Nature

Salmon Hungry Sea Lions Put On Notice

November 26, 2008
By

A federal judge says wildlife officials can go ahead with plans to kill salmon munching sea lions on the Columbia River.

The ruling was handed down today by U.S. District Judge Michael Mosman of Portland.

The judge says federal officials properly followed the law when they approved the lethal methods.

In 2001, wildlife officials noticed a growing number of sea lions gathering at the Bonneville Dam where it was easier for them to catch salmon,

They tried for years to use non-lethal methods to scare off the sea lions but with little or no impact.

Federal officials estimate that by the year 2007, sea lions were eating about 4% of the salmon that crossed the Bonneville Dam.

That year, federal, state and tribal officials began work on a plan to trap the worst offenders. If they couldn’t find a home for them, such as a wildlife park, they would kill the sea lions. It was approved by the National Marine Fisheries Service in March 2008. The trapping program began in April.

The case pitted one set of protected species against another. Most west coast salmon are listed as endangered or threatened species. Steller Sea Lions are also listed as an endangered species. Most of the sea lions at Bonneville are California Sea Lions which are neither endangered or threatened, but are protected by other federal laws.

The program became a huge public relations nightmare in May when a half dozen sea lions were found dead in one of the traps.

At first, officials suspected the sea lions had been shot. But necropsies showed they died from heat exhaustion. Somehow the gates on the trapped closed accidently, giving the sea lions no access to the water to cool off. The gates were supposed to stay open when wildlife officials weren’t around to monitor the situation.

Oregon Calls For More Water Over Columbia and Snake River Dams

November 25, 2008
By

Battle lines are being drawn for a new federal court fight over salmon recovery plans for the Columbia and Snake Rivers.

Today, the state of Oregon and a coalition of fishing and conservation groups asked U.S. District Court Judge James Redden to increase the amount of water that will be spilled over dams in 2009.

Why? To help juvenile salmon make it to the ocean. In a press release, Earthjustice says the extra water flow increases their odds of survival. Judge Redden ordered extra water to be spilled in 2006, and the groups claim that’s the big reason why the numbers of returning salmon are up this year.

But if more water goes through the spillways, it means less is going through the generators, costing the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) millions of dollars. That’s why the latest version of the Salmon Recovery Plan, also known as the Biological Opinion, focuses on finding other ways to help fish get past dams. It also calls for spending millions to improve salmon habitat and the regional system of fish hatcheries.

Judge Redden will hear oral arguments on the newest Salmon Recovery plan on January 19. 2009. He’s rejected three earlier plans. But this fourth plan has more widespread support among state governments and the Northwest tribes.

Little Bird, Big Problems

November 21, 2008
By

It was a rough year for the Western Snowy Plover.

A little noticed press release from federal agencies says that only 71 plovers, born this summer on the Oregon coast, survived into adulthood. That’s down from 124 from 2007. In fact, it’s the lowest number of survivors since 2003. That sounds like the news from Wall Street. Isn’t that depressing.

Biologists say weather was one of the factors. We had a cooler and wet start to the summer, anyone remember “June-uary”? They also say this year’s breeding pairs were younger than average, and when you have less experienced parents, you’re going to have lower survival rates.

Here’s a quote from the press release: “It’s normal for species populations to fluctuate from year to year over the long term,” said Dave Lauten, plover monitor with Oregon Natural Heritage Information Center. “Luckily the plovers have had a string of successful nesting years that got us through this tough year.”

The Snowy Plover is a small shorebird that likes to nest in dry, open sand. It was listed as a threatened species in 1993.

Photo Courtesy U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Salmon Killers and New Ocean Reserves

November 18, 2008
By


SALMON KILLING PESTICIDES

NOAA is calling for some pretty tough restrictions on three commonly used pesticides, diazonin, malathion, and chlorpyrifos.

The report, officially known as a Biological Opinion, says these three chemicals can damage or even kill salmon. It describes them a threat to 27 species of threatened and endangered salmon on the west coast.

