|


|
|
Conservation News |
 |
Thanks to
all who participated in the First Battenkill
Cleanup Day for 2010 on April 17th.
Next one is June 19th.
Meet at 9 am at the
Rte 313
rest area east of Cambridge, NY, near VT border.
Hope to see you
there. |
|
Consequences by the Gallon
Editorial from
Albany Times Union
June 8, 2010
A gas well in
Penfield, Pa., quite likely will join the drilling industry's list of wells
that never polluted anyone's drinking water.
But the well and what happened there last week could just as easily go on
the list that we hope regulators are keeping -- of reasons not to rush into
a huge expansion of natural gas drilling in New York.
It could also go on a personal list we all should keep -- to remind us that
the reason we drill ever deeper -- to the bottom of the ocean and into the
Earth's crust -- is our own dependence on fossil fuels. It's a reliance that
we could greatly reduce through relatively simple, individual acts of
conservation -- setting thermostats at 70 or less in the winter and 78 in
the summer; driving 55 on highways; turning off or unplugging appliances and
other devices when they're not in use.
At the Penfield well, one of more than 1,000 drilled in Pennsylvania's
recent gas rush, explosive gas and polluted water spewed for 16 hours on
Thursday before the leak was stopped. The well, fortunately, was at least a
mile from any homes. The cause is under investigation.
The state's Department of Environmental Protection says the well's blowout
preventer, which controls pressure, failed.
Sound familiar?
The very thing that was supposed to stop a leak also failed at a BP well in
the Gulf of Mexico on April 20, and what is now the nation's worst oil spill
threatens livelihoods, beaches and wildlife in at least four states. A third
of the federal waters in the Gulf are closed to fishing so far. The
devastation, which has only begun to be seen and felt, could last years.
The Pennsylvania accident, which occurred in a rural area about 136 miles
southwest of Corning, comes amid a sharp increase in drilling. and plans for
much more, in the gas rich Marcellus shale that spans six states. This leak,
following the contamination of drinking water for more than a dozen homes
elsewhere in Pennsylvania, underscores the need for New York to proceed more
cautiously than its neighbor.
New York should wait until the federal Environmental Protection Agency
completes its two-year study of the Marcellus drilling method of choice,
hydraulic fracturing, which involves drilling vertically and, in this case,
horizontally, and pumping large amounts of chemical-laced water to break the
rock and release gas. The industry says the threat to ground and drinking
water is remote.
We'd prefer to hear the EPA's view on that.
Two years, of course, will be too long for an industry that's champing at
the bit to tap the Marcellus riches. It's not too long, though, for the rest
of us, who surely don't want to be looking back, as we and our fellow
citizens in the Gulf are now, at all the things government might have done.
Looking to save energy at home, in your car or at work? The U.S. Department
of Energy posts dozens of ideas on its site at http://www.energysavers.gov.
The issue:
A gas well leak in Pennsylvania takes 16 hours to stop.
The Stakes:
New York can choose not to become the next case study.
For more recent postings on the Albany
times
union blog regarding drilling in the
Marcellus Shale Region
|
|
Schoharie County Trout Ponds
By Mike Walchko
Schoharie County has two trout ponds stocked by
DEC and open to the public for fishing. One of the
ponds, referred to in the stocking report as the
Holding Pond, is part of the village of Cobleskill’s
reservoir system.
Mallet Pond is located in the town of Fulton and
is a walk in pond, accessible from a parking area off Rossman Fly Road and a
short half mile walk. The walk is a bit steep, easy walking down but will
get you breathing hard on the way out. Both ponds have special trout
regulations, Mallet Pond a 3 fish limit with a minimum size of 12 inches,
the Holding Pond a 3 fish limit and 10 inch minimum size. Mallet Pond
receives a stocking of 410 trout annually, both browns and rainbows.
The Holding pond receives 585 trout from DEC,
225 of these are the 12-15 inch browns. The COBY Fish & Game Club also
stocks the Holding Pond with 200 12-15 inch tiger trout. Both ponds have an
excellent carryover population, so there are some much larger fish
available. The Holding pond is one of three reservoirs located at the same
site. The other two, Dow Reservoir and Smith reservoir have excellent
populations of smallmouth bass, largemouth bass, perch, and bluegills. These
two reservoirs are a great place to introduce a youngster to fishing with
the panfish usually willing to accommodate.
Directions:
Mallet Pond:
from the Capital District head West on I‐88
toward Binghamton. Proceed to exit 21 (the
second Cobleskill exit). After exiting I‐88 turn
right and proceed to Rt. 7. Turn left on Rt. 7 (west) and
drive 1.3 miles turning left on Beards Hollow
Road. In .1 miles Beard’s Hollow Rd. swings right , go
straight ahead on Cross Hill Rd. Continue up
Cross Hill Rd. 2.9 miles until you come to a T. Turn right on Beards Rd. for
.1 mile and make another right on Rossman Fly Rd. Proceed up Rossman fly Rd.
for one mile . You will see a State sign for Mallet pond. This leads to the
parking area. Rossman Fly road turns into a narrow dirt road, but is
passable with most cars.
Holding Pond :
from the Capital District head West on I-88, exiting at the first Cobleskill
exit (exit 22) .
When you come down the exit ramp turn left on
rt. 145. Take the first right off 145, Mineral springs
Road. Proceed for several miles taking the first
road to the left ( Dow Street). If you pass the white
church on the right, you missed the road. As you
proceed up Dow St. .2 miles you will see the reservoirs on the right.
Parking is available at the Dow reservoir. The Holding pond is up an
embankment west of the Dow Reservoir. |
Connecticut rolls back cost of Fishing
licenses
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Morgan Lyle
Original article in Daily Gazette
There is
good news for New Yorkers who enjoy fishing Connecticut rivers such as
the Farmington and the Housatonic — except for those New Yorkers who
bought their
non-resident Connecticut fishing licenses before last week.
Last fall, Connecticut doubled the cost of its licenses for residents
and non-residents alike, raising the price for those of us on this side
of the state line from $40 to $80. Last week, the Connecticut
legislature rolled back the increase from 100 percent to 35 percent,
meaning a non-resident license in the Nutmeg State would rise from $40
to $55. The rollback is not retroactive though, so if you already
purchased one you will not get a rebate.
Now that
Connecticut has reconsidered, New York is the most expensive state in
the region for out-of-staters to fish.
Our non-resident license increased last fall from $40 to $70.
