Oregon Water Online
© Oregon Water CoalitionPinks, humpies defying past trends in Columbia River
Pink salmon are a species whose presence is so subtle and slight in the Columbia River that it gets little or no mention in state literature or regulations.
But they are back again this year, and marching to the beat of a different drummer. Through Wednesday 52 pink salmon—the smallest of six Pacific salmon species—had been counted passing Bonneville Dam.
Famed in Alaska, Canadian and Puget Sound streams, the autumn spawners, also called humpbacks, are not known to have self-sustaining populations in the Columbia River basin. But they are spotted here and there.
“Pinks are found in the Columbia during odd numbered years; some of the largest numbers (possibly a few hundred fish) are found in the lower Cowlitz,” according to Joe Hymer of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. The humpbacks have also been identified hunting spawning grounds in such tributaries as the Kalama, Wind and Sandy rivers, he said.
“They’re kind of an oddball. They do exist to some degree” in the basin, Hymer said.
“However, it is very unusual to find pinks in the Columbia during even numbered years,” he said. It’s also early to find them in the river. The first was counted passing Bonneville July 2.
This year’s humpback appearance “is much earlier than the last five years,” said John North of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. In 2007 the first pink appeared in the fish ladder count window on Aug. 3.
Likewise for another species—chum salmon. Five have been counted at Bonneville already. They typically enter the river in October and November.
A handful of “summer” chum are found in the Cowlitz almost every year, Hymer said.
State officials sampling treaty Indian commercial harvests confirmed pinks had been caught above Bonneville Dam. Hymer said they were smallish fish, perhaps 2 or 3 pounds
The pinks have been a regular at Bonneville’s fish ladders since 1941, three years after the dam was completed and counts began. The annual count never rose above 50 until 1965, according to data posted by the Fish Passage Center.
The most ever counted was 637 in 2003. There are numerous zero counts, mostly in even numbered years. The total count last year was 27; in 2006 it was 6; in 2005 it was 17, and in 2004 it was 1.
When spawning, males develop humped backs, hooked jaws and reddish-yellow sides. The females tend to be more greenish. The pinks can be up to 30 inches in length and weigh up to 12 pounds, but usually weigh from 3 to 5 pounds.
Pink salmon begin their downstream movement almost immediately upon emergence from the gravel and move rapidly into near-shore nursery areas and shallow marine waters. For a short time, pinks may be abundant in estuarine tidal channels; however, pinks typically spend minimal time in estuaries. After about 18 months at sea, pinks return to their natal streams to spawn. Usually those streams are not too far from the ocean.
Because of their relatively strict two-year life cycle, one year’s produce does not interbreed with the next year’s.
Important spawning populations occur from the Puyallup River in Washington northward to Alaska and eastward to Canada’s Northwest Territories,” according to a Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission fact sheet. A web search found little about Columbia basin pink salmon, although one site referenced them as one of six historic stocks and called the basin humpbacks extinct.
“Occasionally we get pinks. They don’t belong in the Columbia,” said Mike Matylewich, head of the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission’s fishery management department. “They’re not a spawning population.”
He and Hymer said they are likely fish that have strayed southward.
Dworshak failure alters flow, regime for migrating salmon
A mechanical breakdown at central Idaho’s Dworshak Dam will limit fish and hydro managers’ ability this summer to control the reservoir’s cool waters to augment flows downriver and, more importantly, help hold down water temperatures for migrating salmon and steelhead.
That’s the bad news. The good news is that is that the Snake River is running cooler, at least to this point, than it would normally be at this time of the year. The water temperature at the lower Snake’s Lower Granite Dam was 65.5 degrees at midweek. The Dworshak reservoir’s coldest water has been called on in the past even prior to July 4 to dampen temperatures downstream.
“They are staying low,” the U.S Army Corps of Engineers’ Jim Adams said during Wednesday’s Technical Management Team meeting. “We’re not expecting major issues at Lower Granite.”
The TMT’s federal, state and tribal salmon and hydro managers assemble to discuss day-to-day Federal Columbia River Power System operational adjustments that might be made to benefit salmon that are listed under the Endangered Species Act. A goal is to keep water temperatures, as measured at Lower Granite, below 68 degrees. Higher temperatures are unhealthy for the coldwater fish.
Dworshak’s deep reservoir holds water that can be 40 degrees or colder. It is called on in late summer, flushing down the Clearwater River and into the tepid Snake. That water can be released through turbines, through spillways near the surface and through three “regulating outlet” gates. The spillway draws warmer water from near the surface; the ROs, located nearly 200 feet below the spillway crest, release the coldest water.
Those ROs are effectively out of commission. Officials at the dam last Thursday, July 24, discovered that RO2 was passing water and did not fully close during operations. Water from the malfunctioning gate began to leak water into a machinery room down a maintenance passageway and out the downstream face of the dam.
Maintenance crews worked late into the night to finish positioning a bulkhead and stopped the water flow at about 3:30 a.m. last Friday. The bulkhead is a device lowered by crane into position to stop water from entering the gate areas of the dam.
