# Boardman River dam removal updates.



## Boardman Brookies (Dec 20, 2007)

These boards have been pretty quiet lately about the dam removal project. They have recently began the draw down of the remainder of Boardman pond. There is a totally different process taking place compared to what was attempted at Brown Bridge. Deconstruction of Boardman dam should be happening later. Hopefully there are no major issues this time. Be safe around there.


----------



## Boardman Brookies (Dec 20, 2007)

Kinda surprised no one has commented.....


----------



## CrickNotCreek (Jun 15, 2016)

Have any pictures? I'd be curious to see the changes. Also, what is the timetable for the removal of the dam?


----------



## Trout King (May 1, 2002)

Boardman Brookies said:


> These boards have been pretty quiet lately about the dam removal project. They have recently began the draw down of the remainder of Boardman pond. There is a totally different process taking place compared to what was attempted at Brown Bridge. Deconstruction of Boardman dam should be happening later. Hopefully there are no major issues this time. Be safe around there.


Personally, I would rather the dams stay on the Boardman


----------



## 357Maximum (Nov 1, 2015)

Here's a comment. I do not fish there, but anytime one of them unhealthy artery clogging devices is removed it is a good thing for the river and the fish, as well as us in my opinion. If I could wave a magic wand and make them all go poof...I would in half a heartbeat.


----------



## Trout King (May 1, 2002)

357Maximum said:


> Here's a comment. I do not fish there, but anytime one of them unhealthy artery clogging devices is removed it is a good thing for the river and the fish, as well as us in my opinion. If I could wave a magic wand and make them all go poof...I would in half a heartbeat.


While I agree most of the time on dam removals etc, I do not like the idea of the steelhead fingerlings upriver and competing to the headwaters with the brook trout and wild brown trout. Of course, that is the trout fisherman in me.


----------



## Boardman Brookies (Dec 20, 2007)

Trout King said:


> While I agree most of the time on dam removals etc, I do not like the idea of the steelhead fingerlings upriver and competing to the headwaters with the brook trout and wild brown trout. Of course, that is the trout fisherman in me.


I agree 100%. The saving grace here is the Union St dam will remain. Hopefully it is modified to allow zero steelhead or salmon up. At the present those fish can, and do, pass up.


----------



## Boardman Brookies (Dec 20, 2007)

CrickNotCreek said:


> Have any pictures? I'd be curious to see the changes. Also, what is the timetable for the removal of the dam?


I'll see what I can do on that


----------



## 357Maximum (Nov 1, 2015)

Trout King said:


> While I agree most of the time on dam removals etc, I do not like the idea of the steelhead fingerlings upriver and competing to the headwaters with the brook trout and wild brown trout. Of course, that is the trout fisherman in me.



MaNature will sort it out, and I trust her a lot more than I trust us to do that 99.9% of the time. Besides them big ol brookies might just like a taste of fresh smolt over their obvious taste for their own youngins. I do not know, like I said I do not fish there and I am just shooting from the hip. I do not possess that magic wand anyway.


----------



## TCJim (Dec 13, 2012)

Wish they would have waited a week or two. Fished hex below Sabin this week lots of bugs on the water but no fish. Water looks like chocolate milk.


----------



## Boardman Brookies (Dec 20, 2007)

TCJim said:


> Wish they would have waited a week or two. Fished hex below Sabin this week lots of bugs on the water but no fish. Water looks like chocolate milk.


Yep.....it is done down there


----------



## mrblond (Sep 17, 2016)

Thanks for posting about this. Am planning on fishing the river next week.


----------



## CarnageProductions13 (Mar 11, 2011)

Honestly i'm excited to see expansion of waters opened up to steelhead fishermen, etc. The damn is over loaded and I like to get away from the city to fish. As well as other fishermen for that matter, I was recently fishing a stretch below Sabin dam and caught a beauty of a brown, 20.5 inches released for another day. my hope are that these great genetics get passed on up stream for many others to experience.


----------



## STEELnICE (Dec 4, 2007)

Don't worry guys there are plenty of dams to keep the baby trout safe from the big mean steelhead. Trout are an ok way to pass time between runs, but I'm really looking forward to the first runs of steelhead in the upper Boardman!


