[1] Oregon Will Grant NMFS Spill Waiver :: The Oregon State Department of Environmental Quality has granted a waiver to the National Marine Fisheries Service that gives the go ahead for hydro operators to spill water at Columbia basin dams to help juvenile salmon around powerhouses and avoid turbines. But the strategy is not without risks.
By absorbing nitrogen gas entrained in the water column by the plunging water of high spills, both the juvenile and adult fish can pick up the gas in the form of microscopic bubbles that may constrict their vascular systems, leading to reduced swimming ability which makes them easier prey, or it can kill them outright by plugging their gills with bubbles. At present, the effects of nitrogen bubbles on fish are still being studied to determine if some level of spill can help migrating salmon, but researchers are having a difficult time coming up with answers because of the myriad variables of the river environment.
Oregon DEQ commissioner Henry Lorenzen called the waiver an "academic exercise" since the hydro system will be spilling lots of extra water this spring anyway. According to the Army Corps of Engineers proposed planto manage for gas problems in 1997 the system will be dealing with uncontrolled spill for up to a month in the Snake and for two months in the lower Columbia. Voluntary spill will probably not start until early May or June at Lower Granite Dam on the Snake and early June or July at McNary Dam on the Columbia River.
The waiver is required before the legal gas supersaturation limit of 110 percent is exceeded. The NMFS request asked for spill up to 115 percent in dam forebays and 120 percent in tailraces (for the 12 highest hours each day) to occur from April 10 to June 20 on the Snake and from April 20 through June 30 on the Columbia. In addition, they asked for spill at one lower Snake dam from June 21 through Aug. 31 and at three Columbia River dams from July 1 through Aug. 31.
The Oregon department OK'd a 10-day spill to aid a 7-million-smolt release from Spring Creek hatchery about 20 miles upstream from Bonneville Dam. The spill at Bonneville is scheduled to start March 13 and begin at other dams April 10. So far, the Oregon water agency has granted the basin-wide spill waiver to last until April 18, when the DEQ meets again.
Lorenzen, the only one of four commissioners to vote against the Spring Creek spill, said a waiver for the rest of the migration season will be granted at the next DEQ hearing on April 18. In the meantime, DEQ staff will have time to work out terms of the new waiver to help the agency gain more information about the effects of spill on salmon mortality.
Spring Creek Spill-Fix or Fiasco?
Lorenzen said NMFS policy analyst Donna Darm told him the 10-day Bonneville spill is to mitigate for dam construction. However the agency seems to be of two minds on the effectiveness of the strategy, reflecting comments in the Federal Register from April 22 1992. "One commenter stated that large numbers of chinook salmon released from lower Columbia River hatcheries compete with Snake River fall chinook salmon for food and habitat in the Columbia River estuary, and that this practice is a factor in the species' decline. NMFS concurs that competition for limited food and habitat may result from large numbers of fall chinook salmon released from hatcheries annually, and, therefore, contribute further to the decline of wild Snake River fall chinook salmon."
The Spring Creek spill is expected to cost BPA a few hundred thousand dollars this year in ungenerated power, rather than the $2 million that the power agency has figured it has cost in some low water years.
NMFS has figured the strategy will increase smolt survival by 0.3 percent, allowing 22,000 more juveniles to make it to the estuary, and result in the return of 237 more adults, which the agency says adds adults to the mixed-stock ocean fishery, thereby reducing effort on endangered Snake River fall chinook.
The agency's logic may be somewhat convoluted, but one thing is definite-- the estuary in March is not a time for high smolt survival, and Gary Fredricks of NMFS' hydro program said they have been trying to get hatchery managers to release fish later. He said the problem is that hatcheries like the US Fish and Wildlife facility at Spring Creek raise too many fish to cushion for the possible effects of a disease outbreak. He said the 7-million smolt release is "pre-production thinning," and survival is not expected as be as high as fish that are released later.
