What Caused the Impending Extinction of Delta Smelt?

CSPA’s fisheries biologist Tom Cannon gave a presentation entitled “Contributing Cause of Smelt Decline: Water Exports” at a symposium on March 29, 2016 at UC Davis. The theme of the conference, sponsored by the Delta Stewardship Council, was: “Delta and Longfin Smelt: Is Extinction Inevitable?”

In his presentation, Tom put forth the hypothesis that the cause of the probable extinction of Delta smelt was the commencement of operation of the State Water Project’s Banks Pumping Plant in the mid-1970s. When Banks came on line, South Delta exports tripled, going from 2 million acre-feet to 6 million acre-feet per year. Tom’s hypothesis is that the mechanism of likely extinction was entrainment of Delta Smelt into the inflow to State and Federal South Delta pumping plants: exports.

The presentation’s first slide shows the familiar long-term Fall Midwater Trawl Index (Figure 1). Tom emphasized the sharp drop in the Index in 1981 (red circle in Figure 1), the first dry year of operations under the 1978 Delta Plan (water quality standards limiting operations of the Delta pumping plants). He noted that the decline likely started in the mid-1970s, but was most severe in 1981. There were recovery periods in the non-drought years of the 1990’s and 2010-2011. However, in 2001-2005, smelt and other Delta species crashed, a period now known as the “Pelagic Organism Decline,” or POD. Following a mild recovery in the wet year 2011, Delta smelt collapsed to record low indices in 2014 and 2015 (indices of 9 and 7, respectively, not shown in Figure 1).

Other slides depict (1) the huge losses of adult smelt as indexed by January1 salvage numbers in 1981 (Figure 2), and (2) the salvage counts of juvenile Delta smelt in spring 1981 (Figure 3). The total salvage for January 1981 alone was over 10,000 adult Delta smelt, which compares to a total of 56 in January 2015 and 12 in January 2016. The total juvenile Delta smelt salvage in spring 1981 exceeded 100,000; in 2015, it was 4.

An example of salvage during the 2001-2005 POD is winter-spring salvage in 2003 (Figure 4). Tom attributes the POD decline to the tens of thousands of Delta smelt lost to entrainment in winter and spring, including a likely large number of non-detected larvae under conditions of maximum exports.

According to Tom, export entrainment is the primary causal factor for the death spiral of Delta smelt, not low outflow. There were relatively high or improved smelt abundance indices in 1972, 1990, and 1991 (see Figure 1), which were all years with low outflows but also low exports. This is not to say, however, that low outflows are not also factors that contribute to high entrainment (Figures 2 and 3).

Tom concludes that Delta smelt are virtually extinct because their adult spawning numbers are insufficient to provide recovery even under 2016’s good (wet) conditions. Adult numbers are simply too low to produce sufficient offspring (Figure 5). The proof will come this spring, summer, and fall when indices of Delta smelt juveniles will likely remain critically low and not reach 2010 or 2011 levels, the last years when habitat conditions were favorable.

Tom Cannon Presentation – Contributing Cause of Smelt Decline: Water Exports

Figure 1. Fall Midwater Trawl Index for Delta smelt 1967-2013. (Source: CDFW.)

Figure 1. Fall Midwater Trawl Index for Delta smelt 1967-2013. (Source: CDFW.)

Figure 2. January salvage of adult Delta smelt at South Delta export pumps in 1981. Also shown is export rate (cfs) and Delta outflow (cfs). The maximum allowed export rate is 11,400 cfs. (Data Source: CDFW.)

Figure 2. January salvage of adult Delta smelt at South Delta export pumps in 1981. Also shown is export rate (cfs) and Delta outflow (cfs). The maximum allowed export rate is 11,400 cfs. (Data Source: CDFW.)

Figure 3. Spring salvage of juvenile Delta smelt at South Delta export pumps in 1981. Delta smelt juveniles begin reaching salvageable size (>20 mm) in early May. Also shown is export rate (cfs) and Delta outflow (cfs). The maximum allowed exportsrate is 11,400 cfs. (Data Source: CDFW)

Figure 3. Spring salvage of juvenile Delta smelt at South Delta export pumps in 1981. Delta smelt juveniles begin reaching salvageable size (>20 mm) in early May. Also shown is export rate (cfs) and Delta outflow (cfs). The maximum allowed exportsrate is 11,400 cfs. (Data Source: CDFW)

Figure 4. Winter-spring salvage of Delta smelt at south Delta export pumps in 2003. Delta smelt young begin reaching salvageable size (>20 mm) in early May. Also shown is export rate (acre-feet per day) by pumping plant. The maximum allowed export rate is 11,400 cfs (about 23,000 acre-feet per day). (Data Source: CDFW). Winter salvage is primarily adult smelt. Spring salvage is predominantly juvenile smelt (>20 mm). April entrainment of 5-15 mm larval smelt is not accounted for at salvage facilities, because they pass undetected through salvage screens.

Figure 4. Winter-spring salvage of Delta smelt at south Delta export pumps in 2003. Delta smelt young begin reaching salvageable size (>20 mm) in early May. Also shown is export rate (acre-feet per day) by pumping plant. The maximum allowed export rate is 11,400 cfs (about 23,000 acre-feet per day). (Data Source: CDFW). Winter salvage is primarily adult smelt. Spring salvage is predominantly juvenile smelt (>20 mm). April entrainment of 5-15 mm larval smelt is not accounted for at salvage facilities, because they pass undetected through salvage screens.

Figure 5. Index of adult Delta smelt spawner abundance from winter Kodiak Trawl Survey 2002-2016.

Figure 5. Index of adult Delta smelt spawner abundance from winter Kodiak Trawl Survey 2002-2016.

  1. Salvage collections are notoriously inefficient on small fish entrained into the pumping plants. Predation loss before entering the salvage facilities has been estimated to be higher than 90%.

Smelt Update – April 1, 2016

Since the last update, Delta and longfin smelt have continued their trends of record low numbers, as shown in the most recent Smelt Larvae Survey and 20-mm Survey. They are not yet gone, but close. It remains to be seen whether the good conditions provided so far in this wet winter 2016 can lead to some form of recovery for these two endangered species.

Longfin Smelt

With the high winter flows, the young from this year’s spawn are now distributed well to the west, although some remain in the north Delta (Figure 1). Their numbers continue at record low levels (Figure 2) despite a wet winter.

Figure 1. Longfin smelt catch in mid-March in Survey #1 of 20-mm Survey.

Figure 1. Longfin smelt catch in mid-March in Survey #1 of 20-mm Survey.

Figure 2. Average catch-per-unit-effort of young longfin smelt in mid-March 20-mm surveys from 2008-2016.

Figure 2. Average catch-per-unit-effort of young longfin smelt in mid-March 20-mm surveys from 2008-2016.

Delta Smelt

Delta smelt have yet to grow into the size range captured in the 20-mm Survey, but remain present in the last Smelt Larvae Survey (Figure 3). High winter through-Delta flows have resulted in a slightly more westward distribution than in recent drought years such as 2013 (Figure 4). Although numbers collected are very low, it is too early to determine relative production for 2016 compared to previous years in the Smelt Larvae Survey or the 20-mm Survey. Under similar wet winter-spring conditions in 2010 and 2011, Delta smelt had modest population improvements. It remains to be seen if the very low adult spawning population this year (in comparison to the populations in 2010 and 2011) can lead to some form of recovery in the population under this year’s relatively wet conditions.

Figure 3. Delta smelt larvae catch distribution in mid-March 2016 Smelt Larvae Survey.

Figure 3. Delta smelt larvae catch distribution in mid-March 2016 Smelt Larvae Survey.

Figure 4. Delta smelt larvae catch distribution in mid-March 2013 Smelt Larvae Survey.

Figure 4. Delta smelt larvae catch distribution in mid-March 2013 Smelt Larvae Survey.

Winter Run Salmon – “Species in the Spotlight”

Winter Run

Species in the Spotlight

The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has included the Sacramento River Winter-Run Chinook Salmon in its “Species in the Spotlight,”1 one of the eight species under NMFS’s jurisdiction nationwide that are most at risk of extinction.

