How’s the River? 5

Projects & Accomplishments

7

The River Runs Through It

9

Baucus Investigation 11

Inside Story 4

Inside Story 5

Inside Story 6

Inside this issue:

Dear Members,

A s the new president of the Bighorn

River Alliance, I appreci-ate the opportunity to help our organization grow. I will lead with the promise of bringing hope and change. I hope the fish bite, and if not, I will change flies. The Bighorn River ex-perienced a roller coaster year. From water flows as low as 1,800cfs, to a high of 14,000cfs. The high water resulted from low releases all winter and

spring. Fluctuations can be expected on any river, but the Bighorn saw some extremes. Recreational river users and landown-ers were at the mercy of the Bureau of Reclama-tion (BOR). Our biggest obstacle is to be recog-nized by the BOR. A large bureaucracy such as this is not easy to change. but progress is being made. We are asking the BOR to give us a river management plan, recog-nizing the recreational value downstream of the dam.

We have a dedicated and passionate group of Board Members. In this newsletter you will read articles from some of those members. Frank Johnson and his tireless efforts inform you about the Alliance’s Youth Ad-venture Week. Dennis Fischer has committed countless hours of his

From the President

A s project chairman for the Big Horn River

Youth Adventure I must say the 2009 event was a suc-cess beyond my wildest ex-pectations I THINK THE KIDS GOT IT!! I believe we gave them the message

about what a wonderful activity fly fishing can be. Now we must wait and see if they go home and bring others to the sport and con-tinue to share their experi-ence.

As a little back-ground on this project we must go back to the summer of 2008. The observation was made that most of the fly fishermen we see are older fellows. The discus-

Bighorn Youth Adventure Week a Rousing Success by Frank Johnson

Official Newsletter of Bighorn River Alliance November 2009

Volume 4, Issue 2

President

Clint Krumm

Vice-President

Steve Hilbers

Secretary

Zoe Opie

Treasurer

Roger Hile

Directors

Dennis Fischer

Hale Harris

John Sindland

Shawn P. Williams

Advisory Board

Frank Johnson

Doug Haacke

William P. Yellowtail Jr.

Mike Parnell

John May

currents

Continued on pg. 2

Continued on pg. 2

time to create a website for us. And for those of you wondering what the Alliance has done over the past years, the nostal-gic Hale Harris will hearken back on our past accomplishments. We thank our current

members for their contri-butions. As our numbers grow, so does our voice. Your donations help fund our programs. Until our big government bailout arrives, we are solely reli-ant on the charitable do-nations of our members. As a member you can

take credit for helping protect and preserve one of the world’s premier trout rivers. Bring hope and change Clint Krumm President

Fishers Federation’s CEO/President R.P. VanGyten-beek and his Education Spe-cialist Matt Wilhelm and they both thought our idea was a good one. A press release (description of the project) was produced as well as an application form. The press release was circu-lated to Federation Clubs and Councils using the ClubWire Newsletter. Applications were received from kids across America

sion then turned to the fact that someone should be doing something to bring younger people to the sport. Therein was the resolve of the Big Horn River Alliance to do something to intro-duce some youngsters to ‘big time fly fishing’ the Big Horn River, and hopefully send them home with the motivation to share their experience and bring others into the world of fly fishing. We ran our idea past Fly

and we had the sad job of selecting only twelve to come to the Big Horn River for four days of guided fish-ing, fly tying, angling in-struction, sightseeing, and lots of food and fellowship. It was our intention to have kids from ages fourteen to eighteen who “kind of know how” to fly fish and “kind of know how” to tie flies. When the final selections were made we had six kids 14 years old, 1 eighteen

“From the President” continued

“Bighorn Youth Adventure Week” continued

Page 2 Currents Volume 4, Issue 2

River right at the Pipeline. Rising fish!

Nice rainbow, Ben.

B i g h o r n R i v e r Y o u t h A d v e n t u r e 2 0 1 0 Sponsored and produced by Bighorn River Alliance & Federation of Fly Fishers

* June 24—27 (Travel day before and after).

