Shadow Cliffs Back Ponds - Closed to Fishing

[swimbait]

Just the latest in a long line of lost recreational opportunities!

The back ponds are closed for at least 2 years as a protective measure to enhance steelhead chances in Alameda creek watershed.

http://www.alamedacreek.org/Press_Relea ... -15-09.pdf

Ready to do something about it? I am. Stay tuned.

[swimbait]

Update

I talked with Pete Alexander who is the fisheries guy for EBPARKS. He told me that the no-fishing regs have not gone in to effect yet. They will go in to effect March 1, 2010. So, you CAN go fish the back ponds right now if you want. He said he contacted the people at Shadow Cliffs and asked them to take down the sign posted on the photo board.

I am continuing to work on this issue and working on getting in touch with the DFG biologists who are involved. The ideal way to get it so that fishing is allowed in the back ponds again is to have DFG biologists on your side, then go to the DFG commission and follow the formal process for regulation changes. Whether or not the DFG folks involved will support that notion remains to be seen.

[FR0G]

Wow that sucks! Those back ponds are sick.

[DaLa]

This is a shame. I've fished there for the past 30 years. I cannot imagine how fishing all the way up there has anything to do with the steelhead down by Niles.

[swimbait]

Don't give up all hope. Today I finally found some discussion of the proposed regulations in what is called the California Regulatory Notice Register. No mention of the new regulations can be found on the DFG website in either the current or proposed regulations section

http://www.fgc.ca.gov/regulations/regulations.asp

In any case, in the Sept 25, 2009 edition on page 25 is the following:

http://www.oal.ca.gov/res/docs/pdf/notice/39z-2009.pdf

ALAMEDA CREEK SPECIAL REGULATIONS

There are substantive efforts underway to provide fish passage over the 100% migration barriers in the Alameda Creek flood control channel. While working to provide passage for anadromy, members of the Alameda Creek Work Group are, in the meantime, annually relocating anadromous steelhead from below the lower–most barrier in Alameda Creek to locations upstream of this barrier.

As part of early planning efforts to jumpstart the anadromous steelhead run, the Department is currently considering utilizing the land–locked teelhead populations located upstream of San Antonio and Calaveras Reservoirs as a genetic source of steelhead to jumpstart the anadromous run. Genetic tests indicate that these land–locked populations have the genetics of Central California Coast Distinct Population Segment steelhead.

Additionally, trapping efforts have indicated that these populations exhibit the behavioral and morphological characteristics of anadromous steelhead in their migration to and from the Calaveras and San Antonio reservoirs. This proposal will provide protection for the anadromous steelhead that are annually relocated upstream of the barriers in the flood control, as well as increase protection for the possible genetic source of future steelhead enhancements.

Amend subsection 7.50(b)(1.5), Alameda Creek and
Tributaries Special Regulations.

— Add year round closure for all species for areas
downstream of San Antonio, Calaveras and Del Valle
reservoirs.

So, the question is, is there still time for public comment on this issue? The DFG commission is required to take public comment on proposed regulations for 45 days. I am trying to find out if there is still any opportunity to do so. It is difficult to comprehend how the public can have an opportunity to comment when information on what is going on is so tremendously difficult to find.

I have a call in to the commision's main phone number to try and find out. Hopefully will get a call back tomorrow. There is a commission meeting on Feb 3, 2010 (next Wednesday) in Sacramento. If the opportunity is there I plan to go to the meeting. The question is whether the window for comment is still open or not.

[619]

I caught my first bass at shadow cliffs on a castmaster in 1975. Remember the bus that was kidnapped from Chowchilla and the kids were found in an underground conex box out in the gravel pitts?

[Kevin]

I was driving that bus Art.

[tunaman]

I caught my first bass at shadow cliffs on a castmaster in 1975. Remember the bus that was kidnapped from Chowchilla and the kids were found in an underground conex box out in the gravel pitts?

Made me look Art - I seem to vaguely remember the news stories about it, but couldn't remember any specifics. That was actually 1976:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chowchilla,_California

Scary!
Roger

[DaLa]

Caught my first bass in the back lakes in about 1979 on a live bluegill. Caught the bluegill on a redworm first and halfway in I traded up to a 2lb bass -on a gold eagle claw salmon egg hook.

