# Clinton River Fish Ladder - Yates Dam



## Maverick1 (Jan 28, 2009)

I wanted to see what everyone thought about the idea of having a fish ladder installed at Yates to open more access to spawning gravel upstream for steelhead. 

I know a few people who own construction / landscape companies and may be able to donate the heavy machinery needed complete such a project. While the dam itself isn't terribly high it would easy the journey and allow for fish to get upstream fast and spread out after running the gauntlet at the park.


----------



## 1siena (Apr 15, 2007)

I'm not a biologist, but it sounds like a good idea to me. I'm sure there are permits/regulations that would have to be looked into....if anything, it would get pretty interesting watching the people fight over who fishes directly above or below the ladder!


----------



## the rapids (Nov 17, 2005)

why not remove the dam? not all species can utilize a fish ladder, and there are some native fish, mollusks, etc that would benefit from removal of that dam.


----------



## bborow2501 (Nov 12, 2007)

I think it would be cool to see a good sized run of fish up into the gravel in the auburn hills area, but wonder if such a project took place if a weir could be placed on the lower paint creek to protect the brown trout fishery sort of like the one on the little manistee. I think that since there is not really any public access or dnr management program for the coldwater creek that enters in the OU area, this would help contribute to the overall clinton fishery, by allowing anglers to access the fish going up and down the river on the public land in the mid section, but protect them once they reach any gravel in that creek since much of the land on it is privately held. This would help to keep the fish running the river, till the water level management issues in the auburn hills area can be taken care of.


----------



## djweiser (Jun 2, 2009)

But if they remove the dam where will all of you go to catch "Metal Heads"? They will be scattered all over the river and not concentrated in one spot. Definitly cut down on the combat fishing.


----------



## stonefly9 (Dec 2, 2008)

In regards to the Paint Creek Weir suggestion - keep in mind if you want to ever see any kind of natural reproduction begin to happen, it is vital to allow the anadromous fish seek spawning habitat in colder, oxygen rich tribs. Rest assured that steelhead would not disturb the brown trout fishery, as a matter of fact in all likelihood it would help to grow larger browns quicker. If steelhead are able to ascend Paint Creek, you would now have a very substantial new sorce of food available for the resident trout population - eggs and eventually steelhead fry/par. Steelhead won't eat brown trout and they are in the rivers not nearly long enough to become a predominant competitor of food resources - they would actually add to the food resource.

Also, in case you did not know - the weir on the Little Manistee has nothing to do with protecting the brown trout population. That weir is in place to impeed the passage of steelhead/salmon so that they may be captured and eggs harvested from them. They are then released upstream to spawn the remaining eggs - as discussed with a Fisheries Biologist earlier this year, they try to harvest roughly 80% of eggs from the fish prior to passing them. The Little Manistee Weir is not there to protect the brown trout, it is there to ensure the continued future of steelhead in rivers throughout the Great Lakes region.


----------



## Maverick1 (Jan 28, 2009)

There would definately have to be some sort of No Fish Zone put into place above and below any fish ladder. There was a thread earlier in the year about no fishing from the tressle to the dam to allow the fish to have a resting area without 5/0 trebble hooks being tossed at them.

While it would be great for teh damn to be removed all together, the likelyhood is low. easpecially with all the money just investment in the new viewing area by the dam.


----------



## mwp (Feb 18, 2004)

Its a good idea,but I'm sure the DNR will have some issues!!I can't imagine the permits and such something like that will take.


----------



## sweet tree (Apr 30, 2006)

That lowhead dam is a minor obstacle to the steelehad ascending the Clinton. They can leap it with ease and continue upstream to Paint Creek and other gravel...The only thing this dam allows is a minor pause in their journey which allows the anglers to rip and grip.

Tear that bugger down! It serves no purpose but create an environment for combat fishing.


----------



## kolarchi (Mar 20, 2006)

Fish make it over the low head dam all of the time. There was plenty of steel spawning upstream this year. I think time would be better spent lobying for my steelhead to be planted in the Clinton for everyone to enjoy.


----------



## MLH (Dec 19, 2008)

Hey! I was just talking about this with someone else yesterday. We both thought it would be a great thing to do - mostly in spreading out the fisherman and get more naturally reproducing steelhead into the system.