On its website, NMFS describes the condition of Winter-Run (in italics below):

State and Federal Agencies, public organizations, non-profit groups and others in California’s Central Valley have formed strong partnerships to save Sacramento River winter-run Chinook salmon. Efforts to protect winter-run Chinook salmon include restoring habitat, utilizing conservation hatchery programs, closely monitoring the population, and carefully managing scarce cold water. Additional key actions needed to safe guard winter-run Chinook salmon from further declines include:

  • Improving management of Shasta Reservoir’s storage in order to provide cold water for spawning adults, eggs, and fry, stable summer flows to avoid de-watering redds, and winter/spring pulse flows to improve smolt survival through the Delta. (Note: badly needed as these actions have been generally lacking especially in the past two years.)
  • Completing the Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Project and reintroducing winter-run Chinook salmon to the restored habitat. (Note: Badly needed with little progress made in regard to Winter Run.)
  • Reintroducing winter-run Chinook salmon into the McCloud River. (Note: Badly needed with little progress made.)
  • Improving Yolo Bypass fish habitat and passage so juveniles can more frequently utilize the bypass for rearing and adults can freely pass from the bypass back to the Sacramento River. (Note: Badly needed with little progress made.)
  • Managing winter and early spring Delta conditions for improved juvenile survival. (Note: During the past four years of drought, Delta outflow has almost always been inadequate for emigrating juveniles.)
  • Conducting landscape-scale restoration throughout the Delta to improve the ecosystem’s health and support native species. (Note: Little progress has been made.)
  • Expanding LSNFH facilities to support both the captive broodstock and conservation hatchery programs; (Note: In progress. The hatchery program released 600,000 smolts in February last year and 400,000 in February this year. The releases are made in Redding where flows have been too low for good survival because Shasta Reservoir is retaining all its inflow. Much greater survival would be achieved if the smolts were trucked downstream to mid-river and then barged to the Bay.)
  • Evaluating alternative control rules used to limit incidental take of winter-run Chinook salmon in ocean fisheries. (Note: Ongoing and in progress. Fishery harvest for all races of Chinook will likely be curtailed this year.)

Number One Threat

The most serious threat to Winter Run and the major cause of the nearly complete loss of the past two years’ production relates to the first item in the above list: improving management of Shasta Reservoir cold water storage is essential. The change from a 58°F daily-average water temperature standard at Redding (last summer) to 53°F as proposed by NMFS will greatly help by alleviating sporadic lethal conditions that occurred last summer (Figures 1 and 2).

Achieving non-lethal conditions through the summer is possible by conserving Shasta Reservoir’s cold-water pool, which is best achieved by reducing inputs of warm water from Whiskeytown Reservoir (from Lewiston-Trinity reservoirs) into Keswick Reservoir via the Spring Creek Powerhouse (Figure 3). This source of warm water made up about 15% of the release to the Sacramento River from Keswick Reservoir, and required use of extra Shasta’s cold-water pool water to meet the relaxed temperature standard of 58°F in the upper Sacramento River below Keswick in Redding.

Another source of warm water to Keswick Reservoir was from daily afternoon peak power releases from Shasta Dam (Figure 4). High releases in afternoons raised water temperatures in Keswick Reservoir, requiring more cold-water pool release to compensate for warm water inputs. Apparently, the operations were too complicated for Reclamation to maintain the required 58°F average daily temperature at the mouth of Clear Creek (CCR gage: Figure 1). Operations at other times (e.g., first week in August) indicate clearly that Reclamation had the capability of keeping the water temperature well below lethal levels.

Figure 1. Lethal water temperature extremes for salmon eggs and fry (red circles) near Redding in summer 2015. Green circles denote non-lethal conditions that can be maintained with proper management of Shasta’s cold-water pool.

Figure 1. Lethal water temperature extremes for salmon eggs and fry (red circles) near Redding in summer 2015. Green circles denote non-lethal conditions that can be maintained with proper management of Shasta’s cold-water pool.

