Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Valley rivers

  1. #1
    Member Bullelkklr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage Alaska
    Posts
    4,837

    Default Valley rivers

    Do the counts at the Deshka weir reflect directly on the remaining valley/parks highway river king populations?

    How much funding do the weirs take to manage for the king season?

    Some that I have talked to say that the other river kings could be fine on population levels.....

  2. #2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bullelkklr View Post
    Do the counts at the Deshka weir reflect directly on the remaining valley/parks highway river king populations?

    How much funding do the weirs take to manage for the king season?

    Some that I have talked to say that the other river kings could be fine on population levels.....
    Yes,
    The Deshka run is indicative of those further upstream. If not, the mouth of the Deshka would have been full of fish pulling in there as they move on up. This was not the case. The other rivers and creeks upstream of the Deshka are in trouble as well, as far as King numbers. There needs to be a sonar placed at two locations, one on the Yentna and one on the Susitna. There are a couple of good locations where the rivers are channeled into one fairly tight channel but Fish and Game doesn't want to consider it. The current methods to count fish in all the possible locations is woefully inadequate and very expensive. There are some individuals on long term disability from the weir and arieal spotting techniques that no one on the staff wants to discuss as being costs. The actual cost of setting up a weir is cheap, the long term consequences and narrow focus it yeilds is practically useless. A snapshot of one creek is all you get. But a sonar would only require one techie setting at a computer in Anchorage compiling the data and not support a full cadre of "Professionals"......so I don't think we will see it anytime soon. Too bad. They should not even have a season date set, whether commercial or sport. They should rely on the sonar counts and when the minimum escapements are counted, open the seasons accordingly by emergency order, a proactive measure. Instead they choose to remain in a reactive mode, trying to put the proverbial finger in the dike, when they finally realize and acknowledge a problem. The bios time, knowledge and energy could be better put to use, than counting fish, this is very distracting to what they really need to be studying and managing.

    Hopefully,
    Some on the UCI political vetting will determine what the dept needs to be doing and some legislators will mandate actions that will serve the resources better. So far there has been little investigation and mostly just touchy/feely discussion and listening to why Fish and Game does what they do now. To remain focused on what is not working is beauracratic snafu at it's finest.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •