Ice dam along the W. Branch of Pine!

[troutbert]

Back in the 1990s I talked to an old timer who grew up in the area. He said when he was younger the trout could freely move up through. I can't remember if he said the dam was partially breached during that time, or totally gone.

But he said when Pine Creek warmed in the summer, large numbers of trout came up through Galeton, and then continued up both the main branch of Pine Creek and the West Branch.

That way trout living in the big water below Galeton could move upstream and find thermal refuge over the summer, then drop back down again later.

His opinion was that the dam now blocks the upstream movement of trout in the summer, and people target them below the dam, and that this really hurt the trout fishery in Pine Creek. It totally makes sense.

The purpose of building fish ladders is to allow that type of movement. But as someone already pointed out, fish ladders don't work well.

 

[Tups]

TB. Ladders have a spotty record of fish passage in general, but perhaps it will work in this case. Hope so. No doubt the ladder is required as a condition of the state and federal permits as a form of mitigation.

 

[Fly-Swatter]

swampy , willow lined stream nicer then now?

Definitely! +1 on the Little Lehigh park. The money used on dredging and fish ladder can be used for multi-use landscaping and bank augmentation.

 

[BradFromPotter]

Agreed. In many places a flowing stream is the centerpiece.

The Parkway in Allentown with the Little Lehigh Creek flowing through it for example. It's a beautiful place and very popular with local people and visitors.

What people really love are trails along streams.

Just going for a walk outdoors is a good thing. Walking along a lake adds a little flavor.

But walking along a STREAM, now that is awesome. The flowing water really elevates the experience. It's not just fishermen who enjoy that. Nearly everyone loves that.

An example near me is the trail along Spring Creek in "Spring Creek Canyon." It's very popular. There are people walking there probably 365 days a year, even in bad weather. Some of them are fishermen, but the great majority are other folks.

plenty of streams to walk along here. Many people walk around the lake all day here.

 

[BradFromPotter]

Back in the 1990s I talked to an old timer who grew up in the area. He said when he was younger the trout could freely move up through. I can't remember if he said the dam was partially breached during that time, or totally gone.

But he said when Pine Creek warmed in the summer, large numbers of trout came up through Galeton, and then continued up both the main branch of Pine Creek and the West Branch.

That way trout living in the big water below Galeton could move upstream and find thermal refuge over the summer, then drop back down again later.

His opinion was that the dam now blocks the upstream movement of trout in the summer, and people target them below the dam, and that this really hurt the trout fishery in Pine Creek. It totally makes sense.

The purpose of building fish ladders is to allow that type of movement. But as someone already pointed out, fish ladders don't work well.

I do agree if the dam was not here the trout would do better. But as I stated before "it's not all about the trout"

As far as thermal refuges go, there are plenty along the section of Pine that runs along Rt 6. When we have normal temps & rain you can catch trout all summer long in Pine.

 

[BradFromPotter]

I agree with your sentiments pcray, but the Borough residents have decided they will keep the lake and the state has decided that the people of PA shall pay for it. You live by the sword, you die by the sword. We like it when the state pays to fix up the Yellow Breeches, but not when they fix up the lake at Galeton.
.

the residents of Galeton have skin in the game here. It's not all coming from the state. The state would have paid either way.

 

[lycoflyfisher]

I

the residents of Galeton have skin in the game here. It's not all coming from the state. The state would have paid either way.

The difference is in removal there would have been a one time expense with no further liability to the borough or statewide taxpayers. Someone will be paying 10+ million over the next 50 years or so and the state may not always pick up the bill. This is not a new structure by any means.

The logical decision with financial consideration would have been removal as the feasibility study was set to recommend. Then they ran the firm hired to do the feasibility study out of town. I wonder how much money was wasted to ultimately not accept the results of the study?

For the cost of the current dredging project in the works, full removal and restoration could have occurred.

 

[BradFromPotter]

I

The difference is in removal there would have been a one time expense with no further liability to the borough or statewide taxpayers. Someone will be paying 10+ million over the next 50 years or so and the state may not always pick up the bill. This is not a new structure by any means.

The logical decision with financial consideration would have been removal as the feasibility study was set to recommend. Then they ran the firm hired to do the feasibility study out of town. I wonder how much money was wasted to ultimately not accept the results of the study?

For the cost of the current dredging project in the works, full removal and restoration could have occurred.

how did you come up with 10+ million?

the 900k is to restore the dam & the dredging. The money for the up keep of the lake is coming from the borough & not the state.

 

[lycoflyfisher]

10 million may be high, but I gaurantee in the next 50 years substantial maintenance or improvements will be needed on the dam and it will not be cheap.

 

[BradFromPotter]

10 million may be high, but I gaurantee in the next 50 years substantial maintenance or improvements will be needed on the dam and it will not be cheap.

maybe down the road the galeton residents will take the dam down. But for now it's a done deal.