Spring Creek's assistant hatchery manager Jim Bayman said they will be releasing nearly 4 million more smolts on April 17 and another 3.4 million on May 15. Bayman said he was puzzled by the duration of the 10-day March spill at Bonneville since most the smolts made the 20-mile trip in "eighteen to twenty-four hours."
Lorenzen said state fishery managers assured the commission that it took ten days for the fall chinook to make the passage.
New Stipulations Required
Last year's waiver was accompanied by stipulations that required NMFS to address seven topics that included: evaluation of PIT-tag data to determine changes in survival; empirical estimates of survival associated with spill , incidence of gas bubble disease signs in adults and estimates of spawning delays caused by increased spill; survival estimates of transported vs. untransported fish, and interpretation of data from GBD from net pens below Bonneville Dam, and the incidence of GBD signs in resident fish there as well.
The NMFS report said some of the 1996 data appeared to support speculation that high gas caused increased smolt mortality in late May and early June, but the agency said there were reasons "to be cautious with this interpretation," citing incidence of high gas earlier in the season that did not seem to reflect an increase in mortality. The agency played down the gas/mortality speculation after state agencies criticized the draft report.
NMFS now says the late spring mortality could possibly be explained by changes in fish physiology that could result in different swimming patterns from the early to later fish, but they admitted there was little evidence for it.
NMFS also said the decrease in survival could have come from poor condition of hatchery yearling chinook because of their length of time in the migration corridor, long exposure to predators under increasing temperatures, and possibly reflecting high levels of bacterial kidney disease usually found in later hatchery releases. Mortality from "mechanical injuries" due to the high spill was another possibility cited by NMFS.
The agency's response was criticized in written testimony from the Columbia River Alliance, a coalition of businesses and industries. "The State and Tribal fishery agencies have managed to overrule NMFS staff scientists and delete NMFS' conclusion that total dissolved gas problems killed fish in 1996, so that NMFS proffers every conceivable alternative hypothesis..." They also mentioned consultant Steve Cramer's 1996 report that saw evidence of increased mortality from spill.
Lorenzen was clearly frustrated with the NMFS report as well. "This is the fourth year of uncertainty," he said, noting that he requested the report be peer-reviewed before it was presented to the DEQ. He said his request was designed to help "move forward" in the debate about the value of spill as a strategy to reduce smolt mortality at dams.
But there is little evidence of forward progress from the report. For instance, NMFS cobbled together an "empirical" estimate of spill survival after the draft response was criticized by the Independent Scientific Advisory Board in December, an exercise that pegged an overall system survival improvement of 6 percent from a theoretical spill strategy that raised gas levels from 110 to 120 percent. But the estimate did not include such "empirical" factors as the smolt transportation system being utilized at the same time. A 1995 NMFS memo estimated a seven percent improvement in smolt survival to below Bonneville Dam from 30 to 37 percent with spill at 120 percent total dissolved gas (TDG), but the same memo said that with transportation and no spill at dams where fish were collected, survival was estimated at 79 percent.
Promise of Peer Review Broken
Lorenzen said he obtained a promise from NMFS policy analyst Donna Darm that the NMFS report "that included last year's smolt monitoring results and what was learned from it" would definitely be peer-reviewed, but on Feb. 28 she told him that Dr. Charles Coutant of the scientific panel told her there was nothing to be peer-reviewed now, that it would take another year to draw any meaningful conclusions from smolt and gas monitoring efforts.
Lorenzen said he has tried to begin an open and honest debate on the value of spill, but it seems as though "folks have pulled in their horns" after he had requested the peer review. He noted that the NMFS expert gas panel had developed seven "critical assumptions" about the smolt monitoring program at the dams that must be verified before the results of the effort could be validated. So far, except for a notable exception at Rock Island Dam last year, the smolt monitoring program has not shown gas in the river to be much of a problem for salmon. But Lorenzen said the commission is not getting any answers from the agency as to how far along the validation process has come.
He said the DEQ had no business trying to second-guess fish managers, but strives to apply the same scientific standards to anyone who comes before them. "We have an obligation to use the best available science and to close, open, public scrutiny," but he said the fish agencies act as if they should not be held to those same standards. Lorenzen has served on the DEQ for the past eight years.
His term will end this July, but not before the region engages in what has become an annual rite of spring, arguing over the potential benefits of putting as many small salmon in barges as possible to keep them out of potentially lethal gas plumes in the Columbia while the rivers rage on. It's bound to be a lively debate since environmental groups are on record saying that this is the best time in years to put all the fish in the river. -Bill Rudolph
[2] Columbia River Tribes Get More Coho :: Federal Judge Malcolm Marsh told Oregon, Washington and federal officials to produce another one million hatchery coho for the tribal net fishery above Bonneville Dam or give him a good reason for not doing so. Marsh issued a temporary restraining order Feb. 20 that gave state and federal fishery managers 10 days to comply. But on March 3, a day before the issue was to be heard, all parties announced an agreement "in principle" and the hearing was canceled.
The four tribes in the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission (CRITFC) had accused the federal government and the two states of violating elements of the fish management plan that was signed in 1988. According to the plan, the feds and states had agreed to specific release goals of juvenile coho in return for tribal agreement to forego a formal harvest allocation. The tribes agreed not to seek a fifty percent share of the coho harvest, but negotiated that certain production goals above Bonneville be met and serious efforts to restore depleted coho populations be undertaken.
Before Marsh's decision, the states and federal government had agreed to release 7.55 million coho smolts above Bonneville Dam, where the Indian fishery is located. Marsh agreed with tribes who argued that "fish intended to fulfill long-term restoration goals could not be counted as fulfilling short-term equity goals, "according to a CRITFC release. This meant 1.25 million coho raised at the Tribes' Oxbow and Speelyai hatcheries above Bonneville could not be included in the short-term calculation, as the states and federal government had intended. In contrast, over 16 million coho are scheduled to be released below Bonneville Dam.
"This court case is in part about equity, and in part about honor," said CRITFC vice chair Wendell Hannigan. "As Judge Marsh said, the Columbia River Fish Management Plan is a contract. It requires good faith of all parties to see that it is upheld. It is clear that the states, with the help of the federal government, have failed to honor their bargain with the tribes while they have developed new programs for non-Indian fishers."
Bob Eaton, director of the Astoria-based Salmon For All, a commercial fishermen's group, said he was a little disappointed with the tribes. Eaton said that several months ago, all parties had agreed the prospective releases were "fish-neutral," that is, equitable for both upriver and downriver interests. But after the recent floods, the situation has changed, said Eaton. He also feels the state of Washington is not taking a very active role since it seems that any coho that might be trucked upriver to settle the issue would be coming from Oregon hatcheries. And Eaton said the settlement could possibly have a negative impact on the net pen terminal fisheries being developed in the lower Columbia.
It is likely the coho would be transported upstream by truck to the Klickitat River on the Washington side for release. With hatchery return rates around .5 percent in the region, that would mean 5,000 more coho for the tribal fishery when they return as adults next year.
"Restoring upriver natural production will benefit all fishers and the fish themselves," said Umatilla chairman Donald Sampson. "That is where the future is." -Bill Rudolph
[3] Four Wild Coho Make it Back to the Clack :: The Clackamas River may be the only place in the Columbia River watershed where a wild coho run still exists, but in 1997 only four fish returned. Two of these escaped to spawn naturally. The other two have been captured for a hatchery egg supply to maximize the number of smolts from the adult pair.
These smolts will then be released into the upper Clackamas River where it is suspected they reproduce in the wild.
In 1996-1997 the weakest brood on record of the wild Clackamas River coho returned to spawn, capping a dramatic decline. In 1987, the run was 852 adults; in 1990 it had declined to 342; in 1993 the run dropped even further to 50 adults, and now in 1997, the latest count is four adults. The Columbia River Compact ( a compact of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Washington Department of Fisheries to set commercial fishing regulations on the Columbia River) was asked to provide protection for the wild Clackamas coho, but the fishery was not modified.
