Category Archives: Fish (general)

A Report from Puget Sound

Posted on by

Colleagues in the state of Washington write me (in italics below):

Sad to say but the Wild Fish Conservancy teaming with WDFW, using the ESA as a crutch, have eliminated pretty much all of the winter and summer steelhead fishing in Puget Sound streams. The salmon fishing regs are a mess and at the rate they are going, salmon seasons in Puget S. will vanish.

Comment: The salmon season was closed this year here in California to protect future fisheries. Puget Sound fisheries are closed to protect vanishing endangered breeds including Orcas1. Our hope here is that we protect both future fisheries and endangered species. One does not have to preclude the other.

With the massive human population increase in Puget Sound coupled with the anti-hatchery people, coupled with the inability of “habitat improvements” keeping up with habitat destruction, coupled with wildfires, climate change, low river flows/high water temperatures/extraneous bad water quality, things don’t look good for the future. ESA is only used here to eliminate hatcheries. Eventually, it will be just like the Redfish Lake situation where they got down to one returning male and had to go back to hatchery production. The ESU for Puget Sound includes all of the streams plus hatcheries. It seems that with the elimination of hatcheries, the anti’s will eliminate both the commercial and sport fisheries. What is really sad is the 36000 adult Chinook that were “surplus’ last year at the George Adams Hatchery and given to the crab fishermen (according to WDFW). The old WDFW people would have supported the anglers and tried to make things better. The current downward trend is near bottom (i.e., Chinook in Puget Sound declared extinct.)

Comment: It did not have to go this way in Puget Sound. It does not have to in California, either. We in California should learn from the mistakes to the north. There is a different way. More on the “way” in future posts.

Sacramento River 2023 Temperature Management Plan – What is Missing

Posted on by

It is that time of year again for another Sacramento River Temperature Management Plan.  You know, the plan adopted to protect Sacramento River salmon from the operation of the Shasta/Trinity Division of the federal Central Valley Project of US Department of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation).  Past plans have failed to protect salmon since they became a requirement in 1990 in the State Water Board’s Water Rights Order 90-05.

The plans have failed even in wet years, including this wet year (four wet years have occurred since 2010).  This year, Shasta Reservoir is full, and there is more than ample cold water to deliver to the salmon below Shasta Dam (a “Tier 1” wet year).  Oroville and Folsom reservoirs are also full this year and ready to help Shasta supply the needs of salmon in the Sacramento River and Bay-Delta.

In this year’s 2023-sacramento-river-temperature-management-plan, Reclamation has committed to providing 53.5oF water in the upper ten river miles (RM) of the Sacramento River downstream of Keswick Dam (RMs 290-300).  53.5ºF is the upper optimal threshold water temperature for adult salmon spawning, egg incubation, and fry emergence.  Reclamation has not always met this temperature in past wet years (Figure 1).

Other important benchmarks are maintaining lower Sacramento River water temperatures at and upstream of Red Bluff (RM 240) at <56oF and at <68oF downstream of Red Bluff (RMs 100-240).  Reclamation has exceeded these temperatures in the three most recent wet years (Figure 2).  Reclamation has not met summer water temperatures in the lower Sacramento River below 56oF at Red Bluff (RM 240) and below 68oF at Wilkins Slough (RM 120), because water diversions leave flows too low in summer (Figure 3).  In fact, Reclamation has given up trying to meet those temperatures.  The 2023 TMP evaluates maintaining 56oF at Balls Ferry, 36 miles upstream of Red Bluff, but concludes, without any supporting data or evidence, that maintaining that objective would be too uncertain and risky.

Analyses of flow and water temperature data for Wilkins Slough indicates it generally takes 6,000 to 10,000 cfs flow at Wilkins Slough to maintain water temperatures below 68oF in June, depending on air temperatures.  Note the water temperature in early June 2023 reached above 68oF (Figure 2) as flows fell below 10,000 cfs (Figure 3).

Table 1 shows optimal temperatures for adult migration, holding, and spawning.  Adult salmon migrating, holding, or spawning are stressed by water temperatures above 60oF.  Water temperature above 68oF are considered “lethal” for migrating salmon – such temperatures occurred in June of three wet years (Figure 2).  Stressful water temperatures occurred during the spring in the lower Sacramento River in all four wet years (Figure 3).  Spawning and egg incubation water temperatures exceeded the target 53oF for spring-summer spawning winter run salmon in all four wet years (Figure 1).