----------



## -Axiom- (Jul 24, 2010)

STEELnICE said:


> Don't worry guys there are plenty of dams to keep the baby trout safe from the big mean steelhead. Trout are an ok way to pass time between runs, but I'm really looking forward to the first runs of steelhead in the upper Boardman!


Yeah they'll fit right in up there in Carpenter & 22 creek.


----------



## Benzie Rover (Mar 17, 2008)

STEELnICE said:


> Don't worry guys there are plenty of dams to keep the baby trout safe from the big mean steelhead. Trout are an ok way to pass time between runs, but I'm really looking forward to the first runs of steelhead in the upper Boardman!


I could not disagree more. I was born and raised a steelhead junkie and I still fish them regularly, but river rat days are over. I'm a born-again trout guy now. Adult steelhead are not the issue. Interspecific competition between age 1 coho/steelhead smolts and brook trout are my main issue. Brook trout ALWAYS loose this battle. Look at any UP river that hosts anadromous runs. Brook numbers are minimal until you get into the very upper reaches of those systems. MDNR managers in the UP readily recognize and communicate this issue when discussing strategies for re-introducing coasters. But, we never hear the same from NW lower fisheries management. I have never understood why. Degrading the Boardman's very unique, native (yes, there is evidence of brook trout along with the grayling in the Boardman in original surveys from the early 1900s) brook trout population simply to give steelhead smolts yet another cold water trib to dominate is not desirable choice for most local trout fisherman I talk with. Pure inland trout rivers are rare in this state. Brook trout dominated trout rivers in the LP are just about nonexistant. Putting big, dumb rainbows up there will do nothing but degrade the fishery, the fishing experience (steelhead crowds are insane) and god help the private landowners. 

But no worries for you ironheads, I've heard nothing but support for steelhead introduction from the DNR thus far.


----------



## BMARKS (Nov 6, 2017)

Benzie Rover said:


> I could not disagree more. I was born and raised a steelhead junkie and I still fish them regularly, but river rat days are over. I'm a born-again trout guy now. Adult steelhead are not the issue. Interspecific competition between age 1 coho/steelhead smolts and brook trout are my main issue. Brook trout ALWAYS loose this battle. Look at any UP river that hosts anadromous runs. Brook numbers are minimal until you get into the very upper reaches of those systems. MDNR managers in the UP readily recognize and communicate this issue when discussing strategies for re-introducing coasters. But, we never hear the same from NW lower fisheries management. I have never understood why. Degrading the Boardman's very unique, native (yes, there is evidence of brook trout along with the grayling in the Boardman in original surveys from the early 1900s) brook trout population simply to give steelhead smolts yet another cold water trib to dominate is not desirable choice for most local trout fisherman I talk with. Pure inland trout rivers are rare in this state. Brook trout dominated trout rivers in the LP are just about nonexistant. Putting big, dumb rainbows up there will do nothing but degrade the fishery, the fishing experience (steelhead crowds are insane) and god help the private landowners.
> 
> But no worries for you ironheads, I've heard nothing but support for steelhead introduction from the DNR thus far.


It does suck for the brook trout. but the steelhead bring more money. and that is what will always win. the group willing to spend the most money. i have mixed feelings about it because like you stated, brooks are natural there. but on the other hand, another river to spread out the march madness a little wont hurt in my opinion either.


----------



## STEELnICE (Dec 4, 2007)

I wouldn't be opposed to attempting to block the other potadromous species and even lifting size and creel limits to decimate the browns if introducing coasters was the plan. Brookies that spend their entire lives in the river can't grow big enough for me to get excited about them.


----------



## BMARKS (Nov 6, 2017)

STEELnICE said:


> I wouldn't be opposed to attempting to block the other potadromous species and even lifting size and creel limits to decimate the browns if introducing coasters was the plan. Brookies that spend their entire lives in the river can't grow big enough for me to get excited about them.


coasters would be sick! i have never caught a brook of considerable size. but i can only imagine the vicious strike of a 4 lb brook.