Figure 2. Episodes of high water temperature in Keswick Reservoir (red circles) in summer 2015. Peaks were due to hydropower peaking and specific operations of the Shasta Temperature Control Intake Tower to powerhouses at Shasta Dam.

Figure 2. Episodes of high water temperature in Keswick Reservoir (red circles) in summer 2015. Peaks were due to hydropower peaking and specific operations of the Shasta Temperature Control Intake Tower to powerhouses at Shasta Dam.

Figure 3. Warm water (red circle) entering Keswick Reservoir from Whiskeytown Reservoir via Spring Creek Powerhouse in summer 2015. Daily range of 1°F is due to hydropeaking operations.

Figure 3. Warm water (red circle) entering Keswick Reservoir from Whiskeytown Reservoir via Spring Creek Powerhouse in summer 2015. Daily range of 1°F is due to hydropeaking operations.

Figure 4. Warm water releases (red circle) from Shasta Reservoir during daily hydropeaking operations in summer 2015. Release water temperatures in the first week of August and September were lower because of lower afternoon hydropower peaking releases of warm water along with more night-morning cold water pool releases.

Figure 4. Warm water releases (red circle) from Shasta Reservoir during daily hydropeaking operations in summer 2015. Release water temperatures in the first week of August and September were lower because of lower afternoon hydropower peaking releases of warm water along with more night-morning cold water pool releases.

 

Feinstein Gets Some Water, but Smelt Get Some Back

In my March 12 post, I related that Senator Feinstein’s request for higher Delta exports would put the Delta Smelt population in the Delta at further risk of extinction. Well, she received her wish, and exports increased from 6000 cfs to 8000 cfs (11,400 cfs is maximum pumping capacity) in the week after her request when storms brought more inflow to Delta from the San Joaquin River.

However, the higher exports were short–lived, because the 3/14-3/17 Smelt Larvae Survey picked up larval smelt for the first time this year (Figure 1 – green dots). Exports dropped below 5000 cfs again. Though only two newly hatched larvae were collected in the central Delta, their presence is a concern. The presence of larval smelt shows that smelt are spawning in the lower San Joaquin River in the central Delta. According to the Smelt Working Group the net negative flows shown in red in Figure 1 for late March indicate a “medium” risk to smelt and a likelihood that larval smelt will be drawn toward the south Delta export pumps.1 The -5000 cfs Old and Middle River (OMR) reverse flows are the maximum allowed under the Smelt Biological Opinion.

In its review of the results of particle tracking model runs, the Smelt Working Group concluded: “Members stressed the importance of weighing more heavily the results from inserting (particles) at Prisoner’s Point, given the consistent catch of adults there this year and the hydrologic proximity of that location to the south Delta (as compared to Jersey Point). For OMR flow of -5000 cfs, approximately 20% of the particles inserted at Prisoners Point were entrained into the South Delta. For an OMR flow of -2500 cfs, approximately 10% of particles inserted at Prisoners Point were entrained into the South Delta. For an OMR flow of – 1250 cfs, less than 10% of particles inserted at Prisoners Point were entrained into the South Delta.” Prisoners Point is the green dot from the right on the Figure 1 map. In all likelihood, larval smelt are now being drawn or will soon be drawn into the south Delta. It is too early to determine what portion of the population is subject to this risk. But given the unprecedented depressed condition of the smelt population after four years of drought, the risk is significant.

On March 24, after review of “Smelt Working Group’s March 21 recommendations,2 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service “determined”3 that the OMR should be no more negative than -2500 cfs on a 14-day average, and no more negative than -3150 cfs on a five-day average. Reclamation took a slightly more liberal interpretation in the subsequent week’s operations (Figure 2), staying nearer -3500 cfs most of the week with no apparent interest in reaching a -2500 cfs 14-day average. It could be that the Service meant to recommend a -3500 cfs OMR limit. Or maybe the Service got a call from Senator Feinstein’s office. We shall see what this week’s meetings and determinations offer.

