PDA

View Full Version : 1000's Of Delta Fish Killed During Levee Repair



wjorg
11-26-2007, 07:10 PM
YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE VIDEO FOOTAGE FROM THE LINK BELOW!!! There was our WINTER RUN of FISH!!!! floating dead in the water....

http://cbs13.com/local/delta.levee.dead.2.594116.html


"striped bass, salmon, carp, bluegill and other game fish" killed.

I found out this was near Courtland, CA. Check out where that is on Google Maps if you don't know. It's right along the fish(salmon, steelhead, striped bass) highway to the Sacramento Watershed. Wouldn't they have known better?

Read Below

1000's Of Delta Fish Killed During Levee Repair

SACRAMENTO (AP) ― State and federal officials on Monday said they were investigating the death of thousands of game fish in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta after a federal agency drained the water around a protected island during a levee repair.

Masses of fish could be seen floating in shallow water on Prospect Island, a 1,253-acre plot next to Sacramento's Deep Water Ship Channel that is administered by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.

The bureau on Monday halted drainage of the remaining water behind the levee and started removing the fish carcasses, spokesman Jeff McCracken said. He said the agency would begin adding oxygen to the water in hopes of saving some of the remaining fish.

"When we realized how many fish were there, we quit pumping," he said. "By then, we certainly, apparently, had passed the point of causing some fish loss."

The bureau had no estimate on the number of fish killed. Bob McDarif, owner of Cliff's Marina near the delta town of Freeport, estimated the number in the tens of thousands.

"It's like a disaster out there," he said.

The California Department of Fish and Game launched its own investigation Monday, focusing on how and why the fish died.

Although the fish deaths were on federal land, the striped bass, salmon, carp, bluegill and other game fish are considered public trust assets for the state. The results will be sent to state Attorney General Jerry Brown.

The levee under repair is around Prospect Island, which sits along the shipping channel about 20 miles southwest of Sacramento. The channel is the same stretch of water that served as a conduit for a pair of humpback whales that made an unlikely journey inland from San Francisco Bay last spring.

In a project that began in early October, the Bureau of Reclamation plugged two breaks in the 15-foot-high levee and repaired about 600 additional feet. The breaches occurred in January 2006.

Pumping the remaining water from behind the levee was the final step.

McCracken said the bureau received clearance from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to proceed with the repairs. Fisheries officials determined heavy vegetation would make it too hard to salvage the fish, but the contractor was advised to start pumping during the lowest tide of the month, which he did, McCracken said.

"To put nets or do things, they told us it wasn't plausible," he said. "We did instruct the contractor ... to move as many fish out of the way as possible."

The Fish and Wildlife Service studied the potential effects of the drainage project on the delta smelt, which is protected under the California Endangered Species Act. That study showed the levee repair was likely to have no effect on the fish.

State Fish and Game officials said they were notified about the die-off last Wednesday and were not involved in the levee project.

"We wish they would've consulted with us beforehand," department spokesman Steve Martarano said. "We could have maybe given them some ideas on things to do."

That could have included using sport fishing groups to help reduce the fish population before the water was drained or immediately rescue some fish. It also could have meant employing special water pumps that are less harmful to fish, he said.

McDarif, the marina operator, was first to sound the alarm about the stranded fish and said he has been frustrated by the slow response.

He recruited more than 100 volunteers to try to move the dying fish to the river, but he said his efforts were thwarted by federal officials.

"If I saw some fish dying now, I would go and take them out and move them to the river," he said. "The thing is, there's all these politics, and there's no time for politics."

The Bureau of Reclamation bought the island about 12 years ago as part of a planned Army Corps of Engineers program to restore fisheries and wildlife in the delta. Funding stalled, however, and the area was never developed.

The bureau had planned to sell the property this winter. (Who are they going to sell this valuable fish and wildlife habitat to?)

Furthermore from
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2007/11/26/18463695.php

Prospect Island Update: Dead Fish Removal Begins Today

by Dan Bacher

Bureau of Reclamation and DFG biologists on Sunday, November 25 checked Prospect Island, where thousands of fish are dead or dying, and the DFG gave the approval to remove the fish that have died, according to Jeff McCracken, Bureau of Reclamation spokesman.

The majority of fish appear to be striped bass, but salmon, steelhead, sturgeon, bluegill, crappie, Sacramento pike minnows and other species have also died. Endangered delta smelt could also be the victims of the fish kill.

“We've mobilized a crew and expect to begin this first thing this morning,” said McCracken on November 26. “The DFG believes removing the fish will ‘enhance’ water quality and allow for the remaining live fish to survive. We will also pump oxygen into the pools where there are remaining fish.”

