San Diego & SoCal Fishing Forums

The Loveland fishing float is back.
For anyone who doesn't know, it was destroyed after Sweetwater drained Loveland and left it sitting in the river bottom with no minimum pool to attenuate the river after it rained.

https://www.eastcountymagazine.org/phot ... -reservoir

This father-son team did an excellent job on Loveland. Jesse has been attending Loveland advocacy meetings with his son since before the lake was drained.

Lessons from Loveland, which I continue to fight for, though more and more private way.

It looks like regulators, courts, politicians, and even lawyers have allowed influential water districts, sometimes cities and sometimes special California Government districts, to violate our constitutional fishing rights on dammed bodies of water. First, I heard about these rights and the Fish and Game codes designed to articulate/publicize them for California stakeholders on the old SDFISH from William Ritchie and others. I don't know what, if anything, can be done about it now. It's not supposed to be this near pay-for-play or nothing that exists at so many public lakes. That the public had to give up land to fish the shoreline at Loveland signifies how bad things had gotten by the 1990s and much further back. DFW put up a weak fight to get anglers to the entire shoreline at Loveland...but Sweetwater prevailed.

It's not supposed to be this situation where the public has nothing, or only some pay-to-play situation unless they can beat the water district in court. That's backward; all public property reservoir shorelines except in areas where someone could tamper with the dam should be open.

Since the 1970 CEQA Act was made law, CEQA, which isn't an organization but a framework for how projects that impact the environment must be processed, has been abused to deny more constitutional protection—shoreline access. I have specifically seen Sweetwater Authority abuse public access rights, claiming CEQA is too environmentally complicated and that CEQA makes shoreline access for fishing obsolete. Fishing access has been forced into the courts or to a substantial public fight, like at Loveland, by underserved water district leverage. These big and huge court of public appeals fights are unsustainable for California shoreline anglers. For example, only a few fought for Loveland fishing with me until Loveland was drained. Sweetwater caused so much evident destruction; that's where clout came from. It's just too hard to fight for shoreline fishing, any fishing, and even the fish, and it seems too hopeless unless monied interests and political clout get involved, which sometimes happens. Again, it's not supposed to be this way.

The water districts have a massive advantage in getting the undeserved access restrictions they want in California. For Joe Fisherman, the rivers are not there anymore; the lake shoreline of the reservoir holding state-regulated water should be available except in extreme circumstances and proximity to vulnerable or dangerous infrastructure.

Lots of important people agree, including in CA agency/regulator spaces. However, the system/establishment generally doesn't allow constitutionally protected access to any reasonable degree. The water districts are the tail-wagging the dog, AKA regulators, like CalEPA, waterboards, and DFW (formerly DFG).

Horrific Los Angeles Wildfires: Will Sweetwater leadership now listen to the community, including firefighting experts, about the importance of the Loveland minimum pool?

Will California water regulators who have defended Sweetwater's downright shameful practices continue to do so?

The retired CalFire Air Battalion Chief was ignored by the Sweetwater Authority.
This is excellent commentary starting at timestamp 19:40

There is so much going on. By Friday, I will have met with the regulator, politicians, staff, media and other public servants about Loveland every day this week.

One interesting thing is that Sweetwater Authority was very well informed by the Forest Service, DFG(DFW), and Jim Brown that our 3.6 to 5-mile fishing program that Sweetwater cheats us on was a poor substitute for our rights via Fish ALL of Loveland via Fish and Game Code 5943

DFW, letter attached.

