WTF - Overfishing Likely Under Delta Bass Proposal

BassinRob · Post by **BassinRob** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 6:18 pm

I can't believe what the state is proposing:

http://cbs5.com/local/bass.fishing.delta.2.960749.html

Video #1

Its a sad day for bass fishing

FR0G · Post by **FR0G** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 6:29 pm

That would be horrible if this passes. I am crossing my fingers that it won't. They can't let one of the best bass fisheries go like this. What can we do to prevent this?

Rod Martin · Post by **Rod Martin** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 6:38 pm

J.Rios · Post by **J.Rios** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 6:39 pm

Anyone that blew this off when Brian posted the letters from Feinstein to the fish and game commission had better wake up!! I believe they will do this, and do it soon. Everyone had better get their computers going and notify their elected officials. If you take our fish we'll see that we get your job handed to someone that respects the issues of the angler,and the anglers dollars!! Stony can you set the letters and this post to a sticky?This is gonna get ugly real quick!!

sean alarid · Post by **sean alarid** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 6:41 pm

FR0G wrote:That would be horrible if this passes. I am crossing my fingers that it won't. They can't let one of the best bass fisheries go like this. What can we do to prevent this?

We can make all those people disappear!

That's the only thing I can think of.

J.Rios · Post by **J.Rios** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 6:43 pm

Hey Rod read the letters that Brian posted!! I think you'll see that the reporter is dead on. Feinstein wants both species targeted. Those buggers with the pointy hats and live minnows are lickin their lips as they read this crap.NO LIMITS!!!

Morgan · Post by **Morgan** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 6:46 pm

Funny how she doesn't want to sacrifice the seals also, there have been reports in WON that lot's of the adult salmon had seal bites. I've watched them work the Delta and come up with a different fish on every dive!

Morgan

Jason C. · Post by **Jason C.** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 7:00 pm

Yea I thought that to. If they are going to go after stripers and bass because they eat the salmon and delta smelt, then why not go after one of the biggest salmon eaters out there, the Seals! I say Open a hunting season on the seals and set regulations on them like they do deer.

Plus I can see even peta getting in on this one and voting against it, because more "poor defensless animals will be killed!" Peta might actually be our friend on this one! LOL

bassmaster89 · Post by **bassmaster89** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 7:16 pm

Jason I agree with you. There should be a seal hunting season.

I hate it when they go to your spot and you see them coming up eating fish

Brian · Post by **Brian** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 7:21 pm

J. Rios wrote:Anyone that blew this off when Brian posted the letters from Feinstein to the fish and game commission had better wake up!! I believe they will do this, and do it soon. Everyone had better get their computers going and notify their elected officials. If you take our fish we'll see that we get your job handed to someone that respects the issues of the angler,and the anglers dollars!! Stony can you set the letters and this post to a sticky?This is gonna get ugly real quick!!

Yep, I tried to tell you. And those letters came from a very good source. Someone on the "inside"

J.Rios · Post by **J.Rios** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 7:29 pm

Seals don't stand in the way of water export.Every species that they can get out of their way is another step closer to maximizing their water thievery.
For years it had been the decline of the Striper.Then it was the Delta Smelt.Now it's the Salmon.All these things got in their way. Now to make it go full circle the Striper is what is destroying the Salmon and the Smelt??!!!!Oh Yeah,and the Black Bass is part of the problem too.

Modesto irrigation district what a friggin joke.Bunch of crooks still not payin' what the water is worth to begin with. Now they come up with some B.S,. report that all their tags are endin'up in Striper bellies??How is it that the Salmon made it through the years when Striper fishing was commercial and thirty pounders were common as hell.

Yes- Stripers eat salmon,they eat squawfish,black bass catfish ,bluegill,crappie,and evry other specie in the river.Those species in turn at some time eat the striper.What is so hard to figure out about this? Nothing like skewing results for your gains like they are usin' here.

Sorry guys I have to stop this rant now cause I'm gettin' pi$$ed. Tell everyone you know about this because if they get their way every conservation effort we have done for the last twenty years will be for nothing.

