Improvement? Restoration?

I see this happen every time a new easement is purchased. I hear from people in the know that it is done to stabilize the banks and to encourage invertebrate growth.

I also hear that it is a “Restoration” effort to make the streams like they were before human ruined it. The rolling prairies as depicted in the below map is the “ONE” areas.

Anyone that fishes the Wisconsin Driftless Area knows that the “Heart” of the driftless area centers around CRAWFORD,RICHLAND and VERNON counties.

Unless you are color blind and can’t count past the number ONE it is obvious that the BEST counties on the map to fish were category THREE and FOUR before man messed them up.

Categories:

One: Rolling Prairie
Two: Oak Savannah Bur Oak and White Oak
Three: Southern Oak Forest White, Black and Red Oak
Four: Southern Mesic Forest Sugar Maple, Basswood and Elm

Almost all of Richland County and Vernon County were Southern Mesic Forest with Sugar Maple, Basswood and Elm.

Crawford County has the same Southern Mesic Forest and Southern Oak Forest with a little Oak Savannah splashed in.

Please quit making my streams in to Rolling Prairies devoid of trees. The fishing is NOT better after it is done and the premise for doing the “improvement” or “restoration” is flawed.

The streams look terrible after the clear cutting and manicuring of the streams.

If you need a place to spend your money on, please focus on easement purchases and not scaring the streams.

That is your opinion. Can I see your proof. You should investigate the shocking data from before a restoration to the shocking data after a restoration before you make your conclusion. Also, root wads from trees next to the bank is one of the causes of bank erosion. Where did you get your cold water fisheries degree from. I would rather be able to fish a stream with restoration in twenty years instead of streams filled in with sediment. Restoration helps prevent sedimentation by establishing stream sinuosity and making them self scouring. I sure hope you are not supporting the do nothing philosophy onto your young students so that there is not good trout fishing for their kids when the grow up. Luckily you are not in a position to control this issue.

Couldn’t agree more Joe Joe!

Check out these two pics. One is pre-project and one post-project. Which one would you rather fish in? Notice the color of the water and the terribly eroded banks in the first photo. These stream stabilization prjects are doing amazing things for our surface waters. To have someone argue against them because of some tree removal is insane.

Look at all of the destination pieces in fishing magazines.

Do you see photos like this?

or this?

I rest my case.

Quote:

---

That is your opinion. Can I see your proof. You should investigate the shocking data from before a restoration to the shocking data after a restoration before you make your conclusion. Also, root wads from trees next to the bank is one of the causes of bank erosion. Where did you get your cold water fisheries degree from. I would rather be able to fish a stream with restoration in twenty years instead of streams filled in with sediment. Restoration helps prevent sedimentation by establishing stream sinuosity and making them self scouring. I sure hope you are not supporting the do nothing philosophy onto your young students so that there is not good trout fishing for their kids when the grow up. Luckily you are not in a position to control this issue.

---

When I speak to my groups of kids I tell them I don’t like unnatural petting zoos and personally do not fish them.

Quote:

---

That is your opinion. Can I see your proof. You should investigate the shocking data from before a restoration to the shocking data after a restoration before you make your conclusion. Also, root wads from trees next to the bank is one of the causes of bank erosion. Where did you get your cold water fisheries degree from. I would rather be able to fish a stream with restoration in twenty years instead of streams filled in with sediment. Restoration helps prevent sedimentation by establishing stream sinuosity and making them self scouring. I sure hope you are not supporting the do nothing philosophy onto your young students so that there is not good trout fishing for their kids when the grow up. Luckily you are not in a position to control this issue.

---

Did you get your honorary cold water fisheries degree along with your TU Membership?

Quote:

---

because of some tree removal is insane.

---

big trout love cover. Some of my biggest trout have been caught in the root systems of trees that the tree clear cutters would remove.

Call me insane for wanting to catch big trout?

I guess if you have to fish in these artificial man made petting zoos you don’t know much about big trout. Do you hunt in penned in areas too?

I have to agree with Len. My biggest trout have always come in places with natural cover. My experiences with the rip rapped streams seems to be a great place for little trout, not so much for the bigger trout.

I think there is a place for some stream rehabilitation but they always seem to overdo it. And no, I don’t have a degree in fisheries, just 40 years of experience in fishing SW WI trout streams.

Quote:

---

I have to agree with Len. My biggest trout have always come in places with natural cover. My experiences with the rip rapped streams seems to be a great place for little trout, not so much for the bigger trout.

I think there is a place for some stream rehabilitation but they always seem to overdo it. And no, I don’t have a degree in fisheries, just 40 years of experience in fishing SW WI trout streams.

---

51 years of fishing SW Wisconsin. No and I didn’t get a degree in fisheries…..have never had a membership card in TU……..

Quote:

---

Please quit making my streams in to Rolling Prairies devoid of trees.

---

Having no trees on the banks makes for a lot easier casting without a guys flies getting tangled in the brush…..

T

Quote:

---

Luckily you are not in a position to control this issue.

---

You keep on believing that if you want.
http://www.wisconsinoutdoorfun.com/article/20130723/WOF8003/307230027/Blogger-Len-Harris-questions-restoration-improvement-efforts
Affiliated with 12 Northern Wisconsin Newspapers.

http://www.garyengbergoutdoors.com/blog/2013/07/22/restoration-improvement-by-len-harris-7-22-2013/
This blog has a huge readership.

Article will appear in 5 local newspapers.

I write for Midwest Outdoors and have for 5 years.

I have spoken to over 30,000 children over the last 4 years.

I have spoken at the largest fishig show in Wisconsin 2 of the last 4 years.

Len,
There are no trout where my restoration project took place, it’s just a warm-water stream, directly above a lake. The approximately 1500 linear feet of stream was fixed because of severe erosion issues. I believe it was contributing about 100 tons/sediment/year, just from that 1500 ft. of stream.

So do you not care about erosion? Would you rather have trout eggs getting smothered by tons of sediment or loose a few trees? I can understand your frustration of the clear-cutting but you have to see the big picture here.

I’m a bit biased because I make my living doing ecological restoration. I mainly do vegetation restoration and management but I have been involved with streambank stabilization, meandering, rechanneling, and even removing trees. First off, the map at the start of the post is very general. Within the different vegetation types are a mosaic of other types. In your area it is a mix of the woods like on the map as well as prairie, wet meadows, savanna etc. I’m sure this isn’t news. At least in my experience, most of the tree removal and work like in your pictures are in areas that were historically more open. Most of the trees are early successional species like boxelder, ash, invasive woody species. Most are trees less than 40 years old and not what was historically growing at that site. It also isn’t fair to judge these restoration efforts in the first few years before vegetation has matured. In a few years they do look very natural. I have worked closely with a couple of these types of projects and 10 years down the road there is a vast improvement in the numbers and quality of fish. Not to mention the reduction in siltation and damage from moderate flooding.

I am a fan of coarse woody cover and in some of these projects there are large trees cabled and anchored into outside bends to provide habitat and more stability.

I don’t doubt that some of the project areas are poorly chosen but from my professional experience, the long term results are better.

Bear creek project my buddy Mike Barniskis spearheaded was a good project.

One size does not fit all.

The clear cutting in Richland County is embarrassing.

Removing natural vegetation from the stream is not a good solution for fish, water quality, or the over all health of the ecosystem. Wherever you heard that trees cause erosion has caused you to be severely misinformed.

Water causes erosion, not trees (or any other form of vegetation. Streams throughout the driftless area are more vulnerable to erosion because of changes we as people have made to the landscape draining into the streams. Agricultural is intensifying, urban areas are expanding, land is being drained more efficiently by tile, and on and on. In addition to draining the landscape much more quickly, climate change has caused annual precipitation levels to go up several inches/yr in this area. More water + faster drainage = erosion, flooding, poor water quality.

Correct me if I’m wrong Len but you’re point is not that stream stabilization is bad but that it is misplaced. Bank stabilization projects should be targeted in areas where the bank is unstable… in other words there is nothing there to hold it in place (over grazed pastures are good places for instance). BUT… stabilizing banks is not a solution to erosion, flooding, or water quality. The solutions lay in the hands of landowners and the way the land is managed away from the stream. Once the water gets to the stream… there isn’t much we can do. Until people realize that ditch to ditch corn and beans is not sustainable… things will continue to be degraded.

And before it is called into question… both my education and my job are dedicated to this.