Details & application information available soon. Flyfishing clubs should encourage young people between 14—18 years of age to apply. Both boys and girls are welcome. We are expanding the program to include

more evening activities such as ‘You-row-it Carp Tourney,’ casting games, fly tying games, and other activi-ties. For more information contact:

Frank Johnson tel: (307) 672-5164 11 Spring Creek Lane cell: (307 752-7083

Sheridan, WY 82801 email: bghrnhkl@wavecom.net

years old and the rest in the middle. We had ten boys and two girls. They came to us from New York, Washington D.C., Pennsylvania, Michigan, Minnesota, Tennessee, Texas, Kansas, California, Washington and Illinois. One June 24, 2009 twelve kids arrived at Fort Smith and were welcomed at a Community picnic. At the picnic we had a cast-ing area set up and the youth were given the oppor-tunity to tune up their cast-ing skills. That’s when we met Matt Stout, an eighteen-year-old certified casting

instructor and Youth Ad-venture participant from Flower Mound, Texas. Matt was more than willing to help out in any way he could. Between Matt and several of the guides we ended the evening with twelve kids casting like champs.

By the end of the evening the young people were all friends and friends of ours as well. As it turned out the general consensus among those of us most closely involved we could have never gathered together a better bunch of youngsters. That feeling prevailed throughout the entire Youth Adventure. That evening we learned that dealing with the group was like herding cats. You can’t make them do what you want, but if you leave them alone they do just the right thing. Along with the youngsters

came two dads: Kevin Highway and Joe Garza. Although they arrived from different parts of the coun-try they quickly became friends. (Isn’t it interesting how fly fishing does that to people?) It was our concern that the dads would meddle with the program and just generally be in the way as

over-protective parents. Boy were we wrong. These guys were put to work on the first day of the trip as photographers, taxi drivers, lunch haulers, furniture ar-rangers, slide show produc-ers and general go-to guys. A big thank you to both of them from the Alliance. Each day of the Youth Ad-venture was started at 7:00am at the Big Horn Trout Shop for a quick breakfast and a two hour fly tying session. The fly tying sessions were intended as a time to learn and tie the flies the kids would be fishing with each day. We did that and more. The talent level in the room was impressive. The kids worked together and helped one another so we rapidly moved from one pattern to another. These kids cared about what they were doing and really wanted to have the right things for the Big Horn trout. Over the course of the four days of tying and fishing these young people all caught fish on flies they tied themselves, and most of them caught many fish on their own flies. During each tying session one of the youths was given the opportunity to teach a fly pattern to the group. The patterns were pre se-lected with the hope that their patterns would work on the Big Horn. From

“Over the course of the four days of tying and fishing, these young people all caught fish on flies they tied themselves, and most of them caught many fish on their own flies.”

Page 3 Currents Volume 4, Issue 2

Minnesota, Evan Griggs, brought us the Pink Squirrel Nymph, from Pennsylvania, Stephen Sheetz brought the Czech Nymph; from Texas Matt Stout brought the Sus-pended Midge; and from Tennessee Lee Whitehead brought the Soft Hackle Midge Pupa. At 10:00am each morning six PROFESSIONAL BIG HORN RIVER GUIDES were ready to each take two kids for what we hoped would be the fly fishing highlight of their lives. These guides were so good and had so much fun with these youngsters. Most of them have since said: “Sign me up for this again next year”. Without exception, these kids could fish – some were downright ‘fishy’.