In Massachusetts, a non-resident, full-season, freshwater license
costs $37.50;
Vermont, $41;
New Jersey, $34, plus another $20 for a trout stamp; and
Pennsylvania, $52.70, plus $9.70 for a trout stamp.
|
|
Subscribe to Field Notes and receive up-to-date
e-mails related to New York's fish, wildlife and marine resources
Field Notes is
an e-mail list maintained by The Division of Fish, Wildlife and Marine
Resources (DFWMR) that will provide subscribers notice on programs and
activities associated with the management of fish, wildlife and marine
resources, and offer information on available fish and wildlife recreational
opportunities. The listed items below are some examples of topics that will
be distributed:
- Regulation changes and updates on
fishing, hunting and trapping (recreationally and commercially)
- Wildlife viewing events and
opportunities
- Shellfish area closures and contaminant
information
- Fish and wildlife recreational
opportunities
- Sporting license information and
Sportsmen education dates and locations
- Fish stocking activities
- News (press releases) related to fish,
wildlife and marine resources
- Reports and highlights on fish, wildlife
and marine resources program activities
- AND additional fish and wildlife
news-worthy information
|
|
Eastern Brook Trout Status |
|
|
|
Tragedy of the
Trout: The Decline of Heritage Trout |
|
Trout
Unlimited Statement on the Delaware River
Flows |
|
Another
Invasive - Botulism Type "E"
|
|
Eastern Brook Trout Status

Intact stream populations of brook trout
(where wild brook trout occupy 90
to 100 percent of their historical habitat) exist in only 5 percent of
sub-watersheds.
Wild stream populations of brook trout have vanished or are greatly
reduced in nearly half of sub-watersheds.
The vast majority of historically occupied large rivers no longer support
self-reproducing populations of brook trout.
Brook trout survive almost exclusively as fragmented populations relegated
to the extreme headwaters of streams.
Poor land management associated with agriculture ranks as the most widely
distributed impact to brook trout across the eastern range.
Nonnative fish rank as the largest biological threat to brook trout.
Intact subwatersheds of wild brook trout in lakes and ponds are almost
exclusively located in Maine, but self-reproducing populations remain in
some lakes and ponds in New York, New Hampshire, and Vermont.
More data collection is needed to determine the status of brook trout in
various parts of the eastern range, particularly in Maine, New Hampshire,
New York, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania.
Excerpted from "Distribution, Status, and Perturbations to Brook Trout
within the Eastern United States" |
Population decline in bait fish could force ban; switch to artificial
lures for striper catch
By
BRIAN NEARING, Staff writer
Original article from Time Union, Copyright 2010
Friday, April 2, 2010
ALBANY -- One of the rites of early spring
fishing on the Hudson River is the run of striped bass, which come up from
the Atlantic Ocean to spawn. A favorite bait for catching stripers is
herring, a smaller fish that also comes from the ocean to spawn.
Now, a federal fishing commission, concerned
that herring numbers along the East Coast are plummeting, has ordered New
York and 14 other coastal states to limit or ban herring fishing by 2012
unless it can be proved that fish numbers locally are holding steady.
Some fishermen are worried that they may have
to switch to less effective lures or other bait, but conservationists said
something must be done to stem the decline of what is an important part of
the food chain for larger fish.
In addition to being a bait fish, herring is
used in many cat foods and is a source of omega-3 fatty acids, found in
popular health supplements such as fish oil.
"Some areas have gone from a lot of herring
to almost no herring in a big hurry," said Kathy Hattala, a fisheries
biologist with the Bureau of Marine Resources at the state Department of
Environmental Conservation.
After the fish began to vanish, Connecticut
banned herring fishing in 2005, followed by Massachusetts and Rhode Island.
In New York, there are no limits on amount of herring that can be taken.
A recent study found that blueback herring,
one of the two herring types in the Hudson, are at about 1 percent of levels
found in 1950, said David Strayer, a freshwater ecologist at the Cary
Institute of Ecosystem Studies in Millbrook, Dutchess County. "Herring are
coming close to flat line," he said.
Last year, the federal Atlantic States Marine
Fisheries Commission ordered all 15 coastal states to prove herring
populations were steady, or impose restrictions on it by 2012.
Several factors are combining to reduce
herring numbers, including overfishing both on rivers and in the ocean, and
the invasion of the Hudson in 1992 by zebra mussels, which consume
microscopic plankton that is food for the herring, said Hattala.
Over the last two decades, the herring that
return to the Hudson to spawn have been getting smaller and younger on
average. The average fish, once about 11 inches, now about 9 inches,
according to DEC data. Smaller fish produce fewer offspring, Hattala said.
After hatching in late spring, young herring
remain in the river until the end of the summer, before venturing into the
ocean. If the herring survive for three years or so, the fish will return to
the Hudson to spawn, and the cycle repeats.
"We cannot control the mussels, and the
weather conditions and flow in the ocean, but we can control the fishing,
which will buy us some time to figure out these other things," said Hattala.
"We want to know what the fishermen can live with."
At Coeymans Landing on the river in Albany
County, Preston Lightsey has run a charter fishing business for a dozen
years, and fished the river for about 30 years. He hasn't seen a decline,
but admits he is most familiar with his section of the river.
"Herring is bait, but a lot of people also
fish for herring to eat. You can smoke them, pickle them," said Lightsey,
owner of a 20-foot charter boat outfitted for striper fishing. "In this
area, there are tons of herring. You can see them at the edge of the river,
in the rocks."
Lightsey said if herring were banned, he
could switch to artificial lures, which are not at effective at attracting
stripers.
Another commercial fisherman, Joe DeMarco,
owner of Upstate Charters, said, "I've been fishing the upper Hudson River,
from the Troy dam to the Port of Albany, for over 25 years. There are more
herring now than there ever was."
But, he added, a state limit on herring
"would only enhance the future of the fishery."
Another skipper says he has heard
observations of the decline. John Lipscomb has run a water quality
inspection boat for Hudson Riverkeeper, an environmental group, for 10
years.
He's met lock keepers along the Erie Canal
system who told him that they've seen the decline. Herring are able to run
through canal locks going upriver on the Mohawk much more easily than the
return downriver, when they often get sucked into the lock's mechanical
works. "Lock keepers tell me that a few decades ago, there would be dead and
injured herring floating on the surface near the locks, so many that you
could smell them. Now they are not seeing that," Lipscomb said.
Meetings planned
The state Department of Environmental
Conservation is holding a series of meetings on possible state plans for
herring fishing. In the Capital Region, a meeting is set for 7 p.m.
April 21 at Bethlehem Town Hall, 445 Delaware Ave., Delmar.
Meetings are also set for April 25 at
the DEC Region 3 offices, 21 S. Putt Corners Road, New Paltz; and April 29
on Long Island. |
Tragedy of the Trout
How logging, fish stocking, acid rain,
and other man-made calamities nearly wiped out an Adirondack icon: the
wild brookie.
