Ca Dept Fish and Game Killing Salmon...And now changeing their name
California hatchery killing salmon instead of breeding them
It seems a contradiction: A California hatchery charged with ensuring salmon procreate despite the dams blocking their native runs is killing fish by the thousands without allowing them to breed.
Since Sept. 17, the Feather River Hatchery in Oroville has been killing all salmon that enter the hatchery near the base of Oroville Dam. These fish are not being bred to make more salmon, as has been standard practice for decades, but instead are being donated to area food banks.
The reasoning is rooted in new efforts to strengthen the species. The California Department of Fish and Game, which operates the hatchery, says it can't be sure whether the fish entering the hatchery at this time of year are fall- or spring-run salmon. Rather than breed them anyway, as it has in the past, Fish and Game is culling them from the population based on research that shows it's healthier for the species to keep the two runs genetically distinct.
"The operation has been critiqued by academia and conservation groups for quite awhile," said Stafford Lehr, fisheries branch chief at the Department of Fish and Game. "It was clearly pointed out that we needed a clearer separation of the runs, and this is where we start doing it. We're taking this opportunity because it's a good year for (salmon) returns."
The new practice was expected to end Friday.
As of Thursday, about 7,800 salmon had been "culled" from the hatchery without being bred. These fish will go to food banks, including those in Butte County and the Enterprise Rancheria, a branch of the Maidu Indian community. Some may also make their way to Sacramento via the regional Foodlink program.
Losing these fish from the breeding program does not sit well with fishing groups. Their members are eager for every opportunity to boost salmon populations after three historically bad seasons.
"I think it's a bad idea," said Zeke Grader, executive director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations. "The hatchery was built to mitigate not only for losses of upstream habitat but also the operation of the (water) projects. It flies in the face of their legal obligations."
The problem is that spring- and fall-run salmon cross paths at the hatchery for a period of time each fall, and it is difficult for hatchery managers to tell them apart. Called "tweeners," this body of fish has historically been bred at the hatchery despite the fact that they have completely different migratory patterns.
The result has been a loss of genetic diversity for both runs, which recent research shows threatens their survival by weakening their ability to survive changes in the environment. It also runs contrary to the Endangered Species Act, which considers the spring run a threatened species.
"We were concerned about how would it be perceived by not utilizing them," Lehr acknowledged. "But it's very clear we need to do everything we can to keep these runs separate."
The two runs cross paths because of Oroville Dam, built in 1968 by the California Department of Water Resources as part of the State Water Project.
Before the dam, spring-run salmon swam far upriver in spring and summer. High flows caused by snowmelt allowed them to reach high-elevation portions of the river, which would become inaccessible by fall. These fish would then wait through the summer in deep pools, and spawn in the fall.
Oroville dam eliminated access to this upstream habitat entirely. The hatchery was built to allow the species to survive despite this obstacle.
The fall run moves upriver in late summer and fall, and because flows are diminished, it could not reach the pools where the spring run waited to spawn. Instead, fall-run salmon would spawn in lower-elevation areas.
Now, spring-run fish swim as far as the hatchery, where they simply wait for the genetic signal to start spawning. By then, the fall-run salmon have arrived behind them to start their own spawning run.
Outdated hatchery practices caused the species to become at least partially interbred. In some cases, remaining wild spawners from both species bred together in the river while queued up below the dam.
One effect is that the spring run has begun to arrive later, and the fall run earlier. This led to the "tweener" period in which hatchery managers can no longer be sure which species they are breeding.
Culling this group is a first step toward distinguishing the runs again.
"If we can get that separation back and have the spring run spawning prior to the fall run coming back, over time this should become less and less needed," said Kathy Hill, a fisheries program manager at Fish and Game.
The practice of culling these fish is new to the Feather River Hatchery but has been a regular practice elsewhere, including at Trinity River Hatchery, also operated by Fish and Game. Nor is it unusual that the fish are being killed. Even in the wild, all salmon die after spawning.
Hill said the hatchery expects to meet spawning targets for both spring and fall runs despite the culling. For spring run, the annual goal is to breed 2,000 fish and produce 2 million juvenile fish, or smolts. For fall run, the goal is to breed 6,500 adults and 6 million smolts.