Every evening they came in with great grins on their faces. After all, how can anyone come to the Big Horn River when the fish-ing is at its best and not come in with a grin. The skills and enthusiasm of these guides who volun-teered their time was what made the Youth Adventure - 2009 the great success it was. All of the other stuff we did was secondary. These kids went fishing – big time. We were able to show them what a wonder-ful experience it can be to fish the fabulous Big Horn River with the best guides anywhere and perhaps have the quality fly angling ex-perience of a lifetime. On Sunday evening we held a Closing Banquet and Awards Ceremony. Over

fifty people attended includ-ing many of the guides and service providers. Other parents were there as well to enjoy the festivities. R.P. ‘Pete’ VanGytenbeek drove down from Livingston to attend, make a short speech and to distribute a ‘Certificate of Excellence in Fly Fishing and Fly Tying’. We could have given each and every one of the group the award for: ‘Best Youth Group Participant’. For the full report, includ-ing pictures and com-ments from the kids and their parents (It’s worth looking at—the com-ments tell the real story), go to our website, click on “News,” and then find “The Youth Adventure.”

“Bighorn Youth Adventure Week” continued

“Without exception, these kids could fish—some were downright ‘fishy.’ Every evening they came in with great grins on their faces.”

Page 4 Currents Volume 4, Issue 2

Getting ready to net one near the lower end of the Red Cliffs

Aquatic sowbugs are an impor-tant food source for Bighorn trout

How’s the River? Report from Frank Johnson Interview with Ken Fra-zer, District Fisheries Supervisor, Montana De-partment of Fish Wildlife and Parks October 14, 2009.

Of course, it is al-ways interesting to talk to Ken Frazer about the Big Horn River because he has been so close to it for so many years and cares about the river very much.

The overall impres-sion I got from Ken is that because of the increased flows at critical times over the past three years the river and its fish populations are in good and improving con-dition.

Although numbers of trout from this summer’s shocking survey have not been worked up Ken re-ports that it appears the populations in the upper sections (Afterbay to Big-horn Access) of the river have increased. In the lower section of the river (Bighorn Access to Mallards Landing) there are ‘lots’ of young of the year brown trout – But few young rain-bows. The lack of rainbows could be a result of the late spawn and lower river tem-peratures. It is possible that there are good numbers of rainbows but at the time of the survey they may have been too small to capture.

Ken observed that often, depending on the flows, the small brown trout migrate down to the lower reaches of the river and then return upstream as three year old fish.

As many of you know the Corps of Engi-neers has been conducting a “Side Channel Study”. (The steel posts that have been placed at the inlets to some of the major side channels are a part of the study.) The side channels are very im-portant, not only to spawn-ing, but as places where the small trout can be safe from predators and grow to a size where they can safely move to the main river. One of the outcomes of the study is the suggestion that flows be adjusted during the times of moss displacement (late summer and fall) in order to continue adequate water elevations in the channels to protect the small fish as the seasons pass. This would be a good thing.

Our concerns that we are losing side channel environments in the river are real but the loss of side channel habitat is not as a result of down-cutting of the main river channel. The major cause of side channel degradation is because vege-tation has taken root during the low water years and

blocked the channels. (Do we need to go to work and open up some of these side channels?)

Mr. Frazer also pointed out that whenever we have the situation of flushing flows as we’ve had for the past two years the make-up and mix of aquatic insects changes somewhat. The high flows remove much of the silt and debris from the river resulting in lower populations of scuds and other mud dwellers. The cleaner river, however, is better environment for species such as stone flies and larger may flies.

In summary, Ken is optimistic about fish popu-lations. In that regard the fish are healthy and increas-ing in numbers there is a hint of cooperation and un-derstanding of our water flow needs from the Bureau of Reclamation. And the Corps of Engineers study has resulted in a possible plan to better utilize the side channels as rearing areas and therefore more recruit-ment of small fish into the population.

Bighorn River System Issues Group meeting was held in Lovell, Wyoming on September 29, 2009.

“Ken observed that often, depending on the flows, the small brown trout migrate down to the lower reaches of the river and then return upstream as three year old fish.”

Page 5 Currents Volume 4, Issue 2

LaFontaine Deep Sparkle Pupa

The agenda in-cluded a new management plan for controlling the lake levels by the Bureau of Rec-lamation based on their lat-est “rule curve” method of reservoir operations. This

new management scheme is supposed to adjust river flows earlier in the year to limit the extreme high flows during runoff.

