More Fallout From the West Coast Salmon Season Closure (or, "Oh Crap")

With partial closure of the West Coast’s commercial and sport chinook salmon seasons already a fact and a full closure of the season not far behind, the media are sitting up and taking notice.

The economic impacts will surely be huge — big enough to garner attention from around the globe. I thought a quick roundup of articles from a range of media outlets would prove educational. I was right.

First, Britain’s U.K. Independent weighs in with an excellent overview of the situation, including a map of the West Coast of the US (was it for their readers, or the vast majority of geographically challenged Americans?).

America’s west coast looks set to lose almost all of its wild salmon harvest this year, depriving fish retailers and restaurants around the world of one of their key sources of high-quality fish, and raising troubling questions about the viability of commercial fishing in an age of climate change and increased competition over water use.

The New York Times writes some typically tight lead paragraphs focused on the gravity of the situation:

Federal officials have indicated that they are likely to close the Pacific salmon fishery from northern Oregon to the Mexican border because of the collapse of crucial stocks in California’s major watershed.

That would be the most extensive closing on the West Coast since the federal government started regulating fisheries.

“By far the biggest,” said Dave Bitts, a commercial fisherman from Eureka, Calif., who is at a weeklong meeting of the Pacific Coast Fisheries Management Council in Sacramento.

“The Central Valley fall Chinook salmon are in the worst condition since records began to be kept,” Robert Lohn, regional administrator for the National Marine Fisheries Service in Portland, Ore., said Wednesday in an interview. “This is the largest collapse of salmon stocks in 40 years.”

The Stockton Record emphasizes local coverage in its report, including interviews with a fly fishing club and tackle shop employees:

Shutting down fishing wouldn’t be a total shock. Salmon have been in decline for several years now. Fewer people are using professional charter boats for their excursions, and anglers aren’t having particularly good luck. They caught on average less than one salmon every two days in 2007, worse than the two previous years.

“It’s been so slow lately anyway,” said Allison Shawnego at Hap’s Bait in Rio Vista.

At Fisherman’s Friend bait and tackle shop in Lodi, salmon lures stocked three years ago are still on the shelves, said employee Rick Frisk.

“It’s a bummer,” he said. “We’ve got to do something, even if it takes shutting the whole system down and letting the fish come up and do their thing.”

The Coos Bay, OR paper (The World) offers some interesting insight into the management process itself:

The situation is so unfamiliar that scientists had no way to predict the fleets’ ocean fishing effects on Sacramento returns — a stark contrast to the situation in recent years on the Klamath River.

Low returns to the Klamath have frustrated fleets and managers in recent years and once was the driving season-setting factor for much of Oregon’s South Coast fleets. The Klamath Ocean Harvest Model was designed to forecast potential ocean catch effects on the abundance of Klamath River fall Chinook.

But no model has been used for the Sacramento River. None has ever been needed. The stock has been stable.

Until now.

The Salmon Technical Team was forced to push the boundaries of fisheries science in Sacramento: It planned to adopt the Klamath Ocean Harvest Model to the Sacramento River.

“This is the first time I’ve ever seen this,” Charleston salmon troller Paul Heikkila said.

Then the Redding Record-Searchlight — whose editorial board never met a dam, development or water diversion they didn’t like — immediately raises the issue of government handouts to affected parties (presumably in defense of their ad sales department):

But back to economics. If a fish caught is worth $200, the math also works in reverse. Halting recreational fishing for the year will drain millions from the Sacramento Valley’s economy — hurting not just fishing guides and bait shops, but also gas stations, restaurants, hotels and anyone else who pays the rent with tourists’ dollars.

There is heated debate about whether this disaster is natural (ocean currents, climate cycles), man-made (water pumping, habitat degradation) or a mix of both, but there is no doubt that it’s a disaster.

So would the federal government come through with disaster relief? Last year, $60.4 million in aid went to offset the losses on the coast from tight ocean fishing restrictions related to the Klamath River. The potential closure this year is even more severe and could run all the way to Redding.

Nobody likes to ask for a handout, but if there’s ever a time for disaster assistance, this is the year.

This is just the first wave; the real fallout is yet to come (to see it all happen, I recommend following the Aquafornia water blog. It’s the real deal.)

With the endangered Delta Smelt forcing reduced pumping from the California Delta to Southern California (and the Longfin Smelt set to join it on the list), native fisheries in the Delta and elsewhere collapsing, a water-hungry Southern California looking for new water sources, and talk of a peripheral canal and new dams springing up, one thing is sure.

It’s going to be an interesting water-park ride the next few years. Stay tuned.

UPDATE: The Aquafornia blog has also posted a summary article using different sources. Excellent stuff. And if you’re in a mood to read a short article from someone who isn’t interested in letting those pumping the delta into oblivion walk on this one, then read Dan Bacher’s article.

See you in the media, Tom Chandler.

Technorati Tags: chinook salmon,king salmon,sacramento salmon,salmon collapse,west coast fishing closure,salmon recovery,holy crap