Page 6 of 6

Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2007 6:35 pm
by mikehike

Thanks for the reply, you addressed all of my questions. I understand how a lake basin would be ideal situation for frog restoration as opposed to single lake.

I would like to be kept informed on this topic as much as possible and if they allow a fishermans input that would be great.

What is the best website for this topic?

Posted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 4:21 pm
by mountaineer
Russ, sorry about your trip. I like the giggin' idea.

At some point in time, we are going to have to realize that some things are better they way they are now instead of trying to go back to how things were.

Posted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 8:55 pm
by mikehike

Its easy to roll over let this happen with out some voice from the fisherman, I have read both threads in this part of the forum and the fishing hole thread. The fishing hole thread was so heated Eric closed it, it was reduced to mud slinging. I find many discrepancies from some of the pro-frog elite's.

1. lakes with trophy fish are not chosen
2. Gill nets safely catch fish Only.

Well we already no item 1 is false and I have my doubts on Gill netting.

My feeling is America is about checks and balances, without checks we have no balance. I am sorry but I do not trust the frog contingent, If they can find enough grant funding I would not be surpriized if they go after every trout lake possible.

Why would they do this?

Well I would probably discontinue back packing along with many other fisherman, less people in the Sierra's, frog people happy.

Maybe I am being a bit paranoid, because this would be labor intensive and exspensive undertaking, but this is california and if it could happen anywhere its here.

Gill Netting:

Try to find positive data on gill netting, it just doesn't exist. For some reason Gill netting in the Sierras only catches trout. I don't beleive it.
I can see dead ducks getting tangled in Gill nets set for 2-3 weeks at a time. What sorts of Bacteria are formed from rotting fish, where are the rotting fish disposed of. Bald Eagles? could they spot a dead fish underwater? Bald Eagles are more scavengers then hunters, I'd hope gill nets would not be set in area with a nesting Bald Eagle.

I would like to have a voice in this, I would hope some of us passionate fisherman could band together and form a watch-dog group. I don't have problem with preserving endangered species, but with 2,000 lakes in the Sierra's we should be able to have a balance between fish and frogs.


Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 3:41 pm
by gdurkee
Just heard from another froggie researcher friend. He stays in contact with pretty much all the gill net projects in the Sierra. He wrote:
As for gill net by-catch, it happens very rarely. If nets are set carefully, most of this can be avoided. However, I know of dippers, ducks, grebes, and shrews being captured in gill nets deployed in Sierra Nevada lakes.
So, it does happen, but not that often. The fact that Vance hasn't seen any in 10 years of nets in 60 Lakes Basin would seem to me to say it's extremely rare.

Next, it's come up elsewhere that because Vance misstated how ducks swim underwater that both he and researchers in general are suspect. I will say that Vance has spent more time in the backcountry than anyone on this forum and certainly has more experience with gill netting. It was his research that proved eliminating fish would restore frogs to lakes. He certainly knows that ducks go underwater, though don't swim the distances that, say, dippers do.

Mikehike: I appreciate that you seem sincerely interested in the issues involved and looking for information. I'm a little unclear on what you meant by "pro-frog elite." I'm not sure what's elite about it. The enabling legislation of the National Park Service, the Wilderness Act, the Endangered Species Act & etc. is pretty clear. We have both a moral and legal obligation to preserve species and ecosystems. Fish are not native to much of the High Sierra and they are causing a major disruption to that ecosystem. Once again, though, it's not an either/or thing. It's most definitely "both."

You may have misread the description of how lakes are chosen. I didn't say (nor did anyone else here) that "lakes with trophy fish are not chosen." I said that, wherever possible, they're avoided. It won't always be possible though.

There's also a fair number of fish/trout organizations out there. My guess is that the ones in California will be on the notification lists for EAs or EIS being done where gill netting will happen. That would be one way to stay informed and active. The whole idea of an EA is to get public comment when a major project is to be carried out.


Fish decimaters

Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 7:30 pm
by AldeFarte
George. I can appreciate the sentiment of people wanting to save the frog. But I guess you can officially put me in the "left wing black helicopter" crowd. I don't trust the motives of guberment. And by the same token ,the people who do research for the guberment. Even tho the researchers may be wholly and totally doing their research in good faith. Big wigs in guberment tend to draw a conclusion and then figure the best way to reach that conclusion. So to speak. Caddis has alluded to the theory that perhaps it would be better to have isolated populations of endangered critters. Less chance of a catastrophic failure in the "whole" system. I agree with that and it has already proven to be a sound policy. Numerous pockets of isolated pure strain critters have been saved by being isolated and thereby"safe". With NO help from the almighty guberment. The same people who would save the frog by wiping out the fish would think it anathema to kill the wolf or bear to save the deer ,or moose calves. Even tho no sane person wants to "wipe out" any of the species involved. Just my rant for the day. jls

Posted: Sun Nov 04, 2007 8:51 pm
by mikehike

Thanks for the response, I am still quite skeptical regarding the science and the gill netting. I spent another weekend at one of my favorite fishing lakes in Sierra I spent a good 4 hours fishing and observing this beautiful ecosystem.

I watched a groups of mallards circumvent the whole lake several times, diving routinely. I also watched a group of Coots do the same. If this lake had Gill nets it would have snagged several of these birds. Maybe Kings canyon does not have mallards or coots, this problem may be a greater issue around tahoe.

Re: Scientist: Frog's decline threatens Sierra ecology

Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2008 7:35 pm
by SSSdave
Just released up to date information suggesting a yellow-legged frog decline beyond the Sierra in our state and general amphibian decline world wide. Says Sierra decline of YLF is likely to be due to a number of factors. Although trout in lakes has a negative effect on populations, it is just one factor. ... source=rss

Back to the Future

Posted: Wed Aug 13, 2008 8:32 am
by Strider
San Francisco Chronicle August 13, 2014

Vice President Jeb Bush announced that the Romney administration has endorsed the study undertaken by the Bechtel Yosemite Oversight Bureau, and agrees that the lack of water in the Merced river is not a result of global warming. BYOB will increase China's visitor quota by 75,000 next year, and continue to operate the Walmart and McDonald's franchises.

Re: Scientist: Frog's decline threatens Sierra ecology

Posted: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:12 am
by caddis
SSSdave wrote:Just released up to date information suggesting a yellow-legged frog decline beyond the Sierra in our state and general amphibian decline world wide. Says Sierra decline of YLF is likely to be due to a number of factors. Although trout in lakes has a negative effect on populations, it is just one factor. ... source=rss
It's an old thread but I thought we brought that up earlier. I think most people will conceed fish decrease MYLF local populations, but MYLF frogs thrived for scores of years in the sierras since trout were introduced in the backcountry. Killing off the fish shouldn't be a solution to restablish the MYLF. At the bare minimum, don't kill off lakes that can sustain fish without planting or kill off lakes with trophey sized fish. I believe they have a sufficient amount of habitat in fishless lakes and small pockets of water. Just MHO

Re: Back to the Future

Posted: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:13 am
by caddis
Strider wrote: continue to operate the Walmart and McDonald's franchises.

There's a Wal Mart in Yosemite???