|
|
[1] NMFS STILL FIGHTING LOCALS OVER METHOW WATER
Irrigators in northeast Washington's Methow Valley are chafing over proposed NMFS guidelines for reduced water withdrawals after the federal agency unveiled its draft BiOps last week for Upper Columbia spring chinook and steelhead listed under the ESA. While all sides argued, the Methow was flowing at twice its normal rate as last winter's huge snowpack was finally melting in earnest.
If the federal proposals for minimum target flows are not met, all irrigation diversions would be stopped. Irrigators say the flows are unrealistic. But the draft BiOps also say such conditions could be modified if NMFS, the state and Okanogan County sign a memorandum of agreement to create a Habitat Conservation Plan that calls for a 25 percent reduction in all water withdrawals in projects across federal forest land. The unused water would be put in a voluntary "water bank."
Wenatchee attorney Gil Sparks said neither the irrigators nor county agencies have been invited to participate in the latest discussions. He represents irrigators who utilize two diversions, the Early Winters and Skyline ditches.
Sparks said NMFS failed to consider a lengthy study of the river completed in 1992 by the USFWS, which hypothesized that irrigation water leaked from unlined ditches actually recharges the local aquifer in dry months and later discharges water into the channel because of the high water table.
The study (Mullan et al, 1992) estimated that dams and irrigation, despite high water losses from the ditches, have reduced salmon habitat in the Methow by only three percent. Sparks said the NMFS documents refuse to acknowledge the 1992 report, which said in part, "Irrigation, at least at current levels in the Methow River basin, may be more beneficial than detrimental to salmonid habitat because of its positive influence on groundwater." The draft BiOps say the diversions "jeopardize" the existence of listed fish in the Methow Basin.
NMFS Says Ditches Divert Half a River
NMFS says the ditch that diverts water from Early Winters Creek sometimes uses more than half the river flow, which could de-water salmon redds and reduce egg-to smolt survivals, delay adult migrations, degrade habitat and inhibit recovery of the fish populations. For a temporary measure, NMFS calls for lining the 5-mile ditch with plastic sheeting. Beyond 2000, the feds want the ditch lined permanently or changed to a pipe. "During low flow times the amount of water saved via lining the ditches shall be returned to Early Winters Creek by reducing withdrawal."
The feds also want a temporary fix for the Skyline Ditch by lining it with plastic. The six-mile ditch diverts water from the Chewuch River, which flows into the Methow. It needs a fish screen as well, which could cost the irrigation district $200,000.
Irrigators who use another diversion, Wolf Creek, plan on installing a new fish screen this fall. Until then, they must trap and release juvenile salmonids according to the draft federal guidelines. The proposed reduction in flows in the Wolf Creek ditch, which feeds a lake used by Sun Mountain Lodge, the county's largest employer, has already caused the owners to cancel a planned $6 million expansion. Irrigators met at Sun Mountain July 10 with staffers from Sen. Patty Murray's (D-WA) office, telling them that ESA requirements couldn't be met without substantial federal and state funding.
The draft BiOps say that effects of proposed actions "are difficult to quantify, but are expected to be measurable as long-term benefits to the species' habitat or population levels. This could be done by measuring the increased amount of habitat at the specified low flow conditions versus previous low flows. The best scientific and commercial data available are not sufficient to enable NMFS to estimate a specific amount of incidental take to the listed species themselves."
Twelve other irrigation districts in the valley had their water permits temporarily suspended before they climbed aboard the process to create long-term plans to aid fish.
Federal authorities like NMFS official Bob Turner, who heads the federal effort in Washington state, said plans must be very clear. An Oregon federal judge threw out that state's salmon recovery plan, put together with heavy NMFS input, because it relied too heavily on unspecified voluntary strategies.
Feds Push County's Financial Pressure Points
The big question now being argued relates to proposed default positions if a future agreement isn't met. Though negotiations are still going on, it was reported that Turner said even the county's credit rating could be at stake, along with moratoria on new water permits, including previously exempt wells, and building permits, too.
