Category Archives: Chinook Salmon

A Tale of Three Critically Dry Years – More Shasta Reservoir Solutions to Save Salmon

Posted on by

Shasta Reservoir is low again at the end of summer in drought year 2021.  The pattern is very similar to critically dry years 2014 and 2015 (Figure 1) that resulted in the loss of access to Shasta’s cold water and failure of the winter-run salmon spawn in the summer.  Year 2021 is leading to another failure of the winter-run salmon spawn and fry production.  Shasta’s cold-water pool supply is depleted, and river releases are too warm (Figure 2).  Water temperatures downstream of Shasta held in 2020 (Figure 2) despite high water releases (Figure 3), because 2020 had 1 million acre-feet more storage at the beginning of the year than either 2014 or 2021 (Figure 1).

The three disaster years could have had different outcomes if as little as 300,000 acre-feet of additional storage had been available in 2013 and spring 2021.  If at the end-of-year 2013, storage had been 2 MAF rather than 1.7 MAF, and the additional 300,000 AF been carried into 2014 and 2015 and then used to protect fish, the 2014 and 2015 disasters could have been averted.  If the spring releases in 2021 had been minimized as in other drought years, then the 2021 disaster could have been averted.

One reasonable strategy for Shasta Reservoir’s storage problems is minimum end-of-year storage prescriptions based on initial storage and water year type, and limiting releases in spring after dry years when storage is at or below 2 MAF.  Goals should be set for the next year based on initial conditions end-of-year storage (Figure 1).  As stated in a previous post, it is no longer enough to set end-of-September storage targets.  Climate change means in part that more autumn months are very dry. Exports in the fall (and a transfer season now extended through November) pull down CVP storage or at least slow reservoir refill.  Storage at the end of November or end of December needs to an explicit part of the carryover calculus.  Figure 1 shows end-of-November as the requirement.

Proposed Operating Storage Rules

  • Wet Year – High ending storage required (3 MAF minimum e-o-y storage – 11, 17, 19);
  • After Wet Year – if following year turns normal or dry, but reservoir fills, target is 2.5 MAF e-o-y storage (12, 16, and 18); if reservoir does not fill, target is 2.0 MAF (13, 20);
  • Critical Year – if critically dry with low storage, target e-o-y storage is 1.25 MAF (14, 15, 21).

Proposed Operating Release Rule

  • After a Drier Year – if storage is at or below 2 MAF at the beginning of a year and is below 2.5 MAF by the end of March, then April-May Shasta Reservoir releases should be limited to sustain and support in achieving higher summer storage and an e-o-y storage of 1.25 MAF. This decision needs to be made in April, based on a conservative runoff forecast methodology.

 Past Performance 2011-2021

  • 2013-2015 – Critical Dry Years – In 2013, storage fell about 300,000 AF below the 2 MAF e-o-y target, leaving 2014 e-o-y at a deficit that carried over into 2015. That led directly to the loss of access to Shasta’s cold water in summer-fall 2014 and 2015.
  • 2021 – Critical Dry Year – In 2021, Shasta Reservoir failed to regain its starting storage, not because 2020 ended from a storage deficit, but because of excessive releases in April and May (Figure 3).

 In summary, the 2014, 2015, and 2021 salmon production disasters in the upper Sacramento River salmon spawning reach below Shasta Reservoir could have been averted by following simple reasonable criteria for end-of-year minimum storage and stricter criteria for storage releases in spring of drought years.   This presumes, of course, that Reclamation would not have otherwise misused the water thus saved.

Figure 1. Shasta Reservoir daily-average storage levels in acre-ft, 2014-2021. Red circles are suggested minimum target criteria for those year types. Red arrows are years in hindsight the criteria were not met.

Figure 2. Keswick Reservoir release daily-average water temperature, May-October 2014, 2020, and 2021. Target maximum release temperature for salmon spawning in the 10-mile spawning reach below Keswick is 53oF (red line). Note Reclamation’s 2021 stated plan was to maintain target temperatures only at peak spawning in late June, but not in the early (late Apr-early June) or late (July-August) portions of the spawning period. Note also the lost access to the cold-water pool in September 2014 and October 2020. Access to the cold water is being lost in mid-August 2021.

Figure 3. Shasta Reservoir releases April-October in years 2014, 2020, and 2021. Note high releases in spring 2021 compared to 2014 in April-May period (difference was 240,000 acre-feet).