The BOR also dis-cussed raising the elevation of the conservation pool of the reservoir by five feet to allow for more storage and presented a reallocation study. The Army Corp of Engineers then presented their views in a Flood Pool Reallocation Study to evalu-ate the change in flood re-duction benefits due to real-

location of flood control storage.

The Army Corp of Engineers submitted a Big-horn Lake Sediment Man-agement Study that dis-cussed what might be done

to mitigate the effects of the continuing sedimentation of the upper end of the lake. The study has some inter-esting alternatives to help the problem but all come at very high costs.

The Army Corp of Engineers also presented a Bighorn Side Channel Study that demonstrated the loss of side channels in the river over the years since the dam was built. They emphasized the need for high spring flows to keep open the side channels for young fish

habitat.

L a s t l y , L e n n y Duberstein of the BOR demonstrated the effects of moss growth on river stage in the late summer and fall. He stated that the high river elevation created by moss growth early in the fall cre-ated additional habitat for young fish. He suggested that lower river flows early in the fall could bank water in the reservoir so that higher flows could be re-leased later in the fall and winter to keep the river ele-vation at the same level for young fish when the moss growth naturally diminished enhancing the river’s fish production.

The studies and PowerPoint presentations given at the meeting contain much more detailed infor-mation, historical and pro-jected data and can be viewed online at: http://www.usbr.gov/gp/mtao/y e l l o w t a i l /bighorn_longterm.cfm

“How’s the River” continued

Page 6 Currents Volume 4, Issue 2

“They emphasized the need for high spring flows to keep open the side channels for young fish habitat.”

A herd of blank angus at the Drum Hole, spring 2009

2009 was an outstanding hopper year

Projects & Accomplishments of Bighorn River Alliance by Hale Harris E arly in 1995, the Bighorn

River Alliance was formed to contest a proposed land swap between the Na-tional Park Service and the Crow Indian tribe. The trans-action would have involved 3-Mile Access and the 340 acre Lind Ranch which was adja-cent to the access. This land was to be ceded to the tribe in exchange for a right-of-way which was not obtained when the original Ok-A-Beh Marina road was constructed. Alliance leadership participated in nu-merous meetings, both public and private, regarding the pro-posed transaction. The Alliance held their own town meetings, and published newsletters edu-cating the public on this issue. Board members wrote letters and telephoned government officials. In Billings, Montana, former Alliance president, Hale Harris, had a brief meeting with Governor Mark Racicot concerning this issue. The Alli-ance also encouraged many prominent citizens and Big-horn River anglers to write letters to their respective con-gressmen. The proposed trans-action was set aside Over the years, the Alliance has organized and participated in several “river cleanup” days on the river.

The Alliance has also published a document on River Etiquette & Ethics which was distributed to local area fly shops and Park Service offi-cials. The document detailed proper etiquette to follow in order to minimize social con-flicts and increase the quality of angling experience on the Bighorn River. It also educated anglers as to properly identify-ing trout spawning beds, and

avoiding these areas while wad-ing.

The Alliance donated money to the Bighorn Busi-nessman’s Association (BBA). The BBA was organized to combat a 4% resort tax which was to be levied on businesses in the Bighorn River Valley. The BBA’s attorney later pre-vailed in preventing the imple-mentation of this tax. While a taxation issue might seem pe-ripheral to the Alliance’s State-ment of Purpose, allowing the Crow Tribe to gain control of any river-based activities was deemed as counterproductive to long-term, responsible stew-ardship of the river.

Alliance leaders have spoken at Magic City Flyfishers (MCF) meetings in Billings, Montana in order to educate area anglers and encourage cooperative action on Bighorn River issues. The Bighorn River Alliance has formed a strategic alliance with Friends of the Bighorn River, an or-ganization led by Doug Haacke, a MCF member. From the beginning, Doug has been at the forefront of the contro-versy concerning river flows. Doug has graciously joined our Advisory Board of Directors.

The Alliance received copies of FWP biological stud-ies, fish census surveys, and angling pressure data in order to better understand the Big-horn River resource.