Washington's Agriculture Department head Jim Jessernig told Methow residents that the work being done in their watershed would set the tone for fish protection in watersheds all across the state. Okanogan County and the state Ecology Department had been negotiating an MOA on water use, but NMFS said progress on the agreement wasn't fast enough.
Okanogan County water resources director Dennis Beich said better baseline flow data is needed before the county can commit to the severe default provisions. According to a story in the Methow Valley News, Beich addressed representatives from a dozen county, state, and federal agencies at a July 14 meeting. "I think we're trying to target one tool [instream flows] to solve the problem and it's not going to happen."
Attorneys for the irrigators have appealed the permit delays for operation of the ditches, citing issues of whether the delays constitute an unconstitutional "taking" that could result in a loss of state adjudicated water rights. -Bill Rudolph
[2] TROUT UNLIMITED'S EXTINCTION STUDY PANNED
A Trout Unlimited report that claims Snake River spring chinook will be functionally extinct by 2017 unless conditions improve for fish has been found less than convincing by a University of Washington fisheries professor.
The report--announced several weeks ago with much fanfare, including a billboard in downtown Portland--was written by Dr. Phil Mundy, a fisheries consultant whose term on the Power Planning Council's independent science panel has just run out. Mundy analyzed the numbers of returning spawners to Idaho and Oregon streams and concluded that the factors leading to his predicted extinctions have been present in 15 of the 19 five-year salmon generations completed between 1980 and 1998.
But UW fisheries professor Jim Anderson says Mundy's analysis doesn't reflect the real world very well. "Mundy's analysis indicates that Snake River salmon would go extinct if they all returned at the same time and if the extremely poor environmental conditions of the early 1990s continued into the future. Fortunately for salmon, their evolutionary strategy is more robust than Mundy's mathematical fish and the real climate is less hostile than his model's climate."
A Trout Unlimited press release said Mundy's report was "scientifically sound." Yet, the report was not officially peer-reviewed. Mundy said he has incorporated comments from three scientists so far, and he plans to submit his paper for publication, at which time it will be peer-reviewed.
Mundy used spawner-to-spawner counts in his analysis rather than spawner-to-recruit ratios used by other scientists, like the group involved in the PATH process, where more optimistic results for Snake River fish populations have been predicted. And he failed to take into account other factors, such as changing proportions of returning adults from each brood year.
"Real salmon spread their returns over a number of years to take advantage of good climate conditions," said Anderson, "like those we are currently experiencing, and to minimize the effects of bad conditions, like the ones Mundy selected for his model to represent the future."
Most wild spring chinook spend three years in the ocean, but sometimes up to 25 percent return after two years at sea. "Mundy assumed all spring fish spent three years in the ocean," said another biologist, who didn't wish to be identified. "If Mundy's paper had been submitted to a reputable journal, it would have been summarily dismissed." He also pointed to the "very elusive" nature of Mundy's analysis. "Had Mundy picked a different time period, he could very well have generated a different conclusion."
But Mundy says he chose the 1985-1990 period because it represents what has happened most frequently in the years since 1974 and what will happen if spawner/recruit values do not increase above present levels. "I chose not to use another time frame because to do so would have misrepresented the consequences of current conditions on the future of the salmon populations," Mundy said.
Mundy called his extinction model "The Doomsday Clock," which had the Portland media abuzz when his report was announced on July 9. Mundy's analysis said unless conditions change for the better, only the strongest of the 13 populations he studied would have any spawners at all after 2023.
"I have to ask those who are forecasting improved ocean conditions," Mundy said in a recent e-mail, "'When may we expect to see more spring and summer spawners as a result?' Time is the essence of the extinction problem, and timing, quite literally, is everything. Let them step up to the plate and make some predictions of their own. My predictions succeed or fail based on the numbers of fish on the spawning grounds, not on the longing for better ocean conditions."
