NorthBay biz details the struggles of the commercial fishing industry (including dwindling salmon runs and a fishing ban now two years running) and what they mean for our ecological future.
Commercial fishermen on the North Coast are reeling from the effects of a second consecutive year without a Chinook salmon fishing season, an unprecedented turn of events that threatens their livelihoods and underscores the urgency of saving the state’s most iconic fish.
A dramatic decline in Chinook returning to the Sacramento River has led to another ban on commercial fishing of the species in California and Oregon this year. Last year, only 66,000 adult salmon returned to the Sacramento River and San Joaquin rivers to spawn, far short of the minimum goal of 120,000 fish set by the Pacific Fishery Management Council. At its peak, the fall run of Chinook, or “king,” salmon exceeded 800,000 fish.
In coastal streams, such as the Russian River, the Coho salmon teeters on the brink of extinction, its listing as an endangered species raising the stakes in a competition for water that includes fish, farmers and urban water customers.
Where did the salmon go?
The causes for the precipitous decline in the king salmon populations are numerous and complex—and the subject of vigorous debate among fishermen, scientists and environmentalists. A collapse of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta’s ecosystem has contributed to a decline in several fish species, including the Chinook.
Increased pumping of fresh water to farmers in the Central Valley and urban customers in Northern and Southern California, rising salinity and pollution from pesticides and wastewater have all been blamed for the demise of several fish species in the Delta. A third year of statewide drought has worsened the situation. This year, pumping water out of the Delta has been limited by legal rulings aimed at protecting endangered species.
A change in the food supply in the ocean is also believed to be partly responsible for the salmon decline. These poor ocean conditions exacerbated serious, pre-existing problems caused by lack of water and poor water quality in the Delta, which in the past have been masked by good ocean conditions. A recent report from the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) cited a drop in the food supply in the Pacific Ocean as a cause of the collapse of the salmon population. Young salmon venturing out to the ocean for the first time found a paucity of food. Studies found malnourished salmon and other aquatic life, such as sea birds and marine mammals.
It’s a complex crisis that illustrates an intricate ecological web that can easily be altered by human activity. But one thing is clear: salmon are in serious trouble. Already, the winter-run Chinook salmon in the Sacramento River and the coastal Coho salmon, which inhabit the Russian River, are on the endangered species list. The Chinook in the Russian River is listed as threatened. And as the salmon goes, so goes the industry that relies on the beleaguered fish for its own survival.
For 44 years, Chuck Wise has made his living fishing the Pacific Ocean for Chinook salmon from his home harbor of Bodega Bay. This year, he’ll spend more time fishing for crab and holding out hope that next year things will improve enough to reopen salmon season.
Wise, who’s been plying the Pacific for salmon since 1966, says things are as bad as he’s ever seen. “Never in my life have we had a full season closure,” he says. “We’ve had some severely restricted seasons, but never a full closure.”
Is it the worst fishing season he’s ever experienced? “Without a doubt,” says Wise.
Fishermen finding other ways to survive
With the salmon season closed, Wise and other fishermen will do more crab fishing or go after smaller fish such as rock cod, herring or albacore tuna. Some will fish for the giant Humboldt squid, or the slime eel that’s a popular delicacy in Korea. But, according to Wise, some are likely to throw in the towel.
“There are a lot of people who won’t ever be back,” he says. “And there are a lot of people who are barely hanging on. Salmon accounts for half of the average [fisherman’s] income and, if you don’t have half your total income, it’s tough.”
The ranks of small fishermen on the Pacific Coast have been steadily declining for years. Zeke Grader, executive director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, says his group now has 1,400 members, compared to more than 3,000 when it was founded in 1976. The fishermen who do remain aren’t going to give up their livelihood—or let the fishery die off—without a fight.
“You have a lot of things lined up against you,” says Grader. “We have no other option but to fight back. We’re not about to surrender. If we don’t stay and fight for these fish, there’s going to be nothing to pass down for future generations. It’s almost like we don’t have any other option.”
Grader and Wise are optimistic that next year will be better and a commercial salmon season, albeit limited, will be allowed. A combination of improved ocean conditions and more fresh water in the Delta have led to a forecast of as many as 180,000 returning salmon in the fall, says Grader. “But even that’s a small amount. They might decide to allow for a fishery of 30,000 fish. How do you appropriate that?”
This year, some consolation is the allocation of $53 million for disaster relief for California and Oregon salmon fishermen from the federal government. It’s the remaining portion of $170 million that was approved by Congress last year to help the ailing salmon industry. Grader lauds the efforts of Congressman Mike Thompson and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for their efforts to support the fishing industry.
Root causes of the Delta’s decline
The salmon fisheries in the Delta and coastal rivers didn’t collapse overnight. Grader cites problems that started 30 years ago, when state officials began trucking hatchery salmon to the Delta and San Francisco Bay to bolster the populations (the problems truly began decades before, when too many dams were constructed in places without fish passage and massive diversions were engineered to bring water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to support irrigation in the middle of former deserts). “Rather than address the problem of why fish weren’t surviving in the Delta, they started to truck in fish,” he says. “The problem is, in the long term, it’s not good for the species. Native salmon are getting hit hard because we’re losing our natural runs. They need to fix the Delta.”
