| Wild Trout Screensavers |
|| |
Wild Trout Slideshows |
|| |
Wild Trout Reference Photos |
|
Home / Contact Us / Guided Trips / Why Hire A Guide? / 2009 Rates / Area Map / Shopping Cart / Questions? / Links / Add A Link
Views From The Rim / Aquarius Plateau Lakes / North Side Lakes / South Side Lakes / East Side Lakes / West Side Lakes
Boulder Mountain Legends
This is a story about the beaver ponds of Boulder Mountain. This is also a story about brook trout and cutthroat. This is what the Boulder Mountain has always been famous for and still is, at least among anglers. The legendary monster brookies and beautiful beaver ponds of southern Utah’s Boulder Mountain was for many decades what motivated fly fishers and anglers of all types to travel hundreds of miles from around the intermountain west, over some pretty rough roads to get here. Getting to the Boulder Mountain was easy enough, getting over the mountain or to any one of eighty different named lakes and countless unnamed beaver ponds was another matter. Many of the back roads to destinations on this mountain are still so rough, that you really have to have a serious four wheel drive vehicle to even attempt going up these steep and extremely rocky roads. Modern ATV’s are no problem. However, if you dare attempt to ascend in your truck or SUV, beware…….earl local four wheel drive enthusiasts found out the hard way and had to abandon their ride, see image above.
Most local anglers over the age of fifty have a collection of old photographs of fishing trips to Boulder Mountain. When you see these old photos it is clear that the legendary big brookies of Boulder Mountain were not just fish tales. It was common at one time for anglers on Boulder Mountain to catch and keep full limits of three to five pound brookies. Superb catches like these from small lakes or beaver ponds can’t happen indefinitely. It was often several seasons of fantastic fishing and then a number of years of slow fishing with meager catches of smaller trout at any given lake or beaver pond, depending on when you happened to be there. In these high elevation lakes and ponds where brook trout have been stocked, a cycle inevitably develops, where trout populations will soar and peak for a few years and then ultimately crash.
Back in the 1950-60’s legal fish limits were larger and more often than not, most anglers would keep a limit of trout when they went fishing. That is just the way it was, everywhere, not just on the Boulder Mountain. And so families and fishing buddies would often display their huge catch of trout on stringers made from long willows or on lines or ropes strung between trees in their camps.
They would proudly pose with their trophies and have their pictures taken with whatever cameras were brought along for posterity. Were they wrong to harvest these seemingly gluttonous limits of trout? Were wildlife officials wrong to allow limits of twelve and sometimes more fish of any size per angler? Perhaps not. These anglers certainly had the right. Creel limits at that time allowed anglers to keep these large trout. There were no slot limits back in those days. So, anglers usually kept all of the fish that they caught. Some kept only the big ones and let the little ones go. Some kept them all. That was how it was done then. It was common practice, even a family tradition to have a big fish fry in camp and also take plenty of fish home to enjoy at a later date. It’s what made fishing trips so fun!
What happens with Brook Trout [Salvelinus fontinalis] more than any other trout in smaller environs like the high elevation lakes and beaver ponds on Boulder Mountain is that they reproduce. They reproduce naturally, and very prolifically in conditions that other species of trout struggle to reproduce in. Brook trout are really not trout at all. They are actually char. But brook trout and “brookies” are what they are most commonly referred to by anglers almost everywhere and names have a way of sticking. So we'll just keep on calling them brook trout and brookies!
When brook trout are stocked into the nutrient rich lakes and ponds of the Boulder Mountain with such an abundant food source that these waters provide, they will definitely thrive. If you have ever been to one of these sub-alpine waters in early summer and experienced the outrageous midge swarms, or witnessed a huge damselfly hatch in progress, then you can relate to the abundant food source. The density of the scuds in these waters alone could account for the tremendous growth rate of trout here. Well, with so much available food, the growth rate and populations will naturally soar. For a period of years, sometimes a decade or more the brook trout in any small lake or beaver pond will continue to flourish. Eventually though, what goes up must come down.
