Mine was one of the boats in the Global piece. I have watched that piece over and over and every time I think about it I get mad. It was a terribly inaccurate article and made claims that were completely wrong and untrue. For one thing, the wrecked boat did not crash and sink in the middle of the river. They backed off the bank and the reverse jammed and they had no forward. They drifted down into a log jam and tipped over. This could have happened anywhere, there was no operator error or inexperience involved. Don't get me going on the rest of the article.
And remember there have been more pickups and logging equipment in the river than jet boats over the years.
They talk about bank erosion but one freshet causes way more erosion in one spring than all the jet boats in BC could in one year. The banks, by and large, are river rock banks and as such are resistant to wave related erosion but the river runs huge when it is in freshet and cuts new channels every year.
Very few boats ever run in less than a foot of water and where they are shallow it is usually the main channel and is not spawning habitat. I know that jets can run shallow but what I am saying is that most boaters want water under them. Right now the water is so low that 90% of the boats around can't access more than the bottom 5/6 km's.
Geff says that the fish don't need a boat screaming over their heads but ,again, we are running in the deepest, fastest water mostly and not in spawning habitat. Your comment about the lack of hatchery enhancement would be interesting to the staff at the Courbould Creek hatchery because according to the internet "They release 800,000 Coho, 200,000 Chinook, 1,000,000 Chum and 20,000 Steelhead in Pitt Lake and the surrounding lakes and rivers."
StillAqua, didn't that study indicate that the damage to the eggs peaked on the ninth day and there was very little impact on either side of that time? I read that report a while ago because I thought I should find what impact I am having when I boat. As I remember the water in the study was around 12" and I couldn't find any information on the river to compare their conditions to the Pitt but I think the Pitt is a bigger, faster river than where they did the study. Obviously, or maybe not, more water should mean less impact.
Sandman makes some very good points and education should be available so that all boaters (not just fishermen) can minimize their impact. Unfortunately there is nothing available that I am aware of.
Obviously the boats will have some impact but I really don't think it is particularly significant.
I keep seeing that it is crowded at times on the river but I don't think I have ever seen more than a dozen boats on the busiest day but I always hear about how it is too crowded with 20-30 boats. I would guess that most of the times I have been up there I would see about 5-6 boats but I don't go during salmon season. I think a lot of the information about this place is put out by people that have an interest in restricting access to their customers only. Lots of times we will be the only boat on the river that is fishing.
Author
Topic: Jet Boats Affect on Fish (Read 8840 times)