Hardshell · Post by **Hardshell** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 4:53 am

Against my better judgement I have to comment on this wild thing, so here goes. We're the fools in this mix for allowing the radical environmentalist to pit our fishing interests against one of the sportsmans historical allies, the water storage groups and those dreaded farmers. This isn't about Salmon, Smelt or Bass for that matter it's about a well financed bunch of tree huggers that have but one objective in mind and being the total distruction of this states water inferstructure and the return to the stone ages for us here in the areas effected by these water projects. If you notice the dictates come from our magnanomus US Senators from, you guessed it, the SF bay area and you'll never see their loyal subject's ox gored by any of their proposals. Much the same as the national political sceen, the polititicans of this state, from both parties, need an awakening in the form of mass unemployeement notices issued from us the electorate in the form of our votes. If they want to return to a pristine environment lets start with them and vote all the basterds out of office at once so we can start anew. It wouldn't hurt to take a few of our libertys back so some common since can once again be the rule of the day. I'd bet our tax dollars would go a lot further with some new direction also.

Hardshell

sTony · Post by **sTony** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 5:31 am

I watched this last night on the news and the reporting definitely mixed and matched striped and largemouth bass through out the report. Neither fish is an indigenous species to these waters so figure that both are targets for our screwed up legislation. Putting this at the feet of the environmentalists though is likely diverting the attention from what the report did say were the forces behind the effort and that was central California water agencies. It's an attempt at a water grab for water that the northern part of the state clearly doesn't have all that much of right now.

Greene, you were just up on Oroville. Did you see an excess of water when you were there? I didn't. I saw a lake on the rise but certainly no where near full pool. And had federal judges not shut down the pumps, and used the Delta Smelt to do so, that lake wouldn't be anywhere near where it is now. Contracts have been written to the central California water folks and deliveries on those contracts are far short of what they were written to be. Problem is regardless of how much water there is or isn't those agencies have been demanding that their allotments be filled. They'd literally suck the northern lakes dry if they got their way and frankly, they can care less about it.

Now this legislation is attempting to remove all limits and restrictions on the taking non native species, being stripers and largemouths, as they're being targeted as the 'true' threat to Delta Smelt and Salmon and so forth. It's just another attempt to eventually get those pumps running and water exports flowing to central California water agencies, where they can charge folks a lot of money to soak their fields and so on.

Once again it's time to fight the good fight, let your neighbors and non-fishing family members know that our lakes and rivers are once again in real jeopardy as well as our recreational rights along with it. Everyone's got to start thumping these elected officials with a ton of email and letters banging some common sense into them. The water agencies have a lot of money to get their message out as do environmentalists. But anglers tend to be more the 'I just want to go fishing crowd' and traditionally haven't put forth the sustained efforts towards lobbying and building finances that the other side has done for a long time.

sTony

mac (Doyle McEwen) · Post by **mac (Doyle McEwen)** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 5:43 am

I have to agree with Steve on this one..We have always had flare ups between the water users (agri-business) and anglers..Their taking water out of the Delta doesn't hurt the fishing in the Delta near as much as it does some of the lakes having to supply the water, but a movement like the one listed would soon make the Delta a wasteland as far as bass fishing goes..Even if there were no bass or stripers in the Delta, the Salmon runs will never return to their original state or even near it..

Our political representatives are not representing us, cut and dried..Political party affilliation has little to nothing to do with it..Our current group in Sacramento and in Washington are for the most part worthless..

mac

Otay Michael · Post by **Otay Michael** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 7:16 am

I saw that on the news up here in Oakley too. Time to start a campaign of phone calls, e mails and letters to the powers that be.

Hardshell · Post by **Hardshell** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 7:43 am

sTony wrote:I watched this last night on the news and the reporting definitely mixed and matched striped and largemouth bass through out the report. Neither fish is an indigenous species to these waters so figure that both are targets for our screwed up legislation. Putting this at the feet of the environmentalists though is likely diverting the attention from what the report did say were the forces behind the effort and that was central California water agencies. It's an attempt at a water grab for water that the northern part of the state clearly doesn't have all that much of right now.