What happens at the Feather River Hatchery is important because it is the largest producer of spring-run salmon. Although the species still breeds in the wild in Sacramento River tributaries such as Butte, Deer and Mill creeks, the hatchery is critical to sustaining the population.
It's also a major producer of fall-run salmon, which underpins the commercial fishery in the ocean. That's why Grader opposes culling. Until habitat improvements help more salmon breed and survive in the wild, hatchery production is vital, he said.
"I don't think this is how you protect your wild fish stocks," Grader said.
Eliminating the overlap of fall and spring runs was one recommendation in a June report by a science panel that reviewed California hatchery practices. And while culling is a crude practice, several independent fishery experts told The Bee they support it as an interim measure.
Keeping the runs distinct is important, they said, because each has unique adaptations that may help salmon survive future environmental disruptions, such as climate change.
"It's never a good thing when you have to kill fish," said Brad Cavallo, a senior fisheries scientist at Cramer Fish Sciences, a consulting firm. "But in the interim, it makes sense to try to force some separation between the two runs."
California hatchery killing salmon instead of breeding them
It seems a contradiction: A California hatchery charged with ensuring salmon procreate despite the dams blocking their native runs is killing fish by the thousands without allowing them to breed.
Since Sept. 17, the Feather River Hatchery in Oroville has been killing all salmon that enter the hatchery near the base of Oroville Dam. These fish are not being bred to make more salmon, as has been standard practice for decades, but instead are being donated to area food banks.
The reasoning is rooted in new efforts to strengthen the species. The California Department of Fish and Game, which operates the hatchery, says it can't be sure whether the fish entering the hatchery at this time of year are fall- or spring-run salmon. Rather than breed them anyway, as it has in the past, Fish and Game is culling them from the population based on research that shows it's healthier for the species to keep the two runs genetically distinct.
"The operation has been critiqued by academia and conservation groups for quite awhile," said Stafford Lehr, fisheries branch chief at the Department of Fish and Game. "It was clearly pointed out that we needed a clearer separation of the runs, and this is where we start doing it. We're taking this opportunity because it's a good year for (salmon) returns."
The new practice was expected to end Friday.
As of Thursday, about 7,800 salmon had been "culled" from the hatchery without being bred. These fish will go to food banks, including those in Butte County and the Enterprise Rancheria, a branch of the Maidu Indian community. Some may also make their way to Sacramento via the regional Foodlink program.
Losing these fish from the breeding program does not sit well with fishing groups. Their members are eager for every opportunity to boost salmon populations after three historically bad seasons.
"I think it's a bad idea," said Zeke Grader, executive director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations. "The hatchery was built to mitigate not only for losses of upstream habitat but also the operation of the (water) projects. It flies in the face of their legal obligations."
The problem is that spring- and fall-run salmon cross paths at the hatchery for a period of time each fall, and it is difficult for hatchery managers to tell them apart. Called "tweeners," this body of fish has historically been bred at the hatchery despite the fact that they have completely different migratory patterns.
The result has been a loss of genetic diversity for both runs, which recent research shows threatens their survival by weakening their ability to survive changes in the environment. It also runs contrary to the Endangered Species Act, which considers the spring run a threatened species.
"We were concerned about how would it be perceived by not utilizing them," Lehr acknowledged. "But it's very clear we need to do everything we can to keep these runs separate."
The two runs cross paths because of Oroville Dam, built in 1968 by the California Department of Water Resources as part of the State Water Project.
Before the dam, spring-run salmon swam far upriver in spring and summer. High flows caused by snowmelt allowed them to reach high-elevation portions of the river, which would become inaccessible by fall. These fish would then wait through the summer in deep pools, and spawn in the fall.
Oroville dam eliminated access to this upstream habitat entirely. The hatchery was built to allow the species to survive despite this obstacle.
The fall run moves upriver in late summer and fall, and because flows are diminished, it could not reach the pools where the spring run waited to spawn. Instead, fall-run salmon would spawn in lower-elevation areas.
Now, spring-run fish swim as far as the hatchery, where they simply wait for the genetic signal to start spawning. By then, the fall-run salmon have arrived behind them to start their own spawning run.
Outdated hatchery practices caused the species to become at least partially interbred. In some cases, remaining wild spawners from both species bred together in the river while queued up below the dam.
