Class 3 Blue Ribbon Fisheries

[MadisonMan]

Does anyone know the progress being made to create more class 3 blue ribbon fisheries in Utah? I believe the provo is the only class 3 we have. I feel that creating more may relieve some of the fishing pressure on the provo. I know the Governor has mandated over $300,000 for this type of initiative, but what rivers have they or will they be using the money on?

[PowerBaitHeppy]

Two ways to relieve pressure on the Provo. 1. Create a second river within 30 minutes driving distance of home. 2. Convince fisherman that it may be worth it to drive farther than 30 minutes from home to fish. Either way, it is going to be tough for the fishermen up North to take care of this problem.......

[wellsw]

Ed Kent posted a thread saying that he got new regs approved for the section of the weber that goes from below rockport in wanship to echo resevior. I can't remember what he said the regs were and I can't say they will make it a class 3 blue ribbon, but maybe they will make it a better river to fish.

[Don]

Steve I think you can go to the DWR website and follow the links to the Blue Ribbon Fisheries committe. When I went to a meeting they had not to long ago they broke down which rivers and lakes in the state they were considering. What was a little helpfull is they also explained why they were considering those bodies of water. I think you can get most of that info from the website now.

$300,000 is hardly anything when you consider trying to spread it between securing water rights, gaining landowner access, and about a million other things. I know the committe is also trying to use the money in places where it can be matched by other federal, and other state agency funds, to get the most bang for their buck.

There are a lot more than one class three blue ribbon areas. Go to that website and I think they have a list that they are considering. If I'm wrong on anything, woops. I'm sure Wes could explain this way better than myself.

[LIV2FSH]

The river restoration work recently done on the middle section of the Weber was an excellent first step in achieving Blue Ribbon status. Regulation changes for 2002 are also a step in the right direction. As I see it, These changes will be in vein if we don't jump another huge hurdle. This hurdle, I think, is one of the key elements in a healthy trout environment, this is water quality! Until there is some kind of flow regulation implmented, it is going to be hard to achieve a Blue Ribbon Fishery!
The gravel bars I used to stand on and fish from, are now 6" of silt! The rocky stream bed exsposed during low water you love to bust your ankles on are now muddy muck! I can't imagine the browns, or any fish for that matter being able to find a place to build a redd to spawn. I haven't fished the section below Echo Res., but I would bet it is the same way as both resivoirs have been drawn down so low.
Release from Echo Res. right now is .43 CFS. The flows this Summer where consistantly crankin!
Anyway, I'll be off my soap box! This is just my opinion on how I see it! Tight Lines and Iceless Guides!
Bruce

[Ed Kent]

The reason I proposed the new regs. for the wanship ... echo section of the weber were two-fold:

This section is the only section of the river system which currently has a minimum flow agreement during the winter;

Secondly, because of minimum flows and the negotiated angler access with private land owners, coupled with the fact that this section of the river is easily patrolled, lends itself to being immediately incorporated into the Blue Ribbon Initiative program.

The proposal was prompted by private land owners complaining about the amount of trash being left along the river. So by creating an artifical lure and fly restriction would eliminate the bait canister and other such types of trash being left along the river.

I would also suggest that when fishing the river you pack a small garbage sack and pick up the remaining trash that has been left behind.....

The regs. effective January 1, will be downstream from the freeway bridge just below the town of Wanship to the freeway bridge just above Echo Resevoir.....artifical flies and lures, with a two fish limit. I know its not much, but its a start!!!

The reason there have not been many steps taken to improve the fishing below Echo dam, is there is no such minimum flow agreement with Weber water users, and Echo Reservoir would require dredging and the dam itself would have to modified or completely rebuilt to reduce downstream sediment releases.

[MadisonMan]

I am too excited about the new regs. Thanks for all the info. I hope the new regs will be enforced well. How much time will it take to see a good difference in the fishing and fish population, etc.? Is there any effort being made to decrease the whitefish population or will that happen naturally?

[wellsw]

Mike H.

I have many times been happy to catch a white fish on the weber. It has saved me from being skunked for the day. But I have to admit that there is a little disapointment when I am stripping in a fish and it turns out to be a whitie. To me there is a special beauty to a brown or a rainbo trout that just isn't possessed by a white fish. I caught a rainbow on the upper provo along the mirror lake highway and I can't describe how vivid it's colors were and how pretty the fish was. I just don't see that in a whitie. I don't know if you can call it prejudice or preference.

[BTR]

I gave up on the Weber several years ago, for reasons that you all clearly understand. I would like to emphasize Ed Kents suggestion to take a small garbage bag to clean up the area. Although the Blue Ribbon status will take several years to reach, we as a group can show members of that community how one should respect nature and the farmers/ranchers. Maybe such a positive change will help influence other areas to push for Blue Ribbon Status?

