fishteck Posted April 11, 2017 Author Share Posted April 11, 2017 Hyroman - It looks like I've been vindicated! I will be posting the complete list of instream work sites tomorrow. In the meantime have a look at the following video taken today after the cofferdam was opened up to the high flow channel (river left) The water looks clean to me. Once cofferdams are placed above and below the low flow channel (river right) the construction of the low flow channel will start. https://www.facebook.com/CalgaryPaddlingCentre/videos/863766713762925/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcubed Posted April 11, 2017 Share Posted April 11, 2017 Hyroman - It looks like I've been vindicated! I will be posting the complete list of instream work sites tomorrow. In the meantime have a look at the following video taken today after the cofferdam was opened up to the high flow channel (river left) The water looks clean to me. Once cofferdams are placed above and below the low flow channel (river right) the construction of the low flow channel will start. https://www.facebook.com/CalgaryPaddlingCentre/videos/863766713762925/ Don't think you're looking very hard. The far side is almost certainly an exceedance. I also do what Hydroman did as a living, and deal with the Water Act daily. I've read the Approval for this work.. If they are appropriately monitoring, then they will be vindicated if someone calls and compliance shows on site. Same can't be said if we cover our eyes and assume the best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BurningChrome Posted April 11, 2017 Share Posted April 11, 2017 If every project always worked within threshold limits then there would be no need for any regulatory enforcement/compliance. Since such a thing exists, then I'd suspect that sometimes there is a disconnect between the engineers or consultants who wrote the plans and the folks actually doing the work. Like bcube said, the only true vindication is if they show up on site after someone calls in a complaint when seeing significant turbidity and determine that they are within the thresholds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trailhead Posted April 11, 2017 Share Posted April 11, 2017 "Almost certainly" like almost free? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishteck Posted April 11, 2017 Author Share Posted April 11, 2017 This topic was started to inform our community of instream river work that was being conducted by the City of Calgary and the Province to improve or repair infrastructure for the benefit of all Calgarians. Unfortunately, any instream work comes with some short term negative impact to the environment. Various government requirements are put in place to reduce the negative impact on the environment to a minimum. This is certainly the case with this year's Bow River instream work. What this topic has turned into is a debate over environmental stewardship. Calgary is a growing community, probably doubling in size in 20 years with an ever increasing appetite for recreational activities. New city infrastructure is needed that will impact our environment to some degree, but these project will not be curtailed due to environmental advocacy. What is needed is responsible management and execution of instream work. From everything I have been fortunate enough to engage with the City of Calgary, the Provincial Government and those engineers and contractors conducting the work, I am satisfied that the best case practices are being adhered to. Admittedly they are not perfect, but reduce the impact to a minimal level. The following link details all known instream work in the City of Calgary for 2017. https://bowrivertrout.org/2017/04/10/calgary-bow-river-instream-work-sites/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BurningChrome Posted April 12, 2017 Share Posted April 12, 2017 From everything I have been fortunate enough to engage with the City of Calgary, the Provincial Government and those engineers and contractors conducting the work, I am satisfied that the best case practices are being adhered to. Admittedly they are not perfect, but reduce the impact to a minimal level. At least someone doesn't have your same degree of blind trust: http://www.metronews.ca/news/calgary/2017/04/11/harvie-passage-bow-river-calgary-flood-project.html Look, we'd all like to see this get done. It isn't about stopping it from happening. It's about making sure they don't do a disproportionate amount of damage in the process. The best laid plans can be derailed by a few contractors willing to cut corners to complete the project faster if they're already under the time constraint of the in-stream work window. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishteck Posted April 12, 2017 Author Share Posted April 12, 2017 This has nothing to do with "blind trust", but rather a respect for the professionals who are doing the work and monitoring the environmental impact. BurningChrome- A little bit of trust and respect for the agencies governing these activities is needed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownWhisperer Posted April 13, 2017 Share Posted April 13, 2017 Point taken. The hoe was actively working on Sunday afternoon when I got off the water. Does anyone know if the contractor was required to change out the excavator's fluids with enviro oil and hydraulic fluid? Last summer on a line replacement job in BC, we had to swap out an excavator's fluid with enviro rated stuff and that was just to walk it across the coquihalla river. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcubed Posted April 13, 2017 Share Posted April 13, 2017 Does anyone know if the contractor was required to change out the excavator's fluids with enviro oil and hydraulic fluid? Last summer on a line replacement job in BC, we had to swap out an excavator's fluid with enviro rated stuff and that was just to walk it across the coquihalla river. That is typically a mitigation requirement for in stream work in AB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishteck Posted April 13, 2017 Author Share Posted April 13, 2017 This topic is getting out of hand! Should we as anglers inform the authorities every time: - we enter the water and kick up some sediment. - use floatant, oil your reel. - tip cold coffee into the river - have a pixx in the river. - toss a cigarette butt or joint into the river All of these actions when combined together on a summer's day could well impact fish habitat. Lets be serious and realistic with advocacy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcubed Posted April 13, 2017 Share Posted April 13, 2017 ...how is this topic getting out of hand? A very simple question was asked and answered. How you possibly compare multiple backhoes and rock trucks, to pouring of coffee into the water is beyond me. I appreciate that you're invested in this project due to wanting to get additional boat launches in town, and Bow River Trout needs the assistance of the kayak lobby, yet you could care less about the impact on populations? Would your approach and thoughts be different if you were losing fishing days to this in July? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trailhead Posted April 13, 2017 Share Posted April 13, 2017 Appears to me that there is a little bit of fear mongering going on, kind of like how all the rivers in southern Alberta were in extreme peril last year due to the early spring melt and the water temps were going to go sky high and the angling was going to be closed and fish were going to die and ...... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dangus Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 Appears to me that there is a little bit of fear mongering going on, kind of like how all the rivers in southern Alberta were in extreme peril last year due to the early spring melt and the water temps were going to go sky high and the angling was going to be closed and fish were going to die and ...... Glad you said it and not me 😵 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpinkster Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 Appears to me that there is a little bit of fear mongering going on, kind of like how all the rivers in southern Alberta were in extreme peril last year due to the early spring melt and the water temps were going to go sky high and the angling was going to be closed and fish were going to die and ...... If we hadn't gotten all of that rain in July we would have been in a lot of trouble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
albertatrout Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 Can always call it in to the report a poacher line as well, they can get you in touch with the proper authorities. Lots of poor consultants in the province that just fudge numbers to keep the machines working. Contractors will cut corners whenever they get a chance too, lots of bad outfits when it comes to instream work in this province. Lots of self policing as well, sure you can guess how well that works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trailhead Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 And if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle. The future is kind of unpredictable, and as much as human beings think we know it all. Really we don't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smitty Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 So OHVs or peoples' trucks in the water - bad. Backhoe in the water - ok. BurningChrome, internet is a poor medium for detecting tone. So I'll assume the sarcastic emoticon was in full force, ya? The major point being the backhoe has approved work (whether they are compliant or not is a separate issue) that has been deemed either necessary or fulfilling some sort of desired outcome. Either way, the other salient detail is that the backhoe's presence is temporary, whereas recreational users with their OHV's and trucks are disturbing watersheds continually and steadily from May long weekend until, what Labour day (or longer?). And for what purpose; will there be a public benefit? No, it's purely for there own recreational pleasure. Surely you see that difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Current Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 Can always call it in to the report a poacher line as well, they can get you in touch with the proper authorities. Lots of poor consultants in the province that just fudge numbers to keep the machines working. Contractors will cut corners whenever they get a chance too, lots of bad outfits when it comes to instream work in this province. Lots of self policing as well, sure you can guess how well that works. This. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishteck Posted May 5, 2017 Author Share Posted May 5, 2017 The following link details all Bow and Elbow Rivers instream work for 2017. The list is quite extensive including the most recent addition of ATCO removing an abandoned gas pipeline across the Bow River above Grave Bridge. I have been in contact with the majority of the project managers for each of these sites. The concerns of the fishing community have been recognized. https://bowrivertrout.org/2017/05/05/bow-river-instream-work-for-2017/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.