San Juan River Quality Waters Trout Stamp

[DG]

Gentlemen, there is a whole lot of talk here and not much fact. I see no balance to anything that has been reported here, only support for firmly entrenched positions, and questions and comments from several replied to with lots of "We're the good guys, everyone who is not with us is against us, and you/they are all in cahoots with each other!" The press release is a great example of that.

This is the sort of thing that really does not help your cause. Most of the readers here are intelligent people who like to learn the facts and make decisions based on those. Name calling is really not a good way to win support for a position that is not presented with the facts to back it up. It certainly turned me off.

[SJR Foundation]

DG,

These are facts DG. There is a lot of frustration out there on this matter and any matter trying to help this river. I spoke with both Oscar and Greg last week voice to voice. They pull no punches in terms of their agenda. Oscar will tell you off the record that the river is his " way " to lobby directly against oil and gas and he readily knows this perception and does not care. DG, how else do you want us to put it? They are winning the political fight right now and this is war.

A lot of us have sat back for years being the nice guys. The fact is they have money and we do not and they state they are the " voice " of the sportsmen when they are not. Unfortunately we have to disagree and do it strongly for people to understand the agendas at work here.

I hate politics and love this river. We have to fight right now. If this bugs you, don't get involved and watch from a safe distance, but the opportunity is knocking and being PC right now is taking a back seat.

Merc

[DG]

What facts? Opinions are not facts. I asked numerous questions at the start of this thread and you DID NOT ANSWER THEM. All I got back was the sound bite of "stocking, stream restoration, and enforcement". No details. No plan, no research supporting your position, no rational debate on the issues. Just a political position.

I gave up on the Juan years ago, because it was no longer a fun place to fish, with unbelievable crowds, fish caught so many times they give up when you hook them, massive stocking to keep the #s up, rude anglers and guides, and so on. I understand your frustration at wanting to make this a better river for trout fishermen, and I am not necessarily opposed to this stamp or the reasons you are trying to get this legislation passed. But you cannot expect me to just take it on faith that you are the good guys and everyone else is a bad guy, because I have no idea who you, or any of the others whose names you keep dropping, ARE, or that me giving you $10 will make the world a better place. I am playing Devil's Advocate here so that some useful information makes it to the readers of this site. At least I am trying to do so.

I repeat what I asked at the start and have not seen answers for:

What is the stocking plan, or what changes do you propose to fund with this money? Do you have science supporting the need to stock more (or less, or differently) than is done now, or is this just to offset the costs incurred by NMFG to stock? Will changes in stocking be subject to public review/environmental analysis?

What sort of stream improvement? Structural enhancements? Flow regime changes? Gravel supplement (I did see a mention of this, but what sort of enhancement, how much, when, what size rock...)? Is there research and data available to support any proposed work (I see in several other places that there is a need for a comprehensive evaluation of the river)? If habitat work improves spawning, will stocking be reduced to compensate? Will this pay for the environmental analyses required to do this work on public lands? Will it be used to pay for education, efforts to prevent aquatic nuisance species, wash stations for boats, and the like?

What part(s) of the San Juan will this $ be spent on? Will the $ be spent solely on public lands/waters? Will it be required only on public waters (how far down from the dam, in other words)? Is this an additional fee over the state parks fee you have to pay to fish much of the tailwater? Is the fee $10 for nonresidents for a year, and if so, calendar year or year from date of purchase, or will you need to buy this stamp each time you purchase a short-term nonresident license?

[Max]

The SJ Foundation is looking for support here for their idea of a trout stamp to provide additional spending resources for the fishery. In these recessionary times I am opposed to any additional levies or spending.
I also do not understand why information requests from those you ask to support such a levy and spend proposal are not answered by you to demonstrate the need?

[Bubba Smith]

DG here you go
stocking
as of right now NMF&G stocks around 60,000 4 inch fish yearly this seems to be about right to maintain the fish populations as they have been in the past. however there have been times in the past when WD was discovered in the hatcheries and we have gone a few years without stockings.
This has hurt the fishery
In the past there has been cutthrout trout in the river as well, and in the future NMF&G would like to stock cutts again
also NMG&F would love to be able to do a long term study of the fisheries with chips in the fish etc.
that is what the stamp will be for.
changes to the stocking program have always been open for public comment

Flows

the san juan flows at around 500cfs.
In the past the flow was 1,000 cfs, we still have the same river channel just half of the water now.
With the flow change the river has lost fish habitat.
getting this changed is simply never going to happen. the BOR is not going to give in on this. there has been an effort to try to get a little more water but it got no where.
Here was how we had hoped to make all of this work
Last year Gov Richarson gave NMF&G $250,000.00 to start the study for a blue print for the river.
The next step was to have a stamp (around $3.00) help offset the costs of the work that would be done to the river.
due to the shortage of funds this year in New Mexico the Gov has frozen all spending. the $250,000.00 was taken back
So now we will have to use the monies raised from the stamp to help fund the studies that need to be done before any work can be done
there has been a lot of ideas thrown about by all interested groups but, untill a study is done it is just ideas.
if this work some how allows the fish to reproduce yes the stocking numbers will be reduced. however, be aware the the san juan has one of the highest spore counts for WD anywhere in the US. natural reproduction might not be in the cards here.
Any and all impact studies, permits etc will be addressed by NMF&G

all of this work will happen in the quality waters section of the san juan.
the stamp is a one time yearly purchase.
We would like to see a flat $3.00 fee for everyone

Hope this helps.