The 2023 Sacramento River Temperature Management Plan

“Significant uncertainties exist within the forecast that will require intensive real-time operations management throughout the summer to achieve the various goals and targets throughout the system.” (2023 TMP, p. 3) 

Comment:  Reclamation’s repeated strategy of staying close to 56º in a limited stretch of the Sacramento River, even in a year like 2023 when there is really no reason to adopt such a conservative strategy, unnecessarily compromises the salmon and sets a course for failure to meet permit requirements.  At the beginning of June, there were still endangered adult winter-run and spring-run salmon migrating up the lower Sacramento River.

As in 2023, Reclamation made overt decisions in 2017 and 2019 to drop flows below 7000 cfs in the lower reaches of the lower Sacramento River, knowing water temperatures would exceed their permitted upper limit and water quality standard of 68oF.  Flows closer to Keswick Dam in Redding also dropped, allowing Red Bluff water temperatures to exceed their limit of 56oF.

“The strategy of meeting 53.5 at CCR will likely result in average daily temperatures at or near 56 degrees F at BSF. Reclamation does not propose to operate the TCD explicitly to meet 56 degrees F at BSF under conditions that may require changes to TCD operations that could risk cold water pool resources for use later in the temperature management season. This would cause an unreasonable risk to other goals and objectives”.  (2023 TMP, p. 4)

Comment:  The TMP acknowledges from the start that Reclamation has no intention of meeting the 56oF standard at Balls Ferry (RM 276), let alone Red Bluff (RM 240).  With CCR maintained at 53oF, it takes more dam releases to keep the 60-mile upper river reach below 56oF and the 100+ miles of lower river below 68oF.  The 2023 Plan thus plainly ignores these other license and water quality standard requirements important to salmon survival.  Lower river water temperatures above 68oF through late summer will also compromise the fall-run salmon migration up the river.

Update

Water temperatures in the Sacramento River downstream of Red Bluff steadily increased through June (Figure 4).  In over 100 miles of the Sacramento River from Red Bluff downstream to the mouth of the Feather River, Reclamation is operating in violation of federal/state water quality standards, the federal/state Endangered Species Acts, and state water rights permits.  Water temperatures have reached lethal levels for migrating adult and juvenile salmon blocking their migrations up and down the river, respectively.  Stress, disease, and predation are compromising two brood years of salmon production in a wet year!  Water diversions from the river below Red Bluff are approaching 6000 cfs (Figure 5) not counting diversions upstream or from tributaries.

In Conclusion

In conclusion, the Sacramento River Temperature Management Plan should cover all of Reclamation’s obligations under its permits and all applicable water quality standards, not just water temperatures in the upper 10 river miles of over 200 river miles used by salmon.

Table 1. Water temperature objectives for adult Central Valley salmon. (Sources: San Joaquin River Recovery Plan). Note that the temperatures cited in this figure are the maximum daily temperatures. The 2023 TMP target for winter-run Chinook spawning is an average daily temperature of 53.5ºF.

Figure 1, Water temperature (daily average) at the Clear Creek gage in the Sacramento River above the mouth of Clear Creek (RM 290) in wet years 2011, 2017, 2019, and 2023.

Figure 2. Water temperature (daily average) at the Red Bluff (RM 240) and Wilkins Slough (RM 120) gages in the Sacramento River in wet years 2011, 2017, 2019, and 2023.

Figure 3. Lower Sacramento River flow at the Wilkins Slough gage (RM 120) in wet years 2011, 2017, 2019, and 2023.

Figure 4. Water temperature and streamflow at Bend Bridge (RM 250) and Wilkins Slough (RM 120) in May-June 2023. Note 68oF water quality standard and critical water temperature for salmon is exceeded.in late June at Wilkins Slough gage. The 56oF standard was exceeded at Bend Bridge for much of May and June.

Figure 5. Streamflow at various gages in the Sacramento River from Keswick Dam (RM 300), Bend Bridge (RM 250) downstream to Wilkins Slough (RM 120) in May-June 2023. Note: tributary inflows in the reach below Bend gage in mid-June were approximately 5000 cfs in mid-May. Keswick Dam releases were increased in late June to maintain deliveries and sustain 5000 cfs at Wilkins Slough gage.