Many factors have contributed to the environmental crisis in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, the largest estuary on the West Coast and the source of drinking water for more than 25 million Californians. The State Water Project and the Central Valley Water Project pump fresh water out of the Delta to their urban and agricultural customers (the majority is used for irrigation, not drinking). Not only does this reduce the amount of fresh water in the Delta, but also fish are trapped in the massive pumps.
“The primary thing you have to look at is the lack of fresh water inflow,” says Grader. “Fish migrate in and out of the Delta. That’s where young salmon gain their strength and get ready to migrate to the ocean. They’re affected by the lack of fresh water inflow. In dry years, the diverters are taking out even more water and it’s a double whammy. The fish hit the Delta and they become confused and get lost. They begin migrating south and become easy prey for predators or become entrained in the pumps themselves.”
An estuary requires a certain amount of fresh water inflow, otherwise it fails, says Grader. “We’ve always looked at the Delta as a plumbing system and not as a living system,” he says. “When you start altering that system, you’re killing off the estuary.”
When you combine low fresh water flows with runoff from agricultural pesticides and municipal wastewater discharges, “you have low dilution, and the Delta has become a toxic brew for young salmon. It really does point to the need to fix the Delta,” says Grader.
While there’s little disagreement that the salmon fishery’s decline has mirrored that of the Delta, the NOAA report this spring cited poor ocean conditions as a major factor in the sharp drop in the number of fish returning to spawn in the Sacramento River. The ocean conditions also affect fish in coastal rivers like the Russian. “Not to say that all of the issues with fresh water aren’t critical to the survival of the fish,” says David Manning, a principal environmental specialist with the Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA). “But the precipitous decline in the last couple of years, particularly the fish returns last year, those dramatic declines are really related to some poor ocean conditions.”
While some, including Grader and Wise, are skeptical of the NOAA report’s conclusions, Manning says the same sorts of declines were found in both Chinook and Coho salmon, in addition to sea birds and mammals. “There was something happening in the ocean that contributed to their lack of food,” says Manning. “The fact that we saw this coast-wide decline in Coho and Chinook is definitely an indication that something is amiss. There’s very compelling evidence.”
Manning adds, “We’re very interested, as a water agency in a coalition of other agencies, in helping to determine what’s going on in the ocean…in the food chain that affects the survival of salmon in their early years.”
Grader doesn’t disagree entirely. “It’s not that ocean conditions weren’t a factor, but they weren’t the primary factor,” he says. “They unmasked the problems that were occurring in the watersheds.”
The SCWA, which manages water supply releases from Lake Mendocino and Lake Sonoma, maintains stream flows in the Russian River and monitors the return of Chinook salmon to the Russian River as part of its management system “to provide the right habitat and survival conditions,” for the threatened species, says Manning.
While the coastal Chinook make up just a small part of the commercial catch of salmon each year, their plight and the efforts to restore their numbers affect the management of the recreational and commercial fishery that targets the more abundant Sacramento River Chinook. “All these river systems share in the ecological problems related to fresh water,” says Manning. “We don’t share all of the water quality and water export concerns of the Delta. But we certainly have our own competing water needs. Unlike users of the Delta system, in Sonoma and Mendocino Counties we rely entirely on the Russian River water supply.”
Those competing water needs include protecting fish, providing water for agriculture and serving urban customers. The SCWA provides water for approximately 600,000 people in Sonoma and Marin counties. The primary source of that water is the Russian River, which begins in Mendocino County and flows into the Pacific Ocean at Jenner.
Go with the flow
The listing of three fish species as either endangered or threatened has increased the demands on the agency to manage the system, and has also subjected its water delivery practices to the Endangered Species Act. Late in 2008, a long-awaited biological opinion was released by the National Marine Fisheries Services, which dictates a regimen of stream flows in the Russian River to protect the Coho, Chinook and Steelhead species.
Flows during critical times of the salmon’s lifecycle must be coordinated to protect its spawning and migration patterns. What this means for humans is that in dry years, such as we’re experiencing now, flows in the Russian River can be greatly restricted. It also means the SCWA and all its customers will be paying millions of dollars to enhance habitat and protect the endangered Coho salmon.
The biological opinion also limits the amount of water flowing out of Lake Sonoma and down Dry Creek to the Russian River because the creek is a critical Coho habitat. The problem for the water agency is that its collectors and pumps are downstream, and the limits on flows in Dry Creek make it difficult for SCWA to manage river flows during periods of high demand. Thus, an expensive habitat enhancement program within Dry Creek is being undertaken, in addition to the design of a possible pipeline to bypass Dry Creek and bring water directly to the river. Estimates of the Dry Creek project are in the neighborhood of $30 million, and the biological opinion project will cost in excess of $100 million.
Water stored in Lake Mendocino must also be carefully managed so there’s enough water in the Russian River for fall Chinook salmon migrations. Grape growers in Sonoma and Mendocino counties, who rely on the Russian River and its tributaries for irrigation and frost protection, must compete for water with fish and urban users.