After the leak stopped, crews inspected the gate and noticed the pin connecting the cylinder to the top of the gate worked itself free, preventing workers from raising or lowering the gate.
“There’s significant damage there. It will take several months to repair,” the Corps’ Steven Hall told TMT members. Meanwhile the facilities only bulkhead must stay in place at RO2 and can’t be used for inspections of suspect pins in the other two gates.
“My understanding is that there is nothing they can do to lock that gate in place” so the bulkhead cannot be removed, Hall said. If the gate broke open, the reservoir would eventually be drawn down to 1,350 feet –250 feet below full pool.
At this point the Corps is weighing the risk of inspecting the other ROs without the safety provided by a bulkhead. If power to the other gates is lost and water forced its way through, the workers could be washed downstream. The ROs empty about halfway up the face of the spillway.
“We’re going to have to get at least commander-level approval” for any inspection, Hall said. Because the gates are of identical design, they may also have the same weakness so need to be inspected.
The equipment failure may have resulted from excess wear and tear. Recent testing involved repeated opening and closing of RO2, Hall said.
If the other two gates prove to be in good condition, potentially they could be opened to some degree to allow a constant flow.
“We’re not going to want to adjust them on a frequent basis,” Hall said. That option is “still taking some amount of risk” of emptying the reservoir if the gates fail.
The Corps may use cameras to inspect the machinery remotely, he said. The Corps is also checking to see if its Libby Dam in northwest Montana might have a bulkhead that could be used at Dworshak.
The reservoir elevation at the end of the day Tuesday was 1,583.9 feet. The goal is to augment flows for fish, dropping the reservoir level to 1,535 by the end of August, and 1,520 by the end of September.
That will be more difficult with the ROs out of action. The spillway crest is at 1,345 so that option for releasing water is lost when the reservoir level falls to about 1,350, the Hall said. The dam’s Corps operators are now running the dam at full powerhouse (about 10,000 cubic feet per second) and spilling about 4 kcfs.
The worst-case scenario is that all three ROs will have to remain closed through the summer. The Corps expects the reservoir level to drop to 1,350 by about Aug. 20 or Aug. 21 using the current turbine-spill operation.
“Beyond that we may have a difficult time drawing the reservoir down as fast as we’d like,” Hall said.
Meanwhile the dam’s turbine-spill output is 49 degrees and expected to slowly rise as the summer passes. Of concern is a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service hatchery just downstream that draws water from the Clearwater to rear juvenile chinook and steelhead.
The USFWS’s Dave Wills said temperatures rising above 52 degrees exacerbate disease control and prevention in the rearing ponds. The Corps’ Jim Adams said the amount of spill could be ramped down if needed, reducing the amount of warmer water being released. Again that would reduce the chances of meeting the court-ordered end of August drawdown target.
Great Lakes compact receives senate approval
The Senate has voted to ratify a compact to prevent the diversion of water from the Great Lakes, quickly approving legislation sought by the region’s governors worried that thirsty places would covet one of the world’s largest sources of fresh water.
The Senate passed the measure without objection, and it now awaits action in the House. President Bush has said he will sign it into law, and both major presidential candidates, Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain, have said they support it.
“Senate passage of this compact will help us protect the Great Lakes from water diversions and preserve this invaluable resource for future generations,” said Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., the bill’s chief sponsor.
The agreement, negotiated by eight Great Lakes states, prevents countries or remote states from tapping into the lakes from their natural drainage basin with rare exceptions. In addition, states would be required to regulate their own large-scale water use and promote conservation. Michigan was the final state to approve the pact last month.
Sen. George Voinovich, an Ohio Republican and co-chair of the Senate Great Lakes Task Force with Levin, said the best way to preserve and protect the lakes is “by passing and enacting the Great Lakes Compact and keeping control of the lakes in the hands of the states that surround them and value them the most.”
Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., said the compact “will protect the health of these precious bodies of fresh water, preventing unnecessary and dangerous diversions of Great Lakes waters. I know the people of Wisconsin feel strongly about the importance of preserving the lakes for future generations.”
Wisconsin Sen. Herb Kohl, a Democrat, said the compact “would preserve and protect one of our national treasures for us and future generations.”
The National Wildlife Federation urged the House to quickly follow the Senate’s lead, but that will have to wait until next month, when Congress returns from its August recess. The compact was approved by the House Judiciary Committee.
“It’s time to seal the deal and protect our lakes, our drinking water, our economy and our way of life,” said Andy Buchsbaum, regional executive director of the federation’s Great Lakes office.
Rep. Bart Stupak, a Democrat who represents northern Michigan and the Upper Peninsula, has questioned the compact because it allows bottled water to be shipped from the region.
Cameron Davis, president of Alliance for the Great Lakes, said the Senate’s quick action shows that Congress recognizes the Great Lakes “as a national icon.” Levin introduced the bill just last week.
New deep aquifer discovered beneath Albuquerque, NM
A deep-water aquifer has been discovered below the surface of Albuquerque’s West Mesa on land owned by Atrisco Oil and Gas.
