American river salmon restoration

[Mark Kranhold]

I can’t believe they are doing another restoration project on the American, especially at that section of the river. This area has so much great active natural spawning grounds for Salmon and Steelhead. These project have ruined the river in numerous ways throughout the river, you can’t duplicate what Mother Nature has made! It will all get washed out the first big flood and infill the holes below. Haven’t they learned anything yet? This river will all be shallow in no time. I know if they don’t spend their allowance they’ll lose it the following year, use it on something else! Put some structure in this river if you need to use it. Place some VW size rocks throughout the river for some holding water and current breaks. This is getting freakin ridiculous, they’ve failed to many times!:mad:

https://www.waterforum.org/ah/?fbclid=IwAR2lzk91bwMceRsx8CqWPgPR57RQpAvO_gK04MJW 1ZNbkEzVEfqDCRv8WWQ

[Bill Kiene semi-retired]

I can’t believe they are doing another restoration project on the American, especially at that section of the river. This area has so much great active natural spawning grounds for Salmon and Steelhead. These project have ruined the river in numerous ways throughout the river, you can’t duplicate what Mother Nature has made! It will all get washed out the first big flood and infill the holes below. Haven’t they learned anything yet? This river will all be shallow in no time. I know if they don’t spend their allowance they’ll lose it the following year, use it on something else! Put some structure in this river if you need to use it. Place some VW size rocks throughout the river for some holding water and current breaks. This is getting freakin ridiculous, they’ve failed to many times!:mad:

https://www.waterforum.org/ah/?fbclid=IwAR2lzk91bwMceRsx8CqWPgPR57RQpAvO_gK04MJW 1ZNbkEzVEfqDCRv8WWQ

I love the idea of large rocks......like the Dean river in BC.

[Mr T]

It’s been s$&@ show since the dam was built. No reason to expect a change now.

[PV_Premier]

Did you attend the open houses and voice your opposition?

[Mark Kranhold]

Unfortunately no, I wasn’t aware of this until recently.

[Mark Kranhold]

I love the idea of large rocks......like the Dean river in BC.

Wouldn’t that be nice Bill! That river is magical, love to get back there again before I die.

[PV_Premier]

Unfortunately no, I wasn’t aware of this until recently.

Me either. With the city and county it’s always finding out at the last minute, or more frequently, too late at all

[Fishtopher]

I can’t believe they are doing another restoration project on the American, especially at that section of the river.
These projects are part of mitigation that Reclamation must provide. They must dedicate a certain amount of funding towards restoration as part of the agreement with building Natomas and Folsom dams.


This area has so much great active natural spawning grounds for Salmon and Steelhead.
No it doesn't, the main spawning area is downstream of the powerlines within the side channels. This site is more than a mile upstream from that. This section is largely featureless.


These project have ruined the river in numerous ways throughout the river, you can’t duplicate what Mother Nature has made!
Exactly, gravel doesn't travel through the dams so needs to be added to make up for it. Mother nature has not 'made' the current American River, Reclamation has.


It will all get washed out the first big flood and infill the holes below.
That's exactly what is supposed to happen in big floods. Gravel mobilization is super important for spawning fish as it provides fresh substrate. Gravel that is infiltrated with fines will become concrete-like. Gravel mobilization is also important for creating floodplains which is critical for juvenile salmonids. Gravel mobilization is important to prevent encroachment of vegetation that would otherwise entrench the river. Entrenchment disconnects floodplains from the river which is really bad for juvenile salmonids.


Haven’t they learned anything yet? This river will all be shallow in no time.
Gravel augmentation is probably the most accepted science when it comes to restoration. The American is supposed to be a highly alluvial river with alternating bars which don't generally lend themselves to being very deep.


I know if they don’t spend their allowance they’ll lose it the following year, use it on something else!
They will lose it but these projects are planned years in advance so water year generally has no influence when it is constructed.


