# Improper Use of Paint Creek?



## Troutdoors (Jun 20, 2010)

I have an important question. I was fishing Paint Creek this morning, between Tienken and Silverbell. I got out really early, around 4:30 AM and, when I waded to one of my usual spots I saw something suspicious to me. What caused me the concern was two PVC pipes going into Paint Creek each of which were hooked upto it's own water pump. I didn't want to go on the land as it was private property, to investigate further but I did put my hand down near where the pipe was drawing the water in and it had a great deal of suction! I think, but I can't be certain, that these pumps are pumping water to a small pond on this property with a fountain. Is this proper use of Paint Creek? I especially ask as I know that the DNR is considering new rules on usage of this stretch of the Paint because of its habitat for trout.

If this usage is improper, to whom would I report it? I did take pictures of both the pump and pipes and the fountain just in case. Maybe I'm just overreacting but I've never seen this kind of usage of a public waterway before. Thanks.

Best Regards,
Troutdoors


----------



## Boardman Brookies (Dec 20, 2007)

Contact your local CO and let us know what they have to say about the matter. I have only fished there a handful of times, but I do know that the creek does not have the best flow during the hot summer months.


----------



## Steve (Jan 15, 2000)

Between stuff like that, and multitude of irrigation pumps for lawns along the way it a wonder there is any water left at all for the fish.


----------



## Troutdoors (Jun 20, 2010)

Boardman Brookies said:


> Contact your local CO and let us know what they have to say about the matter. I have only fished there a handful of times, but I do know that the creek does not have the best flow during the hot summer months.


Can you advise what a CO is? Sorry but I have only been here a year after moving from NJ. I will contact them as it did seem an egregious violation of that stretch of water.


----------



## Boardman Brookies (Dec 20, 2007)

Troutdoors said:


> Can you advise what a CO is? Sorry but I have only been here a year after moving from NJ. I will contact them as it did seem an egregious violation of that stretch of water.


A CO is a conservation officer. He is the information to the district Paint Creek is located in.

*Lt. David Malloch
*Southfield Operations Service Center
26000 West Eight Mile Road
Southfield MI 48034-5916
*Phone:* (248) 359-9040
*E-mail:* [email protected]


----------



## Troutdoors (Jun 20, 2010)

Thanks! I will do so right now!


----------



## Mitchell Ulrich (Sep 10, 2007)

Co is a Conservation Officer.

You cant draw off water from a stream to fill your own pond! I know of one guy who tried this knowing full well that it was illegal. 

The moron dug out a pretty big hole and was just starting to trench over to the stream that flows just off his property. (The stream leads to a trout rearing pond on State land) Fortunately the DNR nailed his ass!

Call the DNR or the DEQ and let_ them_ determine the approparite course of action.


----------



## Troutdoors (Jun 20, 2010)

Funny how this same guy has been very vehement in telling me on 2 occasions that I would be on private property if I crossed the stream and got on the opposite bank! I've never done anything but wade upto this point and wouldn't have gone as far as I did if it weren't for a nice size brown I was following!


----------



## The Downstream Drift (Feb 27, 2010)

You can also call the RAP hotline if you see anything which looks like a potential violation of natural resource laws. 1-800-292-7800

There are several of these pumps along Paint Creek. From what I have been told they are not in violation of any natural resource law. There is a law on the books which allows for water to be drawn out of public water as long as it is below a certain percentage of the actual flow in that river. To be in violation of that law the pump needs to be drawing thousands of gallons of water out each day. Most of these pumps do not draw enough water to be in violation. 

The problem I have seen though is that collectively all of these pumps might be in violation. While each individual isn't drawing enough water to cause a violation, ten or twenty landowners together might be. For the most part these land owners are using the creek to water their lawns. This takes a small amount of water from the creek each day. Now imagine if every home owner from one road crossing to another does this. That would add up to alot of water removed from the creek.

