What’s Gone Wrong With Hat Creek?

Last Tuesday, a mob of biologists, hydrologists, CalTrout staff, CalTrout founders and others toured Hat Creek’s Carbon Bridge stretch, and with so much scientific brainpower and historical knowledge in tow, those of us willing to listen learned a lot about the causes driving Hat Creek’s unhappy decline.

In the 1970s, Hat Creek became California’s first Wild Trout water, and accounted for the newly formed CalTrout’s first major win. (A lot of the people who made that happen — names like Richard May, Jim Adams and others — were on this tour.)

In the early 80s — at a time when fish counts were in the 6,800 fish per mile range — a plug of sediment started moving through Hat Creek.

Eventually, it decimated the aquatic vegetation, reducing bug populations and speeding the flow.

Meanwhile, invasive Muskrats burrowed under the banks, collapsing them, leaving behind a wider, shallower Hat Creek.

And yes, other bad things happened.

Fish populations plummeted. And fishermen stopped fishing Hat Creek in droves.

That’s the simple story. (Learn more in the video below.)

The good news is the sediment plug (visible in the upper reaches of Hat Creek in aerial photos as early as 1979) has largely passed the Carbon Stretch, and we’re seeing some small vegetation growth in the upper reaches.

Hat Creek Tour

One of the groups touring Hat Creek.

Much remains to be done, and we’re putting together an article and a video about CalTrout’s extensive Hat Creek restoration plan (courtesy CalTrout’s new videomeister Mikey Wier, whose hiring is a story unto itself — look for it soon).

Back with more on Hat Creek soon.

–Protect & Restore, CalTrout.

May 7 “Water Talks” program to focus on Fall River’s unique geo-hydro-ecology

Shasta County-CA — The public is invited to an educational panel presentation about the unique geo-hydro-ecological system of the Fall River. Water Talks: “Fall River’s unique geo-hydro-ecology” will be held Monday May 7th 2012 from 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm at the Fall River Lions Hall located at 44256 Hwy 299 East in McArthur.

The informational Water Talks are free and open to the public.
 
The first Water Talks to be held in Fall River Valley is on the topic “Fall River’s unique geo-hydro-ecology” and will feature presentations from:

  • Andrew Braugh, Director of Programs for the Fall River Conservancy on “Fall River Valley: Who’s doing what and why”
  • Michelle Berditschevsky, Conservation Director for Mount Shasta Bioregional Ecology Center on “Connectivity of Water Resources: Medicine Lake Volcano and the Fall River Springs,”
  • Carson Jeffres, Staff Researcher for the UC Davis Center for Watershed Sciences on “From Subduction to Salmonids, How Geologically Derived Nutrients Fuel Aquatic Foodwebs,” and
  • Erin Donley, Student Trainee for the USDA Agricultural Research Service on “Aquatic macrophytes and food webs of the Fall River,”

First Fall River Water Talks

“The purpose of our Water Talks program is to provide a place for people to learn about water-related topics from a diverse range of perspectives,” explained Curtis Knight, Conservation Director for California Trout.

“We look forward to working with the Fall River Conservancy and Fall River Resource Conservation District and expanding the program regionally with our first Water Talks program in the Fall River Valley,” Knight said.  

“We appreciate the partnership with California Trout and the Fall River Resource Conservation District to bring this educational Water Talks series to the Fall River,” said Andrew Braugh, Director of Programs for the Fall River Conservancy.

“Water Talks is a great opportunity for community members and landowners to learn about the ecology of the Fall River so that we can actively participate in future management decisions.  This is about empowering the people that live and work here, who actually depend on this remarkable water resource as part of their livelihood,” Braugh continued.

“Our stakeholder analysis report identified the need for public outreach forums that discuss forest health and natural resource management. We’re happy that CalTrout already has a model program with Water Talks to provide us a format for meeting our outreach needs,” said Todd Sloat, of the Fall River Resource Conservation District.”

“We started the Water Talks program in 2008 with presentations held in Weed, Mount Shasta, Dunsmuir and McCloud on Mount Shasta’s unique geology, hydrology and ecology,” said Water Talks program coordinator Meadow Barr.

“In 2011 we held a successful series of Water Talks in Mount Shasta on the topics of “Climate, Water and Forests,” “California Water Law and Policy,” “Local Fish and Fishing,” “Land Management and Restoration,” and “Agriculture in Siskiyou County.”

