MAINSTREAM Reporting on the Current of the Pere Marquette Watershed Council Fall 2008 In This Issue: Water Diversion/Withdrawal page 1 C4C Event page 3 Annual Banquet page 4 ORV Legislation Update page 5 PM River Clean-up page 6 MDNR Electro Shocking page 6 Endowment Opportunities page 8 Michigan Department of Natural Resources electro-shocks Pere Marquette River in September - see page 6 for details AQUA fer - - - - ? Who’s entitled to use Michigan’s waters? Well, we residents obviously . . . and our tourist visitors . . . and non-resident customers when we sell them our fruit and vegetables, and processed foods. (Think Gerbers, or Yoplait, or Vernor’s Ginger Ale.) But what about wholesale taking our water itself, either from our lakes or our inland aquifers? That’s where we draw the line. Concern began back in the mid 1980’s when a drought forced some southwestern states to begin to look for major sources of fresh water, with their attention drawn to our Great Lakes. But little action took place until the Saudis proposed shipping 160 million gallons per day (MGD) beginning in 1998. That prompted the eight states and two Canadian provinces that border the lakes to develop a “compact” which would place limits on water diversion from the Great Lakes themselves; a condition of this agreement was that each of the states and provinces must also approve plans which would limit water withdrawal from their territories. We are just now nearing the end of that process. To develop Michigan’s guidelines the governor appointed the Groundwater Conservation Advisory Committee (GAC). This assembly of members was chaired by MDNR and included business interests (Consumer’s Energy, Farm Bureau, Michigan Aggregates Association...) as well as conservation groups (Nature Conservancy/Trout Unlimited, Michigan Environmental Council, GVSU...) and governmental agencies (MDEQ, Michigan Department of Agriculture,...). For over six years they studied all aspects of our most important natural resource. Just to mention a few of the things they investigated: Water inventory: How does it come in? Rain, • snow, river flow, tanker trucks, imported beverage. How does it leave? Detroit River, evaporation, Michigan potatoes, bottled water. How is it used ? Public wells take 730 MGD, ma• jor user Pfizer (Kalamazoo) is 32 MGD, average farm irrigator is 0.5 MGD, Nestle now 0.36 MGD. Groundwater comprises most of our state’s riv• er water, sometimes the only water in the river. Water bottles are just becoming a major is• sue. Perrier (now Nestle) first targeted the Pere Marquette but was warned of its Blue Ribbon trout designation. They went to the Muskegon “Sanctuary” and Evart’s municipal system. The bottled water industry in 2006 was $11 billion; manufacturing their plastic bottles consumed 18 million barrels of oil. The 2003 Michigan laws did not regulate quan• titative withdrawals, but diversion was prohibited and “consumptive uses” (water incorporated into a product or food) were exempted. Bottled water packaged in less than 5.7 gallon containers were defined as consumptive, thus exempt. The Advisory Council agreed to develop a model which would be used to determine when, where, and how much water could be withdrawn without having an “adverse resource impact” (ARI). A matrix was designed listing waterways as streams, small rivers, or large rivers, then classifying them as cold, transitional, cool, or warm. This grid provided eleven categories (Michigan has no large/cold rivers), each of which could be assessed as to the effect that water withdrawal would have on the fish community (fish were selected as the end point to be measured based upon the DNR’s many years of data). The model, looking at several parameters, will show the proportional effect that flow rate reductions have on thriving fish populations. To our dismay (but probably expected by the scientists, the cold small streams are better able to withstand significant reductions in water flow before the populations begin to show an effect (ARI). And not surprisingly, to extract water from these locations they can claim it has the least effect on the fish community. The Advisory Committee presented this model and their recommendations to the governor one year ago July (one member refused to endorse the proposal). The governor turned the data over to the legislature which spent the past year in drafting two bills. The Senate bill, Republican based, favored the interests of industry, golf courses, farmers while the House bill, Democrat sponsored, was more conservative in protecting the environment. Following approval of both, compromise negotiations resulted in final agreement on June 24th of this year and Governor Granholm signed the bill July 9th in Saugatuck. It becomes partially effective October 1st, 2008 and will become fully effective in 2009. This approval of the withdrawal measures now opens the way for approval of the Compact to restrict water diversion from the Great Lakes. Well, what does this new law require? Before getting into the details, it should be noted that two very significant issues were not incorporated into the law. First the issue of Public Trust was not included; the fact that the waters of the state of Michigan belong to the people and must be protected for those people was omitted from the final version. And the matter that our water, just like our oil, gas, minerals, sand are resources which are being consumed without any royalties to the state also was not addressed. Hopefully future legislation will address these omissions. The law now requires that permits from MDEQ must be approved for any new or additional withdrawal of more that 1.0 MGD (Senate bill had 2 MGD limit). No permits will be necessary for any withdrawals of less than 1MGD. Now that they have their permits, where