Until there is a law in the books preventing this I don't see it stopping. This removal of water from the creek is not what I like seeing done but the odds of stopping it are slim. It would need to be put into law that any removal of water from the creek is illegal and you can imagine the difficulity in getting a law like this passed.

IMO, public education for those that are doing this is the best way to get it stopped. Most land owners do not realize the effect their pumps may be having on the creek, just as they don't see how the management of their creek banks effects the creek downstream from them.


----------



## RobFromFlint (Apr 24, 2008)

I worked landscaping a few years ago. We had a huge tank we had to fill with water and then mix with mulch and grass seed to spray lawns. This thing probably held a few thousand gallons. We setup the pump at a creek in Grand Balnc s few times a week. We were stopped several times by police and once by a DNR officer. I was told on each occasion that as long as we aren't dumping anything into water and it's a public source or private with owners permission, no laws are being broken. This was in the summers of 2005 and 2006. I'd still contact a CO just to make sure, because they do make judgement calls in the field and my case may have been one.

-Rob Urban-


----------



## The Downstream Drift (Feb 27, 2010)

Here is a link that explains the new Michigan Withdrawal law. As it reads, there has to be a ton of water taken out for it to be in violation.

http://www.greatlakeslaw.org/blog/2008/07/michigans-innovative-new-water-withdrawal-law.html


----------



## The Downstream Drift (Feb 27, 2010)

Rob... by reading this link we can see that this law went into effect after the situation you explained. And I doubt you were taking enough water out to be in violaiton.


----------



## Liver and Onions (Nov 24, 2000)

The Downstream Drift said:


> ....... As it reads, there has to be a ton of water taken out for it to be in violation.
> 
> http://www.greatlakeslaw.org/blog/2008/07/michigans-innovative-new-water-withdrawal-law.html


A ton of water isn't much water. 250 gallons if my mind is working ok this morning. I'm reading a very different number in the law. Help me out here if I've got it all wrong.

L & O


----------



## The Downstream Drift (Feb 27, 2010)

From what I have read, and what I have been told by people more well versed on this than me, the withdrawal can be up to 10% of the stream flow without a permit needed. It also says that permits are required for more than 2,000,000 gallons of water per day in some cases and 1,000,000 gallons per day in others. I have also read that if the water is used in a manner that it will be returned to the water table it will not be in violation but if it is used as a diversion of water it will be.

I am curious as to where the 250 gallon number is at? I didn't see that number in the text anywhere. Maybe I am missing something here too.?


----------



## RobFromFlint (Apr 24, 2008)

He is referring to the physical weight. A gallon of water weighs 8.35 pounds. Therefore a literal ton of water would be 238.5 gallons.


----------



## The Downstream Drift (Feb 27, 2010)

Oh, I get it now. See, I am half asleep today. :lol:

I meant a ton as in a million gallons or more.


----------



## Liver and Onions (Nov 24, 2000)

The Downstream Drift said:


> ......
> I meant a ton as in a million gallons or more.


We are on the same page now. It would take a ton(a lot) of water to be in violation.  I should have realized you didn't mean 2,000 lbs.

L & O


----------



## The Downstream Drift (Feb 27, 2010)

Good to know I wasn't loosing it here. :lol:

I think that having you guys that use the creek aware of this issue is a good thing. The more public awareness about water withdrawal we have the better. I, for one, am taking the time to remind the landowners I know of the possible negative effects to the fishery that these pumps in question could cause. Like I stated before, not many people realize the potential for a problem we have here.


----------



## Steelmon (Mar 30, 2009)

Are these guys using screens over their intakes. If they are not, wouldn't they be possibly be removing fish illegally? I would hate to see some trout fry pumped out.


----------



## The Downstream Drift (Feb 27, 2010)

Most of the pipes into the creek I've seen are covered with a screen of some sort. I suppose the chore of having to constantly clean off the screen is just karma for taking water from the creek.


----------

