Wild Fish Recovery Management Framework: Dam removal is just the first step

By Bill Bakke

Removing Snake River dams is critical and necessary for wild salmon and steelhead survival in that large and productive watershed. However, removing the dams will be limited by the management framework that fails to protect migration, spawning and rearing habitats, spawner abundance by river, and relies on hatchery production to augment fisheries. In the Snake River basin there have been 3,484 river miles blocked by dams beginning in 1902 to the completion of Brownlee Dam in 1958. Therefore, it is important for advocates to include improvement in wild salmon and steelhead conservation management in the North Pacific and the Columbia and Snake rivers so that the populations that still exist can be conserved and rebuilt. Otherwise, it is unlikely that removing dams will provide the expected benefit for wild salmon and steelhead protected by the Endangered Species Act for their recovery.

The History Of Columbia River Salmon And Steelhead Decline

In the early 1800s, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) and other public funded fish and wildlife agencies viewed salmon as a commercial product, supplying hatchery salmon to benefit the commercial fishery. The first salmon cannery was built by the Hume brothers in 1866 and packed 4,000 cases of fish in the first year at a value of $64,000. In Oregon the first game laws were adopted in 1872 by the legislature but provided no funding to enforce those laws. The fishery catch was not limited by the agencies but by the canning industry when they reached processing capacity and fishermen dumped the excess dead salmon into the river. It wasn’t until 1891 that Oregon appointed Hollister McGuire as the first Game and Fish Protector who, in 1898, recommended protection for salmon in the upper Columbia and Snake rivers. Among his 12 recommendations, the first was to license the commercial fishing industry to support hatcheries and to report their catch. “[T]he 5-year moving average minimum yield of one million individuals [salmon] was sustained by the commercial fishery from 1876 to1931.” (Mundy 2006) decline to 1.8 million fish in 2021 of which only 20% were of wild origin — just 11% of historical abundance and the wild population is 2% of the historical abundance.

The government fish management agencies did not secure enough spawners for rivers through regulation of the fishery to maintain the runs of salmon. Instead, they mined the rivers for salmon eggs by blocking migration with weirs and transported those eggs, robbing the river of its native salmon, and shipped the eggs to the Central Hatchery (now Bonneville Hatchery, located on the Columbia River at Bonneville Dam) in 1909 for release into the Columbia River.

“Throughout the past century of decline, salmon managers evaluated the results of their efforts primarily through quantitative indices of production. These performance measures include catch (sport and commercial), angler days, economic value of the catch, licenses sold, pounds of fish released from hatcheries, and escapement.” While these statistics are useful measures of performance, they are incomplete because they ignore the ecological processes that determine ecosystem health and ultimately the production of salmon. They focus primarily on economic ends while ignoring ecological means.” (Lichatowich 1996)

“The historical estimate of 228 million to 351 million salmon yields a biomass of 640 million kg-991 million kg of salmon returning annually to the rivers from Alaska to California. The current estimate of abundance of 142 million287 million salmon yields a biomass of 305 million kg to 606 million kg, a 47%-61% decrease in annual salmon biomass compared to historical levels.” Gresh et al. 2000)

In 1875, the agencies adopted the idea that salmon hatcheries could increase the supply of salmon for the commercial fishery without the burden of regulating harvest and protecting salmon habitat in rivers. The first hatchery on the Columbia River was funded by the fish canners in 1877 because the runs, and their profits, were declining. Even though Oregon law gives the agency authority to “prevent the serious depletion of any indigenous species” so that it would be an advocate for salmon conservation, it chose using artificial production of salmon over natural production of salmon in rivers. This resulted in an estimated 16 million salmon and steelhead in the Columbia River to

“[A]n ecological approach must be addressed when considering escapement. Fisheries management must begin to reflect the results of research that shows the significance of marine derived nutrients to the freshwater system. If management goals are indeed intended to rebuild the depleted stocks of salmon in the Northwest and British Columbia, the determination of a minimum ecological escapement must be developed and offered as an alternative to the harvest-minded approached currently embraced by state and federal fisheries management.” (Gresh et al. (2000)

“We recommend that the salmon management institutions take the current nutrient deficit into account in setting salmon harvest and escapement

Continued on next page levels. In addition, the current suite of performance measures should be expanded to include indicators of important ecological processes in watersheds. Both recommendations will require a major shift in the way we value salmon-from purely commodities to an appreciation of their ecological role in maintaining healthy watersheds.” (Gresh et al. 2000)