Greene, you were just up on Oroville. Did you see an excess of water when you were there? I didn't. I saw a lake on the rise but certainly no where near full pool. And had federal judges not shut down the pumps, and used the Delta Smelt to do so, that lake wouldn't be anywhere near where it is now. Contracts have been written to the central California water folks and deliveries on those contracts are far short of what they were written to be. Problem is regardless of how much water there is or isn't those agencies have been demanding that their allotments be filled. They'd literally suck the northern lakes dry if they got their way and frankly, they can care less about it.

Now this legislation is attempting to remove all limits and restrictions on the taking non native species, being stripers and largemouths, as they're being targeted as the 'true' threat to Delta Smelt and Salmon and so forth. It's just another attempt to eventually get those pumps running and water exports flowing to central California water agencies, where they can charge folks a lot of money to soak their fields and so on.

Once again it's time to fight the good fight, let your neighbors and non-fishing family members know that our lakes and rivers are once again in real jeopardy as well as our recreational rights along with it. Everyone's got to start thumping these elected officials with a ton of email and letters banging some common sense into them. The water agencies have a lot of money to get their message out as do environmentalists. But anglers tend to be more the 'I just want to go fishing crowd' and traditionally haven't put forth the sustained efforts towards lobbying and building finances that the other side has done for a long time.

sTony

That's just the point, Tony. If we continue to allow these so called environentalist to dictate how water is held and distributited in this state through legal wrangling or legislation soon we will have none for fish or farms. Just think where we'd be right now if we didn't have Shasta, Oroville or any of the other dams that make up this system there'd be very little if any water for anything including fish. Like most of these so called friends of the environment many of my fishing conrads have bought into this water war when if you really look close the needs farmers and fisherman are a lot closer than those of the "DAM DESTROYERS". If you guys leaning towards the elimination of water contracts, water conveyence systems and dams would only consider how big of an effect that would have on the 34+ millions citizens of this state and unite with us, the "DREADED FARMERS" for
the improvement of our out dated system we'd all benefit.
Oh and one more thing, you mentioned the use of pesticides and the safety of our food supply, if you think that when the water runs out and this state that grows about 20% of the worlds food and fiber is toast that your food supply grown, picked, packed and shipped in a forgien country is as safe as what we have now you are sadly mistaken.

Hardshell

DeltaBound · Post by **DeltaBound** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 7:46 am

it all comes down to Arnold, he's already so called borrowing DFG Funds "again" which he never repaid the other times he stole from DFG. He could care less about fish and wildlife management. He already screwed up this state. Time to get out of "COLLYFORNIA"

Paul W · Post by **Paul W** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 8:08 am

Jason C. wrote:Yea I thought that to. If they are going to go after stripers and bass because they eat the salmon and delta smelt, then why not go after one of the biggest salmon eaters out there, the Seals! I say Open a hunting season on the seals and set regulations on them like they do deer.

Plus I can see even peta getting in on this one and voting against it, because more "poor defensless animals will be killed!" Peta might actually be our friend on this one! LOL

As usual, people and the exploding population are to blame here. Seals and Salmon have co-existed for an eternity without any detrimental effect on Salmon population. Far more Salmon have been killed in relation to human activities than the seals have eaten. But getting back on topic, this is a disgusting news story. If this law passes, the poachers, who are already a problem on the Delta, will have a field day out there.

Paul W

J.Rios · Post by **J.Rios** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 8:22 am

Hardshell,
Did you actually look at the video clip? That wasn't a spokesperson for Greenpeace,Fund for Animals,Defenders of Wildlife, or the SPCA. She was speaking on behalf of the MODESTO IRRIGATION DISTRICT!!! Speaking about their contractual rights to the delta water.She also spoke about their independent tracking study??? Since when is the Modesto irrigation district involved in salmon tracking studies!!! Their interest first and foremost is water,Water,WATER!

