THE OSPREY The International Journal of Salmon and Steelhead Conservation Issue No. 106
Fall 2023
The Follies of Salmon Enhancement Lessons From British Columbia’s Past
ALSO IN THIS ISSUE: EEL RIVER DAMS, RECONNECTING CALIFORNIA’S LOST COAST • SPECIAL REPORT: WINCHESTER DAM DAMAGE, NORTH UMPQUA RIVER • KLAMATH DAMS REMOVAL MOVES FORWARD
Contents Columns & News 3
From the Perch — Editor’s Message
4
Hits and Misses — Chair’s Corner
5
Letters to the Editor
20 Fish Watch: Wild Fish News, Issues and Initiatives
Features 6
The Follies of Salmon Enhancement: Lessons from British Columbia’s Past By Michael Price and Kaitlin Yehle
11 Eel River Dams: Reconnecting California’s Lost Coast By Charlie Schneider
Report: Disasterous Dam Repair on North 14 Special Umpqua Sparks Massive Fish Kill, $27.6 Million Fine By Jim McCarthy
15 Update on the Klamath River Dams: A complex but critical dam removal process
THE OSPREY Chair Pete Soverel Editor Jim Yuskavitch Editorial Committee Pete Soverel • Dave Peterson • Greg Knox Brian Braidwood • Rich Simms Bruce McNae • Ryan Smith Guy Fleischer Scientific Advisors Rick Williams • Jack Stanford Jim Lichatowich • Bill McMillan Bill Bakke • Michael Price Design & Layout Jim Yuskavitch The Osprey is published by: Wild Salmon Rivers 16430 72nd Avenue, West Edmonds, WA 98026 Letters To The Editor The Osprey welcomes letters to the editor and article proposals. The Osprey 69278 Lariat Sisters, OR 97759 jyusk@bendcable.com (541) 549-8914 The Osprey is a joint publication of not-for-profit organizations concerned with the conservation and sustainable management of wild Pacific salmon and steelhead and their habitat throughout their native and introduced ranges. This unique partnership includes The Conservation Angler, Fly Fishers International, Steelhead Society of British Columbia, SkeenaWild Conservation Trust, Wild Salmon Center, World Salmon Forum and Wild Steelhead Coalition. Financial support is provided by partner organizations, individuals, clubs and corporations. The Osprey is published three times a year in January, May and September. All materials are copyrighted and require permission prior to reprinting or other use.
By Mark Rockwell
Cover Photo by NASA; Cover Inset Image by Michael Price, SkeenaWild Conservation Trust
2
The Osprey © 2023 ISSN 2334-4075
The Osprey
FROM THE PERCH — EDITOR’S MESSAGE
Hot Salmon Summer by Jim Yuskavitch
I
n a world full of breaking news that comes and goes, one story held throughout the year. That story was that 2023 was the hottest year for both land and sea temperatures world-wide ever recorded since accurate data has been kept beginning in 1850. The story played out in a seemingly unending series of extreme — and often tragic — weather events. In India, a piece of the Uttarakhand Glacier broke off in the Himalayan Mountains, triggered by heavy rains, causing a glacial lake outburst and subsequent flooding that killed dozens of people and displaced tens of thousands. In Libya, two dams collapsed from the force of heavy rainfall and flooding, combined with a lack of proper maintenance of the dams by the Libyan government. Human casualties were estimated to be anywhere from 5,300 to 20,000 people. (See the news story on page 21 of this issue warning about the increasing potential for more such events.) Flooding and extreme hot temperatures were rampant throughout Europe, with some countries, such as Greece, experiencing some of their worst wildfires ever. North America wasn’t spared. Canada had a record-breaking wildfire season in 2023. By early October, more than 6,000 fires had burned 45 million acres of forest affecting all 13 provinces. Heavy smoke drifted into populated areas of the upper midwest and northeastern parts of the US rendering the air unfit to breath. Unprecedented flooding in New England and the southeast, and summertime temperatures, particularly in Arizona and Texas, into triple digits. For wild fish advocates, it is not news that these changes in climate and resulting weather responses are going to affect salmonids — mostly for the worse. The Osprey has been reporting on Climate Change and wild fish for years, going back to when the national media still presented it as “unproved science.” We’ve published stories on how ocean species have shifted ranges northwards, impacting the sea’s food chain, the complexities of wildfire on
The Thwaites Glacier in western Antarctica is sometimes referred to as the “Doomsday Glacier” because if it melts it will raise the Earth’s sea level by several feet. And the Antarctic is melting. Photo courtesy James Yungel, NASA salmon and steelhead and their habitat, the dynamics of melting glaciers on river systems and more. The Osprey will continue to be a leader in informing its readers about Climate Change and its effects on wild salmon and steelhead, and their prospects for continued survival. There is a corny old saying that you have probably heard, “Everyone talks about the weather, but nobody does anything about it.” In the case of a changing climate, we can do something about it, if only we can muster the political will before it really is too late.
How The Osprey Helps Wild Fish The Osprey has been bringing the latest science, policy, opinion and news stories to its readers supporting wild Pacific salmon and steelhead conservation and management for 35 years. But we are much more than a publication that you subscribe to because of your own interest in wild fish conservation. The funds we receive from our subscribers allows us to send The Osprey to wild fish conservation decision-makers and influencers including scientists, fisheries managers, politicians and wild fish advocates.
Fall 2023 • Issue No. 106
Sending The Osprey to decision makers is key to our wild fish conservation advocacy. Your support makes that possible.
So when you subscribe/donate to The Osprey, you not only receive a subscription yourself, but you also help us put The Osprey into the hands of the people we need bring to our side to save our wild fish. Please go to the subscription/donation form on page 23 or on-line at www.ospreysteelhead.org/donation and donate whatever you are able. Thank you. Jim Yuskavitch Editor, The Osprey
3
HITS & MISSES — CHAIR’S CORNER
Wild Works The searuns in the salt chuck are the proof By Pete Soverel
A
s noted previously, I have been a steelhead fly fisher since 1969 — 54 years — about one-third of the total period of West Coast steelhead angling. Based upon our experience over that 150 year span, we can be certain that if we continue with the management practices pursued to date, steelhead and salmon in the lower 48 states plus British Columbia will be extinct before the end of this century. Particularly puzzling is the ongoing, persistent reliance on hatchery programs, in spite of irrefutable evidence of their harmful impacts. See for instance, McMillian et. al. A global synthesis of peer-reviewed research on the effects of hatchery salmonids on wild s a l m o n i d s . (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 111/fme.12643) or the countervailing evidence of wild abundance in Canadian Great Lakes rivers, the dramatic recovery of wild Kamchatkan steelhead and so on. The adverse impacts of hatchery releases on wild steelhead populations have been well documented for decades. Nonetheless, state, tribal and federal management agencies remain wedded to these harmful programs. Compare wild summer steelhead abundance between North Umpqua River and Elwha River post dam removal. In the former, wild summer run returns just prior to the introduction of hatchery summer runs were typically in excess of 5,000 fish. Sixty years later the wild run numbers are few hundred — a plus or minus 95% or so decline after wasting millions on the harmful hatchery program. Adding insult to injury has been the irresponsible, perhaps illegal, repair program for the privately owned Winchester Dam on North Umpqua which has caused massive harm to wild fish stocks which was even too much for ODFW. (See the special report by Jim McCarthy beginning on page 14 of this issue.) On the other hand, in the eleven years
4
between removal of Elwha River mainstem dams in 2013 and now, the wild summer run population has expanded from zero to about 1,000 to 2,000 for free in the complete absence of hatchery interference. Meanwhile, Elwha Chinook and winter run steelhead recovery “jump started” with hatchery
The searuns are all wild and holding their own while local wild summer steelhead over the same 55-year period have declined by 95 percent, swamped by massive hatchery plants. fish have failed completely to recover. Osoyoos River sockeye is a story — the hatchery supplemented population has failed to recover at all while wild-only stocks return by the hundreds of thousands over nine dams. Hatcheries are the hydra we can’t seem to kill. As reported herein and elsewhere, we have embarked on a massive program to remove a complex of four mainstem dams on the Klamath River ($450 million) restoring free
flowing water for its once abundant runs of summer, fall, winter steelhead, along with Chinook and coho salmon. In spite of the foregoing evidence, restoration of spring Chinook, and possibly coho salmon, runs will start with hatchery releases – supposedly to be terminated after a short period. Let’s hope. Personally, I am skeptical. In the case of Elwha River Chinook, hatchery “supplementation” was to be phased out. So eleven years later, no phasing, no recovery, and no recovery in sight. In the past several issues, The Osprey had published articles on the alarming decline of wild Skeena summer run steelhead in British Columbia; a rebuttal that all is well and rebuttal noting that they are not. Well, here we are, 2023 with the steelhead return, based upon the Tyee test fishery projected to be the fourth lowest in the past 69 years continuing the trend of exceptionally low wild steelhead returns over the past 4 to5 years. It appears that all is not well in Skeena country or anywhere else in BC.