By George Earl
Link goes to original
article
**Copyright
Adirondack Explorer magazine, 2010
The
Adirondack
Explorer is a non-profit newsmagazine devoted to the protection and
enjoyment of the Adirondack Park.
*** Please support them to help support
where we so love to fish...BW
In early May, vernal patches of birch
stood out among the darker evergreens lining the remote kettle-hole
pond. As we put our canoe into the icy water, a welcome breeze dispersed
the cloud of black flies that had tormented us during a long carry. I
slowly paddled along the steepest bank while Sam and Dave took turns
casting a floating line toward shore.
The tranquility of this northern scene
was soon interrupted by the staccato zing of Sam’s reel as a fish
inhaled his fly and ran for deep water. Sam quickly set the hook, and I
could see by the bend in the rod that it was a heavy fish. After a long
struggle, he played a brook trout into the boat.
The vigor of the brookie was almost as startling as its dazzling array
of speckles: blue halos with red centers, suspended in the bright orange
and silver along its sides. This was more than just a pretty fish: it
was a heritage-strain brook trout—a descendant of the original fish that
colonized the Adirondacks after the last ice age.
The pond we visited (which we’ll leave unnamed to protect its fishery)
lies in one of the wildest regions of the Park, the 107,230-acre Five
Ponds Wilderness. It’s five miles from the nearest dirt road and thirty
miles from the nearest town. To get there, we had to bushwhack the final
mile, with the aid of a map and compass and plenty of bug dope. But as
avid anglers, we found the reward well worth the hardship, for we
learned firsthand what it must have been like to fish an Adirondack pond
in its pristine state.
Fishermen didn’t always have to travel so far to catch native trout like
this. Before the region’s rise in logging, industry, and tourism in the
mid-1800s, wild brookies were so ubiquitous that they became an
Adirondack icon. The historical record suggests they existed in nearly
every Adirondack pond and stream. Many of these waters harbored unique
varieties of trout. There probably were dozens of distinct strains of
brookies. Today, only seven strains remain, and they inhabit fewer than
forty lakes in the Park.
“The loss of brook trout is staggering when compared to their historical
lake and pond distribution,” said Nat Gillespie, a fisheries scientist
for Trout Unlimited. “Wild, self-reproducing brook trout have been
extirpated or have severely declined from 95 percent of the lake and
pond habitat in the Adirondacks.”
Although the Park boasts vast water resources—about 225,000 acres of
lakes and ponds and six thousand miles of rivers and streams—the region
originally had only three sport fish in any abundance: the brook trout,
lake trout, and round whitefish, all coldwater specialists. But the
brook trout was by far the most widespread. The brookie, salvelinus
fontinalis, is not a true trout (which include non-natives such as
salmon, rainbow trout, and brown trout). Rather, both it and lake trout
are char, the species in the salmonidae family with the highest
cold-water tolerance. These char are happiest in temperatures between
thirty-five and fifty-five degrees.
The brook trout’s preference for cold and its prowess in fast water
allowed it to pioneer the region’s swollen lakes and rivers soon after
the ice age, perhaps even as glaciers were still retreating. As water
levels dropped, waterfalls and steep chasms emerged and many transient
lakes and rivers simply disappeared. Consequently, these distinctive
speckled char were able to establish themselves in waters sealed off
from other fish, making the Adirondacks a biological island inhabited by
remnant boreal species. For early visitors, it was a fisherman’s
paradise.
In the 1850s, the artist William J. Stillman wrote of one of his many
sojourns on Upper Saranac Lake: “I passed the whole day in the open …
and my rod and fly-book provided in a large degree the food of the
household, for trout swarmed there. I caught, in an hour, as large a
string as I could carry a mile.”
Stillman’s fishing expeditions were interrupted by the Civil War, and
when he returned a generation later he complained that the woods were
scarred by logging and fire and that “wretched dolts” had ruined the
brook-trout fishing by introducing non-native fish. Things have got much
worse since.
What we now call the Saranac Lakes Wild Forest (encompassing
seventy-nine thousand acres) once abounded in brook trout. Scientists
estimate that at the time of Stillman’s early visits, the water bodies
with brookies accounted for 94 percent of the region’s water acreage.
Today that’s down to 3 percent.
The destruction of brook-trout habitat began in earnest in the
mid-nineteenth century as demand for Adirondack timber increased. The
clearing of riparian forests stripped rivers of their shade and of
stormwater buffers, leading to rising water temperatures and silting.
Log drives clogged rivers with timber, while tanneries and paper mills
created pollution.
The rise in commercial forestry coincided with another growing industry:
tourism. Railroads had opened the Park to hordes of sportsmen. “The
streams and lakes were overwhelmed with sport and commercial fishermen,”
biologist Carl George writes in The Fishes of New York. “The result was
the decline of fish populations in turn engendering a nearly maniacal
hatchery and stocking program.”
The state was a pioneer in fish farming. Seth Green opened the country’s
first fish hatchery in Caledonia, south of Rochester, and is considered
the father of aquaculture. As an employee of the state’s Fisheries
Commission, he also was the first to introduce bass to the Adirondacks.
By the turn of the twentieth century, the state was stocking millions of
bass, perch, and walleye in the Park every year. The spread of these
aggressive warm-water fish was responsible for destroying the majority
of the Park’s native brook-trout fisheries.
The state’s early hatchery program also hurt native trout through the
development of the “domestic strain” brook trout. Generations of captive
breeding all but stripped these fish of their brilliant coloration and
vigor—the essence of what makes brook trout so alluring. For much of the
twentieth-century, these domestic trout were stocked far and wide
without regard to wild populations. Hybridization between domestic and
wild fish altered or extinguished the bloodline of an untold number of
ancient strains. The heritage trout that survive have never been exposed
to hatchery trout.
DEC’s Bureau of Fisheries continues to stock millions of non-native fish
in the Park every year. Trout Unlimited’s Gillespie thinks the agency
should reexamine this policy and base its stocking program on science,
not on traditional practices. “The protection and enhancement of native
fisheries needs to be given stronger consideration,” he said.
Richard Preall, a DEC aquatic biologist, said the department continues
to stock non-native fish—including hatchery-bred brookies—but only in
waters that no longer support heritage brook trout. “Because native
trout have come back in many streams, due to reforestation, stocking has
been reevaluated and discontinued in many streams,” he said in an email.
“The department continues to evaluate [its stocking program] as wild
trout numbers come back.”
Why stock non-native fish at all? Preall argues that stocking is vital
to anglers.
“The majority of fishermen believe this is what DEC should be doing,” he
said. “They want to be able to take their kids, go to Salmon River in
Malone, and have a fairly easy time catching some nice trout. If we stop
doing that, we rapidly put ourselves out of business.”