can they drill? They cannot pass the ARI lines set up in the model... for coldwater streams (the smallest size streams) the limit is 3% decline in “thriving fish abundance” or a 21% reduction in low flow rate. For coldwater small rivers the line is less than 1% decline in fish abundance or a 20% reduction in low flow (remember that the colder smaller streams lend themselves to withstand greater withdrawals). Most portions of the Pere Marquette River are in this small/cold category. For the next larger rivers, cold-transitional a 5% reduction abundance is permitted. It should be noted that these are very significant revisions from the GAC’s recommendations of a year ago; they would have allowed up to 45% reduction in flow ... picture your river with only half its flow! Now you know why one committee member refused to sign the report. Many of the procedures remain to be worked out. Should local advisory committees be allowed to comment on permit applications? Should local or regional representatives like Watershed Councils, Riparian Associations, Trout Unlimited, Township or County officials be afforded a chance to comment? Should DNR’s Natural Rivers review permit requests? Can the law be revised or amended to change the limits if adverse impacts are seen other than fish impacts? You should know your Watershed Council is on record that we feel there should be no 2 withdrawal from any of the state-designated Natural Rivers. . .can this be a basis for further legislation? All eight states and Canada’s provinces have now ratified their local water limits which opens the door for final approval of the Compact restricting diversion from the Great Lakes. Congress is expected to approve the Compact before you read this. It is also understood that the current president as well as both candidates also support the Compact. Although we are getting closer to saying who is our “AQUA for”, we need to continue to keep our eyes open to protect our water. Submitted by: Dick Schwikert, Scribe 3 15 Teams Participate in Cast for Conservation© Event! Friday, July 18th, 2008 turned out to be a great day for fishing the Pere Marquette. The Annual Cast for Conservation© Event began with a picnic lunch cooked by PMWC Directors with assistance from our host the Flint Rainbow Club. Fifteen teams of two fishermen drew for one of the professional guides donating their time and equipment for the event. Then in turn guides drew for river beats along river beginning at M-37 continuing down to Walhalla. Fishing started at 4 p.m. and continued into pitch darkness. During the 6-8 hours on the river the teams caught and released a number of browns and rainbows. Points were assigned to sizes of species/fish with the winning team of Steve Ladd, Zack Hawkins and guide John Karakashian tallying a total of 135 points. John Kluesing guided Team 7 of Jeff Carpenter and Dave Chism into waters that provided the largest Brown Trout - a 20 “ fish! The Cast began in 1991 as a fund-raising event where the emphasis was more on having a great time on the river. In later years it turned to a more competitive event. Chairman Tom Curtin reported that both were accomplished this year. The smiles in the photos tell it all and the benefit to the Watershed Council’s is that the coffers are $5,000 richer for the donations received from team members. This money is put right back into the river by means of the construction of fish habitat structures and stream bank restoration. PMWC would like to extend our appreciation again to the all of the guides and others that donated time and services to make the C4C a success. A special thanks also goes to the Flint Rainbow Club and their staff for offering their property for the event again this year. 38th Annual Banquet held In Ludington Outgoing President Fred McLane and wife Mary accept the Board’s appreciation gift at the Annual Banquet. PMWC was founded in 1970 and has presented a fundraising banquet each year since. Just since 1990, a mere 18 years ago, a total of $121,500 net profit has been made at the yearly banquets - a quite impressive amount of money that has been put to use throughout the watershed. This year’s banquet at the Ramada of Ludington was attended by nearly 140 people reported Chairman Jill Engelman. Attendees enjoyed a delicious dinner provided by Brann’s Catering. The business meeting included a recap of PMWC activities during the past year and the election of directors to new three year terms. Outgoing President Fred McLane was presented with an appreciation gift for his four years of service at the helm of the orgaztion. 4 The fun really began when Glen Blackwood took to the podium to start the bidding for the live auction. His enthusiasm is contagious and the bidding was fierce. Silent auctions and bucket raffles filled out the evening. New Life Members...... Diane Ferris Dave Gabrielson Richard A. Smith Gary Verplank Thank you for your special support! Diane Ferris receives her Life Member Certificate at the July 19th Annual Banquet 5 Northern Michigan Watersheds Face New Threat From Off Road Vehicles For many years it has been a crime to operate Off Road Vehicles (ORVs) on public roads in Michigan, for a lot of reasons. These vehicles meet none of the modern standards required for On Road Vehicles for lighting, signals, stability, safety or crash survival. They generally have solid rear axles with no differential, meaning that one rear wheel must slide whenever they are turned. Because of this, ORVs are highly prone to flipping over when operated on paved surfaces, causing severe and fatal injuries. The tires are designed for operation in dirt. This combination of the knobby tires and solid rear axles is also uniquely and infamously efficient at causing de-vegetation and erosion. Until a few years ago, there was general