Enviro's are not the problem here.They are a pain in the neck,but not the overall problem.The amount of money changing hands is the problem. More water = More money,and when judges shut those pumps down for whatever reasons someone stands to lose $$$$$$$$$

Bill K · Post by **Bill K** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 9:52 am

J. Rios wrote:Hardshell,
Did you actually look at the video clip? That wasn't a spokesperson for Greenpeace,Fund for Animals,Defenders of Wildlife, or the SPCA. She was speaking on behalf of the MODESTO IRRIGATION DISTRICT!!! Speaking about their contractual rights to the delta water.She also spoke about their independent tracking study??? Since when is the Modesto irrigation district involved in salmon tracking studies!!! Their interest first and foremost is water,Water,WATER!

Enviro's are not the problem here.They are a pain in the neck,but not the overall problem.The amount of money changing hands is the problem. More water = More money,and when judges shut those pumps down for whatever reasons someone stands to lose $$$$$$$$$

You would not want to bet that she is a charter member of more than one of the groups you mentioned. She sure sounds like a sounding board, for them. Delta shad in the bass's stomach, but not word about the seal's stomachs, you know they eat more of them that any bass ever started too. Bill K

Hardshell · Post by **Hardshell** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 10:31 am

J. Rios wrote:Hardshell,
Did you actually look at the video clip? That wasn't a spokesperson for Greenpeace,Fund for Animals,Defenders of Wildlife, or the SPCA. She was speaking on behalf of the MODESTO IRRIGATION DISTRICT!!! Speaking about their contractual rights to the delta water.She also spoke about their independent tracking study??? Since when is the Modesto irrigation district involved in salmon tracking studies!!! Their interest first and foremost is water,Water,WATER!

Enviro's are not the problem here.They are a pain in the neck,but not the overall problem.The amount of money changing hands is the problem. More water = More money,and when judges shut those pumps down for whatever reasons someone stands to lose $$$$$$$$$

Yes, I did watch the video and I'm astounded that MID would allow someone like that to further their agenda as their mouth- piece. On the other hand that sort of rhetoric has become the norm when bureaucracys speak to the public. I can assure that MID isn't the one putting fourth the idea of elimination of the bass population in the delta, that came straight from our great Senator Diane Finestein.

J. Rios, maybe you could answer one question for me that would kinda clear up where you are coming from on this issue. Do think that I and millions of other Americans are the villians here because we have harnessed and utilized some of this nations natural resourses and in the process made a decent living? If you do, how would you solve this problem?

Hardshell

bonsaibp · Post by **bonsaibp** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 10:38 am

Otay Michael wrote:I saw that on the news up here in Oakley too. Time to start a campaign of phone calls, e mails and letters to the powers that be.

Its fine and dandy to post all these items about the state and federal governments plans to ruin our fishing on the Delta, but thats not going to change anything. What may is if the hundreds of thousands of us who fish let to powers that be know our feelings. I don't mean a hand full of emails but an organized concerted long term effort to let them know we have some power as well. Not individually but as a well organized, articulate group of voters who support an industry that is worth tens of billions of dollars or more nationwide. This is an issue that affects fisherman not just here in CA but throughout the country. We need to act as one unified group on these matters. We should try to get BASS, FLW and all their sponsors , the fishing tackle industry and anyone else who can help in a meaningful way involved. Anyone who thinks that this is just a CA problem is mistaken. We need to have our own lobby to try to get the powers that be to hear our side as well, not just the water agencies and well meaning but misguided environmentalists. We need to do so in a calm,organized professional manner. Ranting and raving won't get it done. We need to be ready to make some compromises but to stand strong as well. This isn't an issue that is going to be fixed overnight or by writing a letter or two.
We need to get our facts straight - not jump off half cocked like some of our elected officials. Making personal attacks on them is not going to help. Using our voices, our dollars and votes may. We need to devote time to educate ourselves and those who are in the position to make these decisions.
I believe that we need to start somewhere and this is as good a place as any. I for one am willing to do anything I can to further our cause.
I think we should start by organizing a small group of us to come up with a plan of action of how best to -
1. Educate ourselves and the powers that be of the true issues and what is really involved.
2. Determine what the best way would be to start to organize and get the word out to all the disparate groups that would be affected by these decisions i.e.. all fisherman, tournament organizations, boat and tackle manufactures ,etc..
3. Come up with a plan of action to begin to flex our collective muscles, and create a lobbying group to carry this message to the powers that be.
4. Determine how to carry out whatever plans we come up with
in the most effective manner.

