Department of Water Resources
A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment
June 27, 2007
3. Watersheds
BUTTE CREEK SALMON:
About 200 spring-run salmon may die before they spawn -
How much environmental damage? Experts say Angora fire will hurt lake clarity; extent of impact remains to be seen - Tahoe Daily Tribune
DELTA ISSUES:
Editorial: Act to protect Delta, state water supplies - Contra Costa Times
BUTTE CREEK SALMON:
About 200 spring-run salmon may die before they spawn
By Larry Mitchell, staff writer
About 200 spring-run salmon, swimming in Butte Creek just south of
Action to try to save the big fish has been suggested.
However, Tracy McReynolds, a fisheries biologist with the state Department of Fish and Game, said her agency has decided it's best to leave the salmon alone.
The salmon in lower Butte Creek are certainly stressed, and they may be diseased, she said. If that's the case, encouraging them to join the rest of the run farther upstream, may infect healthy fish.
It seems best to let nature take its course, she said. Butte Creek's spring-run salmon are a treasured resource. They're designated a threatened species, for one thing. But also, Butte Creek is one of the few places in the
The salmon live for three years. They hatch in the late fall or winter in the upper parts of Butte Creek. In the spring, the baby fish migrate downstream to the Sacramento River and then on to the
By this time of year, the salmon that returned should be in deep, cold pools in far up the canyon. Right now, in fact, thousands of them can be found there. They'll wait out the hot summer and in the fall, spawn and die.
This year, for whatever reason, some of the salmon haven't gone into the canyon. They're swimming around in the creek south of Highway 99.
If they don't move up into the canyon, where there's colder water, they will die before they can spawn in the fall, McReynolds said. High water temperatures will kill them.
Allen Harthorn, executive director of Friends of Butte Creek, said he'd like to see something done to save the salmon in the lower part of the creek.
PG&E and a couple of farms could reduce their diversions temporarily, he said. That would cause more water to rush down the creek and might convince the reluctant salmon to go on upstream.
Harthorn and McReynolds both said the salmon might move upstream on their own, given some more time.
But McReynolds said the fish are already stressed from being in water that's too warm, and they may have become diseased. It could be a mistake to encourage them to join the rest of the run, she said.
Harthorn said there's no evidence the fish are diseased.
McReynolds said her agency's decision not to try to get the remaining salmon to go farther upstream is based on a couple of things.
One is the health issue. The other is it appears there are plenty of spring-run salmon in the upper part of the creek already this year.
Harthorn, whose organization seeks greater environmental protection for the Butte Creek watershed, said he questions the notion that there are "enough" spring-run salmon in the upper part of the creek.
"How can it be that there's too many fish, yet we can't fish for them?" he said.
The spring run of salmon on Butte Creek used to be huge. But by the 1970s, it had dwindled to just a few fish in some years.
That was apparently because of low flows, dams that blocked the fishes' way, unscreened diversion ditches, development and other human activities. Then efforts were begun to restore the run. Dams were removed. Diversions were screened. Harthorn, who lives in
In the 1970s, PG&E had to release 10 cubic feet per second of water into the creek above the Centerville Powerhouse. In the 1980s, that was doubled, to 20 cfs. The big change, according to Harthorn came in 1992, when the federal government ordered the power company to release 40 cfs to help the fish.
"Since that flow was increased, we've seen remarkable returns," Harthorn said. Removing dams and fixing fish ladders, which occurred later, helped, too.
In 1992, the total number of fish that spawned in the creek was 750, he said. Three years later, 7,500 fish spawned.
The size of this year's run won't be estimated until after the fish spawn in the fall, but Harthorn said there may be 15,000 salmon in upper Butte Creek right now, waiting for the time to spawn.
If people swimming, boating or tubing in the creek encounter salmon in the summer, the best thing they can do is leave the fish alone, he said. The salmon are resting after their long trip home and saving their energy for spawning. It's bad for their health if they get scared and have to swim hard.
Limited fishing for spring-run salmon used to be allowed on Butte Creek, but it was discontinued in 1994. Harthorn, who is an angler, looks forward to the day it will be allowed again. He said better research needs to be done on Butte Creek's spring-run salmon. More information should lead to better management of the creek to benefit the fish.
There are unanswered questions, he said. For example, while Fish and Game insists that the spring-run fish can't survive in warmer water, he's heard anecdotal evidence to the contrary.
Although McReynolds denies it, he said he believes it's possible that some of the 200 fish downstream from Highway 99 might survive the summer and spawn in the fall. #
http://www.chicoer.com/newshome/ci_6239091
How much environmental damage? Experts say
Tahoe Daily Tribune – 6/27/07
By Tanya Canino, staff writer
As the Angora fire's sooty ashes drop into
"We can expect this to have a negative impact on the clarity of the lake, the extent of which depends on a number of factors," said Charles Goldman, director of the UC Davis Tahoe Environmental Research Group.