Successful Searuns I have been a steelhead fly fisher since I arrived in the Seattle area following a combat tour in Vietnam. It was love at first sight and a lengthy learning/educational experience. 35 years ago my wife and I moved to the oldest house in a small development on a bluff, over looking Puget Sound with Continued on next page
Searun cutthroat trout. Photo by Lexa Meyer, Courtesy US National Park Service
The Osprey
Letters to the Editor
Continued from previous page
the view of a small, urban stream extending its estuary into the Sound. Shortly after moving in, I decided to explore the beach and adjacent estuary for whatever might be prowling the shoreline. Ebb tide, slight easterly airflow, glassy smooth near shore water. Walking the Burlington Northern railroad tracks, I immediately spotted a small commotion caused by fish chasing euphausiid shrimp, which I could see jumping to escape the predators. I scampered down the riprap (remember this was over 50 years ago when I was still a young man) to the pebble beach. First cast with my 4-weight, strong take and short tussle with the most beautiful trout I had ever seen — green back, silver sides with small black dots, yellowish fins, small-sharp teeth – a 17” searun cutthroat. It was love at first sight. I fish this beach 6 to10 times a year. I have NEVER been without at least a strike and more normally a fish or two when prospecting the 300 yards of shoreline. They are all wild, no hatchery slugs, aggressive and beautiful. My non-scientific assessment based upon encounter rates is that the current population seems to be about the same as when I first encountered them. Just a few years before I first encountered these searuns, the ten-year average harvest of wild summer run steelhead from the nearby Snohomish River system was over 1,800. The current total population is certainly less than 100 or so fish. The searuns are all wild and holding their own while local wild summer run steelhead over the same 55year period have declined by at least 95% while being swamped with massive hatchery plants. The lesson? Wild works, hatchery programs are positively harmful. Try searuns in the salt chuck. You will love them. It doesn’t ease the mourning and sense of loss of wild summer and winter steelhead, but it does illustrate that wild fish know what to do and how to do it, if we let them.
Pete Soverel is Chair of The Osprey Management and Editorial Committee and founder and President of The Conservation Angler, one of The Osprey’s supporting partner organizations. Learn more about thier work at: www.theconservationangler.org
Fall 2023 • Issue No. 106
Telling it Like it Is Dear Editor: Just a brief note to tell you how impressed I was with The Osprey publishing Dr. Robert Lackey’s paper, “The Salmon’s History Lesson” in the Spring/Summer 2023 edition. It reminded me of the first time I began paying serious attention to Dr. Lackey and his thought provoking public pronouncements. I recall sitting in a lounge in Richmond, British Columbia following a long day of meeting with the existing suite of federal and provincial fisheries “professionals”. My all time favourite colleague, the late Dr. Art Tautz and I were discussing the current state of affairs, particularly with respect to steelhead, and I mentioned I had read a recent paper by some guy named Lackey. It was published in Fisheries, then a popular publication of the American Fisheries Society. The title of that 2001 paper was “Defending Reality”. Art proceeded to tell me the guy who had been right there among us but who had departed shortly before was none other than Dr. Lackey. I’ve since exchanged messages with him on several occasions, all of which have strengthened my opinion that he is the best of the best at telling it like it is in absolutely neutral, completely understandable English even the most biased decision maker can understand. Dr. Lackey’s Osprey piece is a perfect reflection of how he has been the consummate professional in attempting to educate those willing to accept fact and truth. Clearly there is no joy in describing the events and forces that have brought salmon and steelhead to their present status all the way from California to at least the southern half of BC. Given Dr. Lackey's consistency and the awareness he has worked so hard to generate over a long impressive career, he deserves the sincere thanks of everyone concerned with conserving at least a bit of what we once knew. Bob Hooton Nanaimo, British Columbia (Editor’s Note: Bob Hooton is former Supervisor, Fish and Wildlife Section, British Columbia Department of Recreation and Conservation, Nanaimo, B.C.) Dear Editor: I am a 35-year volunteer for the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife in southern Oregon. I am currently on the Restoration and Enhancement Board with ODFW and the STEP Advisory Committee with ODFW. I am also on the boards of two watershed councils — one on the Umpqua and one on the Rogue — and am a member of three fishing clubs. I recently read Dr. Robert Lackey’s article in the Spring/Summer 2023 issue of The Osprey magazine. I have never read one article that provided me with more valuable information in just three or four pages. Also, his writing brought up for me more questions to think about as we go into the future of fisheries in Oregon. I will hand out copies of his article at one of my next Restoration and Enhancement Program board meetings to encourage people to read and think about. There are a number of issues that we seem to take for granted, like a big drop or a big increase in the numbers of a particular fish run in the Umpqua or Rogue. His discussion of the things to remember when making assumptions about local fish run numbers is absolutely right on. The things he mentioned have to be considered before celebrating a great run or lamenting a poor run of fish. I would like to find out where I can find other articles Dr. Lackey has written recently. I would like to read them. Again, thank you, Dr. Lackey, for this wonderful summation of the history of salmon and steelhead runs in the Pacific Northwest. Dave Grosjacques Merlin, Oregon (Editor’s Note: The presentation upon which Dr. Lackey’s article in The Osprey was based can be viewed at: https://media.oregonstate.edu/media/t/1_xcus7y97)
5
The Follies of Salmon Enhancement Lessons from British Columbia’s past By Michael Price and Kaitlin Yehle
T
he rich ecological and cultural legacy of Canada’s Pacific coast is shaped, if not defined, by wild Pacific salmon; thus, these fish form a vital component of its future. Salmon forge the “identity” of Indigenous Peoples, deliver essential nutrient subsidies to watersheds, and are important to economies through nature-based tourism, fisheries, and processing. Yet, wild salmon in British Columbia (BC) are at a crossroads: a century and a half of intensive commercial exploitation and habitat erosion has left many populations diminished and vulnerable to existential forces like climate change. As such, both Canadian federal and BC provincial governments recently have committed unprecedented resources to help rebuild wild salmon populations in hopes of increasing abundance and strengthening future resilience. While a variety of tools and activities are being deployed, including the development of rebuilding plans for populations of concern and restoration of degraded habitat, much effort is being directed at artificial enhancement. Salmon enhancement is by no means a new endeavour; resource managers have used such technology for nearly as long as commercial fisheries have extracted salmon from BC’s waters. Enhancement is a broad term to describe the “improvement” of wildlife populations and/or their habitat and, for salmon, has been practiced in many forms: hatcheries (which have been the most frequently deployed type of enhancement over the last 150 years), the removal of barriers to migration, construction of fish ladders and spawning channels, and the fertilization of freshwater lakes. There is an array of challenges associated with each, and relatively few have shown much success. Those situations where enhancement has successfully increased salmon abundance, sympatric wild populations and Indigenous communities reliant upon them have been impacted. The difficulty in achieving success may
6
reside in the two, somewhat competing, objectives of enhancement: 1) to sustain or increase fisheries catch, and 2) to rebuild the abundance of diminished populations. More often than not, these objectives are unclear, and both cannot be successful simultaneously. If our governments’ renewed focus on enhancement is to be effective in restoring lost abundance and diversity of wild salmon, we must learn from our past.
Hatcheries The first salmon hatchery in BC began operating during the late 1800s. Situated on the banks of the lower Fraser River, the hatchery was seen as a way to increase the diminished num-
While a variety of tools and activities are being deployed to rebuild wild salmon populations, much effort is being directed at artificial enhancent. ber of sockeye salmon being caught in commercial fisheries. Several decades of gold mining, logging, and human settlement had destroyed much freshwater habitat in the valley. The idea was that a very high and stable production of juvenile salmon could be attained by hand-stripping, fertilizing, and rearing eggs in human-controlled facilities, whereas natural production tended to be highly variable and often low. Sockeye eggs and milt were taken from fish captured on various spawning streams and brought down to the lower Fraser River hatchery for incubation. Based on its early apparent success (that is, the increased production of juvenile salmon), the number of hatcheries on
the Fraser River increased in subsequent years and spread to other areas of existing (and otherwise, thriving) sockeye populations in BC, including Vancouver Island, and the central and north coasts. Despite their proliferation across the province, no real or consistent benefit was evident that hatcheries increased overall abundance of sockeye. Commercial fisheries catch of sockeye had increased in most coastal areas during the early 1900s, largely due to an increase in the number of boats fishing, but generally began a steady decline in the 1920s. All hatcheries relied on the removal of fish from abundant wild populations, but did the artificial production of those fish equal the number of wild fish taken? The Royal Commission on British Columbia Fisheries of 1922, which appeared to focus primarily on economics, concluded that, “the old hatchery methods were of little commercial value” (BCFC 1922). The commission urged the province to undertake experimental tests over several years to prove “success” before there would be any wide-spread continuation of hatcheries in the province. In response, the Fisheries Research Board of Canada created a science program for the study of the merits of natural versus artificial fish production. Russell Foerster, a renowned Canadian fisheries biologist that led the study, concluded that while hatch rate and early survival of hatchery-produced sockeye may be high, such artificial production did not translate to an increase in the number of adults returning to spawn (Foerster 1936; 1968). Recent research now suggests that hatchery fish not only lack the life skills required to forage, evade predators, and survive at sea as successfully as their wild cousins, hatchery fish also can dilute genetic diversity within populations and compete with wild fish for limited resources (Naish et al. 2007; Connors et al. 2020). By the mid-1930s, hatcheries were widely accepted to be Continued on next page
The Osprey
Continued from previous page
ineffective, and, in the midst of an economic depression, the Canadian government cut funding and closed all federally-run hatcheries.
