10 things Obama can do to help NW salmon

Salty

2009-09-12 17:32:34

Fellow trollers,





If you had the opportunity to chart a new and prosperous course for wild salmon, Northwest communities, and American taxpayers, would you take it?



For the better part of two decades now, the federal government has answered that question with a "No". It repeatedly failed to do what is necessary to recover imperiled salmon in the Columbia-Snake River Basin. The last two administrations have avoided making the right choices for salmon and salmon-based communities, harming both fish and people along the way.



Today, the Obama administration is on the cusp of deciding whether it will craft a new, lawful, science-based plan or stick with the current federal salmon plan, a plan that it inherited from the Bush administration. If President Obama's Commerce Department (it will have to approve whatever decisions is made) is serious about salmon recovery, here are the Top 10 actions it must take to repair the deeply flawed Bush plan in order to restore salmon and meet the needs of the people of the Northwest and nation.



View this online



Take Action



#1 Prepare for Lower Snake River Dam Removal

Thousands of scientists have supported a call for removal of the four lower Snake River dams. In 2000, the Clinton administration identified lower Snake River dam removal as the surest and best way to ensure the survival and recovery of Snake River salmon and steelhead. The Obama administration should move forward today to seek Congressional authorization for dam removal, commence the engineering and economic studies for dam removal, bring stakeholders together to address any impacts of dam removal, and be ready to implement that action within the next five years unless salmon and steelhead are exceeding specific biologically-based performance standards (see below). It is an unacceptable risk to salmon - and to salmon-related jobs up and down the West Coast - to continue to avoid an action that the science so clearly says is necessary to protect and restore these fish. Removing the four lower Snake dams is the quickest way to bring back the salmon, salmon jobs and salmon dollars that have been lost in the last several decades.



#2 Create Salmon Standards that Measure Real Progress

Current "performance standards" in the 2008 salmon plan are set at levels that the federal agencies' own 2005 progress report says they are already meeting - meaning that under these standards, salmon are already saved even at their current very low numbers. This ?lowest common denominator? approach is obviously not enough to restore salmon and steelhead throughout the Columbia-Snake River Basin. We need to set biological performance standards that mean something and will actually require greater salmon survival at the dams and elsewhere, not the same or less. If salmon populations were exceeding adequate scientific standards, removal of the Snake River dams might not be necessary. Without such rigorous standards, however, the plan is inadequate both legally and for the future existence of salmon.



#3 Increase Spring and Summer Spill Over the Dams

Spilling water over the dams is the safest means of getting young salmon past the dams and out to the ocean. The 2008 Bush salmon plan rolls back court-ordered spill in both the spring and summer even though this spill has resulted in the highest in-river survival levels the region has seen since we began to document such results. A new and improved salmon plan from the Obama administration would increase both spring and summer spill above court-ordered levels to help restore more natural river conditions and increase salmon survival. In addition, the plan should include provisions to work with the State of Washington to better protect salmon by increasing the Total Dissolved Gas limits in the state's water quality standards to the levels set by the State of Oregon. Setting this more salmon-friendly standard is actually legally required and will ensure more spill to help salmon move through the gauntlet of dams more safely. This is one of the most important steps we can take immediately to keep salmon in our rivers and oceans and fishermen at work.



#4 Increase River Flows in the Snake & Columbia Rivers

An Obama salmon plan should follow the Court's advice and secure more water from the upper Columbia and upper Snake River Basins to improve spring and summer flows for migrating young salmon while also cooling river temperatures to help both young and adult salmon survive. In addition, the new plan should require the drawdown of large dam reservoirs, such as the one behind John Day Dam, during salmon migration. If and when the lower Snake River dams are removed, we may be able to reduce or end some of these measures.



#5 Strengthen - Do Not Weaken - the Endangered Species Act

The 2008 Bush salmon plan incorporates a supposed new ESA standard - "Trending Toward Recover" - that gives the federal dams a pass on ESA requirements as long as at least one more fish returns each year. This "one more fish" standard is neither scientific nor legal and could set a negative national precedent for what the ESA can and should do to protect imperiled species. Judge Redden stated in a guidance letter to the parties that he had "serious reservations" about this anomalous standard. A legal Obama salmon plan would completely delete this standard and the analysis that goes with it.



#6 Admit that Habitat Improvement Is Not a Silver Bullet for Snake River Salmon

The Bush 2008 salmon plan relies almost exclusively on habitat measures to make up for the huge harm caused by the federal dams. However, for the Snake River Basin, the plan does not identify specific on-the-ground actions that serve as the basis for those benefits. Peer-reviewed, published literature by federal government scientists makes clear that habitat measures alone will not protect and restore Snake River salmon and steelhead that spawn and rear in largely pristine habitat in central Idaho. While a legal plan would continue to invest in important tributary and estuary habitat restoration, it also would recognize that the biological benefits of such restoration efforts are uncertain and will take a long time to accrue. Moreover, without dam removal and restoration of the river migration corridor for juvenile and adult salmon, the benefits of habitat measures will be undercut. The current Bush salmon plan improperly relies extensively on very large hoped-for survival benefits from habitat actions; an adequate plan would not do this.



#7 Discard the Bush Salmon Plan's Flawed Scientific Model

The Bush salmon plan uses a model that U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service scientists, along with various state agency scientists, found to be seriously flawed for the use made of it in the Bush analysis; the model is filled with overly optimistic assumptions that render its conclusions unreliable. President Obama's pledge to restore science to "its rightful place" in his administration will be tested by his willingness to discard this model, adopt the one suggested by the USFWS biologists, and include assumptions that are protect imperiled salmon and are neither, overly optimistic nor exceptionally uncertain.



#8 Tackle the Impacts of Climate Change on Columbia-Snake Salmon

The Bush salmon plan - contrary to the scientific literature - assumes that future climate change impacts on Columbia-Snake salmon will not exceed those of the past 22 years. A scientifically sound Obama plan would acknowledge the large volume of science indicating that climate change impacts in the future will indeed be harsher for these salmon, and would include those assumptions in its analysis. Such an improvement to the Columbia-Snake plan would bring it more in line with the Obama salmon plan for the Sacramento River, in which the administration acknowledged the significant impacts climate change will have on salmon and addressed those impacts in deciding which actions to take.



#9 Acknowledge the Current Plan's Harm to Imperiled Puget Sound Orcas

The Bush plan dismisses the impact Columbia and Snake river dams have on ESA-listed Puget Sound orcas by reducing the supply of salmon - the orcas' main food source. The Obama administration's Sacramento River salmon plan acknowledges these impacts and requires that more be done to protect salmon to address the effects on orcas. Orca scientists and renowned ocean champion, Jean-Michele Cousteau, have called for the removal of the four lower Snake River dams in order to help protect imperiled Puget Sound orcas. A scientifically-sound Obama salmon plan for Columbia and Snake river salmon would acknowledge the interconnection of imperiled orcas and these salmon, take the advice of these respected biologists, and include measures to increase wild salmon populations quickly to protect orcas.



#10 Develop an Integrated Plan for Salmon & Clean Energy

The Bush administration went to great lengths to pit salmon against clean energy. This is a false and misleading conflict. Many expert analyses show that we can build a clean energy future for the Northwest, remove the salmon-killing dams on the lower Snake River, and bring back our wild salmon throughout the Columbia-Snake Basin. The Obama team should welcome the opportunity presented by salmon restoration as an integral part of building a clean energy future, not an obstacle to it. The Obama salmon plan should include steps to develop an integrated plan for salmon recovery and a reliable supply of clean energy. Both actions will generate sustainable, family-wage jobs. The Obama salmon plan can do this by recognizing that investment in energy efficiency and renewable energy sources can both provide a clean energy future and replace power production lost by removal of the four lower Snake River dams, all at affordable costs that create new and expanded economic opportunities.

Salty

2009-09-17 17:11:37

Fellow fishermen,

The Obama Administration plan to restore salmon in the Columbia and Snake River Basin is finally out. By all accounts from knowledgeable salmon advocates it is little more than a resubmission of the Bush administration plan that has been rejected at least twice by the Federal Judge in charge of overseeing the restoration of the salmon runs. As the founder of "Commercial Fishermen for Obama" I am extremely disappointed in this plan, in NMFS, and the Obama administration.

With assistance from Save Our Wild Salmon I have sent the following letter to some key newspapers I sometimes read around the country. I will also be sending notes to our congressional delegation.



Eric Jordan



Dear Editors,

I am a lifelong Alaska salmon troller and conservationist. I am disappointed with the Obama Administration’s recent decision to adopt a Bush-era salmon plan for restoring Columbia Basin salmon and revitalizing salmon fishing. For decades now, Pacific Coast and Alaska sport and commercial fishermen have reduced harvest of salmon in order to protect Snake River salmon – endangered not by fishermen but by a lethal Columbia and Snake River hydro and transportation system.