The Alliance has at-tended a number of “water rights” meetings with represen-tatives from the Crow Tribe, National Park Service, Bureau of Reclamation, and other offi-cials.

The Alliance has par-ticipated in many meetings

with FWP officials regarding Bighorn River management issues. We have hosted FWP officials at our general and board meetings. We have ex-pressed our opinion on many issues regarding bag limits, water flows, and other manage-ment issues.

On December 4, 1998 the Big Horn River Alli-ance donated $5,000.00 toward the construction of the new boat ramp at Bighorn Access, allowing that project to be-come a reality. The new ramp has proven to be a wonderful improvement to the access site.

In early 2005, the land exchange between the National Park Service and the Crow Tribe (see first paragraph of article) once again came to the forefront in the form of proposed federal legislation. The Alliance remobilized, caused some changes to be made in the proposed bill, spent time with Senators and Congressmen, and in the end the bill once again went was shelved due to resistance and lack of support.

Alliance board mem-bers have interviewed Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks biolo-gist, Ken Frazier, several times, seeking information on inva-sive species which might pose a threat to the health of the Bighorn River fishery. These species include New Zealand mud snails, Whirling Disease, and the algae, Didymosphenia geminata, commonly known as Didymo.

Alliance board mem-

bers have discussed entomol-ogy issues with Montana State University Entomology Group regarding the various insect

“The Bighorn River Alliance donated $5,000.00 toward the construction of a new boat ramp at Bighorn Access, allowing that project to become a reality.”

Page 7 Currents Volume 4, Issue 2

species currently in the river, and the effects of water flows on the health and proliferation of these species.

The Alliance has or-ganized a letter writing cam-paign to encourage support for Senate bill S.307, a bill intro-duced by Max Baucus and John Tester, which would es-tablish preferred minimum river flows at 2,500 cfs.

The Alliance has par-ticipated in numerous inter-

agency and public meetings regarding the river flow man-agement policies of the Bureau of Reclamation. BurRec’s poli-cies have been extremely detri-mental to the overall health of the Bighorn River fishery in the last decade.

The Alliance helped fund research involving the amount of usage the Bighorn

River fishing access sites re-ceive versus fishing access sites on Bighorn Lake in Wyoming. For political reasons, these counts have been largely dis-counted by the Bureau of Rec-lamation.

Alliance board mem-ber, Dennis Fischer, has estab-lished an “invasive species” eradication program and is working with Federal, State, County, and Tribal officials in effort to address the issue of

excessive Salt Cedar and Rus-sian Olive trees on the banks of the Bighorn River. A pro-ject is planned for the fall of 2009 to eradicate these species on the Big Horn River Access property. With the coopera-tion of the Montana Depart-ment of Fish Wildlife and Parks the Alliance will provide manpower and will provide the

funding for rental equipment. Under the leadership

of Frank Johnson, Alliance leadership and members organ-ized the Bighorn River Youth Adventure Week. In conjunc-tion with the Federation of Fly Fishers, this event hosted twelve teenage anglers during five days of conservation, fly tying, and fly fishing instruc-tion on the Bighorn River. This event was established in order to showcase the river’s legen-

dary fishing, and to give some-thing back to the fishing and conservation community. Our hope is to encourage these kids to go home, mentor others, and bring more of the younger generation into the sport of fly fishing. Bighorn River Youth Adventure Week will be held again in 2010. We hope to make the Adventure an annual event.

“Projects & Accomplishments” continued

“Alliance board member, Dennis

Fischer, has established an

‘invasive species’ eradication

program and is working with

Federal, State, County, and Tribal

officials”

Page 8 Currents Volume 4, Issue 2

The muddy Bighorn River? Think again. This is Soap Creek after a heavy thunderstorm!

The River Runs Through It from September 2009 (A 20’ window, that is!) by Doug Haacke

A s the 2009 water year

comes to a close in a few weeks, let’s take a few min-utes to look at how this year compared with last year, and what we can expect for next season.