Nick Karas, the author of Brook Trout, said DEC is trying to serve two
masters: anglers who want to catch lots of fish, preferably big ones,
and those who prefer to catch wild fish. He said DEC could reclaim some
ponds and streams for heritage brookies by simply ceasing to stock them
with hatchery-bred trout, which don’t reproduce well in the wild. “There
won’t be any fish for the anglers to catch, and they’re going to bitch,
but eventually they can be restocked with heritage strains. It might
take ten years,” said Karas, who is a fish biologist.
Unfortunately, unauthorized introductions of non-native fish continue to
plague brook-trout fisheries. “Invasive fish are being put into the very
best brook-trout waters by what I call ‘amateur biologists’ who don’t
understand the implications of what they’re doing,” Preall said.
One of the many recent examples he cited occurred at Little Tupper Lake.
In 1997, the Whitney family sold the lake and surrounding land to the
state. At 2,300 acres, Little Tupper was the largest lake in the eastern
United States with its original strain of trout. The family had
protected this unique population for a century. When the state acquired
the lake, it forbade the use of bait fish and allowed only
catch-and-release fishing. The regulations didn’t work: bass were soon
discovered in the lake. Preall believes that a fisherman illegally
introduced the bass out of contempt for the state’s restrictive
policies. Today, the aggressive warm-water fish are crowding out the
heritage trout. The good news is that the Little Tupper strain is alive
and well elsewhere.
Acid deposition, which peaked in the 1970s, proved to be the last straw
for some heritage trout. As recently as this past decade, the
Adirondacks probably lost a unique strain in Stink Lake, an acidified
lake deep in the West Canada Lakes Wilderness. DEC caught no trout—or
any fish—in recent years despite numerous trap-netting efforts.
Pond fished out
A heritage strain in Tamarack Pond in the
Five Ponds Wilderness was lost in the 1990s, partly due to overzealous
fishermen. Acidity levels had risen so high that the trout could no
longer spawn, but the more acid-tolerant adults survived and grew
larger. Word got out that the pond harbored huge brookies.
Before DEC could reduce the acidity (by adding powdered limestone), the
lake was fished out. “It had just been pounded by fisherman,” Preall
said. “We removed about forty boats that had been stashed around the
lake.”
Nevertheless, things are starting to look up for native trout. Forests
have regrown along rivers (log drives ended over fifty years ago), and
the federal Clean Air Act has led to substantial reductions in acid-rain
pollution. No longer do fishermen pride themselves on catching the long
strings of fish that Stillman and his contemporaries boasted about.
Today, such a catch would be frowned upon as unethical as well as
illegal. And DEC has begun to shift its focus away from stocking
hatchery-bred trout to protecting naturally reproducing populations.
These favorable developments have spurred a nascent recovery of heritage
brook trout.
The re-establishment of a heritage strain begins with the selection of a
suitable pond—one of a manageable size (usually smaller than forty
acres) and the right water chemistry. Of the three thousand or so ponds
in the Park, Preall believes only a few hundred are good candidates for
heritage trout.
Once a pond is chosen, a biocide called rotenone is put into the water
to kill the existing, mostly undesirable fish, a practice condemned by
some environmentalists. If necessary, a fish dam is constructed on the
outlet to prevent competing fish from getting into the pond.
Once a pond is ready, state biologists release heritage-trout
fingerlings. Leo Demong, a retired DEC biologist, explained the stocking
procedure: Mature fish are captured in wild, often remote lakes during
the fall spawning season. The eggs and milt, or semen, are stripped away
before the trout are put back in the water. The eggs are fertilized in
the field and then transported to the hatchery. When the baby trout
reach fingerling size, after about a year, they’re released into their
ancestral waters or into reclaimed ponds. This practice preserves the
wild character of the trout rather than selecting for traits that favor
hatchery conditions.
A success story
The pond we fished last spring is one of
the success stories. Just a few years ago, it was proclaimed a “dead
lake.” Like other water bodies in the western Adirondacks, the pond was
hit hard by acid-rain pollution from coal-burning power plants in the
Midwest. By the mid-1980s, its pH had dropped to 4.92—too acidic for
fish to survive.
In 1999, a state helicopter dropped roughly eighteen tons of powdered
limestone onto the ice. When the ice melted the following spring, the
dissolving lime neutralized the water’s pH, and a batch of Little Tupper
fingerlings was released. The annual stocking and liming continues today
in the hope that eventually natural spawning will sustain the
population.
All told, thirty-nine lakes have been reclaimed and stocked with
heritage trout, at least ten of which now have self-sustaining
populations. At least five of the reclamations, however, were
unsuccessful. In two cases, rotenone failed to kill all the invasive
fish, which later made a comeback. Anglers illegally introduced bait
fish in two other ponds. And a fish-barrier dam failed in another.
Three of the other heritage strains—in Honnedaga Lake, Nate Pond, and
another Windfall Pond—are endangered or on the verge of extinction. The
fourth strain survives only in tiny Dix Pond. To protect the trout,
DEC’s Preall discourages the public from fishing these waters.
Why isn’t DEC protecting these four strains as well? “The populations
are so small that for us to take eggs and fingerlings would just about
wipe out the remaining population,” Preall said. “You leave them alone
and hope they survive.”
There’s also the question of money. “It takes a huge amount of labor and
infrastructure to support even three strains,” Demong said. “This was
really all that the hatchery system could accommodate.”
In the 1990s, the state reclaimed as many as five Adirondack ponds a
year for heritage trout, but last year it did just one and probably
won’t do any this year. Preall worries that the state’s fiscal problems
will hamper the department’s capacity to reclaim lakes in the future.
“We don’t have the staff anymore,” Preall said. “Where we used to have
six biologists [in the Ray Brook office], now we only have one—I’m it.”
Nevertheless, both Demong and Preall see a growing interest in the
preservation of heritage fisheries. They pointed to the Eastern Brook
Trout Joint Venture, a coalition of private and public groups that hopes
to restore brook-trout habitat throughout the species’ range—from
remnant populations in the Smoky Mountains of Georgia to the lakes and
rivers of northern Maine. They hope the venture will increase awareness
of native fisheries and fund habitat restoration.
Demong, who retired from DEC a few months ago, now looks forward to
spending more time fishing for heritage brook trout. “I can’t fish every
lake one season,” he said, “but I’m going to fish as many as I can this
spring.”
I quickly offered to carry his canoe.
|
One
Strange Fish Tale
By Peter Schmidt
Original Article:
Chronicle of Higher Education, Feb 28, 2010
Behold the regal rainbow trout, dappled
denizen of deep lake and rushing river, fierce hunter of fish and
fly—and prize of pork-barrel politics, invigorator of men, eradicator of
native species, payload of numerous bombing missions.