“To date, 33 presenters representing federal and state agencies, nonprofit conservation organizations, community groups, Tribes, local government, academic institutions, farmers, ranchers, and private business have volunteered their time to participate in Water Talks,” Barr said.

Water Talks Overview

Water Talks are an ongoing series of informational and educational presentations with local and regional experts sharing their knowledge with the public on a range of water related topics. The purpose of Water Talks is to provide a place to learn about water related topics. Water Talks is a project of California Trout. California Trout is a nonprofit organization dedicated to seeking workable solutions for fisheries restoration throughout California. For more information contact Meadow Barr, California Trout Outreach Coordinator at 530-859-1411 or mbarr@caltrout.org.

Fall River Water Talks flyer May 7

Fall River Water Talks scheduled for May 7

CalTrout Interview: Pit River and Fall River Guide Art Teter

 

After guiding on the Pit River for more than 25 years, Art Teter tells us what he thinks of the Pit River’s new flow regime.

Art Teter

Art Teter

Art Teter has guided fly fishermen on Northern California’s rivers for 25 years, becoming a well-known expert on the Pit River and Fall River in the process.

We’re always eager to talk to Art (he sometimes lets fly fishing tips slip, which we immediately steal and claim as our own). This time we wanted his take on a post-relicensing Pit River and the new, higher flows which many have predicted would ruin the river for fly fishermen.

As always, Art offers up his typically candid take on the Pit — how it’s changed, where it’s going, and how fly fishermen should adapt.

/Interview On

Q: How many days would you usually guide on the Pit River?

I usually average 75-80 days per year on the Pit River.

Q: How many did you guide last year?

I think 18.

Q: Wow.

That’s a big difference.

Q: Are you turning more anglers away, or are they staying away?

Because of what they’ve heard about the higher flows on the Pit, they’re mostly staying away. I have had to become more careful about who I take down there, and I work harder at screening people on the phone.

In a way, it’s too bad. People who don’t need to stay away are, and that’s a shame. The fishing has been good.

We’ve had some really, really big number days down there, but you have to want it. The more physical you are, the bigger the reward — both in size and volume of fish.

I had a trip in November with a guy who is a good angler, and he caught around 75 fish by himself.

After only one season, it’s not clear yet how the flows are going to affect the fish, at least not for a couple seasons. But all along those numbers were there.

That said, you have be aware of the current when wading. It’s the volume of the water, not the depth. It’s the pressure on your knees that you need to be aware of.

Q: As a guide, have you found new spots? How have you adapted?

No, I’ve mostly found different ways to fish the same areas.

Really, you’re only looking at a difference in depth of 6″-12″, which doesn’t sound like much, but you need to be three times as careful.

We’re seeing a lot of fish moving out of the middle of the channel to the margins. These days, the fish can be anywhere from one bank to the other. I carry a staff in one hand and a shortline rod in the other and fish the water in the margins.

You’d be amazed when you throw into a spot that looks like it has 6″ of water — boom! Out comes a big fish. Too many people just charge right out to that good-looking seam, missing all the secondary lies.

Also what I’ll do is get down there early and see who is there, who’s parked where. So I’m trying to see where people are wading — often you’ll see them wading where the fish have moved to, and your odds of catching them are pretty low.

Once again, you’re looking at that secondary water.

Basically, it is what is, and we just need to go down there and have fun. Last year we caught a lot of fish and we still caught the bigger fish the Pit is famous for. You just have to approach it with a bit more caution.

It’s a shame that so many people are staying away.

Q: How are you handling potential client inquiries about the Pit?

Before, I had a little fear about some of the different age groups I took down there. The Pit has never been a good river for someone who had trouble walking. Now I have to be a little more careful.

Interestingly, the guys that are getting in trouble aren’t really the first-timers; the people that are having problems with it are the people who have fished it a lot, and rely on those memories to tell us where we can wade or not.

A while back, I went across the river at a spot I’d fished a hundred times; it took me almost 1.5 hours to get back. You can’t make those old assumptions about a new Pit.

Q: I understand that due to the snowpack, 2011 was a bad year for finding out what the new Pit River flows are really like.