We are already starting late so I believe it is imperative that we start
now, before its to late. I know that this is going to be an enormous undertaking , but if we don't stand up for ourselves now who knows where it'll go. First it was Casitas, now they're aiming for the Delta, how long will it be before it starts affecting other lakes?
NOW IS THE TIME TO START TO TAKE ACTION
I can be reached at 818 259-8361 or bonsaibp@earthlink.net for anyone who wants to help get the ball rolling.
Thank you for taking the time to read this post.

DanIsaac · Post by **DanIsaac** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 12:54 pm

sTony wrote:I watched this last night on the news and the reporting definitely mixed and matched striped and largemouth bass through out the report. Neither fish is an indigenous species to these waters so figure that both are targets for our screwed up legislation. Putting this at the feet of the environmentalists though is likely diverting the attention from what the report did say were the forces behind the effort and that was central California water agencies. It's an attempt at a water grab for water that the northern part of the state clearly doesn't have all that much of right now.

Greene, you were just up on Oroville. Did you see an excess of water when you were there? I didn't. I saw a lake on the rise but certainly no where near full pool. And had federal judges not shut down the pumps, and used the Delta Smelt to do so, that lake wouldn't be anywhere near where it is now. Contracts have been written to the central California water folks and deliveries on those contracts are far short of what they were written to be. Problem is regardless of how much water there is or isn't those agencies have been demanding that their allotments be filled. They'd literally suck the northern lakes dry if they got their way and frankly, they can care less about it.

Now this legislation is attempting to remove all limits and restrictions on the taking non native species, being stripers and largemouths, as they're being targeted as the 'true' threat to Delta Smelt and Salmon and so forth. It's just another attempt to eventually get those pumps running and water exports flowing to central California water agencies, where they can charge folks a lot of money to soak their fields and so on.

Once again it's time to fight the good fight, let your neighbors and non-fishing family members know that our lakes and rivers are once again in real jeopardy as well as our recreational rights along with it. Everyone's got to start thumping these elected officials with a ton of email and letters banging some common sense into them. The water agencies have a lot of money to get their message out as do environmentalists. But anglers tend to be more the 'I just want to go fishing crowd' and traditionally haven't put forth the sustained efforts towards lobbying and building finances that the other side has done for a long time.

sTony

Spot on Tony, and I hate to say this but I believe this will come to pass, SOONER rather than later. Why? Because of exactly what you you've pointed out, OUTDOORS APATHY!

We will all stand up and scream bloody murder over a keyboard, but when it comes down to it, SPORTSMEN, especially anglers for some reason don't want to bothered. Whether one hunts, fishes, or does both, WE ALL better wake up on this one. This is only the beginning!

This has always intrigued me, one of the largest special interest groups, if not the largest. Outdoors persons are certainly one of the most walked over groups in the nation, especially here in California! Why we just sit back and let it happens baffles me, but we do and probably will........

Here's to the memories CA Delta, it's been nice!

Dan Isaac

p.s. my letters and e-mails have already been sent, and I pray I'm wrong, but as they say, and as sTony pointed out. Past behavior is the best indicator of future behavior, and our track record as a group is not a good one!

gabuelhaj · Post by **gabuelhaj** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 1:43 pm

Those fish are not safe to eat.

This is a documented and published fact.

So, this is what we can do:

Print out flyers stating that and post them throughout the Delta.

This will reinforce this documented fact.