So what can be done about this?

NOAA says farmers who use these pesticides shouldn’t be allowed to apply them near salmon streams. The report calls for buffer zones of 1000 feet for aerial spraying and 500 feet when these pesticides are applied on the ground. Other restrictions include not applying them during windy conditions, or when a storm is in the forecast. The rain could wash the freshly applied pesticides into the streams.

The report says the chemicals hurt salmon by impairing their sense of smell, making it harder for them to catch prey. It says the pesticides also reduce populations of small fish and insects that salmon eat. And if concentrations are high enough, the three pesticides are outright salmon killers.

For now, these are only recommendations. The Environmental Protection Agency asked for NOAA’s advice as it looks at new restrictions on the use of these pesticides. NOAA says this is only the first in a series of Biological Opinions it will forward to the EPA in the next three years.

No word on when the EPA will issue its final ruling.

2 OCEAN RESERVES FOR OREGON?

A state panel is calling on Governor Kulongoski to establish two ocean reserves, one near Depoe Bay and the other near Port Orford.

Ocean reserves are “fishing free” zones that are set aside as refuges for marine life and areas for scientific research.

The Ocean Policy Advisory Council (OPAC) received about 20 proposals for these marine parks, but after a series of public hearings whittled them down to just two. Four other sites were forwarded to the Governor as worthy of further study.

This has been one of the most controversial issues along the coast since Governor K proposed establishing the zones back in 2000. Fishermen are worried that they’ll be kept out from some of their best fishing spots. The pressure was made more intense because they may also be losing other fishing areas to wave and wind energy farms.

Supporters argue that marine reserves can actually boost fishing stocks and note that Washington and California already have similar zones. Our Ocean, a group that has advocated for the ocean reserves, says these recommendations are a “strong first step.” But it adds that a system of nine reserves is what’s really needed.

No word yet on what the Governor will do with these proposals. The Oregon legislature has the final word.

Mixed Reviews on Klamath Dam Deal

November 16, 2008
By

The news this week about the Klamath River dams is so huge, it’s almost impossible to believe how far we’ve come in the past seven years.

The headline is this. Pacific Power, which owns the four hydroelectric dams on the Klamath River, has agreed to their removal. It’s an agreement in principle. There are many obstacles to overcome. It’ll take years to implement. But if this goes through one of the great salmon rivers of the west coast could be running free from headwaters to the ocean.

This is THE Klamath we’re talking about. Low salmon numbers from this river led to a near closure of the commercial salmon season across most of Oregon and Northern California in 2006. Bitter water wars erupted in 2001 when farmers were denied irrigation water in favor of salmon and other fish. The farmers got their water after the Bush administration intervened, and the following year tens of thousands of salmon died in warm, shallow waters.

So why would any salmon respecting green group be opposed to such a deal?

For Oregon Wild, this deal amounts to little more than a last minute attempt by the Bush team to reward its friends. Oregon Wild says the deal relies on getting $1 billion from the federal government, a four year cost-benefit analysis by the Interior Department, and other conditions it describes as “highly unlikely” to be met. Meanwhile, work on removing the dams wouldn’t even begin until 2020.

Oregon Wild also complains that the deal gives too much water to agribusiness, doesn’t preserve enough water for salmon, and grants another 50-year extension of agriculture development on the Lower Klamath and Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuges.

Other environmental groups are not so cynical. The Wild Salmon Center in Portland told the Oregonian that this is as big as anything they’ve seen to restore a river. The group’s President, Guido Rahr, is quoted as saying “You really are giving a river the chance to come back.”

Sustainable Northwest called the agreement a step in the right direction. This group was involved in the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement, which is based on seeing the dams removed. Sustainable Northwest called on the federal and state governments to implement the entire Klamath Basin agreement and to remove the dams quickly enough so that salmon will benefit.

