Some major news recently at San Pablo. Seismic studies have shown a risk of the dam collapsing during a major earthquake. Because of this, EBMUD has drained the lake much lower than normal this year and it currently sits at 23.5 feet below full capacity. Articles on EMBUD's website and ABC 7 news suggest strongly that this low water level will be maintained, and that the lake will be completely drained to retrofit the dam in the near future!

You can read the articles here:

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/news/102704_nw_san_pablo_dam.html

http://www.ebmud.com/water_&_environment/water_supply/current_projects/san_pablo_dam/default.htm

Now, the question to fisherman is - what is the impact here?

The short sighted view of the dam being drained and a major fish kill occurring is that it will mean bad fishing and we should all be pissed. For trout fisherman, this draw down will really suck. And for bass fisherman in the near term this draw down will really suck too! It appears likely that there will simply be no fishing at San Pablo for a period of several years.

However, a long term view of these developments could mean very good things for bass fisherman. As some of you know, San Pablo had spotted bass introduced in the lake sometime 5 or 6 years ago, possibly longer. The spotted bass, eroding shoreline cover, turbid murky water, and several other factors have combined to really hurt the trophy largemouth population in 2004. Ask the crappie fisherman where all the great crappie fishing has gone. Ask anyone if they have caught a bluegill. They haven't, because the lake is dying off! And this year even the trophy bass started to dry up. If the lake is drained, and all fish are removed or killed, spotted bass COULD actually be eradicated from the lake. The lake could be re-seeded with fish and brought back to life.

A lot of other scenarios unfold from this thing if they do drain it and kill it off completely. Trophy bass could be moved to other lakes or even stored sort of temporarily in briones. But ... EBMUD would have to be very careful not to transport any spots.

In any case, they say stakeholder input will be considered. I'm a stakeholder and you better believe I'm going to give my input. I'd encourage everyone to give their input. Think about things in the long term, be constructive. In 10 years maybe we'll have a great lake again.

This could be the only way SPD will become a great trophy fishery again. My thoughts are that the carp population explosion coupled with urban fertilizer runoff (the golf course up stream) are the major problems right now. The Spots would probably become a problem eventually. A drain of the lake would address 2 of 3 of these factors.
What is a "stakeholder"? Is that someone with an annual pass?

Good question - who IS a stakeholder. The whims of the personnel at EBMUD will probably determine that. But people who make noise are going to get recoginzed during this process. EBUD will have to take some input from the public whether they want to or not, and big stinks will be raised from many sides, you can guarantee it.

You can bet there will be a stink about bird habitat being lost during the draw down. The audobon society or whatever local birdwatching orgs will get involved and have a say. Can you blame them? The ospreys, eagles, terns, and ducks that have come to rely on San Pablo will all be affected by the drawdown. And to think that the same people who ensured the lake is closed from November to February each year to protect migratory waterfowl will rest on their laurels when the lake is drained is a pipe dream. They'll be there for sure to get heard.

And maybe when they flush out the lake, the water running down the stream will attract some steelhead or salmon into the creek. Organizations like San Pablo Watershed Neighbors Education & Restoration Society
http://www.aoinstitute.org/spawners/index.html will have a say for sure. Can you blame them? Steelhead were running in San Pablo creek for centuries before the creek was dammed.

Maybe when they do the inevitable EIR's on the draw down, someone will find a red legged frog or an endangered turtle. Or maybe non-native turtles will be found (like at some North Bay lakes like Apline and Soulajoule). I know I've seen a fair number of turtles hiding back in the back of scow in the spring. People who are advocates for turtles and frogs will have a say, and can you blame them? Turtles and frogs have been there long before the creek was dammed.

But you know what I think the majority of fisherman will say? They'll say things just like the quotes in the ABC7 News article. "I hate it" and "It's Terrible". And they also won't take it one step further. They'll just sit back and bitch and that will be that. And they'll wonder why the birds and the frogs and the turtles and the steelhead will get so much attention during the drawdown, while the regular fish in San Pablo wind up dying in a puddle. The reason will be because they didn't realize they were stakeholders too, and that if they make the right kind of noise, something can get done to build a better future for the lake. Noble thought or foolish dream? You can decide for yourself.