American River Water Forum 2.0 – The Future for American River Salmon and Steelhead

Posted on by

Conditions in the lower American River have been bad all year, and are getting worse.1 Folsom Reservoir storage never recovered this spring and is critically low this summer (Figure 1). Releases from reservoir to the river have been low (Figure 2), resulting in excessively warm river water temperatures (Figure 3).

In a recent post on the Water Forum’s blog, Jessica Law, the new executive director of the American River Water Forum, described current conditions for the lower American River:

I won’t sugarcoat it. Conditions in the river will be bad. However, the Water Forum and our partners are working hard to ensure conditions are as good as they can possibly be, and to minimize harm to fish and habitat. As you may have seen on the news, we began this year with a near-normal snowpack. In most years, the snowpack melts and feeds our lakes and rivers. This year, the snowpack disappeared in the span of several weeks, soaking into the dry soil or evaporating—perhaps foreshadowing what may turn out to be the case study for climate change impacts on our water supplies and environment.

In a recent interview with Matt Weiser posted in Maven’s Notebook, Ms. Law further elaborated about the update of the original Water Forum Agreement from the year 2000.

“The biggest thing we’ve done is develop and implement a Modified Flow Management Standard with Reclamation that governs water movement in the Lower American River and optimizes conditions for fish. So that’s huge. …

But at some point, nature is moving faster than we can keep up. This year, with another extreme drought in play, is a great example of that. We had better water storage in all reservoirs coming out of a dry year than we ever had. This was very intentional by Reclamation and the Department of Water Resources. Still, we’re in a really bad situation this year.

Yet there is more to the story than natural conditions. Notwithstanding the Modified Flow Management Standard, fisheries in the lower American River have been struggling for many years.2

Reservoir inflows are low and water temperatures are high in summer of drier years (Figures 3 and 4), because Reclamation fails to conserve storage and the reservoir’s cold-water pool in most years. In the drier years, high June releases to meet Delta requirements and/or export demands lead to lower summer storage and high July water temperatures (Figures 1-3). Low reservoir storage levels lead to lack of access to the cold-water pool. Peaking power releases in afternoon-evening period draw warmer water from the surface of the reservoir (Figure 5).

A part of the solution to the problem is to have strict rules on end-of-year storage (Figure 7):

  1. 500,000 AF in high-storage years
  2. 350,000 AF in intermediate-storage years
  3. 250,000 AF in low-storage years

It is no longer enough to set end-of-September storage targets. Climate change means in part that more autumn months are very dry. Exports in the fall (and a transfer season now extended through November) pull down CVP storage or at least slow reservoir refill. Storage at the end of November or end of December needs to an explicit part of the carryover calculus. Figure 7 shows end-of-November as the requirement.

Complying with these rules (criteria) would occur through strict management of summer-fall storage releases. It would begin with the higher requirements for high-storage years, when there is water to manage. This would help prevent excessive drawdown from cascading into catastrophic conditions in one year.

Conserving storage in spring of drier years is also important in maximizing water storage for the beginning of summer. Use of Folsom Reservoir to meet short-term Delta water quality demands in winter and spring of drier years like 2021 (Figure 6) exacerbates summer storage and water temperature problems. This also wreaks havoc on the lower American River’s steelhead spawning habitat and salmon and steelhead rearing habitat.3

What is running away from managers of the lower American River is not only climate conditions. It is also the relentless pressure on other Central Valley Project (CVP) and State Water Project (SWP) reservoirs that forces Folsom Reservoir to shoulder more of the burden than it can bear. The explicit goal of “maximizing deliveries” in purpose-and-need statements of the 2019 Biological Opinions for the operation of the CVP and SWP are just one aspect of this pressure.

The over-delivery of irrigation water from Shasta Reservoir to Sacramento River Settlement Contractors in the spring and summer of 2021 made much less water from Shasta available to meet Delta water quality needs. Hence, the sudden demands on Folsom. There is a direct line between deliveries along the Sacramento and the amount of water in storage at Folsom Reservoir. These related problems must be solved to allow implementation of Folsom storage levels to be truly protective.

In summary, Water Forum 2.0 should focus on conserving Folsom Reservoir’s cold-water pool, providing access to the cold-water pool, minimizing the adverse effects of peaking power on river water temperature, and minimizing use of Folsom storage for short-term Delta water needs. While much of the focus must be on drier years, especially years like 2015 and 2021, overuse in high-storage type years can also lead to future problems.