When brook trout are initially stocked into a small lake previously void of fish, one that was recently treated for example, there are a controlled number of fish. The number of fingerling trout stocked are exactly what is in the pond or lake, to begin with. Formulas and models for growth and survival rates can be somewhat predictable, intially. After the first two seasons the recently planted fingerlings will usually show a tremendous growth rate with fish measuring 14 inches or more. These fish are now reaching sexual maturity and will reproduce in the fall of the year. By the end of the third season the first batch of stocked fish are definitely fully matured and about to spawn perhaps for the second time. Numbers of fish in the pond or lake have increased dramatically at this point, and by the end of the fourth season, with the progeny from the first spawn now ready to spawn, they are well on their way to ultimately overcrowding their environ. With little or no natural predation, and only light pressure from anglers the trout population will rise until it peaks and eventually crashes. Average size of individual fish [initial stocking] will also peak, with many fish [on Boulder Mountain] often tipping the scales at eight pounds, or perhaps more.
With little or no angler pressure, numbers of young fish increase rapidly and with each successive generation, the largest fish die off. Eventually the size ratio changes as the numbers of older, larger fish decreases. With each year class of fish in the pond approaching this point, average size decreases exponentially as more big fish die off and are replaced with ever increasing numbers of smaller and smaller fish. Eventually there are so many fish in a lake or pond that the population exceeds available food sources. This condition leads inevitably to stunted populations of brook trout. The numbers of trout in the small lake or pond are vast but the average body size is quite small in comparison to the monster brookies of legend!
It is very difficult to predict if or when overcrowding and stunting will occur. There is no way of knowing just how many anglers will fish at a small lake or beaver pond on this mountain each season. Even if you are able to track the number of anglers, they [the anglers] are free to fish by whatever legal method that they choose, including catch and release. But what can be done about this problem? The answer seems obvious enough, more angler pressure, less catch and release. More anglers taking home full limits of brook trout should do the trick, right?
Well, easier said than done. First of all, public opinion has evolved over time. What was popular forty years ago, taking your rightful limit of fish home with you is not so popular today. The fact that most anglers today claim to practice catch and release and take few if any fish home with them has been just one of the contributing factors to the problem of over-crowding and subsequent stunting of brook trout in many of the lakes and ponds on the Boulder Mountain. Combine this recent trend with the fact that many of these hidden lakes and ponds are almost forgotten or even lost these days and you have even less angler pressure. These two elements alone, less angler pressure and obscurity combined are a sure fire recipe for stunted trout. When there are multiple species of trout in these lakes and ponds, and overcrowding occurs, stunting is not confined to brook trout only. All fish in the affected waters are prone to stunting under these adverse conditions. Once brook trout reproduction reaches a certain point, nothing will stop them from overpopulating and overcrowding a particular water. Stunting will occur and at that point the only logical solution is to remove the brook trout, and consequently all of the other fish that may exist there and then just start over.
Cutthroat trout are the indigenous fish of Boulder Mountain. To be more specific, Colorado River Cutthroat [Oncorhynchus clarki pleuriticus] and Bonneville Cutthroat [Oncorhynchus clarki utah] are the original inhabitants of the lakes and ponds on Boulder Mountain. Whether or not any of these indigenous native trout existed here on Boulder Mountain when the first pioneers settled here is certainly a subject for debate. The first trout to be stocked on Boulder Mountain by the Utah Division Of Wildlife Resources [UDWR] known back then as the Utah Fish & Game, were Yellowstone Cutthroat [Oncorhynchus clarki bouvieri] and Brook Trout [Salvelinus fontinalis].