The fisheries and wildlife director at San Pablo Dam is Roger Hartwell rhartwel@ebmud.com. The Ranger Supervisor is Elizabeth Hill ehill@ebmud.com. I'd encourage everyone who gives a crap to write call or email, and don't be an ass who says "this sucks we hate it" ... take a few minutes to think about the long term. Think about all the positives that could come from this. Be nice and be constructive and let them know that as a fisherman, you're concerned and you want to make sure your voice gets heard when the lake is rebuilt.

My message to them is going to be as follows:

Habitat The lake needs habitat. It needs habitat for bluegill, shad, crappie, and bass. The lake's habitat has been eroded and washed away by natural processes and by boat wakes. Let's organize a habitat program, just like at Chabot and Quarry Lakes, just like the Diablo Valley Fishing Club did in 1980-81 when San Pablo was drained and re-filled. Let's put a no wake speed limit on the lake like the 10mph limit at Del Valle to prevent further erosion when the lake is refilled. Let's put a plan in place for regular habitat additions in the future.

Saving What Fish are Left When the lake is drawn down, don't just go for one day and electrofish a few hundred fish to be transplanted to other lakes. Let's spend a few weeks getting the big bass out. Let's get the catfish, the sturgeon, and maybe even the trout too if they won't die. Let's take EVERY PRECAUTION not to transplant any spotted bass. Then let's have a plan to put a reasonable amount of fish in Briones as a holding area until the lake is refilled. Let's take the rest to other local lakes like Lafayette, Chabot, Shadow Cliffs, Quarry Lakes, etc to help improve those fisheries there.

Killing and Starting Fresh When the fish are taken out and the lake is as low as it will get, rotenone the entire thing and kill every fish that is in there. The amount of rough fish in San Pablo is incredible and there will never be a better chance to remove them. Carp, goldfish, spotted bass, and who knows what else could all be eliminated.

Restocking Before San Pablo Dam was opened to the public, people like Bob Nuzum at EMBUD worked to make it a great fishing lake. They stocked subcatchable rainbow trout, they stocked bluegill, black crappie, catfish, and they stocked 7,000 yearling bass and augmented that with around 1200 adult bass from Briones Res. The result was one of the best fishing lakes in the bay, so let's do it all again. If the bass are removed and put in Briones ahead of time, those same big bass can be put right back in to the lake when it refills.

Managing so it Doesn't Die The biggest mistake that we see made time and time again is that new or rebuilt lakes get opened to the angling public and then the angling public does their level best to ruin it. With a fresh start the lake could be managed to produce a sustainable bass fishery. For crying out loud, EBMUD, DFG, please please please don't reopen the lake to a 5 bass 12" minimum limit. Look what happend at Diamond Valley, they were forced to almost immediately change the limit because people were keeping hundreds and thousands of bass. Why can't we learn? Manage the lake with a slot, or manage it with a 2 fish or 1 fish maximum size limit. Sample the lake annually with electrofishing and adjust the limit to match the fishery.

This is not some new idea here. Lakes around the country are managed like this all the time. There just seems to be a pervasive apathy in California about managing warm water fisheries. It's probably because even with no management, many of our lakes are great all on their own. What I think we don't realize is that our lakes could be better than great, they could be world class. Here's an opportunity for anglers to get involved in building a world class lake. And when they say stakeholders will get a chance to say something, I'm in.

Are there any lakes in the EBMUD which don't have Floridas, but do have Spots? Could we lobby to have the Spots moved there instead of killed? I like to catch Spots, and can't see wasting all the spots that are in that lake. Of course, I'd rather catch Floridas and I don't like it when Spots out compete Florida's.
Tight lines,
Wade

Sure - they can go in Camanche, not that I think anyone really wants spotted bass since they rarely have any problem multiplying to fantastic numbers.