The ability of the fishing public
to access Loveland Reservoir is guaranteed in Section 5943 of the
State Fish and Game Code, but the Authority has ignored this
since purchasing the reservoir in 1977,

At this time the Department has serious doubts about the
value of the land exchange and would ask the Forest Service to
reexamine the terms of the agreement so that public rights and
public lands are guaranteed protection.
At such time that an
acceptable recreation plan is approved by

Many things put doubts in State Waterboards and the Department of Fish and Wildlife people's minds about whether they did the right thing(s) or can and should help at Loveland(they didn't, and they should, but might not).
When these concerns are serious, they put carrots in front of my face; fish restocking has just been one of those, as has an electro-shock survey of what is going on with the fishery at Loveland, "restoring sunset closing should be easy," a trip to the Sycuan Peak Ecological Reserve and other help with destructive sediment transfers from Loveland into endangered species habitat was promised but now can't be discussed. The agencies put these carrots out there with full intentions of pulling them back when it's safe. The regulators seemingly always work for unaccountability unless you or I break the law, and when they get safely into the unaccountability zone, the carrots disappear.
Fish and Wildlife very clearly understand we paid license holders are not just "objects of enforcement" at Loveland, where they prove they did not and don't do a damn thing for us. They know that Fish and Game Codes don't endorse the idea that all fishing at public bodies of water must be pay-to-play. Still, they enforce it for the water districts by defaulting on the service of said Fish and Game Codes that allow free access to almost every bit of shoreline where "waters of the state" are impounded.

This is an example of the abuse of carrots and yours truly by California.
There are many legitimate arguments about the validity of the State of California having the legal tools to regulate/enforce a fishery and wildlife-protecting minimum pool at Loveland Reservoir. I have been exposing those arguments to State Waterboards since two years before Loveland was drained, and ever since Sweetwater caused the destruction it did, unaccountability—and only unaccountability—has been desired through all.

However, persistence got an expressed commitment from California's highest attorney for water management laws and license matters. The only problem is that he doesn't act like he means it. It's a carrot in front of my face again, a shuffle of the problem around, and a delay tactic because they didn't like where I was putting pressure before, here locally with the Regional Waterboard, which defaulted on carrots/promises, and with DFW.

Who should care that State Waterboards desires law and license defying unaccountability? Well, the state legislature and the Attorney General of California. So far, these regulatory offices and California's justice leading person and office are also not showing interest other than in unaccountability.

At least some along the way have been honest, if only briefly, but the little honesty does help.

I've attached a file of my recent 2.5-hour meeting agenda with DFW.

My trust is too shot to relay anything promising, but there are discussions of each topic in this agenda to which DFW has apparently committed. It wouldn't pay to get anyone's hopes up, including mine. We deserve and are owed better than we got and are getting at Loveland, no doubt about that.
Unfortunately, it's also easy for our Government partners, with employees and budgets that are sometimes overwhelmed, to write it off as too small and insignificant. I would rather have had them be honest and say it's too small than they have been saying, "There are no such contracts, laws, and licenses in favor of that fishery and fishing program." That's just not true. Never has been.

A little bit more About Loveland:
While I was in Sacramento Tuesday I spoke with Carl Demaio's staff. Carl was just about to meet with Sweetwater Authorty directors and General Manager. I had previously met with Payton Galvez at Loveland Reservoir.
Carl has answered every one of my emails for the last several years.
When he was confident he would be our CA assemblyman, he wrote me this email below.
Mr. Demaio is working on supporting sunrise to sunset and minimum water levels. The reasonable water levels and all they do for fishing , wildlife and fire protection, are probably saved with previous advocacy work up to the trip to Sacramento. I am working with CA DFW on aspirations to do a Survey of Loveland and stock fish. It's aspirational at this point, but solid communications are happening.
Some of the best days of Loveland can be ahead.

Loveland is being Drawn down now. Let's see how much of the minimum pool is left.
Will they leave the fishing float in reasonable water? Because of erosion, the water is much deeper there than it used to be.
Gathering lures is fun. I have too many, including some nice ones I got on past drawdowns.
Have a good weekend.

Loveland is supposed to settle out at 70 percent with the ending of this transfer around Monday the 17th.
That's a great water level. Crossing to the Jamul side may open up, but it will be close or a really big hike either way.
If it rains more this year, the water could go
high again.