Lichatowich (1996) provides the following review of salmon management in the Columbia River from 1866 to 1996 capturing the history of salmon management that prevails through to the present. The following summary of this history is provided so that we can understand how salmon management today has been structured by salmon management agencies:

1866 To 1888

Status: Rapid increase in catch followed by a sharp decline from the peak in 1883. Average annual harvest was 24 million pounds. The canning industry grew rapidly in economic importance. Response: Minimal laws to regulate harvest and protect habitat were enacted, however they were not enforced. Salmon managers and the canning industry accepted artificial propagation as an alternative to conservation. Management Framework: Laissezfaire access to natural resources and a belief that man must control and dominate nature were the prevailing world view. Theory and practice of salmon management conformed to that view. Managers believed that artificial propagation would give humans complete control over salmon production, and provide an unlimited supply of fish.

From 1884 to 1920 the fishery was working at an apparent annual equilibrium landings level on the order of 25 million pounds (1.25 million Chinook). (Mundy 2006)

1889 To 1920

Status: Total harvest of Chinook salmon was relatively stable and achieved an annual average harvest of 25 million pounds. The fishery intensified with a significant depletion of adult spawners in the upper basin. The spring run declined and total catch had to be maintained by harvesting more of the fall-run fish, which cannery operators considered inferior.

Response: Salmon managers main- tained their belief that artificial propagation could overcome the effects of excessive harvest and habitat degradation. Irrigation, mining, grazing and timber harvest were rapidly degrading the quality of salmon habitat. Harvest restrictions were still minimal, but after 1908, Oregon and Washington enacted uniform harvest regulations. Management Framework: Justification for a strong reliance on artificial propagation shifted from the religiousbased mandate that man should control nature to the Progressive vision of conservation: Natural resources should be managed for maximum economic efficiency by technical experts. Hatcheries easily made the transition to this new set of values. The basic assumption that humans can and should simplify and control salmon production was retained.

1921 To 1958

Status: Chinook harvest declined throughout this period to an overall annual average of 15 million pounds. The fishery underwent a major shift from in-river to troll fisheries. The construction of mainstem dams added a major new factor in the degradation of salmon habitat.

“The fall below 30 million pounds (1921-1931) was taken as the point of for origin for the long term slide into extirpation that continues today. In 1922, it appears that cumulative effects of habitat loss and degradation, combined with ineffective governmental institutions and harvest management regimes, placed wild salmon population numbers below the critical point of replace-

ment.” (Mundy 2006)

Response: As the salmon declined and traditional approaches to management appeared unable to arrest the depletion, the need to place management on a scientific footing was recognized. The first comprehensive surveys of salmon habitat in the basin were completed. The depleted status of salmon resulted in several attempts to share scientific information among salmon managers and to develop restoration plans. Managers ignored scientific information on the stock structure of the salmon and the past failures of hatcheries to reverse the salmon’s decline and turned to artificial propagation as the primary means of mitigating the effects of mainstem dams.

Management Framework: The massive development of the basin’s water resources for power production, irrigation, flood control and transportation was enhanced by the post World War II science of systems engineering. The same approach was also popular in ecology. Engineers and many ecologists assumed the machine was a reasonable model of the systems they sought to analyze, improve or manage. Artificial propagation easily made the transition to the new framework because, like the previous frameworks, control and simplification of salmon production were important elements. The artificial production system achieved a higher level of simplification by circumventing most of the salmon’s freshwater life history through the release of smolts. Willis Rich (1943) said that “The take of steelheads from June to September [summer steelhead] was 2 out of 3 steel-

Continued on next page heads are taken in the fishery.”

1958 To 1996

Status: The average harvest of Chinook salmon dropped to five million pounds, although that figure does not include troll caught fish landed outside the basin. The Snake River sockeye and Chinook salmon were listed under the federal Endangered Species Act. Development of the basin’s water resources was completed and natural flow patterns were altered. Habitat in many subbasins continued to decline. Response: The full development of the hydro system was met with massive increase in artificial propagation. Several in-river fisheries were closed and the commercial season was significantly reduced. Scientific research continued to show the importance of the salmon’s stock structure and identified artificial propagation as contributing to the decline of natural production. The Northwest Power Planning Council recognized the importance of biodiversity and natural production in its Fish and Wildlife Program.