For more detail on the salmonids and their habitat conditions in the lower American River see https://www.calfish.org/Portals/2/Programs/CentralValley/LAR_RST/docs/2020%20LAR%20RST%20Emigration%20Monitoring.pdf .

Figure 1. Folsom Reservoir storage patterns in four drier years: 2001, 2008, 2015, and 2021.

Figure 2. Folsom/Nimbus Reservoir releases to the American River at Fair Oaks in June-July of four drier years: 2001, 2008, 2015, and 2021.

Figure 3. Water temperature in the lower American River at William Pond gage in June-July of four drier years: 2001, 2008, 2015, and 2021. Red line is the upper limit of water temperature considered safe for salmonids.

Figure 4. Dry years 2001, 2015, and 2021 June-July inflow to Folsom Reservoir. Note 2015 and 2021 were very similar.

Figure 5. 48 hours of flow (cfs/100) and water temperature (oF) from Folsom Dam beginning 7/26/21 at 08:00 hours.

Figure 6. Folsom Reservoir daily-average storage releases (cfs) October 2020 to July 2021. Note each rectangle represents approximately 15,000 acre-ft of storage water. The three peaks in spring represent approximately 100,000 acre-ft of the end-of-June storage in Figure 1, or roughly about half the difference between 2015 and 2021 beginning-of-the-summer storage. Higher releases at the end of 2020 also contributed to the difference, along with low precipitation and snowmelt in 2021.

Figure 7. Folsom Reservoir daily-average storage (acre-feet) 2000-2021. Recommended minimum storage criteria are shown by circles: blue for high-storage years; light blue for intermediate-storage years; yellow for low-storage years. Red arrows are years that grossly exceeded such criteria.

Butte Creek Spring-Run Chinook Salmon in Peril

Posted on by

Butte Creek DeSabla – Centerville Project options1 could help save the salmon

Butte Creek’s spring-run salmon are dying in droves (over 12,000 carcasses of un-spawned adults counted so far in summer 2021) in their over-summering reach upstream of Centerville. A huge run of the most important core element of the California Central Valley Spring-Run ESU is being wiped out by low flows and high water temperatures.

This year’s spring-summer salmon migration and holding water temperatures have been about 5ºC higher than normal (Figure 1). Average daily water temperatures where adult salmon have been holding were over 20ºC for a solid month from the third week in June through the third week in July. Though the immediate cause of this year’s die-off is not known, these temperatures can lead to disease and even hypoxia in overcrowded conditions. Streamflows have also been well below average in 2021 (Figure 2). This is a consequence of reduced snowmelt and of reduced water available from PG&E’s Hendricks diversion from the West Branch of the Feather River, part of PG&E’s DeSabla-Centerville Hydroelectric Project.

After decades of successful recovery progress, the recent trend for spring-run salmon in Butte Creek is downward (Figure 3). The huge loss this summer of what was to be a recovery run will make the trend worse.

PG&E has operated the DeSabla – Centerville Project (Figure 4) for a century, but decided in 2017 to withdraw its application for a new license to continue operating the project. PG&E is in the process of trying to sell the project, but after four and a half years, the sale, and the suitability of the prospective buyer, are not certain. Meanwhile, needed improvements to the project have been on hold. In particular, infrastructure to reduce heating of water in a small project reservoir just uphill from DeSabla Powerhouse on Butte Creek could have helped reduce water temperatures in Butte Creek this year.

Without the 40-100 cfs of cool summer water available from the West Branch of the Feather River via the DeSabla project, water temperature and flow conditions would be even worse, and sustaining spring run in Butte Creek might not be possible. Therefore, some stakeholders have suggested that the State of California, specifically the Department of Water Resources, should consider taking over the DeSabla project to secure cool water from the West Branch Feather River for the immediate future.

An additional phase of actions on Butte Creek could entail removing the Lower Centerville Diversion Dam, a low-head dam on Butte Creek just downstream from the DeSabla powerhouse (Figure 4). Removal of the dam and diversion could be a first step in allowing access to many miles of upstream spawning and rearing habitat on Butte Creek presently blocked by the dam. It is likely that several natural barriers might also need to be modified.

As climate change strikes California with an accelerating vengeance, options to protect and recover California’s salmon are becoming fewer and more difficult. Salmon are dying in greater numbers and with more frequency on the floor of the Central Valley. Projects and alternatives to move salmon back into higher elevation habitat seemed far-fetched or exorbitant a decade ago. They require a fresh and more expansive look today.