In many ways, wa-ter years 2008 and 2009 were comparable. Both were essentially normal water years. Both experienced a delayed runoff after achiev-ing a slightly above average snowpack. However, despite ample water, Bureau of Rec-lamation held back river releases to maintain lake elevation, and month after month the river experienced minimal to sub-minimal flows. As just about any fifth grader knows, if you start spring with a higher than normal lake elevation and a normal runoff/precipitation picture, it’s a pretty good bet you won’t have storage available for runoff, and be forced to release lots of water.

That’s exactly what happened this year. Dan Jewell, Area Manager for the Montana Area Office of the Bureau of Reclamation started the fall of 2008 with ample storage and above average lake elevations. He kept the lake elevation up by reducing flows to the river to 2,450cfs which is below the minimum recommended flow for an optimal fishery

of 2,500cfs. By December, lake elevations started set-ting records, and from De-cember through May, Big-horn Lake experienced the highest lake elevations on record for that time period. This might have been a good thing had the spring forecast predicted some-thing less than a normal water year. In reality, a nor-mal to slightly above normal water year was forecast, and the mountains in the Big-horn Basin were peaking at around 118% of normal snowpack. When March came and the lake elevation was down only 20 feet in-stead of the usual 35 feet, many of us began asking Dan when he would start drafting the lake and making room for the runoff. When April came and went with-out any additional increase in releases, we knew we were in for some big re-leases once runoff started. In May Dan assured us that flows wouldn’t reach 6,500cfs and just weeks later flows went over 13,000cfs, essentially double the flows forecast by Reclamation.

Sounds an awful lot like 2008, doesn’t it? With long months of low flows, followed by massive releases during runoff, followed by low flows, it was a lot like this year. If one didn’t know better, you’d almost think a reservoir didn’t exist at Ft. Smith, and that there wasn’t

a team of highly paid ex-perts and engineers planning how to efficiently balance use of all that water.

In 2009, it wasn’t just the river users who were angry. Many lake users were hopping mad when they arrived at Bighorn Lake over the Fourth of July only to find the lake eight feet into the exclusive flood pool, and most boat launches and campgrounds closed due to driftwood and other debris blockading the launch points, as well as other amenities completely submerged. Grant Marsh Fishing Access Site on the Bighorn River was inun-dated and nearly destroyed by the intense releases. One is reminded that Congress has authorized the Bureau of Reclamation to manage Bighorn Lake for three pur-poses; hydro-electric power, irrigation and flood control. 2009 was a normal water year, and stakeholders downstream of Yellowtail Dam experienced flooding. As you can imagine, the Corps of Engineers, who manages the reservoir when lake levels reach the flood pool, were none too happy either.

When confronted with these facts during a weekly stakeholders’ confer-ence call, Dan Jewell finally admitted that he’s doing the best he can managing the reservoir for a twenty foot

“In May, Dan assured us that flows wouldn’t reach 6,500 cfs, and just weeks later flows went over 13,000 cfs, essentially double the flows forecast by Reclamation.”

Page 9 Currents Volume 4, Issue 2

window. That window, in our case, refers to the twenty feet of elevation that starts with a full lake or the top of the conservation pool of Bighorn Lake, which is a lake elevation of 3,640ft, and lake elevation 3,620ft, which represents an eleva-tion Dan does not want to venture below. Now to put this in perspective, since the dam closed in 1967, the average window was nearly twice the size at 35 ft, and used a lower lake elevation of 3,605ft. It just makes sense that you evacuate stor-age to make room for runoff, espe-cially when hard evidence exists in the form of snowpack that run-off is a certainty.

As you can imagine, Dan has support for his twenty foot window. Lake users at the south end of the lake love it, of course. From their perspective, the lake can never be full enough long enough. The National Park Service publicly asked for the twenty foot window several years ago, and fol-lowing a decent water year in 2007, Dan complied, al-though not being required to do so. Isn’t it interesting that the Park Service and Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area, whose greatest number of visitors and revenues comes from

the river, ignores those us-ers. In fact, they have a re-source management plan for the lake, but not the river. Let’s not make the mistake of thinking the National Park Service and Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area aren’t part of this problem!