An angler can catch a lot of rainbow
trout and yet have no clue what a remarkable force of nature—and
mankind—the creatures truly are. Anders Halverson, a research associate
at the University of Colorado's Center of the American West, hoists them
up for close inspection in a book just released by Yale University Press:
An Entirely Synthetic Fish: How Rainbow Trout Beguiled America and
Overran the World.
Few one-that-got-away stories sound
nearly as improbable as his account of how our species,
Homo
sapiens, spread the fish species, Oncorhynchus mykiss,
beyond its native range.
Consider that as of the 1870s, the
rainbow trout and its sea-run variant, the steelhead, lived only along
the Pacific Rim, from California to Russia's Kamchatka Peninsula. Since
then, Halverson says, the fish "have been introduced to every state in
the United States and to at least 80 different countries on every
continent except Antarctica," an expansion of range that took humans,
corn, sheep, and dogs thousands of years to achieve.
Halverson offers statistics that
illustrate how much humans are still involved in the spread of rainbow
trout: For each of the roughly four million people born in the United
States each year, he says, state and federal hatcheries stock about 20
of the fish in public waters. Most of them being mature, they weigh a
total of about 25 million pounds.
Why make such an investment in spreading
this one species of fish? It grows rapidly in hatcheries and withstands
warmer waters and more-difficult conditions than other trout. Perhaps
more important, Halverson says, the stocking of rainbow trout—which
fight hard and leap acrobatically when hooked—has "satisfied a powerful
human need": the primal urge to seek out and battle prey.
Halverson's book is a microhistory, an
examination of America's involvement with a favored fish that sheds
light on broader truths regarding our recent relationship with the
natural world.
He says he fished for stocked rainbow
trout while growing up in Colorado but eventually got bored with the
pursuit and thought little of the fish until he became a graduate
student in aquatic ecology at Yale University, where he earned his
doctorate in 2005. At Yale "I came to realize there is a real paradox to
the way so many fisheries are managed these days," he says. "Like most
fishermen, I see fishing as a way to escape civilization and
industrialization, and a way to sort of make peace with the natural
world." Yet most rainbow trout, being either the products of hatcheries
or the descendants of hatchery fish, "are in many ways a product of that
industrialization."
He decided to write a book examining the
artificial spread of the rainbow trout and obtained a National Science
Foundation grant to help finance the undertaking. He initially expected
the project to be mainly an exercise in muckraking (he had worked as a
newspaper reporter before going to graduate school). But "the more
people I met and the more people I interviewed," he says, "the more I
realized what a complex topic this is." Although he came across case
after case in which efforts to spread the trout led to environmental
disasters, his book generally does not paint those involved as fools or
villains.
When it comes to government policy
regarding trout, he says, "there are a lot of issues for which there are
no clear answers." He points to the dilemma posed by rainbow trout's
ability to mate with the increasingly rare—and unhealthily
inbred—cutthroat trout of the American West. Such interbreeding is
causing cutthroats to become even rarer as a distinct species, but the
purebred cutthroat population is having so much trouble surviving on its
own that hybridization might represent the single best hope of passing
the fish's genes along to future generations. It is unclear whether the
long-term survival of cutthroats requires keeping rainbows at a distance
or bringing the two species together.
The oddest specimens in
An Entirely
Synthetic Fish are the people. They include Livingston Stone, a New
Hampshire pastor who abandoned the pulpit to raise brook trout on a fish
farm, then ventured to California in the 1870s, initially to set up a
federal salmon hatchery in the Sacramento River Valley. He encountered
the rainbow trout and ended up propagating that species in a hatchery on
the McCloud River, where he lived under threat of attack by outlaws and
members of the Wintu tribe. In one report on his activities, he
remarked, "With tarantulas, scorpions, rattlesnakes, Indians, panthers
and threats of murder our course here is not wholly over a path of
roses."
Among others described in Halverson's
book is Al Reese, a crop duster and barnstormer who in the late 1940s
helped persuade California's Department of Fish and Game to drop rainbow
trout into mountain lakes from the air. (He tested the fishes' ability
to survive the trip partly by holding live specimens out a car window at
70 miles per hour.) The state agency recruited World War II pilots and
purchased surplus military airplanes to dump the fish, generally from
about 200 feet. Many of the trout died on impact with the water or ended
up stuck in trees, but enough survived to inspire the agency to
similarly drop turkeys, partridges, and even beaver (in burlap sacks
attached to parachutes). About 50 years later, the agency learned that
it had gone overboard with its fish-bombing runs, inadvertently ridding
lakes of rare frogs, which the fish had devoured, and filling some lakes
with so many trout that their growth was stunted from too much
competition for food.
California fish-and-game officials are
hardly the only ones who eventually altered trout-stocking policies in
response to evidence of money wasted or doing more harm than good.
The book devotes a chapter to the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service's decision in 1962 to deliberately poison the
Green River in Utah and Wyoming to wipe out the native fish and make
room for rainbows. At the time, few in the agency questioned the idea of
pouring huge amounts of the piscicide rotenone into a body of water.
Since 1952 federal and state fisheries managers had used the chemical,
which kills anything with gills, to clear the way for rainbow trout and
other game fish in a long list of rivers and lakes around the nation,
even within national parks.
A few scholars at Colorado State
University and the University of Utah spoke out against the Green River
plan and subsequently complained of efforts by state and federal
agencies to shut them up by threatening to cut off grants to their
institutions. Many of those involved in the river poisoning lived to
regret it, for it ended up being a disaster for both the environment and
public relations.
The project's planners assumed they would
be able to keep the keep the river from carrying the rotenone into
Dinosaur National Monument park by having workers neutralize the poison
upstream from the park with potassium permanganate, but they were wrong.
When dead fish turned up in the park, the Fish and Wildlife Service
found itself in the cross hairs of the National Park Service. Perhaps
even more important, about three weeks after the incident, Rachel Carson
published Silent Spring, helping spawn an environmental
movement that barraged officials in Washington with angry letters about
the Green River kill.
The secretary of interior at the time,
Stewart Udall, responded by curbing the use of rotenone by federal
agencies and calling for the welfare of unique species to be a "dominant
consideration" in such projects from then on. All four of the chief
so-called trash fish that the Green River poisoning sought to kill—the
humpback chub, the bonytail, the razorback sucker, and the Colorado
pikeminnow—now have a place on the federal endangered-species list. The
federal government has spent more than $100-million trying to save them.
