This will negitively efect salmon fishing for years.
We took the long way home from seeing Bryan, up the NorCal coast and Klamath River. When we hit the Klamath at the mouth of the Trinity River I was shocked to see the river was not it's normal green but dark brown from all of the toxic silt and clay being dumped in to the river with large backhoes and loaders.
I thought " There goes this years salmon and steelhead spawn' but I never thought the entire food chain was being wiped out and the river bottom covered in toxic clay. The people responsible need to die in prison. FYI, I was not opposed to removing the dams but responsibly.
https://www.siskiyou.news/2024/02/19/dam-deception-saving-the-klamath-river/
Well, beware of what you ask for! They wanted the dams removed to restore the natural flow and they got it. The law of unintended consequences at work!
Never underestimate the incompetence of political appointees to the Department of Fish and Game.
It took a century to screw up the river and it will probably take a century to undo it all.
If they had dredged all the silt out of the lakes before dewatering and decommissioning them then where would they have put the spoil? What land would have been sacrificed to contain it?
Over that century, what did hydroelectric power do for the surrounding communities? Will they really be able to bring the salmon runs back? By the time it's all done, will they consider the loss of hydroelectric power more important than salmon?
Face it, humans are just a horrible species.
Quote from: oc1 on August 09, 2024, 07:18:02 PMIt took a century to screw up the river and it will probably take a century to undo it all.
If they had dredged all the silt out of the lakes before dewatering and decommissioning them then where would they have put the spoil? What land would have been sacrificed to contain it?
Over that century, what did hydroelectric power do for the surrounding communities? Will they really be able to bring the salmon runs back? By the time it's all done, will they consider the loss of hydroelectric power more important than salmon?
Face it, humans are just a horrible species.
There are a lot of places in the area to put the clay and silt that would not kill an entire river. The lower 3 dams generated less power than the 4th upper dam they are taking out due to a large elevation drop but the Upper Klamath Basin very dry, 12" of rain in a "wet" year, and the entire system never generated much power. The removed dams were not for flood control or irrigation, just power generation. Only the upper dam had a fish pass, what good is that when the lower 3 did not have them. The pro removal people say it freed up 400 miles of spawning habitat but at the most 100 miles.... if that are suitable. Most of the claimed miles are either too warm or mud bottom and right now the water coming out of upper Klamath Lake is over 70°F. There is good spawning habitat in 3 of the lakes tributaries, most of the Sprague (the major Williamson River tributary) and Wood rivers and some in the Williamson River below Spring Creek. One prime spot for salmon to spawn is 1 mile above where I work. I was hoping to see spawning salmon in the upper basin next year but not now.
Quote from: Keta on August 09, 2024, 07:23:33 PMQuote from: oc1 on August 09, 2024, 07:18:02 PMIt took a century to screw up the river and it will probably take a century to undo it all.
If they had dredged all the silt out of the lakes before dewatering and decommissioning them then where would they have put the spoil? What land would have been sacrificed to contain it?
Over that century, what did hydroelectric power do for the surrounding communities? Will they really be able to bring the salmon runs back? By the time it's all done, will they consider the loss of hydroelectric power more important than salmon?
Face it, humans are just a horrible species.
There are a lot of places in the area to put the clay and silt that would not kill an entire river. The lower 3 dams generated less power than the 4th upper dam they are taking out due to a large elevation drop but the Upper Klamath Basin very dry, 12" of rain in a "wet" year, and the entire system never generated much power. The removed dams were not for flood control or irrigation, just power generation. Only the upper dam had a fish pass, what good is that when the lower 3 did not have them. The pro removal people say it freed up 400 miles of spawning habitat but at the most 100 miles.... if that are suitable. Most of the claimed miles are either too warm or mud bottom and right now the water coming out of upper Klamath Lake is over 70°F. There is good spawning habitat in 3 of the lakes tributaries, most of the Sprague (the major Williamson River tributary) and Wood rivers and some in the Williamson River below Spring Creek. One prime spot for salmon to spawn is 1 mile above where I work. I was hoping to see spawning salmon in the upper basin next year but not now.
I am kinda with Steve on this.
I think the problem is that the spoils are not just sediment but some nasty stuff as well. Nobody wants it dumped on their land, but nobody is going to stick up for the seabed, so that is where it ends up.
What is happening now with the silt is what they expected to happen. The options were studied, and manual sediment removal was considered, and I would wager cost was a factor. The project as is is expensive, around half a billion $USD, split between the govt. and PacifiCorp (dam owner).
The chosen process means a tradeoff, where the first couple of years are going to be worse than now as the silt and sediments flush through the system. After that, gradual improvement to an eventual stable, closer to original state. That is, IF they got it right.
Did they get it right? Dunno. Probably not 100%. This is the first large scale dam removal project ever attempted. But I don't think that we can characterize this as just yanking a bunch of dams without preparation. And the dams were coming out one way or the other, as PacifiCorp was not going to invest in them any more.
There are stakeholders that were not happy with the dam removals (mostly farmers) and very happy with dam removals (local tribes and environmentalists), so you can find press coverage out there that is skewed to your particular preferences.
On suitable salmon and lamprey habitat, the scientists expect that the flushing action from removing all of the dams will greatly increase the total spawning habitat, as the river will look much different once "healed". Whether they are right, or Lee is right, we will start to find out in about 7 or 8 years.