acceptance that the proper place for ORVs was on designated trails. Michigan has one of the largest designated ORV trail systems in the nation, and Lake County has one of the largest trail systems in Michigan. The trails are routed to minimize damage to sensitive resources and located away from residential areas to minimize noise and dust pollution for homeowners. ORV tourists arrive here, camp or stay in local motels, and transport their ORVs to and from trail heads with their trucks or trailers. In the past several years northern Michigan business interests, ORV clubs, the national and state ORV lobbying groups and some local residents have mounted an aggressive campaign to make it legal to operate ORVs on public roads. In July 2008 they succeeded in getting a new State law passed which allows all northern counties to pass county ordinances which would allow ORVs to operate on any or all county roads within their borders. Northern Michigan townships have the right, under the new law, to veto any county ordinance for their own township roads. Beginning in July of 2009 any northern Michigan township may also pass its own ordinance allowing ORVs to drive on county roads within the township borders. If a county or township passes an ORV ordinance, the ORVs must drive on the right side of the maintained part of the road, not the shoulder. They must not exceed 25 mph. Children as young as 12 may drive ORVs on the roads if they are under supervision of a parent or guardian and have an ORV safety certificate. There is no required liability insurance, and no registration requirement. There is no requirement for a driver’s license except for youth between 16 and 18 who are not under parental supervision. The Pere Marquette Watershed Council actively opposed this new State law and is now working to try to discourage our local county board from adopting an ORV ordinance. We are convinced that opening county roads to ORV travel will dramatically increase dust pollution, noise pollution stream crossing erosion, stream, forest and wetlands damage, and trespass. There is a widespread agreement among local law enforcement, DNR and conservationists that ORV damage to our natural resources is already a serious problem. MDNR forestry officers have warned that illegal operation beyond the designated trails has already resulted in widespread destruction in the State Forest system, and that opening public roads to ORV travel will dramatically increase access and cause even more damage, perhaps a hundred fold increase in physical damage to the resources. ORVs are already threaten the certification of Michigan forests, risking the economical well being of the Michigan forest industry. The National Forest system faces the same threat. The public roads would become the new (legal) arteries for the ORVs to gain access to all the (illegal) two-tracks, forest service roads, hills, streams and wetlands. Law enforcement, nation and state forest managers are also in agreement that illegal ORV activity is already impossible to adequately police. The local businesses that are demanding that ORVs be allowed on public roads are predicting a large increase in ORV activity in northern counties if the ORV ordinances are passed by the counties. At this point, the issue is in the hands of the county commissions. Anyone wishing to help to oppose opening county roads to ORVs should contact the county commissioners for the counties within the watershed. Submitted by: Eric Lewis The River seemed cleaner..... The first of two clean-up projects this year, the PMWC Earth Day project was held May 4th. Our mission was to clean-up trash along the Pere Marquette River focusing on public access areas. We had an energetic work force of 18 volunteers. The crew split up to cover three river access points - Green Cottage, Claybanks and Mapleleaf. A concerted effort was made this year to sort the recyclable bottles and cans into separate bags and we were able to recycle half of the 30 bags of trash collected. Post clean-up, the work crew rendezvoused at the Kinne Creek Club where we were hosted by Jeff Carpenter for a cook-out and fellowship. Thanks go out to all who volunteered to help keep our beautiful PM River “Wild & Scenic”. Submitted by: Rick Conney 6 “Awesome Brown Trout” says MDNR Fisheries Mark Tonello Author Dave Gabrielson I absolutely could not believe what I was seeing. I knew trout were prone to seeking shelter and hiding, but wow! The first week of September gave me, a new PMWC Board member, an incredible insight into how dynamic and fertile the river is. We have talked about things like overhead structure, woody debris, riffles, holes, etc. at a number of our meetings. However, seeing the effect of these structures and the population of trout that they harbor was something else. I am getting ahead of myself. The MDNR had a crew of six staff members who were supported by eight volunteers recruited by the PMWC. Using a small wooden boat that held an electrical generator, pulled by one hearty soul while three others ran the electrode poles, we did a fish count on a defined stretch of the Pere Marquette River from “Zimmy’s cabin” (near the mouth of the Baldwin River) upstream to Doc Green’s cabin. Two of the MDNR crew identified and measured the trout we netted and subsequently released. The volunteers shuttled the fish from the capture sites to the folks who were measuring and identifying the fish while another person recorded the data. The stretch of water was typical of what one would see anyplace on the river - bends, holes, shallows, overhanging banks, rocks, sand, trees - you get the idea. We made three passes on each section of stream, the left bank areas going upstream, then back downstream via the center of stream bed to the starting point, and then back