[swimbait]

When we moved to Dublin it was always in my mind that I'd teach my kids to fish in these ponds. My boy is 10 months old now. If we all sit around and do nothing he'll never have that chance.

I did more research on this and unfortunately the time for public comment on the new regs has passed and they will become law on March 1. Now the only way to change that is to have the regs changed. I'm going to fight for that change.

If you want to read more, read it on my site. I can't reformat and retype it all here. calfishing.com, freshwater forum. Here's my little boy. I bet some of you guys have kids too. Think about it.

[/img]

[swimbait]

I talked to the DFG commission staff again today to learn more about the regulation change process. Because Alameda Creek issues are not on the agenda for the Feb. 3, 2010 commission meeting in Sacramento, the public can comment on the issue.

I'm taking the day off work and will be going to the meeting. I think that the sooner we do something, the better. I am going to submit comments via email tonight.

Let me know if you can come also. I can drive as many as 4 other people from Dublin. The commission website advises that if multiple people are there for the same topic, that a spokesperson be appointed. I will do that bit, but having more people present cannot possibly be a bad thing. I know this is tremendously last minute and on a weekday. The meeting starts at 10am. The agenda can be found here:

http://www.fgc.ca.gov/meetings/2010/020310agd.asp

Some notes about participating in the meeting (copied from the DFG website)

The public is encouraged to comment on any item on the agenda. In order for the Commission to adequately consider public comments, the public is requested to submit written comments no later than ten days prior to the meeting. Written comments received fewer than ten days preceding the meeting will be submitted to the Commission at the meeting; however, Commission staff is unable to deliver material received one day before and on the day of the meeting to the Commissioners when the meeting is not in Sacramento. Please send your comments to be received no later than two days before the meeting.

If you decide to speak at the Commission meeting, please begin by giving your name and affiliation (if any) and the number of people represented by your organization. Then tell the Commission your concerns. Time allotted for each agenda item depends upon the number of speakers for each item and the length of the agenda. The Commission is interested in your views; don't worry about how to say them. If several people have spoken, try not to be repetitious. If there are several with the same concerns, please try to appoint a spokesperson. The Commission is particularly interested in the specific reasons you are for or against a proposal because the Commission's decision needs to be based on specific reasons.
If you would like to present handouts/written material to the Commission at the meeting, please provide eleven (11) copies.

---

Interested parties may present oral and/or written comments on proposed regulations in person at Commission meetings, or may submit written comments via e-mail to fgc@fgc.ca.gov, via fax to (916) 653-5040, via mail to California Fish and Game Commission, 1416 Ninth Street, Room 1320, Sacramento, CA 95814.

---

A business or a person submitting a comment to a proposed regulation or proposed amendment or repeal of a regulation has the right to request a copy of the final statement of reasons. Requests may also be submitted to the California Fish and Game Commission, 1416 Ninth Street, Room 1320, Sacramento, CA 95814.

---

The Commissioners' ultimate decisions must reflect not only the biological needs of our fish and wildlife, but also the wishes, needs and desires of all those who enjoy these resources with the interest, understanding and involvement of everyone who appreciates our magnificent fish and wildlife resources

[swimbait]

Here's a link to the proposal I submitted last night. If you want to help, come on Wednesday next week to the DFG Commission meeting to show support.

http://www.calfishing.com/files/Images/ ... nges_2.pdf

[swimbait]

Today I went back to the lake to explore and learn more about the creek and how it relates to the back ponds. I started at the photo board where I found the No Fishing sign was still up.

These signs are ILLEGAL. I have it direct from the DFG Commission that fishing is allowed until March 1, 2010. So on Monday my first call will be to DFG enforcement to file a complaint that the East Bay Regional Parks District is violating my rights as an angler by posting no fishing in areas that are legal to fish.



From there I walked around the back ponds, photographing and looking around. There is some water flowing through the system right now due to all of the recent rain.

Here is a view of the front lake


Here is a view of the Island Pond


Here is a photo of some dog people in the Arroyo Pond.