But some, like the UW's Anderson, are not impressed. He said PATH analysis has shown the 1985-1990 period Mundy picked was the lowest period of productivity seen for the stocks. "Mundy's model has little relevance to the real fate of the Snake River fish," Anderson said. "With its reference to Doomsday, it makes rational analysis and decision more difficult." -B. R.
[3] NEW SALMON MODELING EFFORT UNVEILED BY NMFS
More than 100 scientists gathered in Seattle last week to learn about the new analytical framework for salmon recovery planning that is being developed by NMFS' Northwest Fisheries Science Center in Seattle. Led by recent NMFS hire Dr. Peter Kareiva, the goal is to build a tool to serve as a decision support system for salmon recovery planning throughout the region.
"We don't need dueling models," said NMFS scientist Mike Schiewe, "We need tools that work together."
The proposal is billed as a "matrix model," and hopes are that it will soon be used to judge the value of recovery alternatives being developed in the Framework process. NMFS scientists say that it shouldn't be viewed as a competing model to PATH or the habitat model called EDT [Ecosystem Diagnosis and Treatment] being used in the Framework discussions. Rather, the matrix approach is being developed as an "umbrella" for salmon recovery planning throughout the Northwest. They say the new approach emphasizes dynamics, extinction risks and large-scale relationships, while PATH focused on Snake River stocks and EDT emphasized a static equilibrium that's built up from fine-scale analyses of habitat effects.
NMFS is going to great lengths to keep the process "transparent and simple," with its documentation available for public review at a new website. The PATH process had come in for a lot of criticism for its secretive nature and undocumented analyses.
Kareiva said that hopefully, the new effort will show policymakers places in the salmon recovery effort where a combination of improvements to fish survival can provide the greatest impact. He said NMFS isn't developing a cookbook for what to do, but a set of principles to consider when asking questions about each unique situation.
Kareiva said the agency wasn't building a "magic model," but wants to offer synthesis and analysis in "timely fashion," to minimize the risks of extinction to the weakest stocks over the immediate short-term (the next 5 to 10 years) and "promote recovery to populations that can sustain harvests."
Several independent experts spoke about other areas of the new effort, including extinction modeling, benefits and risk of hatcheries, assessing habitat analyses.
Dan Goodman, member of the Power Planning Council's Independent Scientific Review Panel, told the group that it's important to think of the client, that is regional decision-makers, who will be charged with making use of the analysis. He cautioned that statistical inference will "loom large" in the modeling effort because of great uncertainties and incomplete data.
"Academic science is a narcissistic enterprise designed to impress our colleagues," Goodman said. "It's different from convincing a client." He pointed out that the region needs a map of the different probabilities of outcomes and suggested using costs as a measure of each alternative. "You get terrible results if you ignore costs," he said. NMFS policymaker Donna Darm suggested that decision-makers may have different values than dollar costs, like numbers of returning fish or more tribal fishing opportunity.
Several PATH scientists spoke about the difficulty of choosing data sets and comparing them. BPA consultant Charles Paulsen said that was the kind of effort which took up most of PATH's time. Some PATH participants voiced their concern that the new modeling was redundant, and others thought the time line for the new effort was unrealistic for producing meaningful results.
The NMFS schedule calls for a policy workshop at the end of August to deal specifically with Columbia and Snake River issues with policymaker Darm slated to explain clearly what outputs are really needed from the scientific community. NMFS scientist Robin Waples will also be on hand to explain how the federal agency intends to implement the recovery science planning process.
As for now, according to NMFS' Mike Schiewe, it looks like the matrix model will analyze three recovery alternatives being developed in the federal caucus and seven others from the Framework process which may be distilled down to three main alternatives to expedite the modeling analyses. A late September workshop is planned that will focus on habitat and the EDT [Ecosystem Diagnosis and Treatment] model being used by Framework participants, followed by another policy workshop on Oct. 27. -B. R.
