—-

Mount Shasta, Calif. — The Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors’ decision to spend precious county legal funds on challenging the Secretary of the Interior’s pending decision regarding dam removal on the Klamath River is disappointing for several reasons.

First, kudos to Supervisor Ed Valenzuela, who has posed the key questions Siskiyou County residents have whether they are for dam removal or not – “Is this the best use of limited county funds?” And, “Just how much has been spent on legal fees on this issue? To what end?”

There are certain conditions that must be met prior to the Secretary of the Interior making a decision on dam removal. One condition is congressional approval. As the Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors correctly points out, this has not yet occurred. And the secretary can’t make a decision until it does. So, in a sense, the Board of Supervisors is threatening to sue the Department of Interior over something the Department of Interior doesn’t have the authority to do.

The county’s primary concern appears to be that the Secretary of the Interior will make a decision on dam removal without adequate environmental review or that is “contrary to science.” A Draft Environmental Impact Statement was released with hundreds of pages of studies. Also, a Draft Secretarial Determination Overview Report was recently released that summarizes Klamath River biology, hydrology, sediment issues, recreation and economics. Both of these are ongoing and involve a tremendous amount of scientific and economic analysis. The secretary’s decision will not happen until these analyses are complete.

The “hide your head in the sand” approach – hoping the dams can stay and operate as they are – is simply not an option. There are two legal options for the dams: 1) fix them up and relicense them to modern standards at a cost exceeding $450 million, which is passed on to ratepayers; or 2) decommission and remove the dams under the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement (KHSA) at a cost capped at $200 million to PacifiCorp and its ratepayers. Dam removal is cheaper. Much cheaper.

So PacifiCorp, as a private business, has chosen the cheaper alternative. The county’s position to try and force PacifiCorp into a bad economic decision sends the wrong message to other businesses that may want to invest in our area.
In the article, Supervisor Michael Kobseff asserts that “the county will lose $250,000 of tax revenue under the dam removal agreement.”

This is not the case. The KHSA requires California and Oregon to make payments in-lieu of taxes to make up for any lost tax revenue. In other words, under the KHSA the removal of the dams will result in no net loss of PacifiCorp generated tax revenue to Siskiyou County.

The Klamath Settlement Agreements represent a big economic opportunity for Siskiyou County – an opportunity that is not fully realized. The Klamath Agreements are expected to bring 4,600 jobs to the region over a 15-year period, preserve agricultural jobs and bring millions of dollars of investment. Active and collaborative participation in discussions with all the many parties who have come together to solve a problem will only expand the county’s opportunities. This why the biggest irrigation district in the county supports the agreements.

It is time for county leaders to take advantage of this opportunity, not fight progress. Forcing a private company to keep dams that are uneconomical is not good for the future of Siskiyou County.

Powered by Twitter Tools

Only about 10 percent of the fall-run Chinook that spawn in the river are naturally born fish, according to a genetic study released this past week. The dismal count of wild fish, which experts believe would be just as bad in other California rivers, means there are not enough native chinook to sustain a natural population in the river.

“We expected to find hatchery fish, but the sheer number of hatchery fish returning to spawn in the wild is surprising,” said Rachel Johnson, a fishery biologist for UC Santa Cruz and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and a co-author of the study. “It looked like a healthy population of fish returning to spawn, but the reality is that without the hatchery fish the wild stocks are not sustaining themselves.”

Recent studies suggest hatchery fish degrade the survivability of wild stocks within one generation, so even as hatchery fish are used to make up the numbers of the wild runs, they actually make the wild fish less competitive.

It’s yet more evidence that wild salmon stocks must be protected and restored wherever possible (including the Klamath River).

Read the entire SF Chronicle article here.

For those like things neatly summarized, that’s:

Redwood City
Tuesday, 2/28: The Fox Theater, Redwood City (Buy Tickets)

Can't make it in Marin? There's a Redwood City show too...

