Quagmire Mussel Update

[swimbait]

So, after spending millions of dollars and inspecting tens of thousands of boats in CA, has a single mussel been found at any lake in CA? Has the spending been justified, or a total waste?

I've had my boat inspected at Del Valle, San Pablo, Coyote, Santa Margarita, Casitas, Perris, Diamond Valley, Clear Lake, and at the California border with Arizona. At most of those locations I've asked the inspectors if they've ever found anything. In every case the answer has been no.

One inspector actually told me that if they did find something, they would send the person home and not report it to the water district because even a single finding could scare the district bad enough to close the lake completely. Which would mean they would lose their job. This is a classic prinicipal-agent problem. Given this, can we even expect that if mussels are found they will be reported? I would reason that in most cases they will not be reported.

The most likely scenario I see for mussel infestation in Northern California is via a house boat or similar large vessel that comes from an infested location like Mead or Havasu. I watched the woman who inspected my boat when I crossed the CA border coming from Missouri. Water could have been in my lower unit or in the livewell and she would never have found it. I doubt she knew what a livewell was or where to find one in a boat. The inspection was a joke compared to what they put you through at DVL or Coyote. If my next stop was a place like Don Pedro, McClure, Melones, San Antonio, Nacimiento, Clear Lake, Oroville, the CA Delta and Shasta where there are no inspections or joke inspections (Clear Lake) the mussel would get in.

The second most likely scenario to my mind is that the mussels will come from a boat in San Diego that launches at one of those large water bodies named above. That one is a no brainer since lakes like Lower Otay and El Capitan have mussels and there's nothing to stop people from driving straight to a place like Don Pedro and launching. They dump the bilge when they get there and off go the mussels.

We all know that most of those large lakes listed above drain to the CA Delta. So as soon as one is infested, the Delta is only a matter of time. Stopping the mussels from getting downstream will be as futile as killing pike in lake Davis or stopping Asian carp from getting in to the Great Lakes. Those programs make fun work for biologists and headlines in the newspaper but they don't work. They just waste a lot of money that could have been spent doing something useful things like creating fish habitat or cleaning up garbage on the shore of the lake. Just imagine if all the quagga mussel inspectors in the state had been cleaning up trash and planting fish habitat instead of sticking their finger up drain plugs.

I see mussel infestation in the CA Delta is inevitable. When it does happen the question will then be, "What's next?" Water from the Delta flows all over the state. It may be possible to treat and filter to these 'downstream' locations and keep the mussels out, but at what cost? Would it be cheaper to just open up boating at all lakes again and let the mussels go where they may?

Is it cheaper to install equipment at the lakes to deal with the mussels than to inspect for them for year after year? Has anyone done a cost-benefit analysis here? Or was the California response to the dreaded mussel infestation just a knee-jerk reaction based on ignorance of the facts? Here's some maps showing mussel locations across the country.

Maps of Dreissena Mussel Infestation

Should we feel pity for everyone around the great lakes and points south that are infested by the mussel? I mean, their lives must be terrible, right?. Or should we have a reality check and look at the well known fact that the only time any humans have lost water in the United States because of mussels was in Monroe, MI in 1989 for 2 days. Time for a reality check people.

Mussel infestation across California is inevitable. The results will not be disastrous. Fishing will be fine. Drinking water will be fine. The only disaster is continuing to harass boaters and pour money down the drain inspecting boats. The water districts should just save the money for the day when they have to start filtering for mussels. If they had started two years ago they'd have a nice chunk of change saved up already.

[Levy]

So, after spending millions of dollars and inspecting tens of thousands of boats in CA, has a single mussel been found at any lake in CA? Has the spending been justified, or a total waste?

I've had my boat inspected at Del Valle, San Pablo, Coyote, Santa Margarita, Casitas, Perris, Diamond Valley, Clear Lake, and at the California border with Arizona. At most of those locations I've asked the inspectors if they've ever found anything. In every case the answer has been no.

One inspector actually told me that if they did find something, they would send the person home and not report it to the water district because even a single finding could scare the district bad enoguh to close the lake completely. Which would mean they would lose their job. This is a classic prinicipal-agent problem. Given this, can we even expect that if mussels are found they will be reported? I would reason that in most cases they will not be reported.