Put some structure in this river if you need to use it.
They are. From the fact sheet: "Project teams will add large woody material and plant riparian trees and bushes in the alcove, creating places for young fish to hide from predators and for insects and vegetation to grow for feeding."


Place some VW size rocks throughout the river for some holding water and current breaks.
Project isn't designed for holding water. Adult holding habitat is not limiting on the American, juvenile rearing is. In past projects they have added boulders on the spawning riffles.



This is getting freakin ridiculous, they’ve failed to many times!:mad:
I'd like to know what has 'failed' about these projects. I hear this a lot and still can't get a reason why these projects are failures. These projects are not the reason why salmon populations are what they are. I'd blame the unnatural temperature and flow regime, loss of floodplain habitat in the Delta, and ocean conditions long before I'd attribute it to these projects.

[Bill Kiene semi-retired]

Old timers I knew well from the greatest Generation who fish the American river before the dams said the Fall King salmon use to spawn

where Lake Natomas is now.

Also I thought King salmon like larger rocks to spawn in?

[Darian]

Seems like there's an opportunity to prove these projects are having the desired affect this year. From the report in the link provided by Mark, "The project produced a record number of salmon redds—underwater depressions or “nests” created by female salmon to lay their eggs. In 2018, there were zero redds counted in the area. By fall 2019, the area was teaming with redds—more than 1,000."

Since Salmon generally return 3 years after spawning and there was a good spawn (as indicated in the above statement), there should be a good return this year (assuming ocean conditions are supportive).

Have to admit, I haven't followed Salmon/Steelhead spawning or returns in the American for many years but find these projects interesting.

[mogaru]

We all feel it....the American river gets better every year and I'm sure Bill can confirm it. If it wasn't for projects like these there would no fish in the river.........................

[Fishtopher]

Old timers I knew well from the greatest Generation who fish the American river before the dams said the Fall King salmon use to spawn

where Lake Natomas is now.

Also I thought King salmon like larger rocks to spawn in?
The fall run would have historically spawned where Natomas and Folsom Lakes are now. The more abundant spring-run (at the time) would have spawned in the forks of the American up to elevations between 4000-5000 ft.

Chinook generally make redds in fist-sized and smaller gravel.

Seems like there's an opportunity to prove these projects are having the desired affect this year. From the report in the link provided by Mark, "The project produced a record number of salmon redds—underwater depressions or “nests” created by female salmon to lay their eggs. In 2018, there were zero redds counted in the area. By fall 2019, the area was teaming with redds—more than 1,000."

Since Salmon generally return 3 years after spawning and there was a good spawn (as indicated in the above statement), there should be a good return this year (assuming ocean conditions are supportive).

One adult return metric I've used in the past is the proportion of redds over time in the footprints of these projects. You should have pre- and post-construction data so seeing an increase of the proportion of redds could signify the benefits of a project. However, adult metrics are not ideal because salmonid life history is so complex and much of it is dependent on things we can't control (ocean conditions, Delta conditions, etc.). You could create ideal conditions in the river for juveniles and then they immediately die in the Delta or ocean. Standardizing juvenile outmigrants to some form of adult escapement is probably the best metric to use. Juvenile outmigration is really the only thing we have influence over to judge the efficacy of restoration.

[hwchubb]

Does anyone know where, specifically, the project is being done? I’m assuming it’s the riffle straight south of Effie Yeaw?

I’ll reserve judgement on it. I don’t think every project has been wrongheaded - had they added some protections for the work done at Sailor Bar, for example, I think it could have been beneficial to steelhead. Unfortunately, the spawning channel and main river are open throughout the spawning season, so ultimately it simply made fishing the redds easier for those who participate in such activities.

A number of the others seem to have been a waste of time and money. And mogaru, I’m not sure which American you’re referring to, but the one here in Sacramento has plummeted over the last 20 years, especially the winter run. The whole west coast has, but to my eyes the American has fared far worse than the average.

