Fish lifts.

[Member]

Does anyone know anything about the operation of bthe fish lifts at Hinze and Wyaralong dams?
 When I did a tour ofb the Hinze last byear thye person conduction the tour knew nothing about the operation of the lift except that they culled out the " bad" species.
As the lift is only a one way device would it be considered as a operational fish ladder for SIP application criteria.
Does the operating authority have an obligation to keep the lift in operation for ever?
How often is the entrapment chamber checked and is there any data published on what fish are transported or culled?
 Cheers
Ray

[Member]

This is what was proposed but cant find anything on the final result.Quite a bit of it seems to be suck it and see approach.But they certainly have done a lot to minimize fish damage during overflow events.
 http://www.hinzedamstage3.com/PDF/eisSupplementary/hinze_dam_supp_appendix_e.pdf.
 Cheers
Ray

[Member]

The lift at Wyaralong is bi directional according to this. Could not find anything about the spillway design to minimize fish damage during overflow events or to minimize entrapment in ponds below wall.
 Fishway

Fish passage was required to be provided as part of the design of the Wyaralong Dam project. The design criteria, options and evaluation of options were developed through a series of workshops, which included all the relevant stakeholders. Due to the extensive operation range for both upstream and downstream fish movement, and due to the fact that the fish density is relatively low in the river, the preferred option adopted was a bi-directional fish lift. With this design a single fish lift is used to provide fish movement in both the upstream and downstream directions. This design has significant operational flexibility. It is envisaged that the fish hopper will be in the upstream attracting position most of the time, attracting fish for downstream fish movement. However, the same attraction flow used for attracting fish in this upstream position will also be attracting fish into the trapped area for moving fish upstream. Extensive hydraulic modelling was undertaken to ensure appropriate attraction flows during all of the design conditions.

[Member]

As the lift is only a one way device would it be considered as a operational fish ladder for SIP application criteria.

I think you're confusing Fitzy's recommendation with an official ruling. 

A Stocked Impoundment should be just that.  Every precaution should be taken to stop the stocked fish from exiting the Impoundment and getting into natural waterways.  Releasing Murray Darling species into the Albert Logan system would be against the translocation policies.  River stocking groups operate seperately to Impoundment Stocking Groups and this is how it should remain.  Rivers should have a lot of different regulations regarding which fish can be stocked in an attempt to vary the gene pool of breeding fish.  It would also be unfair to force the SIP holders to pay for fish with the intention of having them exit the Impoundment.

[Member]

At that stage I was not aware that the fish lift was a 2 way device. I think that the LASG only propose to stock mary river cod and bass . With the preponderance of the fish being marys and no mention of yellas. It would be great if the Marys do take but it will be an expensive exercise considering the current cost of Mary fingerlings.
 Cheers
Ray

[Member]

Without trying to rubbish anyone or ignore the policies there are already yellowbelly in the logan river system and do not doubt they are in the albert too.

Maroon dam has been stocked with yellowbelly so i figure it was inevitable.
Murry darling species are east of the devide already and it cant be taken back as we all know. Tilapia in the albert is a bigger worry.

I think the effectiveness and amount of usage these 2 way fish lifts get should be studies and come to a conclusion if they are effective enough to call the impoundment a wild or natural system. I think it could go either way.

Steve

[Member]

Ray,
David Roberts is doing a presentation on another subject at the next PRFMA meeting, as it is he in conjunction with Fisheries that have been doing the trials with the fish lift I am sure he would be happy to answer any questions you have.
The Mary fingerlings are dear but if you were to do a fair dincum cost analysis on producing them they would be sold at a loss. Lucky to have someone producing them IMO.

cheers
Steve

[Member]

Being blessed with 20/20 hindsight, I would have to suggest that the Mary River Cod program could well have caused a lot of damage.  If Mary River Cod didn't exist in the Pine, Brisbane and Logan catchments, why should DEEDI want to put them in there now.  Not enough research has gone into finding out what was there.  MRC stockings, and Murray Cod releases in the Brisbane/Stanley systems could well have killed off the Brisbane River Cod.  DEEDI approving the release of these into rivers where they never existed surely goes against their own translocation policy.  I'd hate to see us get to the point of the Trout Cod overpopulation in Victorian waters, where anglers are throwing them on the bank like carp because that is all they can catch now.  The stunted cod populations along the border rivers should also give cause to more thought going into overstocking the apex predator.

[Member]

Yep hindsight is 20/20, plenty of mistakes made.
Hate to use the term but Wyaralong has a vacant niche, despite Mary's being stocked in the catchment they are not that common, it also will experience a population explosion of carp on a massive scale. Would be pretty surprised if a management plan including reasonably large initial stockings of Mary's was not allowed.
Bottom line is the hybridisation of any of the remnant populations of M. peeli subspecies (if they still exist) in SEQ exept mariensis is irreversible.

[Member]

This is a very good point you make Dale why where the MRC stocked in waters they didnt naturally  come from. I think the only species that is more less of a bad thing than others is australian bass, Not all creeks and rivers that have them now had them before but seem to be a more naturally wide spread fish that doesnt have a profound impact on species living with them.

Has any dam simply been stocked with just bass?

Steve

[Member]

Why were the MRC stocked in waters they didn't naturaly come from ?
Because it was presumed that the endemic M. peeli subspecies that occured in those catchments were extinct.
As there would be very little difference geneticly (though this is debatable in the case of the Coomera and Nerang due to a different geologial time frame for the stream capture) it was considered a viable option to restore the extinct M. peeli subspecies with MRC.
The impoundment stocking program was intended to give people an opportunity to fish for them and thus reduce pressure on the remnant population.
 

[Member]

There is just as much evidence that Barramundi existed in these waterways as well, yet they are not permitted to be stocked.  Unfortunately, in the past, and now, DEEDI have based a lot of things on assumption and personal preference.  Surely 2011 is a good time to stop the double dealing.

[Member]

I think for rivers and streams to be restored to their former glory stocking of non naturally occurring fish should stop, it would not be an overnight affair but could have benefits years in the future.

Nothing is ever cut and dry tho.

[Member]

The biodiversity nazis would agree Steve, but with habitat/stream degradation, barriers etc. even with a massive long term effort not likely to see anything resembling former glory. Personally I dont think yellas and silvers should be stocked east of the divide but they are allowed and people want them stocked. What about Toga or Lungfish neither are endemic to the SEQ streams that now have viable breeding populations ?. You said previously that Bass do little harm outside of their natural range what about the in the streams which hold remnant populations of MRC which had no bass at all prior to stocking ? The questions and permutations are endless, one thing that is certain is there is no such thing as the oft quoted "balance of nature" nature is in a constant and violent state of flux and change which has now been accelerated by man. Cant see that stocking a new impoundment with an apex predator that replaces an extinct one so closely is going to have any effect in the greater scheme of things myself. Good on the guys putting in the work to do it, should get help and support to do it not get bagged  IMHO

[Member]

One thing that i would like to see make a comeback over any bass cod or west devide species is the Jungle perch. But im getting a bit off topic now.

Yes it would be near impossible to take back whats done now.

Steve