An Atrisco spokesman said the water is trapped in a triangular fault block and could be as deep as 7,000 feet below the surface. It’s located just north of Interstate 40 between two volcanoes.
Atrisco officials say the company will need to test the water to find out if it’s safe to drink. The testing is expected to take at least two years and cost more than a million dollars.
Peter Sanchez of Atrisco says water samples show the company has the capability through a treatment process to commercialize the water and make it available to the community
FERC urged to slow down on estuary natural gas terminal
A hail of criticism from states, tribes and others has been showered on a federal assessment of environment impacts that would result from the proposed construction of a liquefied natural gas terminal on the banks of the Columbia River.
That final environmental impact statement prepared by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission staff and released June 6 could, however, be the last word. It completes the National Environmental Policy Act process for the so-called Bradwood Landing project. The FERC is the federal agency responsible for authorizing onshore LNG import and interstate natural gas transmission facilities under the Natural Gas Act.
“The commission is at the point now where it can make a decision,” said spokeswoman Tamara Young-Allen said.
FERC had scheduled consideration of the project during its July 17 meeting but it was rescheduled for its September meeting. The commission does not have an August meeting.
FERC can act “notationally” on the proposal at any time, deciding to approve it, reject it, or approve it with modifications, Young-Allen said. It can also decide it doesn’t have enough “administrative knowledge” about the project and delay a decision.
The law does not prescribe a public comment period following the issuance of a final EIS.
“But we have always reviewed them, taken them into consideration,” when comments are received, Young-Allen said.
The post-EIS comments submitted on Bradwood include one from NOAA’s Fisheries Service, which has responsibilities to protect salmon, steelhead, whales and pinnipeds that might be affected by the project. NOAA’s comments encapsulates “information needs” still outstanding that will be required to make a judgment on potential effects on those species.
“The estuary is an important place for steelhead and salmon,” said Cathy Tortorici, branch chief in NOAA Habitat Conservation Division for the Northwest Region.
“It’s a very complex project with a lot of moving parts,” she said. “My staff has been working on this project for three years.” And the job of fashioning a project and mitigation package that doesn’t jeopardize those species is not yet complete.
NOAA is awaiting a revised “biological assessment” from FERC it hopes will fill those information gaps. Likewise NOAA would like to see the final EIS enhanced. That BA is now expected in September.
“The FERC’s conclusion that the project would have limited adverse impacts appears unsubstantiated without greater detail and description of the mitigation recommendation, which are needed to fully assess the environmental impacts,” according to NOAA’s comments on the EIS.
The two documents will be used by NOAA as it prepares a biological opinion that judges whether the project jeopardizes the survival of 13 protected salmon and steelhead stocks that swim past the project, or rear in the vicinity, on their way to the ocean. BiOps are required under the Endangered Species Act.
Tortorici said FERC has the ability to “issue something called a conditional license,” but that the project can’t move forward until certain requirements, such as a completed BiOp, are satisfied. Those requirements include a Clean Water Act Section 401 certificate and Coastal Zone Management Act concurrence, two needs also specifically noted by the states.
The EIS produced a flurry of requests that the decision be stalled and/or that the EIS be withdrawn or improved upon.
“FERC’s report represents a failure to be accountable to the people of Oregon,” Gov. Ted Kulongoski said. “The disregard for Oregon’s concerns is unacceptable, particularly on a project with such profound potential impacts on the lives of Oregonians.”
In a July 10 letter he asked FERC to withdraw the final EIS and not to make any further decisions until Oregon’s concerns are addressed and the state’s permitting processes are completed.
A July 25 letter from the state of Washington says the EIS major public and environmental safety concerns have been left unaddressed.
“Ecology is disappointed that FERC’s final environmental review for Bradwood Landing failed to adequately address concerns we raised in previous comments on behalf of Washington’s citizens and environment,” said Jay Manning, director of Washington’s Department of Ecology. “We are asking FERC to require Northern Star to obtain and comply with state and local environmental permits as a condition of any approval order or certificate.”
Kulongski’s letter said “The overall level of detail in the FEIS is inadequate. Much of the FEIS contains only general information about environmental and resource effects. There is little or no linkage between the factual information supporting the FEIS and the conclusions in the document. Nor has FERC staff proposed enforceable conditions to the FERC license to address most state agency concerns.”
In his letter, Manning asks that FERC reconsider Washington state’s concerns that were submitted during the project’s environmental review phase.
“Ecology is disappointed that FERC’s final environmental review for Bradwood Landing failed to adequately address concerns we raised in previous comments on behalf of Washington’s citizens and environment,” said Manning. “We are asking FERC to require Northern Star to obtain and comply with state and local environmental permits as a condition of any approval order or certificate.”
The state says:
- The final environmental impact statement lacks detail over the spectrum of life-threatening and health-threatening emergencies that could arise from the project.
- The last pipeline project FERC authorized in the state required the project to follow Washington’s regulatory guidelines for in-water projects, which are more protective than FERC’s requirements. FERC isn’t requiring the Bradwood Landing proposal to use the state’s more stringent standards.