The irony would be that it is possible the spots in Pablo that are there now came through from Camanche to begin with. The primary water source for San Pablo Dam is the Mokelumne River via Lake Pardee. Water from Lake Pardee flows through the Mokelumne Aqueducts, to Lafayette Aqueduct #2, then to the Briones Division Water Works where it ultimately finds its way into San Pablo.

If you look at maps of Lake Pardee, you'll see that Camanche is right below it. There are spots in Camanche, but not (that I know) in Pardee. I don't know exactly the details of how the pipes run from Pardee on down, but any water below the dam at Camanche could have spots, so they may get in somehow there.

I know that they're fecund little guys and usually need thinning of the population to attain any real size. That's probably why the way over-pressured Lake Perris used to produce so many huge Spots. I just don't like the idea of wasting so many good fish by poisoning them. Perhaps DFG/EBMUD/EBRPD could contract out the capture and processing of them (as well as all the other un-desirable species) for a fee to help pay for the whole project.
Tight lines,
Wade

Spotted bass were not intended to be introduced in San Pablo dam. There are plenty of other lakes around the state where you can go and catch spotted bass until your arm falls off, and those lakes won't benefit from stocking any additional spotted bass. You also cannot use them as food because as recent reports stated, the fish are contaminated with mercury.

It would be nice not to be wasteful with whatever fish wind up in the bottom of the puddle after the drain the lake. But reality is that a lot of fish are just not desirable and will die. Maybe they could dig ponds back in the coves, shoot all the spotted bass, carp and goldfish through wood chippers into the ponds and then throw a few hundred crawdads in. By the time the lake filled back up you'd have jillions of crawdas and you'd give the opsreys and herons something to dine on in the mean time :9 I'm sure EBMUD will figure out something, and it will probably be just letting the fish die and be eaten by carrion birds.

I did not know that EBMUD would allow fertilizer runoff into a reservoir (drinking water for the East Bay). This should be stopped before the lake is filled again.

ps. A "stakeholder" is also someone intending to kill a vampire.

Bob

Maybe the best thing for that poor old lake though. It's funny, I was recently talking to Josh, and I had made the statement, "Honestly, I think the only thing that could fix Pablo would be to drain the darn thing and start over".... but then I added, "And I know they are not going to do that...." Well surprise, surprise ! Maybe not for us fishermen.... but because of an earthquake danger, apparently so.

Pablo might just be an awesome fishery again someday.... I'd give it a minimum of 10 years (after draining) to have some real giants again. But even so, we all know that there are a lot more factors required "besides time" for a lake to end up with giant Largemouths.

Hmmmm,
Fish

Hmmm... this could be a good thing for the bass if the lake does get drained...
It also brings up some questions though. If they were to restock the lake with LMB what other lake would they get their fish from? Could they/we somehow add some damn cover to the lake besides the fallen trees that dont really provide that much cover in summer when the water is drawn down. :9 Maybe they could model a new san pablo after Diamond Valley where they constructed it with a bass fishery at the top of the list not just a by product of building the lake. Possibilities possibilities...

Now I know there are many factors involved and the draining might not take place for a few years... but if they somehow managed the lake right after the draining SP could be an even better lake than before. Not likely but I'm young and can dream. :-)

Not sure if you caught my original post on this. Check out this video on DVL.

http://www.westernbass.tv/videopage.php?0000140

You asked, "Could they....." ? Well sure. Of course they could.... but the big question is, do they really give a $^&* ??? Sadly, the answer to that is, the majority of the players involved could not care less. But then, looking at this from the brighter side, as long as the ideas of the "fishing minority" don't hurt the plans of the "big $$$ water sales people" (EBMD) we might just have a chance.

It will be interesting to see how things turn out.

I might just have to go give Pablo a shot in the next week or two.... just for rememberences, if nothing else.

Peace,
Fish