McCracken said that Bureau of Reclamation officials, the DFG manager and biologists would meet today to determine the best way to deal with the remaining fish on the island. DD-M Crane and Rigging Company of Alameda, the same company that did the repairs to the levee, will be removing the dead fish and installing aerators in the ponds, amounting to 800 acre feet of water, that remain on the island.

“Apparently there are natural pools there that always had native fish,” said McCracken. “DFG will let us know what the next step needs to be. We believe that the water remaining on the island is sufficient to keep the remaining fish alive once the dead fish are removed.”

After hearing about Bureau of Reclamation plans to remove the fish and oxygenate the water, Bob McDaris, who brought the fish kill to the media and public’s attention after discovering the thousands of dead and dying fish on Prospect Island last Tuesday, was encouraged that something was finally being done about the matter.

“I’m glad that they are removing the dead fish and are oxygenating the water,” said McDaris, owner of Cliff’s Marina in Freeport. “I still would like to go with a group of volunteers and rescue the remaining fish and put them into Miner Slough.”

He noted that one option would be to put fish back into the slough by means of a 1-foot diameter irrigation pipe. All McDaris and his volunteers need is the authority and means of transporting these fish across a muddy wallow to be released back into the slough.

According to McDaris, “I talked to Mary Mason, DFG warden, this morning. She told me ‘I’m not going to tell you that you can’t do the rescue.’”

McDaris, (916) 769-8047, is on standby right now with 75 volunteers to go out and rescue any fish that are still alive. He is also willing to donate money to hire a helicopter to transport the last remaining fish.

“All I want to do is save the fish,” emphasized McDaris.

Meanwhile, the DFG is opening a criminal investigation into the fish kill. “We’ve taken photographs of the dead and dying fish at Prospect Island and the law enforcement branch of the DFG is now doing a criminal investigation of the matter,” said Steve Martarano, DFG public information officer. “We plan to find out if anything occurred at the island that could be considered a crime. If we determined that a crime had been committed, we would then go to the District Attorney to press charges.”

He also said the Department was going to see it they could rescue some of the fish off the island. “We’re looking at all options,” he stated.

and at

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2007/11/23/18463168.php


Stunning Television Footage of Huge Delta Fish Kill/Prospect Island Update
by Dan Bacher
Friday Nov 23rd, 2007 6:28 PM

View the carnage of the huge fish kill at Prospect Island on the CBS13 website. There are already thousands and thousands of dead fish... and this is just the beginning of the fish kill.

http://cbs13.com/local/delta.levee.dead.2.594116.html



Judging by the number of fish shown in this footage shot from a helicopter by Channel 13 TV in Sacramento, this fishery disaster could end up being comparable to or worse than the Klamath Fish Kill of 2002. The majority of visible fish are striped bass, but salmon, steelhead, sturgeon, bluegill, crappie, largemouth bass and carp are also dead or dying. There is a very real possibility that delta smelt, a fish on the verge of extinction that is supposedly "protected" by the state and federal Endangered Species Acts, will be among the victims of this fish kill that is occuring while you read this.

Bob McDaris, Owner of Cliff's Marina, (916) 769-8047, one of the first to bring this situation to light, is on standby right now with 75 volunteers to go out and rescue any fish that are still alive. All he needs is the authority and means of transporting these fish across a muddy wallow to be released back into the river/slough system. He is also willing to donate money to hire a helicopter to transport the last remaining fish.

"We did comprehensive sampling of the fish on the island before the levee was closed," according to Jeff McCracken, spokesman for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. "We found no smelt or salmon. It was due to the lack of threat to the threatened species that the federal fishery agencies concluded we could seal the levee at low tide. And a fish salvage for the entire 1,200 plus acre island was problematic due to the vegetation on the island which the FWS and NMFS concluded fish salvage couldn't be accommodated."

It looks like the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service made a tragic miscalculation of the amount of fish that would be killed by repairing the levee on Prospect Island and draining it. Unfortunately, an area like Prospect Island, with abundant vegetation, cover and forage, is ideal habitat for an array of Delta fish species. Draining an area like this is very destructive, without finding a way to do a fish rescue, because the flooded island is an area where fish from throughout the Delta system congregate.

Something needs to be done about this intolerable situation before more fish needlessly die on the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. I urge people concerned about the stranding of thousands of fish on Prospect Island to call or write to the following officials and urge the federal and state governments to do something about saving the fish:

Ron Milligan, Operations Manager
Central Valley Operations Office
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
3310 El Camino Avenue, Suite 300
Sacramento CA 95821
916-979-2180
fax: 916-979-2494

Richard B. Rogers, President
California Fish and Game Commission
1416 Ninth Street
Sacramento CA 95814
916-653-4899
email: fgc [at] fgc.ca.gov

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
State Capitol Building
Sacramento, CA 95814
916-445-2841

You can call also call the Bureau of Reclamation, Public Affairs Office, 916-978-5100.