I worked and voted for Obama in part because I felt he would change this flawed Bush plan. This plan allows the dams to “legally” kill up to 90% of the juvenile salmon as they migrate to the Pacific Ocean. Dams and habitat destruction are the primary culprits driving Snake River salmon toward extinction, but it is the fishermen who are punished while the real killers go free.

Change we can believe in?





Eric Jordan

103 Gibson Place

Sitka, Alaska 99835

907-747-6743

Salty

2009-09-22 04:51:37

15:30/02. OBAMA ADMINISTRATION PRESENTS ITS ALTERNATIVE ON COLUMBIA SALMON BIOP: After postponing their deadline multiple times, the Obama Administration released its alternative to the contested Bush-era Biological Opinion (BiOp) for salmon on the Columbia River on 15 September. Under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), a BiOp must be developed when federal management actions may affect the survival prospects for a federally listed species. If proposed actions are likely to cause “jeopardy” for the species, then they are illegal under the ESA.







The Columbia River BiOp deals with how the extensive network of federal hydroelectric dams in the Columbia River Basin will be operated to maintain salmon populations in the years to come, and the decision about whether or not it is legal will come down to one man: U.S. District Count Judge James Redden. Judge Redden has already rejected two prior Bush Administration BiOps for the Columbia Basin, one in 2000 and the other in 2004. This most recent third Bush Administration Opinion, however, which was released in 2008, has received broader support than prior versions, including from most Columbia River Tribes, because of more extensive habitat restoration measures.







However, many salmon advocates in the litigation (including PCFFA and IFR), the Nez Perce Tribe, and the State of Oregon say the current BiOp does not provide adequate evidence that the actions it proposes will actually increase endangered salmon runs. Specifically, opponents believe that removing or breaching four dams on the lower Snake River should also be a part of the BiOp, or at least a part of the contingency plan if the initial habitat measures fail to provide results. Removal of the dams has long been on the conservation agenda because the giant structures prevent anadromous fish from reaching hundreds of miles of rich and pristine spawning and rearing habitat in any numbers. The four lower Snake River dams are also an attractive target for removal because they produce just a small percentage of the Northwest’s power, the transportation needs of the area could be served by an existing railroad instead of the current river barge system, and the dams do not provide any sort of flood control for the region. Also, salmon mitigation costs of keeping these dams in place are already in the billions, and are likely ultimately to exceed the value of their benefits, according to several prior economic studies.







Judge Redden spent the spring and summer deliberating and gathering information to decide how to proceed. He sent multiple letters to both opponents and supporters of the plan suggesting that they should work to make its provisions even more aggressive. He also hinted that he remained unconvinced that all of the legal arguments supporting it hold water. For example, the BiOp claims that as long as salmon are “trending toward recovery” then the status quo for operations is legal. However, “trending toward recovery” is not the same as “recovery” as required by the ESA, and also is a term so vague as to be largely meaningless, and certainly difficult to enforce violations. Judge Redden has also called the issue of enforceability into question when judging whether the proposed mitigation efforts were “reasonably certain to occur,” as is also required by the ESA.







With a changing of Administrations, however, Judge Redden wanted to wait for a review of the plan from the Obama Administration’s fisheries managers. Groups who did not think the BiOp went far enough to protect salmon populations hoped that the new Administration would use its fresh perspective to push for significant change. Supporters of the BiOp hoped the new Administration would find it suitable, increasing the chances that the measures to help dwindling populations can be implemented before the clock has expired.







As it turns out, the Obama Administration did neither. In the press release accompanying the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) review of the BiOp, NMFS states that while they will strengthen the existing plan, they will not fundamentally alter it, stating that it is already scientifically and legally sound. Despite the promised $940 million in enhancements, however, the Administration did not take the aggressive steps many had hoped for toward considering dam removal as a viable option.







“It’s clear that dams provide good clean energy,” said Jane Lubchenco, Administrator of NOAA, in a New York Times interview. “They allow integration of wind into the grid. It’s not clear what impact their removal would have on salmon, and we believe that removal of them is not necessary in the short term. We want to give these other actions a chance to work.”







In the end, it will be up to Judge Redden to decide whether the plan passes legal muster or not. He is expected to state his final ruling within the next few weeks.