One effect is that the spring run has begun to arrive later, and the fall run earlier. This led to the "tweener" period in which hatchery managers can no longer be sure which species they are breeding.
Culling this group is a first step toward distinguishing the runs again.
"If we can get that separation back and have the spring run spawning prior to the fall run coming back, over time this should become less and less needed," said Kathy Hill, a fisheries program manager at Fish and Game.
The practice of culling these fish is new to the Feather River Hatchery but has been a regular practice elsewhere, including at Trinity River Hatchery, also operated by Fish and Game. Nor is it unusual that the fish are being killed. Even in the wild, all salmon die after spawning.
Hill said the hatchery expects to meet spawning targets for both spring and fall runs despite the culling. For spring run, the annual goal is to breed 2,000 fish and produce 2 million juvenile fish, or smolts. For fall run, the goal is to breed 6,500 adults and 6 million smolts.
What happens at the Feather River Hatchery is important because it is the largest producer of spring-run salmon. Although the species still breeds in the wild in Sacramento River tributaries such as Butte, Deer and Mill creeks, the hatchery is critical to sustaining the population.
It's also a major producer of fall-run salmon, which underpins the commercial fishery in the ocean. That's why Grader opposes culling. Until habitat improvements help more salmon breed and survive in the wild, hatchery production is vital, he said.
"I don't think this is how you protect your wild fish stocks," Grader said.
Eliminating the overlap of fall and spring runs was one recommendation in a June report by a science panel that reviewed California hatchery practices. And while culling is a crude practice, several independent fishery experts told The Bee they support it as an interim measure.
Keeping the runs distinct is important, they said, because each has unique adaptations that may help salmon survive future environmental disruptions, such as climate change.
"It's never a good thing when you have to kill fish," said Brad Cavallo, a senior fisheries scientist at Cramer Fish Sciences, a consulting firm. "But in the interim, it makes sense to try to force some separation between the two runs."
| SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- After six decades as the California Department of Fish and Game, the agency in charge of the state's wild animals has a new name - one that has many hunting and fishing organizations leery. Gov. Jerry Brown signed legislation recently replacing "Game" with "Wildlife," in a nod to environmentalists and animal-rights activists. Sporting groups fear the legislation signals a change in the department's traditional focus. "Generally, that means a shift toward butterflies, endangered species and other stuff like that," said Mike Faw, spokesman for the U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance, an Ohio-based advocacy group that has seen similar efforts in other states. Once the name change takes effect Jan. 1, only 12 other states will use the word "game" in the names of their wildlife agencies. The name change grew out of a two-year effort to develop a strategic vision for the department. Hunting and fishing organizations say they didn't feel they were adequately represented during the department's makeover, which supporters say better reflects California's changing political and demographic landscape. "We were outnumbered, there's no question about it," said Bill Gaines, president of the California Outdoor Heritage Alliance. His organization was one of four representing hunters on the department's 51-member "stakeholder advisory group." Another six organizations represented recreational and commercial fishermen. The name change "was far from a consensus, I can tell you that," Gaines said. "I think that what the proponents wanted to do was send a signal that we're changing the foundation of the Department of Fish and Game - and that's hunting and fishing." Brown signed the name-change bill last week as he also approved a California ban on the centuries-old practice of using hounds to hunt bears and bobcats. It was a double blow for Josh Brones, president of California Houndsmen for Conservation. "There's less of an appreciation for a rural way of life," Brones said. "We're moving more from rural to urban and from conservative to liberal." Money from the sale of hunting and fishing licenses has generated hundreds of millions of dollars for the department over the decades and has gone to land purchases, species rehabilitation, habitat restoration and other programs. Department spokesman Mike Taugher said the name change came from the Legislature, not his agency. Assemblyman Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael, who included the name change in AB2402, said it came from the department's advisory groups. Both said the name change will not imperil hunting and fishing, even as expectations for the department's mission have grown to include habitat conservation and protecting endangered species. "This department's been around under the same brand for over 100 years," Huffman said. "The resources of the department have not kept pace with its mission, which has become very broad. The trend not just in California but in the United States has been away from managing only for hunting and fishing, and managing broadly in a way that includes hunting and fishing." The bill also beefs up the department's law enforcement role and its use of science to guide policies that will be designed to protect entire ecosystems instead of individual species. It