 

Yuba River – Plan for New Fish Facilities at Daguerre Point Dam

Posted on by

On May 16, 2023, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, National Marine Fisheries Service, and Yuba Water Agency announced a plan to design and build a fish bypass at Daguerre Point Dam on the lower Yuba River (see Figure below).

At present, the dam has fish ladders on both ends of the dam that don’t work well.  The plan’s conceptual design is for a bypass channel that would allow fish to circumvent the existing dam; the plan would retain the dam.  The plan would reconfigure the diversion works at the dam’s south end and add effective fish screens to the agricultural diversion infrastructure at both ends of the dam.

Essentially, the bypass would operate as a long, high-capacity fish ladder that would also allow passage of sturgeon and lamprey, which cannot use the existing fish ladders.  In addition to improving the upstream migration of adult fish, the bypass would also allow for more natural downstream passage of juvenile fish.

For adult salmon and steelhead migrants headed upstream to spawn in the higher-flow, cooler, and gravel-abundant 10-mile reach between Daguerre Point Dam and Englebright Dam, the bypass would likely reduce delays caused by reluctance to enter the existing ladders and by the difficult ascent up those ladders.  For juveniles outmigrating downstream, the bypass could offer more natural conditions than simply spilling over the dam or seeking out the openings to the two ladders and passing downstream in the ladders.  The existing features place the young fish at the mercy of native and non-native fish predators below the dam.

The bypass concept is one of several designs that could reduce existing problems at Daguerre.  In addition to passage improvement, the concept could accommodate fish collection and segregation, and may be a feasible location for a conservation hatchery.

Several key elements should be added to this bypass plan, including:

  1. A segregation weir that that allows selective passage and capture of upstream and downstream migrants for processing and transfer.
  2. Predator removal, either at the segregation weir or by means of another nearby arrangement, to minimize predation below the dam. Predator control would likely benefit the entire lower Yuba system.  Major predators in terms of numbers and threat below Daguerre Dam include striped bass, smallmouth bass, pikeminnow, and American shad.
  3. Stream habitat improvements upstream, in the bypass, and below the dam, in particular those that create refugia for juvenile salmon, steelhead, and sturgeon, and that are less favorable to the fish that eat them.
  4. Fish handling, processing, and holding facilities.
  5. A conservation hatchery for salmon and steelhead.

Alternative designs should also be fully evaluated through CEQA/NEPA and CESA/ESA processes.  For example, one alternative may involve upgrading one or both of the existing ladders to include as many of the advantageous features as possible.

 

California Needs a Wild Salmon Policy

Posted on by

Canada has a Wild Salmon Policy. California needs one. California can develop a better salmon policy by taking a good look at the Canadian policy.

In past posts, I have mentioned the need for a comprehensive California Salmon Plan.1 There are many plans in California, but there are few with real actions like NOAA Fisheries (National Marine Fisheries Service – NMFS) Central Valley Salmon Recovery Plan. The problem is that most plans have no “bite.” NMFS has been given a “bite option” in issuing take permits under the Endangered Species Act, but NMFS rarely uses its full authority in issuing biological opinions for federal projects. NMFS is particularly averse to issuing “jeopardy” opinions with mandated Reasonable Prudent Alternatives (RPAs).

Canada’s Wild Salmon Policy2

“Wild salmon hold tremendous value for natural ecosystems, cultural and spiritual practices, jobs and income, and recreational enjoyment along the coast and inland watersheds of the Pacific Region. They are important for Indigenous people, communities, individuals, groups and businesses.” (Policy, p. 5).

The value of California’s wild salmon public trust resources needs more consideration and recognition. For example: in setting rules for commercial and recreational harvest of the dominant fall-run Chinook salmon stocks, little or no consideration is given to protecting dwindling wild fall-run salmon populations.

While Canada’s Wild Salmon Policy is not exactly a plan with specific actions (the Policy leaves that to local and regional entities), the Policy does outline goals, objectives, strategies, approaches, and what might be called overarching concerns. Chief among the Wild Salmon Policy’s overarching concerns that also apply to California salmon are:

  • Diversity – There were once many salmon stocks located within and among the many rivers and tributary streams in the Central Valley. Preserving this genetic diversity deserves much more consideration.
  • Keystone species – Maintaining the role of salmon that were once important to the entire ecosystem, bringing in marine nutrients and carbon to watersheds, is important.
  •  Declines in specific populations – There is a need to immediately address sudden or unforeseen drops in abundance of any population or subpopulation.
  • Ocean and river conditions – There is a need to recognize and react to sudden or unforeseen changes in habitat conditions that have potential adverse impacts to salmon.
  • Less predictable returns – Accurate predictions are real problems for fishery managers; poor predictions are the norm.
  • Reduced available stocks for harvest – There is a need to anticipate and address stock collapses before and after they occur through aggressive planning and an array of actions; lower fishable stocks threaten traditional uses of public trust resources like salmon.