The trout pictured above [caught locally] are no doubt Yellowstone cutthroat considering the time period of the photograph [circa 1950]. Any guess as to their individual weight? Surely the two in the center of this old worn photo are well over four pounds, closer to five or six is more likely. Yellowstone cutthroat are hard pressed to reproduce naturally in the lakes and ponds on Boulder Mountain. Conditions are usually not suitable for them to spawn with any degree of success.. However, they once grew to great size in some of the lakes and beaver ponds on Boulder Mountain. In most cases they were stocked on an intermittent cycle. Trout that grow to the size of those in the old photo above grew that large because of the plentiful food source and the lack of competition for food at that time, in that particular lake or pond. There seems to have been a natural balance between these fish and the ecosystem at that time. Remember, the ecosystem in these waters was in far better condition in most cases in those days than it is today. There may or may not have been much pressure from anglers there during this time period. But the balance between the cutthroat and the brook trout was more stable. This could have been due to the average depth at these waters being higher and favoring the cutthroat. The Yellowstone cutthroat grew rapidly on the abundant food source and were not very capable of natural reproduction. This made them ideal for stocking on Boulder Mountain. The Yellowstone cutthroat as a species are fairly long lived with a life expectancy of 8 -10 years and in some cases even longer. They will hit a fly readily and are terrific fighters. However, this particular sub-species is no longer stocked anywhere on this mountain. They have been replaced with the more suitable and politically correct subspecies such as the Bonneville cutthroat [Oncorhynchus clarki utah] and the Colorado River cutthroat [Oncorhynchus clarki pleuriticus]. The Yellowstone cutthroat were great fun while they lasted…..
Above is a digital image of a Yellowstone cutthroat trout [Oncorhynchus clarki bouvieri]. This fine cutthroat was caught and released using a barb-less dryfly in the early summer of 2003. This trout was stocked as a fingerling into this unnamed water in the early summer of 1999. Clearly a considerable growth rate. The Yellowstone cutthroat were for many decades, the tried and true stocker for the lakes and beaver ponds on Boulder Mountain. They thrived without reproducing and grew to fantastic size. They did not overpopulate their environ and remained healthy through all but the harshest of winters. However, conditions at most of these waters were different then. Lakes and ponds all over this mountain were healthy complete ecosystems several decades ago. Beaver ponds were maintained by healthy populations of beaver. Average depth of these waters was much higher than today.
There are still a few healthy but definitely aging populations of these beautiful trout in a small number of lakes on Boulder Mountain. But not for long. For now we have their replacements, the Bonneville cutthroat [Oncorhynchus clarki utah] and the Colorado River cutthroat [Oncorhynchus clarki pleuriticus]. Under the right conditions, these native trout will also grow well here. Now, after having been stocked into many lakes and ponds on Boulder Mountain, beginning as far back as the late 1990’s, results are very encouraging, with many fantastic fish over five pounds being caught regularly from some waters. This is especially true of the Colorado River cutthroat.
At one time there were huge brook trout like the one shown above in most of the lakes and beaver ponds on this mountain. Their were also good populations of Yellowstone cutthroat trout in most of the lakes and beaver ponds on Boulder Mountain. These two species were a good mix, providing some diversity for anglers. As anglers, we were more than happy to catch big “cutts” and huge “brookies” when we came to the Boulder Mountain to fish.
What happened then? What happened to that balance? Will the replacement cutthroat sub-species fair as well? The answers to those questions are complex. Several distinct situations have evolved over the past few decades with many of the fisheries on Boulder Mountain. First, public opinion and the now popular method of catch and release fishing. This combined with lack of angler pressure at many waters. These two factors alone have contributed to excessive numbers of fish in many lakes. The widespread practice of catch and release fishing and less angler pressure are just two of the underlying causes of the decline of quality fishing in a particular lake or a group of lakes where brook trout are concerned. Next, wildlife agencies like UDWR are under pressure from the public to increase the quality of fishing. UDWR has looked for a solution to the problem poor quality fishing statewide in diversity. More species of fish are now being stocked into Utah waters than ever before. The Boulder Mountain is no exception. More species equals more bang for the fishing buck. It seems that we as anglers would rather have multiple species available wherever we go fishing. Where once we were content to come to the famous Boulder Mountain and hike into a remote lake or hidden beaver pond or drive our Jeeps on some of the worst roads imaginable, to catch and release or more often that not back then, catch and cook some of the finest cutts and brookies you would ever find anywhere, now we need diversity….. We seem to quantify not by how many fish, but by how many different types of fish we can catch, hence the phrase “grand slam”.
Now we have many species to choose from on Boulder Mountain and the surrounding area, including: Bonneville cutthroat, Colorado River cutthroat, Yellowstone cutthroat, Splake, Brake, Rainbows, Brownbows, brook trout, tiger trout, Artic Grayling and Tiger Muskie! Is this enough already?