CalTrout/Leland’s in Larkspur
Tuesday, 3/20: The Lark Theater, Larkspur, Marin (Buy Tickets)

The Fly Fishing Film tour, CalTrout style

Because we don’t want our members to live a life of regret, here are a couple other California dates:

Other California Showings

Wednesday, 2/29: Sacramento (24th Street Theater: Buy Tickets)

Thursday, 3/22: Modesto (The State Theater of Modesto: Buy Tickets)

As we so insightfully noted in another F3T post (all the cool kids call it “F3T”), to avoid a life of regret, you better:

• Click here to buy tickets

• Click here to see a schedule

The Fly Fishing Film Tour (again, use F3T in casual conversation with your friends) is a night of fun, so make sure you’re

This ABC News story offers an overview of the Searsville Dam removal issue, which is slowly picking up steam:

We’re happy to see Stanford studying its options with Searsville Dam, especially those that will lead to a restoration of endangered steelhead to San Francisquito Creek.

Powered by Twitter Tools

Nor do you have to go fishless, though you do have to adapt to fish that may have changed their locations and feeding habits due to the colder water temperatures and shorter days. We talked to several fly fishermen about their favorite winter fly fishing tips, and we’re passing on that wisdom here.

Enjoy your winter fly fishing in California. With several blue-ribbon rivers now open year-round, there’s little reason to miss it.

There's no reason to avoid winter fly fishing.

Fish Where They Are, Not Where They Were Last Summer

All too often, fly fishermen will fish a spot in winter simply because they caught trout there during the summer. Sometimes that works, but often it doesn’t. Instead, I take a two-pronged approach to winter fly fishing:

• Fish the kind of habitat where trout hold in winter
• Imitate what they’re eating

When the water temps are at the low end of the thermometer, trout tend to prefer slow, deep, holding water. These types of runs and pools accumulate more mud/silt and may be weedy – the preferred habitat of midges! Midges are an incredibly abundant food item in winter, and in many places, the trout target them almost exclusively.

You can try your summer spots, but don’t waste too much time throwing summer flies at pocket water. Instead, scout out some of the better winter holding water and throw small bugs at ‘em, and see if your catch rate improves.

By Dave Neal, Reel Mammoth Adventures Guide Service

Dave Neal is the owner/operator of Reel Mammoth Adventures guide service, located in the Eastern Sierra Region of Ca. As a full-time, year-round guide in the mountains, Dave is no stranger to the minor discomforts of frozen rod guides, numb fingers and a chronic runny nose.

Want To Catch More Winter Steelhead? Try An iPhone…

Gazing into the eyes of a Pacific run winter steelhead is a definitive moment in winter fly fishing. Catching one of these elusive beast requires being at the right place at the right time. Often this is done by luck or intuition, but with the technology of today we can use actual live data to know precisely when the river gets into shape.

I rely on the Fishhead app on my iPhone. It helps me keep an eye on the flows; I can fish a river right as the river rises but before it goes off color — or right as the river drops back into shape, yet hasn’t completely cleared. This is a very narrow window but these are two best chances at encountering a winter steelhead.

Here in California we have so many rivers to fish, and with this great app I can track weather, flows, tides and lunar phases. It’s a guide’s guide. Don’t read fishing reports, be the source.

By John Rickard, Co-Owner Wild Waters Fly Fishing

For over a decade, John Rickard and Wild Waters Fly Fishing have helped fly fishermen catch steelhead, salmon and trout on California’s stunning northern rivers and streams. Masterfully combining instruction with unforgettable on-the-water experiences, Wild Waters Fly Fishing is an Orvis Endorsed Guide Service.

How to succeed in winter? Read On...

Feed Them What They’re Eating

I fish small bugs 20, 22, 24 year-round, but especially in the winter when they comprise a majority of a trout’s diet. My go-to patterns are Zebra midges (black with a clear bead), Johnny Flashes and dark WD40s (which pass for midges and small baetis/BWO). I also carry midge emergers for those lucky moments when you find fish taking midges just beneath the surface.

Fishing small flies is challenging, but then you probably wouldn’t be fishing in the winter unless you enjoyed a challenge. Remember that trout in cold water won’t move very far for any bug, much less a tiny one. If you’re nymphing, try envision what that fly is doing in all three dimensions; you’ll often need to “feed it to them” to draw a strike.