In any event, the risk to Delta Smelt remains “medium” at combined exports of about 3500-4000 cfs. With an export capacity of 11,400 cfs, Delta outflow still exceeding 50,000 cfs, reservoirs continuing to release snowmelt, and San Luis Reservoir in the San Joaquin Valley only half full, there will be continued cry for more exports and for approval of the Tunnels. In the meantime, it appears from Figure 1 that some smelt larvae and a good amount of snowmelt are escaping west to Suisun Bay, while some larval smelt remain at risk in the central Delta.

Figure 1.  Net daily flow in Delta in late-March 2016. (Gage data source:  USGS). Green dots are location of seven Delta Smelt larvae collected in Survey 6 of Smelt Larvae Survey (http://www.dfg.ca.gov/delta/data/sls/CPUE_Map.asp ).

Figure 1. Net daily flow in Delta in late-March 2016. (Gage data source: USGS). Green dots are location of seven Delta Smelt larvae collected in Survey 6 of Smelt Larvae Survey (http://www.dfg.ca.gov/delta/data/sls/CPUE_Map.asp ).

Figure 2. OMR March 23 to March 28.  (Source: CDEC)

Figure 2. OMR March 23 to March 28. (Source: CDEC)

Fremont Weir Overflows Again – Prepare for Salmon and Sturgeon Rescues

fish rescuesIt is one of those wet springs when the Sacramento River has spilled over the Fremont Weir at the upstream (north) entrance to the Yolo Bypass near Verona. In a January post I summarized the need to fix salmon and sturgeon passage at the weir. In early April 2011 adult sturgeon and salmon were rescued at Tisdale and Fremont weirs1 under nearly the same circumstances that have developed since mid-March this year. In the coming weeks, many adult sturgeon and Winter Run salmon attracted by the high Bypass flows will again show up and become stranded at the Fremont Weir as the weir ceases to overflow. River levels are expected to drop as much as eight feet in the coming week. As the Bypass slowly drains in the coming days more and more salmon and sturgeon will migrate up the Bypass via Cache Slough near Rio Vista. Many will become stranded in the upper Bypass as far up as the Fremont Weir concrete apron, where rescues occurred in the past.

map of flowsOthers will make their way to the west side of the upper Bypass to outlet of the Knights Landing Ridge Cut (KLRC), and migrate up into the Colusa Basin via the Colusa Basin Drain where they will be lost. In spring 2013, many Winter Run salmon were found stranded in the Colusa Basin under similar circumstances. The peak migration of Winter Run and sturgeon is in March and April. So I expect many salmon have or will be headed up the Ridge Cut, which is flowing 500-600 cfs.2 The CDFW trap is removed from the Ridge Cut outlet at such high flows.

Fixes for both problems are in the works, as they are required in the Central Valley Salmon Biological Opinion for operating the state and federal water projects. Reclamation District 108 is working on the outlet solution for the KLRC. DWR, DFW, and others are working on Fremont Weir passage. 3

In the meantime, trapping and rescues are the only measures to save fish again this year. These efforts should start soon. Note similar problems occur at the Moulton, Colusa, and Tisdale weirs (see map and last photo).

Above Photo: Fremont Weir on March 13, 2016. Overflow to Yolo Bypass was 30,000-40,000 cfs. Overflow peaked at 65,000 cfs two days later, as river stage rose to 36 ft, two feet above that in photo. For video of overflow event and Bypass flooding see http://youtu.be/9hrn2bSgg8A .

Above Photo: Fremont Weir on March 13, 2016. Overflow to Yolo Bypass was 30,000-40,000 cfs. Overflow peaked at 65,000 cfs two days later, as river stage rose to 36 ft, two feet above that in photo. For video of overflow event and Bypass flooding see http://youtu.be/9hrn2bSgg8A .

Above Photo: Fremont Weir on March 20, 2016 when overflow temporarily ceased at river stage dropped to 33.5 ft. Insert: 2011 rescue photo.

Above Photo: Fremont Weir on March 20, 2016 when overflow temporarily ceased at river stage dropped to 33.5 ft. Insert: 2011 rescue photo.

Above photo: Moulton Weir in January 1997.

Above photo: Moulton Weir in January 1997.