Improved Passage Effort during this early period of salmon management also was directed at improving fish passage along sockeye migration routes. At times, this involved the re-opening of rivers that had been blocked by rockslides and debris due to human activity, such as had occurred at Hells’ Gate on the Fraser River in 1914. Hell’s Gate is an abrupt narrowing of the Fraser River that, for centuries, was an integral fishing site for Indigenous Peoples in the area. There, a large rockslide was triggered by the construction of a railway, which subsequently obstructed the passage of millions of migrating salmon. Similarly, a natural rockslide that was obstructing salmon migration in the Zymoetz River of the Skeena watershed (northwest BC) was cleared in 1907. When fish arrived on spawning grounds further upstream of the previous obstruction that autumn, the project was considered an enormous success. It then wasn’t enough to simply restore passage, fisheries managers now saw opportunities to expand passage where natural obstructions impeded migration. Consequently, steps were blasted into the rock at Witset Canyon on the Wetzin’kwa (Bulkley River) — the largest
Spawned-out pink salmon on the Nakina River. Removing natural barriers has resulted in introducing pink salmon to new habitat where they spawn on top of other salmonid redds. Photo by Kaitlin Yehle, SkeenaWild Conservation Trust.
Fall 2023 • Issue No. 106
Spawning channels, human-constructed streams designed to increase available sockeye salmon spawning habitat and increase the harvestable population, may also introduce disease to wild fish. Photo by Kaitlin Yehle, SkeenaWild Conservation Trust. tributary of the Skeena — to enhance fish passage in 1929. Decades later, a natural obstruction to salmon migration was blasted by dynamite at Hagwilget Canyon, located further downstream on the Wetzin’kwa. And as a final remedy to ease fish passage for this productive salmon river, a series of concrete ladders were built into the rocks at Witset Canyon in 1959. While these enhancement practices have at times been essential to the survival of salmon populations — like the removal of rock debris at Hell’s Gate that impeded most salmon from migrating to the Fraser River’s upper reaches (which, incidentally, occurred again during the summer of 2019) — such human intervention also can leave a legacy of consequence for salmon and people. The removal of the natural barrier at Hagwilget Canyon eliminated the salmon fishery for both Gitksan and Wet’suwet’en villages that historically fished on opposing sides of the river. The village of Hagwilget was subsequently awarded $21.5 million as settlement by the federal government for the offence, but this will never return their lost fishery. A more insidious consequence of the barrier removals and construction of fish ladders on the Wetzin’kwa has been the opening of new habitat for pink salmon. Prior to Canada’s Department of Fisheries and Oceans’ (DFO) meddling, the constriction at Hagwilget Canyon largely restricted pink salmon from migrating
further upstream. Wet’suwet’en knowledge speaks of no pink salmon historically above Hagwilget; yet, these fish now ascend annually into the headwaters of the Wetzin’kwa, where they can spawn atop the redds (nests) of other salmonids.
Spawning Channels By mid-century, DFO began investing in a new approach to sockeye enhancement in BC: spawning channels. Spawning channels are human-constructed streams with controlled water flow and optimal gravel for spawning, which — unlike hatcheries — still allow fish to choose their mate and thus maintain a level of genetic diversity. The goal was simple: increase the number of fish available for commercial fisheries. In Babine Lake — historically the largest producer of sockeye in the Skeena watershed, home to at least 30 known wild spawning populations — roughly 5km of flow-controlled channels were built on two salmon rivers that flowed into the lake. The commercial catch of wild sockeye populations in the Skeena, including the Babine, had declined by more than 50% during 1920-1947 (Price et al. 2019; 2021), sparking a five-year federal fisheries investigation. Ironically, commercial fisheries were deemed the ultimate cause of the decline (Pritchard 1949). A natural rockContinued on next page
7
Continued from previous page
slide on the Babine River in 1951 set off a chain of events that led to the development of the artificial channels. Spawning adults began returning to the channels in 1970, and abundance has steadily increased over the decades to a peak of over 6 million fish in 1996. This enhancement has been so successful at producing fish (largely because it provides near perfect gravel, flow, and temperature to rear eggs), 70% of all sockeye returning to the Skeena River now are produced in the Babine spawning channels. Despite returning the total average abundance of sockeye to what it was a century ago — which has renewed opportunities for commercial marine fisheries and some Indigenous fisheries — salmon production from Babine spawning channels may impact wild Skeena populations in at least four ways: (1) Pathogen transfer from enhanced to wild fish could decrease survival. While there historically have been disease outbreaks at Babine spawning channels (Traxler et al. 1998), improvements may have decreased these risks. (2) Straying of enhanced fish may erode local adaptations in wild populations due to genetic dilution (Naish et al. 2007). Sockeye salmon are known to spawn near their river-of-origin, and different Skeena populations remain genetically distinct (Beacham et al. 2014), yet enhanced fish may stray into wild spawning streams within the Babine system given the proximity of spawning channels to neighbouring wild streams. (3) Enhanced fish could compete with wild fish for resources (Peterman 1982). However, there is no evidence that competition with enhanced sockeye has reduced the survival of wild Skeena populations (Price and Connors 2014). (4) Enhanced fish could elevate mortality of wild fish as a result of their incidental capture in mixed-stock fisheries targeting enhanced fish (Meffe 1992). Increases in the total number of sockeye returning to the Skeena since 1970 are thought to have exacerbated the trade-off between mixed-stock fisheries catch and the protection of wild population diversity in the watershed (Walters et al. 2008; Wood 2008). All wild populations likely were over-exploited in the decades immediately following spawning channel development due to their co-migration with enhanced sockeye (Walters et al. 2008). However, Canadian aggregate mixed-stock exploitation has declined
8
in recent years [from 46% (1970–2009) to 28% (2010–2017); English et al. 2018] and may be sustainable for some wild populations. Thus, the degree to which spawning channel production now compromises sockeye diversity in the Skeena remains unclear.
Hatchery Resurgence and the Salmonid Enhancement Program
abundance, stimulate local economies, and involve the public and change awareness about salmon; ultimately, the primary objective was to double salmon production for commercial catch. There also was a stated priority to focus on research and evaluation of enhancement success, which had not existed previously. Nearly two decades later, Ray Hilborn — an established fisheries scientist — critiqued the program’s ability to assess success given its evaluation component in a series of articles (e.g., Hilborn 1992; Hilborn and Winton 1993). Not only did the SEP program fail to double the catch of salmon in BC, but commercial catch continued to decline. Hilborn also noted that the ecological effects of SEP on wild salmon remained unknown, a concern raised by Peter Larkin prior to the program’s conception. Despite these failures and concerns, hatcheries have continued to operate, and SEP remains the agency responsible for salmon enhancement in Canada today.
Salmon hatcheries made a resurgence during the 1960s due to further widespread declines in abundance across Pacific salmon species and no longer solely focused on the production of sockeye. While it was naively believed that new and improved technologies would ensure success this time around, many facilities were unsuccessful and closed within a few years of operation. In 1974, BC’s first provincial fisheries biologist, Peter Larkin, wrote the influential essay, “Play it Again, Sam – An Essay on Salmon Enhancement,” which outlined the natural desire for enhanceLake Fertilization ment while acknowledging its many shortcomings. Larkin highlighted that The SEP program expanded its enprevious enhancement efforts across hancement activities to include the nuthe province were disjointed, lacked trient enrichment of sockeye rearing clear goals, evaluation, and scientific lakes in the late 1970s. Similar to hatchbasis, such that many were “embarrass- eries, the fertilization of freshwater ingly unsuccessful” (Larkin 1974). lakes was seen as a way to increase the However, because having more salmon production of juvenile sockeye largely available to catch remained desirable, for the benefit of commercial fisheries, hatcheries were worth investing in de- and often in response to the widespread spite the risks. He urged an immediate decline in abundance of those lake-rearinvestment of at least $100 million and ing populations. By adding nutrients to the establishment of a single agency lakes, the amount of food available for with the sole responsibility of salmon sockeye would increase, which theoretenhancement in the province. Continued on next page Canada responded by launching the Salmonid Enhancement Program (SEP) in 1977, investing hundreds of millions of dollars into hatcheries and habitat improvements — like spawning channels and lake fertilization — over the next few decades. Whereas previous efforts focused largely on sockeye, enhancement of all commercially-caught salmon species escalated. Several goals were outlined for SEP: in- Hatcheries continue to play an outsized role in salmon encrease wild salmon hancement programs. Photo by Jim Yuskavitch
The Osprey
Continued from previous page
ically would result in larger (and more numerous) juveniles that would survive to adulthood and be available for commercial fisheries. Numerous sockeye nursery lakes in the Skeena were fertilized, including Wedzin Ben (Morice Lake) – an extraordinarily beautiful lake high in the Wetzin’kwa of low historical productivity owing to the influence of mountain glaciers. Like most other lakes fertilized under SEP, it was not adequately monitored before or after fertilization to quantify success or improvement. The sockeye population there did not respond with a return in larger numbers; indeed, it has remained a diminished population in need of rebuilding. Ultimately, the fertilization of sockeye rearing lakes across BC ceased due to their enormous cost and lack of success.