Naturally, there’s a “but” in all this (there’s always a “but” in fly fishing). There are times I’ve tied on a great big black rubber-legged thing and done very well with that in the winter. If one’s simply not working, try the other.

By Jeff Thompson (Executive Director, California Trout

Thompson is a lifelong fly fisherman who has fished extensively in California’s rivers and streams for trout and steelhead.

You Can’t Tie On A Fly If You’re Shivering

Winter fly fishing is beautiful in a stark, solitary kind of way, but it’s hard to enjoy it after you’ve lost all sensation in your lower body. Fleece pants and lightweight, hyper-warm jackets (like Patagonia’s Micro and Nano Puffs) keep your core warm, but it’s no fun when your feet go numb — and even less when they come back to life.

The exact wrong thing to do is stuff more socks on your feet; you’ll cut off the circulation. One-size bigger wading boots are a useful solution to winter wading. At the very least, don’t overtighten your boot laces.

A good hat is a no-brainer, as are fleece or neoprene gloves, which retain some of their insulating value even when wet (which is most of the time). And if you’re hiking, don’t overdress only to arrive dripping wet from sweat. Stuff warm clothes in a pack, and change when you arrive.

A little suffering is good for the soul, but with today’s miracle fabrics and warm-when-wet insulators, there’s no reason to drop dead on the bank.

By Tom Chandler, Writer of The Trout Underground Fly Fishing blog

Chandler lives minutes from the Upper Sacramento and McCloud Rivers (and a handful of small streams), and fishes as often as his three year-old daughter will let him.

Enjoy your winter.

Iron Gate Dam on the Klamath River would be removed under the KBRA

The Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA) — and its sister agreement, the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement (KHSA) — were hammered out by diverse groups (including former “sworn” enemies like irrigators, commercial fishermen, native Americans, environmental groups, California, Oregon and others).

One of the goals is to restore the failing Klamath river while providing economic security for irrigators and other parties.

Critically, CalTrout believes these agreements will dramatically improve the Klamath’s steelhead fishery while restoring its fabled salmon and other endangered fish populations. This short position paper summarizes our reasons why.

Overview Of A River On The Brink

The Klamath River was historically among the top three most productive salmon rivers on the USA’s west coast; upwards of a million Chinook salmon returned every year to spawn. Between 1917 and 1965, a series of hydroelectric dams were constructed which severed access to almost 450 miles of Klamath River salmon and steelhead spawning habitat.

The dams degrade the river’s water quality (in the summer, toxic algae blooms turn the waters of the lakes pea-soup green, and health warnings are posted for miles down the river), and also heat the water, increasing stresses (an diseases) suffered by migrating fish.

Today, Pink and Chum salmon are extinct on the Klamath, and Coho salmon, Shortnose Suckers And Lost River suckers are listed under the Endangered Species Act.

Even the highly adaptable Chinook salmon returns represent a tiny fraction (10%) of their historic numbers, and many of those are hatchery fish, which produce inferior offspring with far lower survival rates.

Irrigators, Fishermen Both Lose

During the 2001 drought, water supplies to Upper Klamath Basin irrigators were cut off to protect endangered suckers, imposing an economic hardship on the area’s agricultural community.

In 2002, Vice President Dick Cheney intervened to reinstate water deliveries, resulting in untenably low flows — and the west coast’s largest ever fish kill (estimates suggest as many as 60,000 salmon died).

By 2006, salmon runs in both the Klamath and Sacramento watersheds had declined to the point that West Coast commercial salmon fisheries were closed to protect the decimated populations (this multi-year closure also decimated the commercial fishing communities along the coast).

Fishing on the Klamath is popular -- and would grow more so were salmon and steelhead populations to grow (photo Craig Nielsen)

Groups Look For A Solution

Without hint of progress in the air for fish or farmers, a group of over two dozen entities (including “sworn enemies” like irrigators, native American tribes, environmental groups and commercial fishermen) sat down and negotiated the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA).

It provides for reduced — but predictable — water supplies for Klamath Basin irrigators. The KBRA (and KHSA) also mandate the removal of the four lowest Klamath River Dams (Iron Gate, Copco 1 & 2, and J.C. Boyle), an increase in water storage capacity (wetlands restoration), and extensive habitat restoration projects.