Covelo
11-26-2007, 08:20 PM
I saw this when it originally aired and the vast majority of the fish looked to be non-native bass and carp. Certainly does not seem to be holding water for salmon or steelhead. Hard to get too excited about it as it seems the impact to native fisheries is minimal.

STEELIES/26c3
11-28-2007, 04:32 PM
I saw this when it originally aired and the vast majority of the fish looked to be non-native bass and carp. Certainly does not seem to be holding water for salmon or steelhead. Hard to get too excited about it as it seems the impact to native fisheries is minimal.

That's the exact kind of apathy our government representatives and utility commissioners depend on in order to move forward with 'business as usual'.

In this case, It is the principal rather than the product which gravely (pardon the pun...) concerns me.

You are correct stating that not many salmonids were killed in this event of carelessness. However, other, loftier decisions (namely, the increased water export bond measure being pushed via the ad-hoc committee; 'Coalition for a Sustainable Delta') is also backed by the Bureau of Reclamation and if it is passed it will have catastrophic effects on Chinook and Steelhead viability in our San Joaquin/Sacramento Delta system.

Get excited!
M

Covelo
11-28-2007, 07:04 PM
I do not see how the two are equivalent. I see this fish kill as a distraction from far greater issues which we should be focusing on. This one is being propped up and gives everyone some body they can point a finger at.

Is this sustainable delta act you are refering to the same as the periferal canal to move the water extraction point from the delta to further upstreram?

Darian
11-28-2007, 07:53 PM
Hi Covelo,.... The "Coalition for a Sustainable Delta" is, as I understand it, a group of agri-business/water distributors/politicians supporting the governors initiatives to "re-design" the Delta to essentially do what you've described plus more for a price tag of $10 Billion in bonds. I'm not sure which part of all of this I would oppose more. :? :?

Of course, the Delta re-design is a water grab and the bond issue is absolute financial lunacy considering that over half of annual state revenues are budgeted for debt service on prior bond issues.... :mad: :mad: This, while facing a structural, annual budget deficit. ](*,) ](*,)

As you've pointed out, moving the water extraction point upstream is associated with the peripheral canal. Not sure where that proposal is since the Governor's Blue Ribbon Committee recommended a complete re-design by establishing a cross Delta water transport system that, essentially bisects that body of water and does a lot more. :shock:

The outcome of all of this is bad for all fishes (native or not) that use the Delta for living or migration to spawning areas. :? :( :(

STEELIES/26c3
11-28-2007, 08:15 PM
Mr. Menken summed it up well as I see it.

And agreed, the two issues are separate and not equivalent.

I was speaking against becoming complacent is all.

Yes, the proposed peripheral canal and subsequent increase in water exports would be the far greater demise of our fisheries.

The likelihood of a 9 billion bond issue passing with our current economy and state deficit is not likely but what concerns me is that there is also a trend towards environmental protection and many Americans might read JUST THE TITLE of the proposition on the ballot and do the 'feel good' thing of voting YES for a 'sustainable delta' instead of reading what exactly it entails.

It would more aptly be called the 'Coalition for a Drainable Delta'...

Hopefully people will read and not just glance at titles of the issues before them when they go to the polls.

Meanwhile, I am writing letters and researching other ways to get more involved towards the defeat of the prop.

Take care~
Mark

Covelo
11-29-2007, 12:26 PM
Sending more water south is definitely a bad move, but I am not so sure a peripheral canal type project would be inherently bad for the delta or rivers. Currently water is pumped out of the system at the beginning of the delta and the river flows are adjusted to make sure no salt water is pumped. This results in unseasonably high flows that screw up holding patterns and migration of species. Taking water from locations near the dams would remove the salinity issue. Lower flows on the Sac during the summer months would be closer to natural historic flow regimes. Maybe that would allow them to release more water in the early winter and fall, like now, instead of capturing it for summer releases. I believe this would be very beneficial. Of course, if they just plan to ship the water south then this discussion is moot.

Darian
11-29-2007, 10:06 PM
Hmmmm,.... Tristan, I just re-read all of the posts under this thread and kinda feel like we were engaging in a fairly objective discourse from all sides.... :) Am I missing something or were you referring to the other threads that had so much emotionalism in them. :? :?

You are correct, that the current fish kill is a blip on the horizon compared to the overall status of the delta and tributaries. It's a complicated mess with all kinds of related issues (economic/environmental/legal). Not easily solved without objective analysis/discussion/decisions.