Inform the DFG that if there are no more sport fish in the Delta, they would lose all revenues from the Delta stamps that are sold (would like to know this dollar amount).

And, inform the DFG that they could also lose additional license revenue as a lot of anglers buy the license just to fish the Cal Delta. (Would like to know what the dollar amount of this would be).

And, if the DFG was to lose revenue, the State in turn would lose that revenue as well.

We all know what would happen if that were the case, right?

NOT GOOD!

And, Iâ€™m sure there are groups of people that would not condone the murder of fish as no one would be eating what is caught out of the Cal Delta! Right!?

blkdog812 · Post by **blkdog812** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 1:49 pm

this has been proposed for some time now. its just now making the news because of the recent plans not to pump water to the west side central valley farms, so it can go south.
most people could care less about a a small fish like a delta smelt and they know they couldn't stop anything over the smelt. by claiming the salmon is affected, most people know about salmon, so that is the issue they use to push their agenda.
what most dont know or realize is that our nor cal water issues are dictated / directed by the senators from so cal. our fine northern ones are jumping on the bank wagon.
funny how, full of crap feinsten, votes against other states water issues, yet she votes for them here in calif. if call their office and say ur for eviro issues, you'll get through and they ask for all your info. if you oppose them, they will hang up on you. until they are voted out or they divide the state, we will always have a battle over our water.

bonsaibp · Post by **bonsaibp** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 2:18 pm

We can not turn this into a north or south issue. This is not a battle over our water but a battle to save our sport. There are many diverse opinions about how the water is used, etc. The bottom line is we are one state, we all need water and just because we have an antiquated and inefficient water delivery system we shouldn't be pitting one group against the other.
What we need to do is stand united as fishermen to preserve and protect our passion which is fishing.
I hope we can put aside whatever differences we have or we'll all be sorry later. Please read my post entitled save our fisheries. Iâ€™m not a known figure in the fishing world, donâ€™t fish tournaments so I donâ€™t really know the personalities who may be able to help. What I am is a passionate fisherman who wants to do everything possible to preserve , protect and grow our sport.

jimmy87 · Post by **jimmy87** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 2:22 pm

most people do not understand fishing nor do they care about it.

we are not the majority

First thing this reporter says "you would think fishermen would be in favor of this proposal"

what I feel to be the facts:

The salmon numbers will never return to what it once was.

These people could care less about salmon and steelhead populations.

Dams have been built that destroyed nearly all of salmon steelhead spawning grounds.

The FEW river hatcherys that ever exsisted no longer operate or have been reduced greatly. 50% or less production.

What we will have is a lifless delta if they get thier way.

few bass few stripers and few salmon/steelhead

The only thing this is about is MONEY

I want to know where all the water is going to come from that they want to move to LA?
anyone look at our lakes latley? not much there to send south when we have less than normal rainfall.

They need to build desalinization plants to remove the salt from sea water. Its the only logical answer.
There is simply not ENOUGH water to meet the demands of southern Ca as it continues to grow.

Arnolds canal is a horible idea. If they continue down the same path we will one day (long after all the fish are gone) walk down to the delta and see nothing more than a trick of water and mud.

when the lakes are emty won' t the delta dry up next?
so basicly we would have water in the delta during the winter and spring. by fall it would be empty.

Am I ignorant or what here?

bonsaibp · Post by **bonsaibp** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 2:26 pm

[quote="jimmy87"]most people do not understand fishing nor do they care about it.

we are not the majority

You're right we're not the majority but if we stand united we will have a voice that can't be ignored.
I'm not trying to solve our water problems which is way beyond me, but I would like to do everything possible to save our fisheries.

bigstick · Post by **bigstick** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 2:40 pm

We as fisherman can only do so much.
Unless the guys with money get involved i.e Boat/Tackle manufacures, the large retailers (BPS) etc. who stand to lose a lot in this as well, nothing is going to change.

bonsaibp · Post by **bonsaibp** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 2:50 pm

