-->Protecting salmon species in the
face of future climate change is complicated by the wide array of population
responses observed across all scales due to shifting conditions. Management and
conservation policy acts on a regional scale, necessitating a more thorough
understanding of the differences that determine the broad range of salmon
response to regional climate changes. Knowledge of the environmental and salmon
population features that account for this diversity will equip policy makers
with the tools to build effective and comprehensive conservation strategies.
 |
| Watershed map for Puget Sound freshwater habitat recovery plans [20]. |
Schindler et al. addresses the
challenge of climate-based management and suggests that regional policy be
built on a foundation of multi-habitat impacts; governance of habitat
maintenance and commercial harvest strategies must be designed based on the
variation in climate impacts on all habitats used by salmon during their life
cycles. Previous failures of policy focused primarily on the existence of
favorable conditions in a single habitat, such as the ocean where juvenile
salmon spend the majority of their lives feeding and maturing, which masked the
degradation of freshwater and estuarine habitat quality. Such a skewed perception
of habitat performance has led to several instances of population crash,
precipitated by over fishing and accelerated by freshwater habitat decline, of
which Oregon coho salmon are a notable example. Schindler et al. emphasizes
that the danger in poor freshwater habitat being overshadowed by high marine
survival rates is exasperated by climate change and its ability to drive ocean
conditions between high and low quality [23]. Due to this tendency of the oceans to
oscillate between favorable and unfavorable conditions, the survival of salmon
populations will also continue to shift in its reliance on primarily oceanic or
freshwater conditions, making accurate knowledge and regulation of all
salmonid habitat critical to the continued preservation of this valuable
resource.
 |
| Map of Washington dam system, with the four lower Snake River dams in red [21]. |
 |
| Ice Harbor Dam, one of the four lower Snake River dams proposed for removal [22]. |
Conservation efforts already in motion to
increase survivability of salmon species in the Pacific Northwest include those
that seek to restore salmon habitat. One of the largest projects at hand is the
fight to remove the four lower Snake River dams and consequently aid the
recovery of steelhead and other salmon species to the Columbia Basin. The dams
are under federal control, so advocacy groups such as Save Our wild Salmon have
been working to prove that the existing federal Salmon Plan, concerning the
fate of the Columbia and Snake Rivers, violates the Endangered Species Act in
its retention of the lower Snake River dams and consequential direct
endangerment of endemic salmon species. The federal dams negatively impact
salmon more than can be compensated for by habitat enhancement measures [24]. Idaho
Rivers United calls the dams high-cost, low-value projects with few societal
benefits, all of which can be replace by cost-competitive alternatives that
will save taxpayers money in the long run; and, of course, dam removal is the
best opportunity for salmon restoration in the Columbia Basin [25]. The Snake River
dams have been instrumental in the demise of PNW salmon populations, with
numbers at only 2-3% of the original wild runs of the Columbia and Snake
Rivers [26]. The Snake River coho salmon provides a sad example of the magnitude of
the dams’ impact, as the population went extinct with its last returning
spawner in 1986, virtually unnoticed federally. The Nez Perce Tribe of Idaho
has been active in a reintroduction program of hatchery-raised coho fry since
1995 to compensate for the loss, but the wild Snake River population of this
species has forever disappeared [27]. It is evident that without removal of these
dams, Columbia Basin salmon will continue to decline. Similarly, Pacific
Northwest salmon stocks will suffer in the future without the application of
wide-scale climate change-focused management. In both cases, action is
necessary, as change, for better or for worse, is imminent.
No comments:
Post a Comment