If anyone has more specific details than what was in the link, I’d like to see what they are.

[Darian]

Fishtopher,.... Just to clarify my understanding, please define the term adult escapement.

With respect, if I understand what you've said about determining the efficacy of these type projects correctly, project managers don't consider the end result (return) in measuring the success of the project but isn't the increase in spawning redds in a project area an indicator of increased returns?? Hmmm,.... Maybe I answered my own question. Apparently, returns are counted as spawning redds. :cool:

[Fishtopher]

Does anyone know where, specifically, the project is being done? I’m assuming it’s the riffle straight south of Effie Yeaw?
There is a map on the project fact sheet in the original link. Project is directly across from the nature center.


Fishtopher,.... Just to clarify my understanding, please define the term adult escapement.

I use adult escapement to refer to any metric that use fish that have escaped the fishery whether it be in the river or in the ocean (i.e. had the opportunity to spawn). A bunch of different metrics can be used to determine escapement: weir counts, carcass counts, redd counts, etc. All are estimates of true population size.


With respect, if I understand what you've said about determining the efficacy of these type projects correctly, project managers don't consider the end result (return) in measuring the success of the project but isn't the increase in spawning redds in a project area an indicator of increased returns?? Hmmm,.... Maybe I answered my own question. Apparently, returns are counted as spawning redds. :cool:
Spawning redds can definitely be an indicator of project success if that was the goal of the project. In this project, it does look like they are trying to increase spawning area via gravel augmentation. Increasing the number of redds in in area is definitely good, but the number of redds is generally highly variable from year to year (probably need a minimum of 3 brood cycles to evaluate). It also does you no good if you created all this new spawning habitat at the expense of another area.

The bottom line is that you can add all the spawning habitat you'd like in rivers like the American but it likely won't lead to higher returns since juvenile rearing is generally the limiting factor in most regulated rivers. For example, increasing adult escapement by 1% based on the goal of 160k (CVPIA goal) only results in 1600 extra fish, whereas increasing juvenile outmigrant survival by 1% of 2 million (this number is definitely higher if you include hatchery smolts) yields 20,000 extra fish. You get way more bang for your buck by improving juvenile rearing habitat.

[Darian]

Thanks for the info. Now I have to chew on it....

[Mark Kranhold]

Fishtopher, thanks for all your info! I am no scientist but what I’ve observed after these projects is not good. I have had many conversations with guides and local fishermen that were born on this river about these restoration projects and we are all on the same page, it’s doing more damage than good. Ok the gravel is supposed to wash down river for spawning grounds, well what we’ve all noticed it’s filling in holes and has also created frog water, two places where salmon /steelhead don’t spawn. It has ruined many runs, and yes more frog water. The river gets shallower every time one these projects happen, not do to CFS but rather to infill. I have many heavy equipment operator friends that have worked on these and for how much money that gets spent on these projects, many of them have been a flop. It also seems like these open houses fly under the radar so people can’t give their thoughts and concerns. Like I said, I’m just giving my opinion on what I’ve seen go on for many moons. Scientific research and studies can always be manipulated in government entities, it all comes down to money as history shows.

[Smitty Fish]

Greetings, Yes I agree with Mark. These restoration projects are just making the river shallow and filling in the runs. Use to be you could go down to the river and see Salmon in late August-November in the river . The last time I saw a good return was when they closed fishing for Salmon for 3-5 years I think it was. That was over 10 years ago. Since then IÂ’ve noticed a rapid decline.

These droughts are not helping either. And the big fish kill they had at the hatchery sure didnÂ’t help. IÂ’m no fish biologist or scientist. But it doesnÂ’t take one to notice the decline of Salmon or Steelhead. IÂ’m just a fishermen.

Fishtopher, thank you for the information. Fish on!