Two of the newcomers to this mountain are hybrid fish, stocked as much as a control measure as they are for diversity. One is the Tiger trout [Salmo trutta X Salvelinus fontinalis] a cross between the Brown trout [Salmo trutta] and the Brook trout [Salvelinus fontinalis]. The other is the Splake [Salvelinus fontinalis X Salvelinus namaycush], a cross between the Brook trout [Salvelinus fontinalis] and the Lake trout [Salvelinus namaycush]. Both of these two hybrid fish, like some of their parent species are known to aggressively prey upon other fish once they reach maturity. This is a particularly good trait if your goal is to control overpopulation by brook trout.
Another major, and quite possibly the most serious contributing factor to the overall decline of fisheries on Boulder Mountain is the unnatural loss of habitat. UDWR has for many years employed an aggressive fish management strategy [rotenone treatment] program on the Boulder Mountain. Many lakes here have been treated and restocked multiple times. Is rotenone treatment and the eradication of brook trout and then the subsequent, immediate restocking of the same species and other exotic species the right way to go? This is what has been happening for the past two decades on this mountain. This redundant treatment of these waters has to have some adverse effect on the invertebrate population as well. The theory that the only way to manage trout on Boulder Mountain is through redundant rotenone treatment / eradication and restocking is twisted. This process of redundant eradication has certainly resulted in the dramatic decline of trout habitat.
Have you ever wondered what happens when trout are removed from a lake or beaver pond? What is the exact process? The first physical step in the process of actually removing trout for the purpose of restocking is and always has been, according to UDWR policy, is to apply rotenone [treatment]. Before rotenone can be applied however, the lake or beaver pond has to be evaluated for volume and that equates to how much rotenone solution to be applied. There is the possibility of CFT Legumine being used here as well. The application process of these chemicals and organic compounds can vary from a few gallons of rotenone solution along with CFT Legumine applied using handheld sprayers together with drip stations at the inlets and outlets, to larger sprayers carried on pontoon boats, row boats or even power boats on larger lakes and even aircraft mounted sprayers for the largest bodies of water.
The lakes on Boulder Mountain range in size from ½ acre beaver ponds to 50 acre natural lakes and reservoirs. The large lake above is 36 acres and more than 20 feet deep. In the late 1990's UDWR announced that this lake was on the list of waters to be treated with rotenone. Public opinion and opposition from local anglers persuaded the UDWR to postpone this proposed treatment. Local anglers adamantly claimed that this particular lake was in superb condition. This lake has always recieved intense angler pressure. Local anglers revered this lake and routinely caught fish in the 3 - 5 pound size range. However, in the fall of 2004 this lake was treated covertly by UDWR. Their plans were to restore this lake by stocking Bonneville cutthroat [Oncorhynchus clarki utah]. Several thousand cutthroat fingerlings were stocked into this lake in the spring of 2005. Later that season and the following season, UDWR gillnet surveys could find no cutthroat, only brook trout. In their haste to get the job done, a total fish kill was not acheived. The result was an undetermined amount of brook trout [possibly large brook trout] remaining in this water to greet the new arrivals the following season. These remaining brook trout were apparently able to avoid the rotenone and survive due to the percolating springs at this lake. This phenomenon of upwelling springs is common to most lakes on the Boulder Mountain and makes a total fish kill difficult at some waters. Consequently, all of the cutthroat fingerlings were devoured by the brook trout it seems. In any case, UDWR abandoned the restoration project at this lake [like so many others here] and left it to the remaining brook trout, who by the way have made a great comeback all on their own! There is a manmade reservoir at the opposite end of the lake shown above. The road leading to this reservoir was used to transport personnel and much equipment including a boat with a motor, and a huge amount of rotenone when this water was treated by UDWR. You might think that the amount of physical effort and manpower required to treat a lake of this size would increase exponentially. But this is not necessarily true because the road to this lake allowed the use of four wheel vehicles to transport all of the equipment such as a boat with a motor. This motorized boat is really the key to accomplishing this task quickly. Rotenone will not penetrate the thermocline barriors in some lakes. Failing to get this rotenone solution down to the bottom where many of these large brook trout are schooling near the springs is one of the chief causes of not achieving a total fish kill. The Forest Service controlled burns being conducted in the immediate area of this lake at that time allowed for the road to this lake to be conveniently blocked while UDWR carried out the treatment work. Once again, this was a thoughtless decimation of a much revered trophy fishery on the Boulder Mountain and a huge waste of public resources. "Haste makes waste". In their apparent haste to get this particular job done, mistakes were made. A total fish kill was not achieved here. However, the efforts of UDWR to restore other fisheries in the area have met varying degrees of success. The recent restoration of Panguitch Lake is one notable example of their successful rotenone projects. This treatment and restocking project at Panguitch Lake was conducted openly and completed in 2006, with much fanfare and wide media coverage.