There were dozens of dogs jumping in the lake today. I am looking at the dog angle as an interesting side issue related to closing the back ponds. There was [a href="http://www.ebparks.org/files/sc_pub_mtg ... -06-09.pdf"]public comment[/a] at one of the EBPARKS meetings a while back on shadow cliffs where the anti-fishing views of the dog people were evident. Here are some quotes:

"Dog owners are concerned about injuries from fish hooks"

"EBRPD should provide separate areas for dogs and fishermen"

While many dog owners are probably fishermen, or have no problem with fisherman, there are undoubtedly some very happy dog owners right now because of the imminent closure.

As I walked along the levee I saw a lot of birds. There were several people bird watching today with binoculars. Here is a photo of the island on the island pond. No fishing is allowed near this island so that the birds are not disturbed. I wonder if the bird watchers realize that the reason these trees are filled with cormorants is because of the stocked trout in the front pond? Just a classic example where the goals of recreation and biodiversity meet with confounding outcomes.


Here are some white pelicans that are living at Shadow Cliffs only because of the man made front lake and the stocked trout.


After a while I grabbed my tube and fished the island pond. Here is a classic shot showing the kind of great flippin cover available at these ponds.


Fishing was pretty slow. But that was OK because my main goal was to find the point where the creek flows in to the Island Pond. It took a while but I finally found it. There was a solid wall of tullies with some current pushing through. Now ask yourself if this looks like suitable steelhead habitat, and consider the fact that we just had our big rain for the year and it rained the night before. This is IT, there is no channel here, just this wall of tullies. Fish can't swim through this!



A bit later I saw this big fat turtle sitting on some tullies. It was fast asleep. I could have grabbed it with my hand. Took a few photos and headed on. I don't know if this is a native turtle or some pet that escaped. Herpetology isn't my thing.



Oh yeah, this is a fishing report too. I went to the front pond and launched my tube amongst the dog melee. Clint sprained his wrist trying to launch at one of the steeper launches the other day and I was over that. The only good launch is the big middle launch so off I went.

A bit later I had a bite, set the hook 3 times and lost the fish. It swam at me the whole way and I watched it fall off the hook. Maybe 3lber. I was using an EWG with a senko which I never do. Just forgot my regular hooks. 10 minutes later I went back to that tree and flipped in again. Similar bite and caught a 3lber. What was cool was that you could see the mark where I had missed the fish on the first go-round. Just a classic example of why EWG hooks aren't good on most baits.



On the way out I was packing up my truck and saw a park worker open up the photo board. I thought she might be taking down the No Fishing signs so I hurried to go talk to her. We wound up chatting for about 15 minutes. She said there are 4 signs around the back ponds now that say no fishing as well. I didn't see them, so not sure on that? She said she couldn't understand why they were closing the back ponds to fishing.

So I went back to my truck, loaded up and backed out. Then I heard a sick crunching sound. That was my tire running over my rods, which had been propped on the side of the truck x( Ugggg. Most bonehead move ever. I just got thrown off my routine from talking to the lady. The damages were two curado 200's, my favorite Castaway flippin stick and a custom Performance Tackle swimbait rod

Clearly these reels are defective...

[Andy Giannini]

Awesome write up, except for the running over the rods/reels part.



A.G.

I covet that series of reels as well.

[swimbait]

Today I drove to Sacramento to attend the DFG Commission meeting and give public comment on the Shadow Cliffs back ponds issue.

I arrived way too early and waited for 4 hours to speak for the allotted 3 minutes. The time came, I talked, and the result was that one of the directors that was running the meeting referred me to talk to Neil Manji who is the Chief of the DFG Fisheries Branch.

Another piece of info I picked up was that the Commission does fishing regulations on a 3-year cycle, and they just completed the latest cycle. So this Shadow Cliffs issue has bad timing and would have to go in as something of an "emergency" change.

Watching the Commissioners for reaction during my 3 minutes didn't give me much of a sense of how they sided on this. I think they were somewhat surprised by my comments and likely had no idea that there was a warm water fishery in the back ponds. Could be wrong, that's just the sense I got.

Any case, I had a chance to talk to Neil Manji one-on-one which was good. He was aware of the issue and had talked to the local biologist. The sense I got was that the DFG didn't really look in to the back ponds when they got on board with the recommendation to close the creek and all it's tributaries.

The good news is that I got the feeling from talking to Neil that DFG will come out in favor of allowing some fishing in the back ponds. This is not a promise, just a sense. A more important question will be how the other stakeholders come out on this.