[Mike]

You can bet that not everyone will know or care about the regulation changes! That's why it's important to do our part as fly fisherman to keep the area clean. If you get a few land owners seeing that sort of action, you can bet that they'll certainly be left with a positive impression. If the reg changes don't end up chaging the state of that portion of the river with regards to garbage and such, it's not going to reflect well on the fly fishing community and may even have a negative effect on Ed's efforts.

[Jeff Camomile]

Guys, help me out here.

I am totally excited and in favor of the new regulations on the Weber. However, I just have a feeling that we are overrating the positive impact these new regulations will have. I have fished the section below Wanship and above Coleville on numerous occassions, and I really haven't seen a whole lot of people taking fish out of there. I am sure most of you have had different experiences. Most of the time when I have fished this area, it has been nearly empty of other anglers. My own personal opinion is that the water issues on the Weber are still the major reason why the Weber is not up to Provo River quality. So many times it has been muddy. One time I was fishing the Weber, and within ten minutes the water flow doubled. I checked the stream flow reports that day later on, and sure enough, the water went from 180 cfs to 420 cfs in about 15 minutes (almost got me stranded in a deep pool!) Then a few days later, it was back down to 200 cfs. These abrupt changes can't be good for the fish.

Really, I am totally in support of the new regulations, and think they are good. But I won't get too excited about the Weber until I think that the water quality and water flow issues are solved, if they ever will be solved. With Park City becoming interested in the water also, it doesn't look good.

Occassionally, I will see an angler keep fish, but really I haven't seen people hauling out tons and tons of fish. I don't doubt that some of you have seen people keeping lots of fish. The funny thing is, the area I have seen where most people keep fish is above Wanship, and this area is not receiving new regulations! I am sure I am wrong, else why the need to put the new regulations? Since I don't fish the Weber every week, then I am sure people keep a lot more fish than I realize, it is just that I haven't seen it a lot after fishing it regularly for the past several years.

Anyway, the new regulations are the first step. Let's just make sure that we take step 2, then step 3, and so on. That is the point of my post.

[mcgx2]

I think the new regulations on the Weber are a step in the right direction and am very encouraged by them. As someone above said this is only the first step and it will be what we do from now on that will determine if that section of the river will truly become a blue ribbon fishery. Education of the general fishing public is probably one of the keys. From what I've seen the people on this board are pretty knowledgable of the issues and all have their hearts and minds in the right place. I don't think this is true for the average fisherman. Utah has a lot of potential for many blue ribbon fisheries, I just hope EVERYONE can pull together to make some of these happen.

mcg

[Ed Kent]

Jeff C., I would agree with your assessment regarding the taking of fish along this section. Although I have witnessed some, most of what I have seen taken have been larger browns, or the stocked rainbows. However, in my opinion, this section of the Weber has been fishing better in the last couple of seasons, than it has in 15 years....don't ask me why???? Whether its a change in the attitude of anglers who fish this section, minimum stream flows during the winter months, what ever it is, I would like to see it remain...get better. My primary motivation for proposing the regulation change was the private land owner's complaints about the trash being left behind....some were angered to a point that they were threatening closure of their parts of the angling access. I didn't want that to happen...

Mike, I suspect you will be right about some of the anglers fishing this section....they will be unaware of the changed fishing regs. until they get ticketed, or we tell them that they are breaking the law. I can tell you though, this section will be patrolled, and tickets will be written. As for me? See you guys on the river, and have a merry christmas!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Jeff Camomile]

Ed,

Putting new regulations on the Weber to stop the litter is a great plan. I never even considered that. You can bet I will take a litter bag with me everytime I fish the Weber, to help out. I hope others will do the same.

[Wes Johnson]

A little clarification and future expectations.

The Blue Ribbon Fishery Advisory Council has taken a very close look at where we want the money to be spent. As per our discussion with John Kimball on these funds, he gave us the charge to oversee where and how these monies will be spent. The BRFAC will have oversite on where your BRF money is spent.

What will happen is this. All projects proposed for any water that has been designated as a BRF, must first be approved by the BRFAC. If the project is approved we will provide some funding for the project. Additional funding may come from the Habitat Council and federal aide matching grants.

So far we have approved two projects for funding from the BRFAC. The acquisition of Lake Canyon Lake, $50,000 and fencing of the riparian zone on a section of the West Fork of the Duchesne, $50,000.

We are also looking at improving the spqwning channel at Kolob Reservoir, more fencing on the Weber, E.Fk.Sevier and Duchesne Rivers. Plus we have recommended that $10,000 be granted to USU to study siltation on our rivers.

We are looking at nearly $10-million worth of projects for the future. This will include angler access, conservation pools, habitat restoration, fencing and many other projects. Your money will be well spent.

To clarify the difference between BRF and Class I, II, or III streams. The Division of Wildlife Resources many years ago developed a classification system for all waters of Utah. These range from Class I waters like the Green, Provo, Logan, Lake Powell and others to Class VI waters which are mearly more than mudholes. A BRF may be any Class of body of water. These waters are selected based on their unique characteristics and their economic value to the local communities. There will not be any Class III BRF or Class I BRF; the water will be a BRF.

Now for whitefish. I have always refered to these as the "freshwater bonefish." Many anglers have hooked what they thought was a monster trout only to discover it was an average whitie. They will give you a tussle. I am looking forward to hooking one on the new 1-weight my wife got for me for Christmas. My favorite "bonefish" hole is near Taggert off of I-84, between Morgan and Henefer. And the resturant at Taggert is great.

I hope this clarifies some of these issues.

All of you come out and support Ed Kent's Town Fisheries and our BRF.

Wes

[PowerBaitHeppy]

right now there is only $300,000 dollars for these projects. Where is future money going to come from? Is that why Gov. Leavitt is going to axe a whole bunch of State jobs next year? to make more funding for this? This project is supposed to bring more revenue into the state by providing better fishing, right? Hasn't the DWR known that better fishing will bring in more revenue for the last 100 years or so? The DWR has been trying to make ALL the lakes and rivers better fishing all along. So don't you think that the DWR is pretty much just going to keep doing what they have already been doing, and make everything better fishing. Giving the DWR $300,000 to improve the fishing in the state is like giving me $5 and telling me to go build my new home. Get real.

[Larry S.]

Hey Wes,

Do they still have that knockout shrimp basket there?

Seriously you guys are doing a bang-up job down there. Keep up the good work.

A little heads up for January 24th. Talk to Ken Theis about our January Cache Anglers meeting. Hope you can make it up. I don't think you will be disappointed.

[Ed Kent]

Larry, what is on the agenda for your meeting on the 24th? Would be interested in attending if you don't mind?

Ed

[Larry S.]

Check your email.

[Wes Johnson]

Gentle anglers all, let me say this again.

The Blue Ribbon Fishery Advisory Council will have oversight of ALL of the BRF funds. It will be spent where this citizen council of anglers allows it to be spent.

Where will the funds come from: you the angler. Half of the $2.00 increase in license fees in 2003 for BRF will go directly to the BRF program.

Ed Kent and hopefully a similiar council of "urban" (sorry Ed) fishery folks will over see the $1.00 they will get through Ed's Town Fishery Initiative.

Yes, this does amount to a $3.00 increase on current license fees. But remember our current 2001/2002 fishing license is $2.00 less than it was 3-years ago. So in all reality you will only see a $1.00 increase in fishing license fees.

[PowerBaitHeppy]

I don't know exactly who is on the council, but I don't understand why we don't let the DWR make their own calls. These guys have spent most of their life dedicated to improving the fishing in this State. They know how to do their job, why should the State take someone else to tell the DWR how to do their job? It seems insane to me.

[RHeppy]

The Money to fund BRF will be available to fund the program, the problem I see is developing a "Blue Ribbon Fishery." Regardless of how much money there is some places cannot and will never be turned into a BRF. This program was initiated by our good govenor to mend some broken bridges with sportsmen and to try and generate money to counties in rural Utah by attracting sportsmen to a "Blue Ribbon Fishery." The fact is there has been little biological input from our Fisheries Biologists, no one has even given a definition of what a BRF is yet. This has became and was always intended to be a political incentive for good ole Mike.
If sportsmen are interested in doing good and supporting programs that will increase fishing access and improve the fisheries throughout the state. The Habbitat fund is working great. All the Access and Improvements on Thistle Creek came from this fund, access on sections of the Weber and Provo have been the result of the habitat fund. And for you guys in Cache Valley how about the improvements made on the Little Bear River.
Lets support something that is actually doing some good and not give in to some Political concocktion that will cost us alot of money with very little results,

[Larry S.]

Why is there a Wildlife Council That recommends what goes into the proclamations as far as the regulations go? As far as the DWR having someone "telling" them how to do their job I think by statute that is the way it is to a certain extent. I don't think you would have to look very far to find plenty of people who have differing views as to letting the DWR make all of their own decisions.

As far as the BRF goes who cares as to why Gov. Leavitt proposed it? If you remember he proposed $500,000 yearly to go into the fund only to have it cut by the Legislature. Too bad he couldn't make all the rules by himself :^) !!

[Wes Johnson]

It seems to me that PowerBaitHeppy and RHeppy do not realy understand the overall concept of the BRF.

One of the major problems that DWR has had in the past is that they do not have the manpower to do alot of the aquatic projects that need to be done. Why? Lack of sufficient funding to hire aquatic personnel to do the work. Currently each of the DWR regions is understaffed by as many as three (3) aquatic/fisheries personnel. The backlog on projects to improve our fisheries is as long as a Spey rod.

