India Brook mischeif

[cappy]

Yep Buttermilk Falls, thanks Brian.

[Razorbacker]

I hope this guy gets financially hammered.

[NJAngler]

The NJDFGW doesn't care if the trout population dwindles. I mean good riddance to all those invasive brown trout right?

[Rusty Spinner]

The NJDFGW doesn't care if the trout population dwindles. I mean good riddance to all those invasive brown trout right?

They have been very concerned about this illegal activity and directly involved. I know because I involved them.....

[Rusty Spinner]

The NJDFGW doesn't care if the trout population dwindles. I mean good riddance to all those invasive brown trout right?

They have been very concerned about this illegal activity and directly involved. I know because I involved them.....

[NJAngler]

I thought destroying wild browns was their priority/policy? I am being a bit facetious of course but I still can't get past the fact they were actually euthanizing them with the Rhinehart situation. They are a valuable fishing resource native or not. Just seems to go against everything they fight to preserve.

Years ago I came across a concrete barrier which was completely deflecting Mulhockaway Creek from its original channel and sending it off into woods in several different directions. I took a few pics, sent them to Pat Hamilton and she contacted enforcement. The WCO in charge found out a farmer who lived along the creek was tired of the stream flooding the back of his property so he built the dam. He was cited, fined and had to pay for its removal.
This is just what you see on public lands. One can only imagine what people are doing on private property. I have seen some truly epic bs as I tend to ignore posted signs(a stream cannot be owned IMO. I will argue that anytime) Stream channel diversion is common as it cutting away streamside vegetation and some serious dam building.

[Rusty Spinner]

I thought destroying wild browns was their priority/policy? I am being a bit facetious of course but I still can't get past the fact they were actually euthanizing them with the Rhinehart situation. They are a valuable fishing resource native or not. Just seems to go against everything they fight to preserve.

Years ago I came across a concrete barrier which was completely deflecting Mulhockaway Creek from its original channel and sending it off into woods in several different directions. I took a few pics, sent them to Pat Hamilton and she contacted enforcement. The WCO in charge found out a farmer who lived along the creek was tired of the stream flooding the back of his property so he built the dam. He was cited, fined and had to pay for its removal.
This is just what you see on public lands. One can only imagine what people are doing on private property. I have seen some truly epic bs as I tend to ignore posted signs(a stream cannot be owned IMO. I will argue that anytime) Stream channel diversion is common as it cutting away streamside vegetation and some serious dam building.

Only where they want to save native brook trout are they doing anything about wild browns, and that is less than a handful of the thousands of miles of wild trout water we have in NJ. In some waters, the Division is giving up on the native brook trout and embracing wild brown trophy fisheries. So I know you are being facetious, but it doesn't tell the entire story.

[brettdv]

These mf’rs are back at it. Took a family hike. They had truck and heavy equipment working right up to the riverbed On the hike up. Photos from the hike back down. Clearly looking to poach some water.

Does anyone know if they have permit/permission to do this.

9C6D72B9-ABE2-49B4-8FF6-17614B53B4D8.jpeg (2.99 MiB) Viewed 2344 times

A593EFE4-CC78-4245-9E7B-42CB9829A935.jpeg (7.28 MiB) Viewed 2344 times

[Twism86]

Based on what it looked like last time I was there they are filling in the previous ditch. It used to be 6’ deep so that looks like it’s being filled in.

[brettdv]

Definitely but they installed a pipe/valve to take water from the brook.

[NJAngler]

I was there about three weeks ago. I made sure I stayed on the twp property and gave the middle finger in his direction. He’s got a camera there so I just wanted to say hello.

[cappy]

Definitely but they installed a pipe/valve to take water from the brook.

This landowner clearly thinks he is above the law. That pipe looks like he plans to illegally take water from the stream. I don't know this section of India Brook or I would report it myself. Someone needs to alert the proper authorities who if needed can meet at the location.

[kennyp2339]

Looks like the creek was semi restored in his illegal work area, the pipe might be approved since the inlet is above the stream current, so he'll only get water when there a surplus of water, but who knows unless its actually inspected.
Glad to see that when people see something that might be wrong, they report it.

[NJAngler]

This sort of chicanery goes on a lot of private property that the public doesn’t see. A few years back I was at a Hunterdon WTS when I decided to ignore the trespassing signs to explore a little further downstream. A few hundred feet away from the border of state property, I came across a dam, a stream diversion into a pond and all kinds of steamside cuttings. It looked like a construction site. Water was leaving the pond but warmer and cloudier. I couldn’t report it since I wasn’t suppose to be there. It does explain why the brown pops have dropped so much. Over in Pa have seen same. One dude blocked the creek, installed a concrete pipe leading directly into a pond so where the entire original channel was dry. I mean this was some serious work and I’m pretty sure if you order a pipe like that you have to explain the why and where. This was a Class A brook trout stream.

[Jerzguy21]

I have seen some truly epic bs as I tend to ignore posted signs(a stream cannot be owned IMO. I will argue that anytime) Stream channel diversion is common as it cutting away streamside vegetation and some serious dam building.

Mark, It's good to see that at least some reasonable remediation was done from the previous damage, even if that pipe was allowed to be installed through some loophole in the law, On my previous post on this thread, exactly the same scenario is occurring on a Oldwick WTS that I spent hours sending photos, making phone calls and attempted to get the Biologist involved, but they wouldn't touch it. I was given a contact persons number in the DEP and supposedly a person was sent out and it was determined that no harm was done. Bottom line is that MONEY determines what action if any will be taken. If you want to get aggravated and see for yourself (only have to step out of your car ) send me a PM. Jack