In any case, I know you have some good insights into this stuff (....even if we don't always agree). 8) 8) :)

OceanSunfish
11-30-2007, 09:03 AM
No offense to those who are concerned about this issue. You should be rightly concerned about the health of the Delta, but seriously this chest-beating about the levee break & associated fish kill does nothing as this issue is but a small drop in a huge ocean of problems. Everyday fish are killed at the pumps or as a direct consequence of the operation of the water facilities, yet we are more worried and worked up about a couple thousand fish that died as a result of a levee repair, but not when hundreds of thousands of fish die at the pumps? :roll: :?:

People are treating this incident as if its some sort of isolated occurence and tragedy, expending political capital and energy by threatening lawsuits that frankly won't go anywhere.... (Even though I do think those responsible are guilty of a crime, doesn't mean you are gonna win, and you might as well save that time and $ for when it really matters.)

In the end we don't have anyone to blame but ourselves for this situation. Its our own government and federal agency who are responsible for this mess. We voted for those in charge now. (Such as the governor, president, ect.) They have made it pretty obvious where they stand on the issues....and while I do believe Covelo made an eloquent and thoughtful post about the merits of an alternate conveyance method, I think that at this time everyone identifies the Governor's plan as the only option (which is flawed) and therefore we cannot meaninfully discuss such issues without someone crying bloody murder.

My .02

-Tristan

On the contrary, I believe your post is very offensive to those that will be out there sloshing around in the muck this weekend saving the few fish that are still alive. And, also to those you refer to as "chest beating" this topic or treating it as an isolated case, etc.

Do you think they are ignorant to the larger picture you refer to? Of course they aren't. They understand damn well what dies at the pumps every day of the year. In essence, this is why they are going out there to save those fish because any sportfish in this state should not be wasted especially under our current misguided system.

There will be many people out there this weekend who attend DFG scoping meetings, SDIP hearings, members of fishing groups, letter writers, fund raisers, etc. Most are restless and just want to actually get out and do something where they will feel a small amount of instant satisfaction by saving a few ramaining surviving fish.

All other comments to this thread are opinions and agendas we've heard before and certainly acceptable as such and is what gives this forum its well deserved following.

Hairstacker
11-30-2007, 10:37 AM
Tristan, although I haven't posted, I have followed the issue and this discussion with great interest. Could you please (I mean this sincerely) elaborate more on the Nature Conservancy and any of its efforts you're aware of that directly or indirectly impact the Delta? I've been curious for some time as to which environmental group is likely to provide the most bang for the buck, so to speak, and you've suggested this may be the one.

Bill Kiene semi-retired
11-30-2007, 10:57 AM
I have ADD or something like it so reading huge amounts of text are difficult, to say the least, for me.

That said, I have been in the sport fishing retail business in Sacramento for the past 43 years and over that time have heard many discussions around the fishing tackle shops I have worked. I have chatted with lots of people in the environmental fields too.

I get the distinct feeling that between the "water needed down south" and the "commercial salmon interest", the Striped Bass and our Delta has not go a chance of getting any real help now or ever.

Just my take on these issues...............

Covelo
11-30-2007, 12:19 PM
I get the distinct feeling that between the "water needed down south" and the "commercial salmon interest", the Striped Bass and our Delta has not go a chance of getting any real help now or ever.


While I agree with your conclusion, I think one needs to ask why any agency should be doing anything to bolster striped bass populations when so many of our salmon and steelhead runs are in peril and are directly competing for food with bass and are preyed upon by bass. I know the DFG has moved away from planting juvenile bass for this reason. Certainly there is a conflict when you have the winter run chinook listed federally and at the same time want to bolster the population of a non-native predator downstream. Seems like it should be a violation of the ESA to do anything to increase bass populations at the expense of salmon.

The delta needs to be fixed but it needs to be fixed for the delta smelt, sturgeon, and juvenile steelhead and salmon that use it as a nursery, not so that more stripers will be available for fishermen. If you want leverage, than the many federally listed native species that utilize the delta as critical habitat should be enough.

Darian
11-30-2007, 03:23 PM
Covelo,.... IMHO, the answer to the question of why any agency would should be doing anything to bolster Striped Bass populations is that all agencies are headed by political appointees and/or elected officials who are responsive to the wishes of their appointers or constituencies. 8) 8)

Stripers have friends in the form of fishing clubs, fisherman, guides, sporting goods dealers, fishing equipment and boat mfgr's/sellers. Plus there's a related trade in the marine portion of the sport. Unfortunately, many of these interests do not act in concert or to achieve a goal; regardless of what that agenda/goal is. :( :( Thus, the current state of fisheries for native and non-native species. :( :(

While we disagree on supporting Striper populations, I concur that leverage can be exerted thru using the listing of endangered native species in order to restore the Delta. 8) 8) Stripers would benefit if an effort were made to restore critical habitat in the delta, So I guess you could say that, "....a high tide floats all boats." :D :D

Bill...., interesting/disturbing perception that one of the reasons that the Delta won't receive any help is due to one of the special interests that would directly benefit by increased Salmon runs. :? :? Not surprising, tho. :( :(

matt johnson
12-01-2007, 04:18 PM
I think Kiene is right on, which is rather depressing.