The most likely scenario I see for mussel infestation in Northern California is via a house boat or similar large vessel that comes from an infested location like Mead or Powell. I watched the woman who inspected my boat when I crossed the CA border coming from Missouri. Water could have been in my lower unit or in the livewell and she would never have found it. I doubt she knew what a livewell was or where to find one in a boat. The inspection was a joke compared to what they put you through at DVL or Coyote. If my next stop was a place like Don Pedro, McClure, Melones, San Antonio, Nacimiento, Clear Lake, Oroville, the CA Delta and Shasta where there are no inspections or joke inspections (Clear Lake) the mussel would get in.

The second most likely scenario to my mind is that the mussels will come from a boat in San Diego that launches at one of those large water bodies named above. That one is a no brainer since lakes like Lower Otay and El Capitan have mussels and there's nothing to stop people from driving straight to a place like Don Pedro and launching. They dump the bilge when they get there and off go the mussels.

We all know that most of those large lakes listed above drain to the CA Delta. So as soon as one is infested, the Delta is only a matter of time. Stopping the mussels from getting downstream will be as futile as killing pike in lake Davis or stopping Asian carp from getting in to the Great Lakes. Those programs make fun work for biologists and headlines in the newspaper but they don't work. They just waste a lot of money that could have been spent doing something useful things like creating fish habitat or cleaning up garbage on the shore of the lake. Just imagine if all the quagga mussel inspectors in the state had been cleaning up trash and planting fish habitat instead of sticking their finger up drain plugs.

I see mussel infestation in the CA Delta is inevitable. When it does happen the question will then be, "What's next?" Water from the Delta flows all over the state. It may be possible to treat and filter to these 'downstream' locations and keep the mussels out, but at what cost? Would it be cheaper to just open up boating at all lakes again and let the mussels go where they may?

Is it cheaper to install equipment at the lakes to deal with the mussels than to inspect for them for year after year? Has anyone done a cost-benefit analysis here? Or was the California response to the dreaded mussel infestation just a knee-jerk reaction based on ignorance of the facts? Here's a map showing mussel locations across the country.



Should we feel pity for everyone around the great lakes and points south that are infested by the mussel? I mean, their lives must be terrible, right?. Or should we have a reality check and look at the well known fact that the only time any humans have lost water in the United States because of mussels was in Monroe, MI in 1989 for 2 days. Time for a reality check people.

Mussel infestation across California is inevitable. The results will not be disastrous. Fishing will be fine. Drinking water will be fine. The only disaster is continuing to harass boaters and pour money down the drain inspecting boats. The water districts should just save the money for the day when they have to start filtering for mussels. If they had started two years ago they'd have a nice chunk of change saved up already.

Amen, best post I have seen to date!!!

[Johnny C]

Well said as usual Rob!!!!

[bigbass111]

They will not find any mussels in your boat anyways!!! The mussels eggs are not visible and they are in the water of every lake contaminated.

And I have seen these dudes all over our SD lakes. El cap has them crusted all over brush, concrete and bushes.

[swimbait]

Another thing that drives me insane is these people who act as if some precious ecosystem will be destroyed if man-made lakes get quagga mussels in them.

Let's see, take a nice big river like the Tuolumne and stick a massive dam across it to build Don Pedro Lake. Then stock the lake with largemouth bass, smallmouth bass, rainbow trout, brown trout, kokanee salmon, landlocked king salmon, threadfin shad, bluegill, and who knows what else.

Now let thousands of people go camping along the shore and rip up and down the lake in powerboats. And while you are at it, suck most of the water out of the lake every summer and fall to create a barren wasteland of rock and mud along the shore.

Anything that used to live in the Tuolumne river where the lake is now, be it bird, fish or reptile is pretty much toast now. Some critters like Ospreys might do well eating stocked trout, and maybe there's more frogs with the increase in miles of shoreline. But overall the entire environment is totally man-made and filled with non-native species.

We could call the kokanee salmon invasive but that word doesn't fit well with salmon since salmon have a nice happy anadramous fish reputation and it's not nice to call them invasive. No one calls a seal in the Delta invasive either. Seals have cute whiskers and it's just not nice to say that about them.

But as soon as some bivalve comes along to our man-made lakes that we can't put on the barbecue grill or catch on a glob of powerbait it's like the sky is falling and the earth is about to end.