- Future shippers won’t be required to follow Washington’s voluntary standards for tank vessels that help safeguard against spills.
In 2005, Congress passed a law that gave sole authority to FERC for siting, construction, expansion and operation of liquefied natural gas terminals. Gov. Chris Gregoire strongly opposed the change because she said it undermined local and state ability to protect citizens and natural resources. The states want local and state public safety and environmental protection standards included as conditions of certificates FERC issues for the project.
Comments from the governors and from lawmakers such as U.S. Reps. Darlene Hooley, David Wu and Peter DeFazio of Oregon and Brian Baird of Washington say constituents have expressed concern about what impacts this project could have on public health and safety, the environment, tourism, recreation and the economy
“If the project is authorized, we will work closely with our counterparts in Oregon who have the environmental regulatory authority over the terminal construction and operation to keep Washington residents’ concerns in the forefront,” Manning’s letter said.
FERC has made it clear that the federal rules prevail, as evidenced in its May 30 authorization of the 1.8 billion cubic feet per day Rockies Express Pipeline LLC project to construct and operate a new interstate. The 42-inch diameter pipeline will traverse 639 miles from Missouri through Illinois and Indiana and into Ohio.
That authorization said that “Any state or local permits issued with respect to the jurisdictional facilities authorized herein must be consistent with the conditions of this certificate.
“We encourage cooperation between interstate pipelines and local authorities,” FERC said. “However, this does not mean that state and local agencies, through application of state or local laws, may prohibit or unreasonably delay the construction or operation of facilities approved by this Commission.”
Challenges to FERC rulings “have been upheld when they are in conflict with states,” Young-Allen said.
Tribal comments on the final EIS say it ignores their earlier input and that the project has far more risk than benefit.
“… the ecology of this Bradwood site compared to that of other LNG proposed sites leaves no doubt less harmful alternatives are available,” according to comments submitted July 24 by the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission. “Bradwood is a unique, valuable and productive salmonid rearing habitat that must be preserved and protected, not destroyed.
“In total, stark contrast, the Bradwood LNG project would be a large-scale industrial development that will have lasting, permanent negative affects on the surrounding fish habitat and related environments,” the CRITFC comments said.
NorthernStar Natural Gas is seeking authorization to build the ship terminal on a former industrial site at Bradwood, Oregon, 38-miles from the river mouth. A “sendout” pipeline would stretch nearly 19 miles upriver, cross the Columbia and run 17 more miles to Kelso, Wash.
The purpose of the Bradwood Landing Project is to import natural gas to the Pacific Northwest. LNG is natural gas that has been turned into a liquid state by cooling it to about minus 260 degrees Fahrenheit to reduce its volume for transport in specially designed carriers some distance across oceans from its point of origin to the proposed LNG import terminal.
The project includes:
- Dredging a 58-acre maneuvering area off the federally-maintained Columbia River navigation channel, and a single berth capable of receiving and unloading LNG carriers with cargo capacities ranging from 100,000 to 200,000 cubic meters;
- Installing a set of four 16-inch-diameter LNG unloading arms at the berth, and a 1,240-footlong 32-inch-diameter cryogenic LNG transfer pipeline and 6-inch-diameter LNG
- Recirculation cool-down pipeline from the berth to the storage tanks;
- Installing two 160,000 m3 insulated LNG storage tanks;
- Building a vapor handling system and vaporization equipment, including seven submerged combustion vaporizers capable of regasifying the LNG for sendout through a transfer meter station; and
- Building ancillary utilities, service buildings, and associated safety and security systems
“Based on the analysis included in the EIS, the FERC staff concludes that the proposed action would have limited adverse environmental impacts,” the FEIS concludes. “However, if the Bradwood Landing Project is constructed and operated in accordance with applicable laws and regulations, and with implementation of NorthernStar’s proposed mitigation measures, and the additional mitigation measures recommended by staff, environmental impacts would be substantially reduced.”
Idaho releases plan to increase, conserve Snake white sturgeon
The Idaho Department of Fish and Game this week released its draft plan for reviving flagging populations of white sturgeon, a popular game fish found in the Snake River.
The agency will accept public comments until Sept. 15 on its “Draft Management Plan for Conservation of Snake River White Sturgeon in Idaho.” The draft is available for public review and comment at fishandgame.idaho.gov.
The draft Fish and Game management plan considers only white sturgeon found in the Snake River in Idaho—not the population in the Kootenai River of northern Idaho. Snake River white sturgeon have declined in abundance due to a variety of factors, including overharvest, dam construction, water management and water pollution, according to the agency.
White sturgeon are the largest freshwater game fish in North America, historically reaching lengths of more than 15 feet and weights of more than 1,000 pounds. They can live to be 100 years old.
The management plan describes actions that could increase the range and population abundance of white sturgeon in the Snake River. The IDFG will work with other agencies and stakeholders to accomplish actions identified in the plan.
The objectives of the management plan include providing for coordinated management of white sturgeon in the Snake River, providing for an orderly and sustainable no harvest recreational fishery, facilitating data collection for stock assessments, integrating and defining the role of artificial propagation, increasing public awareness through information and education, and obtaining public acceptance and compliance for the plan.
In Idaho, the historical distribution of white sturgeon included the Snake River upstream to Shoshone Falls, a 213-foot natural barrier to migration. Sturgeon were found in the Salmon River as far upstream as McKim Creek, and in the Kootenai River drainage in northern Idaho. In 1994, white sturgeon inhabiting the Kootenai River were listed as endangered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under the Endangered Species Act. Management and recovery of the Kootenai stock is directed under a separate document.
White sturgeon are now segmented into nine reaches of the Snake River including the Hells Canyon complex. Of the nine reaches, only two support viable populations characterized by self-sustaining natural recruitment. These reaches are Bliss Dam to C.J. Strike Reservoir and Hells Canyon Dam to Lower Granite Reservoir along the Idaho-Oregon border. Reaches other than these two show little or no detectable reproduction.
The draft says there is a high demand for white sturgeon angling opportunity, particularly in three reaches: 1) below Bliss Dam, 2) below Hells Canyon Dam, and 3) immediately below C.J. Strike Dam. The altered habitat and low population productivity in the Snake River means it is unlikely that any sustainable harvest opportunity on wild fish can be provided in the foreseeable future, according to the plan.
Because the various Snake River reaches have a range of characteristics and are essentially isolated from one another, the management plan addresses white sturgeon on a reach by reach basis. Within the native distribution of white sturgeon, population and recreational fishery objectives are developed for each reach based on the physical habitat and flow conditions and the current status of the population and fishery.
The management plan also addresses expansion of white sturgeon into new waters outside their historical distribution to provide unique recreational opportunities.
In Idaho, the IDFG is the lead agency responsible for white sturgeon management, but will work with other state and federal agencies and other entities to implement management actions.
Idaho Power Company is an electric utility that owns and operates a number of hydroelectric facilities in southern Idaho, including on the mainstem Snake River. As a result of relicensing the Middle Snake River projects (Shoshone Falls, Upper Salmon Falls, Lower Salmon Falls, Bliss) and the C.J. Strike Project, IPC is responsible for implementing a number of protection, mitigation, and enhancement activities to benefit white sturgeon in the Snake River.
The Nez Perce Tribe, as per treaty rights, conducts research on white sturgeon populations in the Hells Canyon-Lower Granite reach of the Snake River and participates in a tribal harvest fishery in the same area.
The IDFG proposes three separate categories of white sturgeon populations in the Snake River based on those defined by a multi-state position document on genetic considerations concerning cutthroat trout management produced by the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources in 2000. The categories include:
- White Sturgeon Core Conservation Populations, which are defined as self-sustaining populations that support sport fisheries and have regular natural recruitment and all age/size classes represented. Core conservation populations have adequate flow regime, water quality, and physical habitat characteristics to meet all life history requirements in most years. IDFG management emphasis will be on protecting and enhancing habitat and water quality to promote sustainability by natural recruitment, and on protecting the genetic integrity and diversity of the population. Sport fishing for white sturgeon will continue under the current catch-and-release regulation and angling-related mortality will be assessed. Conservation enforcement efforts will focus on these reaches to minimize illegal harvest.
- White Sturgeon Conservation Populations are reaches with existing white sturgeon populations and sport fisheries but with infrequent or no natural recruitment and unbalanced age/size structure. These reaches may receive recruitment from downstream drift or may have received hatchery supplementation in the past, but lack the flow, water quality, and/or physical habitat characteristics to meet all life history requirements in most years. IDFG management emphasis will be on protecting and enhancing habitat and water quality. Supplementation with hatchery fish or translocated wild fish may be used to rebuild spawning populations or enhance angling opportunity. Sport fishing for white sturgeon will continue under the current catch-and-release regulation and angling-related mortality will be assessed.
- White Sturgeon Sportfish Populations are suitable large river waters outside the historical distribution where white sturgeon can provide or have provided diversity to existing fisheries. These river reaches are expected to lack the flow regime, water quality, and physical habitat characteristics to meet all life history requirements, and angling opportunity would be supported by the periodic stocking of hatchery-reared Snake River white sturgeon. Sport fishing for white sturgeon would be under the current catch-and-release regulation although a limited harvest fishery may be an option in the future.
Fish and Game expects to conduct public open house meetings on the plan at Fish and Game regional offices in Jerome, Nampa and Lewiston. Comments will be accepted until Sept. 5.
For information contact Scott Grunder, native species coordinator, at 208-287-2774.
NMFS must examine pesticide impacts on salmon
A coalition of fishing and environmental groups this week settled a lawsuit with the National Marine Fisheries Service regarding the impacts of pesticides upon federally protected salmon and steelhead.
The settlement requires NMFS to examine the impacts that 37 pesticides commonly used in the Pacific Northwest and California have on salmon and steelhead listed under the Endangered Species Act.