CDF&G was pressured to stop its striped bass salvage/stocking program by the USFWS and NMFS/NOAA Fisheries because they felt the striper program was in conflict with the recovery of winter-run Chinook. In my opinion this was scape-goating based on little to no scientific data.

The scape-goating of our striper population continues and this really sucks because they are a resiliant species and there is still time to bring this fishery back. The striped bass is an "everyman" game-fish. You can be an immigrant with a hand-line or a guy in a $40,000 bass boat and enjoy fishing stripers. They are accessable to everyone. They are the perfect sport-fish for California’s diverse and growing population.

On the contrary, due to habitat loss, winter and spring-run Chinook can never be recovered to fishable levels in the Central Valley. I think Central Valley steelhead might have a little better chance, but C&R regs since the early 90's do not appear to have made a difference. The Battle Creek restoration program, if it ever actually happens, might add a few more wild fish, but there is a finite source of available habitat in the Central Valley. Furthermore, the coldwater management of the Sacramento for winter-run Chinook appears to be favoring residency over anadromy within the native Sacramento mykiss population. This is just an educated guess based on personal fishing observation and conversation with guides. Nobody really knows anything about wild Central Valley steelhead.

Don’t get me wrong, I love the Central Valley’s unique populations of wild salmonids, and I believe they have intrinsic value well beyond putting a bend in the rod of California‘s fishermen.. I am just frustrated with the striper bashing. As has been mentioned in this thread, reducing water exports and pollution in the delta will benefit all fish species that use the delta. I don’t think we will ever return to a “1960’s” kind of abundance in the delta and the rivers that feed it, but I think we can keep what presently remains of our salmonid diversity intact AND re-build a healthy striped bass population. Just my thoughts. Matt.

STEELIES/26c3
12-01-2007, 04:36 PM
Very well said Matt~

echoes my sentiments very closely.

M

Darian
12-01-2007, 08:23 PM
Hmmmm,.... Matt, I'm slightly confused. :? Your statement about recovery of Salmon seems too gloomy. I quote from your remarks, "On the contrary, due to habitat loss, winter and spring-run Chinook can never be recovered to fishable levels in the Central Valley." Do you really believe that all runs of Valley Salmon have declined in numbers enough to stop fishing for them altogether as your statements indicate :?: :?: Also, that they will never recover in numbers enough to fish for :?: :?:

IMHO, since Salmon (Chinooks) are part of a commercially valuable fishery and hatcheries appear to have emphasized their production over others (Silvers/Steelhead), it would appear that Chinooks have a better chance for recovery. That's what I found difficult to fathom in Bill's post. Why would commercial Salmon interests oppose efforts to restore critical habitat in the Delta :?: :?: Restoration should directly benefit a commercial, ocean Salmon fishery. But, what do I know... :roll: :roll: :roll:

Anyway,.... I find I can't agree that what was posted in this thread about Stripers was "....striper bashing." The questions/statements seemed like observations about non-native species and governmental agencies (....the latter being something I understand very well). True, support for their survival is not high among everyone on this BB for reasons they see as valid. I choose to listen/learn/debate about those reasons and find what I can use to work for all of our goals.... Hope you do as well.

matt johnson
12-02-2007, 01:45 PM
Darian,

I was stating my opinin that I do not believe that Central Valley winter and spring-run Chinook stocks can ever be recovered to fishable levels. I was not refering to ALL races of Chinook in the Central Valley. Fall-run Chinook were left with much of their natural spawning habitat and their numbers are bolstered hugely by hatcheries (12 million smolts a year by Coleman alone). Fall-run are doing fine (well, not great in 2007) and in all likelyhood will persist.

I believe Bill is correct in his opinion that commercial salmon interests will always oppose striper management. Stripers eat hatchery fall-run smolts at release locations like rodeo. Commercial salmon fishermen don't like that.

I was not directly refering to posts within this thread when I noted that I was frustrated with "striper bashing". I was perhaps tangentially refering to the love/hate relationship Californians have with stripers and the "salmon-centric" management of the resource agencies. If there were a bunch of salmon hanging out on Prospect Island I seriously doubt that the present fiasco would have taken place. Thanks, Matt.

Covelo
12-02-2007, 10:30 PM
CDF&G was pressured to stop its striped bass salvage/stocking program by the USFWS and NMFS/NOAA Fisheries because they felt the striper program was in conflict with the recovery of winter-run Chinook. In my opinion this was scape-goating based on little to no scientific data.