Rotenone is most often applied in the smaller lakes and ponds by hand with 4 - 5 gallon backpack sprayers and 5 gallon jugs with a small hole in the lid, inverted and placed as a drip station in the inlet and outlet streams. If the pond or lake is large enough that a sprayer cannot squirt liquid rotenone solution all the way to the center of the pond from the shoreline or by wading out as far as possible, then a raft or pontoon boat and in some cases just a floattube are utilized to get the job done. All of this translates into varying amounts of effort and manpower required for each particular job. If you are about to apply 5 - 10 gallons or more of rotenone solution to a small beaver pond, and you have just spent the first half of the day hiking [usually uphill] with all of the equipment on your back, then you are apt to look for the easy way out. It is just human nature to seek the path of least resistance.
Lowering the level of the water in the beaver pond is also going to decrease the overall volume of water contained there. With the pond smaller in diameter and shallower with less volume it is then easier to apply the rotenone. But in order for this to happen, you must first make a small notch in the beaver dam. This would obviously involve the use of heavy pry bars, shovels etc… as well as much physical labor to operate these tools and time to wait and watch the water slowly drain out. This use of heavy pry bars and shovels by the way, is the exact proposed method of decreasing the volume of water prior to the rotenone application described in every USDA Forest Service environmental impact analysis [EIA] and every USDA Forest Service environmental impact statement [EIS] ever written concerning this subject on Boulder Mountain.
Remember, the UDWR biologists doing all of this work have just hauled all of this equipment uphill for almost 2.5 miles, which by the way, is the typical hiking distance from any Forest Service designated trailhead to any destination such as a lake or group of lakes on Boulder Mountain that cannot be accessed by vehicle. After the initial hike [grueling if you’re packing heavy pry bars] to the lake or pond, there is time for a breather, maybe some lunch…..then there is the work at hand. With only so many hours left in the day, and so much water in the beaver pond, it would be so much easier to make a small notch in a beaver dam than toiling for many hours or even days with a heavy pry bar! How about a small explosive charge? DYNAMITE!!
What they [biologists] have done in almost every case on the Boulder Mountain as an alternative to actually using or even bringing the heavy pry bars and shovels is to simply leave the tools in the truck and bring along some much lighter dynamite instead. It is easier and less time consuming to plant a small explosive charge [dynamite] in the beaver dam and blow a huge gaping hole in the structure. This blast and the resulting ugly gap in the dam usually drains the pond in just a few minutes. Seeking the path of least resistance is only human nature……
Now the application of the rotenone can begin. The powdered rotenone is then mixed with water, put into sprayers and jugs, and applied. The jugs are carried upstream, and these are typically very small and steep spring creeks, to the first obvious natural barrier such as a steep pour off. Since the fish cannot pass upstream beyond this natural barrier, this is where the 5 gallon jug of rotenone solution is placed, inverted, allowing the solution to drip at a controlled rate through the small hole in the lid into the stream. The same is done at the outlet stream at the breach in the dam. Meanwhile the others are busy wading around in the leftover shallow water of the pond with the sprayers applying the rotenone. After or even during the application of rotenone in the pond and feeder streams, the outlet stream is treated with another drip station [inverted jug] of potassium permanganate solution to neutralize the rotenone as it flows downstream.