Enhancement Today As if 150 years of failure isn’t enough for lessons to be learned, enhancement persists as a key component of salmon management in BC — in the form of SEP, and in new federal and provincial policies aimed at rebuilding wild salmon. Hatcheries continue to release approximately 300 million juvenile salmon each year in BC; yet most salmon populations are highly diminished in abundance and remain on a downward trajectory. Salmon enhancement is one of four main components of Canada’s Pacific Salmon Strategy Initiative (PSSI) launched in 2021. While the main objective of the PSSI is to “stop serious declines in key salmon stocks and rebuild these species to a sustainable level,” one of its main tools for doing so is to increase the use of conservation-based hatchery production. The objectives remain twofold: to rebuild lost abundance and create opportunities for fisheries. The BC government also launched a Wild Salmon Strategy in 2018 to restore “healthy and abundant wild salmon stocks”; a recurring theme of the strategy is to expand the production of salmon from enhancement facilities. Our governments seem incapable of waking from the hypnotic myth that artificial production will return stable numbers of salmon last seen over a century ago. It’s true, the Babine spawning channels appear to be doing just that for sockeye in the Skeena watershed: providing an annual abundance of fish available for ocean
Fall 2023 • Issue No. 106
commercial fisheries that otherwise would have been sunk several decades previous. But such enhancement has come at the cost of reduced abundance and diversity of wild populations throughout the watershed, which arguably provide the species’ best chance at adaptation to a rapidly changing Morice Lake (Wedzin Ben) was one of a number of sockeye world. And salmon nursery lakes that were fertilized to increase productivthese smaller, ity, but with disappointing results. Photo by Michael Price, wild (non- SkeenaWild Babine) populaanother human generation to act upon. tions disproportionately contribute to And such is the childish game we play food security for Indigenous Peoples in watersheds like the Skeena at the exthat rely on them for subsistence fishpense of millions of dollars annually, eries, and the delivery of salmon-dethe food security of Indigenous Peorived nutrients to local ecosystems. ples, the wildlife and ecosystems deRebuilding our wild salmon populapendent upon salmon provisions, and tions requires a thoughtful approach — wild salmon themselves. Pacific salmon based on lessons learned from the past are at the crossroads. They have the re— and a clear, measurable, vision. Govsilience to persist and thrive even ernment agencies must collaborate to under the influence of a rapidly changensure the collective action of humans ing climate. But to get there, we need to contributes to the recovery of wild apply the lessons learned from our past salmon, not their demise. Artificial enand truly prioritize their rebuilding. hancement cannot replenish lost salmon abundance and, in many cases, has contributed to the declines in wild populations. But should we forego any form of enhancement in the name of conservation? Habitat enhancement Michael Price is a Liber Ero Postdocwith a focus on the restoration of detoral Fellow with Simon Fraser Univergraded natural systems, which consity, and Director of Science at tributes to the long-term survival of SkeenaWild Conservation Trust. His rewild populations, certainly is warsearch broadly explores how salmon ranted. Even targeted production of populations have responded to a cenfish in hatcheries can help some setury of change in climate, fishing, and verely diminished populations, such as artificial production. those on the precipice of extirpation Kaitlin Yehle joined SkeenaWild Conand in need of life support. But we must servation Trust as a fisheries biologist stay true to the goal. If, for example, in 2023 after completing her MSc. at the the goal is to rebuild the abundance University of British Columbia. She fo(and diversity) of a diminished populacuses on wild salmon conservation and tion by artificial production, we must fisheries management, through the avensure the safe return of as many fish enues of research, communications, as possible from that population to help and advocacy. it rebuild; fisheries with the potential to SkeenaWild Conseration Trust is one intercept those fish must be closed. of The Osprey’s supporting partner orMixed-stock fisheries that incidentally ganizations. To learn more about their (or purposefully) catch fish from the work visit: https://skeenawild.org rebuilding population will simply kick the “recovery can” down the road for
9
Literature Cited Beacham, T.D., Cox-Rogers, S., MacConnachie, C., McIntosh, B., and Wallace, C.G. 2014. Population structure and run timing of sockeye salmon in the Skeena River, British Columbia. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 34: 335– 348. British Columbia Fisheries Commission (BCFC). 1922. Report and Recommendations. Ottawa. Connors, B., Malick, M.J., Ruggerone, G.T., Rand, P., Adkinson, M., Irvine, J.R., Campbell, R., and Gorman, K. 2020. Climate and competition influence sockeye salmon population dynamics across the Northeast Pacific Ocean. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 77(6): 943-949. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfas-2019-0422 English, K.K., Peacock, D., Challenger, W., Noble, C., Beveridge, I., Robichaud, D., Beach, K., Hertz, E., and Connors, K. 2018. North and central coast salmon escapement, catch, run size, and exploitation rate estimates for each salmon Conservation Unit for 1954–2017. Prepared for Pacific Salmon Foundation. Retrieved from https://salmonwatersheds.ca/libraryfiles/lib_451.pdf Foerster, R.E. 1936. A study of sockeye salmon propagation methods in British Columbia. The Progressive Fish-Culturalist 3:25, 4-6. Foerster, R.E. 1968. The sockeye salmon, Oncorhynchus nerka. Fisheries Research Board of Canada Bulletin 162. Ottawa. Hilborn, R. 1992. Institutional learning and spawning channels for sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka). Canadian Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 49: 1126-1136.
ships between wild Skeena River sockeye salmon productivity and the abundance of spawning channel enhanced sockeye smolts. PLoS ONE 9(4): e95718. Price, M.H.H., Connors, B.M., Candy, J.R., McIntosh, B., Beacham, T.D., Moore, J.W., and Reynolds, J.D. 2019. Genetics of century-old fish scales reveal population patterns of decline. Conservation Letters 12: e12669. Price, M.H.H., Moore, J.W., Connors, B.M., Wilson, K.L., and Reynolds, J.D. 2021. Portfolio simplification arising from a century of change in salmon population diversity and artificial production. Journal of Applied Ecology 58: 1477-1489. Pritchard, A L. 1949. The Skeena River salmon investigation. Canadian Geographic Journal 39: 60-67. Traxler, G.S., Richard, J., and McDonald, T.E. 1998. Ichthyophthirius multifiliis (Ich) epizootics in spawning sockeye salmon in British Columbia, Canada. Journal of Aquatic Animal Health 10: 143–151. Walters, C.J., Lichatowich, J.A., Peterman, R.M., and Reynolds, J.D. 2008. Report of the Skeena Independent Science Review Panel. A report to the Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the British Columbia Ministry of the Environment, Victoria. Retrieved from http://remmain.rem.sfu.ca/papers/peterman/Report_of_the_Skeena_Independent_Science_Review_Panel.pdf? Wood, C.C. 2008. Managing biodiversity of Pacific salmon: Lessons from the Skeena River sockeye salmon fishery in British Columbia. American Fisheries Society Symposium 49: 349-364
Hilborn, R., and Winton, I. 1993. Learning to enhance salmon production: lessons from the Salmonid Enhancement Program. Canadian Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 50: 20432056. Larkin, P.A. (with appendices by Campbell, B.A., and Clay, C.H.) 1974. Play it again Sam – an essay on salmon enhancement. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 31: 1433-1459. Meffe, G.K. 1992. Techno-arrogance and halfway technologies: Salmon hatcheries on the Pacific coast of North America. Conservation Biology 6: 350–354. Naish, K.A., Taylor, J.E., Levin, P.S., Quinn, T.P., Winton, J.R., Huppert, D., and Hilborn, R. 2007. An evaluation of the effects of conservation and fishery enhancement hatcheries on wild populations of salmon. Advances in Marine Biology 53: 61-194. Peterman, R.M. 1982. Nonlinear relation between smolts and adults in Babine Lake sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) and implications for other salmon populations. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 39: 904–913. Price, M.H.H., and Connors, B.M. 2014. Evaluating relation-
10
A natural barrier in the Witset Canyon on the Bulkley River (Wetzin’kwa) dynamited for fish passage eliminated the salmon fishery for Gitksan and Wet’suwet’en villages. Photo by Jitze Couperus, Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic License.
The Osprey
Eel River Dams: Reconnecting California’s Lost Coast By Charlie Schneider
T
he renowned artist, author, and angler Russell Chatham once described the Eel and Russian Rivers as California’s two best steelhead rivers, at least for those “eccentric throwbacks” that endeavored to catch steelhead on a fly rod. But in the intervening 50 years since Chatham’s writing, each river has seen steelhead and salmon populations dwindle to the point of Endangered Species Act (ESA) listings. For the Eel, problems have been acute: initial overharvest from canneries, the post World War II tractor logging boom,1955 and ‘64 floods, and, in more recent times, the green rush of cannabis. Each event, whether natural or induced, had profound negative effects on the health of the river. But many of these circumstances are improving. The canneries are long gone and recovery is being supported by modern forest practice rules and improved regulation as well as better management of water use. For the Russian, the impacts have
been more chronic. This includes population growth, urbanization and largescale land use change coupled with water over allocation driven by a strong agricultural sector and prized wine grape production. Given the difficulties and conflicts associated with recovery, hatcheries rather than habitat have been relied upon as a solution to triage salmonid population declines.
Dams in the Eel and Russian River basins have taken a toll on once-thriving fish populations by blocking access to critical cool headwater stream reaches.
Scott Dam, which, along with the Cape Horn Dam, makes up the Potter Valley Project, was constructed, without fish passage, to store water for summer power generation. Photo by Kyle Schwartz, California Trout.
Fall 2023 • Issue No. 106
Dams, in both basins, have also taken a toll on the once-thriving fish populations by blocking access to cool headwater stream reaches, which are critical to California’s Mediterranean climate salmonids. While yeoman’s work continues to restore thriving salmon and steelhead populations across the North Coast, there is a unique sense of hope on the Eel where basin-wide recovery is possible. A key part of recovery is that the last two major dams in the basin – part of a now obsolete hydropower project that linked the two basins– are slated for removal. An undammed Eel would be California’s longest free flowing river and a stronghold for recovering salmon and steelhead populations.