An Entirely Synthetic Fish
recounts many other governmental attempts at improving nature that went
awry. In the 1960s, for example, researchers discovered that stocking a
river with hatchery trout can decimate the wild trout population and
actually leave it with fewer trout over all; the hatchery fish
aggressively compete with the locals for food, and many end up being
eaten themselves because they seem to associate the shadows of predators
with those of hatchery workers tossing kibble. Beginning in the late
1980s, the Colorado Division of Wildlife inadvertently unleashed trout
epidemics by stocking rivers with rainbows infected with parasite-born
whirling disease, which leaves its victims disfigured and prone to
swimming in tight circles.
The book also compellingly traces how the
nation's attitudes toward fishing have varied over time. In the 17th
century, the leaders of the Massachusetts Bay Colony regarded fishing
with a hook and line as an exercise in idleness deserving punishment.
During and just after the American Revolution, fishing suffered a
similar image problem, thanks to its association with the English
aristocracy. Beginning in the mid-1800s, however, interest in sport
fishing boomed as it gained status as a diversion for the wealthy and
came to be viewed as a pursuit that helped keep men virile and in touch
with nature. Politicians eager to take credit for bringing hatchery jobs
and better fishing to their states happily supported federal efforts to
stock waters with game species.
Throughout much of America, one can still
encounter the absurd sight of fishermen gathered on riverbanks next to
hatchery trucks, hoping to catch naïve rainbow trout minutes after they
are stocked. While not exactly shooting fish in a barrel, perhaps no
other experience comes as close.
For his part, Halverson is attempting to
restore the populations of rarer species of trout by, counterintuitively,
encouraging people to fish for them. Taking a cue from the culture of
birdwatchers, many of whom will travel long distances to add to their
"life list" of species they have seen, he has set up a
Web site that encourages
anglers to catch and release as many species as they can. His logic is
that if enough people roll into small towns and say they are out to hook
rare fish species X or Y, the local chambers of commerce will get word,
and new constituencies will be created to lobby for the fish's
restoration.
Writing An Entirely Synthetic Fish
has renewed his own interest in angling, both for rainbows and for other
trout, Halverson says. "I actually love fishing again. You pick one of
these rainbows up, and it is just a book that says so much about us."
|
|
A new plan to curtail the advance of invasive species
has grown past Adirondack
Park boundaries.
At their recent meeting, the Adirondack Park Agency commissioners
gave up their seats while a new interagency coalition penned an agreement
of cooperation.The APA, Department of Environmental Conservation, Department of
Transportation and Adirondack Chapter of the Nature Conservancy joined
forces to form a front line of defense against the spread of aquatic and
terrestrial invasive species threatening ecosystems around the state.They’ve been working together inside the blue
line for 10 years.
REGIONAL APPROACH
Steve Sanford, director of the newly formed DEC Office of Invasive
Species Coordination in Albany, said the statewide effort has been divided
into eight regions.Each region will be run
similar to the Adirondack Park Invasive Plant Program, which is celebrating
a 10th anniversary this year.Sanford said the
Invasive Plant Program is “way ahead of everyone else.”With a regional approach, he said, each group will build
public-private partnerships with environmental conservation groups; lake,
ocean and river associations; and other organizations “with a strong
volunteer component.” Each regional office would open with $250,000, he
said, promising a stream of state funding for the new effort. “We’re close,
but we’re not quite there yet.”
GRANTS, EXPERTS
Hilary Oles, founder and director of the
Adirondack Park Invasive Plant Program, described the success they’ve had
in a decade worked on a shoestring budget. “Instead of faltering, we have
excelled,” she said, citing the nearly $1 million in grant funds and other
monies they have raised over time. Oles working under the aegis of the Adirondack Chapter of the
Nature Conservancy has established a go-to group of experts and data
banks that document the advance of water and land invasive species.
INFESTATIONS
Inventories conducted every three years show 51 waterways in the Adirondacks are infested with invasive species,
including Eurasian milfoil and water chestnut. Two response teams have been
trained and mobilized to deal with priority infestations, Oles said.
New signs administered by DEC will be posted at boat-launch areas on
each affected waterway to say: Attention — Invasive species are present in
this water body.”
APA Chairman Curt Stiles congratulated Oles
for her leadership. “We would not have (the program) if it weren’t for
Hilary’s work,” he said. “(Awareness and control of) Adirondack
invasive species would not have gotten done if it weren’t for the one
person who made that happen. Most people would
have walked away as seeing that as an insurmountable task.”
Mike Carr, executive director of the Adirondack
chapter of the Nature Conservancy, said the Adirondack Park Invasive
Program is an impressive display of perseverance. “It is a very elegant
solution to a problem bigger than anyone ever thought it would be.
“Hilary’s work is tangible and hopeful,” Carr added. “The blue line is not
as impenetrable as we like to think it is.”
ON WATCH
The state alliance will monitor invasive species around the state in
various habitats. The Adirondack Park Invasive Plant Program has already
trained a group of water stewards through Paul Smith’s College Watershed
Institute. The stewards monitor boats coming and going
from park waters and educates people about watching for invasive
plants. |
|
Delaware River Plan
|

|

|

|

|
|
Trout Unlimited Statement on the Delaware
River Flows
“A river is more than an amenity, it is a
treasure. It offers a necessity of
life that must be
rationed among those who have power over it.”
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell
Holmes, 1931 Delaware River Diversion Case
Trout Unlimited (TU) is
dedicated to the ecological preservation of the Upper
Delaware River environment and its trout fisheries. Because of this, our organization and its
New Jersey, New York,
and Pennsylvania Councils cannot support the reservoir release
schedules that are contained within the interim Flexible Flow Management
Program (FFMP) due to the significant damage these releases will bring to
the Delaware River’s ecosystem. In particular, under the interim releases
the trout fisheries of the Upper Delaware River’s
main stem will be lost due to lethal rises in water temperatures and loss
of habitat. Additionally, the
interim release schedule harms American shad populations and habitat, dwarf
wedge mussels and other fish and wildlife as well as the recreational
tourist economy of the Upper Delaware
region. TU does, however, support in
principle the FFMP adaptive release concept to address the flow
management issues in the Delaware River basin.
It is well documented that
there is more than enough water in the Upper Delaware
River for all the Decree Parties and for healthy aquatic
habitat for trout, shad, and the many other species that live in and along
the Neversink, East and West branches, and Main
Stem of the river. The current
constraint under which the FFMP is modeled, however, is invalid, biased,
and inflexible: •New York City’s annual diversions from Neversink,
Pepacton, and Cannonsville
reservoirs over the past ten years have averaged 508 mgd. Yet the Delaware River Basin Commission
(DRBC) has consistently required that all OASIS modeling of future
scenarios consider an annual New
York City diversion of 765 mgd. This means that over 290 mgd is available for ecosystem benefits downstream of
the reservoirs, not the 35 mgd that the DRBC is
currently modeling.