A more neutral press report:
https://apnews.com/article/klamath-dam-california-removal-restoration-473a570024584c2e02837434e05693da (https://apnews.com/article/klamath-dam-california-removal-restoration-473a570024584c2e02837434e05693da)
An overview of the studies with links to the individual studies form the USGS:
https://www.usgs.gov/centers/california-water-science-center/science/klamath-dam-removal-studies (https://www.usgs.gov/centers/california-water-science-center/science/klamath-dam-removal-studies)
-J
Wow. We all "be Damed" with this one.
My favorite place on the river was below Iron Gate.
The article I linked is from a pro dam source but I personally saw the river this week. Here is very little industrial pollution in the basin and most of the agricultural land is cattle pasture but we have naturally occuring arsenic and Upper Klamath Lake bottom is 100' plus deep bird droppings and decomposing algae. No telling what is in the treated efluant coming out of Klamath Falls, the only "city" on the river and a bit over 28,000 people, but I am sure there is bad things people flush. It will be the clay and naturally occuring nitrates and phosphates, from years of dying algae, that is being dumped into the river that is the problem. The clay will not flush like silt and will cover gravel beds for years if not forever. The clay and silt is being dumped into the river with heavy equipment and the river is running dark brown 100 miles down river from the lowest dam, and most likely out into the ocean. People have been fined for putting millions of times less silt into salmon streams. Why are these criminals given a pass?
It would be simple but expensive to haul it out in trucks for proper disposal.
I do not know about the former reservoir bottoms below the Keno Dam but upper basin "muck" makes a excellent soil amendment but too "hot" to put much directly on plants.
Quote from: oc1 on August 09, 2024, 07:18:02 PMIt took a century to screw up the river and it will probably take a century to undo it all.
If they had dredged all the silt out of the lakes before dewatering and decommissioning them then where would they have put the spoil? What land would have been sacrificed to contain it?
Over that century, what did hydroelectric power do for the surrounding communities? Will they really be able to bring the salmon runs back? By the time it's all done, will they consider the loss of hydroelectric power more important than salmon?
Face it, humans are just a horrible species.
Humans are the worst thing ever to happen to the planet. Thannos was spot on.
Quote from: Gfish on August 09, 2024, 10:13:09 PMWow. We all "be Damed" with this one.
My favorite place on the river was below Iron Gate.
We drove up to Irongate Dam from Hornbook and the river is disgusting. I really hoped to see salmon and steelhead in the upper basin before I pass on but it looks like that won't happen. I wish I was driving the jeep, we would have continued up river past all 4 former dam sites. Topsey Grade is a 4x4 only "road", steep, rough and narrow along a deep canyon.
I used to notice the abnormal color on the lower river, fishing Winter Steelhead in the late 70's, occasionally seeing little clumps of algae. Prolly formed in the reservoirs. Then in the late 80's I saw that Upper Klamath Lake was kinda eutrophicated in the Summer and Fall. Lotsa farm/ranch runoff, I guess.
Cheap electricity, plentiful irrigation opportunities, "OH BOY PROFIT"!
We drove up to Irongate Dam from Hornbook and the river is disgusting. I really hoped to see salmon and steelhead in the upper basin before I pass on but it looks like that won't happen. I wish I was driving the jeep, we would have continued up river past all 4 former dam sites. Topsey Grade is a 4x4 only "road", steep, rough and narrow along a deep canyon.
[/quote]
Dam removal comes with a high price when it comes to ecosystems. 2011-2014, 2 dams were removed on the Elwha river on the Olympic peninsula here in Washington. Both dams had 100 years of sediment and 10 years later, the only salmon are hatchery origin, because the silt clogged the lower spawning beds, and the wild salmon have still not come close to any kind of recovery. The Elwha was world class river in early 1900's, with salmon that regularly reached 80-100+ pounds. The pipe dream was removing the dams would bring those huge salmon back, but in reality, those brutes were all but extinct, and the supposed old time spawning beds above the removed dams that produced those monster salmon will take hundreds of years or more to be spawning habitat once again, but the huge salmon will never return, only man made hatchery origin, and hatcheries are famous for using brother and sister to make hatchlings, which isn't how mother nature intended. Trailer trash is what they end up with. No DNA diversity is the nail in the coffin
Very sad to hear they're now trying this same scenario on the Klamath. Guess we never learn from our mistakes
I worked in a Private non-profit hatchery North of the Klamath R., a tributary to the Smith R. Occasionally a stray from another river system would show-up. But yeah, we spawned 5 females to one male, not great for diversity. Yet another aspect is gathering wild fish from the main stem of a system and breeding them all together, thus eliminating the special genetics from strains unique to specific tributaries all up through the system.
Quote from: Keta on August 09, 2024, 11:15:19 PMThe article I linked is from a pro dam source but I personally saw the river this week. Here is very little industrial pollution in the basin and most of the agricultural land is cattle pasture but we have naturally occuring arsenic and Upper Klamath Lake bottom is 100' plus deep bird droppings and decomposing algae. No telling what is in the treated efluant coming out of Klamath Falls, the only "city" on the river and a bit over 28,000 people, but I am sure there is bad things people flush. It will be the clay and naturally occuring nitrates and phosphates, from years of dying algae, that is being dumped into the river that is the problem. The clay will not flush like silt and will cover gravel beds for years if not forever. The clay and silt is being dumped into the river with heavy equipment and the river is running dark brown 100 miles down river from the lowest dam, and most likely out into the ocean. People have been fined for putting millions of times less silt into salmon streams. Why are these criminals given a pass?
