CurrentsEddiesIII

TGF, Conservation and Money

Grey Fox

For many of us who fly fished in the '60's and '70, the Theodore Gordon Flyfishers was the leading conservation organization fighting for clean water and enviorment. The battles for constant water releases for summer fish survival with the buracuracy of New York City are classics and should be a primer for other rivers and conservationists.

The '80's showed less fight for TGF and the '90's they were almost non-existent.

Now in a period of weeks TGF has made new on two fronts.

The New York Times in an article "Snow Making Delights Skiers but Alarms Conservationists" reports how Hunter Mountain Ski Bowl,NY began the season in November with the whir of machinery pumping water at 9,000 gallons a minute for its snowmaking operation.

The self described "snow making capital of the world," Hunter has been in operation as a ski resort since 1959. But the snow making that has made the 4,040 foot moun-tain famous has also led to years of costly litigation and protracted legal disputes.

Several conservation groups have sued the State Department of Environmental Conservation for failing to safeguard Schoharie Creek, where Hunter gets it water for snow making. As anyone who's read Art Flick's Streamside Guide to Natuarals and their Imitations, 1947, knows, the Scholharie was Art's home river, and where all the research for Streamside Guide was done.

By the early '60 the Schoharie wasn't the river that Art knew and loved. Low water, draughts and pollution was already starting to take it's toll.

Fishermen say the Shanty Hollow Corporation, which operates Hunter Mountain's pumping equipment, is ruining a trout stream by lowering the water level and therefore destroying fish eggs and the insects that fish eat. The anglers also charge that after Shanty Hollow violated the terms of state permits by withdrawing more water than legally allowed, the state permitted the corporation to pump even more water.

The battle goes on with the traditional money, enviornment, lines clearly drawn. Years of wrangling have resulted in a split between fishermen and skiers; between the traditional Catskill angler and hard-partying ski buffs from nearby cities. It has also pitted the Slutzky family, which owns the ski bowl, against fishermen who accuse them of arrogantly diverting water for their own purposes.

Shanty Hollow runs its water use program under the terms of a 1992 consent order issued by the State Department of Environmental Conservation. The order allows withdrawals to lower the stream flow to 11 cubic feet per second, and as low as 5 feet at certain times.

That is far too low, said Jonathan Director, co-chairman of the conservation committee of the Theodore Gordon Fly Fishers, a fishing and conservation group in New York City. Mr. Director, a lawyer, is an avid fly fisherman and skier. but he refuses to ski at Hunter. The Theodore Gordon Fly Fishers, along with the state chapter of Trout Unlimited, is appealing a March 14 decision by Justice Lawrence E. Kahn of State Supreme Court in Albany that upholds current withdrawal levels.

"Hunter has been rewarded for violating the terms of the original agreement drawn up in 1980 that regulated their water use," Mr. Director said. "Shanty Hollow was given a withdrawal limit 16 years ago, which they ignored. The D.E.C.'s response was to allow them to continue to take as much water as they wanted."

Shanty Hollow was served with a complaint by the state in February 1990 for violating a 1980 consent order specifying that no water was to be drawn from the creek when it was running at 10 cubic feet per second or lower. After a series of studies, the D.E.C. issued the 1992 order. Various conservation groups felt its terms were too generous, and filed suit to have the depart-ment reconsider. But Justice Kahn upheld the consent order, calling it a "rational determination" by the department.

For its part, the D.E.C. says it is still working on the problem. "The order is an interim measure," a department spokes-man, Gary Sheffer, said. "We are working on developing water withdrawal levels that both the mountain and the fishing groups are comfortable with."

No one disputes that Hunter is an economic engine of Greene County. Hunter had 285,000 ski visits in the 1995-96 ski season, paid $500,000 in sales and property taxes, and will employ close to 500 people at the height of this ski season.

A lawyer for Shanty Hollow, Thomas West, said that the fishermen's claims that Hunter's water use is harming fish have no basis in fact. He said studies have shown no evidence that the fish population of the creek is diminished by the water withdrawals.

"We have found healthy brown trout populations just downstream from Shanty Hollow's water diversion," Mr. West said. "Anyone who says that Hunter is harming the fish in the creek is either uninformed or unwilling to fact the facts." He said the goal was a balanced use of Schoharie Creek, between fishermen and skiers.