By imposing a release
schedule calculated for extreme water supply diversions (765 mgd) when the actual annual average diversions are much
lower (508 mgd), the DRBC’s
interim FFMP will result in far more reservoir spills and significantly
higher reservoirs each year than the OASIS model currently predicts. This is wasteful and irresponsible
management of the Delaware River’s water. •New York City’s annual average diversions have been decreasing
over the past 15 years, and they are not projected to increase for the
foreseeable future.Given New
York City’s average diversions and the resulting additional
water in the Upper Delaware River, the
following changes will correct the deficiencies of the FFMP with no risk to
any of the Decree Parties’ water rights and availability.
(1) The releases
in the interim FFMP must be increased. Higher reservoir releases
from Cannonsville are needed from May to
September to protect trout habitat in the lower West Branch and Main Stem
Delaware River. Similarly, higher
release rates are required for the Neversink and
East Branch tributaries to protect against low flows and high water
temperatures. In light of the large
quantity of available water that will not be diverted to New York City and will
eventually find its way downstream as spillage over the dams, TU cannot
accept any FFMP without an increase in releases from all three
reservoirs. The OASIS model can
substantiate this, and the DSS model verifies the considerable habitat
gains for the rivers.
(2) More release levels and seasons are necessary in
the interim FFMP. The interim FFMP structure is very
inflexible; during most summers, releases will remain in L2 more than 75
percent of the time. At a minimum, additional graduated levels need to be
added to both the L1 and L2 Storage Zone. The FFMP will also benefit from additional seasons, particularly
because of traditional water temperature and flow problems in mid- to
late-May, early-June, and the summer period through mid-September whenever
Montague flow target releases are not made.
(3)Weekly
averaging of the Montague flow target is needed. The
wildly fluctuating releases that result from the efforts to meet Montague
flow target shortages must be eliminated. These extreme daily variances create dangerous water temperature
fluctuations to the biota and disrupt various forms of recreation on the
rivers. Proactive directed releases
must be based on a weekly average target rather than daily variances. Anticipated hydropower generation
releases from the Lackawaxen and Mongaup rivers make this entirely feasible and such a
weekly averaging should be instituted immediately. Using anticipated water diversions,
anticipated Montague target releases, and projected hydropower releases,
the Rivermaster can institute a weekly Montague
release that accounts for these factors and eliminates these harmful and
unnecessary daily fluctuations.
(4) Directed
releases for the Montague flow target must be balanced from the reservoirs. Some portion of the Montague
releases should be apportioned as necessary to the East Branch and Neversink rivers when the Rivermaster
requires water releases for the Montague flow target. Such an allocation in releases will
provide more aquatic habitat to the three tailwaters
and help avoid draining Cannonsville during dry
years.
(5) A formal
annual review of the FFMP is mandatory. A process must be
established to provide for an annual review of the FFMP to assess its
performance. Consistent review,
analysis, and response are needed to address any of its shortcomings and
incorporate new research. Because
these aquatic environments are extremely sensitive, we stress the need for
the DRBC to maintain the ability to act quickly at times to avoid long-term
environmental damage from loss of aquatic habitat. Any formal process to review and respond
to new information or environmental conditions must include the
stakeholders and not be unnecessarily hindered by the bureaucratic process. TU recognizes the
extraordinary efforts that are necessary for the equitable apportionment
and management of the Upper Delaware
watershed for both the DRBC and the Decree Parties.
We recognize that management needs for
these rivers will remain dynamic and require constant assessment. By implementing the above courses of
action to correct the deficiencies of the interim FFMP, the DRBC and the
Decree Parties can use their power to significantly improve the health of
the Delaware River and its treasured trout fisheries—and with no risk to
New York City or any other Decree Party’s water supplies or rights. |
|
Another Article on
Invasive Species and
their Damage on our Environment
Sunday, December 16, 2007 EAST LANSING -- A dozen dead loons lay
chest up on a stainless steel table in Michigan's wildlife morgue, the
crimson eyes turned ashen gray, their haunting calls silenced by a deadly
epidemic sweeping across the Great Lakes.
A bacterium that surfaced in 1999 in Lake Erie has since killed
75,000 fish-eating birds in the Great Lakes, including nearly 10,000 this
year in northern Lake Michigan. Among the casualties: About 9,000 loons, the so-called
icon of the North and a threatened species in Michigan, according to government and
private bird monitoring data.
"There are thousands of birds in Lake
Michigan dying from this; it's disturbing," said Thomas
Cooley, a wildlife biologist for the Michigan Department of Natural
Resources who performs necropsies on the birds. "We don't normally see
diseases that kill thousands of animals."
The culprit: Avian botulism,
specifically Type E botulism, better known as food poisoning. Biologists believe zebra mussels, quagga mussels and round gobies that hitchhiked into
the Great Lakes in the 1980s in the
ballast tanks of ocean freighters created a new link in the food chain, one
that delivers deadly Type E botulism to fish and fish-eating birds. The resulting bird kills are another example of how
exotic species have altered the lakes' ecosystems, they said. "To have mussels affect top-level
predators, fish-eating birds, is really incredible," said Helen Domske, a biologist who tracks the epidemic for the New
York Sea Grant program. "To know that botulism killed these birds
shows how invasive species have changed this ecosystem." The botulism carnage that began in Lake Erie quickly
spread to Lakes Huron and Ontario
before killing 2,900 birds last year at Sleeping Bear Dunes National
Lakeshore on Lake Michigan, north of
Manistee. This year, the bacteria killed another 1,000 birds at Sleeping
Bear Dunes and about 8,500 more birds around the northern tip of Lake Michigan, according to monitoring data. "This year, the dead birds in Lake
Michigan were found from Ludington to the Mackinac
Bridge and all along the Upper Peninsula coastline," said Ken Hyde, a
wildlife biologist at Sleeping Bear Dunes. "It went from a 14-mile
patch of dead birds last year to affecting most of the northern section of Lake Michigan this year. It just exploded."
Over the past decade, Type E botulism
has killed birds from 52 different species in the Great
Lakes -- gulls and mergansers, ducks and grebes, bald eagles
and federally endangered piping plovers. The bacterium also has claimed dozens of lake sturgeon
and thousands of salamanders, known as mud puppies, in Lakes Erie
and Ontario. The outbreak has spread as far south as
Ludington on the Lake Michigan coast. But
experts said fish and birds in all the Great Lakes except one, Superior, are
vulnerable to the bird kills because of the presence of zebra mussels, quagga mussels and round gobies.