Manning believes the biological opinion “offers the potential to balance the water supply and fish conservation needs. We believe it’s the best opportunity we have to reverse some of the declines we’ve seen here in the Russian River.”
Competing needs
The competing needs of water supply and conservation frequently clash. This spring, Coho salmon were killed in a tributary of the Russian River (Felta Creek in Healdsburg) when grape growers pumping water for frost protection caused water levels to drop suddenly. This incident followed a similar one involving Steelhead in Felta Creek (as well as along the river in Hopland) last year.
Environmental advocates say the events point to a problem that’s much larger than the two reported fish kills. “It’s absolutely the tip of the iceberg,” says Don McEnhill, director of the Russian Riverkeeper organization. “It leads us to believe there’s a lot more of that going on than what was reported. Tributaries in spring cannot support someone sticking a pipe directly in the water and drawing water out of pools. During frost events, we’re hearing reports that tributaries are being drawn down to zero.”
McEnhill says using river or tributary flows for frost protection “is not as big an issue in years when there’s abundant water…but it certainly points to a critical problem in dry years. The draw down can be so sudden, [fish] can be on dry land pretty quickly. The impacts are potentially pretty significant—mortality is about as significant an impact as you can get.”
In April of this year, the state Water Resources Control Board held a hearing on the issue of frost protection and its impacts on endangered and threatened fish species. After taking testimony, the board declined to take any immediate action, but the message was clear that grape growers needed to address the issue before Spring 2010 or face regulatory consequences, according to Nick Frey, president of the Sonoma County Winegrape Commission.
“Our goal is to be proactive and resolve the problem without the need for regulation,” says Frey. “I think it’s in everyone’s best interest if we can do that.” He says his organization has developed best management practices for frost protection and “we’re really encouraging people to look at what they’re doing and how they can do that job differently and use less water and still protect their crops.”
In general, Frey says, “I don’t think people appreciate the Endangered Species Act and the fact that we have three threatened or endangered species in our watershed. That’s a rigid constraint, and there’s not any flex or negotiation. The fish are likely to get their water before other beneficial uses, like people, recreation and agriculture. They have to divide what’s left. That’s the new reality and we have to live with that going forward.”
Striking a balance
Growers and regulators are working to resolve the problem without more regulations. Last year, the National Marine Fisheries Service’s enforcement branch formed a Russian River Watershed Frost Prevention Pumping Task Force to address the issue.
McEnhill hopes a cooperative effort among all the competing interests can produce a workable solution, but he’s withholding judgment. “We’re hoping with all our hearts that these cooperative efforts do succeed, and we appreciate the agriculture people who have stepped forward,” he says. “We hope farmers understand that if things keep getting worse for the fish, what’s going to jump to the forefront are the legal efforts.
“There are so many pumps in the water, and they’re pumping hundreds of acre feet of water,” says McEnhill. “At some point, there needs to be a pulling back on the demand for water.”
Growers would like to see the state amend its water permitting process to allow more off-stream storage during winter peak flows, which could be used for frost protection or irrigation during the spring and summer, when low stream flows occur. “Right now, getting permits to do that is almost impossible,” says Frey. “The state needs to give us some help with permits so growers can manage that off-site storage and manage the water supply in the watershed to protect the fish. If we don’t get there, it’s going to be pretty rough for agriculture down the road.”
While he agrees we need to balance the demands in the Russian River watershed, McEnhill argues, “We need to understand clearly that the fish have a limited ability to adapt to a change in conditions. Humans are the most resilient species…we can’t stand by and watch these species go extinct. They’re part of our culture and our history. No one has the right to take that away.”
The Sonoma County Water Agency is charged with balancing Russian River water demands. One the one hand, the agency is obliged to supply water to 600,000 customers and provide water to thousands of grape growers. On the other, it has a responsibility to protect an endangered species, the Coho salmon, which is described as being in an “extinction vortex.”
“Coho are in such dire conditions, we need to do everything we can to make sure those fish survive,” says Manning. “The Coho population at this point is hanging by a thread. It’s hard to make light of any condition that contributes to any killing of fish. We’ll collectively spend $100 million on saving the fish. If there’s a way we can avoid injuring those fish, we should do that.”
Manning says the discussion must go beyond the idea that we trade one use of water for another. “People and the species in the watershed are inextricably linked,” he says. “You can’t trade one use of the water for another. Water is required for fish to survive, we need water to irrigate crops and water is needed for us to survive.”
To those who ask if it’s worth spending all that money to save a fish, Manning has his own question. “The better question is this: Is it worth it to have a nonfunctioning watershed? The only path forward to continue to protect our water resources is to find a solution that involves all users. There are ways we can put our heads together and do that. There’s not a single person in this county that doesn’t have an impact on the water supply.”
Trying to balance that optimism with reality is McEnhill. “We’re hopeful that those kinds of cooperative efforts will work,” he says. “But as we look at the history of cooperative efforts, they usually don’t work for the species. There are some success stories, but there are far more failures. The laws don’t provide any assurance to prevent the extinction of fish.”