So, what’s the fore-

cast for fall, winter and early spring? Let’s look at a few numbers to put things in perspective.

The current lake elevation is 3,641.6ft. Here we are in the middle of Sep-tember and we’re still in the flood pool. Normally, lake elevations for this time of year are 15 feet lower at 3,626ft. River releases are at 3,050cfs, which is slightly higher than the average of 2,600cfs, but this would be expected when lake levels are still in the flood pool.

It seems to reason then, with Dan Jewell’s op-erating policies, that shortly

after lake elevations come out of the flood pool (probably around the end of the month), river releases will be cut back to mini-mums or even less. And then, it’s just 7 or 8 months until high flows and flood-ing.

The Bighorn River

Alliance, along with many other groups, organizations and individuals, has devel-oped a strategy to fight Dan Jewell and the twenty foot window. That strategy will seek the assistance of Mon-tana’s senatorial delegation and several federal agencies. We will need the support of as many folks as possible to bring this important strategy to fruition. As a member of the Bighorn River Alliance or just a friend of the Big-horn River, we hope we can count on you when the time comes to write a letter of support, or make a quick call to your local delegate. Thanks!

“The River Runs Through It” continued

“Isn’t it interesting that the Park Service

and Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area, whose greatest

number of visitors and revenues

comes from the river, ignores

those users. In fact, they have a

resource management plan for the lake, but not the river.”

Page 10 Currents Volume 4, Issue 2

Trophy Bighorn Bow!

Baucus Calls for Investigation into Bighorn River Mismanagement Article from Billings Gazette, Oct. 22, 2009

www.bighornriveralliance.org

U.S. Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., Thursday de-manded an investigation into the Bureau of Recla-mation's management of the Bighorn River and Yellowtail Dam after a dewatering of the river on Tuesday, the second such incident in less than three months. In a letter to Mary Kendall, acting inspector general of the Depart-ment of Interior, Baucus laid out other problems with management of the river, including reduced river flows despite a heavy spring runoff. He wrote: "It is clear that better coordination on the entire length of the system would have pre-

vented many of the im-pacts of these damaging events. I would like your office to con-duct an investi-gation into the overall manage-ment of the Big-horn River Sys-tem, specifically investigating the operation of the Yellowtail Dam in coordination with all the dams on the river." The Office of In-spector General is an in-dependent, investigative arm of the federal gov-ernment. Baucus further requested that Kendal

provide the technical rea-sons behind the failures in July and October, how

failures can be prevented in the future, the effects on the downstream fish-ery and what the Depart-ment of the Interior will do to assess and mitigate the impacts.

For full text of news article and Senator Baucus’ letter to the Inspector General of the Department of Interior go to the Alliance web site. Click on “News” tab, “Bighorn River Problems,” and then go to “Baucus Demands Investigation.”

“Baucus further requested that Kendal provide the technical reasons behind the failures in July and October”

Page 11 Currents Volume 4, Issue 2

Senator Max Baucus

Statement of Purpose

Understanding that the Bighorn River is potentially the finest trout fishery in America, it is our purpose to preserve, protect and enhance the quality of this fishery. In this understanding it is incumbent upon us, the users of the Bighorn to address the following issues and related concerns:

• water flows

• bag limits

• angler populations

• angler access

• trout populations

• tackle restrictions

• water quality

• recreational easements and education

• general aquatic biology All efforts shall be directed toward maximizing quality angling opportunity on the Bighorn River.

It is further the purpose of this organization of anglers and professionals to develop positive relationships and work together with all management agencies involved with the well being of the Bighorn River.

Organizational memberships will in no way be limited, but shall include as much representation as possible from all users of the Bighorn River.

The Bighorn River Alliance is a non-profit organization.

Bighorn River Alliance P.O. Box 7884

Fort Smith, MT 59035

PRESERV ING, PROTECT ING, ENHANCING

To join go to:

www.bighornriveralliance.org