|
 The
following is the text of the FUDR's formal response to the DRBC
plan.
Fisheries Docket
Delaware River Basin Commission
P.O. Box 7360, West Trenton, NJ
08628-0360
March 17, 2004
The Friends of the Upper Delaware River (FUDR) is a nonprofit
organization, incorporated in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and formed
for the express purpose of protecting and enhancing the wild trout fishery
in the Delaware River from the Cannonsville Reservoir downstream through
the Scenic Corridor. FUDR is opposed to draft Docket No D-77-20 CP
(Revision 7) and the “Proposed Interim Fishery Management Plan” as
presented at a public meeting in Hawley, PA on March 2, 2004. Our
principal objection is that the release program from May 1, 2004 to May
31, 2007, prescribed by the draft resolution, is inadequate to maintain,
much less improve, the world famous wild trout fishery that currently
exists on the upper Delaware River.
The existing wild trout fishery was developed as a result of water
released from the Cannonsville Reservoir over the past 30 years, primarily
to meet the minimum flow of 1750 cfs at Montague, New Jersey, as mandated
by the U.S. Supreme Court Decree in 1954. (Releases from the Pepacton and
Neversink reservoirs cannot provide cold water to the main stem for
several reasons that will be discussed below.) In order to meet the 1750
minimum flow, releases from Cannonsville averaging in excess of 650 cfs
during the critical months of June through September have been required.
These releases have produced an excellent fishery throughout the West
Branch and main stem. However, there have been weaknesses in the release
regime that have been very damaging, that have led to occasional fish
kills and that often resulted in very poor conditions for the insects, the
fish, the trout fisherman and the local economies:
(A) Releases have been needlessly erratic, averaging 650 cfs, but
fluctuating widely from day-to-day. This has often left insects high and
dry, has interrupted hatching activity, stressed the trout, ruined the
fishing and negatively impacted the local economies – occasionally for
weeks at a time.
(B) Fluctuating releases have often led to water temperatures well
above target maximums (72 degrees F average and 75 degrees F
instantaneous) which exceed the 68 degree F temperature level above which
trout become stressed.
(C) So called thermal releases have been poorly timed and often have
not been made even when desperately needed.
(D) In apparent violation of Part 671 of New York State DEC
regulations, cold water releases have often not been made during periods
when warm water is spilling over the top of the reservoirs. This has had
predictably negative effects on the fishing.
In our opinion, if 650 cfs average releases were adjusted gradually
(ramped) over a period of days rather than hours, the insects would be
protected, hatching activity would b
enhanced, the trout would be healthier, fishing would improve and the
economic activity of the area would be substantially enlarged. Moreover,
all of these positive things could be accomplished using little, if any,
more water than has been used over the last 30 years.
Note: Nothing in the proposed experimental release program Rev. 7,
addresses these negligent procedures that unnecessarily harm the existing
fishery. Moreover, the combined conservation, habitat and thermal banks
prescribed are inadequate to maintain the thermal and habitat requirements
that were accidentally met during the past 30 years, simply by meeting the
1750 cfs Montague flow target.
The advent of new power generating releases by PPL will greatly change
the flow regime in the entire Upper Delaware System under the guidelines
of the proposed resolution. Instead of releasing flows from Cannonsville
at historic levels throughout the hot summer months to satisfy the 1750
cfs flow target at Montague, releases under Revision 7 will, at times, be
required only to satisfy arbitrarily determined and woefully inadequate
habitat and thermal requirements. Moreover, the plan acknowledges that
habitat and thermal requirements necessary to sustain the existing fishery
in the main stem cannot be met with the banks authorized in the proposed
resolution.
We believe that the proposed interim plan falls short of protecting,
let alone improving, the existing fishery because it relies on inaccurate
and unsubstantiated assumptions.
First, although the study conducted by Sheppard (1983), that is used to
support the pending proposal, concluded that 225 cfs at Hale Eddy "should
be considered for the waters in the Upper Delaware basin during normal and
below-normal storage conditions, provided that temperature requirements
can be satisfied", Sheppard also stated in his report that "for the
protection of the designated trout management section on the main Delaware
River (Hancock to Callicoon), the West Branch summer conservation releases
will have to be greater than 325 cfs." Friends of the Upper Delaware
understand that for much of the time under the proposed plan, releases in
excess of 225 cfs will be necessary to meet the 1750 Montague target as in
years past. However, the plan gives no guarantee that adequate releases
will be made from Cannonsville in the summer months if the 1750 cfs flow
at Montague is met by other releases, such as from Lake Wallenpaupack by
PPL. The fishery, under the proposed interim plan, will often be at the
mercy of “thermal releases”, with their demonstrated unreliability and
inadequacy even when sufficient water is available. Given the acknowledged
inadequacy of the proposed thermal banks to meet the temperature
requirements of the existing trout fishery downstream of Hancock, it is
manifestly inaccurate and misleading to either imply or assert that the
proposed release program is an improvement over existing conditions.
Clearly, it is a step backward and jeopardizes the existing fishery and
the local economies that depend on a viable coldwater fishery during the
late spring and through the summer. Unnaturally fluctuating temperatures
and flows during the summer disrupt the cycle of reproduction (hatches) of
aquatic insects, reduce the trout’s food supply and diminish (or
eliminate) surface feeding by the trout. These conditions are damaging to
the fish population and subsequently cause anglers to stay home rather
than come to fish, thereby immediately harming the local economies.