In 1990 the lower Columbia River coho salmon were petitioned for listing as endangered species, but the Clackamas wild coho were not included. The National Marine Fisheries Service denied the coho petition, by saying there were no distinct wild populations remaining in the lower Columbia River. Both states had already developed a "management plan" that maximized the commercial harvest of hatchery coho that provided for little escapement for wild coho populations in tributaries. This plan effectively eliminated the wild runs, replacing them with mongrel hatchery fish.
A distinct population
NMFS did not evaluate the Clackamas wild stock then, but it could be included in a subsequent petition to list coho salmon due this April. According to Fred Allendorf, a geneticist from the University of Montana, and Doug Cramer, a biologist for Portland General Electric, the Clackamas wild coho is distinct from all other lower Columbia River coho because it is larger, has a later run timing, and has smaller eggs. Also, the Columbia coho salmon are distinct from coastal coho populations because the Columbia salmon are resistant to a disease not found in most coastal rivers, called Ceratomyxa shasta.If this brood goes extinct, the Clackamas River wild coho will have lost a major component of its evolutionary legacy and productive potential.
The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife stated a commitment to restore natural production of coho in the lower Columbia River tributaries, and since the coast-wide coho salmon crash in 1994, commercial and sport fisheries in the Columbia have been curtailed. But ODFW scientists are puzzled by the lack of response to reduced harvest mortality by coho in the lower Columbia and some coastal watersheds. It seems that once a population has been reduced to low levels, its resilience is reduced, keeping it from breaking through some threshold to higher levels of productivity.
Unfortunately, the Clackamas wild coho salmon has not been given priority by the Northwest Power Planning Council or the National Marine Fisheries Service. It rests with the Clackamas River Fish Working Group and its meager funding to help restore these last wild coho of the Columbia. If the Clackamas wild coho go extinct, they will join the Hood River spring chinook (1992) and the Grande Ronde River coho (1986). An accurate extinction record for the Columbia River is not maintained by the fish agencies, so the list may be much larger. (For more information, contact: Barry McPherson, ODFW, 503-872-5252 x 5418 or Doug Cramer, PGE, 503-630-6831). -Bill Bakke
[4] Agencies and Utility Work to Maintain Fish Runs :: Mutual concern over fish resources of the Clackamas River near Portland, Oregon, has created a fertile ground of cooperation and funding. Portland General Electric joined with the U.S. Forest Service, the Pacific Northwest Forest Research Station, and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife in 1993 to support a winter steelhead creel survey and habitat restoration evaluation on Fish Creek. Over the last four years these agencies have contributed an average of $210,000 to fish projects. By this year, more than $1 million will have been dedicated to fish work in the Clackamas River to evaluate habitat restoration, juvenile and adult life history studies, spawning surveys, smolt production studies, genetic analysis, and harvest surveys.
The focus of the working group has been on natural production of salmon and steelhead using the Clackamas River watershed above four hydroelectric dams owned and operated by Portland General Electric Company.
This unprecedented collaborative process has resulted in a management and restoration plan that each agency can help fund. For example, in 1995 the U.S. Forest Service initiated a juvenile salmon PIT-tagging program to learn more about migratory behavior. They contributed $111,000 to this and other projects. The U.S. Forest Service has also been expanding the off-channel rearing areas for juvenile salmon and trout by reconnecting the river with its flood plain and opening up passage blocks caused by road culverts.
In 1993, the U.S. Forest Service testified before the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife to seek protection for the Clackamas wild coho salmon in the Columbia River fall commercial and sport fisheries. PGE and the U.S. Forest Service worked with the state to protect juvenile wild coho and steelhead in the upper Clackamas by convincing fish managers to open the trout fishery later than usual.