Figure 1. Water temperature recorded April-July 2021, plus recent four-year average.

Figure 2. Streamflow recorded April-July 2021, plus 90-year historic average.

Figure 3. Butte Creek annual spring-run salmon snorkel counts. Data Source: CDFW.

Figure 4. Modified DeSabla Project concepts. Solid red line is continued transfer of West Branch of Feather water via DeSabla powerhouse. Red “X”s denote options to remove diversion dams and power canals.

 

  1. The Central Valley Salmon and Steelhead Recovery Plan (NMFS 2014) includes an action to evaluate a Butte Creek water management option for the PG&E DeSabla-Centerville Hydroelectric Project to determine the flow conditions that optimize coldwater holding habitat and spawning and rearing habitat. ↩

Feather River Salmon Recovery Responsibilities, Commitments, and Recommendations

Posted on by

The State Water Project (SWP) is not protecting salmon in the Feather River.  The Feather River’s once-prolific populations of wild spring-run and fall-run salmon have been replaced by smaller numbers of hatchery fish of inferior genetic composition.

The fact that the replacement of wild fish by hatchery fish plagues all salmon stocks in the Central Valley Evolutionarily Significant Units (ESUs) is no excuse.  The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) has many responsibilities and commitments to protect Feather River salmon under the SWP’s project’s hydropower license, water rights, and other permits, and more generally under the public trust doctrine and the reasonable use doctrine in the state constitution (Article X, Section 2).  The SWP has not met these responsibilities or related commitments since the SWP’s completion in the 1960s.

Neither Feather River nor Central Valley salmon recovery can be achieved without cleaning up the mess in the lower Feather River.  This fact is recognized widely in salmon recovery plans, federal biological opinions, State incidental take permits, and even in part in the Oroville Settlement Agreement for the relicensing of the SWP’s hydroelectric facilities at Oroville.  DWR has made many promises and commitments toward salmon recovery, but has realized very few.  While DWR has spent billions on upgrading project infrastructure, especially after the 2017 spillway failure, it has spent little toward salmon recovery.

So how should DWR focus its salmon recovery process for the Feather River at this point?

Well, most certainly on mandatory provisions in the soon-to-be issued FERC hydropower license and related State Board water quality certification.  Also, on existing or needed conditions in its water right permits that extend beyond the small geographic scope of the FERC license.  The next focus should be on  the “Habitat Expansion Agreement for Central Valley Spring-Run Chinook Salmon and California Central Valley Steelhead” (HEA) that DWR and Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) agreed to during the Oroville relicensing.1 There are also requirements in the Reasonable and Prudent Measures in the 2016 federal biological opinion for the Oroville relicensing.

The overall focus should be on recommendations in specific salmon recovery plans pertaining to the project.

Below are my recommendations for top priority actions for Feather River salmon recovery from among the sources mentioned above.

Spring-Run and Fall-Run Salmon Introgression

A primary focus and priority should be on minimizing introgression of the spring-run and fall-run salmon populations in the hatchery and natural spawning area of the 8-mile Low Flow Channel (LFC) downstream of Oroville Dam.

For the natural spawning area of the LFC, one option is a segregation weir at the lower end above the Thermalito Afterbay outlet that would provide for selective passage of selected adult spawners into the spawning area.  Similar weir systems are operated in lower Battle Creek and lower Butte Creek.  For example, the weir could provide seasonal passage to accommodate only spring-run spawners that arrive earlier than fall-run.  The fall-run would be forced to spawn downstream of the afterbay outlet in the High Flow Channel (HFC) where habitat conditions, especially water temperatures, would be more suitable later in the year when fall-run salmon are spawning.  The weir could also trap fish to allow direct segregation or egg taking, or trapping-and-hauling of selected adults or offspring produced in the LFC.

The hatchery program should focus on broodstock selection and hatchery operations that produce returning adult spring-run and fall-run salmon of the highest genetic integrity possible.   It should also operate to limit straying of Feather River origin hatchery salmon.  Hatchery operations should also focus on strategies for smolt releases that provide the greatest return while limiting effects on wild salmon.  Otherwise, the Feather River Fish Hatchery Improvement Program (Article A107 of the Oroville Settlement Agreement) should be implemented.  This program sets specific targets for hatchery temperatures, requires development of a hatchery management program (including a Hatchery and Genetics Management Plan), potential installation of a water supply disinfection system, and funding for annual hatchery operations and maintenance.