upstream, on the right bank. This allowed us to cover small sections of the survey site and sample the entire width of the 7 river. As you might expect, most of the fish were captured along the banks, but a number of trout (maybe 5-10%) came from the center sections. The process of electro shocking involves bursts of electrical current from negative electrode poles to the positive pole when submerged into the water. The electrical generator in the boat that the probes were tethered to provided the electrical power. The low voltage electrical shock stuns the fish and they temporarily float to the surface where they are scooped up and transferred to the volunteer fish brigade to take them to the measuring stations. We netted trout ranging in size from a half inch or so to over 20 inches. I could not believe where we captured these fish. To a casual observer, these areas would appear barren, but after the electro shocking, as if by magic, five or six smolts would appear. Some areas were just deep holes, some areas were heavily covered with logs and bank overhangs, and some areas had a foot or so of water going over riffles or algae beds. The process of sampling the river took about three hours of steady work and this was done on two consecutive days - in the same area. On the first day of the survey a fin was clipped on all of the netted trout as they were identified, measured and recorded. On the second day, again going over the same stretch of stream, the process was repeated except that this time the survey crew also determined if the fish had been caught on day one, or if the fish was a new catch. This allowed the MDNR officials to determine the efficiency of the sampling methods. A high percentage of recaptured fish indicates that the process had collected and recorded the majority of resident trout. So, what did I learn by taking part in the survey? First, our efforts for habitat preservation and restoration pay direct dividends on improved fish population. In one area where there were a number of trees in the water near a bank we collected at least a dozen fat, sassy, and healthy brown trout all over 14 inches. I had fished that area twice from a drift boat and, if I recall correctly, caught and released only one nice trout. Second, the number of fish that were one to four inches was amazing and indicated a healthy and productive hatch. Third, I saw three, there may have been more that the other volunteers transported to the stations, 12 plus inch beautifully colored rainbows. I suspect that at least a few of the steelhead smolts are planning to take up permanent residence in the Pere Marquette. The information below has been taken from the MDNR’s chart showing the numbers and estimated fish weights. I will be the first in line to volunteer again the next time this is done. I cannot begin to describe how satisfying it is to see the positive evidence of what good stream management and stewardship can yield. Thanks to all of those who have served before to sustain and protect this exceptional water resource. Station area (sampling area) = 1.31 acres • Brown Trout - 259 per acre & 112.17 lbs/acre ** • Rainbow Trout - 1,373 per acre & 37.31 lbs/acre • Coho Salmon - 170 per acre & 1.81 lbs/acre • Chinook Salmon - 33 per acre & .65 lbs/acre ** Largest number and lbs. per acre since 1982! Pere Marquette Watershed Council, P.O. Box 212, Baldwin, MI 49304 info@peremarquette.org www.peremarquette.org PMWC BOARD OF DIRECTORS OFFICERS Paul Bigford, Pesident Fred McLane, Vice President Jill Engelman, Secretary Jay Barnhart, Treasurer DIRECTORS Clint Anderson Jim Bos Jeff Carpenter Rick Conney Steve Fraley Dave Gabrielson Eric Lewis Kevin Morlock Dick Schwikert Tom Seroczynski Grant Snider Chuck Turk BIG tax savings...... Everyone is looking for a way to reduce taxes this year and PMWC has a suggestion that will benefit not only you, but our organization as well. Several years ago the Pere Marquette Watershed Council established an Endowment Fund within the structure of the Lake County Community Foundation (an affiliate of the Fremont Area Community Foundation). Our goal is to have the fund grow to the point where proceeds (dividends, etc.) will cover our operating costs as well as provide additional discretionary revenue for the benefit of the Council in perpetuity. Each donation is tax-deducible as we are a 501c3 non-profit entity. And as a special benefit your donation qualifies for a State of Michigan tax credit. Married donors, filing jointly, can receive a 50% tax credit of up to $200 on a gift of $400. A single person can receive a $100 tax credit on a gift of $200. Michigan businesses have the potential to receive up to a $5,000 tax credit (not to exceed 5% of total Single Business Tax) on a gift of $10,000. (Code #14 on the Michigan 1040 tax return.) Additional savings for married and single tax payers may be realized as the Michigan tax may reduce the amount of State income tax deduction on the Federal return the next year (above is based on being in the 25% marginal tax bracket). These tax benefits are only available for donations to the Endowment Fund. Please remember PMWC when considering your charitable-giving plans this year. It is a win-win for both you and your organization. You receive a tax savings and PMWC’s endowment increases allowing us to expand existing programs to protect the priceless resource we all know and love - The Pere Marquette River. Make Checks to: Lake County Community Foundation/Sidemarked - PMWC Endowment Fund Mail donations to: Lake County Community Foundation P.O. Box 995 Baldwin, MI 49304 8 Drawing for River Beats..... Cast For Conservation© Event - see Page 3 for details If you have an article you would like to submit for a future Mainstream issue, please contact Jill Engelman, Editor at (231) 745-8505