It would be simple but expensive to haul it out in trucks for proper disposal.
I do not know about the former reservoir bottoms below the Keno Dam but upper basin "muck" makes a excellent soil amendment but too "hot" to put much directly on plants.
I just read some more, and you are right that toxicity of the silt was not the issue. It was just the sheer volume of the stuff. If they try to truck it out, in addition to the cost, it would take much longer to remove the stuff, resulting in many more years of silt in the river. They are betting on it being better to get it all over with quickly.
I would also find it sickening to watch them bulldoze silt into the Klamath. Hopefully, this was the best (or least worse) option.
-J
The Klamath is a upside down river. Most rivers start in the mountains and flow into the ocean at flatter ground. The Klamath starts in farmland and marsh and hits the ocean in mountains. Klamath and Agency lakes are large but shallow petri dishes for algae. Wood River and Spring Creek come out of the base of the mountains and flows 100% through pasture land. It is seepage from Crater Lake and high in minerals but christol clear. The Williamson starts in a large ranch surrounded by mountains and goes into Upper Klamath Marsh picking up a tea color from tanic acid. Spring Creek increases the flow by 8-10 times and clears the water some. The Sprague starts in the mountains and flows through farm and ranch land for miles then enters the Williamson, clearing it more. Wood River flows into Agency Lake where it picks up muck and algae, the Williamson does the same into Upper Klamath Lake. Agency Lake feeds Klamath Lake and the outflow is Link River. Link River is short and flows into Lake Euwana, the headwaters of the Klamath. The only city on the Klamath is Klamath Falls and it is not large. The river picks up some AG run off and treated sewage above the Keno Dam but from there there are only very small towns and native villages.
The lower 4 dams should have never been built, especially the lower 3, (in California) without fish passes. The Keno and Link River dams were built on top of natural lava dams.
Lee, would getting above average rain help flush the basins, or just add to the silt load?
I don't think it would make much difference with them using heavy equipment to dump silt and clay into the river. Once brush and grasses get establish on the former reservoir bottom heavy rain will just add more.
After they quit dumping and plants have grown enougha flood event like the '64 flood might help.
First salmon spotted migrating past what used to be the Iron Gate dam:
https://apnews.com/article/klamath-dam-removal-california-oregon-salmon-river-f3c44eaa8caebfd79fed54e68da862f4 (https://apnews.com/article/klamath-dam-removal-california-oregon-salmon-river-f3c44eaa8caebfd79fed54e68da862f4)
-J
They/it will have to get to Spencer Creek, above where JC Boyle Dam was and at the upper end of JC Boyle Reservoir, to find a place to spawn.
Hey it's a start.
It would have been a better start if they did not dump millions of not billions of yards of clay and silt on top of spawning steelhead, covering the downstream gravel with a layer of clay and suffocating all life below the dams with silt, including hundreds of thousand Chinook smolts below Irongate Dam. They were dumping clay and silt into the river with large loaders and backhoes. The original plan was to truck it to areas where it could be safely dumped, only a few miles for JC Boyle.
I was hoping to see spawning steelhead and salmon in the Williamson River next year upstream of where I work.
They're pretty proud of what they've done. Lot of articles lately touting it. Typical bureaucratic propaganda. ;)
Not a lot about dumping the silt and clay though. From what I saw all of the life from invertebrates to fish have been wiped out if they could not get into the tributaries. I saw hundreds of dead crawfish mixed in with dead trout, steelhead, salmon and endangered suckers. Elk, deer and wild horses have died in the muck that was on the reservoir bottom too.
We need a major 100 year flood or more to flush the system but the upper and mid Klamath Basin is dry country and it might not happen.
The weaker-than-normal polar vortex is predicted to give you guys higher-than-normal precipitation this winter.
Such a great drainage system. A wonderful aquifer system around the Upper Klamath. Up at Fort Creek(Agency lake area) the water was only 8 inches underground in some places. Clear, cool and nutrient dense, perfect for rearing salmonids...
I've seen Salmon and Steelhead get through some nasty looking warm water and on up those long fish ladders on the Columbia/Snake system... who knows...
We don't know how this is going to turn out yet. Don't know if any of y'all read the studies I that linked to earlier (I just scanned through them TBH), but once the dams were removed, the sediment was either going to get washed downstream or it was going to get trucked out. The sheer volume of sediment made removal not only costly, but would have taken multiple seasons to remove, so either way there was going to be lots of sediment getting washed down the river.
The "least bad" option according to the studies was to get it as much of it over with as quickly as possible. This was also the option favored by the tribes and the environmentalists, whose interest are more aligned with ecosystem recovery. The cost of the studies ran into the millions if I remember correctly. These were trained folk with resources, trying to get it right.
This doesn't mean that they did get it right, but they have a better shot than taking a poll of us folk in the cheap seats.
Automatically assuming corruption and bureaucratic incompetence is a self-fulfilling prophecy. You get the government that you expect to have.
I am encouraged to see that Chinook are already starting to fight their way past the first dam site. I hope that the plan works out well enough that Lee's wish to personally see them return to the upper river is fulfilled.