Though the Clackamas salmon and steelhead runs have major problems that must be resolved, this science-based agency and utility fish program is providing the means to maintain native spring chinook, winter steelhead, and the last remaining wild coho run in the lower Columbia River (For more information contact Doug Cramer, PGE, 503-630-6831 or Joe Moreau, U.S. Forest Service, 503-668-1605). -Bill Bakke
[5] Some Federal Agencies Increase Salmon Budgets :: Prospective budgets for federal agencies were aired at last week's Power Council meeting in Boise. The Clinton administration has asked for a significant boost to the Army Corps of Engineers budget to improve fish passage at dams, up to $127 million in FY 98 from $96 million this fiscal year. On the Corps' wish list for 1998 is $3.4 million to pay for spillway deflectors at Ice Harbor Dam to reduce saturated gas levels; $5.7 million for deflectors at John Day Dam; $10.2 million for extended-length screens in front of turbines at John Day; $3.2 million for studying deep reservoir drawdown at John Day; $36.4 million to evaluate surface bypass systems for collection of juvenile salmon and to begin construction of such a facility at Lower Granite dam on the lower Snake; and $50 million in additional dam improvements to aid juvenile salmon migration.
The Bureau of Reclamation proposes to spend $9.3 million on the Umatilla Basin Project, an ongoing effort to improve conditions for fish in the Umatilla River. Water conservation projects and water purchases to improve salmon spawning and migration are slated to cost $13 million, and $8.7 million has been budgeted for ongoing fish habitat and flow improvements in the Yakima River Basin.
The National Marine Fisheries Service proposes spending $10.3 million on hatchery operations and $4.4 million for ongoing screen installation, substantially the same as FY 97. Hatchery operations are on the decline, as fish production budget has been cut by nearly $5 million since 1993.
Bonneville's total debt stands at $16 billion, with about $6 billion in ongoing costs of retiring the WPPSS debt from nuclear power plants. In FY 98, BPA proposes to spend $805 million on its debt to the US Treasury for construction of dams and transmission facilities, and $745 million on nuclear plant costs. Most of that will go to retire the debt from unfinished WPPSS plants 1 and 3, with the rest going to pay BPA's share of ongoing costs for the closed Trojan plant and for the only nuclear plant still operating in the region, WNP-2 at Hanford.
BPA proposes to spend $127 million to implement the Power Council's fish and wildlife plan in FY 98, set by last year's fish cap agreement. In FY 97, BPA spent only $68.5 million on these projects, with the difference carried over to the current fiscal year. Projects costs were less than anticipated, and changes in BPA's accounting practices are responsible for this difference.
In the memorandum of agreement that capped fish costs, BPA estimated an annual cost of $183 million through 2001 to replace electricity that could not be generated because of water used to help migrating salmon. But last year, only $20 million was spent in this way because of the above average water supply. BPA figures $96 million in such costs by the end of the current fiscal year (Sept. 30), and $89 million in FY 98 to replace lost generation.
In March the Power Council will submit written testimony to support the budget proposals. -Bill Rudolph
[6] New Economic Advisory Board Named By Power Council :: At their meeting in Boise last week, the Power Council appointed eight economists to the newly formed Independent Economic Advisory Board, whose job will be to improve cost analysis of fish and wildlife measures. The panel will conduct an annual review of BPA fish and wildlife funding and offer economic advice on other fish, wildlife and energy issues.
The group of eight was chosen from more than 70 applicants. They have substantial experience in natural resource economics and policy, irrigation and agricultural economics, water use, river transportation economics, electricity system configuration and Army Corps of Engineers project evaluation.
The new board includes: Kenneth Boire, consulting economist; Emery Castle, professor emeritus at Oregon State; Joel Hamilton, professor of agricultural economics at the University of Idaho; Dan Huppert, associate professor at the Institute for Marine Studies at the University of Washington; Lon Peters, president of Northwest Economic Research, Inc.; Jack Richards, retired from NMFS and now teaching at Portland State University; Anthony Scott, professor emeritus of economics at the University of British Columbia; and Paul Sorenson, consulting economist and expert in transportation project development and local-area impact assessment. -Bill Rudolph
[7] Modifications Slated for Wanapum Surface Collector :: Grant County PUD commissioners have approved a $2.7 million contract for additions and modifications to the prototype surface collector at Wanapum Dam. Another $1.2 million was approved for additional power plant model and river flow testing in Iowa.