----------



## mroberts8 (Apr 13, 2011)

There is a group in TC working to protect the native brook trout population in the Boardman. If interested: 
https://www.facebook.com/The-Coalit...WHiUewoVxGmOAtn6hopbgt3Jfj12d61cN5RxA&fref=nf


----------



## Boardman Brookies (Dec 20, 2007)

BMARKS said:


> right.... maybe they will decide that that is all the farther they want them to run. i doubt that will be the case as it isn't the case right now, and i believe they have plans in the work to make it easier for fish passage with some easy "fishpass" design or something that i have read.


Because there is still several hundred tons of concrete and earth blocking them any further....Sabin Dam. What was told to us years ago, at multipr meetings, by the DNR was Union St dam in conjunction with the weir would be modified to allow certain fish passage. Certain native fish, specifically walleye and sturgeon. These fish traditionally spawned in the lower river and Boardman Lake. Up until recently has this whole steelhead thing come up and we are hearing all this “ we haven’t made a decision yet”


----------



## BMARKS (Nov 6, 2017)

Boardman Brookies said:


> Because there is still several hundred tons of concrete and earth blocking them any further....Sabin Dam. What was told to us years ago, at multipr meetings, by the DNR was Union St dam in conjunction with the weir would be modified to allow certain fish passage. Certain native fish, specifically walleye and sturgeon. These fish traditionally spawned in the lower river and Boardman Lake. Up until recently has this whole steelhead thing come up and we are hearing all this “ we haven’t made a decision yet”


if walleye can pass and spawn, steelhead will, no if ands or buts about it. there is no way to allow walleye and sturgeon but not steelhead, you could do the opposite, but it is not possible unless you had someone hand picking them out. which would cost even more money to the DNR. i guess we can go over this all day but it is most certain that the boardman will soon be an even better steelhead fishery. like i said before maybe they will find a way to appease both people.


----------



## Boardman Brookies (Dec 20, 2007)

We can go round and round but that serves no point. I guess you don’t live around here? Right? I do. The vast majority of the people not just anglers do not want this. Period. We were told one thing by the DNR and are now getting some lip service. 

Enough about the steelhead, for now. Work is soon to commence on Sabin and upstream resto efforts on the unstable banks above where Boardman Dam was. Im getting ready to chase brookies on Saturday once again with hopefully many more years of that to come.


----------



## BMARKS (Nov 6, 2017)

Boardman Brookies said:


> We can go round and round but that serves no point. I guess you don’t live around here? Right? I do. The vast majority of the people not just anglers do not want this. Period. We were told one thing by the DNR and are now getting some lip service.
> 
> Enough about the steelhead, for now. Work is soon to commence on Sabin and upstream resto efforts on the unstable banks above where Boardman Dam was. Im getting ready to chase brookies on Saturday once again with hopefully many more years of that to come.


Hey man i wasn't trying to argue or prove anything. just discussing the situation with someone else who cares about it, that's all. i am not from traverse city but i am a resident of this state and a user of the resource. i just don't see any way they can stop the steelhead, or any incentive for them to. and you are correct there is a lot of work to be done before any of this matters anyways. good luck on the trout tho! i will still be chasing the steel for a couple weeks.


----------



## Jay Wesley (Mar 2, 2009)

We have agreed to close the fish ladder at Union Street to allow brookies to have a chance to expand to restored river habitat. 

The FishPass experiments and design will be a fish sorter to pass native species while blocking undesirable species. It would be cool if it works. If not, fish would have to be passed manually. 

The entire Union Street dam will be rebuilt to accommodate this experimental facility. Hope that great lessons are learned to be applied to other systems.


----------



## mbirdsley (Jan 12, 2012)

Jay Wesley said:


> We have agreed to close the fish ladder at Union Street to allow brookies to have a chance to expand to restored river habitat.
> 
> The FishPass experiments and design will be a fish sorter to pass native species while blocking undesirable species. It would be cool if it works. If not, fish would have to be passed manually.
> 
> The entire Union Street dam will be rebuilt to accommodate this experimental facility. Hope that great lessons are learned to be applied to other systems.


How do you sort fish. Somebody going to be there to sort them and send them up stream. Sign me up for that


----------



## Jay Wesley (Mar 2, 2009)

Computer recognition, flow rates, pheromones, grates, deterrents and whatever else they come up with.