Since they are dependent on us I think if we present a strong enough united voice they'll have no choice but to get involved. If we don't have places to fish we won't be purchasing their products.

blkdog812 · Post by **blkdog812** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 2:56 pm

unfortunately, it is a north / south issue. the south has the money and power to dictate all the water issues in/of the north.
unless something changes to correct this imbalance, we will continue have little to no-say, as to how water is used and distributed. sadly we will all have to suffer from what ever they impose.

bonsaibp · Post by **bonsaibp** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 3:06 pm

That I'm afraid is an even bigger battle than trying to save our fisheries. I'm sure there are way more factors involved in restructuring our water system than any of us realize. We all need water- north, south and center. Desalination seems to me to be the obvious choice but somehow I think it all comes down to the almighty $. Like the petroleum industry I don't think to much will be done as long as there is money to be made. When we run out of water than there will be an all out effort to find another answer. Just like as long as oil comes out of the ground there won't be any major efforts to find an
Lets fight one battle at a time..

swimbait · Post by **swimbait** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 3:12 pm

Steve made one of the best points in this thread. If farming is reduced in CA by restricting water, food will be grown in other countries and imported in larger and larger amounts.

If you think for one second that countries like China and India give a rats *** about pollution, you have not been there. I have been to both and seen it first hand. A river in India is just a convenient place to toss trash and take a dump in. The ocean in China is so brown and disgusting it doesn't look like any water I've ever seen in my life. And the smog in Beijing is so thick you can see it inside the buildings.

By restricting water supplies to farmers in CA, the state becomes a net pollution exporter. It's that simple. But from a political standpoint, it's much easier to do that since 99.9% of the CA population will never see the places where the food winds up being grown. Thank God they just passed that law requiring food to be labeled with the country of origin. Now I can avoid anything grown in China.

To the topic of eradicating non-native species. This seems to be a popular one lately. Eg, the Center for Biological Diversities' lawsuit against the DFG forcing them to conduct EIR's before planting any more rainbow trout in lakes less than 1000 acres -- and this proposal to remove bag limits on non-natives at the CA Delta.

The thing that no one seems to be realizing is that removing non-native fish like planted trout or largemouth bass is not something you can do in a vacuum!!! When you remove non-natives, you are affecting the entire ecosystem that has evolved around them.

Example: No trout will be stocked at Santa Margarita lake this year because it could be the 'straw that breaks the camel's back' for native animals like red-legged frogs. But go to Santa Margarita lake and observe the predators that have evolved around the stocked rainbow trout. Note the cormorants, blue herons, golden eagles, and of course the largemouth bass.

All of these hungry predators have reached population levels in line with their food source. Now the Center for Biological Diversity takes this food source away. What will those animals do next? It doesn't take a degree in Biology to realize they'll go after anything that moves including red-legged frogs. Who is to say that won't be the straw that breaks the red-legged frog's back at Santa Margarita lake?

Someone made a point about seals eating salmon. Take away striped bass and largemouth bass (and especially channel catfish) and what do you think seals will do? Eat more salmon perhaps??? I'd think so. But meanwhile lets do a reality check. You'll never ever remove largemouth bass and striper entirely from the CA Delta. Ever. They can't get pike out of Davis lake can they?

The point I'm getting to is that non-natives are not the root cause of reduction in species like red-legged frogs, salmon, or delta smelt. The non-natives are only proximate causes. The real root causes are the Dams and the use of the water by humans.

Given that removing dams or limiting the use of water by humans in CA will result in a hideous export of pollution to other countries and the destruction of their native species you would think the people who are advocating for removal of non-native species would realize that the non-natives are by far the lesser of two evils. But they don't seem to get it! The ignorance and narrow-mindedness of their view infuriates me.

mac (Doyle McEwen) · Post by **mac (Doyle McEwen)** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 3:16 pm

On the water problem and dividing the state, even if this were to happen, the water problems would still exist..Northern California would still need money to function and the one really quick way of getting that money is selling resources..One of those resources is water from the Delta via the various reservoirs..Splitting the state will do nothing to solve the potential situation we are discussing..