-J
Quote from: Gfish on October 09, 2024, 07:16:53 PMSuch a great drainage system. A wonderful aquifer system around the Upper Klamath. Up at Fort Creek(Agency lake area) the water was only 8 inches underground in some places. Clear, cool and nutrient dense, perfect for rearing salmonids...
I've seen Salmon and Steelhead get through some nasty looking warm water and on up those long fish ladders on the Columbia/Snake system... who knows...
The Wood River system is a jewel. The Williamson above spring creek is not so good and the river in the canyon east of Spring Creek Hill is not passable, even when water is flowing out of Upper Klamath Marsh. I think Spring Creek is too cold for good spawning. H Sections of the Sprague River have good spawning habitat but it is mostly soft bottom, above Bly to Gadowa springs is prime habitat. Link River would support spawning in the late fall but it is running close to 70°F now.
I have heard from reliable sources that the Klamath above Keno often has zero oxygen and is all mud bottom. The Klamath above the JC Boyle dam site looks good once the river re establishes a channel, right now the upper part of the former reservoir is running 200 yards wide and 6" deep.
"Us folk in the cheap seats". Ha! Good one, story of my life.
Quote from: jurelometer on October 09, 2024, 07:34:22 PMAutomatically assuming corruption and bureaucratic incompetence is a self-fulfilling prophecy. You get the government that you expect to have.
I doubt corruption is a factor but I am 100% certain "profit" is. A slow draw down and planting native vegetation to stabilize the former lake bottom and trucking the muck to sagebrush flats a relatively close haul from JC Boyle would have cost far more but the system below JC Boyle would not be dead now. The area around Copco 1 and 2 would require trucking it further than JC Boyle and Irongate but there is suitable places a few miles from JC Boyle and between Irongate and Montague to dump it, the pot farms around Montague might even pay for it
Silt will flush out relatively quick, clay will not.
This is the first chinook spotted that made it past the final dam site -J. C, Boyle. Date: Oct 16. Several more were spotted shortly after.
(https://dfw.state.or.us/news/images/2024/Oct_16_2024_Fall-run_Chinook_Salmon_Klamath_River_Oregon_01_ODFW_photo.jpg)
A few salmon ain't a recovery, but it is still cool to see.
Lee: Is that Keno stretch the last hurdle for salmon making it up all the way to the Williamson?
-J
The Keno and Link river dams above JC Boyle have good fish passes but the river quality above the Keno dam is usually not good with low to no desolved oxygen. Once they get to Upper Klamath Lake they have 20+ miles to go to reach the first potential spawning gravel.
He river above JC Boyle and below the Keno dam has OK conditions for spawning.
Awesome to see!
This morning I saw another article about salmon showing up above JC Boyle Dam. The tributary was not named but there is only one, Spencer Creek. The lower section has potential but the middle section has little durable gravel and the upper section is blocked by a culvert and small waterfall. If more fish get to Spencer Creek tere is a good chance for successful spawning. However this creek is not in the upper basin, that begins above the canyon just down river of Keno, where it starts it's way through the Cascade Mountains.
The next possible spawning area could be the mile long Link River 10 miles above Keno. After this section it is 20 or more miles to the Wood, Williamson and Sprague rivers. The Wood and sections of the Sprague have the best spawning gravel with some in the Williamson.
Quote from: Keta on October 19, 2024, 01:20:59 PMThis morning I saw another article about salmon showing up above JC Boyle Dam. The tributary was not named but there is only one, Spencer Creek. The lower section has potential but the middle section has little durable gravel and the upper section is blocked by a culvert and small waterfall. If more fish get to Spencer Creek tere is a good chance for successful spawning. However this creek is not in the upper basin, that begins above the canyon just down river of Keno, where it starts it's way through the Cascade Mountains.
The next possible spawning area could be the mile long Link River 10 miles above Keno. After this section it is 20 or more miles to the Wood, Williamson and Sprague rivers. The Wood and sections of the Sprague have the best spawning gravel with some in the Williamson.
Good call. That photo was from Spencer Creek. In addition to following their sense of smell to the source above where they were born, they must be looking for good spawning habitat.
ODFW also spotted a redd and a spent female in Jenny Creek. I guess that is off Iron Gate.
If they are seeing a dozen or so, there has to be more. I think that they also spotted a lamprey past Iron Gate. Whether or not the plan was the best one, the fish sure are stepping up to the plate to do their part...
https://www.sfchronicle.com/california/article/klamath-dam-removal-salmon-19844792.php (https://www.sfchronicle.com/california/article/klamath-dam-removal-salmon-19844792.php)
-J
One article I read said the Klamath tribes are excited about the salmon showing up in their nets. This just boggles my mind
Be interesting if they could find spent-tagged fish to see their possible origins. The nose tags have a code on them and the fish are tagged as juveniles.
Since there has not been spawning areas available for a long time, these returning fish must have been hatchery reared with hatchery genetics. No?
The river below Irongate had a lot of places for spawning in the fall after the river temperature dropped so there were native coho, chinook and steelhead.
The largest tributary of Jennie Creek historically gets dewatered in the spring and diverted to the Rogue Valley.
Quote from: oc1 on October 19, 2024, 07:54:58 PMSince there has not been spawning areas available for a long time, these returning fish must have been hatchery reared with hatchery genetics. No?