Chet Karwatowski, vice president for the state chapter of Trout Unlimited, said the group was continuing its legal battle because Hunter Mountain had been given too much leeway. "The water diversion has certainly affected the game-fish population over the years," he said. "Anyone who knows the stream can tell you that. But we don't consider this a skier versus fisher issue. The mountain takes water all year round, and we consider that important enough to appeal Justice Kahn's decision."

The Catskill Center for Conservation and Development is not part of the appeal, but it is still worried about the water withdrawal.

"We reached an agreement with the Ski Bowl that set an absolute 15 cubic feet per second withdrawal limit for the creek," the group's Associate director, Ike Icard, said. "Anything below that concerns us."

That agreement formed the basis of the center's conditional support for Hunter's expansion plan, which was proposed earlier this year. The proposal would have doubled the size of the resort and would require an amendment to the state's Constitution because it involves a trade between public and private lands. It was passed in the State Senate but was not brought up for a vote in the Assembly.

The president of Hunter Mountain Ski Bowl, Russell Coloton, said that the expansion proposal was on the back burner and that the main concern now was simply running the mountain.

"We'll keep the deal we made with the Catskill Center," he said. "But stream flows are in the 80's right now, so water hasn't become an issue."

You have to wonder who it isn't an issue to?

Then in an announcement to it's membership, a confirmed embezzlement in the 6 figure range by an officer of 18 years. This loss is particularly troubling in that two years of so ago, an unsigned letter was circulated accusing the TGF board of mismanagement, with an emphasis on financial mismanagement. At that time I referred the letter to 2 ex-Presidents of TGF and they said it was generated by a disguruntaled ex-board member. The saying "where there's smoke, there's fire" held true here.

Perhaps more importantly, how does a convervation, enviormental organization, with over 20 Directors, overlook a 6 figure loss when accusations were made?

TRAVEL ROD PIECES, 3 OR 4?

A.J. LIU

Travel rods are in. For air travel, they are really the only way to go. The ability to have your rods at your side is a fantastic advantage. Just ask any traveling angler who had to fly with his rods in baggage and some how they didn't get to the same destination as the angler.

As more and more traveling anglers are finding, you have to decide right from the begining, whether you are going to use either 3 or 4 piece rods. Either will fit in the overhead, or a compact car's trunk. Why the decision? Because, if you have 3 4 piece travel rods and the fifth one you purchase is 3 pieces, your travel rod bag must be 38 inches, instead of the normal 30"-32" travel rod bag used for 4 piece rods. Most anglers who travel, carry more than one rod. Most anglers who travel, carry their travel rods in a travel rod case. Chances are that the angler with the 3, 4 piece travel rods had a 32" travel rod case. With the purchase of a 3 piece travel rods he will have to purchase a 38" travel rod case.

What's the difference between the 3 and 4 piece travel rods? Both are excellent. It's the question of what styles fit your taste and casting. Besides the extra section, most 4 piece rods have quicker, faster actions, and tend to be used in mainly the highest tech materials. For lines 6 and up, these properties, work well in this configuration. Lighter weight lines seem to make the extra ferrule more pronounced and the extra weight of that ferrule appears noticable. If you prefer softer actions in your 2 through 5 wt. rods, 3 piece rods will likely be much more to your liking. As usual, never purchase any of these rods without test casting it.

Most 3 piece travel rods have a limit of 9' in length. 4 piece rods are available as 10'ers(32" case needed"). If you prefer the longer rods, stay in the 4 piecers.

Travel rods cases are set up to carry 2 or more travel rods up to a certain section length. Some are configured with tube compartments for a set amount of rods. These of course, limit the capacity, unless you modify it. Others are soft and are designed for use with the travel rods original aluminium or hard tube. We have found that all these tubing arrangements just constitutes additional weight when traveling. One stiffener, or tube is all that's we use in the travel rod case if it can be used that way. This allows the packing of more rods than specified. These cases are either in your hand, under your arm or over your shoulder. There normally isn't any rough handling like baggage, involved.

If you decide on 3 piece travel rods and 3 piece case, you can sneak 1 or 2 4 piece rods in the case, even the 10' 4 piecers. The same, of course, isn't true if you initially start with 4 piece rods and cases.