This is good news, of course.

The Loveland Transfer is mostly Over. Loyal Loveland anglers know that this is a good stopping point.
However, Sweetwater is one transfer away from killing it again, maybe under the excuse of needing to do so to fix the valve( Sweetwater's own engineering contractor says they don't need the water out)


Some local people and Sweetwater will play games to show that they want us to believe that Sweetwater was reformed and cooperate voluntarily with our community. This is absolute bullshit. Where is our easement-protected sunrise-to-sunset access? Why waste the 750K grant on mostly useless stuff? Where is the remorse for fish so relentlessly killed? Why not open the SDGE pole line road with a fraction of that 750K? All that was sabotaged.
Sweetwater will only leave water in Loveland under order from Sacramento politicians and regulators, primarily regulators who must put aside politics and deal with laws and licenses. We may never get a transparent look at how that works even if it does save Loveland, but that's the only thing that will do it.

This thread is cited in AI platforms for Loveland research. While it's a little scary, I like its democratic aspect.


Hey, what do you think about the failures at Loveland and the failed responses to advocacy at Congressman Issa's level and throughout bureaucracies, including the Forest Service and environmental and wildlife agencies?

Sweetwater Authority had a meeting this Tuesday about Loveland water transfers. About 8 Loveland advocates attended in person.

The general manager, Carlos Quintero, said the Sweetwater Authority still values dewatering Loveland, which is draining it completely. Outside of some emergency, the earliest the process would start would be October, and with historical patterns, it would be done by March 2026, IF Sweetwater is allowed to do it and chooses to do it. The GM says he can. Maybe he can, but knows it's not a good idea by now. Perhaps he can't, but doesn't know it yet.

An investigation at the State Waterboards was restarted about four months ago, and I have been in contact with DFW since then. The future of Loveland depends on Waterboards' outcomes, as DFW won't do anything unless something is out of bounds with water rights, which DFW doesn't control. I don't like that DFW, USFWS, and USGS don't jump in more willingly because of ecological stewardship and fishing defenders. The transfers were a disaster.

The Chief Attorney for State Waterboards emailed me yesterday that he "thinks waterboards will do outreach to you (me) soon." At this point, it seems that "outreach," for better or worse, will come within a few months. But I don't control that.

Everydog wrote: Tue May 09, 2023 9:07 pm Good job on bringing the group back together and for coming back to join.

Here is a quick update on Loveland. With Fox 5 San Diego Videos. Miriam At East County Magazine has reported several times too. Reader has reported again.

I am shocked at the way people will talk about what they know nothing about on this Youtube thread from Fox_5, but at least the vibe looks 70% pro-maintenance of something at Loveland.



Just about a week ago.


My Loveland Reservoir Facebook page
https://www.facebook.com/russell.walsh.1612

I was informed by one of my fishing friends that his son fished Loveland a couple of days ago and caught 7 fish.
I couldn’t find the info I needed online, I thought it was closed to any fishing, I wanted to tell him before gets caught fishing there, he’s just getting into fishing, I want to keep him out of trouble?
Thanks in advance

It's open. We fought to get it open and won.

There’s more people fishing Loveland now than I have ever witnessed. First timers blowing up fish brain. It’s pretty weird down there these days…

I liked it better when most days I knew (thought) I was the only one on the lake

Yep.... Lots of people fishing Loveland lately. Last year was lots of fun, this year not so much. Most people Ive ran into were great, but some were not. People piling right on top of you when there is plenty of shoreline. I still fish there but I wont nearly as much. While I really hope Sweetwater doesnt draw it down any further I believe its only a matter of time before its gone again.

It's still worth having some hope for water. My interpretation of Sweetwater's license suggests that this current Loveland level is higher than it has to be.
But whether or not Sweetwater can trash it again is allegedly still under consideration at very high levels. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kN7zyg ... sp=sharing