They are following the imprinted scents to get them in the neighborhood. som of the scents come from upstream of the dam, blended from multiple tributaries.
Since river/stream habitat can change from year to year, it would not make evolutionary sense to try to return to a very specific location. I would expect them to hone in the the general neighborhood and then find suitable spawning habitat. with some portion willing to spread out even farther to fill in any new suitable habitat.
Since they had dies-offs of fish milling around below the dams, I suspect there were fish whose programming was already pointing them upstream, they just couldn't get there. Now they can.
There are probably studies on this, but not feeling the urge to look for them at the moment.
-J
A high % of fish stray and spawn in other systems.
They're getting sophisticated and very picky about salmon genetics these days. They have been able to differentiate fish from different water sheds with DNA. Now, they're identifying genetically different subpopulations which have different spawning habits and timing within a system. At times, they talk about a subpopulation becoming extinct even though the species as a whole is doing fine.
They can try to return waterways to their "natural" state but probably don't know the natural state of the fish subpopulations that were there before the dams. It will be interesting to watch how secession and evolution (re-evolution) happens. I bet they have some techno-tricks up their sleeve for Klamath?
One of the major issues for the Klamath is the parasite c.shasta. They are in every stream in the North Pacific but the Klamath has far more than any other system. If you put non Klamath fish in the river or lake they rapidly die. Biologists have been trying to deal with this for years. The parasite uses a intermediate host to reproduce that is attached to the weeds in the river, historically the flow of the upper river was drastically reduced by late summer, Link River often dried up completely.This reduced the c. shasta levels but they have kept the river higher than it was in the past allowing the parasite levels to explode. Many of the tributaries below Irongate Dam have been over exploited, the Shasta River has been de watered several times by farms, the Salmon River by farms and pot growers and a very high % of the Trinity River ( the largest Klamath tributary) goes to the LA Basin, despite several court rulings.
https://microbiology.oregonstate.edu/research/aquatic-microbiology-ecology/monitoring-studies#:~:text=Ceratonova%20shasta%20in%20the%20Klamath%20River&text=Ceratonova%20shasta%20is%20a%20freshwater,impacts%20in%20the%20Klamath%20River.
I have heard that ODFW has planted salmon in the upper tributaries to jump start the recovery.
Hatchery environments are like laboratories for breeding various fish diseases. Crowded raceways and ponds, low water quality, crappy diet and constant skin and fin injuries(they bite each other chasing after pellet feed).
Quote from: Keta on October 20, 2024, 12:10:12 PMOne of the major issues for the Klamath is the parasite c.shasta. They are in every stream in the North Pacific but the Klamath has far more than any other system. If you put non Klamath fish in the river or lake they rapidly die. Biologists have been trying to deal with this for years. The parasite uses a intermediate host to reproduce that is attached to the weeds in the river, historically the flow of the upper river was drastically reduced by late summer, Link River often dried up completely.This reduced the c. shasta levels but they have kept the river higher than it was in the past allowing the parasite levels to explode. Many of the tributaries below Irongate Dam have been over exploited, the Shasta River has been de watered several times by farms, the Salmon River by farms and pot growers and a very high % of the Trinity River ( the largest Klamath tributary) goes to the LA Basin, despite several court rulings.
https://microbiology.oregonstate.edu/research/aquatic-microbiology-ecology/monitoring-studies#:~:text=Ceratonova%20shasta%20in%20the%20Klamath%20River&text=Ceratonova%20shasta%20is%20a%20freshwater,impacts%20in%20the%20Klamath%20River.
I have heard that ODFW has planted salmon in the upper tributaries to jump start the recovery.
Wow. That should keep the fish squeezers busy for a while.
Quote from: Gfish on October 20, 2024, 05:37:38 PMHatchery environments are like laboratories for breeding various fish diseases. Crowded raceways and ponds, low water quality, crappy diet and constant skin and fin injuries(they bite each other chasing after pellet feed).
It gets even more complicated. They can release disease free but non-resistant hatchery fish from stock from a nearby river, which can allow this parasite to multiply to such a high level that it will overwhelm the infection load capacity of the resistant native fish in the Klamath.
I followed Lee's link to a couple more papers.
They just recently figured out that the only viable intermediate host (a type of tube worm) is restricted to the Shasta and Williamette watersheds, which explains why only salmon and trout from these rivers are resistant to the parasite.
There are variants of this parasite too. The ones more likely to infect the one-and-done spawners like chinook and coho are more deadly, while the one more likely to infect multiple spawners like steelhead usually result in a chronic infection.
River flows and water temps affect the abundance of the intermediate host, with the effects of damming and water diversions contributing to a larger populations.
Fascinating reading here:
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11010528/ (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11010528/)
Anybody who thinks they know exactly how this project is going to turn out is fooling themselves. But at least we are trying to unwind the damage for a change.
-J
Quote from: Gfish on October 20, 2024, 05:37:38 PMHatchery environments are like laboratories for breeding various fish diseases. Crowded raceways and ponds, low water quality, crappy diet and constant skin and fin injuries(they bite each other chasing after pellet feed).
....and the hatcheries also fertilize eggs willy nilly, and sometimes mate a brother and sister without knowing.