What ever happened to the mitten crab anyway?

[DanIsaac]

Mitten Crab? Cooch has em' all. What do you think he uses a trailer for his Wadda Bomb jig? Must work!

Dan

[jazzwannabe]

I saw something about quaggas on TV. It said that in addition to the damage they do by clogging everything up, etc., their fecal matter is toxic. It is said to kill plankton, fish and birds, and it costs a lot more money to filter for human consumption. Has that actually happened anywhere?

[swimbait]

Take a look at the maps I linked to above that show where there are quagga and zebra mussels. If those places are awash in "quagga fecal matter" it must be pretty gross.

CNN.com loves to carry stories about stupid nature stuff like this and I haven't seen anything on it. Not saying it doesn't happen but it must not be that big of a deal if it does.

[rexford]

I agree with you 100% Rob!

Anyone else noticed a decline in their fishing due to this topic?
I used to fish Santa Clara lakes every weekend but have not
been back since this whole mess started.

Its a pathetic approach and I refuse to pay for it. The Delta is
close enough and I will spend my time there.

What else can we do?

Mike

[scottsweet]

Rob, I understand what you are saying. However, there is something that no one has mentioned yet and unfortunately, there is little "published" information as it relates to it. The cost of management and the impact it has on water costs as a result of mussel infestation.

Remember, the number one issue/concern of the mussel infestation is the impact to the water transport infrastructure, not fishing. In the Midwest where we have the largest infestation, the fishing, etc has probably improved in some situations, but the amount of money to clean all the pipes and maintain the valves, gates, screens, etc has cost millions.

They are trying to figure out ways to prevent infestation, control the spread and perhaps eliminate them. So far, there has been little or no success that can be empirically measured to speak of. We don't have a true test to prove one thing or another since we don't have a control to measure against. However, people have come up with their best guess on how to control the spread as best as possible.

I find your argument interesting: "...with all that has been done, have they ever found anything...no... and therefore there must not be a problem." Rob, is it possible that with all that has been done, have we accomplished the goal of slowing the spread? I think we have done this due to some (including YOU and other bass fisherman!) being informed. Boats are being inspected and therefore many (not all) people are being more careful. This is a good thing.

Having said that, there are some lakes that have gone over the top in their prevention policies, like Casitas. The folks who are on the Board of Directors are fanatical and of course are in California, so they have to keep up our reputation right? . So you know, the reasons the Board of Directors at Casitas responded the way they did is because they did not have 100% protection (prevention or with costs) from the very agencies that are to protect them. I was at the meetings, I was involved for the entire process and I heard the information presented to the Board of Directors. They wanted a 100% guarantee and NO ONE can even begin to do this. All the other lakes have taken a more reasonable approach to prevention and some have quite frankly been a joke, as already noted.

Bottom line, we all have to contribute to the prevention. Yes it is inconvenient and yes it may cost us all a little more time or money. Heck, at the very beginning of all this, it cost me an entry in to a tournament and a shot at the TOC due to the ignorance/inexperience of the inspectors! In the big scheme of things, its equivalent to a couple of good swimbaits over the period of a year or two. Lord knows, you have spent a small fortune on those babies with many having the success of catching YOU, not a fish.

I say suck it up, realize it is an inconvenience that California is dealing with and move on. Let me tell you, if this is THE only problem you have in your fishing experience/career, it is VERY small in comparison to those who are ill, fighting for our country or out of work and wondering if they will have a roof over their head next week.

We live in a great country to be able to do what we love. We live in a state where people can be fanatical, litigious and waiting for the opportunity to prey on someone for a buck. It is what it is so let's move on and go fish. Be happy with what you have, not complain about the small inconveniences and things you don't have!

Tight Lines and have a Happy Holidays and safe New Year.

[Kevin]

It seems as if there HAS to be something that would eat these darn little Quagga's. Do the Goby's in the Great Lakes eat the Mussels?

[scottsweet]

Yes, they have natural predators and the scientists know what they are. But it is kinda like saying, doesn't water put out a fire? Yes..of course, but a garden hose won't help with a forest fire.

The natural predators are not indigenous to the waters where there is an infestation - at least to the point to control them. The mussels reproduce by the millions! They are just hard to control.

