Colorado Fisherman Forum banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
210 Posts
There are changes coming for a lot of those rivers. Things being designed, new tech being tested, and other things that the public doesn't see.

San Joaquin system has a test system up and running for removing selenium, salt and things from the water, then recycling it through the fields. Idea is, less water pulled from the river, more water used multiple times for crops.

Also working on other ground break fish passage for high head dams. If it works well, it could open up every dam on the west coast for Salmon and Steelhead. Don't get me wrong, things won't change over night, but 20 years from now, lots of habitat will be available that hasn't been for 75+ years. More money will be thrown at it if the drought persists in California.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,182 Posts
People don't want to pay high prices for oil and gas, yet are opposed to drilling - cant have it both ways.

Still seems like a loose connection between oil and gas running the river dry, considering 99.9% of all water in Colorado is owned by someone and you cant just go siphoning it off for whatever project you feel necessary, whether it be oil and gas or building your own pond on your own land.

More fear mongering....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,180 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Not going to try and argue something I know little of but I do not think the fear is the river running dry it is more about the chance of contaminating the water. (at least for the White River(CO))

Hope you are right Scyry and glad to hear that some are trying to be pro active and reactive to what others have done to our waters.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,180 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Not sure I have ever seen gas and oil prices affected by "local" (US) drilling .Seems to me most of what we drill for goes to the market for someone else. Again I do not claim to be an expert or have greater knowledge than you or anyone else. Just my thoughts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,182 Posts
Not going to try and argue something I know little of but I do not think the fear is the river running dry it is more about the chance of contaminating the water. (at least for the White River(CO))

Hope you are right Scyry and glad to hear that some are trying to be pro active and reactive to what others have done to our waters.
Fair enough, not really looking to argue, just thinking of possibilities, and you bring some to the table as well.

Does the EPA and the other regulatory people allow the rivers to be contaminated?

Perhaps we should require a certain % of oil/gas be sold domestically only? Or better yet we could reduce our need, LMAO like that's going happen....

Allowing salmon up high dammed rivers is a cool idea. Once again though, our need for electricity and hate for nuclear and of course everyone that likes showers and green gas are all to blame for the current issue with rivers. It seems the greater need for energy comes at the cost of the lesser need of wild fish. Its not always so black and white, but in this case that's sort of how it boils do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
585 Posts
Most if not all of the wells will be way downstream of the good trout fishing. Probably down near Rangely and in the Piciance Basin. There has always been a lot of wells there. I have never fished the White below Meeker, so I guess I dont know whether there is much to fish down that way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
210 Posts
Hope you are right Scyry and glad to hear that some are trying to be pro active and reactive to what others have done to our waters.
Really there hasn't been on channel reservoirs built in 30+ years. Looks at Ridges Basin in Durango, and the new one in Parker. Anything new will be pump off stream and store.

As for existing dams, if there is money, there is a way to get it done. Problem is, money doesn't show up except for 3 reasons. Federal Judge ruling forcing action, drought driven need for more storage, and Indian Treaty settlement.

Does the EPA and the other regulatory people allow the rivers to be contaminated?
For us, if there is any sheen on the water, the EPA has to be contacted and the spill has to be contained. I'd assume it is the same for private companies. Harder to see a sheen on a creek/river though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,180 Posts
Discussion Starter #9 (Edited)
Fair enough, not really looking to argue, just thinking of possibilities, and you bring some to the table as well.

Does the EPA and the other regulatory people allow the rivers to be contaminated?
I do not think they allow it but I do believe that it does happen.

Perhaps we should require a certain % of oil/gas be sold domestically only? Or better yet we could reduce our need, LMAO like that's going happen....

Can be done but we are too lazy and old habits die hard. I agree very unlikely any change will come but maybe set an example for our children. We worry about getting kids involved in fishing (which i don't agree with, the water is crowded as it is) JK How about teaching them about the responsibility of conservation and reducing our use and re-using what we can. Simple terms: Every little bit helps.

Allowing salmon up high dammed rivers is a cool idea. Once again though, our need for electricity and hate for nuclear and of course everyone that likes showers and green gas are all to blame for the current issue with rivers. It seems the greater need for energy comes at the cost of the lesser need of wild fish. Its not always so black and white, but in this case that's sort of how it boils do.
How about farmers, ranchers, golf coures, down stream cities put in more efficient systems or reduce the use and waste of current practices. But I agree with the greed for our use.(showers and such)

Most if not all of the wells will be way downstream of the good trout fishing. Probably down near Rangely and in the Piciance Basin. There has always been a lot of wells there. I have never fished the White below Meeker, so I guess I dont know whether there is much to fish down that way.
I feel it is not just about fishing. But it is a concern seeing that the White dumps into Powell via the Green and then the Colorado Rivers. And from what I understand it is a "clean" river. But what if the wells will go up stream from Meeker?

Really there hasn't been on channel reservoirs built in 30+ years. Looks at Ridges Basin in Durango, and the new one in Parker. Anything new will be pump off stream and store.

Sounds like you either work in or around this field or you are more involved than I. Good for you and thank you for your insight. I should be more involved than I am which admittedly is not much. But when I read about a river close to me that helps motivate me and I gain knowledge from peeps like you and others.

As for existing dams, if there is money, there is a way to get it done. Problem is, money doesn't show up except for 3 reasons. Federal Judge ruling forcing action, drought driven need for more storage, and Indian Treaty settlement.


Money is hard to come by unless you can make more money from it. Capitalism working hard for America, but that is a discusion somewhere else and some other time. (By the way I am not disagreeing with your three reasons at all) They sound reasonable to me

For us, if there is any sheen on the water, the EPA has to be contacted and the spill has to be contained. I'd assume it is the same for private companies. Harder to see a sheen on a creek/river though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
210 Posts
Sounds like you either work in or around this field or you are more involved than I. Good for you and thank you for your insight. I should be more involved than I am which admittedly is not much. But when I read about a river close to me that helps motivate me and I gain knowledge from peeps like you and others.
I'm an engineer for the Bureau of Reclamation. I mainly work on fish passage designs. Most of my work in is the Washington, Oregon and California for salmon, steel head and bull trout. I have worked on other places closer to home, Rio Grande and San Juan drainages.

Currently working on Cle Elum dam in Washington. Think giant water slide, helix, spiraling downward to pass juvenile salmon downstream passing 400 CFS. It is going to be a test site basically. If it works, we'd be able to allow downstream passage to pretty much any dam. This has been the biggest deterrent to salmon with dams. Trick is going to be to attract the fish to the entrance, and have the flow increase slow enough that they don't turn around prior to it being to faster than they can escape.

Money is hard to come by unless you can make more money from it. Capitalism working hard for America, but that is a discusion somewhere else and some other time. (By the way I am not disagreeing with your three reasons at all) They sound reasonable to me
Crazy thing is the water price agreements that have been in place since the 50s. A lot of places, farmers pay the same price per volume they did in the 60s. If you look at the pay back 50 years down the road it is worth it. Prior to that, no business model will work for it. Look at around here, we need more storage. It is really hard to justify the cost and environmental impact. We will need it though, and the cost only goes up each year it is delayed.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top