West coast Canadian hatcheries use broodstock from captured wild male salmon to keep that from happening, and have much more robust returns of mature fish. Wish our hatcheries managers would learn from our neighbors to the north
Maybe it makes more sense to be stocking Lost River Sucker and Shortnose Sucker instead of salmon and trout. The sucker will eat the worms that harbor the parasite that kills the salmon.
There are well-known techniques for mass production of suckers and other members of the carp family. Since these particular suckers are endangered species the hatchery gets extra points and extra funding.
USFWS is already building a sucker hatchery there that's scheduled for completion in 2026. However, it is only 8.5 acres of ponds with a production goal of only 60,000 fish per year. That's less than two fish per square meter. They need to think big and broaden the goal from saving the suckers to saving the entire ecosystem. The century-old existing Klamath Hatchery says it produces 3 million trout per year. Hatcheries always lie about their numbers but it's still probably a lot more than 60,000 fish per year.
Ooh... more interesting stuff.
It looks like the endemic sucker species (four total) are affected by the dams, but also by the draining of wetlands/water diversions for farming, so the hatchery work is focused more on preserving the species until the the lakes and streams are in good enough shape to support a recovering population. Juveniles in the wild are not currently surviving long enough to reach reproductive age, and the existing reproductive population is aging out. They could be one big drought event from extinction.
Didn't see any claims that a recovered sucker population would affect salmon parasites, but considering how huge the historic biomass was, it seems unlikely that the basin ecosystem would be the same without them.
Here is one overview:
https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/70209229 (https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/70209229)
Stuff that Lee probably knows all about, but I was just vaguely aware of:
A big chunk of restoring the watershed comes at the expense of the ranchers and farmers in the area, which were traditionally family operations. Many were homesteads granted to returning WWII vets. Burdened with more frequent droughts and increasing water diversion restrictions, some (many?) are selling out to big Ag operations, which brings a different set of challenges to making the necessary tradeoffs. I am not going to open this can of worms, as it is would get political real fast. :-X
Fixing the Klamath piecemeal just keeps getting more complicated, but it seems to be the only option.
-J
Similar efforts are underway in MI
Most hydro dams are in disrepair and owners do not want to pour in the $$
So overall taking out dams is good for salmon ??
Quote from: jurelometer on October 21, 2024, 05:35:00 PMDidn't see any claims that a recovered sucker population would affect salmon parasites, but considering how huge the historic biomass was, it seems unlikely that the basin ecosystem would be the same without them.
What made me wonder was a photo somewhere in the links above showing worm collection. Those things grow on a hard surface as well as in the substrate where you'd expect to find a tube polychaete. If a PhD in SCuBA gear can scrape them off a boulder, then why-the-heck hasn't some small fish or crustacean come along and eaten them? Tube polychaetes are a delectable worm in a mucus sack. Any small fish, crawfish or glass shrimp would love to find some. It doesn't make sense unless things are much worse than I imagined.
Quote from: oc1 on October 22, 2024, 05:06:39 AMQuote from: jurelometer on October 21, 2024, 05:35:00 PMDidn't see any claims that a recovered sucker population would affect salmon parasites, but considering how huge the historic biomass was, it seems unlikely that the basin ecosystem would be the same without them.
What made me wonder was a photo somewhere in the links above showing worm collection. Those things grow on a hard surface as well as in the substrate where you'd expect to find a tube polychaete. If a PhD in SCuBA gear can scrape them off a boulder, then why-the-heck hasn't some small fish or crustacean come along and eaten them? Tube polychaetes are a delectable worm in a mucus sack. Any small fish, crawfish or glass shrimp would love to find some. It doesn't make sense unless things are much worse than I imagined.
These suckers are big suckers, one species getting up to around a yard long. From what I just read, Klamath suckers were historically abundant enough that they were harvested by pitchfork. There was even a commercial fishery. That means a lot of zooplankton, bugs and worms getting chowed down by a lot of fish.
They also have those toxic algae blooms in the lake nowadays which cause dieoffs of suckers annd other species. Also a loss of wetlands for rearing juveniles and the food that they eat. So things got pretty bad in multiple dimensions.
Quote from: Gobi King on October 21, 2024, 10:36:55 PMSimilar efforts are underway in MI
Most hydro dams are in disrepair and owners do not want to pour in the $$
So overall taking out dams is good for salmon ??
Pretty much. Dams usually screw up habitat, and impede migration. They can also help with some useful stuff like controlled releases during droughts to keep the rivers flowing and cold. But pretty much always a net negative.
The crazy part is that since the ecosystem has adapted to the presence of the dam, yanking out the dam causes a yet another adaptation cycle, which brings a new set of issues to manage. It is not simply unwinding back to the good old days.
That is how this thread got started. We are kicking around some of the ramifications of yanking out the Klamath dams.
-J
It's weird because a century ago they were building dams as fast as they could so we'd all be civilized. Now, they can't get rid of them fast enough so we'll all be environmentally conscious. Something like 1,300 dams have been removed in the last 30 years. They just blew up one in Maryland a few weeks ago. In MD, they are trying to restore herring and alewife for the Chesapeake Bay. If it goes forward, the Snake River project will a big one; that also in the name of salmon migration and spawning.
From a fishing perspective, the removal of some dams would be catastrophic. Without the Santee Cooper dam in SC there would be no landlocked striped bass or the recreational fishing economy that grew up around them.