Lower Feather River Habitat Improvements

There are many potential habitat improvements in the LFC and in the High Flow Channel (HFC, the lower Feather River downstream of the outlet of Thermalito Afterbay).  Habitat improvements could provide significant benefits to adult salmon holding and spawning success, and wild fry survival and smolt production.  One general category is water quality (i.e., water temperature) and streamflow management through improved infrastructure and operations strategies of flow releases to the LFC and HFC.  The second category is improvements to the physical (non-flow) habitat features, including channel configuration (depths, velocities, and substrate composition) in both the LFC and HFC.

Flow and Water Temperature

Adult spring-run salmon migrate in spring to the lower Feather River, then hold in deep pools over the summer to spawn in early fall.  Adequate flows and cool water temperatures are essential elements of (1) spring adult migration habitat in the lower Feather River and (2) over-summering holding habitat.  Without adequate flows for migration and holding, adult salmon are prone to disease and pre-spawn mortality, poor reproductive success, or lower survival of eggs.  Water temperatures should be no higher than 65oF during migration and 60oF during holding to minimize such detrimental effects.  Water temperatures in the HFC (or LFC) should not exceed 65oF in spring (Figure 1).  Water temperatures in the LFC should not exceed 60oF in summer (Figure 2).  The various planning documents outline potential options to reduce water temperatures in the LFC and HFC.  These include measures to sustain Oroville Reservoir’s cold-water pool and reliably release water from it.  They also include measures to keep water in the Afterbay complex cooler prior to release into the HFC.  Still other measures may include limiting release of water from the Afterbay through a variety of modifications to facilities and operations.

Physical Habitat Features

The Biological Opinion and Settlement Agreement for the Oroville relicensing include prescriptions for the restoration and enhancement of lower Feather River salmon habitat, consistent with the NMFS Salmon Recovery Plan:

  1. Design and build infrastructure and stream channel features that will allow for segregation and reproductive isolation between fall-run and spring-run Chinook salmon naturally spawning in the LFC of the Feather River.
  2. Develop a spawning gravel budget and introduction plan, and implement the plan.
  3. Design, construct, and maintain side-channel and off-channel habitats for spawning and rearing salmon and steelhead.
  4. Obtain river riparian and floodplain habitat through easements and/or land acquisition as needed, allowing the river room to grow and move as necessary to provide key transition habitats, and to minimize degradation (such as channel incisions/filling and substrate armoring) of existing high quality habitat features. Provide a balance between the needs of flood conveyance, recreation, and aquatic, riparian and floodplain habitat in and near an urban environment.
  5. Design, build, and maintain channel features that provide optimum habitat, fish passage, and flood control necessary to minimize scour and erosion. High-flow floodplain channels may be such a feature.
  6. Provide deeper holding habitat and cover for adult over-summering spring-run salmon in the channel habitat features described above. Such habitat is often larger pools with a large bubble curtain at the head, underwater rocky ledges, and shade cover throughout the day. Adult spring-run Chinook salmon may also seek cover in smaller “pocket” water behind large rocks in fast water runs.

Benefits to Other Species

Efforts to improve salmon habitat in the lower Feather River will benefit other important native fish.

The lower Feather River is home to other significant fisheries resources including the following:

  • Spawning anadromous steelhead – spawning is concentrated in Low Flow Channel below the Fish Barrier Dam in winter and spring.
  • Steelhead eggs in gravel redds are concentrated in Low Flow Channel below the Fish Barrier Dam in winter and spring.
  • Steelhead yearling smolts rearing occurs in the Low Flow Channel and the High Flow Channel in winter and spring.
  • Steelhead fry rearing occurs in the Low Flow Channel and the High Flow Channel in winter and spring.
  • Spawning of green and white sturgeon occurs in spring in the High Flow Channel.
  • Sturgeon eggs are found in rock crevices of the river bottom in the High Flow Channel in spring.
  • The newly hatched larvae and fry of sturgeon occur on the river bottom in the High Flow Channel in spring.
  • Resident trout and non-salmonid fish occur year-round throughout the lower Feather River.

