Public Comment period for protecting Paiute Cutthroat Trout

[Trootfisher]

Silver King Creek, near the crest of the central Sierra Nevada, is a tributary to the Carson River. DFG and the US Fish and Wildlife Service propose to eradicate non-native trout from the project area using the piscicide rotenone. The project is needed to prevent Paiute cutthroat trout from going extinct.
Public comments due by May 4, 2009.

http://www.dfg.ca.gov/news/pubnotice/

[rayfound]

This is GREAT news. Thanks Troot!

[briansII]

The planned eradication has been blocked how many times now? I'm not up on the issue, but I have read a little about the previous, failed attempts. Can anyone comment on the current stance of the opposition...............maybe I should just do a google.

briansII

[rayfound]

I don't know about the opposition. The Rot. eradication has been shown to work well in the past, and has little to no lasting effects on non-fish species. The insects all come back extremely fast.

I guess this is where its important for us as Anglers to make our comments that this is an important and worthy step to save a threatened Salmonid, and allow for future recreational use.

[briansII]

The opposition is from "environmentalist". From what little I scanned over from a google search, it may be a while, if ever, Silver King will get treated. You and I may see rotenone as an effect means, but others see it as a "poison", that kills indiscriminately. I'd be shocked, if the opposition has changed their stance. IIRC.....and I can certainly be wrong, I think the same organization(s?) opposed the Davis Lake treatments. They did eventually re-treat Davis. So far, I haven't heard of any pike being found.......or any Plumas Co. residents sprouting a tail or 3rd eye.

briansII

[rayfound]

So, the same people that want backcountry lakes poisoned or netted of fish to restore frog habitat, want this practice NOT to happen to preserve endangered fish.

It seems to me that "Environmentalists" almost prefer species without recreational value vs. those without. Its always been a weird to me.

[briansII]

So, the same people that want backcountry lakes poisoned or netted of fish to restore frog habitat, want this practice NOT to happen to preserve endangered fish.

It seems to me that "Environmentalists" almost prefer species without recreational value vs. those without. Its always been a weird to me.

Yep.

Once all criteria in the recovery plan are met, management passes to the state, which may open that section of the creek to angling. “We have an opportunity to restore a rare species and create a very unique trout fishery,” says Bob Williams, supervisor for Nevada Fish & Wildlife.
“The real purpose of this project is to set up a fishery in the future,” says Erman, pointing out that the four creeks in which the Paiute have been restored are too remote for angling. “The nonnative fish that now exist in that section of Silver King Creek were planted by Fish and Game, and they are planning to use rotenone to correct this.”

FYI, Mrs Erman and the Center For Biological Diversity is opposed to the rotenone treatment.

........I should probably shut my piehole before I say something completely/factually wrong

briansII

[darrin terry]

…It seems to me that "Environmentalists" almost prefer species without recreational value vs. those without. Its always been a weird to me.

Well, that would keep more pesky, irksome, trouble making people out of the environment. Wouldn't it.

[RichardCullip]

If you get (or can get) Fly Rod & Reel take a look a the April 2009 issue. Ted Williams (the conservation columnist not the dead baseball player) has an article about this issue and California's trout stocking issue in the April 2009 edition and the Decembr 2008 edition. They are a good read.

[NorcalBob]

The CBD lawsuit against the Paiute Cutt restoration project was based on the fact that the USFS and the DFG worked together on the EIR/EIS and the resulting document was a piece of you know what because each side thought the other was going to do the important sections. As a result, the judge had no real choice but to side with CBD because the EIR/EIS was seriously flawed. Supposedly, all the flaws in the EIR/EIS have now been fixed and the project is going forward. If the flaws have been indeed been fixed, CBD will have to try a new legal strategy to block it this time and is on much shakier legal ground on this go around. Last round was a legal slam dunk for CBD but, we'll see what happens in this new legal skirmish!