Canada’s Wild Salmon Policy has three main strategies:

  1. Involve stakeholders – Stakeholders have unique and important knowledge about Pacific salmon, how the local environment functions, and characteristic ecological relationships.
  2. Develop technical methods and tools – To support the status assessment of salmon conservation units, there must be initiatives to assess habitat and ecosystems, and day-to-day fishery and ecosystem management decisions within regional programs that reflect the principles, goals, and objectives of an overall wild salmon program.
  3. Develop and implement a comprehensive management plan – Canada uses a comprehensive plan with a five-year implementation plan and an annual-review process. (Note: the latest 5-Year Winter-Run Salmon Plan in California was dated 2016.)

The general approach of Canada’s Wild Salmon Policy is:

  • Engage partners and stakeholders at the local level to leverage local knowledge and expertise.
  • Facilitate collaboration through salmon governance processes and capacity building.
  • Consider guiding principles and objectives in ongoing management and program activities, both internally and with partners.
  • Adapt and update best practices based on lessons learned.

The strategies for and approaches to assessment in Canada’s Wild Salmon Policy are:

  • Standardized monitoring of wild salmon – To understand the current status of wild salmon stocks, it is important to have regular, standardized, science-based monitoring that identifies benchmarks for Conservation Units (CUs).
  • Determine the current status of Conservation Units.
  • Continue to monitor and assess status of Conservation Units.
  • Set Priorities – Implement prioritization method for assessing and monitoring Conservation Units or groups of Conservation Units.
  • Modify or develop metrics and document new status assessment methods.
  • Consolidate and improve documentation of standards for internal and external monitoring programs and improve data sharing through open processes.
  • Consider guiding principles and objectives in planning annual and multi-year work processes.
  • Continue integrated planning discussions through various mechanisms, including local roundtables.
  • Work on an integrated approach to wild salmon.

The delineation of Conservation Units and their benchmarks does not prescribe specific management actions, but rather is used to inform decision-making. As spawner abundance (escapement) decreases, a Conservation Unit moves towards a lower status, and the extent of management intervention for conservation purposes increases. A low Conservation Unit index is undesirable because of the risk of extirpation and the loss of ecological benefits and salmon production. Changes in status should trigger management actions, which will vary depending on species, geographic regions, and cause of the decline.

The implementation Plan of Canada’s Wild Salmon Policy involves:

  • Assessment of impacts and monitoring habitats.
  • Accountability in completing actions and reporting.
  • Maintaining and rebuilding salmon populations.

In conclusion, Canada’s Wild Salmon Policy provides a good model for a badly needed comprehensive Central Valley Salmon and Steelhead Protection and Recovery Plan or Program, for the entire array of federal and state salmon and steelhead projects that are undertaken in the Central Valley. It should encompass planned and ongoing projects funded by the departments of the Interior, Commerce, Agriculture, Defense, Energy, and by the EPA, as well as those jointly permitted by the California Resources Agency.

How to Not Close Salmon Fisheries

Posted on by

California salmon fisheries do not have to close. Hatcheries in California are still releasing thirty million hatchery smolts each year. This means that three to five hundred thousand adult hatchery salmon are still out there for potential harvest. About a quarter of the fish released from hatcheries are marked. Selectively harvesting the marked hatchery fish, while returning to the water all unmarked fish that are caught, is reasonable.

Marking all the hatchery smolts would quadruple the number of harvestable fish.

Do not let anyone tell you this is not reasonable. The state and federal governments have mismanaged California’s natural salmon production nearly into oblivion. They can spend the money to partially mitigate the consequences by marking all hatchery fish.

two fish photo, showing fin removal

Photo of marked and unmarked hatchery fish. Photo credit: Idaho Dept. of Fish and Wildlife. In the Columbia basin, all hatchery salmon are marked, and thus hatchery fish and wild fish are immediately distinguishable.

For more information on mark selective fisheries see:

https://wdfw.wa.gov/sites/default/files/publications/02353/wdfw02353.pdf