The Potter Valley Project The Potter Valley Project is comprised of two dams and functions as a trans-basin diversion, taking Eel River water and diverting it to the Russian River for power generation. Built in 1908, the 63-ft tall Cape Horn Dam creates a small reservoir and forebay to divert water into a tunnel, through a mountain, and to a small powerhouse in the East Branch Russian River in Potter Valley. Water that leaves the hydroelectric turbines is used for agriculture in Potter Valley before draining into Lake Mendocino. From Lake Mendocino, the water is released into the Russian River where it has been used to augment natural water supplies. Twelve miles upstream from Cape Horn Dam, the 130-ft Scott Dam was completed in 1922 and is used to store winter water for summer power generation. Scott Dam has no fish passage facilities and is the largest barrier to native salmonids on the North Coast of California, blocking access to 288 stream miles of high elevation, climate change resilient habitat in Mendocino National Forest and Snow Mountain Wilderness. For years, conservationists, biologists, and local communities Continued on next page
11
Continued from previous page
have recognized the need to address the issues caused by these dams. A number of studies show definitively that no single action would benefit Eel River salmon, and the health of the river, more than the full removal of both dams. ( Alyssa M. FitzGerald, David A. Boughton, Joshua Fuller, Sara N. John, Benjamin T. Martin, Lee R. Harrison, and Nathan J. Mantua. 2022. Physical and biological constraints on the capacity for life-history expression of anadromous salmonids: an Eel River, California, case study. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. 79(7): 1023-1041. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfas-2021-0229) Every 30 to 50 years, large hydroelectric dams must be relicensed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to continue operations. The license for the Potter Valley Project expired in spring of 2022. Prior to license expiration, the owner, Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) tried to auction off the facilities. Finding no party interested and noting that the Project is no longer viable as a business venture for energy production, PG&E made the decision not to relicense the facilities. A number of factors likely played into their decision, including the failure of the transformer bank in the powerhouse in 2021, which would require costly repairs, ongoing maintenance costs for the aging facilities, and the need for changes in Project operations to comply with the ESA. This summer, PG&E announced a new seismic analysis that showed increased risk of Scott Dam failing during an earthquake. To mitigate the risk, the California Division of Safety of Dams has required PG&E to reduce the storage volume in the Lake Pillsbury Reservoir behind Scott Dam by 26%. (https://www.pgecurrents.com/articles/3687-water-levels-lake-pillsbury-lower-year) Rather than make needed repairs and upgrades, it’s cheaper for PG&E and their ratepayers to retire the facilities.
Recent Developments PG&E is currently developing a plan to surrender their license and decommission the Project. They expect to release an initial draft of their plan to the public in November of this year. After two rounds of public comment, one mandated by FERC, PG&E plans to submit their final license surrender and de-
Historically, the Eel River produced abundant populations of salmon and steelhead for the local fishery. Photo Courtesy Humboldt County Historical Society
The Cape Horn Dam on the upper eel River diverts water to the Russian River for hydropower generation. Photo by Mike Wier, California Trout commissioning plan to FERC for approval in January 2025. While dam removal is not a sure thing in FERC license surrender and decommissioning proceedings, PG&E has told interested parties that their plan “will include the removal of all in water facilities such that no feature will continue to impound water and the natural flow of the river will occur,” suggesting that dam removal on the Eel is not an “if” but a “when.” The road to dam removal is not without its challenges. It involves complex
negotiations, regulatory hurdles, and substantial financial investments by the Project owner. The cooperation of diverse stakeholders, including tribal nations, government agencies, environmental organizations, and local communities, is essential for the success of such an ambitious project. Water users who have benefitted from free Eel River water abandoned into the Russian River would like to see some diversion continue after dam removal and have asked PG&E to consider a conContinued on next page
12
The Osprey
Continued from previous page
troversial, last-minute proposal to include a future diversion in their decommissioning plan. While dam removal proponents are wary that the proposal would delay dam removal, the proposal concedes that both Scott and Cape Horn Dams will be removed. It seems that even the interests that have the most to lose have accepted that the future is an Eel River free of dams.
Looking to the Future The efforts to remove Scott and Cape Horn Dams on the Eel River symbolize a broader movement in California and beyond. As aging hydropower facilities reach the end of their lives and energy markets favor the use of cleaner energy sources like solar and wind power, the age of expansive and duplicative hydro systems seems to be dwindling. A swift resolution to the decommissioning of the Potter Valley Project and removal of the two dams is essential in preserving the Eel River and West Coast salmon and steelhead. But delay, and any outcome short of removing both dams to restore the function of the river, would be a wasted opportunity. As we work toward the restoration and recovery of this iconic river, we are not only healing the wounds of the past but also charting a course toward a more sustainable future for our rivers, our fish, and our communities. If California truly wants to preserve biodiversity, rectify historical injustices, and reap the economic and ecological benefits healthy salmon runs provide, there is no greater opportunity than that presented by the removal of the Eel River dams.
Charlie Schneider is Lost Coast Project Manager for California Trout and a third generation California steelhead angler. He was raised in a commercial fishing and logging family and community on the North Coast. To learn more about California Trout and their work visit: https://caltrout.org For more information on Eel River summer steelhead, see “Restoring Wild Summer Steelhead to California’s Upper Eel River” by Scott Greacen in the May 2019 issue of The Osprey, https://www.ospreysteelhead.org/archiv es
Fall 2023 • Issue No. 106
With the two dams removed, the Eel would be California’s longest undammed river, opening 288 miles of cool water refugia, and spawning and rearing habitat for salmon and steelhead. Photo by Mike Wier, California Trout
13
Special Report: Disasterous Dam Repair on North Umpqua Sparks Massive Fish Kill, Pollution Spills, State Senate Inquiry, and $27.6 Million Fine By Jim McCarthy
O
n October 6th, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) filed a $27.6 million claim for recovery of damages in the Douglas County Circuit Court against the Winchester Water Control District and its associated contractors TerraFirma Foundation Systems and DOWL Engineering for the preventable loss of at least 550,000 juvenile Pacific lamprey during this summer’s botched repairs to the District-owned Winchester Dam on the North Umpqua River near Roseburg. The filing represented one of the largest damages claims for illegal killing of wildlife in Oregon’s history, and seeks reparation for the loss of a valuable public resource, as well as the state’s costs to mount an emergency rescue operation for dying lamprey at the dam. Pacific lamprey are listed on ODFW’s Sensitive Species List and are culturally significant to Pacific Northwest tribes. Also on October 6th, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality issued a pre-enforcement notice to Winchester Dam’s owner’s for water quality violations associated with the summer 2023 repairs. DEQ’s Office of Compliance and Enforcement is expected to issue a final enforcement order in the next few weeks. The state’s actions surprised some observers, and were seen as a credit to the region’s Native American tribes which have worked for years to raise awareness about the importance and value of Pacific lamprey, and to restore their populations in the Pacific Northwest. The developments were also hailed as a victory by members of a statewide grassroots coalition of fishing, conservation, and whitewater groups formed to end the ongoing harm caused by the 133-year-old Winchester Dam, and remove it. The coalition has been working for years to raise alarm bells with government officials over the Winchester Water Control District’s chronic non-compliance with state and federal repair permitting, engineering,
14
The 17-foot high, 133-year-old Winchester Dam on the North Umpqua River near Roseburg provides a recreational lake for nearby residents. Photo by Jim Yuskavitch
At least 550,000 juvenile Pacific lamprey were killed due to the botched repair of Winchester Dam on Oregon’s North Umpqua River. water quality, and dam safety requirements as well as their disregard for protections for fish and wildlife despite the essential habitat importance of the North Umpqua for salmon, steelhead, and other aquatic life. Previously, on September 27th, during testimony before state legislators regarding botched repairs at the derelict Winchester Dam on the North Umpqua River near Roseburg, Shaun Clements, acting deputy director of ODFW, acknowledged that the private
dam owners’ repairs this summer resulted in a massive kill of native Pacific lamprey, “on the order of hundreds of thousands of lamprey, and by statute that could result in significant financial damages.” The statement came during a question and answer period following a presentation on the Winchester Dam repairs by ODFW, DEQ, and the Oregon Water Resources Department (OWRD) to the Senate Interim Committee on Natural Resources and Wildfire. Committee chair state Senator Jeff Golden (D–Ashland) and committee member Senator Floyd Prozanski (DSpringfield) grilled agency brass on the widespread public perception of the agencies’ indifference to reported serial violations of state law and regulation committed at the dam this summer and in previous years. After the hearing, members of the coalition and public expressed appreciation to the Committee members and welcomed the increased scrutiny of the infamously outlaw Continued on next page
The Osprey
Continued from previous page
Winchester Dam. Just a few months prior to the hearing, ODFW officials had declined to even answer river advocates’ formal request to use their authority to require a less harmful repair alternative maintaining reservoir levels and upstream fish migration — only weeks before collapsing summer steelhead numbers spurred ODFW to shut all angling in the North Umpqua from August through November. The disintegrating, 17-foot-high, 133year-old Winchester Dam is maintained solely to create a private waterski lake for surrounding landowners, but it kills, injures, or delays salmon and steelhead trying to access 160 miles of high quality habitat upstream. Impacted species include spring Chinook, fall Chinook, summer steelhead, winter steelhead, cutthroat trout, and Pacific Lamprey, as well as threatened Oregon Coast coho listed under the federal Endangered Species Act. The hearing and record fine came in the wake of intense media scrutiny and public outcry generated in large part by a handful of individuals from WaterWatch, Native Fish Society, Umpqua Watersheds, The North Umpqua Foundation, and Steamboaters, who spent weeks in the heat and wildfire smoke documenting and reporting multiple apparent violations of state and federal laws during this summer’s repair efforts at Winchester Dam. These included possible violations of laws intended to protect fish, wildlife, aquatic habitat, drinking water supplies, and worker safety. Starting August 7th, these river advocates witnessed one ecological disaster after another as the Winchester Water Control District commenced repairs proposed to be to the minimum extent necessary to address public safety issues at the dam. Sadly, their cheap-as-possible approach came with near-maximum environmental damage. Observed repair impacts include: ‘ A massive fish kill of Pacific lamprey as a result of the repair process, in which upwards of hundreds of thousands of fish died. ‘ Mats made from old vehicle tires likely containing a compound lethal to