NMFS, under the settlement, has agreed to design permanent measures to help pesticide users minimize the harmful effects of those pesticides.
The Environmental Protection Agency determined that the 37 toxic pesticides at issue in the settlement may harm protected salmon and steelhead. Most of the pesticides have been detected in major salmon and steelhead rivers in the Pacific Northwest and California. Scientists have found that, even at low levels, toxic pesticides can harm salmon and steelhead by causing abnormal sexual development, impairing swimming ability, and reducing growth rates.
”This settlement starts the federal agencies down the path of honestly addressing a serious problem endangered salmon still face in our rivers—too many pesticides and other chemicals. It also brings more certainty to the agricultural community by ensuring that these issues will not be hanging over them indefinitely. Cleaning up our rivers is good for both fishermen and farmers, and will also help restore thousands of lost fishing jobs to the Northwest,” said Glen Spain of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, a commercial fishing industry trade association that is a co-plaintiff in the suit.
More than five years ago, a federal court ordered EPA to consult with NMFS on the impacts that certain pesticides have on salmon and steelhead in the Pacific Northwest and California. EPA began submitting the required assessments to NMFS, but NMFS never identified the measures needed to protect salmon and steelhead from the pesticides.
Brian Gorman, regional spokesman for NMFS, says the agency has agreed to complete the long overdue assessments over a 4-year period, with the first decisions due by October 2008.
These consultations are expected to culminate in on-the-ground measures designed to reduce the amount of pesticides that run into salmon-supporting rivers and streams.
Agreement could open up new water rights for WA irrigators
A landmark agreement was signed last week that opens the possibility that the first new water rights in decades could be granted to Columbia-Snake River Irrigators Association members while assuring that flows for salmon and steelhead aren’t diminished.
The first “voluntary regional agreement,” approved by Washington’s Department of Ecology and signed by the CSRIA July 18, focuses on conserving water. The association is developing proposals for three pilot projects that will test how much water can be saved in irrigation processes.
The savings would allow the issuance of drought permits to existing interruptible water right holders and new permanent water rights on the Columbia River and lower Snake River for like volumes.
Those new water rights cannot reduce or negatively impact Columbia stream flows in the months of July and August, a time when the river is at its low ebb. The new withdrawals cannot reduce Snake River flows during the April through August period.
To meet that standard of protection, the state agency and CSRIA will pursue conservation, storage, acquisition and other opportunities to provide new water to offset new withdrawals during the summer months.
The agreement stems from 2006 state legislation directing the agency to aggressively pursue development of Columbia basin water supplies to benefit both in-stream and out-of-stream uses through storage, conservation and voluntary regional water management agreements.
The bill also created a Columbia River Basin development account and authorized the issuance of up to $200 million in general obligation bonds to support enactment of the Columbia River water development and management program.
“The issuance of water rights would be based on the success of the program,” said Joye Redfield-Wilder of the WDOE. Water savings would be logged as credits that could be transferred to participating interruptible water rights holders in drought years when their water supply would be cut off and allow expansion of senior water rights. The state has a backlog of several hundred water rights applications.
The state took a precautionary approach when beleaguered salmon and steelhead stocks began garnering Endangered Species Act protections in the 1990s. A moratorium on new water rights was imposed in the late 1990s to preserve existing in-stream flows for fish. That moratorium was later lifted but only a few new rights have been issued for projects that “show substantial environmental benefit,” Redfield-Wilder said.
“We’re finally done with it,” CSRIA board representative Darryll Olsen said of the organization’s long push for increased water rights. That fight included litigation that led to a settlement agreement and ultimately to the legislative mandate.
“We’re breaking a past history of contention and litigation,” Redfield-Wilder said of the new VRA.
“We’ve identified some conservation projects that we think will work pretty well,” Olsen said.
The strategy expected to yield the first benefits is conservation operations and maintenance. There are ongoing projects by CSRIA members that involve fine tuning their irrigation scheduling and monitoring.
“There’s a demonstrated savings of 10 to 15 percent,” Olsen said. Those projects, funded by the Bonneville Power Administration, could qualify for extra water rations.
“It goes back to the idea of awarding the efficient,” Olsen said.
Other projects being considered include converting open diversion canals to piped, pressurized systems. Creating a small reservoir on the Hanford Nuclear Reservation is also being explored, Olsen said.
In addition, Washington Gov. Chris Gregoire announced two other Tri-City area water projects.
“Nowhere is water more essential to the environmental and economic welfare of a region than here,” Gregoire said during a stop in Kennewick. “These projects will help protect an agriculture economy that generates $3.1 billion every year for the region. They will provide water that’s absolutely essential for growth and development. These projects also ensure that we will have more water in the river for our endangered salmon during the driest months. This is a triple win for Eastern Washington families, businesses and the environment.”
The projects approved will:
- Allow early work on a major pump exchange project to bring water to Red Mountain and eventually double the flows in the lower Yakima River;
- Test and pilot ways to store millions of gallons of Columbia River water in underground aquifers to be reallocated when communities and fish need it the most.