One of the mandates that we, members of the BRFAC, noted is that DWR will use $1.00 of the license fee increase to hire new aquatic habitat and fishery biologist. This $1.00 when matched with other federal aide money will allow 20-25 new personnel to be hired. These must be field people.

RHeppy, the fact of the matter is we have had alot of input from each of the regional fisheries biologists. They have made some great recommendations and identified specific waters that they feel should have BRF status. Have you attended any of our BRF meetings; they are open to the public. The next BRF meeting will be January 17, in St. George at 2:00 PM with a public open house that evening. The place has yet to be established, but it will be announced when all the details are worked out.

Yes the Habitat Council has provided alot of funds for good projects. You mentioned Thistle Creek, this is great. But you have access only for 10-years, after which the land owners can close the access again. The Weber River was the work of Jerry Wiechman, Ogden DWR, who has since left for greener pastures, and Trout Unlimited. The middle Provo River access was through the federally imposed Central Utah Project mitigation. It is my understanding that DWR did not purchase any of the access along the middle Provo, nor were any Habitat Funds were used for the project.

One of the main efforts of the BRFAC is to protect these BRF waters from degredation. Currently there is only one stream in Utah that is protected from degredation of water quality. We will ask that the Division of Water Quality impose strict water quality standards on waters selected for BRF status. They have agreed to help us on this issue.

We will make recommendations on ways to protect these fisheries from poachers and other anti-fishing organizations.

Who are the members of the BRFAC. All of our names are posted on the DWR BRF website. We are not a "Political concocktion" as RHeppy implies. Members of the BRFAC are all anglers who want better fishing for future generations of anglers in Utah.

It will not cost you alot of money. You fishing license went down $2.00 two or three years ago. The BRF funding will bring the cost of a fishing license back to what it was. The "Town Fisheries Initiative" that Ed Kent is pushing will only raise the license fees $1.00 when compared to what it was. PowerBaitHeppy, How much does a bottle of Power Bait cost and how much do you throw away, as evident on the shores of Strawberry Reservoir.

Perhaps if you would come to our meetings you will learn more about what we are trying to do.

There is much more that I would like to add, but space is limited. I suggest that you contact members of the BRFAC if you have more questions. Better yet, come to one of our meetings, listen to what we are doing, and ask questions in person.

[PowerBaitHeppy]

I could not tell you the cost of a bottle of powerbait. I have never bought a bottle, which means I have NEVER thrown any away. I am a fly fisherman (which is why I choose Utah on the Fly forums). I don't beleive that anyone is complaining about a price increase (or decrease) of licenses.....we can all see good coming from money being put in. But, why, if the money is going towards more job positions, is Gov. Mike cutting jobs this year? (maybe it has something to do with the Olympics?) As far as the input from regional fisheries biologists, did you listen to the input? Don't get me wrong, I am all for better fishing across the state, I just sometimes wonder about the motivations of certain people.

[RHeppy]

PBHeppy is correct about hiring personell. The UDWR currently has a freeze on hiring of new personell. There is alot of worry from DWR personell because of the possibility of loosing jobs because of the budget shortfalls that are being percieved for the future. In no way do I for see 20-25 new positions.

Has there been a definition of what a BRF is?

When the DWR was asked to submit waters that they would like to be listed as BRF there was no one who could define what a BRF was. One Regional Manager asked the Question "should Utah Lake be considered a Blue Ribbon Fishery because it is the only location in the world a June Sucker can be caught"

Im sorry there are still to many questions and concerns with this program for my support.

[Larry S.]

I don't profess to know what goes on in the minds of the users of this board or which of you are members of any club affilliates(ie. TU or FFF,etc.) or not. But I would suggest that at the very least you attend the meetings when they are in your area to better educate yourselves as to the purposes of these councils.

Yes there are some budget shortfalls in the forseeable future and there are freezes and such. I'm not sure if the BRF would continue to get funded in times of trouble but the guys in there now are trying there damndest to see that it will not happen. It is up to each of us to decide how much we are willing to become involved and help regardless whether or not there is a project in your area.


Oh yeah, it's about 3 bucks a bottle at Wal-Mart.

[roundrocks jim]

A few years back , Montana did a survey on the madison river which is known for its great fishery. They found below Quake and and for fourty miles down stream that the white fish to trout ratio was 300 white fish for every trout. I would be willing to wager that the Henrys fork is the same or maybe even more white fish
I will say one more thing about the white fish. the closer your fly is to the botom the more likly you will catch a white fish. Even when I was a kid fishing on the South Fork we would use a sinker and bobber and hang stone fly nymphs right on the bottom in a fair currant and about 3 feet deep. We caught very few trout on this rig but lots of white fish