----------



## Mr Burgundy (Nov 19, 2009)

I know this is probably going to be a stupid question but we will still be able to fish below Union Street Dam correct. I really enjoy drifting Bobbers and staying down there for early Kings and Chrome and it would be a shame to lose that


----------



## Jay Wesley (Mar 2, 2009)

Yes. Half the channel will be used as an experimental area and the other half will be open to fishing.


----------



## Mr Burgundy (Nov 19, 2009)

Nice tnks for the reply


----------



## Mr Burgundy (Nov 19, 2009)

So after the project is complete will salmon no longer be able to pass union street dam


----------



## Sparky23 (Aug 15, 2007)

Boardman Brookies said:


> Bmarks, you keep bringing up the money. So let’s discuss that some. Special interest groups have the money and power to sway the DNR. We saw it recently with the latest round of gear restrictions. Specifically TU. I normally do not get behind these tactics but there are already things in the works by these groups to ensure this does not happen on the Boardman. Period.


Not the dnr. More the nrc. Who now has another tu member on its board. Not good. Ive fiahed grayling and caught 100s of them. They are dumber than a brook trout and not that good to eat unless cooked right away. Not sure where the fascination lies with them ..they are cool.


----------



## Sparky23 (Aug 15, 2007)

Boardman Brookies said:


> We can go round and round but that serves no point. I guess you don’t live around here? Right? I do. The vast majority of the people not just anglers do not want this. Period. We were told one thing by the DNR and are now getting some lip service.
> 
> Enough about the steelhead, for now. Work is soon to commence on Sabin and upstream resto efforts on the unstable banks above where Boardman Dam was. Im getting ready to chase brookies on Saturday once again with hopefully many more years of that to come.


Dnr lying about somethin? Some have said that never happens...


----------



## BMARKS (Nov 6, 2017)

Jay Wesley said:


> Yes. Half the channel will be used as an experimental area and the other half will be open to fishing.


Sounds like a mess.


----------



## Jay Wesley (Mar 2, 2009)

If you google FishPass you can pull up conceptual drawings.


----------



## Benzie Rover (Mar 17, 2008)

Boardman Brookies said:


> This is a weir, there is a barrier. How familiar are you with the project? The entire river system?


Correct, there is a weir, however it won't be an effective barrier under the current management strategy. Currently it's put in around Labor Day and pulled out by early November, sometimes earlier. There are hundreds of coho that come after it's pulled and a few frisky early kings that make it upstream to Sabin before it's closed under this current timeline. Not to mention the sparse run of summer run steelhead. I've heard nothing mentioned about investing in additional MDNR resources to keep the weir from Labor Day until Memorial Day, which would be mostly effective, but man would that create a plugged up, nasty mess of fish and fisherman in the 1/2 mile of river below the weir. It'd be a mini-Tippy scene and I doubt that would jive well with Downtown TC folk. As much as I personally want to block them at the weir, the additional funding needed and debacle it would create downtown are two realistic concerns that will probably prevent it from occurring, sadly. But we can hope.

IMO, the only effective way to do it would be to move the weir to where Sabin is, however, funding is the issue there. Location wise, it's all public land and is big enough to handle a total blockage of great lakes salmonids and the fishery that entails, but I know I'm just dreaming there as well.

The bi-directional fish passage thing is quite interesting from a research perspective in terms of having a realistic lab to determine the most effective ways of attracting adults fish of various species on their spawning runs and then passing them above a barrier. Phermones, current manipulation and other tactics are difficult to test, this will provide them a great opportunity for that. However, I am less than impressed with their downstream passage tactics for young fish. Basically, it's to allow them to flow-over the main spill way in the middle according to the engineering folks I spoke with at the public open house. They can adjust the height of the spill to some degree, but not too much since it's acting as a dam and would changing river and lake levels above. They could theoretically block certain species from going upstream there as well, but Sabin is coming out this year and that thing won't be built for several years, so they would get established for a short while at least. We can only hope that more people speak out for the brookies and there is a call made somewhere high up in the DNR to prioritize them over the all mighty $teelhead for this special river.


----------



## Hoytman5 (Feb 1, 2008)

-Axiom- said:


> There are certainly some Otter around, I haven't seen any on the Boardman but I see a few every yr on the Manistee.
> 
> I walk my dog regularly along the Boardman.


The Boardman is in my back yard and I have seen a few otter's over the years.


----------