The process of collecting the necessary data to determine how many fish are in a particular lake or beaver pond, or if overcrowding is causing stunting to the point that it warrants treatment, eradication and subsequent restocking is corrupt. This data is presumed to be collected physically, literally, using gillnets and electro-shocking techniques by UDWR conservation officers in the field. No doubt that this process is conducted legitimately state wide in most instances. But on the Boulder Mountain this process is a sham! Here gillnet and electro-shocking are done from a considerable distance with a keyboard and a mouse. The results of the data collected are predetermined by an agenda. Procuring annual U.S Fish & Wildlife [USF&W] and matching state funds for fisheries management [more rotenone and dynamite] programs supercedes actual legitimate data collection. This practice of blowing beaver dams, draining ponds and treating them with rotenone over and over has been a waste of valuable resources. A beaver pond holding trophy brookies on public land is a valuable publicly owned resource. Falsified data and subsequent destruction of the beaver dams, eradication of the quality fish and even the beaver at these ponds is just wrong!
Of all the beaver dams and lodges on Boulder Mountain treated with explosives by UDWR over the last two decades, not one has been rebuilt by beavers to date. In fact, there is not one viable free roaming population of Beaver [Castor canadensis] left on Boulder Mountain. There is just one current breeding population of beaver on the Boulder Mountain. This colony of beaver resides in Posy Lake. The incoming water to this small lake runs for miles through a pipeline as does the outgoing water. These beaver are monitered by the Forest Service constantly and culled when necessary to keep their numbers in check. This particular colony of beaver are allowed to exist at this particular lake to serve a distinct purpose. By having these beaver currently healthy and thriving at Posy Lake, all future environmental impact statements [EIS] and all future environmental impact asessments [EIA] written by the Forest Service on this area, technically don't have to list the beaver [Castor canadensis] as having been extirpated.
For every beaver dam on this mountain that has been breached with dynamite, there is also a one or more beaver lodges associated with that dam that have also been destroyed with explosives. You may think this is a case of gross exaggeration, but it is a fact. The image above shows a a very famous beaver pond on Boulder Mountain when beaver were still inhabiting the pond in 2003. The beavers lodge is in great shape as is the pond itself. Now look at the image below, this photo was taken in 2006. The beaver lodge and dam have been blown up with explosives. The two flyfishers are standing on what was once the interior floor of the lodge.
One only has to visit any lake or beaver pond on the Boulder Mountain and the evidence is clear. The breached dams and blown lodges are very apparent. The other obvious clue is right there growing all along the shoreline. The thriving willow clumps and aspen starts are a near perfect timeline as to how long the beaver have been gone from a particular lake or pond and the riparian zone along it’s shores.
Where you should see obvious signs of recent gnawing by beaver on these willows and young aspen [if there were beaver there], there is no sign of recent activity at all. The willows are abundant and thick. The young aspen are growing tall right down to the shoreline. All signs of the lodges are gone and in some cases even the dams and all of the wood from the dams is gone. This material has been utilized over time by anglers making campfires. Anglers have always taken wood from the beaver lodges and dams for fires because of the convenience. However, this pilfered material was constantly replaced by the industrious beavers. With the beavers removed, the wood supply dwindled until hardly a trace of it remains at most ponds.
The water levels at nearly all of these lakes and ponds is very low compared to the previous high water mark along the shorelines.
There is a stark contrast between the current water levels and the obvious stain of the high water line on the huge boulders common to all of the lakes here. This low water situation is perhaps the most alarming factor to consider in terms of evaluating a particular body of water and it’s ability to over winter trout. Those UDWR officials who would evaluate the likelihood of a particular lake or pond to over winter trout and thereby consider the water for continued stocking of trout are ironically many of the very same biologists who are responsible for the destruction of the dams and beaver lodges and the deliberate extirpation of the beaver, which has been the primary reason for the low water condition in the first place!
The mature brook trout pictured above is approximately 10 inches long. This brook trout may seem rather large to some anglers who have been conditioned to believe that this is a big brookie. But it is not what would ever be considered a big brookie on the Boulder Mountain. Too many trout this size in a small lake is a clear indication of stunting due to overcrowding! This scenario would be an obvious signal that some course of action should be taken to improve this fishery. Should we get the dynamite? Too late, there is no dam left to blow up! Should we rotenone? Maybe. Should we change the creel limits at this particular lake? Perhaps. But the take no action alternative definitely will not work here now.