Scientists are sure the fire's devastation will cause environmental damage to the lake and the
"There will be a clear short-term impact and perhaps a long-term impact, but we don't know the extent of that yet," said John Reuter of TERC.
The immediate effects of the fire stem from the ash, soot and other pollutants falling into the lake. Because it comes from vegetation, the ash is full of nitrogen and phosphorus that stimulate algae just like fertilizer. The ash will send algae into a growth spurt in just 24 hours, Reuter said. UC Davis researchers will be monitoring the algae growth, but they expect to see it peak in the next one to two weeks before dropping off.
"There is going to be a very significant impact to water clarity and algael growth on the
The additional nitrogen and phosphorus from the ash will also stay in the lake, recycling through its depths for five to 20 years, spurring algae growth for years to come. Additionally, any dust, debris or particles from the fire impact clarity.
"Fire sediments settle so slowly they will impact transparency for a longer period of time," Goldman said.
Ash falling from the sky is not the scientists' biggest worry, however. It is the potential runoff into
"The area burned is 5 percent to 10 percent of the watershed of the
If Angora Creek is filled with sediment from fall and spring rains, that will drain into the
"We don't know how many years it will take for that watershed to stablize," Goldman said.
U.S. Forest Service fuels officer Dave Marlow said the Burned Area Emergency Recovery (BAER) team is already in place to assess a plan for emergency watershed restoration treatments. However, it takes years to heal a forest, he cautioned, just as it takes decades to grow a tree. Impacts on wildlife are yet to be assessed by the BAER team, but Tahoe Regional Planning Agency spokesman Jeff Cowen said there are little hopes for the two goshawk nests and the spotted owl nest in the burn area.
Cowen said the TRPA had invested $7 million worth of Environmental Improvement Program projects in the area, one of which was a stream and fisheries restoration of Angora Creek.
For TRPA Executive Director John Singlaub, the mental picture keeps coming back to him of the charcoal he saw washed up on shore at
"This is really bad news," Singlaub said. #
http://www.tahoedailytribune.com/article/20070627/NEWS/106270067
DELTA ISSUES:
Editorial: Act to protect Delta, state water supplies
Contra Costa Times – 6/25/07
HOW CAN THE DELTA'S environment be preserved while meeting the water needs of 25 million Californians? That is a question that has been looming for years as the ecology of the state's largest estuary has deteriorated and demands for fresh water from the Central Valley and
It is no longer a problem that can be ignored or somehow finessed. A sharp decline in the Delta smelt population, an indicator of the environmental health of the estuary, forced the state to shut its massive water pumps for 10 days.
The federal government also turned down the volume on its pumps to help protect the smelt.
For years, state water officials have been violating the California Endangered Species Act by not having permits to kill fish while pumping water south.
In April, Alameda County Superior Court Judge Frank Roesch ordered state water officials to comply with the act or shut down.
He was serious, and the pumps were closed from May 31 to June 9. The pumps are running again, but not yet at full capacity.
Clearly, the huge state and federal water pumps cannot be shut down or sharply slowed for any length of time without jeopardizing
Rep. George Miller, D-Martinez, was on target in saying, "We have an emergency on our hands," and that "federal agencies are lurching from crisis to crisis without a sustainable plan that can protect our Delta environment and manage our water supplies."
He and Rep. Ellen Tauscher, D-Alamo, are among six Bay Area lawmakers calling for a hearing by the water and power subcommittee of the House Natural Resources Committee. It will be held at 9 a.m. July 2 at
Leading state and federal water managers and regulators will be invited to discuss the health of the Bay-Delta estuary and what state and federal water and wildlife agencies are doing to help restore the Delta environment.
For years, the so-called Cal-Fed coalition of state and federal water interests cooperated on a plan to improve the Delta ecology.
Billions of dollars were spent, but the environment is worse now than before, with the collapse of several fish species, including the Delta smelt.
Just what is causing the decline in fish populations remains unclear. It could be from higher salinity, an invasion of Asian clams, agricultural runoff or even toxic metals from decaying ships in
It is long past time for water officials to get a grip on exactly what is harming the Delta fish and what it means for the future health of the estuary.
Even more important is the question of how the Delta can be safeguarded while sufficient fresh water supplies are pumped south to the Central Valley and to
If pumping needs to be curtailed or even shut off at certain times of the year to protect fish and other wildlife, there will be an even greater need for more water storage capacity above and below ground.
Even if the Delta faced no ecological threat, more water will have to be stored to ensure adequate supplies during droughts. With just one dry year, Bay Area water officials are calling for greater conservation. A drought like that in the late 1970s could be a disaster.
We hope that the congressional hearing on the Delta in
Nothing should be left off the table, including building more dams or constructing a fresh water aqueduct around the Delta. Both the future of the Bay-Delta environment and the economy of
http://www.contracostatimes.com/opinion/ci_6225278?nclick_check=1
####
No comments:
Post a Comment