12 years is a long time to wait for dam removal to begin. Much of the costs of dam removal will fall on the shoulders of Oregon customers of Pacific Power. A deal that removes dams, but still doesn’t provide the water needed by salmon isn’t much of a deal at all.

Powerful political forces are lining up behind this. We hope they get it right.

Living With Oregon’s Wolves

October 25, 2008
By

With the Feds trying again to delist Gray Wolves, you might be wondering what will happen to Oregon’s wolves, should the Feds succeed.

Russ Morgan, with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, hears that question a lot. He’s the wolf coordinator for the northeast corner of the state. And since that’s where all the wolves are in Oregon, that makes him the go-to guy for these sorts of things.

Morgan says federal delisting will mean little in Oregon. Grey Wolves are on the state’s endangered species list. So even if they lose federal protection, they’ll still be protected under state law.

So what does that mean exactly?

Morgan outlined Oregon’s Wolf Management Plan this morning at the 2008 NW Wolf Conference sponsored by the Wolf Education and Research Center and Concordia University in Portland.

For starters, it means no one can shoot a wolf, not even if it’s attacking livestock or pets. You can scare it away, but you can’t do anything that would kill or injure the wolf. Federal delisting doesn’t change this.

But Morgan also says ODFW’s long range goal is to move wolves off the state’s endangered list.

It moves in three phases.

First, establish four breeding pairs and maintain that for three years. Once this happens, the wolves could be delisted under Oregon law.

Second, allow them to expand to 5-7 pairs. That creates a big enough population base to prevent them from having to be relisted.

The third phase begins when there’s at least 7 breeding pairs.

Along the way, Morgan says the management plan gradually decreases protection for the wolves. Wolves could be killed if they become a chronic problem for a rancher, or the rancher could use more forceful methods to scare them away. Even then it’s not a just a matter of grabbing a gun and shooting. Ranchers would need permits and would have to work with ODFW on dealing the problem wolves.

But perhaps the most telling part of the presentation is what ODFW wanted to do during the 2007 session of the Oregon legislature. Morgan didn’t say it, but it does give some insight into what ODFW would like to do in the future. The department proposed legislation that would let them change the wolf’s status to that of a game animal. Landowners could kill wolves attacking their livestock without needing a permit. And it would have created a state sponsored program to pay ranchers for their wolf caused losses and provide them with funds to help protect their livestock.

Morgan says ODFW has no plans to reintroduce changes when the legislature returns early next year.

Morgan was only one of several speakers at today’s conference. There were also representatives from Defenders of Wildlife, Oregon Sheep Growers Association, Oregon Cattlemen’s Association and Salmon Safe. The Wolf Center’s Executive Director Chris Anderson said the purpose was to help find common ground between advocates for wolves, and producers who could be hurt by wolf attacks on their livestock.

For more information about the state’s wolf management plan visit:
ODFW: Wolves In Oregon

Feds Try Again To Delist Gray Wolves

October 25, 2008
By

The Bush Administration is making another attempt to remove Gray Wolves in the Northern Rockies from the Endangered Species List.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service says it will reopen public comment on delisting in Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, the eastern third of Washington and Oregon, and parts of north central Utah. The comment period opens October 28 and runs until November 28.

This is Fish and Wildlife’s second attempt this year at delisting these wolves. In March, it announced it was delisting the species, only to have a federal judge restore protection in July. The courts vacated the ruling in September but Fish and Wildlife kept the wolves on the endangered list. The agency suffered another setback earlier this month when a different federal court ordered it to put Midwest wolves on the list.

Fish and Wildlife’s position is that wolves have exceeded the minimum recovery goals in the region for six years running, and says protection isn’t necessary.

Conservation groups, including the Defenders of Wildlife and the Natural Resources Defense Council are promising a fight. They say there aren’t enough wolves to ensure they’ll survive delisting.

For more information about the proposal visit:
Fish and Wildlife: Gray Wolves In The Rocky Mountains

To file a comment visit:
http://www.regulations.gov