One alternative would be to treat the lake again with rotenone, remove the stunted trout, repair the breached dams by hand as needed, prior to the restoration of the beaver to facilitate a deeper and more suitable habitat. Then restocking the pond with trout such as one of the native sub-species of cutthroat, tiger trout, and or splake to help control the inevitable return of the brook trout and hope for the best. This sounds like the logical alternative. UDWR officials would have you believe that this is in fact what they have been doing all along, except for restoring beaver. When it comes to the beaver, they will always avoid any dialogue with the public. It just happened somehow. Nobody seems to know how the beaver disappeared from the entire Boulder Mountain. Perhaps it was a virus. Maybe there was a sudden widespread beaver virus that suddenly wiped out the beaver. It got so bad that it even ate the beaver dams and lodges!
Whatever alternative is utilized, nothing could be as backwards and wrong as the continued reckless use of dynamite, and a policy of extirpating the beaver. If you think that the Forest Service or UDWR would never exterminate or extirpate a species from our forests, then check out the image below showing early Forest Service personnel with their day's quota of porcupine. This picture was taken on the Boulder Mountain circa 1950.
It is highly unlikely that those individuals responsible for destroying so many wonderful fisheries, so many times, whether they were Forest Service personnel, UDWR wildlife officers or both [albeit in an official capacity], on southern Utah’s Boulder Mountain will ever be held accountable for their actions. Many of them are now retired and ironically, probably spending more time fishing.
But what can be done is to repair many of these dams? Do you need permission? From who? Should you even bother to ask for permission from the very agencies that blew the holes in the dams that you wish to repair? In some cases a gap in a dam has been filled with sandbags and covered with a layer of readily available basalt rocks. This brings the depth of the pond or lake up considerably and in has been a proven method for preventing winterkill, thereby preserving the fishery. This is no mean feat to be sure. It is very hard work and time consuming for one or two individuals to repair a blown out beaver dam by this method. However, a larger group of concerned and dedicated anglers can accomplish this task in a matter of hours. Of course, this involves a bit of wading around in the muck. But that would pale in comparison when you sank up to your eyeballs in a pathetic quagmire of bureaucratic Forest Service red tape trying to get permission.
The Forest Service in all of it’s infinite wisdom feels that all of this work by all of these concerned individuals and groups such as fly fishing clubs or boy scout troops would cause too much adverse impact on the sensitive flora and fauna on and around these fragile riparian zones…...
What is dynamiting a huge gaping hole in the beaver dam and blowing the beaver lodge to smithereens? What do you call that? Tender loving care?
Extirpate
Ex"tir*pate\ (?; 277), v. t. [imp. & p. p. Extirpated; p. pr. & vb. n. Extirpating.] [L. extirpatus, exstirpatus, p. p. of extirpare, exstirpare; ex out + strips stock, stem, root.] To pluck up by the stem or root; to root out; to eradicate, literally or figuratively; to destroy wholly; as, to extirpate weeds; to extirpate a tumor; to extirpate a sect; to extirpate error or heresy.
Syn: To eradicate; root out; destroy; exterminate; annihilate; extinguish.
Contact Us soon to make your reservation for the 2009 season.
Call Steve Stoner at 1-435-335-7306 Your call will always be returned
Click on this link for an easy to use Utah Road Map http://www.utah-map.org/utah-road-map.gif
The Fly Fishing Loop is sponsored by flydepot.com This Fly Fishing Loop site is owned by Steve Stoner
Home Contact Us 2009 Rates Questions? Shopping Cart Area Map Equipment
Guided Trips Why Hire A Guide? Private Waters Area Streams Remote Streams Area Lakes Remote Lakes
Views From The Rim Aquarius Plateau Lakes North Side Lakes South Side Lakes East Side Lakes West Side Lakes What Are They Taking?
Brook Trout Brown Trout Splake Tiger Trout Colorado River Cutthroat Bonneville Cutthroat Yellowstone Cutthroat
Beaver Ponds On Boulder Mountain Interesting Articles Feedback Links Add A Link
© 2009 Steve Stoner All Rights Reserved