Stripers eat hatchery fall-run smolts at release locations like rodeo.

Matt, these two statements are contradictory. Do you believe the stripers are selectively feeding on hatchery fall-run chinooks and not migrating wild spawn smolts. I doubt anyone believes that stripers are the sole or even primary reason the winter and spring stocks are imperiled in the Sac River, but obviously they are an unnatural impact, hence the pressure to move away from stocking striped bass juveniles to bolster their population when it is known they feed on outmigrating salmon. To claim they are not an impact would be short sighted, just as claiming they are the primary impact would be.


If there were a bunch of salmon hanging out on Prospect Island I seriously doubt that the present fiasco would have taken place.

I would certainly hope so considering the winter run is listed federally and the spring run isn't that far behind. It is not like striper populations are in any way at risk of crashing. I certainly wish there were as many salmon as there were stripers and that is a sad statement of the current state.

matt johnson
12-03-2007, 03:02 AM
Hey Covelo,

I think that striper predation on juvenile salmonids becomes a problem mainly where an "artificial predator/prey" scenerio takes place. The perfect example of this are the hatchery release points like rodeo. The hatchery juveniles are dropped off at the same places and times like clock work and the stripers have this figured out. Both commercial and sport salmon fishermen get riled up about this because they think the stripers are taking away their fish. I think somebody is actually trying to file a lawsuit against the state hatcheries for the practice of simply dumping all the fish at the same place? It is thought (proven?) that acclimating and then towing the smolts around in realese pens where they slowly dribble out results in higher survival.

Surely predation by striped bass on wild juvenile salmonids occurs throughout the bay/delta/ and rivers but to what extent who knows? Based on my experience monitoring the outmigration of wild juvenile salmon in the upper Sacramento River basin, I do know that they do not behave like a bunch of idiots. They move at night and especially on high water events. They also move in "pulses' and over an extended migrational timing period (don't all leave the system at once). These are behaviorial adaptations against predation by the native Pikeminnow and other native predators like merganzers and likely serve them quite well aginst striped bass in an open environment. (but not in Clifton Court Forebay!)

It has been noted before on this bulletin board and others that back in the 50's/60's when stripers were at their peak of abundance in the bay/delta, salmon, including winter-run, were also getting along quite nicely. Matt

Covelo
12-03-2007, 08:34 AM
Thanks Matt. It sounds like not much has been done investigating how large or small the impact of striped bass is on out migrating salmonids. I am familiar with the phenomenon at the hatchery release points as a good friend used to religiously fish at Benicia on the release dates. Considering the abundance of stripers in the bay/delta and their proclivity for eating salmonids, it seems that there could be a significant impact. Further, in other systems out migrating salmon do not just blow through the estuary zone, but utilize it as a nursery for some amount of time. Is there any evidence of this in the Sac or even historical evidence that it used to occur. Stealhead certainly do this in coastal streams also. This would certainly increase the toll taken by stripers.


It has been noted before on this bulletin board and others that back in the 50's/60's when stripers were at their peak of abundance in the bay/delta, salmon, including winter-run, were also getting along quite nicely.

As has been observed with other species, when native populations are abundant, minor challenges like those posed by introduced species do not weigh heavily on that abundance. However, when you lump in a bunch of other impacts (water diversions, warmer water, poor ocean conditions, more fishermen, etc etc), the balance can tip from the combined pressures of these impacts, and the native species can decline significantly, even crash totally if a minimum effective population size is not maintained.

Covelo
12-03-2007, 08:51 AM
Since we are discussing survival of out migrating salmon, here is something I found that states the survival for out migrating late fall run juvenile salmon to the ocean was measured at 2% for the Sac in 2007. That is dismal especially when compared to the survival measured on the Columbia River with all its dams, which was 56% made it to the ocean.

http://www.buchal.com/salmon/news/news_docs/NMFSmemo.pdf

OceanSunfish
12-03-2007, 01:16 PM
Since we are discussing survival of out migrating salmon, here is something I found that states the survival for out migrating late fall run juvenile salmon to the ocean was measured at 2% for the Sac in 2007. That is dismal especially when compared to the survival measured on the Columbia River with all its dams, which was 56% made it to the ocean.

http://www.buchal.com/salmon/news/news_docs/NMFSmemo.pdf

Interesting.

I listened to a Bob Simms show recently and he had a gentlman who has been intimately involved with the salmon for DFG somewhere over 20 years, perhaps closer to 30 years. Nevertheless, he has some history.

This person made as statement that I found very alarming and that was the DFG had no reliable indicator as to just how many salmon smolt make it past the GG Bridge. Please note, that an indicator can be anything from commmerical catch to creel census at the docks to whatever. After I paused to think, I guess it shouldn't be alarming. It's a tough task.