Second, the proposed interim plan fails to recognize that erratic and
unnecessarily low, summer flows, not low winter flows, are most limiting
to trout populations. Our scientific advisors inform us that low winter
flows, as currently provided for in the Upper Delaware system are, indeed,
too low and are unnecessarily harmful to the trout population, but that
there is enough water within the system, if conscientiously applied, to
provide sufficient habitat throughout the cold winter months. Trout and
aquatic insects can adapt to low winter flows given sufficient time to
move, and provided enough flow is maintained and gradually changed to
avoid the destructive impacts of anchor ice. Such a release/flow regime
can easily be provided without any impact on other users. However, trout
and insects have not adapted, and physiologically cannot adapt, to sudden
changes in water level and temperature during the critical summer months
when they are actively feeding and growing. It is the summer months that
are so important to the aquatic insects upon which the trout depend for
their food. And it is during the summer months when sufficient habitat
must be provided while the trout are actively feeding and experiencing
most growth. Sudden changes in water level and temperature disrupt the
behavior of the trout and kill untold numbers of insects. What is more,
such unnatural changes disrupt the normal life cycle of growth, emergence,
reproduction and dispersion of aquatic insects. Sudden increases and
decreases in water temperature and level have undoubtedly limited the size
of the insect and trout populations in past years. Under the proposed
resolution, Revision 7, this situation would get even worse. Fish kills,
as dramatic as they appear, are probably not as harmful as the unseen
killers described above. That is the reason we propose optimum thermal
criteria (68 F max), rather than incipient lethal temperatures as
guidelines for future studies.
The Friends of the Upper Delaware propose that unlike the past, the
trout fishery and other recreational and economic interests be given equal
consideration as out-of-basin and downstream users. The proposed
resolution and the information presented on March 2, 2004, at Hawley, PA,
give the erroneous impression that there is insufficient water to sustain
the existing trout fishery (specifically in the upper main stem of the
Delaware) but at the same time imply that the plan would actually improve
the fishery. Such inconsistencies and contradictions are ample proof of
the inadequacy and inaccuracy of the proposed plan. We contend that the
issue is not so much the availability of sufficient water, as it is a
question of what priority (if any) is assigned to protecting and improving
the trout fishery and the economic viability of the Upper Delaware
Communities.
The Friends of the Upper Delaware strongly advise that the proposed
Docket NO D-77-20 CP (Revision 7) be amended to include a minimum release
of 600 cfs from the Cannonsville Reservoir from the period of May 15
through September 15 and a minimum release of 300 cfs during the remainder
of the year. Optimum minimum releases should also be made from the
Pepacton and Neversink Reservoirs to enhance the fisheries in the East
Branch and the Neversink. Our 600/300 cfs proposal for the West Branch can
be implemented without substantially changing the study parameters of the
proposed fishery plan and without materially affecting currently
authorized uses of the water within the basin. Such measures would protect
the fishery and would completely eliminate the factors that are limiting
its full development.
Although we are in full support of efforts to improve conditions on the
East Branch and the Neversink, it is important to understand that
adjustments to their release regimes will have little or no direct impact
on the West Branch/main stem fishery. The Neversink flows into the
Delaware well downstream from the cold water trout fishery. As for the
East Branch, because the Pepacton Dam is far above the junction with the
Beaverkill and because the Beaverkill runs warm in the summer, there is no
way that larger releases from Pepacton could cool the main stem.
Finally, we maintain that whenever the Cannonsville Reservoir level
drops to 30% capacity or lower, releases should be augmented by releases
from the Pepacton Reservoir on the East Branch to reduce the amount of
silt and low dissolved oxygen water emanating from the Cannonsville
Reservoir under such conditions. In 2001, we came within a hair of losing
the entire fishery when the Rivermaster reduced the Cannonsville Reservoir
to an unprecedented 3% level while the Pepacton reservoir was still at
approximately 70% of its capacity. Despite numerous complaints from
anglers and businesses, the Rivermaster continued to draw the reservoir
down. Only at the 11th hour, rain prevented a major catastrophe. It is
unconscionable that this could be allowed to occur on a world famous wild
trout fishery.
It is recognized that in unusually dry years the above recommended
releases might not be sustainable at all times without affecting other
authorized uses of the reservoir system. And it is equally true that in
some years more water may be available for sustaining the trout fishery.
FUDR would welcome the opportunity to assist in developing measurable
protocols that would trigger a proportional reduction of the releases
recommended above during periods of drought or anticipated drought. It is
recognized that under such a release plan the Delaware trout fishery, as
occurs in all trout fisheries, might experience occasional, infrequent,
declines during dry periods. But such declines would occur as a result of
infrequent natural conditions, rather than by a permanent decline brought
on by unnecessary and arbitrary limitations imposed by the release program
currently under consideration.
Attached, please find a copy of the twelve points that support the
Mission Statement developed by the Friends of the Upper Delaware River.
These points, we feel, are a critical foundation to a comprehensive
fisheries management plan.
Respectfully submitted on behalf of the Friends of the Upper Delaware
River.
Craig Findley
President |