If EBPARKS, Alameda Creek Alliance and the other large stakeholders agree right off with allowing fishing in the back ponds as I've proposed (barbless, zero take on steelhead/salmon) then it's possible we'll be back fishing the ponds by May.

If there's disagreement then the path forward becomes cloudier. I'll learn much more a week from today when I meet with EBPARKS, Alameda Creek Alliance, and DFG.

[lunker punker]

Good job Rob. This is truly ridiculous. I grew up fishing back there and collecting lures off of the trees. EBRPD has always baffled me with thier take on things. Hopefully this being on a higher level your efforts will pay off. Let me know if I can help.
Jeremy

[CN]

Good job Swimbait.

Perhaps if more of us (me) would do as much we may not lose as much

Mike

[jimmy87]

*NM*

[CN]

[quote="jimmy87"]bunch of crap.
In the 80s we has a decent run of steelhead in the creek. There was a rubber inflatable dam where the fish could not pass.
we were catching the steelies and putting them over the dam in hopes they would spawn.
At the time we tried to get them to save the run of fish that had shown up for the first time in many years.
because it was not "cool" to be a tree huggin politician the whole idea was pushed aside.

Its too late now.
They have only had a fish or 2 run up that stream in the last decade. So much water is sucked out of that creek salt water has indruded. There was talk of pumps to some how solve the problem

The Alameda Creek alliance is just another JOKE.

I tried to help them once but in a heart beat I could see their lies.
I actually helped them net a steelhead in the creek once. They were going to use the fish they netted to spawn more fish for the creek.
well the ONLY one that came up the stream that year was determined to be lost and not native to the creek.
They refused to use that fish because they felt it was an eel river strain and not alameda creek.
My thoughts were that perhaps a lost fish in the stream is mother natures way of ensuring LIFE should something go wrong in the creek and kill off the original strain.
So she sends a fish that was born in the eel river to kick start the lost run.
is not some type of fish better than NONE?????
why not put fingerlings from an Oregon hatchery in the creek and see what they do?
but NO thats not the correct STRAIN of steelhead.


The creek will never be opened to fishing again as long as the alameda fish alliance has a say.
Their dream is to restore a small run of fish and WATCH them.
They would like to see little viewing AREAS where us the SHEEP can for probably a FEE stand and look at spawning fish.
Well the HELL with that. If you notice they already have closed most all the access to the creek.

the entire environment of the creek and surrounding land has be changed and will never return to what it was in the 50s when my grandfather use to take steelhead there every season.

instead of being environmental wak jobs they need to put some type of sport fish that will thrive in the creek despite the development and population growth that has taken place.
something that will create fishing for the kids in Fremont.

smallmouth bass maybe?

spotted bass?

The ALAMEDA CREEK ALLIANCE are NOT fishermen nor do they LIKE FISHERMEN or another sportsmen.
Just another environmental group of assholes that want you OFF THE WATER[/quote

[swimbait]

CN, thanks for the historical info. Not being a steelhead fisherman, I never explored Alameda Creek much during the 7 years when I lived in Fremont. It's a beautiful stretch of water through Niles, but not much to look at in the channelized section down by the quarry lakes and east. The part I am concerned with here is the Arroyo Del Valle tributary.

So look, I just got involved in this thing about 2 weeks ago when I saw a no-fishing sign at Shadow Cliffs, so I don't know the views of all the people who were involved in shutting down fishing in Alameda Creek. But I have spent a lot of time in the past 2 weeks researching, getting informed, and studying the strategy that was used to get these regulations turned in to law.

This might seem like some mysterious process or conspiracy but it's not. Groups like the Alameda Creek Alliance have no special powers, or rights. They are people just like you and me, and therefore we are equal in the eyes of the law making process. The reason these groups are successful is that they hire biologists to study the areas and build their case with constituents like parks districts, water districts, and the DFG. If that fails they engage lawyers or law students to file lawsuits. They understand the required strategy to get what they want. Most fisherman don't understand the process for fish and game laws so we feel helpless or steamrolled when we see some outcome like closing these back ponds to fishing.

