|
 |
|||||||||||
| FUDR Response to the June 2007 Morgan Lyle article:
In a recent article by Morgan Lyle, a number of misstatements beg for correction. Also several important omissions require comment. Mr. Lyle notes that most of the public responses to the proposed FFMP called for more water for the fishery. He failed to say that the majority of the public critics were arguing for voids and represented flood mitigation groups. Flood relief advocates, not CP2 supporters, forced the DRBC to step back. Mr. Lyle failed to remind his readers that the FFMP eliminates the temperature targets used to protect trout with added releases during very warm weather when otherwise authorized releases are inadequate. Mr. Lyle does not tell his readers that during April, FFMP provides, at best, for releases of only 80 cfs (with 35 million gallons per day available) and during May, only 180 cfs (assuming 35 million gallons per day available). This is confusing on its face but suggests low releases during the key months of April and May as well as June when fishing and fishing related spending are at their peak. Mr. Lyle admits that CP2 is less than ideal but fails to tell his readers that the water temperatures that will result on the lower West Branch and on the upper Main Stem will be so high as to threaten or be lethal for the trout and prevent day time trout fishing as early as May and many times even in April. Recent USGS data confirm these conclusions (see FUDR/ USGS charts at www.fudr.org) which typically shows that on a 75F degree day in May, and with a 255cfs release at Cannonsville, the water temperatures in the lower West Branch was between 70-72F degrees and 70-76 degrees between Hancock and Lordville – a killer for the trout and the fishing. FUDR will be reporting the releases and water temperatures to the public throughout the summer to show that the FFMP and the CP-2 plan releases are entirely inadequate for the trout fishery. Putting the CP2 plan to a reality check shows that the CP2 plan does not protect the lower WB and the Main stem and does not provide for any habitat increase on the main stem. As mentioned above, the current hot weather vs. releases shows that the temperature increases are too high for the lower WB and the Main Stem. The Coalition has been stating that the WB and the Main Stem will have increased trout habitat but the recent temperatures do not support that. Is there a flaw in all the computer modeling that has been done? The CP2 plan does not reflect what is accurately being experienced on the river. In referring to the incremental releases that may be required to meet the Montague flow target, Mr. Lyle ignores the increased releases that result from the newly expanded PPL project on the Lakawaxen and increased flows from Rio/Mongup both of which are counted in calculating the Montague requirement and, therefore, act to greatly reduce the calls for water from Cannonsville for the first time in history. In our mind, this action is a clear violation of regulation 671. Mr. Lyle refers to the possibility of releases from Cannonsville of as little as 60 cfs if nothing is done (i.e. if the FFMP or CP2 is not adopted). This is nothing new. It is a theoretical threat that has existed for years but that seems extremely unlikely to be realized in view of the uproar such low releases would engender among those concerned with the danger of flooding (except during periods when the reservoirs had already been largely depleted). Mr. Lyle refers to FUDR’s demand for summertime releases of 600 cfs from Cannonsville. He is not up to date. The FUDR void/graduated release plan provides for minimum voids in the reservoirs and for an adaptive release regime with the amounts determined by reservoir levels. More releases when the reservoirs are full and less releases when reservoirs are reduced – what could be simpler? Mr. Lyle observes that 600cfs has never been on the table. It is possible that the old 600 cfs release plan sponsored by FUDR would have gained more credence and possibly won if it had received support from the Coalition. Mr. Lyle fails to note that FUDR was alone in objecting to the now discredited Revision 7 and fails to indicate the deficiencies of the OASIS model, the current drought curves and the absence of Rondout in the DRBC’s calculations. He also fails to acknowledge that summertime releases have averaged over 600 cfs for years before Revision 7, a revision that he supported and continues to support even though all parties now consider it a failure. Mr. Lyle belittles the claims that skimpy releases will hurt (have already hurt) the fishery. In so doing he ignores the decline in the number of rainbows being caught on the Main Stem and the fact that low flows and high temperatures have virtually eliminated day time fishing on the lower West Branch and the Main Stem during the warm weather. For decades, the fishery between Buckingham (mile marker 8) and Callicoon (mile marker 30 approx.) was full of trout fishermen throughout June – now you would be hard pressed to find a single fisherman, even in the early season. This has greatly reduced the economic impact of the fishery for the local communities. |
||||||||||||
| FUDR :: 1148 5th St., New York, NY 10128:: email: catskilldan@mac.com :: 607-363-2001 | ||||||||||||