Habitat Expansion Agreement – Final Habitat Expansion Plan

The Oroville Project Habitat Expansion Agreement (HEA) requires creation of habitat suitable to increase populations of Central Valley spring-run Chinook salmon by a minimum of 2000 adults.  The Habitat Expansion Plan proposed by DWR and Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) focuses on physical habitat improvements to the Lower Yuba River to benefit spring-run Chinook salmon.   According to DWR and PG&E, this would develop a viable, self-sustaining population of spring-run Chinook salmon below Englebright Dam.

In my opinion, this is a big mistake.  The lower Yuba River below Englebright Dam has many of the same problems as the lower Feather.  Its spawning habitat already has capacity for many more spring-run salmon than are currently utilizing it.

A much better option is saving the Butte Creek spring-run salmon, the largest core population of the CV Spring Run Salmon ESU.  A first phase of a Butte Creek recovery program would be to secure Butte Creek’s supply of cold Feather River water for the immediate future.  PG&Es decommissioning of the DeSabla-Centerville Hydroelectric Project would potentially eliminate or reduce cold-water inputs from the West Branch of the Feather River to Butte Creek.  The DeSabla Project moves water from the West Branch Feather in canals for release into Butte Creek through the DeSabla Powerhouse.  This additional, relatively cool water provides holding and spawning habitat that presently sustains Butte Creek’s spring-run salmon and supports Butte Creek’s fall-run salmon and steelhead.

A second phase of a Butte Creek recovery program would entail removal of the Lower Centerville Diversion Dam, a low-head dam on Butte Creek just downstream of the DeSabla powerhouse (Figure 3).  Since 2014, this dam has not diverted any water.  Removal of the dam and diversion, and potentially removal or modification of other fish passage improvements at natural barriers if needed, could allow access to many miles of upstream spawning and rearing habitat on Butte Creek.  This would truly expand spring-run habitat in the Central Valley.

Summary and Conclusion

Feather River salmon recovery should proceed through improvements in flow, water quality, and physical habitat, project operations and facilities, and hatchery operations and facilities.  Habitat expansion for spring-run salmon should focus on saving the existing run of spring-run salmon on Butte Creek and expanding their upstream range, not on physical improvements to the lower Yuba River.

Figure 1. Water temperature in the lower Feather River within the HFC in spring 2020 and 2021. Red line is upper water temperature safe limit for migrating salmon.

Figure 2. Water temperature in the lower Feather River within the LFC, 2013 and 2021. Red line is upper water temperature safe limit for pre-spawn, adult holding salmon.

Figure 3. Map of PG&E DeSabla Hydroelectric Project features on Butte Creek and the West Branch of the Feather River.

Reclamation Has Done Everything it Could to Kill off Salmon this Summer. Now it Plans to Finish the Job.

Posted on by

The Bureau of Reclamation’s plan for Shasta-Trinity operations in summer of drought year 2021 was founded on killing off the salmon in the upper Sacramento River to sustain hydropower and water deliveries. So far, it has been wildly successful. Now Reclamation plans to finish the job on winter-run, spring-run, and fall-run salmon.

First, in late April and early May, Reclamation released an extraordinary amount of warm water from Shasta Reservoir for contractor water deliveries. These early releases compromised and delayed early winter-run spawning and late season smolt migration to the ocean (#1 in Figure 1). The early releases also unnecessarily reduced already critically-low Shasta storage, compromising the summer storage and cold-water-pool supply.

Second, Reclamation’s late May and early June releases of colder water (it ceased warm surface releases) encouraged spawning under falling flows, dropping river stage, and marginal spawning temperatures (Figures 1 and 2).

Third, increasing cold-water releases in late June and July (Figure 1) encouraged further spawning under rising and higher water levels (Figure 2).

Now, Reclamation plans to reduce releases of water in August and September (Figure 1). The water will get steadily warmer, because most of the cold water is gone. The combination of warm water and sharply dropping river stage (Figure 2) will complete the demise of this summer’s delayed winter-run spawn. The warmer water temperature will kill the late spawned eggs/embryo. A 4-foot drop in water level will strand and dewater many of the redds. The loss of Shasta’s cold-water-pool will also compromise the spring-run and fall-run spawning runs.

And finally, Reclamation will draw Shasta Reservoir down to historically low levels this fall. This will place Reclamation in a great position to kill all the salmon next year, too.

Figure 1. Flow and water temperature below Keswick Dam in the upper Sacramento River near Redding through late July 2021, along with Reclamation’s projections for August-September.

Figure 2. River stage below Keswick Dam in the upper Sacramento River near Redding through late July 2021, along with Reclamation’s projections for August-September.