It turns out the flows were much higher than they were supposed to be. Pit #3 and Pit #4 were consistently 50 cfs – 100 cfs high, and on Pit #5, flows were consistently 100 cfs – 150 cfs higher than we expected. On Pit #5 the flow issues are partly a function of where the gage is placed, and that needs to be resolved.

This is probably the year we’ll probably see what the new flows are really supposed to look like; I don’t think the fishing is going to change that much. We’ll still see the kind of numbers the Pit is famous for.

Also, all the access issues we suffered last year due to the construction of the campgrounds and access facilities should be finished.

The construction was problematic; truck drivers would yell at you; at times the road down to Pit #3 was completely closed, other times it was difficult. You had to know how and when you could — the signs were misleading and it was a mess.

That’s largely finished, though there will be some gravel work and road work in Pit #4.

Q: How did the individual reaches fare?

The river in Pit #3 was able to spread out — it had room. But Pit #4 became really difficult — all of the biologists hired to do the bug and fish surveys said they couldn’t get to the middle of the river to gather data.

That’s because Pit #4 is more canyon-like — it doesn’t have the room to spread out like Pit #3, so it’s become challenging.

The worst was Pit #5 — there really were no spots I could cross at all.

It’s hard to say how bad it will be when flows are lower like they’re supposed to be.

Q: To your experienced eye, how did pressure on the river decrease?

We’re seeing a dramatic decline in business and angling pressure. Some of the surveys said that a majority of people who fished the Pit this year weren’t interested in coming back.

What’s going to happen is that in a few years, you’re going to see these numbers rebound some, but this year’s survey says almost half the people fishing Pit #4 and Pit #5 wouldn’t return.

Hopefully the flows will settle in and some of them will reconsider.

Speaking as a guide, it’s still a great river for catching a lot of fish.

Art Teter Guide Service

(click to visit Teter's website)

Q: Give us a couple tips for fly fishing the Pit.

First, the Pit is a window fishery; I don’t get really excited until I start seeing bugs in the air. Stay aware of the temperature. The other day the bite went from 11:30 to 2:30, and then it was largely done [ed: this interview conducted during late winter].

During the summer, the mornings and evenings are generally better, and it’s bet to adapt to that reality.

Second, fishermen often focus on the wrong things. When they’re nymphing, fly fishermen often obsess too much over the fly. I tell my clients that far and way the most important thing is your location. Presentation of the fly is #2, and the fly itself is #3 — last on the list.

Q: What do you want to happen on the Pit?

It’s a really complex issue. We’re not asking anyone to put the flows back to 150 cfs. Somewhere around 220 cfs and 250 cfs would be very fishable on Pit #3. Right now, Pit #3 is the easiest to fish, and at 220 cfs it would be great.

I understand the temperature thing on Pit #4 and Pit #5, but those flows are too high. Getting them down to what they’re supposed to be would be a good start.

I think no matter what you do, the fish are going to adapt and the fishermen are just going to have to adapt to it. Still, fishing accounts for something like 98% of the recreational use of the Pit River, and it needs to be safe for those users.

We’re working with Curtis Knight [ed: CalTrout Conservation Director] and the technical review group to try and make this better. I think we’ve got some good points to make.

Q: What would you say to anglers who are staying away from the Pit?

It’s fishing well and the numbers are there — you just have to be careful. This year’s flows could be a lot better, and the fishing could be excellent. Don’t write the Pit off.

Art Teter has guided Northern California’s rivers, streams and lakes for more than 25 years. He runs the Art Teter Guide Service, and is widely acknowledged as one of the most experienced guides on the Pit River (the Fall River is also a specialty). You can visit his website here.

CalTrout’s Comments On DFG’s Proposed Suction Dredge Mining Regulations

March 5, 2012
Mark Stopher
Environmental Program Manager
California Department of Fish and Game
601 Locust Street
Redding, CA 96001

Re: California Trout Comments on Proposed Suction Dredge Regulations

Dear Mr. Stopher:

California Trout (CalTrout) is providing comments on the Department of Fish and Game’s (Department) proposed suction dredge regulations. We appreciate the Departments recent efforts to incorporate public comments and propose improved suction dredge regulations.

We remain concerned about the impacts of suction dredging, even when new and improved regulations are adopted, on specific streams. Most notably we are concerned about the impacts of suction dredging on coho salmon streams, designated state Heritage and Wild Trout waters, and popular blue-ribbon trout fisheries.