The Kennewick Irrigation District received $95,000 from the state to study the feasibility of bringing new water to Red Mountain, which has been identified as a highly productive grape-growing area. This is the first installment of a $15 million state investment the district will receive.
The KID project will test the possibility of moving KID’s withdrawal point from the Yakima River to the Columbia River, supporting the lower Yakima River stream flows and fisheries and eventually increasing irrigated acreage.
“Bringing water to Red Mountain will open up one of the state’s prime viticultural areas and exponentially contribute to the state’s already successful wine industry,” said John Jaksch, KID board president. “In addition, the exchange of Yakima River for Columbia River irrigation water will materially increase in-stream flows in the lower Yakima, benefiting endangered salmon and steelhead runs in the river.”
The city of Kennewick received more than $1 million to explore ways to capture water during the winter and store it in an underground aquifer, then reuse the water during the summer months. At least one-third of any stored water would be used to support stream flows for fish migration and spawning.
“An aquifer storage system provides the flexibility to meet the interests of both the city and state—to supply water to citizens and fish—particularly during critical flow periods on the Columbia River,” said Kennewick City Manager Bob Hammond. “It also provides an important alternative water source on the west side of our city.”
Feds defend sea lion decision; take could be 22% of steelhead
“Congress entrusted NMFS with determining when impacts reach the level of ‘significant’” in deciding whether lethal removal should be used to reduce sea lion predation on salmon and steelhead stocks that are listed under the Endangered Species Act, according to documents filed by the federal government in U.S. District.
And the agency used its expertise appropriately in deciding that California sea lions should be removed from below the Columbia River’s Bonneville Dam, the documents say.
The U.S. Justice Department filings rebut arguments presented earlier this month by the Humane Society of the United States. The July 3 motion for summary judgment says that NOAA’s March decision to allow lethal removal is arbitrary and capricious under the federal Administrative Procedures Act and contrary to the MMPA and the National Environmental Policy Act.
The HSUS motion asks the court to set aside NOAA’s decision.
The federal reply filed this week says NOAA followed all the rules in granting 5-year authorization for the states of Idaho, Oregon and Washington to lethally remove California sea lions.
“The Plaintiffs object to the exercise of this ‘lethal take’ authority on principle,” according to the federal filing. “They believe that it should never be used, except as a last resort.
“But that argument has been rejected by Congress, which has weighed the protection of sea lions under the MMPA against the protection of threatened and endangered salmon and steelhead under the ESA, and found that the protection of sea lions must yield under these circumstances.
“While Plaintiffs undoubtedly disagree with this policy, the fact is that NMFS complied with applicable procedures, used its expertise, and reasonably concluded that all of the relevant statutory factors were met. This decision was further supported by virtually every other expert that reviewed the issue,” the federal briefs say.
The HSUS arguments focus in great part on MMPA’s permitting language that says that lethal removals are allowed only of “individually identifiable pinnipeds which are having a significant negative impact on the decline or recovery of salmonid fishery stocks…” The organization says that NOAA did not prove that the sea lions’ impact was significant and didn’t properly quantify what sort of impact would be deemed significant.
The federal attorneys say NMFS analyzed three principle factors in deciding whether impacts are significant: (1) whether the sea lion predation is “measurable, growing, and could continue to increase if not addressed,” (2) whether the adult salmonid mortality is sufficiently large to have a measurable effect on the numbers of listed adult salmon and steelhead contributing to affect the productivity of the populations; and (3) whether the “mortality rate for listed salmonids [caused by sea lion predation] is comparable to mortality rates from other sources that have led to corrective action under the ESA.”
“Applying these factors, the record amply supports NMFS’s conclusion that sea lion predation is having a “significant” negative impact under the MMPA,” a federal memorandum in support of its motion says.
While the actual observed predation immediately below the dam has reached only as high as 4 percent of the upriver spring chinook salmon run in any given year, the actual level of take is likely much higher.
“Based on the bioenergetic needs of the species, actual take may be as high as 12.6 percent of listed spring Chinook and 22.1 percent of listed steelhead,” the memorandum says. In addition, pinniped scarring rates of adult salmon and sea lions rose from 11 percent in 2002 to 37 percent in 2005.
“This level of impact is sufficiently large enough to have a measurable effect on adult salmonid productivity.”
That level of impact is “comparable to impacts NMFS has sought to decrease under the ESA. For example, NMFS has reduced the harvest allowed for tribal and commercial fisheries. NMFS has also recommended a series of steps to reduce the impact of the Columbia River power system by incremental improvements,” according to the memorandum.
“Plaintiffs repeatedly argue that the impacts of predation are ‘at most’ 4.2 percent. This is incorrect.
“In addition, Plaintiffs argue that other decisions made by NMFS under NEPA and the ESA make this decision unreasonable. This argument fails because NEPA and the ESA are different statutory schemes with different standards, definitions, and purposes and also because the specific circumstances underlying those decisions make simple comparisons inapt,” according to the federal filing.