Saving the salmon is a worthy cause, although I doubt anything we could do in the immediate next couple of years will make much if any difference..The damage has already been done and it is highly unlikely we will ever be able to completely repair it..

Sometimes I think our state and even our federal representatives have no idea just how much money is involved in sportfishing and other fresh water activities..You would think they would know, but their actions tend to show they do not..I know California has more than their fair share of environmental activists and they have or seem to have the ears and minds of our representatives, much to our detriment as anglers..

I have absolutely no idea of how to fix the problem..In all honesty I doubt we can do much at all..But we would be severly lacking in our love for the sport of bass fishing if we don't try something..I do know we have had this same situation virtually every year, I have seen nothing to lessen it and certainly nothing stopping it..

mac

TomAtkeson · Post by **TomAtkeson** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 3:18 pm

sTony,
Is there any way we can get a letter and petition going on here where everyone can sign it provide our email addresses and demand we each get an answer to our questions and concerns in our email box?

blkdog812 · Post by **blkdog812** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 5:44 pm

bonsaibp i do agree with you. all the coastal cities should go to desalination for their water. the amount of water the could be diverted to rivers, lakes, farms etc would help to stop of alot of this crap.

jimmy87 · Post by **jimmy87** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 7:28 pm

bonsaibp wrote:
jimmy87 wrote:most people do not understand fishing nor do they care about it.

we are not the majority

You're right we're not the majority but if we stand united we will have a voice that can't be ignored.
I'm not trying to solve our water problems which is way beyond me, but I would like to do everything possible to save our fisheries.

agreed 100% We NEED to do somthing. Keep me posted on what can be done.

Hardshell · Post by **Hardshell** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 3:48 am

This is the kind of idea that could go a long way to combating an insane plan such as the one proposed. Excellent way to fight fire with fire, 'cause they damn sure don't listen to us when to talk in a "NORMAL" voice!

Hardshell

gabuelhaj wrote:Those fish are not safe to eat.

This is a documented and published fact.

So, this is what we can do:

Print out flyers stating that and post them throughout the Delta.

This will reinforce this documented fact.

Inform the DFG that if there are no more sport fish in the Delta, they would lose all revenues from the Delta stamps that are sold (would like to know this dollar amount).

And, inform the DFG that they could also lose additional license revenue as a lot of anglers buy the license just to fish the Cal Delta. (Would like to know what the dollar amount of this would be).

And, if the DFG was to lose revenue, the State in turn would lose that revenue as well.

We all know what would happen if that were the case, right?

NOT GOOD!

And, Iâ€™m sure there are groups of people that would not condone the murder of fish as no one would be eating what is caught out of the Cal Delta! Right!?

mark poulson · Post by **mark poulson** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 5:38 am

Steve,
You made another great point that totally exposes how false the water district's "save the salmon" claim is.
Dams, the same dams that hold the water they sell, are the biggest killer of salmon, by restricting their migration and spawn.
If the dams were all gone, the salmon would return in their historic numbers.
But you don't hear the water districts advocating that.
Frankly, that would be idiotic. We need more dams and reservoirs, not less.
This is just a smoke screen to get the pumps turned on again.
Desalination is one answer for all coastal cities.
And a pipe line from the Mississippi to Lake Powell, to pull some of the flood waters off that rake the big river every year and cause billions in losses on a regular basis.
A couple of 30' diameter pipes, like the ones running from Pyramid to Castaic, could move a lot of water, running night and day during the flood season.
And Lake Powell, and Mead below that, can hold a lot of water.
If the Colorado River system ran to full capacity, there'd be enough water for SoCal, and that would release our hold on NoCal water.
They could even pump some back up to the Central Valley.
That would be a great infrastructure project, and the Oil Companies already know how to do it. They built a pipeline down from Alaska.

And I'm from SoCal, so it's not just a NoCal problem, it's all of us.

J.Rios · Post by **J.Rios** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 4:32 pm

Tags

Notice