[Fishtopher]

I am no scientist but what I’ve observed after these projects is not good. I have had many conversations with guides and local fishermen that were born on this river about these restoration projects and we are all on the same page, it’s doing more damage than good.
I keep on hearing the words 'damage' and 'failure' from guides and fishermen who 'know the river' yet they don't identify how these projects are doing this. Rivers are supposed to be dynamic, some holes change and fill in, new ones are created. We've stopped this process on most of our rivers with the advent of dams. Take a look at the changes that happen annually on Eel, Mad, or the Smith. These changes used to happen on the valley rivers too.


Ok the gravel is supposed to wash down river for spawning grounds, well what we’ve all noticed it’s filling in holes and has also created frog water, two places where salmon /steelhead don’t spawn. It has ruined many runs, and yes more frog water. The river gets shallower every time one these projects happen, not do to CFS but rather to infill.
I know I've said this before but I'll say it again. We are not spawning habitat limited on the American. Salmonids have plenty of spaces to spawn, the American River alone could probably support in excess of 100k spawning salmon (this doesn't mean that it can support the number of juveniles produced though). Filling in holes and creating frog water (which is a stretch) is not a barrier to the recovery of salmonids and plays no role in the number of returning fish.

A wide, shallow river that is highly alluvial with multiple channels is exactly what the goal of these projects are. Floodplains are absolutely critical to juvenile salmonids. The Yolo Bypass floodplain study, which has been highly touted on this forum, is a perfect example of this. Floodplains are one of the most productive ecosystems on earth. Loss of floodplain habitat is one of the most important factors in the decline of salmonids in the Central Valley.

I agree that sometimes these changes are not conducive to fishing. My opinion is that guides and fishermen have their 'spots' and refuse to adapt to changing conditions. The fish are still there, just maybe not in the same spots they were previously. One of my favorite steelhead streams in Alaska is unrecognizable from year to year due to annual snowmelt, yet I still do not have any trouble catching fish out of there. Half of the fun is finding the good spots every year.


Scientific research and studies can always be manipulated in government entities, it all comes down to money as history shows.
Rather than spreading conspiracy theories about the manipulation of science in stream restoration, why don't you reach out to the scientists and entities responsible for these projects? You'll find most of them care deeply about fish and many are passionate about the rivers they work on. These projects take up a miniscule amount of funding for DWR and Reclamation. No one is getting rich doing stream restoration or working in fisheries for that matter.

[mogaru]

Does anyone know where, specifically, the project is being done? I’m assuming it’s the riffle straight south of Effie Yeaw?

I’ll reserve judgement on it. I don’t think every project has been wrongheaded - had they added some protections for the work done at Sailor Bar, for example, I think it could have been beneficial to steelhead. Unfortunately, the spawning channel and main river are open throughout the spawning season, so ultimately it simply made fishing the redds easier for those who participate in such activities.

A number of the others seem to have been a waste of time and money. And mogaru, I’m not sure which American you’re referring to, but the one here in Sacramento has plummeted over the last 20 years, especially the winter run. The whole west coast has, but to my eyes the American has fared far worse than the average.

If anyone has more specific details than what was in the link, I’d like to see what they are.

I was just being sarcastic. I remember fishing in the early 90's and salmon were plentiful. There were so many you could smell the dead ones from the parking lot. Sad state of affairs compared with what we have right now.

[Rossflyguy]

I was just being sarcastic. I remember fishing in the early 90's and salmon were plentiful. There were so many you could smell the dead ones from the parking lot. Sad state of affairs compared with what we have right now.

The salmon drop off coincides with the reduction of hatchery salmon. I remember the dead salmon smell on the feather river. Whens the last time that happened? Look up some of the clean water bills that were passed. Some of it included the dead salmon smell. The rich people who lived along the rivers didn't like it. Money can make things happen.

[Rossflyguy]

Honestly no one should be complaining about trying to help the salmon. Salmon and steelhead do spawn on the American. Any help they can get is greatly appreciated by me.