NOAA’s report and its accompanying press release are available at http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/Salmon-Hydropower/Columbia-Snake-Basin/FCRPS-AMIP.cfm. For a 15 September article from Crosscut.com, see http://crosscut.com/2009/09/15/science-environment/19237. A 15 September article from the Los Angeles Times about the BiOp is at http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-salmon-dams16-2009sep16,0,3655234.story. Another story, from the New York Times, can be found at http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-salmon-dams16-2009sep16,0,3655234.story.

yak2you2

2009-09-22 05:05:29

Judge Redden any relation to the famous Redden fishery supply store out of Bellingham? Couldn't be that easy could it ! :D

spike christopher

2009-10-03 02:59:38

Salty,

Please keep us informed on how the administration is doing and all the good things they are doing for our fishery. I know it would sure be nice if this administration was different than all the rest. I don’t believe they are, as my experience shows that most decisions are make on vote and money power. If the powers to be, believe their decisions will get them votes, that is the way the decision will go. It is a very simplistic concept but very true. I lost my faith in judges and politicians a long time ago. It is very demoralizing to campaign for a cause or a politician only to see them not only go back on the promises but to find out that they never intended to really do anything about it in the first place. I have spoken with and to several of our representatives in regards to fishing issues. Most the time you get the old Tallahassee two step, they dance around the issues or just blow you off. Right or left I believe politicians are all poured from the same mold. Since the Truman area. and there after, all the dams as well as the water allegations have screwed the fishing industry. With the small voting power the fisherman have, I seriously doubt that any thing will happen to improve our standing. If anything it will probably be accomplished by the tribes which will again put us on the back burner. I hope for the best but prepare myself for the worst. With that said I think our state biologists do a good job with the funds allotted them. I have ideas on what would improve our fisheries but that is another issue for another time.

Salty

2009-10-06 21:34:20

Spike and all,

I hear you and sometimes I also get a bit depressed about how things seem to be going but then I think of my mothers adage which is to "make the best of the cards fate deals you". As an accomplished Pinochle and Cribbage player she knew of what she spoke. She is also doing well in a nursing home in Lewiston, Idaho during which we planned a 90th birthday celebration in a year and a half.

While this summer certainly was not what we hoped for in price, light winds, coho size, or hatchery Chinook here in SE there were some bright spots and I for one am grateful that the season turned out as well as it did considering. Due to the work of our troll representatives on the SSRAA Board we had a fair shot at Neets Bay Chums and while way more trollers showed up than some of us had anticipated the fishery seemed to work well for all concerned.

One of the lessons learned there is that if trollers are given a reasonable shot at the chums in a terminal area we can harvest them in an orderly and productive manner. Plans need to be developed for other chum release sites such as Hidden Falls, DIPAC, Port Armstrong, Deep Inlet, and Anita Bay toward the goal of trollers achieving their 30% share of the value of the SE hatchery salmon harvest. Of course the first priority remains for trollers to target hatchery Chinook and Coho but that will not get us to 30%.

On the positive side here are some things to think about.



1. There are record smashing returns of Chinook and Chinook jacks on the Columbia. I just returned from a trip to Oregon, Idaho, and Washington. The big Chinook and Steelhead returns are big news in that country.

2. The big power company which owns four Dams on the Klamath River has announced an agreement to remove them by 2010. This will benefit salmon on the Klamath a great deal.

3. Zeke Grader has a great article in this months Fisherman News http://www.pcffa.org/

on how the water diversion and pumping on the Sacramento River virtually destroyed those healthy runs. These were irresponsible policies of the Bush and Schwarzenegger Republican administrations. Things will be better under the Obama and whichever Democrat succeeds Arnold. Nevertheless they will not be as good as we would like and we must continue to be vigilant and active in protecting salmon habitat.

4. The overall economy, while tough on trollers, is devastating to our charter fishing nemesis. There will be less guided sport fishing for the forseeable future in SE Alaska.

5. Two outstanding trollers, Linda Behnken and Joel Kawahara were just named 2009 Highliners by National Fisherman Magazine. Joel has worked tirelessly to conserve NW salmon and has been active on the Board of Save our Wild Salmon in addition to other groups. Linda has had an amazing career helping to conserve groundfish and longliners in Alaska as the Executive Director of the Alaska Longline Fisherman's Association.

6. Our communication, chart plotting, and fish finding technology has been steadily improving to the point that the challenge of keeping up is equal to the challenge of keeping things going.

7. Direct marketing and the ability for some of us to start being rewarded by consumers for our attention to quality handling and stock sustainability is inspiring.



So, there you go Spike, 7 good reasons to be encouraged about the future. Anybody else have any other good news?