As fishermen we have no real reason to organize, hire biologists and engage lawyers because we aren't asking for things to be closed. But when things do get closed, we need to wake up, get informed, and be strategic about the response. For now I'm negotiating with these groups in good faith. No reason not to. This is square one. But as I learn more, if it becomes obvious that there are differences in opinion that can't be resolved then I'll look in to other options.

Bottom line, being angry and upset is a natural response, but it doesn't accomplish anytyhing. I'm interested in getting results. Results to me mean a situation where I can grab my float tube after work, hike up over the hill and catch a few bass in those back ponds. That's the goal I'm fighting for. So far I haven't felt like I've needed help to fight. I went to Sacramento by myself yesterday. But in the future I might need a lot of help. Fishermen need a victory in a landscape where all we see is more closures and less opportunities. This is a perfect chance to get that victory.

Please keep reading this thread, or the thread on my site. I'll keep both up to date.

[CN]

CN, thanks for the historical info. Not being a steelhead fisherman, I never explored Alameda Creek much during the 7 years when I lived in Fremont. It's a beautiful stretch of water through Niles, but not much to look at in the channelized section down by the quarry lakes and east. The part I am concerned with here is the Arroyo Del Valle tributary.

So look, I just got involved in this thing about 2 weeks ago when I saw a no-fishing sign at Shadow Cliffs, so I don't know the views of all the people who were involved in shutting down fishing in Alameda Creek. But I have spent a lot of time in the past 2 weeks researching, getting informed, and studying the strategy that was used to get these regulations turned in to law.

This might seem like some mysterious process or conspiracy but it's not. Groups like the Alameda Creek Alliance have no special powers, or rights. They are people just like you and me, and therefore we are equal in the eyes of the law making process. The reason these groups are successful is that they hire biologists to study the areas and build their case with constituents like parks districts, water districts, and the DFG. If that fails they engage lawyers or law students to file lawsuits. They understand the required strategy to get what they want. Most fisherman don't understand the process for fish and game laws so we feel helpless or steamrolled when we see some outcome like closing these back ponds to fishing.

As fishermen we have no real reason to organize, hire biologists and engage lawyers because we aren't asking for things to be closed. But when things do get closed, we need to wake up, get informed, and be strategic about the response. For now I'm negotiating with these groups in good faith. No reason not to. This is square one. But as I learn more, if it becomes obvious that there are differences in opinion that can't be resolved then I'll look in to other options.

Bottom line, being angry and upset is a natural response, but it doesn't accomplish anytyhing. I'm interested in getting results. Results to me mean a situation where I can grab my float tube after work, hike up over the hill and catch a few bass in those back ponds. That's the goal I'm fighting for. So far I haven't felt like I've needed help to fight. I went to Sacramento by myself yesterday. But in the future I might need a lot of help. Fishermen need a victory in a landscape where all we see is more closures and less opportunities. This is a perfect chance to get that victory.

Please keep reading this thread, or the thread on my site. I'll keep both up to date.

Swimbait I cant take credit for that post. Being the computor idiot I am I must have done something wrong. I think it was Jimmy87

[swimbait]

No problem. I see how it came through because you accidentally did reply with quote, and Jimmy87 deleted his original post.

[jgomes]

I grew up in pleasanton and fished the back lakes in every place possible. i want to be able to fish them again. Last year at this time i could go down there and use just a nightcrawler and texas rig it, no weight. All you had to do was drop it in at the edge and walk back a ways just as if you were bait fishing. 2-3 even 4 pounders would bite. Some of the most consistent bass bite for shore anglers around here.
The Arroyo obviously starts at Del Valle there is a natural spring that comes up in the back lakes it then flows all through pleasanton, meeting up with the other runoff from dublin at the 680 freeway it then flows along foothill road then meets at niles canyon then goes all the way through fremont and into the bay right across the bay is coyote creek that flows all the way to san gregorio beach at the ocean
I have caught steelhead there at the river mouth at san gregorio beach. I would hope that someday the fish dams and spillways throughout the water flow eventually are removed so that the steelhead might return to downtown pleasanton.
FYI some of the best bass fishing from the arroyo is further down the creek in pleasanton and off foothill rd. which is illegal to fish anyway because of trespassing.
I think i will wait 2 years and see if they actually fix or remove any of the cement fish dams.
I look forward to the day we can fish it. The bass may actually bite on a variety of lures again.