graduate student) worked as a private consultant with Trout Unlimited to secure
fisheries-friendly instream flows for that river. Unfortunately, the goal of
Charles Gauvin and associates seemed to be to put the pulp and paper mill out
of business, rather than to achieve a win-win situation during the
FERC-relicensing process. For this reason, TU-National alienated itself from
some of its Maine chapters, to the point that one member from the Sunkaze
Chapter recently complained to me about it all these years later. Indeed, I had
to point out that although I worked as a consultant for Trout Unlimited, that I
didn't necessarily support its hardball tactics. For this reason, I didn't get
further instream-flow work with this organization. But I later became a Golder
consultant in Alberta, where I saw unfair pressures from the industrial side.
And I heard many horror stories from other scientists who worked for other
consulting companies. Hence, environmental and development interests often try
to sway their consultants to say what they want them to say, thus subverting
good science. It was for this reason that I've become a government biologist,
where the bottom line isn't pleasing CEOs or stakeholders.

Anyway, here's our article:

by Robert L. Vadas, Jr., Olympia Chapter
1821 8th Ave. SE

Olympia, WA 98501-1856

Tel. (360) 902-2594 (W), (360) 705-2231 (H)

and Robert L. Vadas, Sr.
Department of Biological Sciences
University of Maine
Orono, ME 04469
Tel. (207) 581-2974 (W)

McGurren (2002) wrote a tribute article to salmon fishing in this northern
Maine river. Given that (a) we have collectively fished and camped on this
river since the late 1960s (including the leasing of a river cabin for two
decades) and (b) the senior author has provided consulting services on
instream-flow issues there a decade ago for Trout Unlimited, we'd like to
clarify and set straight the fishing facts about this river.

First, although McGurren indicates that some 10-lb. salmon may be here since
the 1920s planting of this stock, we've not heard of such large fish being
caught. A friend of ours once took a 6 to 6-1/2 lb fish near the McKay Station
powerhouse and the junior author saw a 7-lb. fish taken at Sourdahunk Falls by
a spin-casting fisherman about 10-15 years ago. But we have never seen, or
heard of, anything bigger, but the junior author regularly took 4-5 lb. fish in
the late 1960s and early 1970s, whereas we have collectively taken 3-lb. fish
since that time into the 1990s. These fish certainly aren't big because of
their landlocked life cycle.

Second, although the salmon fishery was still hot after stocking was stopped in
1978, this wild run has not faired as well recently, causing anglers like
ourselves to head to eastern Canada for better Atlantic salmon fishing.
Although McGurren is correct that this wilderness river is clean/cold and has
had good rainbow smelt runs that provide salmon food when Chesuncook Lake
(Ripogenus Dam) outflow is high, the smelt and thus salmon runs have been
depressed in the past decade or so. Hence, we have caught only small,
non-keeper fish in the last few years in places that we used to score big. Paul
Johnson, the state's fisheries biologist in Greenville, says that the lack of
smelt drift coming through McKay Station was partly responsible for the smaller
fish in the lower river. Also, he claims to be partly responsible for the
smaller fish in Chesuncook Lake and the upper West Branch, due to the state
regulations that were implemented in the late 1980's or early 1990's.

Third, although there is better cooperation between anglers and whitewater
rafters since the successful opposition to the proposed Big A dam in 1984 (cf.
Klausmeyer 2002), it is well to note that rafting guides have run their boats
over fishing lines here, their customers have regularly made snide remarks
about the "local yokels" as they pass by, and company photographers have
ignored "no trespassing" signs to take pictures of rafts along the river.
Nevertheless, I was heartened to see that rafting guides were respectful of the
senior author and his son Robbie in their boat this summer (2005), such that
things may be getting better. The rafting companies also interfere with osprey
feeding sites, notably at the mouth of Sourdahunk Stream where disruption
starts with the first rafts around 9 AM that prevent feeding until late in the
day (after 5-6 PM). The companies are supposed to be off the river by about 4
PM, but sometimes individuals are rafting or kayaking there until 7-8 pm or
dark. The reason that this location is especially disrupted is because all the
rafters slide down the falls there. Another drawback of whitewater rafting here
is that there no longer are low-flow weekends during summer holidays that
formerly provided the hottest fishing action. Indeed, McGurren notes that lower
flows are best for fishing, with 1300-2000 cfs being best for wading anglers
and up to 3000 cfs for boat anglers.

Fourth, although we agree with McGurren that the upper river (i.e., from
Ripogenus Dam up to Seboomook Dam) is the most remote area of this river, given
its dirt-road conditions, we disagree that salmon fishing isn't as good as
brook trout angling there. Rather, we used to catch much big salmon there
during canoeing/camping trips to areas that Henry David Thoreau once wrote
about when he explored the Maine woods. But we agree with McGurren that brook
trout prefer lower flows than salmon in the West Branch. Hence, we especially
caught trout in the bypass reach below Ripogenus Dam (i.e., above the McKay
Station powerhouse) during past decades. The few other spots along the river
that anglers take trout include spring holes and tributary mouths. So McGurren
is right about the general lack of trout, such that brookies are definitely not
important in the river overall.

In sum, the West Branch is no longer the hot fishery that it once was. But the
rafting companies have been making tons of money taking people downstream on
this scenic river. And we do enjoy going to our camp, where Robbie has
regularly caught big fallfish minnows and this year proudly caught his first
Maine salmon. Hopefully, he'll someday be able to catch his first keeper
landlocked salmon there.

References

BDN. 2012. Penobscot River Restoration Project: reviving a river, restoring the

sea-run fisheries of Maine's largest watershed for people and wildlife. Bangor
Daily News, Custom Publication, June 11: 12 pp. (cf.
http://www.penobscotriver.org).

Klausmeyer, D. 2002. Maine's Atlantic salmon: working to restore a monarch.
Trout

44(3): 24-31.

McGurren, P. 2002. The West Branch of the Penobscot River: where landlocked
salmon

rule. Trout 44(3): 34-44.

From: ifc_mail-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ifc_mail-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On ;
Behalf Of McHugh, Peter
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2018 11:16 AM
To: ifc_mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: IFC_mail: Effects of scheduled whitewater releases

Dear IFC members,

A Friday afternoon plea for info/expertise...

I'm reviewing/compiling literature on the (potential) impacts of scheduled
whitewater releases on riverine fish/biota, habitat, etc. and am reaching out
to IFC members for any info/studies that you're aware of that have been
conducted in your neck of the woods (or beyond). There's plenty of published
info to borrow from relating to general concepts of human-induced flow
alteration, and provisions for emulating natural conditions to the extent
possible (ramping rates, frequency, magnitude, etc.), but I'm looking for
studies/reports that evaluate the effects of recreational whitewater releases
in particular. Any info or insights that you can share will be greatly
appreciated.

Thanks!

Pete

[momVT]

Pete McHugh
Streamflow Protection Biologist
802-622-4305
peter.mchugh@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:peter.mchugh@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Vermont Fish & Wildlife Department
One National Life Drive, Davis 2
Montpelier, VT 05620-3702

References:
- IFC_mail: Effects of scheduled whitewater releases
  - From: McHugh, Peter

IFC_mail: Re: Effects of scheduled whitewater releases

Other related posts: