Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Author Topic: ~~~Jet Boats on the Upper Pitt~~~  (Read 10263 times)

Randog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 350
    • Ultimate Sportfishing Adventures
~~~Jet Boats on the Upper Pitt~~~
« on: February 01, 2005, 05:45:33 PM »

Just wanted to get a general concensus of what people feel about using a jet boat in a responsable manner on the upper Pitt river. I understand that it should be avoided during Aug/Sept due to returning salmon spawning, but what about other times say Oct/Nov. Let's not make this a mud slinging topic, just wanted to know how other people feel about it.

leadbelly

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1599
  • Dont pitch it out, Pitch in!
Re: ~~~Jet Boats on the Upper Pitt~~~
« Reply #1 on: February 01, 2005, 06:26:17 PM »

good question.here is some info I stole from the ARMs site  http://www.alouetteriver.org/ its under Issues and Articles (2003)

ARMS Requests Regulatory Controls on
Motorized Vessels on the Upper Pitt River


Written and Compiled by Geoff Clayton and Caresse Selk

The Upper Pitt River is a small and shallow river system that has maintained viable and healthy populations of fish due in part to its year round catch and release fishery. Recent years have seen an increasing trend in the number of people using jet boats and jet skis to access hot springs 21 km upriver. While an increase in user groups and tourists to the Upper Pitt River has heightened public knowledge and awareness of the area, it has also brought degradation and disregard of the sensitive riverine environment.

Residents in the Upper Pitt Valley are active stewards of the River's Watershed and have seen first hand the potential for environmental destruction that can be wrought at the hands of unaware, or irresponsible visitors to this region. Boating issues of concern are: the potential for the destruction of fish habitat caused by the disturbance of fish on their spawning beds, hydrostatic shock to eggs and alevin in the gravel, and the anchouring of boats at holes or creek mouths targeting fish in these areas. Without regulation, jet boats traveling at high speed detract from bank and wading fisherman's sport as well. This repeated disturbance of speed and sound from the increasing number of jet boat river travels must be having some detrimental affect on the birds and wildlife too. Regulations will be required to see this watershed continue to thrive as a healthy, wild ecosystem.

For those that may read this and have never been to the Upper Pitt we profiled the mean average flows of the Gold River (which has limits on jet boats) and the Chilliwack/Vedder. The aforementioned are very similar, in mean average monthly flows to the Upper Pitt (CHS records). Just think about the reaction one would get from bank fishermen on the Vedder as you jet boomed by with the resulting wave action at 40-50ks.

These environmental concerns have prompted ARMS to recommend and request of the Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection and the DFO "regulatory controls" on motorized boats in the Upper Pitt River." Excerpts from our Ministerial request can be viewed below.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reasons and Rational
By Geoff Clayton

The issues of harmful impacts of motorized watercraft on some rivers on a worldwide scale are now becoming well known. Professionals charged with the protection and regulatory controls of fish and wildlife, that have been given funds and direction to study these concerns, have come forward with their results.

ARMS has included a small synopsis of some of these results from Alaska, Montana and New Zealand. We, of course, have only touched the surface of the research that has gone on in the field of harmful human impacts to river and riverine areas.

In dealing directly with the Upper Pitt River, our request for controls on motorized watercraft above the Rocky Main Bridge is based on the river becoming shallow and braided above this point. Clearly it is the accumulative impacts, by the growing number of powerboats frequenting the area, that have moved these issues to the regulatory level.

The lower section of the Pitt has already forced regulatory authorities to ban motorized vessels on the Alouette and Widgeon rivers, and speed restrictions at Grant Narrows Landing (lower Pitt). The use of paddles vis-a-vis motors and speed, being the issues here. But there is nothing slower and less able to move out of the way of a speeding vessel than a wading fisherman at waist level in the river, which is another issue in the Upper Pitt to be considered.

The River of the Upper Pitt has been carving a path from glacier to tide water for many millenniums, holding an abundance of salmon in its arms. Being born and raised in the flood plain of the Pitt sixty-seven years ago, I have seen, first hand, the shift from abundance, to the threat of extinction, of many west coast salmon stocks in my lifetime. Therefore governments aided by volunteers, must try to hold on to the vital remnants of the salmon gene pool in the hope of rebuilding these stocks in the years to come. Sport fishermen are one of the core user groups who must do their part for recovery to succeed. This is the core to our request for motorized regulations, protecting the aquatic habitat in the Upper Pitt.

"Rivers like the Upper Pitt hold the critical nucleus of tomorrows hope."

So if we err in regulatory control, we must err on the side of safety for our wild rivers. In this way there is a road back to our heritage- so beautiful- so fragile and yet, still visible in the Upper Pitt.

"In order for wild rivers to live and flourish in our mechanized world, governments must act, as they are the only means to rational control and protection in public ownership".

Below is a sample of some of the research that we have found on this subject. If you would care to review the full documentation, please contact our office.





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background Research

Please read a small collection below of other's research," but our reason to act now":
Studies in Alaska and New Zealand have found that in shallow water where boat use is high, and especially where channels are constricted, developing salmon eggs and alevins in the gravel can suffer high mortalities as a result of pressure changes caused by boat operations, which can result in removal of gravel or mechanical shock generated in the area under the mid-line of the boat. A study by National Park Service (NPS) staff was carried out during the summers of 1986 and 1987 to evaluate resource condition under the current permit system. The most serious consequence of human activity along American Creek identified during the study was the increased rate of erosion and alteration of streambed morphology that results from jet boat use. Permanent photo points were established in 1989 to monitor riparian vegetation cover and erosion along the creek every 2 to 4 years.

In 1991, the NPS funded a study of the effects of jet-driven boat turbulence on sockeye and other salmonid reproduction in Alaska streams. Much of the field work planned for the study occurred on American Creek in Katmai. The study was conducted by the Alaska Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit at the University of Alaska Fairbanks. The study, completed in 1994, found that jet driven boats can indeed kill salmonid embryos in redds. Water pressure was not found to be the culprit; instead, mortality occurs when river substrate (gravel) is moved by the direct discharge from a jet unit. The authors found that limiting jet boat activity may be warranted in small streams where the potential for substrate disturbance is high. Any such restrictions, however, should be made on a case-by-case basis.

Today, jet-driven boats are becoming more popular because of their shallow draft. Shallow headwaters are preferred by Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus sp.) and rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) as sites of egg deposition for reproduction. Based on a 1992-1993 study by the University of Alaska at Fairbanks, jet boat operation can lead to significant salmonid embryo mortality through mechanical shock, intrusion of fine sediments into the gravel affecting eggs that remain in redds, and the removal of gravel covering eggs in redds with subsequent washing away of eggs.

Studies in Alaska and New Zealand have found that in shallow water where boat use is high, and especially where channels are constricted, developing salmon eggs and alevins in the gravel can suffer high mortalities as a result of pressure changes caused by boat operations, which can result in removal of gravel or mechanical shock generated in the area under the mid-line of the boat.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Links to other sites with information on jet boating in the Upper Pitt River

The Steelheader Magazine

The Pitt River Lodge

A River Never Sleeps

A complicated issue.In my opinion the use misuse or over exposure from jet or other boats on a wild and possibly delicate system should be examined very closely and carefully regulated.


 
 
Logged

The Gilly

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 985
  • Let equity be the rule of our actions
Re: ~~~Jet Boats on the Upper Pitt~~~
« Reply #2 on: February 02, 2005, 08:46:48 AM »

Same problem with Jet boats that we have with any other thing.  The people who use them irresponsibly will ruin it for everyone.  I think that boats should be allowed to go where they won't cause dammage to the natural envirionment.  I've seen too many morons buying $50000 boats.  I can't believe that I need a pleasure boat operators card to operate a 12' boat with 10hp and I don't need one for an 18' jet boat with 200hp.  Everyone operating a boat should have to pass very rigorous testing. 

Can you tell that I've been upset by some jet boat operators?
Logged

leaseman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 276
  • on the water or in the bush...thats entertainment
Re: ~~~Jet Boats on the Upper Pitt~~~
« Reply #3 on: February 02, 2005, 09:09:51 AM »

I agree about the moron part...I don't know how many times i have been anchored and fishing and had one of these yahoos come flying up beside us, ask how the fishing is then hit full throttle and take off...Show offs that are going to get someone hurt plus limit the access to other fishermen one of these days...
Logged

Randog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 350
    • Ultimate Sportfishing Adventures
Re: ~~~Jet Boats on the Upper Pitt~~~
« Reply #4 on: February 02, 2005, 09:16:55 AM »

Looks like every jet boat operator is getting painted with the same brush here.  ::)

 Let me just reiterate my original query, how do people feel about RESPONSABLE jet boat use on the upper Pitt.

The Gilly

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 985
  • Let equity be the rule of our actions
Re: ~~~Jet Boats on the Upper Pitt~~~
« Reply #5 on: February 02, 2005, 09:21:32 AM »

The people who use them irresponsibly will ruin it for everyone. 

Not everyone.  Most are good.  The bad ones (in any boat or PWC) ruin it for everybody.  I think that's what has happened on the upper pit.  I didn't mean to point my finger at everyone but, so few screw it up for so many.
Logged

Sandy

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 642
Re: ~~~Jet Boats on the Upper Pitt~~~
« Reply #6 on: February 02, 2005, 05:14:11 PM »

All rivers should have at least a no wake rule,
 I know it would be hard to police.
several years ago I was almost knocked off my feet by the wake from an inconsiderate jet boater, who claimed I was too far from the bank. fortunately (in a way) it was not a deeper draft boat therefore there was a smaller wake to deal with.there also should be a ban on disturbance of any kind on spawning beds by boating/rafting.
Logged
finding your limits is fun, it can also be VERY painful.

If you care about Canada's future, get involved by holding your MLA's & MP's accountable!! don't just be sheep!!

The Gilly

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 985
  • Let equity be the rule of our actions
Re: ~~~Jet Boats on the Upper Pitt~~~
« Reply #7 on: February 03, 2005, 07:50:22 AM »

Here is a little contrtoversy... a boat travelling at 30-40mph usually puts out less wake than a boat doing 5mph.  I think you've been swamped by an inconsiderate a%^h*^$ that, as I said earlier, ruins it for everyone.  Boats are registered, but has anyone every tried to record a registration # from a boat doing 30mph?  Good luck.

Back to the thread...If environmental degradation can be proven then they should be shut down.  This obviously has to be tempered with consideration for the level of stock returns etc. etc. etc.  If it can be done, as Randog said, with people acting responsibly, then they should be allowed.
Logged

Rieber

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1441
Re: ~~~Jet Boats on the Upper Pitt~~~
« Reply #8 on: February 03, 2005, 10:30:21 AM »

Definitaly some of these jet operators are jerks. During this past Sockeye season we anchored early at the bottom of Grassy. This donkey on with a boat called Hellfish comes over and is obviously pissed that we anchored there. These things happen if you sleep in. Anyways he tries to anchor directly above us but can't get his anchor to bite. After several attampts he's pissed. He tries again, can't hook up and drifts almost right on top of us. We yell at him as we're in a little 16' and he's rocking the hell out of us. Well he gasses it and the boat's back end swings out and slams into us with enough force to dent our boat and it jarred my wrist because I was holding on for dear life with the vision of this 21' jet about to slam us. He didn't come over and appologize or ask if we were ok - nothing. In fact this my friend came over to out bouy and blasted our anchor with his jet while we we're off chasing a Spring. On our way back we see hime directly over our bouy and as we go to hook up we find our anchor has mysteriously  ::) drifted downstream placing us awkwardly close to his brother's jet which pulled up directly below us. We hook back up again and their laughing thinking this is funny. And to think people wonder how fights start.
Logged

The Gilly

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 985
  • Let equity be the rule of our actions
Re: ~~~Jet Boats on the Upper Pitt~~~
« Reply #9 on: February 03, 2005, 12:55:26 PM »

Poor Randogs thread has been stolen. It's not fair to Rand dog to miss his original point.   Lets keep this one to the original concept of the upper Pit R. and environmental degredation due to wakes.  I'll start another thread for general jet (and other) boat beefs.

Mod: Go to http://www.fishingwithrod.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=5973.0 for the boating complaints.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2005, 01:18:16 PM by Rodney »
Logged

Gooey

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1618
Re: ~~~Jet Boats on the Upper Pitt~~~
« Reply #10 on: February 03, 2005, 01:17:11 PM »

Randogg...the proplem always lies with the irresponsible users in any goup...it really doesnt do anyone any good focussing on the responsible users.

That said, if indeed this is a smaller river and most of the traffic is heading 21KM up river to the hot springs, I would think that the river should be shut down.  People will not travel 21km slow enough to minimize environmental damage, its just too far.

I would think that in the spectrum of boaters on the upper pitt, the fishermen would be the most environmentally friendly; unfortunately in this scenario it sounds like fishermen dont make up most of the traffic.  If I picture a boat headed to the springs, I picture it loaded with people and possibly booze rippen around (and I think the average PWC operator is no better).

I would think closing it to general access and having a liscence or permit (like in national parks)  would be a good way to control the traffic...a $10 permit is probably enough to keep most of the yahoos away.
Logged

Randog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 350
    • Ultimate Sportfishing Adventures
Re: ~~~Jet Boats on the Upper Pitt~~~
« Reply #11 on: February 03, 2005, 02:49:22 PM »


I would think closing it to general access and having a license or permit (like in national parks)  would be a good way to control the traffic...a $10 permit is probably enough to keep most of the yahoos away.
Quote


 Excellent Idea Gooey, buy a measily $10.00 is mere pittance to someone willing to spend a minimum of $60.00 in gas to access this area with a $50,000.00 Jet Boat. 

 I have to agree with some points, I'd like to see in black and white (some sort of study or research) for myself exactly how much ecological damage jet boats are doing on that system. Not systems in New Zealand or Alaska like quoted below, I like to compare apples to apples.

Background Research

Please read a small collection below of other's research," but our reason to act now":
Studies in Alaska and New Zealand have found that in shallow water where boat use is high, and especially where channels are constricted, developing salmon eggs and alevins in the gravel can suffer high mortalities as a result of pressure changes caused by boat operations, which can result in removal of gravel or mechanical shock generated in the area under the mid-line of the boat. A study by National Park Service (NPS) staff was carried out during the summers of 1986 and 1987 to evaluate resource condition under the current permit system. The most serious consequence of human activity along American Creek identified during the study was the increased rate of erosion and alteration of streambed morphology that results from jet boat use. Permanent photo points were established in 1989 to monitor riparian vegetation cover and erosion along the creek every 2 to 4 years.

In 1991, the NPS funded a study of the effects of jet-driven boat turbulence on sockeye and other salmonid reproduction in Alaska streams. Much of the field work planned for the study occurred on American Creek in Katmai. The study was conducted by the Alaska Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit at the University of Alaska Fairbanks. The study, completed in 1994, found that jet driven boats can indeed kill salmonid embryos in redds. Water pressure was not found to be the culprit; instead, mortality occurs when river substrate (gravel) is moved by the direct discharge from a jet unit. The authors found that limiting jet boat activity may be warranted in small streams where the potential for substrate disturbance is high. Any such restrictions, however, should be made on a case-by-case basis.

Today, jet-driven boats are becoming more popular because of their shallow draft. Shallow headwaters are preferred by Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus sp.) and rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) as sites of egg deposition for reproduction. Based on a 1992-1993 study by the University of Alaska at Fairbanks, jet boat operation can lead to significant salmonid embryo mortality through mechanical shock, intrusion of fine sediments into the gravel affecting eggs that remain in redds, and the removal of gravel covering eggs in redds with subsequent washing away of eggs.

Studies in Alaska and New Zealand have found that in shallow water where boat use is high, and especially where channels are constricted, developing salmon eggs and alevins in the gravel can suffer high mortalities as a result of pressure changes caused by boat operations, which can result in removal of gravel or mechanical shock generated in the area under the mid-line of the boat.

It appears that general Joe public is viewing all jet boat owners as a bunch of red neck beer swillin' yahoos that don't give a crap about anything, well you might as well say that EVERY driver on the road under the age of 20 as a crummy driver, not always the case.

Just for the records, while fishing Peg Leg last year, my son was fighting a fish and some bonehead drives his 14' cartopper right over his line, after I was waving him off and signalling that he had a fish on. He wasn't too happy removing that fireline from his prop. (oops should move this comment to other thread)
« Last Edit: February 03, 2005, 02:54:20 PM by Randog »
Logged

Sandy

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 642
Re: ~~~Jet Boats on the Upper Pitt~~~
« Reply #12 on: February 05, 2005, 11:58:30 AM »

Randog
 you may have a good idea, special area permit? all would have to be included in a study program that if proven that boating etc. is causing damage to the beds or banks  plus specific times where disturbance to spawning fish, then boating would have to be excluded. I hate to see people excluded from an area but some areas are still almost pristine because they are almost inacsessable to the hoards .
Logged
finding your limits is fun, it can also be VERY painful.

If you care about Canada's future, get involved by holding your MLA's & MP's accountable!! don't just be sheep!!

FF

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 37
Re: ~~~Jet Boats on the Upper Pitt~~~
« Reply #13 on: February 05, 2005, 01:57:05 PM »

Depends what think responsible is,
As a guide working for the lodge on this river I am on it more then anybody period. There are very few "Green" jet boaters that come up this river system and if they do they wont make it up very far before runing it up on the beach. This past summer there was 3 boats (that I know of) that either sunk or ran up the beach. Which is expected on any river system with the same structer and flow as the pitt. Im the first to say that 95% of the jet boaters on the Pitt river run it at apropriate times meaning in the from Mid May-mid Aug where the water is high, there is no salmon on the redds, and the channels are so wide that a jet boater can get past other anglers with no harm done what so ever. But as the summer starts to end the glacier isent pumping out as much water. The river drops usually a good 3-4 feet and that is when the salmon (both spring and sockey) begin to move into the now shallow tailouts to spawn and complete their cycle. Now imagine a 19foot sled with a 225hp engine flying up the tailout at 30 mph sometimes in as little as 3 inches of water leaving behind nothing but a 12X6 inch trough in the gravel. I dont care who you are theres some kinda damage going on there. To give you a general idea of the size of the pitt in late summer though fall would be the chehalis river at a medium flow. Another conern I have is saftey. No matter how responsible the pilot is he can't slow down in shallow water.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2005, 02:00:42 PM by FF »
Logged