Fall 2023 • Issue No. 106
Blocking passage for native migratory fish was one of a number negative inpacts resulting from dam repair work. Photo by Kirk Blaine, Native Fish Society salmon and steelhead placed in the river and driven over again and again with heavy equipment. ‘ Blocked passage for native migratory fish, including imperiled, iconic summer steelhead. Fish were observed jumping again and again at the impassable dam. ‘ Wet concrete dumped into the waters of the North Umpqua, likely changing the river’s pH level and harming or killing fish and degrading habitat downstream. The reservoir drawdown method of repair, chosen as the Wet concrete was dumped into the North Umpqua River cheapest dam repair during repair work. Photo by Kirk Blaine, Native Fish Somethod by dam owner ciety Winchester Water Control District over other well- created a migratory dead-end for established and more fish-friendly dam imperiled summer steelhead, spring repair options, dewatered vast areas of Chinook salmon, and other native Pacific lamprey habitat while likely species attempting to move upstream to releasing stored sediment downstream the 160 miles of excellent cold water onto state-designated Essential habitat above the dam. The release of Salmonid Habitat/federally-designated stored water downstream also likely critical Coho salmon habitat. Meanwhile, the closure of the ladder Continued on next page
15
Continued from previous page
attracted native migratory fish towards the dam just as the ladder closed, confining them for weeks to the warm water below the dam, with no cold water refugia nearby. Compounding this harm, the reservoir refill in early September temporarily reduced river flows downstream of the dam during the driest and hottest period of the year and injured North Umpqua instream water rights intended to protect salmon and steelhead. On average, Winchester Dam repairs have occurred once every three years since the 1960s, but public records show no permits for repairs prior to 2023. State and federal natural resources agencies issued permits in 2023 after intense pressure from river advocates in the coalition, who asserted that their failure to require permits was irresponsible at best, and likely unlawful. Even so, the state and federal
permitting agencies still largely failed to do their jobs in the lead up to the 2023 repairs. Concerns and irregularities that river advocates raised during the permitting process in the lead up to the 2023 repairs included but were not limited to: ‘ The dam owners failed to disclose to regulators that during past unpermitted repairs, the release of stored reservoir water also released stored sediment downstream onto salmon habitat and into A coho salmon swims through the Winchester Dam public drinking water sup- fishway during the spawning run. Photo by Jim plies. State and federal per- Yuskavitch mit approvals for the 2023 repair were given after the dam owners contact with public drinking water. told regulators that the presence of in- Winchester Dam is just 50 feet upvasive aquatic plants in the reservoir stream from Roseburg’s public drinkwould prevent release of sediment, and ing water intake. Despite this, additionally, that regulators did not require removal of they would secure a any pressure treated wood from the 50’ x 100’ tarp to the structure. The 2023 repair plan called reservoir bed with for drilling large numbers of holes into sandbags. The the dam’s pressure treated wood to seplants and tarp cure a steel lattice.
would be subject to the full force and flow of the river flowing through the dam’s two narrow water release gates. (Despite flying drones over the site several times, river advocates were unable to find eviPacific lamprey are listed as an Oregon Sensitive Species, dence that a tarp and are culturally important to indigenous people of the was placed in the Northwest. Photo by Sean Connolly, US Fish and Wildlife river as proposed Service. before or during repairs.) ‘ State records show the dam owners have previously repaired the dam by installing large numbers of toxic pressure treated wood planks. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Department of Human Services recommend that treated At least 550,000 juvenile Pacific lamprey were killed during wood not be used repair work on Winchester Dam in 2023. Photo by Bob where it may come Hoehne in direct or indirect
16
‘ Previous repairs used rock fill to repair the many cavities within the wooden central span of the dam. As a cost-saving method, the 2023 dam cavity repairs abandoned rock fill in favor of injections of chemical intensive polyurethane foam, a known source of microplastic pollution, just 50 feet upstream from Roseburg’s public drinking water intake. ‘ The Winchester Dam owners were notified by state officials in a January 2023 letter that they were storing water in excess of their filed water right claim SW 398. The letter instructed the owners to come into compliance by lowering their reservoir pool by 1.5 feet, or to file for a new water right. The owners have disregarded the state’s instructions, and instead proposed a repair involving a reservoir refill that injured downstream water rights, including certificated instream rights intended to protect the North Umpqua’s invaluable fisheries, including Oregon Coast Coho, which are listed under the federal Endangered Species Act. Despite ongoing unlawful storage of water, the dam’s repair proposal received all necessary state and federal permits. In August, the District filed a Continued on next page
The Osprey
Continued from previous page
petition in Marion County court asking the judge to stop enforcement against their unlawful storage and instead create a special exception under Oregon law just for them to allow them to increase their water storage claim while maintaining the pre-1909 priority date on their claim. The agency failures in 2023 are even more galling because harm from the previous Winchester Dam repair was well-documented. According to state investigators, pollution from the 2018 repairs at the dam degraded aquatic habitat, killed fish, and harmed the primary drinking water source for the City of Roseburg and the Umpqua Basin Water Association — serving approximately 37,700 people combined. Investigators also found that dam repairs were conducted without following known best management practices, even after authorities provided the dam owners with information in advance on how to protect water quality and fish. Unfortunately, 2018 likely wasn’t the first time Winchester Dam repairs polluted drinking water supplies and harmed North Umpqua fish and wildlife. Public records describe “leakage” during another previous repair and a state official complaining to the contractor “about cement in the river and no permits.” 2023 and 2018 also aren’t the only documented fish kills at Winchester Dam. ODFW public records show that ODFW collected 86 dead steelhead (1 adult, 85 juveniles) and 2 dead spring Chinook during the drawdown for Winchester Dam repairs in 2013. ODFW further estimated that 11,208 Pacific lamprey “perished” just in one small control area established within the vast reservoir reach. ODFW has the authority under statute and rule to issue fines for unlawful killing of fish and wildlife at a rate of $750 per salmon or steelhead and $50 per Pacific lamprey. The fine from the mortality documented by ODFW in 2013 would have equaled or exceeded $626,400. There is no record of ODFW issuing any fines after the 2013 fish kill at Winchester Dam. ODFW is in charge of regulating fish passage as well as the designating the in-water work period and approving fish salvage plans for in-water work in the North Umpqua River for the protection of salmon and steelhead
Fall 2023 • Issue No. 106
The North Umpqua River is a famed wild summer steelhead fishery, as well as hosting runs of coho and Chinook salmon. Photo by Jim Yuskavitch runs. An in-water work extension authorization letter sent by ODFW on September 1st to the Winchester Water Control District states that because the repairs continued after August 28th, that native migratory fish including spring Chinook and summer steelhead were harmed. This is especially concerning because the public record shows that all the major repair attempts at this dam between 1997 and 2013 occurred after August 28th and that all these repair attempts have drained the reservoir pool and stopped upstream migration for a minimum of 12 days. River advocates have been unable to find any fish passage authorizations, in-water work designations, or salvage plan approvals from ODFW for these previous repairs. Following the September 27th hearing, Senator Golden issued a letter to the three agencies, reiterating the need for thorough investigative transparency and stating in part: “Public perception has grown over the years that operation and maintenance of this dam have not been held to statutory and regulatory standards that similar facilities around the state have to meet. I see the attention surrounding this most recent repair project as an opportunity to address and, if possible, to reduce that perception.” Senator Golden’s letter also invited representatives of the three agencies to come back to the Committee to offer follow-up testimony on the issues
surrounding Winchester Dam as early as November 6th. The state Senate committee’s leadership, and state agency actions, have provided more hope for accountability and progress at Winchester Dam after a brutal summer of needless harm to the North Umpqua River’s water quality, aquatic life, and habitat. Unfortunately, although federal agencies such as NOAA Fisheries and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have also failed again and again to hold the owners of Winchester Dam accountable for harms caused to the North Umpqua, Oregon’s U.S. Senator Ron Wyden, U.S. Senator Jeff Merkley, and U.S. Representative Val Hoyle have stayed silent even after our state elected leaders have publicly called for accountability and transparency. Readers who care about the North Umpqua River should contact our federal elected leaders’ offices now and ask them to publicly stand up for our irreplaceable heritage in the Umpqua
Jim McCarthy is Southern Oregon Program Director for WaterWatch of Oregon. To learn more about their work visit: www.waterwatch.org
17
Update on the Klamath River Dams A complex but critical dam removal process By Mark Rockwell
I
n the heart of the Pacific Northwest lies the Klamath River, a vital waterway that flows through Oregon and California, supporting diverse ecosystems and communities. For years, the Klamath River has been the center of a contentious debate over water and the fate of its dams. The decision to remove these dams represents a significant milestone in environmental restoration efforts and a testament to the power of collaboration. Join us on a journey through this remarkable story, as we explore the intricate interplay of leadership, environmental stewardship, and the unwavering commitment to restoring the Klamath River to its former glory. Discover how this project not only breathes new life into a vital ecosystem but also inspires a global movement dedicated to preserving and revitalizing our world’s most cherished natural wonders.
