CLINTON ST. QUARTERLY Indian, have to give way to protect the resource. The Indian Tribes are in a unique position, fortunately for the salmon, for without their treaty fishing rights there would be no strong argument — with legal teeth in it — to get the salmon resource restored in ‘the upper Columbia River Basin. The tricks of history: the Indians now are coming to the aid of the salmon which has for thousands of years supported the Indian way of life. The Five-Year Plan In February, 1977, the federal district court signed into law “ A Plan for Managing Fisheries on Stocks Originating from the Columbia River and its Tributaries above Bonneville Dam,” which became known as the “ Five-Year Plan.” The plan established a management scheme directed at providing viable fisheries in the Columbia River and created formulas for sharing the salmon wealth between the Indian and non-Indian fishermen. When asked how the Indians feel about the Five-Year Plan today, a biologist for the tribes said that the “ Indians have gained nothing; they have only lost.” He doubts that there will be any further agreements between the Indians and the states concerning salmon allocation on the Columbia. It is the opinion of some biologists that the states knew that they could not deliver on allocations for spring chinook to the Indians. The allocation formula for spring chinook is 60 percent for non-Indian fishermen below Bonneville Dam and 40 percent for Indian fishermen above the dam after a spawning escapement of 120,000 is subtracted. The escapement goal for spring chinook is 250,000 adults into the river, but the spring chinook run has been so poor that no fisheries were allowed in 1975, 1976, 1978 and 1979. The spring chinook fishery below Bonneville Dam is in better shape because of intensive hatchery rearing on the Willamette and Cowlitz rivers. Few spring chinook are reared in hatcheries above Bonneville Dam — in spite of promised compensation for lost habitat due to dam construction — and the success in raising these difficult fish is poor. When losses have occurred, the states have decided to compensate, in many instances, by releasing juvenile salmon below the dam rather than where the losses have occurred; for example, The Dalles and John Day dams. Furthermore, an accident at a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service hatchery on the upper Columbia last year killed 700 adult spring chinook from the lowest run in history. The summer chinook are unique to the Columbia River. Their numbers have been low for so long, however, that they were not included in the Five-Year Plan as a target species, but the Indians are permitted to take 2,000 fish for ceremonial purposes. The size of the fall chinook fun to the Columbia River was set at 300,000 fish: 100,000 for spawning escapement and the rest for harvest. However, nothing like 300,000 salmon have returned to the river since 1976; even the modest goal of 40,000 fish for the fall escapement above McNary Dam has not been met since 1974. The Pacific Fishery Management Council, which has jurisdiction over offshore fishing, has failed to do its part in implementing the Plan. The Indian position is that, “ 300,000 fish were to constitute a standard, just as the 100,000 spawning escapement for these fish is considered a standard.” The Indian tribes maintain that, “ The Five-Year Plan agreement is still in effect and, therefore, the minimum run size specified for spring chinook (250,000) and fall chinook (300,000) is still binding.” The Indian Tribes continue, “ as the run sizes to the Columbia have declined — rather than increased — from 359,000 in 1976 to 169,000 in 1979, it is questionable that the PFMC has made good-faith attempts to comply with sound principles of resource management, or the law.” As the runs decline, it has been the trend of the management agencies to scale down the escapement allotments so that the social and economic pressures of the fishery can be met, thus avoiding economic dislocation among commercial fishermen. The Indian Tribes are already economically dislocated, being at the end of the line, so they are challenging the regulations that have been set to accommodate the ocean fisheries at the expense of the in-river fishermen and the resource itself. One biologist said, “ The intensity of the ocean interception fisheries make our worries about genetics and habitat protection on the spawning streams seem moot.” The ocean fishery is continuing to grow and is not adequately regulated, yet, . .ocean fishing can only be justified on the basis that, for most stocks and most years, the odds are high that harvests in the ocean will not take those fish needed for spawning escapements. The problem in recent years is that progressively higher ocean fishing rates have left more and more native runs without sufficient harvestable surpluses to support ‘inside’ fisheries and, in some cases, not even provide adequate spawning escapement. In other words, the risks or odds of ‘over-fishing’ occurring in the ocean have continually escalated.”1 To use the fall chinook as an example, data based on hatchery contribution rates indicate that 77 percent of the total catch of fall chinook occurs in offshore fisheries. Of that number, the combined California, Oregon and Washington troll fisheries take 22.5 percent, sport fisheries take 20.5 percent, and the Alaskan and Canadian MAP OF THE COLUMBIA R IVER BELOW MCNARY 0AM SHOWING AREAS OPEN TO COMMERCIAL F ISH IN G “I f flows are inadequate to move the salmon downstream, they stop moving and perish from predation and thermo-pollution. ” commercial fisheries (ocean) average 34 percent of the catch. On the other hand, in-river Columbia net fisheries account for 22 percent of the catch, and in-river sport fisheries account for the remaining 1 percent. It is not my purpose here to drag the reader through a collage of data — much of which the biologists are unable to explain — but to show how one aspect of salmon management affects the Columbia River salmon stocks, that of ocean harvest. The Indian Tribes said in 1979 that they no longer wanted to take their treaty catch from the spawning escapement. They maintain that the ocean and inriver fisheries have to be managed so that there are enough fish to satisfy the treaty fishing agreements and provide for spawning. In-River Salmon Problems The most pressing environmental problems facing the upriver stocks of salmon and steelhead are inadequate passage at the dams and the lack of adequate flows through the reservoirs. It has been well documented through research that dam-related mortalities for juvenile salmon and steelhead are 15 percent per dam, but under some conditions they may go as high as 30 percent. In 1973, a low- water year, the estimated loss of juvenile salmon and steelhead emigrating from the Snake River was 97 percent. The cause: in low flow periods the water goes through the turbines, and where the water goes so do the juvenile salmon. To the fish biologists, turbines are known as “ the grinders.” Contrary to what some people might think, the juvenile salmon do not swim downriver to the sea but are carried there by the river’s current. Because the Columbia and Snake rivers are now dammed into reservoirs, and since there is increased water storage in the upper basin, the river no longer flows as it did when the salmon were evolving, genetically fitting themselves to the rhythm of a natural river. The juvenile salmon must reach the estuary of the Columbia when they are physiologically able to adjust to salt water. If they are delayed — and they are delayed by the slack water reservoirs — they are unable to adjust to salt water and so they die. If, as in 1977, flows are inadequate to move the salmon downstream, the juvenile salmon stop moving in the reservoir behind the dam and perish from predation and thermo-pollution. It isn’t enough to transport the fish by barge or truck around the dams — like in 1977 at Lower Granite Dam on the Snake River — as some fishery agencies insist, because in low-flow years the fish don’t reach the transportation collection sites. Consequently, the salmon and steelhead resources on the Columbia and . Snake rivers will require adequate' flows at the right time for the fish and adequate passage facilities around the dams if they are to be restored to their former abundance in the upper basin. However, we are now in a time of water shortage, for at normal and low flows there is not enough water to meet the irrigation, power and fish needs of the river. Development of the Columbia River Basin has gone on, as is usual for us in America, with each interest Pizza or Sandwiches 1401 SW Yamhill Map by Maurita Smyth 29
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTc4NTAz