[4] CORPS RELEASES PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES OF SOCIAL, ECONOMIC COSTS OF DRAWDOWN
The Corps of Engineers has released preliminary economic reports on power, water supply and transportation, along with recreation and 'tribal circumstances," as part of its monumental feasibility study on fish passage in the lower Snake River. The reports are three products of the Drawdown Regional Economic Workgroup (DREW), which has been charged with looking at the economic and social ramifications of different fish passage alternatives, including breaching the four federal dams on the lower Snake. Public review of the entire document is scheduled to begin next fall.
The report on power looks at effects on the region if it loses the capability of producing electricity from the lower Snake dams, which produce 1231 aMW of electricity in an average water year--about 11 percent of the capacity of the federal system and 5 percent of the region's total generating capacity.
The analysis concludes that total hydropower costs from dam breaching would amount to between $221 million and $255 million annually, with another $22 million to $28 million that would have to be spent on reinforcing the transmission system and ensuring system reliability. Other ancillary benefits that would be lost were calculated at $8 million a year.
The estimated effect on residential ratepayers was in the range of $1.50 to $5.30 in additional monthly charges to electrical bills.
Another fish passage alternative that calls for major system improvements would actually increase generating capacity by a small amount, adding $7 million to $10 million in annual benefits. The analysis has concluded that economic costs from drawdown would range from $251 million to $291 million a year.
The preliminary transportation analysis has found that shipping costs would increase by about 28 percent if barging ended on the lower Snake. Presently, nearly 80 percent of the 4 million tons of cargo shipped annually is wheat or barley, and the rest mainly logs and wood chips. The report said that it would cost 27 cents more to ship a bushel of grain if the region expands trucking and rail service to make up for lost barge traffic. That's roughly $100 million a year in added shipping costs.
Counting On California Tourist Dollars
The present analysis included gauging the future value of recreation and tourism in the region if the dams were breached. The draft report estimates the present worth of these activities is about $62 million annually and would remain at that level if major fish passage improvements were completed at the dams as well. With a natural river level drawdown, which would be achieved if dams were breached, recreational value could increase to $129 million annually, but that figure includes a big question mark--the uncertain number of Californians who would come north to recreate if dams were removed. Without the potential Californians, recreational value to the region would get a mild $15 million annual boost.
The draft report also says that the high-use scenario that figures future yearly recreational value at $300 million isn't realistic, because such optimistic values "do not fully reflect the limitations on the system to support recreation."
Another valuation that has created considerable controversy is "existence value," the amount of money people are willing to pay just to know that a particular resource exists, even if those people will not visit or use the resource. The draft report estimates the existence value of salmon and a free-flowing Snake at a whopping $1 billion. But the report points out that most of this value would also apply to a river alternative that provided a comparable level of salmon recovery. The economic analysis was completed by AEI, Inc., of Fort Collins, Colorado.
A water supply analysis was also completed. It concluded that if dams were breached, taking irrigated farmland out of production now is more cost-effective than attempting to modify pumping stations. New pumping stations would have to deal with fluctuating and meandering river conditions if the dams were breached.
The loss of irrigated farmlands was estimated at $9.2 million annually; annual losses to municipal and industrial pumping stations were pegged at $0.8 million to $3.8 million, and a $3.9 million yearly loss was estimated to accrue to owners of private wells in the region. This analysis was completed by a DREW subgroup led by the Corps.
An economic appendix that looks especially at tribal circumstances under various river alternatives has also been included. With high unemployment on reservations and from 27 percent to 44 percent of Indian families living below the poverty level, along with a death rate from 0.2 to 2.3 times higher than non-tribal neighbors, the draft appendix concludes "that there is a significant relationship between loss of the salmon and the adverse circumstances of present-day tribal peoples." According to the fact sheet released by the Corps of Engineers last week, even though the four lower Snake dams "are not solely responsible for these conditions, they cause a significant mortality of Snake River salmon "and consequently bear a significant level of responsibility."
The draft report, completed by Meyer Resources for the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, says that breaching the dams wouldn't necessarily recover fish runs to pre-dam days, but could boost stocks by 30 percent.