The Klamath Dam Conundrum The Klamath River, once known for its thriving salmon runs and pristine habitat, faced a dramatic decline in the
last century due to the construction of four hydroelectric dams: Iron Gate, Copco 1, Copco 2, and J.C. Boyle. These dams blocked fish passage, disrupted the natural flow of the river, and exacerbated water quality issues, causing ecological harm and economic challenges for indigenous tribes, fishermen, and local communities.
The Dam Removal Agreement The quest for Klamath dam removal began with discussions between various stakeholders, including tribal lead-
ers, environmental and fishery organizations, government agencies, and dam owner PacifiCorp. The negotiations culminated in the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement (KHSA) and the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA) in 2010.These agreements outlined a comprehensive plan for dam removal and restoration, with the primary goals of restoring salmon runs, improving water quality, and revitalizing local communities. The KHSA addressed the dam removal process and funding, while the KBRA focused on broader ecosystem and water management issues in the Klamath Basin.
Challenges and Delays
Removing the dams will open up over 400 miles of historic salmon habitat, allowing these iconic fish to again thrive in the Klamath River.
While the dam removal plan promised significant environmental and social benefits, it faced several obstacles. Key challenges included securing funding, obtaining regulatory approvals, and addressing concerns from various interest groups. The initial timeline for dam removal, set for 2019, was delayed due to these complexities. One of the most substantial hurdles was the need to coordinate federal, state, and local agencies, as well as navigate legal and regulatory frameworks. Additionally, the project required substantial funding to ensure the safe and environmentally responsible removal of the dams and subsequent habitat restoration efforts.
The Environmental Promise The ecological benefits of Klamath dam removal are expected to be profound. Restoring the natural flow of the river will improve water quality, reduce toxic algae blooms, and rejuvenate riparian habitats. Perhaps the most significant impact will be on salmon populations. Removing the dams will open up over 400 miles of historic salmon habitat, allowing these iconic fish to once again thrive in the Klamath River. COPCO 2 Dam on the Klamath River in the process of being demolished. Photo by Shane Anderson, www.swiftwaterfilms.com
18
Continued on next page
The Osprey
Continued from previous page
Where Are We Today And Into 2024
is complete. All dams will be dismantled simultaneously through the summer, with expected completion in October 2024, prior to adult fish needing to enter the river for spawning. A replacement hatchery is being created on Fall Creek, just up-river from the current hatchery at Iron Gate dam. This hatchery will function for the next 7 years to bolster the salmon population while in-river spawning is established. Once successful in-river spawning is sufficient to replace the hatchery smolt production, hatchery operation will cease. The hope is that in-river wild fish production will once again be established and successful. Along with the deconstruction of the dams, a parallel process of restoring the river footprint is happening. Resource Environmental Solutions (RES) started 3 years ago with seed and plant collection and propagation.
Conclusion The Klamath Dam removal process is a complex and multifaceted endeavor, requiring collaboration between various stakeholders, Tribal Leaders, regulatory agencies, and other affected communities. Despite its challenges and delays, it represents a remarkable opportunity to restore a critical river system, recover historical fisheries, revitalize struggling ecosystems, and support local economies. This project is more than a feat of engineering; it’s a powerful symbol of cooperation and the shared responsibility of safeguarding our natural treasures for generations yet to come. As this monumental effort steadily progresses, it shines as a beacon of hope for environmental restoration endeavors worldwide, serving as a poignant reminder of what humanity can achieve when we pool our resources and expertise to heal our wounded planet.
License transfer and surrender has been approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and the license to operate and remove the dams is now held by the Klamath River Renewal Corporation (KRRC) and the states of Oregon and California. Work has begun on the process to remove the dams with supporting infrastructure construction on bridges and roads to ensure the heavy equipment needed can pass safely, and other preparations for dismantling are being made. See https://klamathrenewal.org/ for more detail on the process and timing of dismantling. In Kikacéki, a place sacred to the Shasta Indian Nation, there is an area commonly known as Ward’s Canyon Watch the short video below: where the river has lacked consistent flows for nearly a century. The Yurok Tribe Dr. Mark Rockwell, D.C. is Construction Corporation and President of the Northern Yurok Fisheries Department, California Council, Fly Fishin coordination with ers International. Fly Fishers KRRC, Shasta Indian International is one of The Nation, and Heli-Dunn, a loOsprey’s supporting partners. cally owned helicopter comSee more of their work at: pany, are clearing the alder https://www.flyfishersinternaand cottonwood trees from the tional.org river corridor, while leaving To learn more about the neall floodplain vegetation ingotiating process to remove tact. The trees are being transthe four Klamath River dams, ported to a staging location for https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q248MhRH49w see Rockwell’s article “Inside later use in the restoration of the Saga of the Klamath the 2,200 acres of reservoir Dams Removal Campaign” in The Osbeds that will be exposed after drawprey, Winter 2023 issue, down is complete. www.ospreysteelhead.org/archives Located within the traditional homeland of the Shasta Indian Nation, Kikacéki connects traditional villages, For Additional Information important ceremonial places, and the Tribe’s spiritual center of the world. ArReconnect the Klamath chaeological evidence shows that the area has been inhabited for thousands https://reconnectklamath.org/ of years — until construction of the Klamath River Renewal Corporation Copco dams began. During the dams’ construction, Shasta people livhttps://klamathrenewal.org/ ing there also had their lands taken by eminent domain. Restoring at Scale Copco 2, the smallest of the 4 dams is near total removal, and should be comhttps://res.us/home/restoring-at-scale/restoring-at-scalepletely out by October 1st. docuseries/ Once spawning fish have finished their Fall activity and spring fish hatchTribal Connections ing and travel down river is finished, the deconstruction process will begin — https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=T likely by June 2024. Heavy dismantling ribal+work+on+the+klamath&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8 of the dams will begin once drawdown
Fall 2023 • Issue No. 106
19
FISH WATCH — WILD FISH NEWS, ISSUES AND INITIATIVES 2023 Ocean Temperatures Off the Charts Ocean and land temperatures in 2023 have turned out to be at the highest levels recorded since data collection began in 1850. By April 2023 scientists were already measuring ocean temperatures well above key data records maintained by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. By July, ocean surface temperatures of 0.99°C (1.78°F) continued to be at record levels for the fourth consecutive month. By August, large portions of the northwest Pacific near Japan and the northeast Pacific off the coasts of California and Oregon were more than 3°C (5.4°F) warmer than normal. By September, global ocean surface temperatures saw record highs for the sixth consecutive month. Temperatures were plus 1.03°C (1.85°F) — from the 174-year average.
