Congressman Mike Simpson - Snake River dams must go

Old406Kid

Active Member
One thing I am not sure of and have not seen addressed is mitigation $ for raising salmon and steelhead. Idaho releases millions of smolts salmon and steelhead. Would this $ still be earmarked for raising fish if dams are removed?
Good question, I would think there would be provisions to scale it back proportionately as the native runs return.
 

Old406Kid

Active Member
Does anyone have pictures or a link of what the river looked like prior to these dams?
I tried Google Images but didn't find anything.
 

JACKspASS

Active Member
Good question, I would think there would be provisions to scale it back proportionately as the native runs return.
Sounds reasonable. I'm afraid without hatchery releases we wouldn't have much of any fisheries being reliant on wild reproduction, steelhead and spring Chinook. Hatchery steelhead provide so much recreation, wild fish....not so much. I would like to see the dams go however
 

O' Clarkii Stomias

Active Member
Sounds reasonable. I'm afraid without hatchery releases we wouldn't have much of any fisheries being reliant on wild reproduction, steelhead and spring Chinook. Hatchery steelhead provide so much recreation, wild fish....not so much. I would like to see the dams go however
Dam removal aids in passage, but in this instance, I'm afraid it won't have a significant increase on habitat. Need to go upriver for that. Dworshack, Hell's Canyon, etc....
 

troutpocket

Active Member
I read an article today on the Simpson plan that mentioned $75 million set aside for hatchery programs. Now I’m curious how that would be structured.
 

LilCutts

fish & whistle
WFF Supporter
Nice article by TU - The tipping point for salmon and steelhead

“The Snake Basin currently contains 20 percent of the stream habitat occupied by salmon and steelhead on the West Coast. By 2080, it is forecast to contain 65 percent of the coldest, most climate-resilient stream habitats in the region. The Snake is our best, and maybe only hope for a large, wild salmon and steelhead stronghold in the continental United States.

But only if the fish can get there, and they cannot right now because of the four lower Snake River dams.

Since 1995, redd counts in the Middle Fork Salmon River have averaged just 3 percent of their numbers from the 1950s and ‘60s. The Middle Fork contains the most pristine salmon habitat outside of Alaska...”
 

O' Clarkii Stomias

Active Member
Since 1995, redd counts in the Middle Fork Salmon River have averaged just 3 percent of their numbers from the 1950s and ‘60s. The Middle Fork contains the most pristine salmon habitat outside of Alaska...”
That is a cut and paste from the attached, which also claims that 48,000 is a conservative estimate of the average number of chinook of adult chinook that swam up the middle fork in the 50s and 60s. This means that roughly half of the adult chinook that crossed ice harbor from 1962 until 1970 were destined for the middle fork. Impressive claim.
 

Attachments

  • rmrs_2020_thurow_r001 (2) (1).pdf
    1.1 MB · Views: 2

O' Clarkii Stomias

Active Member

O' Clarkii Stomias

Active Member
I'm thinking it's time for Idaho and the Nez Perce to start suing WA, OR, BPA, USACE, Commercial Fishing groups, etc....
Seems like your elected representatives just want to use salmon, steelhead, and orcas as just another political football.
 

O' Clarkii Stomias

Active Member
From 1953. The 1952 Salmon River Spring Chinook escapement estimates.
 

Attachments

  • Res-Hauck1953 Size and Timing of Runs of Anadromous Species of Fish in the Idaho Tributaries o...pdf
    67.9 KB · Views: 7

long_rod_silvers

WFF Supporter
They rejected it stating that “Regional collaboration on a comprehensive, long-term solution to protect and bring back salmon populations in the Columbia River Basin and throughout the Pacific Northwest is needed now more than ever. . .However, a solution must ensure those who rely on the river in the Basin and across the Pacific Northwest are part of the process.”

Simpson has had literally hundreds of stakeholder meetings to ensure he's hearing the voices of everyone. In fact, I believe he started this as a concept that he took to stakeholders for input and developed from there.

At the same time they reject it, they propose no solutions and then the WA wildlife attorney has the balls to say "But we hope they work quickly toward a path to removing them, as it’s absolutely critical to saving salmon and the Southern Resident killer whales.”

If it's that critical, why are they shooting it down? Why aren't they making specific suggestions?
 

Support WFF | Remove the Ads

Support WFF by upgrading your account. Site supporters benefits include no ads and access to some additional features, few now, more in the works. Info

Latest posts

Top