Any thoughts on what would occur upstream if Yates dam was actually removed?


----------



## bborow2501 (Nov 12, 2007)

stonefly9 said:


> In regards to the Paint Creek Weir suggestion - keep in mind if you want to ever see any kind of natural reproduction begin to happen, it is vital to allow the anadromous fish seek spawning habitat in colder, oxygen rich tribs. Rest assured that steelhead would not disturb the brown trout fishery, as a matter of fact in all likelihood it would help to grow larger browns quicker. If steelhead are able to ascend Paint Creek, you would now have a very substantial new sorce of food available for the resident trout population - eggs and eventually steelhead fry/par. Steelhead won't eat brown trout and they are in the rivers not nearly long enough to become a predominant competitor of food resources - they would actually add to the food resource.
> 
> Also, in case you did not know - the weir on the Little Manistee has nothing to do with protecting the brown trout population. That weir is in place to impeed the passage of steelhead/salmon so that they may be captured and eggs harvested from them. They are then released upstream to spawn the remaining eggs - as discussed with a Fisheries Biologist earlier this year, they try to harvest roughly 80% of eggs from the fish prior to passing them. The Little Manistee Weir is not there to protect the brown trout, it is there to ensure the continued future of steelhead in rivers throughout the Great Lakes region.


A few points (warning, book ahead)



1 I am fully aware of why that one is in place

however, I am not suggesting that a weir is put in the paint to harvest eggs, just to block the fish from entering period, and then open it up like they do on the little man later in the year.

there are already locations such as the old dam under second street that I assume would be suitable locations for a weir

also opening up the paint to this would most likely open it up to other undesirables such as sea lampreys and pike of the lower clinton

2 If large numbers of steelies were allowed to ascend paint creek the crowds from yates (especially those who do not follow the rules anyway) would descend upon the paint creek during the spawning closure.

as I am sure you know fishing during the spawning season in never good

and since there are locations in the paint where steelies would likely stack up (in locations such as the aforementioned dam, the falls in the park, and under main st) they would just go to these places and there simply are not enough cos to keep all these bases covered. the paint would surely suffer from this kind of extra pressure.



3 It leaves little to wonder why a good majority of the highest regarded brown trout/ brook trout fisheries in the lp are so great. (the upper manistee, all 3 branches of the ausable, the boardman, the black, the 2 pines, the maple, the boyne the big sable, the rogue, tribs to the thunder bay, and the bear just to name a few.) I am sure one of the contributing factors is that steelies and salmon cannot assend these waters to these highly regarded waters because of dams. 

As one who has fished the rifle (no dams here) often knows, the browns in the rifle are few and far between in the the sections with the gravel when the steelies are in the river. Trout by nature are territorial, and the steelies end up pushing the browns which are smaller up into the smaller streams in the area. Many will drive right past the rifle to get to the ausable for brown trout fishing, and for a reason.
As you may or may not know the trout in the paint do not have this option due to other issues.
Also with all do respect I believe you are quite mistaken when you say that steelies will not take a bite out of smaller brown trout, as both steelies I have caught on smaller rivers such as the clinton were caught on hardbaits about the size of the browns they stock in the paint, and in trout colors!!! This is why streamers are sometimes used to catch salmon, steelies, and large browns.
The dnr stocks the creek when the steelies would be in it.
I suppose the steelies might not actually eat the browns, but they sure would mash them up quite well judging on how they hit those type of lures. 
There is just not enough space in this river for them to coexist. They would end up fighting over limited space in this small river.​ 4 and as I mentioned in the previous post I am sure the coldwater stream that runs through Oakland university would be a suitable alternative stronghold of natural reproduction to the paint till the water quality issues in the upper clinton in the auburn hills area can be straightened out. I am aware that It would take tons of work, but it would be awesome to see successfull reproduction in the auburn hills area.:idea:

5 the paint creek is fragile; don't tip the balence


----------



## bborow2501 (Nov 12, 2007)

Also: has anyone ever considered installing sand traps for this watershead? I think money would be well spent doing this given all the bridge crossings in this urban area.


----------