I don't know what "accoustically tagged" means, but perhaps this does allow biologist to tag a enormous amount of hatchery smolt and follow them downriver and out the GG?

Darian
12-03-2007, 02:35 PM
Hmmmm,..... Just thinking out loud here.... I just can't feature why the info required for study of out-migration/survival rates is not available.... Information about the indicators mentioned would appear to be in place and available to DFG. Every captain keeps a catch log and commercial catches are subject to inspection/assessment of fees by DFG enforcement staff who capture/report their findings. So, it would seem that the indicators or measures are already in place. 8) 8)

Assuming the info is available, lack of same might indicate that 1) DFG enforcement staff are not performing their assigned duties (....for whatever reason) or 2) biology staff are not aware of the existence of the information already available. :? :?

I'm not willing to say that enforcement staff are not doing their jobs. Altho, that's a possibility due to the lack of adequate numbers of wardens. That leaves the possibility that the information is available but not utilized for whatever reason (....might not be a valid or representative sample :?: :?: ). So, the info has been captured and is available but may not have been reported or be in DFG's possession....

Anybody with some ideas on this :?: :?: :?:

Blueracer
12-05-2007, 07:34 PM
Somone please tell me why they're draining the dang island!!!!!?!?!??!

Blueracer
12-05-2007, 07:36 PM
"Health and safety reasons" What???????????????????

Darian
12-05-2007, 10:31 PM
Blueracer,.... If you accept what was written in the article in the SacBee on 3/21, the island was being drained to enable the sale of the property to recover the purchase price of same. Prospect Island has regular soil as it's base; not peat. That makes it prime property for development. 8) 8)

After the original levee break, the flooded island was, apparently, identified by Congress (Federal) for creation of a preserve. According to the Bee, BuRec was directed to purchase the island in anticipation of meeting that need. However, Congress then didn't fund the acquisition leaving Burec with a very large expenditure and no way to recover it's money other than to sell the island. There was some unknown involvement of CalFed, as well.

IMHO, their (BuRec) mistake was in carrying out the action without offering the island to a non-profit like the Nature conservancy, first. Of course, that action probably would've taken much longer to accomplish.

There's a lot more to it but I'm leaving out a bunch of details from the article in the interest of brevity. 8) 8) 8)

steeliejim
12-10-2007, 07:14 AM
I find stunning the ignorance (Definiition: "a will neglect or refusal to gain knowledge..." displayed by Tristan in several of his statements, so I started with a bit of of "shock and awe" with my above statement.

First, the assertion that the efforts both in fish rescue and anger over what happened as misplaced, emotional, and only a tiny event in the array of issues facing the Delta. While Prospect is only one piece in the complicated Delta puzzle, what happened is a simple to understand example of the larger disaster looming ahead if all who love the Delta and love to fish do not wake up.

It's hard to get anglers to pay attention to anything but trying to catch fish. And, the slow death of the Delta is being done "by a thousand cuts," that are hard to see. Every step taken by agencies leading to the decision to abandon the objective of restoring Prospect Island to its natural state is representative of the actions, or inactions, related to overall Delta issues--water diversions, plumbing and habitat.

By putting the magnifying glass on Prospect, you can, if you care to look (and Tristan does not--pity), all the ills of the Delta represented in the dying fish. And, dead fish that can be seen get far more attention, and, perhaps action beyond the fish rescue, than the untold thousands of fish being killed by the State and Federal pumps.

Another ignorant assertion by Tristan--that environmental groups are ineffective. Just a couple of local examples to prove him wrong. Environmental Defense in a lawsuit on behalf of Save the American River Association, stopped the East Bay Municipal Utility District from diverting massive amounts of water from the American River at Nimbus Dam through the Folsom South Canal. And the Natural Resources Defense Council represented SARA in permanently stopping the construction of the Folsom South Canal. And, of course, there's little SARA itself, which in spite of naysayers like Tristan went ahead and fought the water goliaths--the Bureau of Reclamation and Environmental Defense--and won.

I have many more specific examples of the effectiveness of the environmental orgs in fighting for water and habitat for fish (BTW, the Nature Conservancy is great at buying land, but it is NOT an advocacy group, and fish NEED water!!), but in deference to Bill's ADD, I'll not list them now.

Another common theme on this thread has been that since the primary game fish being rescued is striped bass, Prospect isn't relevant to steelhead and salmon. Wrong again.

The following states the purpose for purchasing Prospect Island:

“…provide rearing habitat for endangered winter-run chinook salmon and other anadromous fish, spawning and rearing habitat for Delta smelt and proposed Sacramento splittail, habitat for federally listed waterfowl and shorebirds on the Pacific Flyway and to provide high quality riparian, shaded riverine aquatic, wetland mudflat, emergent marsh, upland and shallow water habitat for a wide variety of aquatic, avian, and terrestrial species.”--from Project Summary, Prospect Island Restoration, June 24, 2000, Coastal America, a partnership among federal, state and local governments and private alliances created by the first President Bush in 1991.