Interesting stuff. Depends on where you're coming from. A "net negative" or net positive. The Smith and Chetco Rivers in N. Cal. & S. Or. showed me which side I land on. The real kicker though, was experiencing Alaskan Rivers. Choked with various Salmonid runs all throughout the warm season.
The Snake R. system would be interesting to see change. Those are some long-tall dams. Navigation, electricity production, irrigation and recreation would suffer, though.
A big part of the "mullet" (sucker) problem has to do with 20,000 cormorants (relatively new to the upper basin) thousands of native pelicans, mergansers and western greebe eating them.
The Klamath Tribe has had a "mullet" hatchery on the Sprague River for decades and the nature conservancy has flooded thousands of acres on the north end of Klamath and NW side of Agency Lake over 20 years ago.
Artificial downstream water demand has reduced the size of Tule Lake and a lot of it was de-watered a few years ago. One good thing about dewatering Tule Lake was it reduced the levels of avian botulism on the refuge.
All I can say is that we didn't see salmon in the upper Elwha for something like 4 years, and it took over a decade to be certain that there were actual returns. We still won't be able to fish it for another 8 years, and I'm certain it will be another decade after that again.
Humans aren't horrible, we were just ignorant, and there is never an answer that everyone sees as the best. Without a doubt, these removals are about getting votes, but at the end of the day, several human lifetimes from now which is really the only frame of reference that matters, them being gone is a good thing.
The Man
The silt will wash downstream the next few high water events but the clay will be around for a long time. The spawning habitat above Irongate is no where near the claimed 40 miles, more like 150 miles, and much less than the clay covered gravel below Irongate Dam. The dams needed to go but the way they did it was greedy driven stupidity.
From a couple days ago: Over a hundred chinook past the dams, 20 or so reds spotted. I think a steelhead too. Video taken of spawners by the Yurok tribe:
https://www.facebook.com/TheYurokTribe/videos/1282431603111752/ (https://www.facebook.com/TheYurokTribe/videos/1282431603111752/)
They are pushing upstream, looking healthy, and a few tried to get up the fish ladder at the Keno dam, but no joy. There is probably more work needed to enable larger fish to get past Keno.
The tribe and the biologists are pretty happy with how things are going so far, but a long way to go:
https://www.ijpr.org/environment-energy-and-transportation/2024-11-01/fish-biologists-collaborate-to-track-pioneering-klamath-river-salmon (https://www.ijpr.org/environment-energy-and-transportation/2024-11-01/fish-biologists-collaborate-to-track-pioneering-klamath-river-salmon)
Got my fingers crossed...
-J
Unlike the lower 3 dams in California the Oregon dams, JC Boyle, Keno and Link River dams, were built with fish ladders. The ladder at the Link River Dam was replaced a decade or so ago with a modern ladder that allows the klamath and lost river suckers access to Klamath Lake.
As far as steelhead on the Klamath I do not think it has a fall run.
Where we gon git all de e-lec-tricity we's used ta usin?
Will the kilowatt-hour price go up? Alternative sources?
The lower 3 dams generated less power than the upper dam, JC Boyle, and it was used for peaking power as it did not have enough flow to run continuously. Power wise the loss of these 4 dams is not a big concern and none were flood control or irrigation dams.
Removing them was a good thing, dumping silt on spawning steelhead and covering many miles of spawning gravel with clay is a tragedy and will not replaced by the little suitable gravel areas above the dams, the 400 mile number is a lie as most is mud bottom and the main tributary of Jenny Creek is mostly diverter to the Rogue Basin at the Howard Prairie dam. Lower Spencer Creek, the Wood and parts of the Sprague and Williamson (below Spring Creek) should be good.
Quote from: Gfish on November 02, 2024, 02:57:22 PMWhere we gon git all de e-lec-tricity we's used ta usin?
Will the kilowatt-hour price go up? Alternative sources?
Yeah, it's ironic how the hydro power is being trashed while the world looks for alternatives to fossil fuels. When they started building hydro dams around the turn of the century there weren't so many people and having a couple of light bulbs in the house was a huge improvement in quality of life.
We have 2 dams in SoCal slated for removal. I hope they are watching what's happening up north.
Malibu Creek Dam
https://www.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=28459
Matilda Creek Dam
https://matilijadam.org/about/
The Malibu Creek Dam has been a useless POS for many decades, I will look into the other.
Didn't know Steelhead were that far South. Heard about their range North increasing up in Alaska. My guess would be numbers/river, not so much new to a river system.
Quote from: Gfish on November 14, 2024, 03:14:25 PMDidn't know Steelhead were that far South. Heard about their range North increasing up in Alaska.
Some say that apart from humans Rainbow Trout are The Most Prolific Invasive Species Planetwide.
Quote from: whalebreath on November 17, 2024, 06:11:26 AMQuote from: Gfish on November 14, 2024, 03:14:25 PMDidn't know Steelhead were that far South. Heard about their range North increasing up in Alaska.
Some say that apart from humans Rainbow Trout are The Most Prolific Invasive Species Planetwide.
Steelhead are naturally occurring in Southern California. With the increasing number of drought years and hotter summers, survival at this southern end of the their range doesn't look good. As Greg noted, fishermen recognize a northward shift of some species on the USA West Coast, but don't know what the scientists think about all this, and whether this includes steelhead.