CalTrout is encouraged by the passage of AB 120 in July 2011. This legislation suspends the issuance of permits until the Department has completed an Environmental Impact Report and adopted new regulations. AB 120 includes two other important provisions:

1) The bill requires the Director of DFG to certify that the new regulations fully mitigate identified significant environmental impacts.
2) The bill requires a fee structure that allows for suction dredge permit costs to fully cover the costs of administering the program. The checkbooks and bank accounts of this state’s hunters and anglers should not be used to underwrite a program that harms the very species we pay licenses to fish.

Background

CalTrout members use and enjoy the rivers of California to pursue their passion of fishing for California’s diverse trout, steelhead and salmon. Angling stimulates local economies and is an important driver of local economies in many rural areas.

California Trout’s mission is to protect and restore wild trout, steelhead and salmon and their waters throughout California. California Trout is supported by approximately 7,500 members and approximately 60 affiliate organizations representing approximately another 10,000 members. California Trout is headquartered in San Francisco and operates 5 field offices throughout the state.

The current state of California’s trout, steelhead and salmon is bad and worsening. [Read more...]

The Fishing’s Still Good In California During The Winter

Many fly fishermen pack away the gear in winter, but over the last decade, a lot of California’s Blue Ribbon rivers have been opened to winter fly fishing — including the Pit and Upper Sacramento Rivers. Here’s a 15″ Rainbow Trout caught on the Upper Sac last Sunday (on a dry fly):

Upper Sacramento River Rainbow Trout

A 15" Upper Sacramento River Rainbow Trout caught on an October Caddis dry

It may be winter, but don’t forget to get out and enjoy California’s fly fishing. We promise to protect and restore as much of it as we can…

PG&E Adds Pit River 3 Flow Gauge

(ED: This notice came from PG&E)

———-

Pit 3, 4, 5 Project stakeholders,

I am pleased to inform you that PG&E has established real-time flow information reporting for the Pit 3 reach, on the Pit River. The flow information is available on the California Data Exchange Center (CDEC) web site at http://cdec.water.ca.gov The station identification for the Pit 3 reach is P35.

With the establishment of the Pit 3 reach flow information on CDEC, real-time flow information on all three river reaches of the Pit 3, 4, 5 Project are now available. The station identification summary included below will direct you to the hourly real-time data for the Pit 3, Pit 4, and Pit 5 river reaches:

Pit 3 Reach; Station Identification – P35

Pit 4 Reach; Station Identification – PR4

Pit 5 Reach; Station Identification – PRB

Thank you for your participation and continued support during implementation of the Pit 3, 4, and 5 Project license. If you have any questions regarding this notification or implementation of the license, please contact me directly.

PG&E Conducting Tests: Pit 5 Will Be Blown Out Tuesday

PG&E’s conducting flow gate tests on Pit 5 this Tuesday, which not only means high water that day, but likely unsettled fishing.

From PG&E:

Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) has rescheduled to Tuesday, Oct. 11 an increased flow test on the Pit River below the Pit 5 Diversion Dam. The test was originally scheduled for Monday, Oct. 3.

PG&E is conducting a regular test of dam flow gates, which is required by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The test is being done on a weekday in the fall when recreational use of the river is low and before winter rains increase river flows. Water levels will rise about half a foot an hour for about six to eight hours, starting before dawn so that the river stops rising before sunrise.

The increased flows will not be noticeable beyond the Pit 6 Dam. This portion of the Pit River is remote with no established recreational facilities.

The higher flows will not exceed those experienced in fall and winter.
The maximum flow of 1,800 cubic feet per second (cfs) will be held for about six to eight hours, then gradually reduced over a period of about six to eight hours until all gates are closed.

The anticipated flow before and after testing will be 350 cfs.

CalTrout Beginning Restoration Projects on Hat Creek, Fall River

 

“Given our history and connection to these streams, CalTrout feels a strong responsibility to reverse the current decline”

 
by Drew Braugh, Mt. Shasta Conservation Manager

Few streams typify the “spring creek” fly fishing experience better than Northern California’s Hat Creek and the Fall River. Known for their crystal clear water, exceptional scenery, and challenging angling, these streams exemplify what spring creek fisheries are all about.

Fall River (by Val Atkinson)

The Fall River (photo Val Atkinson)

In 1971, CalTrout worked with the Department of Fish and Game to designate Hat Creek as the state’s first protected “Wild Trout Area” (WTA). Thanks to the new management guidelines set up under the WTA, Hat Creek quickly became one of California’s most productive fly fishing waters and notable accomplishments in CalTrout’s 40-year history.

Unfortunately, now more than 40 years later, habitat conditions in both Hat Creek and the Fall River have once again begun to deteriorate. Both rivers are suffering from habitat degradation caused by over- sedimentation and the collapse of native aquatic plants.

Sedimentation, Plants Causing Decline

In the Fall River, invasive Eurasian watermilfoil continues to outcompete and overtake native aquatic plants, which in turn negatively affect macroinvertebrate food sources and overall fish populations.

In sizeable areas of Hat Creek, aquatic vegetation has almost completely disappeared, taking with it important sources of food and shelter.

Given our history and connection to these streams, CalTrout feels a strong responsibility to reverse the current decline. This summer, we plan to begin a comprehensive long-term campaign to restore these fisheries by improving critical habitat, managing invasive species and installing monitoring systems that will track changes in conditions over time.

The purpose of this effort is to protect the extraordinary recreational and ecological values of Northern California’s most important “spring creek” wild trout fisheries – Hat Creek and Fall River – for future generations.

In both cases, CalTrout is working to bring together a group of public and private stakeholders to develop viable long-term solutions.

For Hat Creek, these stakeholders, known as the Hat Creek Resource Advisory Committee (Hat RAC), include the California Department of Fish and Game, PG&E, the UC Davis Center for Watershed Sciences, the Regional Water Quality Control Board and other key groups.

Restoration Efforts Underway

Already, the Hat RAC has developed a draft restoration plan and secured over $100k for implementation and monitoring.

On the Fall River, we will be partnering with the newly formed Fall River Conservancy (FRC).

Together, CalTrout and FRC are designing a two-year pilot program that will utilize the milfoil weevil (small beetle) as a biological control for managing highly invasive Eurasian watermilfoil found throughout the Fall River.

Over the next two years, CalTrout aims to restore more than 15 miles of spring-fed, cold-water habitat in Hat Creek and the Fall River while boosting wild trout populations by more than 1,000 fish per mile/per stream.

Additionally, we will monitor water quality for specific parameters including temperature, dissolved oxygen, bacteria and excessive nutrient loading.

To read more about our efforts to protect Hat Creek and the Fall River visit our website at caltrout.org/initiatives/blue-ribbon-waters.

The Facts About The Pit River Hydropower Relicensing

 

Despite a Contentious Relicensing Process, CalTrout Works To Protect and Restore One Of California’s Blue Ribbon Rivers

 

While the Pit River is one of California’s best-known destinations for fly fishermen, it’s also one of the state’s most controlled, hydrologically modified rivers.

California's Pit River

California's Pit River (photo courtesy Val Atkinson)

Despite still providing an excellent fly fishing experience, the notoriously hard-to-wade Pit River’s most popular reaches — Pit 3, 4 and 5 — have been impacted by a low, highly controlled flow regime. So when the Pit River hydropower complex came up for relicensing, CalTrout negotiated to protect and restore the health of the fishery — and for the benefit of California’s anglers.

Through the course of extensive studies, what we discovered was not exactly what we expected…

The Pit River Was Not Entirely Healthy

Extensive studies revealed some surprising facts about the Pit River, including some which were having a significant impact on fishermen. For example:

  • The Pit 4 reach supports approximately half the trout biomass as Pit 3
  • Pit 5 only supports approximately half the trout biomass as Pit 4

Given the Pit’s status as a Blue Ribbon fishery, this was alarming information; the river was not as healthy as we believed.

After crunching the data from over $10 million in studies, CalTrout identified four problem areas which needed attention during the negotiations:

  • High Summer Water Temperatures
  • Sub-Optimal Flows for Habitat
  • Lack of Purging Flows
  • User Conflicts

Solutions

Facing the steady decline of one of California’s iconic rivers, CalTrout (along with Trout Unlimited [TU] and Federation of Fly Fishers [FFF]) invested a lot of time and effort in the lengthy hydropower relicensing process, and though we didn’t emerge with exactly the outcome we wanted, we are confident we’ll see an improvement in the health of the fishery under the new flow regimes.

Problem: Water Temperatures

The Pit River (especially Pit 4 and 5) suffered from high water temperatures during the summer months (especially July and August) — often exceeding 70 degrees, which is too hot for healthy trout.

We negotiated a new flow regime in Pit 4 and 5 that will reduce daily maximum and mean stream temperature by 2-2.5 °F, bringing water temperatures in Pit 4 & 5 reaches into the optimum growth range for trout during the summer months (approximately 66 degrees).

That means flows will generally increase from the current 150 cfs to 350 cfs – 400 cfs on Pit 4 and Pit 5. In simple terms, new flow regimes for Pit 4 and 5 should grow larger, healthier trout in these two reaches.

Problem: Flows Too Low for Optimal Habitat

“Wettable area” studies suggested optimal habitat flows for Pit 3, 4 & 5 were far higher than the current base flows (often, the best flows for fish were in the 600 cfs range).

At current flows, optimum trout habitat was often located in the thalwag (the area of highest flow in the channel) — near the center of the river.

Flow modeling indicated that as Pit River flows were increased, optimum trout habitat moved from the thalwag to better habitat at the edges of the river — where they’re more accessible to anglers.

Like the temperature issue covered above, higher flows were needed to improve and restore the fishery. This is why — despite CalTrout’s attempt to peg Pit 3 flows at 200 cfs — other participants successfully negotiated flows at 300 cfs and above. (See flow data at end of article.)

Problem: Lack of Freshet Flows

The lack of periodic freshet (purging) flows meant the river channel was narrowing and bug/trout habitat in the river was not being renewed.

CalTrout negotiated freshet flows a minimum of every other year (if they don’t naturally occur), which should improve habitat for invertebrates, trout and spawning. (See flow data at end of article.)

User Conflicts

Whitewater interests wanted high pulse flows most weekends during the summer months, an option we found untenable.

Instead, after a delay until 2013 to gather baseline data, “whitewater flows” will occur occur only one weekend in August (maximum of 1500 cfs) and one weekend in September (maximum of 1200 cfs) — and the impacts of those flows on invertebrates and trout will be closely monitored.

Should significant impacts appear, the adaptive management process we helped negotiate allows us to return to the negotiating table and potentially stop reduce or eliminate whitewater flows.

The Fishability of the New Flow Regime

Fishermen have voiced concern (sometimes vigorously) about the fishability of Pit 3, 4 & 5 under the new flow regime.

Because no party to a negotiation gets exactly what they want — other stakeholders looked at the studies and advocated for flows far higher flows than CalTrout wanted — the final flow regimes are excellent for the fishery, but a bit higher than many consider optimal for fishermen.

CalTrout initially wanted to raise flow rates in Pit 3 from 150 cfs to 200 cfs, and raise flow rates in the troubled Pit 4 and Pit 5 sections to 350 cfs.

In addition, we took a very cautious stance on the request for ongoing “pulse” flows for whitewater recreational use, concerned about impacts on invertebrate populations.
The negotiated Pit 4 and Pit 5 flows were only a little higher than we wanted, but Pit 3 — which didn’t suffer from summer water temperature issues — ran far higher than we wanted.

Fishermen typically end up begging for more water in streams and rivers, and there’s little doubt — despite a few statements to the contrary — the new flow regime will have a positive (potentially hugely positive) impact on the health of the Pit 3, 4 and 5 fisheries.

The problem for fishermen becomes one of access; how do you fish a Pit 3 at 300 cfs when you’re used to fishing it at 150 cfs?

We believe several things may help mitigate the higher flows for fishermen:

  • At higher flows, trout will move from center channels to better habitat on the edges, making them more accessible to fishermen who can’t wade into the main channel
  • Higher flows will tend to widen the channel and remove encroaching riparian vegetation, resulting in a “flatter” river channel and better access than is currently experienced at these flows
  • Freshet flows will restore bug and spawning habitat, improving trout populations
  • Optimal water temperatures will grow more — and bigger — trout

Summary

In the new Pit River license we achieved the following:

  • Substantially increased minimum flows that optimize trout habitat and lower maximum water temperatures
  • A guarantee of appropriate spring freshet flows designed to mimic historical flows that are important for cleansing spawning gravels and maintaining fish habitat
  • A complete re-operation of Lake Britton to more closely mimic run-of-the-river flow fluctuations resulting in a more natural flow patterns during the winter and spring months
  • A limit on ramping rates for power fluctuations which have occurred due to the critical role this project plays in power generation
  • A very substantial investment in monitoring studies during the life of the license to monitor response of fish, habitat and other aquatic resources to the new flow regime
  • An adaptive management process whereby conditions can be modified based on outcome of the monitoring
  • Increased PG&E responsibility for maintenance of the Hat Creek fish barrier and a $300,000 enhancement and restoration fund for the Hat Creek Wild Trout Area.
    CalTrout — along with Trout Unlimited and the Federation of Fly Fishermen – are confident conditions of the new Pit license are in the best interest of this remarkable river and fishery.

We look forward to fishing these new flows and we hope you do as well. Providing your feedback is important as CalTrout will be consistently involved in meetings to review data and provide feedback to PG&E and agencies.

This adaptive management process allows for changes in the license based on data being collected. The important thing to know is CalTrout will continue to stay involved in the future of the Pit River.

Flow Data

Pit 3
Summer – 300cfs (4/21-8/31); Fall – 280 cfs (9/1-11/1); Winter – 300cfs (12/1-4/20 [prior to spill]); Winter – 350cfs (11/1-4/20 [after spill])

Pit 4
Summer – 375cfs (5/16-8/31); Fall – 350cfs (9/1-11/1); Winter – 375cfs (12/1-6/15 [prior to spill]); Winter – 450cfs (11/1-6/15) [after spill])

Pit 5
Summer – 400cfs (4/21-8/31); Fall – 350cfs (9/1-11/1); Winter – 400cfs (12/1-4/20) [prior to spill]); Winter – 450cfs (11/1-4/20) [after spill])

Freshet flows Freshet flows of 1500 cfs will be provided every other year, if natural freshet flow does not occur in a Project reach in the late winter and early spring.

A freshet flow release is a 21 day flow release with a two day average flow of 1500cfs, after which the flow decreases in approximately five equal steps.

Recreational Flows

  • One weekend in August (minimum flows of 1500 cfs from 10:00 am to 4:00pm)
  • One weekend in September (minimum flows of 1200 cfs from 10:00am to 4:00pm in the Pit 5 reach)

These flows will not begin until 2013 at the earliest. Over the next two years baseline data for fish, bugs and others creatures will be collected at the new base flow. This data allows us to review the impacts of recreation flows on the fishery, and the adaptive management process allows us to petition to have them modified.

Pit River Background

The Pit River offers up excellent water chemistry — reflected in its abundant invertebrate life and excellent hatches — but as a river, it has been dramatically altered by 80 years of hydro engineering.

For example, pre-dam flows in the relevant sections rarely fell below 1800 cfs, yet after the series of dams were completed in the early 1920’s, flows in some sections were essentially nonexistent (Pit 3 didn’t receive any real water until a successful CalTrout petition to augment flows in the 80s).

Some water was eventually restored, but even today, low flow rates mean high water temperatures for trout, which favor warmwater species like suckers and pikeminnow to the detriment of native trout populations. (High water temperatures reduce dissolved oxygen, rendering trout far more susceptible to disease and reducing growth rates.)

Chronically low flows also have the effects of smothering bug and spawning habitat while encouraging growth of riparian vegetation and narrowing the channel, artificially “shrinking” the Pit River.

PG&E Says McCloud River Flows About to Increase

The McCloud River has been quite fishable so far this spring, but an end to the unseasonably cool springtime weather in the northern end of the state means the record snowpack is melting and flows are on their way up — including on the McCloud River.

This notice from PG&E:

As you may be aware, McCloud Dam has been spilling approximately 150 to 300 cubic feet per second (cfs) for past several weeks. PG&E has been taking careful steps to manage the spill flow and increasing inflow into McCloud Reservoir by monitoring the reservoir level, maintaining the water surface elevation in Iron Canyon and McCloud Reservoirs, and diverting water through James B. Black Powerhouse to maintain the maximum amount of storage capacity.

Based on the current snowpack condition, increasing air temperature, and increasing inflow conditions into McCloud Reservoir, PG&E anticipates that the spill magnitude at McCloud Dam will continue to increase steadily over the next several days, and possibly weeks depending on the long term weather trend.

Click here for the most current flow conditions in the Lower McCloud River below the dam.

Click here or the most current flow conditions in the Lower McCloud River at Ah-Di-Na.