It will be the third spring/summer testing to find out if surface collection and bypass is the best approach for Wanapum. All 30 of the water intake structures for the 10 turbines will be part of this year's surface collection system.
Last year high river flows affected testing and similar conditions are expected this year as well. The testing in Iowa will allow engineers to study more variables than under high flow conditions in the Columbia. A 1/16 scale model in a water basin will be used at the University of Iowa's Institute of Hydraulic Research to test different flow patterns. -Bill Rudolph
[8] Shad No Fad on the Columbia :: Several Northwest scientists have pooled their collective curiosity and formed a group to promote the study of shad. Columbia River researcher Rich Hinrichsen of the University of Washington is president of the Shad Foundation, he edits the Shad Journal and has put together a Web site to promote the overgrown relative to the herring.
Shad first came to the Columbia after being planted in the Sacramento River in 1871. By 1938, 5,000 were counted passing Bonneville Dam, the year it was completed. Fifty years later, the count is more than three million annually, with around two million more that spawn in the lower river below the concrete.
While the Northwest spends hundreds of millions every year to save salmon in the Columbia, East Coast folks are spending plenty to restore their shad populations by building expensive fish elevators to help them past dams. A $20-million fish lift is being constructed on the Susquehanna River at Holtwood Dam.
Meanwhile, on the West Coast, shad don't get much respect. Hinrichsen points out that some fishery managers on the Columbia have called for the shad's elimination, and he says only a few studies have even looked at the amazing creatures.
Shad enter the river in late summer to spawn, and migrate seaward as delicate fry that seem to have no problem navigating slack summer flows and dam turbines. But that's about what we know. Their ocean migration patterns are a total mystery.
Hinrichsen and oceanographer Curt Ebbesmeyer say the Shad Foundation was formed to encourage research about the thirty or so species around the world. "It's mission," says Hinrichsen, " is to promote a greater understanding of shad for their restoration where depleted and their wise use where sufficiently abundant."
Columbia River commercial shad landings have ranged from 66,000 lbs. to more than 1.2 million lbs. In the past few years, landings have averaged around 400,000 lbs. Shad roe is a delicacy and is found at many Asian markets during the summer season, but eating the rest of the fish can be a bit of a chore. There is a pamphlet available that describes the 32 steps to de-bone shad.
A growing sport fishery has developed for the gold-scaled mystery fish that weigh in around four lbs. apiece. Sport anglers are catching more than 100,000 of them every year.
Oceanographer Ebbesmeyer was amazed by the lack of knowledge of one of our region's most prolific fish. "When you add up the biomass from the shad population," he said, "the Columbia is producing as much fish as it did when it was full of salmon."
The Shad Foundation's address is PO Box 21748, Seattle, WA 98111-3748. An annual membership costs $15 and brings you four issues of the Shad Journal. -Bill Rudolph
[9] Oceanographers Speculate on Salmon's "Thermal Curtain" :: Two Canadian oceanographers have taken a stab at explaining why salmon are found in the ocean just where they are. By looking at the thermodynamics of the Pacific Ocean where low-latitude and high-latitude waters mix, an area whose southern boundary lies about 42 degrees north, (Cal-Oregon border) they say this may create unique conditions that create a natural corral that keeps salmon from straying.
They speculate that salmon distribution in the North Pacific may be tied to changes in temperature and salinity that affect a salmon's ability to the navigate in their migrations back and forth across the ocean. By staying in a relatively narrow band of the north Pacific, the fish can detect the different chemical and electromagnetic cues they may not be able to pick up outside that part of the sea.
In a presentation at last fall's PISCES meeting in Nanaimo, Eddy Carmack of the Institute of Ocean Sciences in Sidney, BC, and Edward Bennett of Applied Ocean Sciences, Parksville, BC, gave fellow researchers the lowdown on their speculations.
By thinking of the North Pacific (and Atlantic) as great estuaries, they begin their speculative journey. They point out that these are places where oceans lose heat rather than gain it like what happens in low-latitude oceans. Since water tends to evaporate in the low latitudes from the heat gain, the upper layers of the subtropical seas are stratified by temperature. In the high-latitude seas, the upper layers are stratified by salinity.