Note the reference to salmon and steelhead. Just because there were few adult salmon and steelhead found (but not zero), has no relevance to the importance of Prospect and other Delta wetlands to the rearing of young salmonids.

And, as has been pointed out, but obviously needs to be pounded on over and over, in the 60's before massive diversions built up at the south end of the Delta, there were many more salmon and steelhead--and striped bass--than now. The decline of both striped bass and salmonids in the Sacramento drainage correlates perfectly with the buildup in pumping.

So, Tristan, I invite you to lead, follow, or get out of the way. Because, there does need to be lawsuits filed regarding the apparent breaking of several laws, letters and phone calls to our congress people (Doris Matsui and Dan Lungren, I believe, are the two that have the most direct interest in this issue), asking for the following: Congressional oversight of the decision making process that led to the abandonment of the Prospect Island restoration project, a stop to the divesture of the island, AND reflooding the island.

Jim

Mrs.Finsallaround
12-10-2007, 09:18 AM
Very nicely stated Jim! 8)

And, for those following this, rumor has it that there will be another rescue planned on prospect island later this month, so STAY TUNED! :D

steeliejim
12-10-2007, 10:01 AM
Thanks,

People who won't lift a finger to try to accomplish some good, but only sit on the side lines mouthing off about what you are trying to do is useless, really p--- me off. You never know if you will win, esp. against long odds. But, you will surely lose if you don't even try. And, I am convinced that, like the Klamath fish kill, some good could come out of what happened at Prospect--if we don't buy into the negativism.

BTW, another bit of disinformation that needs to be corrected. PCFFA, a coalition of commercial fishermen, led by Zeke Grader, has been one of the strongest allies with angling and enviro groups in the fight for healthy rivers and the Delta.

I spoke with Bob McNaris yesterday and he said that he meets with the Bureau of Rec tomorrow to hopefully get another go-ahead.

There are still thousands of fish stranded and alive, and according to Bob, they actually are doing better now with a rise of six inches of water from last week's storms. That's the good news. The bit of bad news, he said, is that they are a lot friskier and will be harder to catch.

Jim

Darian
12-10-2007, 10:05 AM
Hmmmm,.... I can't agree that Steeliejims post was "....nicely said" as it amounts to a personal attack that tended to discredit the information in the balance of his post. :( :( The attack was obviously the result of a lot of emotion/passion on the part of the author but that doesn't justify the statements made about another board member with which he doesn't agree. :? :? IMHO, as is the same with all of our posts, there's some good info and a bunch of editorializing included. I find that I can agree with some of the points raised and strongly disagree with others. 8) 8) Let's leave out the ego and get back to some real discussion.... 8) 8)

steeliejim
12-10-2007, 11:18 AM
When someone expresses opinion as fact and belittles the efforts of others who are trying to make a difference without knowing, or even being interested in the facts, that's what's personal--and ignorant.

He was being personal--and ignorant--in his blanket indictment of the good that the folks who are making the fish rescue, and environmental groups, are doing.

Hence, I exposed his ignorance with facts.

Sometimes the truth hurts. If he doesn't want to help, then he should just get out of the way, go fishing, stop sniping from the sidelines, and leave the job of trying to make a difference to others.

Bob Laskodi
12-10-2007, 11:28 AM
ERRRRRMMM :roll:
Tristan has a fisheries biology degree from UC Davis and works for the CA State Govt in some capacity relating to water resources (not sure exactly what he does as he just started this job). I wouldn't exactly call him ignorant. His statements in his posts were his personal opinion, of which many of you disagree, and that's fine. But personal attacks are another matter and I do not think they are called for.

steeliejim
12-10-2007, 12:01 PM
No, Tristan stated that what the fish rescue volunteers was doing was useless, and so were the efforts of environmental groups. That may be his opinion but his opinion is based on ignorance.

Here's the full definition: "(n.) A willful neglect or refusal to acquire knowledge which one may acquire and it is his duty to have." (emphasis mine)

Ignorance. It's not being stupid. That, a person cannot help. That would be wrong and personal. That Tristan has a degree in biology makes his statements denigrating environmental groups at the forefront in the water wars, and fish rescue efforts all the worse, wrong, and ignorant. With his background, he should know better, or at least want to know better.

Nip Hadlock
12-10-2007, 12:04 PM
Can't wait for the next tribal council! :lol:

aaron
12-10-2007, 12:54 PM
Well if we can't be objective and polite time to lock this thread down.