Corps spokesman Greg Graham said the opinions and findings in the draft reports "do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Corps." The analyses are still preliminary, subject to review and revision based on comments received as part of the reviews of the DREW team and the NWPPC's Independent Economic Analysis Board.
The reports are available on the Corps' Walla Walla District home page and will be included in the full feasibility report scheduled for release this fall. That report will also include economic analyses of water supply, recreation and tribal circumstances. -B. R.
[5] ODFW LISTS LAST WILD COHO STOCKS AS ENDANGERED UNDER STATE LAW
Following a staff recommendation, The Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission has listed wild coho in the Sandy and Clackamas rivers under conditions of the state's Endangered Species Act. The two rivers are the only streams in the entire Columbia River basin that are still home to wild coho salmon stocks. Once the coho were abundant in upper Columbia and Snake tributaries, but most had disappeared by the 1980s. Coho in Oregon's Grande Ronde River were extinct by 1986.
The first petitions to list the Snake River chinook in 1990 also included a petition to list lower Columbia River coho, but the coho petition was rejected by the National Marine Fisheries Service because NMFS could find no distinct, native populations to list. In 1992, Oregon Trout and other groups which filed to list coho, joined with PacifiCorp to try again, but NMFS rejected that effort.
In 1995, David Moskowitz of Oregon Trout, made another effort to list the coho under the state's ESA, but the Commission rejected that request. However, Moskowitz and ODFW staff remained unconvinced.
The ODFW Commission was once again approached by staff in 1998, with considerable data from Douglas Cramer of Portland General Electric, and a thorough scientific review by ODFW biologists, especially Mark Chilcote. The Commission then OK'd development of a listing proposal.
Five years after the first attempt at the Oregon listing, the wild coho have finally made the state's endangered species listing. And there are rumblings that NMFS may eventually list lower Columbia River coho, putting them under federal protection as well.
Back in 1982, ODFW adopted the state's first species plan for salmon. They called it the Oregon Coho Plan, and its policy directed that no spawner escapement would be provided for lower Columbia River wild coho populations. To make up for the potential harvest of all the spawners in the fishery, the state would use hatchery coho to stock the streams and keep natural production alive. But the combination of a 90 percent harvest rate on Columbia River coho, a poor ocean environment from 1977 through 1995, habitat destruction on spawning streams and hatchery stocking all contributed to coho declines. By 1995, native coho populations in all streams below the Willamette River were extinct.
In his analysis of the situation, ODFW's Chilcote developed a concept called the "Extinction Vortex". At a certain point, according to Chilcote, a depleted wild, native salmon population runs out of gas. With growing odds against its survival, these stocks cannot recover even when some pressures are reduced, like cuts in harvest. Small populations cannot cope with a combination of less productive habitat, a constant predator load, poor ocean conditions, hatchery introgression and competition, and 10 years of drought.
Reducing fishing mortality was not enough to offset the other factors. The runs collapsed, beginning with the small, less productive ones. Both the Sandy and Clackamas wild coho runs were larger than the those found in other lower Columbia River tributaries. While these smaller streams had zero spawners in the 1990s, the two larger rivers had as many as 1,491 (Sandy) and 3,476 (Clackamas), but the effects of attrition and neglect eventually caught up with them. By 1996, less than 200 fish were counted in each basin.
Over the next 24 months, all 13 relevant state agencies must develop habitat management plans to recover the coho. The state Endangered Species Act does not affect federal and private landowners, but it does require a recovery plan by affected state agencies.
In a controversial ruling by the Oregon Attorney General, the waters of Oregon are considered land and the Oregon Water Resources Department must participate along with other state agencies in developing land management plans to protect coho salmon. -Bill Bakke
[6] ANTI-BREACHING DECREE PASSES HOUSE RESOURCES COMMITTEE
The House Resources Committee last week approved Rep. Doc Hastings' (R-WA) resolution that opposes focusing on removal of the four lower Snake River dams as a way to recover federally protected fish. The bill may be considered by the full House of Representatives, but some members of the Northwest Congressional delegation aren't sure a floor debate on HCR 63 would be good for the region.
Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR) is concerned the resolution could have "the sort of perverse effect of energizing national environmental groups on this issue and elevating Columbia-Snake River salmon recovery to a national environmental issue," said DeFazio spokesman Jeff Stier. Stier also pointed out that a floor vote against Hastings' resolution "could be seen as approval for breaching."
"The whole goal in introducing [HCR 63] was to build broad national support to look at other options that contribute to fish deaths rather than just dams," said Jennifer Scott, spokeswoman for Rep. Hastings. Scott also maintained salmon recovery is already a national issue, "from the farm bureau to the environmental side." The Resources Committee's approval of the resolution shows that educational efforts to "make sure everyone understands the importance of the dams to the region" is working, but more needs to be done.
Hastings' resolution calls for retention of the "tremendous economic and environmental benefits" the Columbia and Snake River dams provide to the US; states that plans to recover federally protected fish should not "rely on dam removal schemes;" calls for addressing all the factors that affect sustainability of resident and anadromous fish in the system; and for basing any comprehensive fish recovery plan on sound data that considers "economic and social costs associated with changes to the management and use of the river infrastructure."
Rep. Jay Inslee (D-WA) also reportedly has reservations about further consideration of the resolution, while Rep. George Nethercutt (R-WA) supports Hastings' resolution.
Environmentalists have already come out against it--not further consideration, but the resolution itself. The Sierra Club, Save Our Wild Salmon and Trout Unlimited blasted the resolution in a news release, charging it would undercut the ongoing public process for Snake River salmon recovery. "Rather than simply obstructing the process, we challenge Hastings to offer up his own recovery plan and run it through rigorous, independent scientific review," said Jeff Curtis, western conservation director for Trout Unlimited. And Bill Arthur of the Sierra Club said Hastings is inviting a "national debate over taxpayer subsidies, the Northwest's special deal with cheap power, and the role some of these dams have had in driving wild salmon to the brink of extinction. We welcome this public debate."
A date for floor debate hasn't been scheduled, said Hastings' Scott, who added the resolution won't come up until after Congress returns from its August break, which runs from Aug. 7 to Sept. 7. -Jude Noland
[7] NEW FACES ON SALMON RECOVERY FRONT
A new commander has taken charge of the US Army Corps of Engineers' 14-state Northwestern Division. The agency announced Brig. Gen. Carl A. Strock has taken over for Brig. Gen. Robert H. Griffin, who will move on to command the Corps' Great Lakes and Ohio River Division, headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio. Gen. Strock will oversee all Corps activity in the Northwestern Division, which includes spending more than $1 billion annually on water resource activities and military and environmental programs. Strock came from the Corps' Pacific Ocean Division, based in Honolulu, where he was commander
Washington Gov. Gary Locke has appointed Bill Ruckelshaus to chair the state's salmon recovery funding board, a 10-member body created by this year's legislature to guide spending targeted for salmon recovery. Ruckelshaus was director of EPA in the early 1970s. Lately, he has served as a special envoy to expedite talks over the Pacific Salmon Treaty. He also heads a western Washington group of businesses, environmental groups and tribes that has forged a partnership to recover salmon stocks. -Bill Rudolph
Subscriptions and Feedback
Link/Document AnnexLINKS/DOCUMENTS FROM NW FISHLETTER 085:: Below are listed links and documents referred to in the text of NW Fishletter issue 085.
THE ARCHIVE :: Previous NW Fishletter issues and supporting documents.
NW Fishletter is produced by Energy NewsData. Publisher: Cyrus Noë, Editor: Bill Rudolph,
Phone: (206) 285-4848 Fax: (206) 281-8035
Contributing Editors: Bill Bakke and Jude NolandIf you would like to be notified when the next NW Fishletter is published online, send an e-mail message to webmaster.com with "Subscribe NW Fishletter" in the subject line and your name and e-mail address in the body.
Please contact webmaster.com,
with questions or comments on this site.
Copyright ©2002 Energy NewsData Corporation