Yellow-legged frogs decimated by DFG trout planting?

Any information related to prospecting

Moderators: russau, Leonard

Yellow-legged frogs decimated by DFG trout planting?

Postby mojavejoe » Thu Mar 10, 2011 1:41 pm

How ironic is this? ……………

According to the Center For Biological Diversity in a Jan 25, 2010 news release....

""Mountain yellow-legged frogs are adapted to high-elevation habitats without aquatic predators. Widespread stocking of nonnative trout in high-elevation Sierra lakes by the California Department of Fish and Game has been the primary cause of decline for the species. Introduced trout prey on tadpoles and juvenile frogs and change the food web of the aquatic ecosystems frogs depend upon. "

The CBD even filed suit on DFG over this issue in 2006.

Read more here, then write a letter to DFG about their new restrictions on dredging areas:

http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news ... -2010.html

My comment would be:

OK. Let's see. DFG kills of millions off yellow-legged frogs with poor management practices by stocking non-native trout to appease the million+ fishermen who buy sport fishing licenses every year. So, now dredgers are going to be in violation of law if we inadvertently suck up a tadpole and place it unharmed 20ft downstream. Get Real!
Last edited by mojavejoe on Fri Mar 11, 2011 9:48 am, edited 3 times in total.
so much gold....so little time :)
User avatar
mojavejoe
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 12:21 pm
Location: Mojave Desert

Re: Yellow-legged frogs decimated by DFG trout planting!

Postby CalGoldDredger » Thu Mar 10, 2011 2:24 pm

They are using this reason for much of the proposed regulation in the Sierra North.
Look here http://www.nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=27399at Chapter 4.3. Biological Resources go down to page 88 which is in TABLE 4.3-1. ACTION SPECIES which states what proposed restriction goes with what species.

Excerpt from that Chart: Foothil Yellow-Legged Frog - Class D for species range per CWHR. Class E for select watersheds in CDFG Region 2. Impacts to early lifestages could result in a deleterious effect. Class D restriction for species range would avoid or minimize impacts to egg masses. Operation restrictions that prohibit dredging within three feet of the lateral edge of the current water level [Section 228(k)3] and disturbance of egg masses or tadpoles [Section 228(k)16] would further minimize impacts to early lifestages and breeding habitat. Class E restrictions are proposed for select watersheds in CDFG Region 2. These watersheds are generally tributaries of mainstem streams that have hydrology altered by hydropower operations. In these watersheds tributaries are important refugia for the species, and therefore Class E restrictions are proposed to avoid or minimize impacts to early lifestages.

Foothill Yellow-legged Frog ain't Threatened, Endangered, or A Candidate for such so why the restriction shown in this table on page 88, many other there to question upon. Worth checking out.
Dredging is a impact to these frogs based upon what?????
Last edited by CalGoldDredger on Thu Mar 10, 2011 2:36 pm, edited 4 times in total.
CalGoldDredger
 
Posts: 784
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 1:57 pm
Location: Hell, if I don't change my ways !!!!!

Re: Yellow-legged frogs decimated by DFG trout planting!

Postby foundit » Thu Mar 10, 2011 2:26 pm

Based on a bunch of trustfundfagowhackoevirobuerocrats
foundit
 
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2010 12:42 pm

Re: Yellow-legged frogs decimated by DFG trout planting!

Postby CalGoldDredger » Thu Mar 10, 2011 3:04 pm

foundit wrote:Based on a bunch of trustfundfagowhackoevirobuerocrats


Yes, foundit, and we need to get this fixed or we will have to live with dredging in the fall/winter with a 4" dredge and won't be able to dredge near the banks closing many a creeks for us. To top it off no use of a motorized winch for the safety of the divers.

I am glad we have some time to make comments as I need as much time as possible. Having trouble commenting on specific restrictions as that is considered acknowledement and acceptance of them if not worded correctly but having no problems commenting on their reasons as they aren't there.

We must make a point that the proposed regulation are indeed flawed past the point of using and enforcing and that we need to go back to the 1994 EIR generated regulations as Dredging the way we were in the recent past under the 1994 regulations, that were in place at that time, had no impact if followed and enforced.
CalGoldDredger
 
Posts: 784
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 1:57 pm
Location: Hell, if I don't change my ways !!!!!

Re: Yellow-legged frogs decimated by DFG trout planting!

Postby foundit » Thu Mar 10, 2011 3:30 pm

I do Hear ya, I am being very diligent and careful in my wording as well because if this passes as the new norm , most my claims will still be undredgable, I hope that all other claim holders in the area do the same as well, I just had to be a smarta$$ for a minute, its better that the alternative :evil:
foundit
 
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2010 12:42 pm

Re: Yellow-legged frogs decimated by DFG trout planting!

Postby gremlin » Thu Mar 10, 2011 4:38 pm

it was not the dredging that hurt the frog. it was the hungry miners. frog legs can be tastie with spotted owl soup.
save a tree, eat a squirrel.
gremlin
 
Posts: 614
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 3:05 pm

Re: Yellow-legged frogs decimated by DFG trout planting!

Postby Geo-George » Thu Mar 10, 2011 4:52 pm

gremlin wrote:it was not the dredging that hurt the frog. it was the hungry miners. frog legs can be tastie with spotted owl soup.


I like the legs and owl deep fried in Exxon oil.
Sweet crude that is. ;)
I have done so much, with so little, for so long, that I am now qualified to do anything with nothing.
Now, I just have to find the time to put the dang thing together.
User avatar
Geo-George
 
Posts: 187
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 5:51 am
Location: Reno, Nv.


Return to General Prospecting

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests