By Ed McGlinn
Michigan, the Wolverine State. Where the only wolverines are in the Detroit Zoo or on the playing fields of Ann Arbor. Where the world's largest mayfly is sometimes called a fishfly, and often called a caddis. Where the alias of the walleye is pickerel, and a freshwater rainbow is boldly named a steelhead.
A state blessed with 36,000 miles of rivers and streams, 40,000 square miles of Great Lakes waters, and 11,000 inland lakes. A state that stretches more than 700 miles from the smallmouth waters of Lake Erie to the brook-trout streams near the copper mines of the Keweenaw.
The birthplace of Trout Unlimited, Michigan has been without catch and release regulations on any trout waters until recent years. (The only no-kill waters at the beginning of the Eighties were in the Upper Peninsula's Sylvania Tract - but they were for bass, mandated by Federal regulations, not by state law.) On the twenty-fifth anniversary celebration of T.U.'s birth in 1984, Michigan lacked (and still does) regulations that define fly fishing.
Michigan. Once home to grayling and large stands of virgin white pine, it now has coho and Chinook salmon and too many miles of stumps and jack pine. A state where rainbow trout are often caught in a deceptively clean Detroit River, but where Chinook in Lake Michigan are dying from a yet undetermined disease.
Michigan. A state of obvious contrasts, complexities, and contradictions, defying any simple analysis of environmental problems, especially as they relate to fly fishing. A bellwether state for the upper midwest and Great Lakes region, it is the home of some of the best trout headwaters of the St. Lawrence River. With a long history of fly fishing, it can only offer the angler an uncertain future as the last decade of the century begins.
Our environmental problems are many, but they're not much different than any other state east of the Mississippi. They also vary in nature and degree depending on the region. The root cause is overpopulation - of man, not trout or bass. As a wise swamp critter observed many years ago: "We have met the enemy, and he is us."
Development and Rivers of Sand
Sedimentation is today's major pollution problem, especially in our northern trout streams. However, it adversely afflicts all our rivers, including some very good bass rivers in the lower part of the state.
Sources are many. Stream bank erosion, road crossings, cultivated fields, drainage from development and urbanization, gas and oil well development, and logging are examples. Sand "loading," the storage of sediment in stream channels - present in all northern streams - is the result of indiscriminate logging when lumber barons raped the land and devastated the rivers with log drives in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Much of the sand load generated more than a hundred years ago has not yet washed through.
It doesn't take much sand moving through our streams to reduce trout populations significantly. Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) biologists believe that a concentration of but twenty parts per million (PPM) will reduce trout populations by ten pounds per acre. (A stream eight feet wide and one mile long equals about an acre of water.) Many of our streams have bedloads of 50-100 PPM, according to Gaylord Alexander, one of our top fishery research biologists. Alexander believes the control of continuing erosion and the elimination of the present bedload of sand would, on average, double trout populations.
Whole watersheds, severely damaged by the wholesale removal of bank vegetation caused by logging, were then subjected to floods, log drives, and eventually fires. When fire destroyed the remaining organic matter the stream banks and uplands were often left with dry sands, barren of vegetation. We now find, a century later, many of these sandy soils are unable to support plant species.
The expansion of cities near trout streams requires more roads, parking lots, ditches, and storm sewers. Cottages, manicured lawns, gas stations, commercial and industrial development, and four-lane highways multiply the threat to our waterways. And let's not forget golf courses; condo developers insist on golf courses, especially along trout streams. (We now have a lieutenant governor who as a state senator tried to exempt golf courses from the wetlands' protection laws.)
Development is an anathema for all water resources; it leads to more pollution and less water in our streams. It leads to road improvements, often with streams unprotected at crossings. Road grading becomes more frequent, with even more sediment during rains and snow melt. Reduced stream flow results in greater concentrations of present day pollutant discharges.
In some places, I hate to say, northern Michigan is assuming the shoddy chrome-and-asphalt veneer of southeastern Michigan. "North woods sprawl" diminishes the supply of water to charge aquifers, reducing the cold clean groundwater so important for trout habitat. More surface drainage means greater spring flooding and lower, warmer summer flows.
Alexander describes "north woods sprawl" as aesthetic pollution and observes we are "junking up all our water frontage with developments."
The Ambience of Rivers
Paul Young stopped fishing the Mainstream Au Sable in the late Forties because of commercial canoes; it didn't take long after the war to make the river below Grayling and Roscommon unfit for daytime fishermen. Glen Sheppard, the intrepid editor and publisher of The North Woods Call, writes, "The canoes ... drove Dad from the river (the South Branch) in the 1940s. That took a big chunk out of my heart, which is still there, below the High Banks. ... The most gut-wrenching fight I've lost has been to commercial canoes. (And I love to canoe: it is one of man's beautiful inventions.)" Tom McGuane, who grew up in Michigan and learned to fish for trout in our northern streams, never fished the Au Sable; "it seemed too busy twenty-five years ago." His favorites were the Sturgeon and the Little Manistee.
Our rivers are "too busy" today. Since the Fifties, the fishermen have fought river overuse by canoes, and we have lost. There has been some regulation of commercial canoe liveries, enforced by the U.S. Forest Service, on rivers such as the Pere Marquette and the Pine. For rivers outside national forests, such as the upper Au Sable, the Michigan DNR has been ineffective.
Those who live along the river, and those who visit to fish, have their favorite horror stories about canoes and the behavior of those enjoying a "pristine wilderness experience." Fishermen, especially on summer weekends, leave the river to the canoes during the day. Unfortunately, there are some good daytime hatches in the early and late season, and the blue-winged olives are common on overcast July and August days; conflicts between unregulated canoes and fishermen continue.
Conflicts and the pressures of too many people cloud the future of fly fishing on many of our streams. Leland Day wrote, on Opening Day in 1974, "... it is now very much a possibility that the Au Sable will be unable to hold its own against we humans much longer. If the time comes when we cannot bring ourselves to save this river, then Opening Day will remain only in the memories of those who lived in the years when the river retained much of its pristine glory. ... I believe strongly that we fishermen hope to hang onto it. I wish we knew how. So far, we have not shown that we do." Leland was writing about the Au Sable, but he could have been writing about any of our other favorite Michigan streams.
There are too many people using our rivers, but there is also inadequate public access. There also are too many cabins stifling our rivers in the Lower Peninsula. When this reaches a certain level, the rivers lose their charm. Those who still love and fish the Au Sable and the Manistee endure the canoes and overdevelopment, and each other, because these rivers remain lovely and productive; they are the heart of fly fishing in Michigan.
The Au Sable Mainstream and its branches constitute one of the largest "spring creeks" in the country. Over eighty percent of the total flow entering Lake Huron comes from springs fed by groundwater. The total length of the Mainstream is about 150 miles with over a third submerged in impoundments from power dams. The only rivers in Michigan that I believe approach the Au Sable in "spring creek" attributes (there surely must be others) are two small rivers in the western part of the state, the Platte and the Crystal. They may very well have over ninety percent of their flowage derived from groundwater.
The Platte is special. It is a beautiful river, unimpeded by power dams. However, in recent years, excessive runs of salmon and discharges from the large hatchery located upstream near Honor have polluted and damaged it. The river also suffers from excessive development along its fragile banks, from too many snaggers, from erosion, and simply from neglect. It one time had a strong resident population of brown trout - which I understand has disappeared - and in the Fifties and early Sixties, magnificent hatches of mayflies, especially Hexagenia. It is my understanding that repeated applications of lampricide have all but destroyed the Hex hatches.
The Platte was, in my judgment, one of the most beautiful rivers in the Lower Peninsula. I haven't fished it now for over five years. I am afraid of what I would find.
Unfortunately, the Au Sable and the Manistee are intertwined with the 150,000 acres of Camp Grayling, a major training facility for the Fourth Army. Twenty years ago, the military use of this area was a minor nuisance, easily avoided during the brief summer training, or mildly tolerated. Over the last decade, the training and all its attributes have doubled, and the army plans to expand this facility and to increase its use over the next decade.
The ambience of Grayling is often like a war zone. The rivers still flow, the trout are there, but when you can't hear the trout rise, when helicopter gunships, bombing and artillery keep you from a good night's sleep, the total experience is destroyed.
Of major concern to fly fishers are the loss of stream habitat and the alteration of the natural character of rivers and their corridors. The DNR has learned it is difficult and very expensive to construct in-stream habitat on a large scale. Fisheries biologist Dave Smith observes that "we have not been able to maintain structures built just twenty years ago."
Public ownership of land on our many blue ribbon trout streams wherever possible is imperative - but impossible, at least in our lifetimes. The next best option is the "natural rivers" and other greenbelt zoning programs to protect habitat and return streambanks to their natural condition.
The Toxic Future
Probably the most serious environmental concern in the future is the known and, more often, unknown pollution of our waters by toxic substances, derived usually, but not always, from industrial and agricultural operations, and the wastes so produced.
In the innocent Fifties, we equated pollution with what we could see or smell; the debris found in and along our waterways, the eutrophication with algae blooms, and the turbidity of sedimentation. With today's sophisticated knowledge, we now know the most dangerous pollution is more often that which we can't see.
These toxins are found in all the Great Lakes States. We all are now knowledgeable about PCBs and DDT. (The extensive poisoning of Michigan by PBBs, similar to PCBs, more than a decade ago is not as well known.) All of these synthetic organics and many other toxic substances, including many diverse polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), phenols, mercury, zinc, asbestos, mine tailings, lead, copper, and other heavy metals, cyanide, arsenic, and lord knows what else, are found in many of Michigan's waters.
Warnings about eating fish from Lake Michigan, and even from inland lakes and some of our rivers, have been issued over the last two decades by state, federal, and private organizations. This is not the place to argue the pros ands cons of such warnings. It is important, however, to recognize that our environment is heavily contaminated with very toxic materials, and that these substances have the potential of doing serious damage to our fisheries, if not to the health of animals, including Homo Sapiens, who eat fish. Simply put, most of these toxins are not only carcinogenic but also mutagenic; they can cause serious and fatal disease, and change the very nature of life.
I can hear my friend, the skeptical fly fisher, who just purchased a three hundred dollar graphite rod, reply: "So what! The fish are still there. The fishing will still be good, and as long as I don't eat them there's nothing to worry about. Besides, isn't this a good way to promote catch and release?"
My friend is right - in the short run. In the long run, I don't believe we want to fish in a polluted environment for mutant or sick fish with strange tumors and bent spines. Besides, the waders and fly lines necessary to fish these waters would have to be made of much stronger stuff than vinyl, rubber, or neoprene. But I'm sure our creative chemists would be up to the task.
Michigan waters contain PBBs, DDT, PCBs, and many other toxic substances. The Michigan DNR has stated, in recent years, that PCB levels are decreasing in Great Lakes salmon. It is very likely that salmon have redistributed these persistent organics in the environment, for example to the streams (where they die) and hence to the birds and animals that feed on them, possibly to the resident fish population, to those who have eaten salmon (I have eaten a lot), to the dogs and cats that have been fed commercial products processed from harvested salmon, and to numerous landfills and backyard gardens ... and to where else? The salmon have probably been cleansing the Great Lakes of PCBs for the last two decades.
Michigan borders four of the five Great Lakes. Forty percent of all Great Lakes waters are within Michigan's boundaries. In 1985, the International Joint Commission (formed in 1909 to protect and manage the Great Lakes) identified chemical contamination as a "principal issue facing the Great Lakes," and cited forty-two "hot spots" where pollution is of known particular concern; ten are completely within Michigan borders. Four others are shared with Wisconsin or Ontario.
We will list but a few to give an idea of the magnitude of the Lakes' pollution. Tumors have been identified in walleye from Torch Lake, contiguous to Lake Superior; the cause still unknown. PCBs contaminate sediments in the U.P.'s Manistique River flowing into Lake Michigan. White Lake, contiguous to Lake Michigan on our "Gold Coast" has contaminated groundwater containing chloroform, tichlorethylene (TCE), carbon tetrachloride, and perchloroethylene entering the lake from a defunct chemical plant. Saginaw River and Bay have toxic organics, contaminated sediments, eutrophication, and contamination of fish from municipal and industrial discharges, runoff, and sediment contamination. Heavy metals, toxic organics, municipal wastewater, and contaminated sediments plague the Rouge River flowing into the Detroit River.
Are these the worst of the forty-two? The Rouge and White Lake are likely to be in the top five. But Waukegon harbor in Wisconsin may be the worst; there are at least 100,000 tons of PCBs in the bottom. No one knows what to do about it, so all harbor use has been abandoned. In most places along the "Fifth Coast" of North America, the dredging of harbors continues in spite of contaminated sludge, according to William Ashworth in his book, "The Late, Great Lakes." Most of this toxic sludge is then dumped in the center of the lake - in deep water. But Waukegon harbor is so badly contaminated the dredging has been discontinued, and the harbor is filling in.
My skeptical friend again: "But I don't fish in these places, especially in Waukegon harbor. What does this have to do with my sport?" My reply is "probably nothing - right now." But these toxic pollutants are persistent and will spread: in the long run they have the potential of affecting the fish population in places where we, including my friend, do fish.
And as I write, these toxins are spreading. About fifteen years ago, a research team found PCBs and other toxins in fish from a lake in Isle Royale. The toxic pathway was airborne, in rain or snow. We now know that these industrial poisons are everywhere, even in the most remote reaches of the Arctic, and in snowpack on the highest mountains.
Dave Smith believes that the airborne toxin pollution problem can be solved in the long run but will be much more difficult than surface discharge control. He hopes that if the same degree of improvement, made in the past two decades with surface discharges, can be sustained, we will see significant progress in the next decade.
Point source toxin concentrations are not confined to the big lakes; they accompany heavy industry, intensive agriculture, and indiscriminate dumping. Fortunately, most of our blue-ribbon trout streams are in areas that lack heavy industrial development, or where soils and climate prohibit successful agriculture. This is not so for our southern bass streams.
Nor for some of our best trout streams. Camp Grayling, at the headwaters of two blue-ribbon trout streams is an example of serious concern. The firing of guns and the explosion of shells and bombs is a chemical process that leaves significant toxic substances in combustion gas effluents and ground residues. An artillery or bombing range can accumulate, over decades of use (such as those at Grayling), a significant amount of toxic residues - along with unexploded ordnance. The Michigan National Guard has now fenced off thousands of acres of "ruined" land, which either cannot be reclaimed or which would be prohibitively expensive to reclaim because of the amount of unexploded shells and bombs on the ranges. The Michigan DNR has not determined, or even studied, the significance of the ingravescent toxic residues left from exploded shells and bombs.
Camp Grayling is at the headwaters of the Au Sable and Manistee. Wurtsmith Air Force Base is near the mouth of the Au Sable where it enters Lake Huron. This base has polluted the groundwater with TCE and other toxins that have affected waterways, such as lakes, streams, and the Au Sable. The Air Force for decades has indiscriminately disposed of used TCE, a "miracle cleaner" and known carcinogen, either by dumping or washing it off the tarmacs into the soil. Investigators have found additional hazardous waste sites containing other toxins on the base. Many believe that Wurtsmith may be the most contaminated site in the state.
One of the more disheartening aspects of both the Camp Grayling (which has dumped raw sewage into a feeder stream of the Manistee) and Wurtsmith cases, is the suspicion that the DNR has known of the nocuous conditions for many years and has been unable to do anything about either. In both cases the conditions became public through private citizen action, with little DNR initiative.
Concrete and Acid
What about dams? In spite of the success of some tailwater trout fisheries below very large (and deep) reservoirs, the environmental effects of dams around the country are negative. In Michigan, tailwater fisheries have not developed; here, dams have destroyed prime trout water since concrete was poured.
There are 113 hydro dams in Michigan, affecting forty-nine rivers - almost every major river in the state. They impound over 600 miles of rivers, dewater fifty-six river miles, and influence through their operation almost 1000 river miles. In return these facilities provide less than two percent of the electricity produced in the state.
Twenty-seven Michigan dams will have their licenses renewed in the next three years. Six are on the Au Sable and two on the Manistee. Of the remaining, thirteen are in the Upper Peninsula. Most are on trout rivers, usually on the lower stretches. When constructed, there was no concern about protecting fisheries, wildlife, or any other environmental values. The licensing process, over the next three years, provides Michigan fishermen the first opportunity to improve or safeguard the aquatic environment of twenty-four river systems, including some of our most important rivers, for the next three to five decades.
The Au Sable dams destroy or damage more than eighty miles of what could be blue ribbon trout water, and produce but forty megawatts of electricity (at peak capacity). Many fishermen agree with John Robertson, the Director of Fisheries for the DNR, that "dams are a scourge on the face of Michigan." Most of us also agree with Haig-Brown, and want "to be near rivers." Over the next several years fishermen will be fighting to free the Au Sable and other blue-ribbon rivers of concrete, or at least to mitigate the damaging effects of the remaining dams.
Many believe that dams are clean power producers, free of adverse environmental effects. Acid rain is well known to be the result of "dirty" power. However, they have some things in common.
They both destroy rivers. In Michigan, dams have buried our rivers under ponds, subjected them to extreme fluctuations of flow, and have warmed them beyond the tolerance of trout. Acid rain also has the long term potential of destruction. Furthermore, Michigan dams have created useless and almost sterile lakes; acid rain over the years is doing the same, as it has in other parts of our country, in Canada, and in Scandinavia. There are natural sources of sulfur and nitrogen emissions which contribute to acid rain. However, there is no doubt about the sources of the modern threat of acid rain: our technical society with heavy demands of electricity, produced mostly by burning coal, and a dependence on petroleum to get us from our homes to the trout streams.
(But do not assume that a less industrialized society lacking our addiction to electricity, and without our obsession with cars, is safe from acid rain. China has a serious problem and it all stems from intensive use of coal, mostly for heating and industrial processes.)
Acid rain, like any acidity, is measured on the pH scale. This scale is logarithmic and ranges from 0 (very acidic) to 14 (very alkaline). Unpolluted rain has a pH of 5.6; a neutral reading is 7.0. A pH of 4.0 is ten times more acidic than a pH of 5.0, and 3.0 is a hundred times more acidic than 5.0.
Michigan has sampled rain at six sites for almost a decade; during this time, it averaged between ten to forty times more acidic than unpolluted rain. Last year, Michigan was one of three states with the most acidic rainfall, some of it as acidic as vinegar.
Scientists have known for some time that acid rain in significant doses disrupts wildlife and reproductive cycles. reduces crop and forest yields, erodes stone buildings, and releases toxic heavy metals, such as lead, copper, aluminum, cadmium, and mercury into groundwater, rivers, and lakes. These metals, normally immobilized in soil, are dissolved by acids, move through the soil with the rain, and eventually are discharged to lakes and streams, already stressed by lowered pH, causing further damage to aquatic life. It is believed the leaching effects of acid rain on soils has caused mercury contamination of some U.P. lakes.
Lakes and streams in the western Upper Peninsula, underlaid with granite, lack the buffering capacity necessary to neutralize the rain. A recent survey found about forty percent of the lakes in the central peninsula were acidified. A federal study recently identified the Upper Peninsula and northern Wisconsin as one of six areas in the nation having the most acidic lakes and streams.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service claims that the fish we fly fishers desire the most - smallmouth bass, rainbow, and brown trout - are unable to survive in water with a pH of less than 5.0. Our favorite, the native brook trout is a little more tolerant. Mayflies will disappear sooner at a pH of less than 6.0; acid-tolerant insects such as water boatmen will thrive even at a pH of 3.5.
Fish and other aquatic life, especially in their early stages of life, require water within a specific range of pH. The low pH of acid rain increases the mortality and lowers reproduction rates. Scientists suspect that constant exposure to highly acidic water also makes mature aquatic life susceptible to early death, possibly by altering metabolic rates.
And don't forget acid snow. Acid in snow migrates to the bottom and is rapidly released during spring thaws. The snowpack has been likened to a sponge, which when warmed is given a "squeeze," concentrating the acid and releasing it with the first melt; our rivers then experience a rapid rise in acidity - called "acid shock." Early meltwater can be ten times more acidic than the remaining snowpack. This surge in acid occurs at a critical time with fish in poor condition; the rainbows in northern rivers are either spawning, or ready to spawn, and the brown and brook fry from the previous fall are emerging. Trout eggs and fry are much less tolerant of increased acidity than older fish. (Ten years ago a friend measured the acidity of core samples collected from the early March snowpack near the Au Sable; the average was twenty times more acidic than unpolluted snow.)
When the ground is frozen, buffering can't take place. This means that "acid shock" can be as severe in the Lower Peninsula as in the Upper.
Even with unfrozen soil, continued acid rain lowers the soil's buffering capability; in saturated soil the acid runoff goes directly into lakes and streams, with traumatic effect on fish and other aquatic life. Furthermore, the acid releases essential nutrients, making the soil less productive and increasing erosion.
Biologists have assumed that Lower Peninsula waters are immune because of soil buffering. However, we should consider acid rain to be a serious threat to our fishing future in both peninsulas. There is more buffering in the Lower Peninsula soils, but it can deteriorate and be overloaded, especially with acid snowmelt.