[Noluk]

I am certainly glad that bass were stocked ot California way before my time and before this ecological political nightmare. I know there are folks out there who would try to stop the introduction of bass to California waters if it was being done for the first time right now. Heck I am glad we don't have political folks who (like Japan) claim bass are an invasive species and should be eradicated from california waters... yet.

[jack65274]

One of the main points Swimbait is making is that the inspections are pretty much useless because it is rare that the inspector really checks anything or even knows what to look for and where to look. I have been thru several inspections where I was asked where my boat had been and that was all-no physical check. The only real inspection happening here, for the most part, is the one we do ourselves. Otherwise its all just more wasted time, wasted money, and in the end nothing accomplished which is pretty typical of this state.

[swimbait]

Scott,

Thanks for the reply. I'm interested to debate this issue and hear other viewpoints. To your point, I don't dispute that treating mussel infestation costs a lot of money. I just question how that cost compares with the cost of inspecting. Nico (my team partner) looked in to this issue of the cost of treating for mussel infestation once infested vs. the cost of inspecting.

Here is one case study from Florida that he found:

http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/fe693

If you breeze through this article it will make it seem that inspecting and educating is much cheaper than treating. But if you use a critical eye you'll see that the author's assessment that inspecting and educating would yield a net gain of $188 million vs. a net loss of $244 million if nothing is done includes a value of $219 million for lost wetland function. What is lost wetland function? The author does not define it. I suspect that it is an intangible value assigned using loose methods.

I like wetlands and don't want to see them ruined by quagga mussels. But I get annoyed when arbitrary dollar amounts are assigned to things like this. It would be like if we started calculating "Lost River Function" and assigning dollar losses for every dam in CA that ruined the river system it blocked. I like rivers but I also like having drinking water and food to eat so I think it's a waste of time to assign a dollar value loss for the rivers that have been ruined for human use.

Throughout history humans have made and justified lots of tradeoffs that trample the environment. A lot of it makes me sick. Read the book "Collapse" by Jared Diamond if you want to get your learn on. But I say let's pick our battles and let stuff like the quagga mussel go. It's not worth it. in CA we're just trying to protect fake ecosystems that we created with dams and intentional species introduction.

The few natural lakes and rivers we have that should be worth trying to protect biodiversity in are the ones that are not being protected and that have already altered far more than any mussel ever could. Instead the water districts are guarding places like Lake Casitas or Coyote. I say it's a pointless waste of time. Just my opinion.

[rexford]

I say suck it up, realize it is an inconvenience that California is dealing with and move on. Let me tell you, if this is THE only problem you have in your fishing experience/career, it is VERY small in comparison to those who are ill, fighting for our country or out of work and wondering if they will have a roof over their head next week.

We live in a great country to be able to do what we love. We live in a state where people can be fanatical, litigious and waiting for the opportunity to prey on someone for a buck. It is what it is so let's move on and go fish. Be happy with what you have, not complain about the small inconveniences and things you don't have!

Tight Lines and have a Happy Holidays and safe New Year.

I agree with you that there is allot to be thankful for. I do not think
that is a reason not to question or tolerate incompetence. Especially
if I am required to pay for it.

[Riplip]

I'm conducting research into a viable alternative that would actually produce a positive fiscal result and save the state millions...Quagga Tacos.

I'll bet for less than $200 million dollars I can de-toxify the little bass-turds into something tasty.

All kidding aside, great debate...

[swimbait]

Riplip, you're joking but thinking outside the box is how this kind of thing gets "fixed".

Maybe quagga and zebra mussel waste can be processed to produce energy. Maybe the shells have value as fertilizer. Maybe you can use them to make sandpaper. There could be many possibilities that no one is thinking about.

Most likely everyone will just continue on a one track way of thinking about these things, but I hope not.

[durobi]

When our government legislates to solve a problem, it doesn't have to solve anything, it just has to FEEL GOOD!
Think about global warming, homeland security, welfare, war on drugs , I could go on and on.

[flipit]

I agree with you 100% Rob!

Anyone else noticed a decline in their fishing due to this topic?
I used to fish Santa Clara lakes every weekend but have not
been back since this whole mess started.

Its a pathetic approach and I refuse to pay for it. The Delta is
close enough and I will spend my time there.

What else can we do?

Mike

I like you have elected to fish elsewhere rather then deal with Santa Clara's mess.