Common loons seem to be particularly susceptible to the
botulism outbreak. Loon deaths are
significant because the birds are a threatened species in Michigan, which has an estimated
population of less than 500 breeding pairs, according to the Audubon
Society. Its North American population is being squeezed by shoreline
development, powerboats that scare the birds off lakes, along with mercury
in fish and lead fishing gear that can poison the birds, biologists
said. In October and November,
hundreds of dead loons and thousands of other birds washed up on beaches
across northern Lake Michigan, according
to monitoring data. "We see
dead gulls and cormorants ... but most disheartening of all -- loons,"
said Henry Singer, a retired Petoskey physician who has a Lake Michigan
cabin south of Cross
Village. "Our
precious loons, whose eerie calls echo off the lake and turn early summer
dawns into a meditation on the northern wilderness experience ... it's
tragic." There are about
545,000 loons that nest each summer in Canada
and another 32,000 in the U.S.,
according to data compiled by the New York Department of Environmental
Conservation.
Loons are not believed to be in any immediate danger of
being wiped out by Type E botulism. But continued outbreaks could quickly
reduce their numbers because the long-lived birds, on average, produce less
than one chick per year, said Joe Kaplan, a biologist and co-director of
Common Coast Research & Conservation in Hancock. Kaplan said some species of birds, such
as gulls and cormorants are better suited to surviving the botulism
outbreak because there are more of them and they reproduce faster than
loons.
"The thought of botulism turning the Great Lakes into killing fields, it's not a good
situation," Kaplan said. "This botulism outbreak in northern Lake Michigan is right at the back door of where
loons are breeding every summer."
Threat is old and new Type E
botulism is a naturally occurring compound released by the "Clostridium
botulinum" bacteria. Spores of the bacteria
reside in the bottom sediments of the Great Lakes
and many other lakes. The botulinum bacteria is harmless unless exposed to low
oxygen conditions, which allows it to grow into a vegetative state that
contains a toxin capable of paralyzing the muscles and respiratory systems
of fish, birds and humans.
The colonization of the Great
Lakes by zebra and quagga mussels
triggered a chain of events that unleashed the toxic strain of the botulism
and pushed it up the food chain.
Humans and dogs that eat fish or birds infected with Type E botulism
could become seriously ill or die, said Domske.
Most people who die from food poisoning are killed by Type A or Type B
botulism, but there have been rare cases of humans dying after eating
improperly cooked or smoked fish contaminated with Type E. People who swim in the Great
Lakes are not at risk of contracting Type E botulism, experts
said. Humans only come in contact with the bacteria by eating infected fish
or birds.
The state of New
York has issued advisories urging anglers and
hunters to avoid eating fish or birds that act lethargic, and to avoid
handling the guts of fish and waterfowl when cleaning those animals. Michigan has not yet
issued advisories warning about the dangers of Type E botulism. Avian botulism has killed Great Lakes birds before. >From 1963 to 1983, Type
E killed 16,000 birds in Lakes Michigan and Huron, according to federal
data. Some researchers blamed those bird kills on alewife, a foreign fish
that overpopulated the lakes in the 1960s and often died in huge numbers.
Alewife that littered Great Lakes beaches
provided a fertile breeding ground for Type E botulism, experts said.
Salmon first stocked in Lake Michigan in 1967 reduced the alewife population
and the botulism outbreaks waned. The deadly bacteria went into remission for 16 years,
until it was confirmed as the cause of death for thousands of birds in Lakes Erie and Huron in 1999. What's different now is the widespread
distribution of zebra and quagga mussels and round
gobies, in four of the five Great Lakes.
Only Lake Superior, which hasn't been
colonized by quagga mussels or round gobies, has
avoided the latest botulism outbreak.
Experts believe vast areas of the other four Great
Lakes are vulnerable to fish and bird kills from Type E
botulism because they all have the necessary ingredients: quagga mussels, beds of cladophora,
round gobies and fish-eating birds.
Elizabeth Brockwell-Tillman, a nature
interpreter at P.J. Hoffmaster State Park in Norton Shores,
said the deaths of thousands of birds in northern Lake Michigan seems to be having an effect
here. She said there were far fewer water birds this autumn at Hoffmaster, a haven for migratory birds. "Just because our beaches aren't
littered with dead birds right now doesn't mean we're not affected; it
means we're going to see some species of birds less frequently," Brockwell-Tillman said. "The lake is not healthy
and these bird deaths are a symptom of the overall health of the lake. It's
scary." |
|

|
Didymo
Alert!
|

|
Update your list of invasive species to include the
aquatic diatom (a unicellular algae) known as didymo, or Didymosphenia geminata. ‘Rock snot’ was confirmed present in the Upper Connecticut
and White Rivers
in Vermont
in June of this year. And as if this news wasn’t bad enough, biologists
with the USGS, NY DEC and VT ANR just confirmed Didymosphenia geminata
is also present in the Batten Kill in VT and NY.
By the time you read
this, there will be signs posted on the Batten Kill advising all river
users of the presence of didymo in the river, and
offering recommended procedures to help prevent its spread to other waters.
While we wait to hear of the plans devised by VT, NY, and NH environmental
agencies, who are cooperating in this effort, as to how they intend to deal
with didymo, here are a few facts about didymo, what to do if you think you’ve found it, and
most importantly, what you should do as a responsible angler to help
prevent spreading it to other waters.
Didymo can form
extensive mats or ‘blooms’ on the bottom of rocky stream beds. When it does
this, it can make survival impossible for aquatic macro invertebrates, plants,
and other organisms by smothering them.
A single cell of didymo is microscopic, making it nearly impossible to
detect on waders, boots, or clothing. Therefore, it is essential for all
anglers to adopt a preventive attitude, and follow these guidelines
established by New Zealand Biosecurity:
Check, Clean
& Dry. (For more details on these steps, see page 3.) According
to the EPA, decontaminating your equipment in between uses in different
freshwater systems is vital to preventing the spread of didymo.
|
Sightings of Didymo in VT should
be reported to:
Didymo Identification, Water Quality Division
103 S. Main St., Bldg 10N, First Floor
Waterbury, VT 05671-0408
(802) 241-3770 or (802) 241-3777
|

|
The VT ANR is urging anglers and all freshwater
recreationists to follow these procedures outlined by New Zealand Biosecurity for preventing the introduction and spread
of didymo: Check, Clean and Dry.
1. Check: Before leaving a river or stream, remove all obvious
clumps of algae and look for hidden clumps. Leave them at the affected
site. If you find any later, do not wash them down drains; dispose of all
material in the trash.
2. Clean: Soak and scrub all items for at least one minute in either hot (140 degrees F) water, a two percent solution
of household bleach or a five percent solution of salt, antiseptic hand
cleaner or dish washing detergent. Be sure that the solution completely
penetrates thick absorbent items such as felt-soled waders and wading
boots.
3. Dry: If cleaning is not practical, after the item is completely
dry to touch, wait an additional 48 hours before contact or use in any
other waterway.
|
|