The HSUS contends that NOAA “reached a conclusion that flies in the face of more than a decade of past administrative decisions concerning the relative significance of those ‘other reasons for the decline’ of salmonids” as compared to sea lion predation.
But federal attorneys argued HSUS’s numbers deliberately downplayed sea lion impact and poorly characterized other sources of mortality. The 17 percent spring chinook impact allowed in tribal and non-tribal fisheries is a maximum and is only permitted in years of abundant returns. And sea lion impacts are more than 4 percent and almost certainly more than the 12.6 percent estimated via the bioenergetics modeling, the federal filing says.
The law requires NMFS to consider those other impacts, which it says it did.
“However, NMFS was not required to eliminate or minimize the impacts of other actions before finding that impacts of California sea lion predation are significant under Section 120 of the MMPA and accordingly, Plaintiffs’ argument lacks merit,” federal attorneys say.
The states of Oregon and Washington last week both filed motions in support of NOAA, urging that its decision be left in place.
“The threat to the salmon and steelhead in the Columbia River is current and it is significant. The loss of salmonids to CSLs at Bonneville Dam is new and growing. The exercise of this authority poses no threat to the CSL population,” according to Oregon’s memorandum.
“WDFW agrees with and joins in the motions filed by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW), and the arguments in support of those motions,” according to the memorandum filed by Washington’s Attorney General’s office.
“Recovery planning and other efforts to reduce impacts to salmon in the Columbia Basin have been guided by the principle that all manageable sources of salmon mortality should be addressed. This approach is based on recognition that the decline in salmonid populations has many causes, and there is no single action that will restore these fish,” the Washington filing says.
“California sea lion predation is currently the only measurable, potentially manageable and yet increasing source of salmon mortality in the Columbia Basin.”
Both states stressed that extensive non-lethal deterrence has been attempted, to no avail.
The sea lions typically begin arriving at the dam in the Columbia in winter with their numbers peaking in April and May, the same time that the annual spring chinook salmon spawning run is building.
The federal filings noted that few of the pinnipeds made the 146-mile, inland foray in recent decades past. But their numbers began to swell in 2002, peaking at about 100 in 2004 and 2005.
NOAA in March approved an application via section 120 of the Marine Animal Protection Act that would allow the removal of up to 85 California each year for five years. In its decision NOAA said says it is unlikely that more than 30 could be removed annually.
The decision says that the removals would not harm the health of the sea lion population overall and would reduce mortality of the listed fish.
The plaintiffs now have until Aug. 8 to file their opposition to the federal and state briefs and reply in support of their own request for summary judgment. The briefing in district court would be complete by Aug. 22 when the federal government and states file their replies. Oral arguments are scheduled for Sept. 3.
The district court process was scheduled to allow the judge to render an opinion this fall and thus leave time over the winter for an appeal or appeals to be argued and completed before the sea lions return in force in the late spring.
Reclamation reveals plan for Water for America Initiative
The Bureau of Reclamation has made available its portion of the proposed Water for America Initiative Implementation Plan for review and comment. Beginning in October, Reclamation will partner with the United States Geological Survey to implement the Water for America Initiative.
“This initiative is aimed at addressing 21st century water challenges and ensuring secure water supplies for the future,” said Commissioner Robert Johnson. “We encourage our stakeholders and the public to review the plan and provide any comments they may have.”
The Water for America Initiative is a multi-agency, U.S. Department of the Interior initiative that will help communities meet increasing demands on limited water supplies through collaborative projects, water conservation technologies, and expanded information sharing.
Reclamation will focus its efforts on two of the three strategies: (1) Plan for Our Nation’s Water Future, and (2) Expand, Protect, and Conserve Our Nation’s Water Resources. The third strategy, Enhance our Nation’s Water Knowledge, will be undertaken by the USGS.
The strategy to Plan for Our Nation’s Water Future includes Reclamation’s long-standing Investigations Program and a new Basin Studies Program which will focus on comprehensive water supply and demand studies to assess the impact of increased water demands.
The second strategy, Expand, Protect, and Conserve our Nation’s Water Resources, will include two existing programs, the Challenge Grant Program (formerly part of Water 2025) and the Water Conservation Field Services Program. Through another component of this strategy, Reclamation will accelerate Endangered Species Act compliance activities to maintain and improve existing populations of listed or proposed species and critical habitat affected by Reclamation’s projects and programs.
To learn more about the Water for America Initiative or to provide a comment on the Initiative, please visit the Water for America website at www.usbr.gov/wfa. You may also mail your comments to Bureau of Reclamation; Policy and Program Services; Attn: Avra Morgan; PO Box 25007; Denver, CO, 80225-0007. To make your comments most useful and effective for Reclamation, please submit them by August 18.
If you have any questions about Water for America, please contact Avra Morgan at 303-445-2906 or wfa@do.usbr.gov.
Reclamation is the largest wholesale water supplier and the second largest producer of hydroelectric power in the United States, with operations and facilities in the 17 Western States. Its facilities also provide substantial flood control, recreation, and fish and wildlife benefits. Visit our website at www.usbr.gov.
