Fly Fishing Forum - View Single Post - Critical Habitat Designations
View Single Post
  #8  
Old 08-26-2005, 08:46 AM
juro's Avatar
juro juro is offline
Coast2coast Flyfishaholic
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Steelhead country|striper coast|bonefish belt
Posts: 20,593
I share the passion brother.

However if the habitat designations are for wild salmon and steelhead, then flytyer's argument carries water for those sections that are truly never graced by indigenous anadromous species.

BUT (and this is a huge but) one of the biggest problems with watershed management is that actions are made in a small-minded manner without considering (or caring for) the impacts on adjacent waters, in this case as Deerhawk and OC pointed out being directly downstream which is the worst possible scenario.

But even when an aquifer is drained far away from the river banks it negatively affects the welfare of fragile systems. The average north american aquifer is hundreds of square miles.

Use of pesticides and fertilizers without proper buffering and precautions can devastate an entire system.

I see no point in moving backwards, regardless of whether the fish moved thru that particular section or not.

A compromise that alleviated constraints on these adjacent waters while restricting impact on the overall watershed would be acceptable. My level of confidence that special interests could maintain such respect for the overall watershed while they move toward expliotation? Very, very low.

The proof is in the pudding, history proves that humans really suck at this sort of thing.

.02
__________________
IFFF Certified THCI @ 2005
Capeflyfisher Guide Service
Island Hopper, Guitarist, Incurable Dreamer
and Founder, Worldwide Flyfishing Forum
Reply With Quote