Court Decision Banning Trout Plants Will Have Wide Ranging Impact

Court Decision Banning Trout Plants Will Have Wide Ranging Impact

by Dan Bacher

Lake Natoma, situated on the American River east of Sacramento, is one of the best habitats in California for producing huge rainbow trout. Frank Palmer of Orangevale set the California state inland lake record for rainbow trout on October 2, 2005 when he pulled a 27 lb. fish from the lake. His monster eclipsed the previous record of 23 pounds set on January 17, 2000 by 7-year-old Jeremy Brucklacher of North Highlands, also at Natoma.

The lake is a "big trout factory", due to its relatively stable water temperature, high abundance of pond smelt and other forage, and relatively light fishing pressure. Fish planted in the lake by the DFG as 10 to 14 inch “catchables” hold over and grow rapidly, up to 3 pounds per year.

Lake Natoma is on a hit list of about 175 California waters, including some of the Sierra Nevada’s most productive trout fisheries, that will be not planted by the Department of Fish and Game until an environmental impact report (EIR) is finished by the agency, under a court order by Sacramento Superior Court Judge Patrick Marlette.

The ruling is result of a lawsuit filed in 2006 against the DFG by the Pacific Rivers Council and the Center for Biological Diversity, represented by students from the Stanford Law Clinic. The EIR process is now scheduled to be completed in January 2010.

Although the list of lakes chosen for a suspension of plants has puzzled many anglers, the DFG and groups said the decision has been made under a set of parameters that they DFG and groups came to agreement on.

“We didn’t actually pick these lakes,” said Jordan Traverso, DFG spokesperson. “Rather the DFG and the groups agreed on the parameters of lakes where trout plants would be suspended and put the list on our website.”

With some exceptions, the court order has a broad prohibition against DFG stocking “nonnative” fish in “any California fresh water body” where surveys have demonstrated the presence of 25 specified amphibian or fish species or where a survey for those species has not yet been done, according to the DFG. The order does not address the stocking of native fish into native waters. Also, major reservoirs with over 1,000 surface acres are also exempted from the stocking ban.

“Interim measures limiting stocking are needed to help save California’s native fish and frogs from extinction,” said Noah Greenwald, biodiversity program director for the Center for Biological Diversity, in explaining the reason for the agreement. “Fish and Game will still be able to stock hatchery fish, but mainly in places where they won’t harm native species.”

“The Department needs to consider the environmental impacts of its fish-stocking program before it stocks more fish into waters that are still strongholds for native species,” added Dr. Chris Frissell, director of Science and Conservation for Pacific Rivers Council. “This is the only way that the Department can be sure that it is not causing or contributing to the loss of the last remaining populations of these native California animals and the habitat they depend on.”

The temporary stocking ban affects waters throughout the state, most significantly lakes, reservoirs and streams in the Sierra Nevada, Trinity Alps and Northern Mountains, but also reservoirs in Santa Clara, Alameda, Marin and other Bay Area counties. Reaction to the ban by anglers and fishing groups has ranged from strong opposition to the settlement by fishing businesses most impacted by the ban to support by fish conservation groups.


Sierra Businesses Strongly Oppose Stocking Ban

In the Central Sierra, owners of fishing businesses were outraged because 11 out of 22 waters formerly stocked in Alpine County will no longer be planted and no waters in Calaveras County will be planted.

“Catching a fish of a lifetime or having your children or grand children enjoy the pleasures of catching their first fish may be only a memory of days gone by,” emphasized bill Reynolds, owner of Ebbetts Pass Sporting Goods in Arnold. “This court ruling passed down will affect hundreds, if not thousands of people including all of the businesses that are dependent on our fisheries up and down our Highway 4 corridor.”

The list of waters where trout won’t be planted in Alpine County include Lake Alpine, Upper Blue Lake, the East and West Forks of the Carson River, Markleeville Creek, Meadow Lake, Upper and Lower Mosquito Lakes and Silver. Two of my favorite reservoirs in the entire Sierra, Spicer Meadows and Union Reservoir, won’t be stocked.

“This will be devastating to not only our business and surrounding businesses, but will have a trickle down affect to suppliers and manufacturers,” said Reynolds. “I am in this for the long haul and I am prepared to fight for what has been a heritage for most families, including mine, passed down from generation to generation.”

Reynolds criticized the two environmental groups for having little concern for the economic impact the litigation will have upon local businesses, as well as the dollars that recreational fishing generates for conservation and local fish restoration.

“This lawsuit was initiated by groups that not only do not care about us, especially in these tough economic times, but are not even located in our state.,” said Reynolds. “The Pacific Rivers Council is located in Portland Oregon and the Center for Biological Diversity is located in Tuscon AZ. Tuscon AZ.”

Bob Boucke, owner of Johnson’s Bait and Tackle in Yuba City, said a halt to DFG planting in Feather River watershed lakes including Rollins, Scotts Flat, Englebright and Collins lakes will have a big impact upon tfishing businesses already hammered by the unprecedented salmon closures on ocean and Central Valley rivers this year. He also noted that suspending plants at many lakes and streams could have the opposite effect intended, putting more fishing pressure on wild trout and other fish populations.