Management Framework: In spite of a long history of persistent decline, failures to reverse those declines in Chinook salmon production and scientific evidence questioning the management framework, the basic assumption that control and simplification of the production system could restore salmon production remained intact.

There are signs that a new framework based on an ecosystem perspective is emerging out of the present crisis. The basic assumptions of the emerging framework appear to be diametrically opposed to those underlying the current framework: restoration and protection of ecological processes vs the circumvention of those processes; controlling human behavior that limits or destroys ecological processes vs the attempt to control and improve nature and; promoting biological and habitat diversity vs simplifying the production process in the act of improving it. Adopting a new framework is a difficult undertaking. It could be argued that the existing framework hasn’t changed much in the last 120 years. The region is in the midst of transitions, through which way it will proceed is uncertain. If changes, like in the past, are primarily superficial, the region can only expect that the present crisis will deepen.

The current status of Pacific salmon in the Columbia Basin is not what salmon managers intended to achieve. Salmon managers, culturists, and researchers were a hard working group of professionals dedicated to maintaining the “supply” of salmon. Given those good intentions, how did reality deviate so far from expectations? A major part of the answer to that question is found in the framework, the set of assumptions and principles that made up management’s underlying foundation. The framework which was so taken for granted that it was rarely referred to or discussed, turned out to be a major determinant of the salmon’s future.

(Lichatowich et al. 1996)

Conservation Framework For Wild Salmon And Steelhead

The basic elements of the fine-grained or river and population specific management are: gDevelop escapement targets for the wild populations of each species to achieve egg deposition and smolt production goals. Monitor compliance with those targets. gDevelop and protect a habitat template that supports adult holding and spawning, juvenile rearing, a diversity of life histories and a healthy web of ecological relationships. Monitor life history diversity as an indicator of ecological health of the stream and population. gAllow no interbreeding between hatchery and wild fish. gAdvocate for native diversity in all its forms throughout all watersheds inhabited by wild salmon.

(Lichatowich, James. 2019)

Summary Of Salmon Management

“The state allows the take of the publicly owned native wild fish by monetizing the fish and selling permits for their harvest. The funds are used by the state to manage the fishery.

“When native fish stocks decline, the state uses some of the money for an artificial production program that produces hatchery fish for harvest. As wild stocks continue to decline, the state increases hatchery production and prohibits much of the take of the wild fish.

“As the cost of hatchery production increases the state raises the cost of the take permits. Eventually the fishers balk at the cost of the permits and the state taxes the general public to provide a subsidy to the fishing industry so they can continue to take the hatchery fish.

“The current dilemma is that the hatchery fish stocks are declining along with the wild stocks. The state’s response is to take more wild fish for hatchery broodstock in an attempt to sustain the hatchery program.

“The only solution the state has for this crisis is to increase hatchery production again. This has not worked in the past and won’t work now.” (Jim Myron 2022)

Bill Bakke, a life-long wild fish advocate, founded the Native Fish Society in 1995 serving variously as Executive Director, Director of Science and Conservation, Corporate Secretary and member of the Board of Directors. He is currently a scientific advisor for The Osprey.

References

gCraig, J.A., and R. L. Hacker 1940. The history and development of the fisheries of the Columbia River. U.S. Bureau of Fisheries Bulletin 32:133216.

gGresh, Ted, Jim Lichatowich, and Peter Schoonmaker 2000 An Estimation of Historic and Current Levels of Salmon Production in the Northeast Pacific Ecosystem: Evidence of a Nutrient Deficit in the Freshwater Systems of the Pacific Northwest. Fisheries. American Fisheries Society Jan. 2000.

gLichatowich, James. 2019 Managed Annihilation of Wild Pacific Salmon. http://www.salmonhistory.com/ gLichatowich, James A. Lars E. Mobrand, Ronald J. Costello, and Thomas S. Vogel. 1996. A History of Frameworks Used in the Management of Columbia River Chinook Salmon. Prepared for the US Department of Energy. Bonneville Power Administration. Environmental Fish and Wildlife. Portland, Oregon gMundy, Phillip R., Harvest Management. Return to the River 2006. Editor Richard N. Williams. Elsevier Academic Press) gMyron, James. 2022. Comment on the status of salmon and steelhead in Oregon. gRich, Willis. 1943. The Salmon Runs of the Columbia River in 1938. Department of Research, Fish Commission of the State of Oregon. Contribution No. 7. (Oregon State University Library)