2003 has turned out to be the warmest year on record, including land and sea temperatures . Photo by Jim Yuskavitch The primary driving forces behind this year’s record ocean surface temperatures include the current El Niño that amplifies ocean warming along with ongoing human-caused global warming. Research has shown that 90% of excess heat in the atmosphere that has occurred in recent years is absorbed by ocean surface water. A NOAA study found that nearly half of the world’s oceans were experiencing a marine heat wave — the largest area ever affected since data collection began in 1991. El Niño is expected to continue over the Pacific Ocean, affecting ocean surface temperatures, through March and possibly longer. For the more information and additional links visit the NASA Earth Observatory website at: https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov
mainland regions have not had salmon and steelhead spawning data collected since 2018 or earlier. Eighty percent of salmon-spawning streams throughout BC have deficient data or no data collection since at least 2018. Along the Central Coast, 81 percent of streams have not been enumerated within the last five years, and 29 BC salmon Conservation Units have no public record of salmon spawning data. The research also found that spawning data is often not collected at all on more remote streams, which also have among the lowest salmon returns. Only 2 percent of BC’s new Salmon Restoration and Innovation Funds are dedicated to Central Coast projects while $19 million of those funds support aquaculture projects. For more information and additional links visit: https://pacificwild.org/data-deficiency-the-salmon-dilemma/
Eelgrass Research Identifies Restoration Best Practices A study commissioned by Pew Trust, and released by the Pacific Marine and Estuarine Fish Habitat Partnership (PMEP) that looked at eelgrass habitat along the coasts of California, Oregon and Washington found that successful restoration efforts is more reliant on location and environmental conditions than any particular restoration method. Information is provided in the report “Eelgrass Restoration on the U.S. West Coast: A Comprehensive Assessment of Restoration Techniques and Their Outcomes.” Eelgrass is an important marine plant the provides numerous benefits such as absorbing carbon dioxide, producing oxygen and supplying nursery habitat for fish, including salmon and steelhead (See “Eelgrass as Vital Nursery Habitat for Young Salmon” by Michael Arbeider and Jonathan Moore, The Osprey, January 2018, https://www.ospreysteelhead.org/archives). About 30 percent of the world’s eelgrass has disappeared since the 1870s. In some parts of the West Coast the decline has been as much as 90 percent. For additional information and links visit: https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/articles/2021/06/17/eelgrass-study-shows-location-matters-morethan-method-in-restoration-efforts
Incomplete Spawning Data Collection Hampers BC Salmon Management Research by Pacific Wild analyzing British Columbia salmon spawning enumeration data compiled by Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) and the Pacific Salmon Foundation has found that there are “massive gaps in the data collected used to inform management decisions.” Their findings show that a majority of streams in the Nass, Skeena, Fraser, Central Coast and Vancouver Island and
20
Eelgrass, which is declining throughout the world’s oceans, is critical habitat for a variety of marine life and sequesters atmospheric carbon. Photo by John Brew, Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Continued on next page
The Osprey
Continued from previous page
Aging Dams Coupled with Climate Change are a Growing Threat A majority of the world’s population will live downstream of large dams built in the last century by 2050. As these dams age, the odds of infrastructure failure increases, with the potential for catastrophic damage to downstream communities, habitats and biodiversity. A report by the United Nations found that most of the 58,700 large dams worldwide were constructed with a 50- to100 year lifespan, with signs of aging by 50 years. Structural stress from extreme hydrological events caused by climate change will accelerate the aging process. The report also found that the average age of the 90,580 dams in the US is 56; more than 80 percent of US dams in 2020 were operating at or beyond their life expectancy, 75 percent of dam failures happen after the dams reach 50 years old and; it would cost $64 billion to refurbish all US dams. More than half of all dams in Canada are 50-plus years old. To learn more about aging dams visit: https://www.preventionweb.net/news/ageing-dams-pose-growing-threat-un
mals on private lands but managed as furbearing animals on public lands. Beavers have long been known to be a keystone animal, and particularly beneficial to many aquatic and riparian species. In recent years, major efforts are being made throughout the West Coast to reintroduce beavers to habitat from which they had been previously extirpated, to help improve salmon and steelhead habitat, and are considered an important tool to help restore naturally functioning aquatic wetlands and wild fish populations. Beavers’ dam-building and other activity helps increase water security, decreases wildfire risk, sequesters carbon and improves ecological functions of wetlands and riparian areas, making them both important to wild salmon and steelhead recovery, and combating climate change. For more information visit: https://westernlaw.org/factsheet-oregon-beaver-believer-bill/
New Law Protects Oregon Beaver Populations on Private Lands In late June, the Oregon Senate passed HB 3466 — the “Beaver Believer Bill” — that authorizes the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife to manage beavers on private property, and no longer allows unlimited, permit-less killing of beavers as nuisance animals on those lands. The bill also allows ODFW to collect data on beaver populations on private lands to facilitate better management of the animals, promote non-lethal beaver management tools when they cause problems such as flooding from dam-building activities, develop standards on when beavers can be removed, require removal permits, and reporting of removals to ODFW. Oregon Governor Tina Kotek subsequently signed the bill into law. Previously, beavers were designated “predatory” ani-
Beavers will no longer be designated as predators on private lands in Oregon, offering more protection. Photo by Enel Lepik , Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International
FEMA’s flood insurance program encourages development in floodprone areas that provide valuable habitat for fish and wildlife. Photo by Jim Yuskavitch
Conservation Groups Sue FEMA Over Flood Insurance Program A coalition of conservation groups including The Conservation Angler— one of The Osprey’s partner organizations — Center for Biological Diversity, Northwest Environmental Defense Center, and Willamette Riverkeeper are suing the Federal Emergency Management Agency over its failure to protect floodplain-dependent imperiled salmonids and orcas in Oregon that are protected under the Endangered Species Act. FEMA’s National Flood Insurance Program provides taxpayer-subsidized flood insurance for structures in high-hazard, flood-prone areas that private insurers won’t cover. The program, created by the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, is intended to provide federal flood insurance and reduce loss of life and property to floods by improving floodplain management. Despite its intent, the program has led to increased development in floodplains, placed people in harm’s way, destroyed valuable habitat for endangered species and left taxpayers with an ever-growing bill to cover flood damage. The program is $22 billion in debt, and in 2022 taxpayers paid more than $280 million in interest on that debt. Continued on next page
Fall 2023 • Issue No. 106
21
Continued from previous page
FEMA was forced to consult with the National Marine Fisheries Service after conservation groups filed suit in 2009 over the agency’s failure to consider how the program harmed imperiled species in Oregon. In 2016, the Service determined that FEMA’s implementation of the program in Oregon jeopardized the survival and recovery of protected species through poor floodplain management and by encouraging development in floodplains. These types of decisions, called “jeopardy decisions,” are rare and speak to the seriousness of the harm to imperiled species. The Service’s biological opinion recommended several changes to the program to comply with the Endangered Species Act, but FEMA has failed to make them. These changes include updating flood maps, developing new criteria to limit floodplain development and more fully mitigate harm when development does occur, and improving reporting and enforcement. FEMA’s failure to meet mandatory deadlines for compliance is at the heart of the lawsuit. Sixteen salmonid species are imperiled by the flood insurance program, as well as the southern eulachon — a small smelt — and the salmonid-dependent Southern Resident orca. Floodplains are areas along rivers, streams and shorelines that are regularly inundated with water. They provide important fish and wildlife habitat, increase flood storage capacity and protect water quality. They also provide critical landscape resiliency in the face of more extreme flooding exacerbated by the climate crisis. For more information see: https://biologicaldiversity.org/programs/biodiversity/pdfs/20 230628-FEMA-NOI-CENTER-NEDC-WRK-TCA.pdf
Warming Ocean Increases Chinook Salmon Bycatch During Pacific Hake Fishery Researchers at Oregon State University have found that Chinook salmon bycatch rates during the commercial Pacific hake fishery increase when ocean temperatures rise. As ocean temperatures rise and marine heatwaves become more common, that might begin to negatively impact Chinook salmon populations, many of which are already under pressure from a variety of factors. Pacific hake, also known as Pacific whiting, is the largest
As oceans warm and Chinook salmon swim deeper in search of cooler water they are more susceptible to becoming bycatch during the Pacific hake fishery. Photo Courtesy NMFS
22
commercial fishery on the West Coast measured in tonnage. The fishery occurs at depths of 200 to 300 meters (656 to 984 feet), while Chinook salmon generally travel at shallower depths. But, based on a review of 20 years of bycatch and ocean temperature data, as ocean temperatures increase Chinook seek cooler, deeper water and become more vulnerable to being inadvertently caught in the hake fishery. For more information visit: https://today.oregonstate.edu/news/warmer-ocean-temperatures-increase-risk-salmon-bycatch-pacific-hake-fishery
SE Alaska Commercial Fisheries Kill More Than Three Million BC Salmon in 2023 Alaskan interception fisheries have killed well over 3 million British Columbia-origin salmon this year, according to Watershed Watch Salmon Society. This is nearly three times more than the allowable harvest in neighboring British Columbia waters. Some of these intercepted fish are considered by-catch by Alaskan commercial fishers. While there are 13 fishing districts in southeast Alaska, two districts — District 104 and District 101 — are strategically located to intercept BC salmon. District 104 encompasses part of the BC salmon migration path, while District 101 is located on the salmons’ approach to the Nass River. Fishers in these two districts harvest more salmon than the total number of a commercial, recreational and indigenous fisheries in BC, Washington, Oregon and California combined. Alaska’s total salmon fisheries is worth $5.7 billion annually. To learn more visit the Water Watch Salmon Society website at: https://watershedwatch.ca/a-tale-of-two-fisheries/
AI and Indigenous Fishing Technology Harnessed to Count Migrating Salmon The Wild Salmon Center in partnership with the Gitanyow Fisheries Authority and Skeena Fisheries Commission are deloping first-of-its-kind technology to combine artificial Intelligence and First Nations fishing methods to count migrating salmon in real time on central British Columbia coastal rivers. Called the Salmon Vision pilot study, researchers have annotated more than 500,000 video frames of salmon and other fish captured while migrating through Ingenious fish counting weirs on the Bear and Kitwanga rivers on the central BC coast. The Salmon Vision computer deep learning model then utilizes various Artifical Intelligence tools to identify and count fish species. As the fish pass through the weirs’ video camera box, the computer model annotates the species, health status and the probability of it being a wild versus hatchery fish. Initial testing has shown the system is capable of identifying a dozen different fish species as they passed through the two weirs. It scored 90 to 80 percent accuracy for identifying coho and sockeye salmon, which are two of the primary salmon species targeted by First Nations commercial and recreational fishers. To learn more visit the Wild Salmon Center website at: https://wildsalmoncenter.org
The Osprey
Attention Wild Fish Researchers and Advocates Previous issues of The Osprey, going back to 2008, are now available on our new website, providing access to years of in-depth science, policy and legal articles pertaining to wild Pacific salmon and steelhead, their management, research and conservation written exclusively for us by experts in their fields. Whether you are doing a literature search for a research project or preparing a wild fish conservation initiative and looking for supporting data, The Osprey is an invaluable data base of wild fish information — past and present. Access back issues of The Osprey at: https://www.ospreysteelhead.org/archives Older issues available by request.
The Osprey recipient of the
Haig-Brown Conservation Award for excellence in fisheries conservation journalism and communications
SUPPORT THE OSPREY To support our conservation mission and receive The Osprey three times per year, January, May and September, please fill out this coupon with your check made out to The Osprey - The Conservation Angler and mail to: The Osprey P.O. Box 13121 Portland, OR 97213 NAME
Or donate at: www.ospreysteelhead.org/donation
Yes, I will help protect wild salmon and steelhead ❏ $15 Basic Donation/Subscription ❏ $25 Dedicated Angler Level ❏ $50 For Future Generations of Anglers ❏ $100 So There Will Always Be Wild Fish ❏ $
Other
Send My Copies By E-Mail
q
Send My Copies by Standard Mail This is a gift subscription
q q
ADDRESS
CITY/STATE/ZIP
PHONE
Scan the QR code with your phone to support/subscribe to The Osprey Fall 2023 • Issue No. 106
23
THE OSPREY Wild Salmon Rivers P.O. Box 13121 Portland, OR 97213