“Now these waters will only have wild fish to fish for,” he said. “I fear that the wild trout populations will get caught and the groups will use this as the excuse to close all fishing on these waters. The hatchery program, in my opinion, actually helps the wild trout populations by taking pressure off them.”

Although some have portrayed the decision to stop stocking as a “frogs” versus “fish issue, the ban was enacted to “protect” not only frogs, but 16 fish species, including California golden trout, southern California steelhead ESU, south-central California steelhead ESU, central California steelhead ESU, summer-run steelhead trout, McCloud River redband trout, arroyo chub, winter-run chinook salmon, coastal cutthroat trout, spring-run chinook salmon, Goose Lake tui chub, hardhead, Modoc sucker, Owens speckled dace, Owens tui chub and the Santa Ana sucker.

Amphibians that the ban was designed to protect include the California red-legged frog, Cascades frog, foothill yellow-legged frog, northern leopard frog, mountain yellow-legged frog, northern red-legged frog, Oregon spotted frog, the tailed frog and the arroyo toad

El Dorado County was also hard hit by the planting ban, with 16 waters taken off the plant list. These include the Silver Fork of the American River, South Fork of the American River, Dark Lake, Upper and Lower Echo Lakes, El Dorado Forebay, Ice House Reservoir. Jenkinson Lake, Kalmia Lake, Lost Lake, General Creek, Stumpy Meadows Reservoir, Taylor Creek and Wrights Lake.


Fish Conservation Groups Encouraged by Interim Agreement

The good news to anglers is that 750 of the Department's current fish planting sites - 80% of planted bodies of water in California - will still be stocked with hatchery fish during the environmental review process. “We are pleased that the order allows us to continue stocking in a number of areas where the communities depend on fishing,” said Donald Koch, DFG Director

The presidents of both Kokanee Power and California Inland Fisheries Foundation Inc. (CIFFI) were encouraged that most California waters on the DFG plant list will continue to be stocked.

"This is encouraging news and a little bit of a relief,” said Gary Coe, President of Kokanee Power, in reference to the settlement. “I'm glad to see that an agreement was reached that will satisfy the interim goals of both parties. With California's dense population, stocking is necessary in order to provide anglers with the opportunity to catch fish. It's unfortunate that there aren't enough wild stocks left to meet the demand of the state's angling population, all the more making hatcheries and fisheries management and enhancement important."

Garry Erck, the president of CIFFI, had similar feelings about the court ordered settlement.

“The California Inland Fisheries Foundation is somewhat relieved that Superior Court Judge Patrick Marlette, after negotiations with all parties involved, will allow the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) to begin restocking hatchery reared fish into some of California's waters,” said Erck. “We realize that the issue does not close with this compromise, but it is a first step in the process until DFG provides the Environmental impact reports on waters where there is potential harm to approximately twenty-five endangered or threatened species.”

Erck emphasized that this compromise step will allow many of the hatchery stocked lakes to resume planting schedules and relieve the pressure on hatcheries already bulging with fish ready to plant.

“While relieved with this first step in resolution, there are still many details to be worked out,” Erck said. “A significant number of well known lakes will go unplanted until the EIR is complete in 2010, including lakes that see heavy angler use throughout the year. We anxiously await the completion of the EIR and hope for more information to further define where we are now and what the future may bring for California’s angling public.”

California Trout also said it supports the agreement reached between environmental groups and DFG.

"While we strongly support providing positive fishing experiences for anglers around California, we also want to ensure that the planting of hatchery fish augments the fishing experience without threatening the health and well being of species native to the rivers, streams and lakes where they originated, according to a statement from the group. "This is why we support the current legal agreement that has been reached between conservation groups and the Department of Fish and Game, which allows ongoing stocking of most of the bodies of water that are currently part of the state's hatchery program while providing additional time for Department to better analyze and understand the environmental implications of the program."

The list of lakes being stocked and not being planted may change, based on the DFG’s monitoring. “If we find that none of the endangered species are found in a lake or stream, that water could be taken off the no-plant list,” said Traverso. “Conversely, waters on the stocking list could be taken off if endangered species are found there during the study.”

Chris Shutes, FERC Projects Director for the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, has done an excellent analysis of the “stocking lawsuit” and what you can do in his “Q&A information guide” to this issue at http://www.calsport.org/12-3-08a.htm

The next opportunity for public involvement and input regarding the DFG’s fish planting programs will be at scoping meetings that will be held when the draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report is released, most likely in February or March 2009, according to California Trout.

For a complete list of the lakes being stocked or not, go to http://www.dfg.ca.gov/news/stocking/

Note: Noah Greenwald of the Center for Biological Diversity, Fish and Game Deputy Director Jordan Traverso and Dan Bacher will join Tom Stienstra, S.F. Chronicle outdoor columnist, on a panel, Frogs vs. Fish, on Jan. 9 at 5 p.m. at the Sportsmen's Exposition in San Mateo. "Question? Statement? Let it rip," said Stienstra. For more information, go to http://www.sportsexpos.com.