Concerning the effects of "acid shock," we should also note that road salt, besides being a serious contaminant itself, can release mercury and undoubtedly other toxic metals strongly held in stream sediments. Moreover, the increase in acidity of waters caused by salt addition also helps to release mercury. Our streams, and the delightful finned creatures we pursue, then get a double whammy in early spring from acid snowmelt and the accumulation of salt (or brine) used on our roads throughout the winter.
Salmon, Skamania, and Sand Traps
I have briefly surveyed a few of the major environmental issues affecting our fly fishing future as we begin the Nineties. Much more could be said. Such issues as snagging, poaching, lack of stream and lake access, the destruction of rivers and resident fish populations by heavy runs of "anadramous" fish, overuse of some rivers and lakes, unregulated use conflicts, and "Indian treaty rights" are examples that should be more thoroughly discussed.
Moreover, we should highlight some positives: the successes of the past that have improved our angling future.
To begin, many private organizations have helped in the protection and enhancement of our rivers and lakes. Without them, and their initiatives, our waters would be much worse today.
The introduction of salmon into the Great Lakes must be given a mixed review. It satisfied its primary objective: the elimination of the annual alewife dieoff. For over two decades, it has provided an excellent big water fishery. On some rivers it has given us the chance to catch large fish.
The DNR originally intended the salmon to provide only a big water sport and commercial fishery, with the surplus harvested at weirs for commercial use. However, PCBs polluted the fish which then could not be safely eaten. They migrated into every river and creek and reduced resident fish populations. In some instances, dead salmon have over-enriched rivers. On the other hand, Gaylord Alexander has pointed out that while dead salmon enrich our rivers, this enrichment produces greater smolt production. (In his view, the total result is positive, if the goal is a salmon fishery.)
Possibly the most serious environmental effect is the inescapable certainty that these Pacific imports will eventually compete with native salmon in the Atlantic.
However, the DNR deserves a modest passing grade, even though to most fly fishermen the salmon have been more nuisance than success. A prevalent opinion is somewhat neutral; the program may have relieved the rivers of excessive fishing pressure during the summer.
I don't wish to leave the impression that fly fishing for stream salmon has not developed in Michigan. I just insist that the drawbacks, such as the legitimization of snagging, have outweighed the benefits. A much wiser use of funds from the viewpoint of the fly fisherman would have been a dramatic expansion of rainbow and brown trout plantings (with possibly the introduction of landlocked Atlantic salmon and sea trout).
We should praise the DNR for its successful program of lake-run rainbow, including the Skamania which gives us a summer "steelhead" run. DNR programs on coastal brook trout, lake trout, splake, lake run browns, grayling, Atlantic salmon, and Quebec brook trout are also credible, although some have been only marginally successful or have failed.
The DNR has improved stream trout habitat with sand traps, erosion control and additional cover, on almost all watersheds, often with the support of private organizations. (Without private groups like TU and FFF, and their initiatives, our rivers would be much worse.) However, so much needs to be done, with not enough funds. River rehabilitation, which must include the elimination of the suffocating sand bedload, will be very expensive, and will take many years.
We now have strong leadership in the DNR Fisheries Division. With the support of the Natural Resources Commission, we recently got no-kill regulations on the "Holy Water" of the Au Sable Mainstream, and earlier on a short stretch of the South Branch. The protection and improvement of all our fisheries require additional restrictive regulations.
Rick Clark, DNR research biologist, believes that "we have the opportunity to expand and improve fly fishing in the 1990s, especially on warmwater streams with the focus on smallmouth bass." To Rick, "Warmwater streams in Michigan are like the last frontier for fisheries management." Over two-thirds of our rivers are warmwater. While some are very good, others are degraded if not dismal. Rick likens the present status of our warmwater fisheries to that of coldwater (trout and grayling) during the logging era: "they have been used and abused without consideration for the value of the fishery." We have done much to restore our trout streams from the abuses of the lumber barons, and we can do the same for warmwater streams. I hope that Rick is justified in his belief that "we will go a long way in restoring these rivers in the 1990s."
The Bad, The Profane, and Too Many People
Some may insist I paint a too dismal picture of the environmental issues affecting the fly fishing future in Michigan. However, anyone who fished Michigan's waters in the Fifties cannot be an optimist in the Nineties. Just as I could never experience the Au Sable as Paul Young did in the Thirties and Forties, the younger fishermen of today will never see the rivers in the same way I have.
Rick Clark is more an optimist - and much younger. He reminds me that "there have been many good environmental laws and programs enacted in the last two decades which have enhanced public awareness of fisheries, wildlife, and pollution issues, and have caused a great improvement in water quality." He is, of course, correct; let us hope that these laws and programs, made more effective and enlarged, will give even greater protection in the future.
Even though sedimentation (erosion and the sand load in our rivers), overuse, over-fishing, dams, over-development, diminished wetlands, lack of land use controls, canoes - and on and on - are the more serious problems facing us today, toxic pollution may likely be our greatest concern in future decades. This problem is so grave - we may just be seeing the smallest tree in a large forest - it can't be ignored. We also should realize it is now insoluble; we don't know how large it is or how to get rid of the contamination. Industrial society must reduce the use of toxic materials, and when used (they can't be avoided) we must control or immobilize the waste. We are not doing very well at this, but at least we know how; we have to do better - very soon.
It may be a toss-up whether acid rain or toxic rain is, or will be, the more serious. Acid rain may not be as poisonous as toxic rain, but it is more pervasive, at least right now, and it releases toxic metals from the soil. We know how to reduce acid rain, but as long as we burn coal, or use petroleum, we will never eliminate it. The reduction of acid rain is, and will continue to be, very expensive; it requires courageous political directives and strong legislation. So far, our elected representatives have found it politically expeditious to duck this issue.
In Michigan, dams have been very destructive to our fisheries. We now have a chance to do something about a few of them. The fight will be very political; considering past conflicts in Michigan when the environment is up against big bucks, I can't be optimistic.
There are a few issues I didn't address, but not because they lack importance. Indian "treaty rights" is a volatile absurdity that has seriously influenced sport fishing. Judging the political climate, this will get worse before a solution is found - if it ever is. Oil and gas drilling have come to the north woods with the threat of pollution and stream erosion from brine pits and pipeline stream crossings. ORV use on and near our rivers and streams has increased over the years; it is a serious source of erosion and a major nuisance. (The DNR estimates damage done by ORVs in less than one-third of Michigan's counties to be more than a billion dollars.) The increased salinity of rivers and lakes, especially the Great Lakes, from road salt and brine runoff has reached alarming levels. It already seems to have affected some lower forms of aquatic life. (Maybe in 50-100 years, the Great Lakes salmon will truly be anadramous.) Alexander doubts that salinity will become serious enough to cause problems for trout, but points out that other contaminants associated with waste brine may become a problem.
In the arid west, the fight over water, i.e., water rights, is undoubtedly the most serious problem facing rivers. Recently I have learned that this issue now presents a serious threat to the rivers in the upper midwest. (It probably already has diminished them.) Agricultural irrigation increased four-fold in the 1970s and doubled again in the 1980s. Most of this irrigation comes from groundwater and streams, not from the big lakes. Moreover, this problem in Michigan is not confined to the southern Lower Peninsula; irrigation with large sprinkling systems has come to parts of the northern Lower and Upper Peninsulas. The DNR is concerned; our laws are probably as weak in this area as they are in the west. It would be tragic for Michigan, surrounded by so much fresh water, to have its stream flows diminished by excessive withdrawals, thereby reducing and degrading stream habitat, increasing summer water temperatures, reducing oxygen, and concentrating pollutants.
A final note. Most of our problems, if not all, result from a burgeoning population. There are too many people competing for too few resources. It may seem frivolous to have such trivial concerns as rivers, lakes, and trout when the exorbitant population growth in the world leads to famine and wars.
However, if we in North America do not soon reach a zero population growth - negative would be much better - trout fishing will go the way of buffalo hunting. Future generations will only know it as an excursion to some amusement park where they will draw lots to cast worms in planted waters. In the meantime, if I was managing the Trout Fishing World, I would keep the joys of this sport a secret; I would promote other activities, like golf, tennis, sailing, bungee diving, scuba diving and hang gliding off the eastern slopes of the Big Horn Mountains. That's how selfish I would be.
RWOL
© Copyright 1997 - , Anglers of the Au Sable, Inc. All rights reserved. Last modified: January 20, 2005