They point to a boundary where the two domains meet and suggest the mechanism that separates the temperature-stratified domain from the salinity-stratified one also explains the thermal limits to salmon previously observed by fisheries scientists.
Where Waters Meet
Carmack and Bennett say this boundary zone exists in both hemispheres and is marked by a surface density maxima between 10 and 6 degrees C. that is about 100 km. wide, a unique place where surface waters converge that allows for the low salinity waters from high latitudes to slide below saltier waters from the low latitudes."For thermodynamic reasons," says their abstract, "and as long as Earth maintains oceans with temperatures above and below 10 degrees C, the subarctic frontal zone and its attendant production of low-salinity intermediate waters will always form near 10 degrees C, regardless of variability in atmospheric forcing."
They point out that in the absence of other information, the 10 degrees C isotherm is used to define the real-time location of the subarctic front in the North Pacific.
"Within the boundary zone," they say, "subduction occurs via a convective flux structure of interleaving layers of cold/fresh and warm/salty waters that effectively pumps, much like a bellows opening and closing annually, fresh water out of the surface layers of beta oceans and into the intermediate layers of alpha oceans."
They speculate that salinity-stratified oceans are the sole domain of salmon because if the fish wander out of these areas, they lose the environmental cues (chemical, electromagnetic, acoustic) that are maintained by freshwater mixtures in the upper ocean that are required for navigation back to home spawning sites.
"In other words," say the oceanographers, "salmon will live where the temperature is able to support a freshened surface layer, whatever the salinity of that freshened layer may be." They point to physical evidence that has placed salmon within 10 and 6 degree boundaries. In other words, the fish may be fenced in partly by their own sense of smell. -Bill Rudolph
[10] Public Asked to Review Latest Salmon Study :: The Northwest Power Planning Council, on behalf of the Independent Scientific Group, is inviting the public to review and comment on the ISG’s report, Return to the River. Informal comments from scientists are being solicited as well. The comments will be collected by the Council and passed on to members of the Independent Scientific Group, who will have the option of including them before finalizing their report.
In a March 4 announcement NWPPC chair John Etchart said, "We ask that your comments focus on the report itself and not on the potential impacts of the report or its use in future policy discussions. We intend to address future uses of the report in a scientific symposium that the Council will convene on behalf of the Independent Scientific Group later this year. The Independent Scientific Group will issue a separate call for papers for that symposium in the near future."
The Council’s actions resulted from concern that the public was not privy to peer review comments of the initial report. The peer review process was somewhat unorthodox because the ISG picked the scientists to review their own report.
Copies of the draft Return to the River are available from the council by calling 800-222-3355 and requesting document 96-6.
Please mail your comments by April 15, 1997 to Mark Walker, Public Affairs Director, Northwest Power Planning Council, 851 S.W. Sixth Ave, Suite 1100, Portland, OR 97204. -Bill Rudolph
Link/Document AnnexLINKS/DOCUMENTS FROM NW FISHLETTER 029 :: Below are listed links and documents referred to in the text of NW Fishletter issue 029.
THE ARCHIVE :: Previous NW Fishletter issues and supporting documents.
NW Fishletter is produced by Energy NewsData with grants from the Montana and Idaho offices of the Northwest Power Planning Council, the Council itself, the Bonneville Power Administration, the National Marine Fisheries Service, Chelan County PUD, Douglas County PUD,
Grant County PUD and Direct Service Industries, Inc.
Publisher: Cyrus Noë, Editor: Bill Rudolph,
Web Editor: Denise Lee,
Contributing Editors: Bill Bakke and Jude Noland.
If you would like to be notified when the next NW Fishletter is published online,
send an e-mail message to dlee@newsdata.com with "Subscribe NW Fishletter"
in the subject line and your name and e-mail address in the body.
Please contact dlee@newsdata.com if you have questions or comments
about this website or call 206/285-4848.