I would't use the term "most prolific invasive species" for Rainbow trout. Prolific refers to fertility and reproduction rate. You might have an argument for one of the more widely distributed invasive fish species, if we keep score by countries and not square miles.
Here is where the scientists keep score:
https://www.iucngisd.org/gisd/ (https://www.iucngisd.org/gisd/)
I counted something over 80 countries for introduced Rainbow Trout, but kinda doubt that they are going to be a big problem in places like French Polynesia.
-J
More good news: Now hundreds of spawners just a month or so after final dam removals.
https://apnews.com/article/klamath-dam-removal-salmon-spawning-4240169b4bfa327a6a67383ab536e971 (https://apnews.com/article/klamath-dam-removal-salmon-spawning-4240169b4bfa327a6a67383ab536e971)
I am relying mostly on scientific reports and national news media. The local news media up there is mostly a source of toxic waste, making it impossible to get a reliable local perspective. While I am probably not in the same camp as Lee on the recovery program, I am appreciative of reading the firsthand observations from someone who lives there and knows the watershed.
If you believe the local tribes and the scientists, things are working out as good/better than projected at this stage. But they are also saying that it is still way too early to know much for sure. And we are talking decades here, not a season or two.
Keeping my fingers crossed...
-J
I am pro recovery but not happy with what they did to the river below Irongate. The lower 3 dams did not produce as much as the upper dam, JC Boyle, and it was a peaking dam with large daily swings in the surface elevation. It had the only fish ladder of the 4 dams and had some redband trout (not stocker rainbow) but was infested with non indigenous bass, yellow perch, bullhead and I think some idiot put goldfish in it. The river was diverted at the JC Boyle Dam into a canal and penstock to the powerhouse and less than 10% went in the river bed and down the canyon. The canyon between the dam and powerhouse has several springs that cooled what little warm water they let "escape" to perfect temperature for redband trout. It was a young persons spot to fish due to the deep and steep canyon walls but it was full of smallish, 18"-24", trout. It is now filled with the river that exceeds 70° by July, but the fish can stack up at the springs. Unfortunately stacking up will make them easy targets.
Getting rid of the dams was a good thing.
When I was much younger, and not very smart —- I would hunt bear around the North side of the Klamath.
In the afternoon, arounds Scott's Bar where I was camped —- I would fish for Steelhead and Salmon.
Last time up there was in '76.
Best, Fred
I usually hunted fully clothed, especially in Alaska.
I saw a drone video of salmon in the lower 200 yards of Spencer Creek, 50 yards of it being the former bottom of JC Boyle Reservoir. It looked like several dozen fish stacked up below a section too shallow to pass over. With the rain and melting snow they should be able to continue upstream but the water is cold now. The lower few miles is good spawning habitat, the next several miles is soft bottom and marshy with willow lined banks, good rearing habitat as long as the water temperature is cool enough. If they can get past the mid section there is several miles of good spawning habitat until they will be blocked by a culvert under a road that is not fish friendly.
Matliha dam is up above Ojai, part of the Ventura river. I went to high school in Ojai in the early 70's and we'd go up there and do what high school kids do. Never fished that area, never looked fishy. It didn't hold much water and don't know why it was there. Good riddance
There was a minor high water event on the Klamath 12/29 that most likely moved silt downriver but I doubt the clay has not moved. The Sprague River, the main tributary of the Williamson River, is flooding but Upper Klamath Lake is buffering down Stream flow.
(https://alantani.com/gallery/39/1583-030125162117.png)
(https://alantani.com/gallery/39/1583-030125162811.png)
(https://alantani.com/gallery/39/1583-030125163028.png)
Oct 2025 update:
Fall run Chinook are moving through the Klamath now. Looks like some made it all the way past the lake and into the Williamson and Sprague this year.
"The run so far this year has been incredibly exciting, and we're expanding our monitoring program on an almost daily basis to keep adapting," said Mark Hereford, ODFW Klamath fisheries reintroduction project leader. "It is incredible to be a part of this historic return and see where these salmon go and what they do."
https://www.opb.org/article/2025/10/17/salmon-clear-klamath-dams/ (https://www.opb.org/article/2025/10/17/salmon-clear-klamath-dams/)
So far so good...
-J
Cool!
Klamath lake is big, fairly shallow and on the alkaline side of the scale. Pretty good trout fishing in the Winter.
The fishing on Upper Klamath Lake was never "hot" but the redband trout are large. In the last 10 years the trout numbers have declined. I was on the lake from sun up to after sundown on Friday and Saturday harvesting algae and saw no jumping trout. Agency Lake is in better shape but not what it was in the past. The trout fishing in the Williamson River should be picking up with the cool weather and the fishing on the Wood River should be good now.
My first use/ownership of a baitcaster was on the shoreline of the Lake in the Winter, using a night crawler on a bottom rig. Didn't really know what I was doing casting or fishing at a new-to-me place. When I unexpectedly got bit, I got so excited I dropped the reel, and unbeknownst to me, the drag star hit a rock and bent. Every time I cranked the handle, the star hit the reel and would loosen-up. Of course I lost a nice Trout, got frustrated with using that type of reel and pissed about how cheap that Shimano Bantam seemed to be. Would of looked pretty funny to anyone watching...
After that, I mostly fished the Williamson River, which was great in the evening and at night.
Spring Creek keeps the Williamson River cool in the summer and "warmer" during a hard winter.