also allows it to increase and broaden its collection of fees beyond the money raised through hunting and fishing licenses. Huffman's legislation, which does not change the name of the regulatory California Fish and Game Commission, was one of several bills signed by the governor that supporters say will modernize a department that traces its origins to Spanish and Mexican laws enacted before California became a state. Brown also approved SB1249 by Sen. Lois Wolk, D-Davis, which will let the department contract with nonprofit conservation groups to manage state-owned lands and charge fees for using more of its properties. California created the nation's first fish commission in 1870, expanded it to include game in 1878, added a Division of Fish and Game in 1927 and elevated it to the Department of Fish and Game in 1951. California had been one of 13 states to include "game" in the name of the agency overseeing wildlife issues, according to the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. Eighteen states use "wildlife," while the others generally use "natural resources" or "conservation." The trend recently seems to have accelerated, according to the association and the National Conference of State Legislatures. "The department's name says a lot about its mission. We do believe there has been a shift, and it has come at the expense of those who hunt and fish," said Marko Mlikotin, executive director of the California Association for Recreational Fishing. He said the money to change the name would better be spent easing the state's lingering budget deficit. Taugher said the department projects the name change will cost more than the Legislature's upper estimate of $300,000, mostly to redo the department's website and computer systems. The current letterhead, uniforms, license forms, vehicle logos and other remnants will be used until they're exhausted, he said, then replaced in the normal cost of doing business. Wendy Hopkins, spokeswoman for Ducks Unlimited in nine western states, said her organization does not believe the department's evolving mission will undermine waterfowl hunting. Organizations such as hers said they believe there are enough protections built into state law to prevent the money raised through hunting and fishing licenses from being siphoned off for other needs. Huffman also authored the 2010 bill that prompted the department to re-evaluate its role and responsibilities. He said it's natural for sporting groups to be nervous about the change. "I think people will just have to bear with us and have this play out over time," Huffman said. "I am very confident this is going to be good not only for hunting and fishing but for all aspects of the department's mission." CDFG or W Strategic VisionSuggested Statements of Core Values During discussions about the future vision of DFG and F&GC, certain recurring values were directly and indirectly suggested; these core values represent the highest priorities of how people within DFG and F&GC should carry out their responsibilities. Values are the core ideology of the organization and how it and its employees will conduct themselves; when combined with the vision and mission, they create a framework in which decisions are made. Core values underpin policies, objectives, strategies, and procedures because they provide an anchor or reference point for all things that happen within the organization. It is suggested that these values be considered core by DFG and F&GC: Stewardship: Consistent with their missions, DFG/F&GC are responsible for holding the state’s fish and wildlife resources in trust for the public, respecting that these resources have intrinsic value and are essential to the well-being of all California’s citizens. Integrity: DFG/F&GC hold themselves to the highest ethical and professional standards, pledging to fulfill their duties and deliver on their commitments. Excellence: DFG/F&GC pursue quality, proactively assessing their performance and striving to continuously improve programs, services, and work products, as well as the efficiency and cost-effectiveness with which these are delivered. They employ credible1 science in their evaluations of programs and policies. Teamwork and Partnerships2: DFG/F&GC pursue productive relationships through communication, collaboration, understanding, trust and respect, and engaging employees, other organizations and the public at all levels of the organizations. Innovation: DFG/F&GC encourage creativity as they proactively meet challenges, promoting a culture of finding solutions. _______________________________________________ 1 “Credible” is used here to also represent “best-available science” also known as “best scientific information available” (BSIA), which according to the National Research Council should not be overly prescriptive due to the dynamic nature of science, but should include the evaluation principles of relevance, inclusiveness, objectivity, transparency, timeliness, verification, validation, and peer review of information as appropriate. 2 In this context, the term “partnerships” is a general concept rather than solely relationships based on a formal legal agreement. Rather, a partnership is a mutually beneficial arrangement that leverages resources to achieve shared goals between the partners, based on mutual respect and genuine appreciation of each partners’ contribution. Partnerships are intended to include all forms of collaboration, both formal and informal. I for one will never buy another fishing or hunting license in the state of Ca, and will be promoting all others to do the same. HIT THEM where it will hurt the most...Lack of Money!!! |
Amazon Forum Fav 👍
Last edited:
Upvote
0