Today, the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA) has been embraced by irrigators, Native Americans, PacifiCorp (owners) environmental groups, commercial fishermen, California, Oregon, and others.

The Case For The KBRA

Fisheries Improvements

With so many different species of fish in jeopardy on the formerly (and hugely) productive Klamath River, it’s clear fisheries need a boost.

Removing the four lower Klamath River dams would open up between 68 and 420 miles of spawning habitat to anadromous fish (the range varies based on the species), and the draft EIS/EIR suggests Chinook salmon populations (the most commonly fished for commercial salmon) would see an 81.4% boost in population should the KBRA be instituted.

Steelhead trout populations — perhaps California’s most desirable game fish — would also benefit from over 400 miles of enhanced spawning habitat, delivering a surge in recreation-based dollars to the area’s economy.

In fact, the draft EIS/EIR’s Benefits of The Proposed Action document suggests the steelhead and trophy Redband Rainbow trout fisheries would experience sizable benefits:

Distribution of Steelhead in the watershed is expected to expand to a greater degree than that of any other anadromous salmonid species under dam removal. Access to approximately 420 miles of historical habitat is estimated to again be available for steelhead upstream of the lowest dam.

Steelhead are the most prized game fish in the Klamath River; providing recreational fishing opportunities that would expand well into the Upper Basin in Oregon. Dam removal would also expand the total distribution of trophy Redband Rainbow trout in the fishery and would provide a more natural flow and temperature regime for trout and reintroduced salmon and steelhead.

In addition to dam removal, the KBRA also calls for habitat restoration projects and grows the acreage of the Upper Klamath wetlands, which offer the side benefit of more water storage than is currently provided by the four reservoirs (which would be removed).

Economic Benefits

Removing the privately owned lower Klamath Dams seems inevitable given the cost of keeping them:

• Keeping the dams would require an estimated $450+ million in improvements (including fish passage); if removed, PacifiCorp’s liability is limited to $200 million

• Operating the dams after relicensing would reduce power generation from an annual average of 82 MW to 62 MW, resulting in dams that would operate at a $20 million annual loss

It’s important to note that these four dams are privately owned by PacifiCorp, who makes decisions based on what’s best for the company and its ratepayers. In a presentation to the Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors, PacifiCorp’s CEO said:

Reiten stated that the issue of Klamath dam removal is not political for PacifiCorp, but one of business and economics.

Reiten said that retro-fitting the existing dams to comply with regulations and qualify for re-licensing would cost rate payers about $450 million. However, the company has negotiated a $200 million cap on rate payer contributions to the removal process, he said on Thursday.

“It comes down to an economic calculation, trying to cut the best deal for customers” Reiten said.

Finally, there are the sizable economic benefits (the draft EIS/EIR economic summary can be found here, though highlights include:

• 4600 new jobs as a result of dam removal over 15 year life of KBRA
• 1400 new jobs during the year of dam removal
• 70-695 additional jobs in the agricultural sector due to reliable water supplies.
• 453 new commercial fishery jobs

With the economics so starkly in favor of removal, it’s hardly surprising PacifiCorp is actively campaigning for the KBRA.

Reliable Water Supplies For Fish & Farmers

One of the drivers of the KBRA agreement were the constant lawsuits which plagued the Klamath River Basin over the last couple decades. After the 2001 irrigation water turn-off and the 2002 fish kill, formerly “sworn” enemies met and proceeded to hash out the KBRA.

While Upper Klamath irrigators gave up some of their water rights, they’ll receive regular, predictable water allocations, allowing them to plan for the future.

In the same vein, fisheries groups wanted more water for fish than they ultimately got, but felt that endangered salmon populations would recover, and that fast-disappearing salmon populations wouldn’t survive decades more neglect.

Copco Dam 1 on the Klamath River

Six Common Myths About Dam Removal

Opponents of dam removal have cited several reasons the dams shouldn’t be removed, though many of the often-cited reasons are more myth than reality. Here are a few.

Removing The Dams Will Harm Irrigators

This myth has been often heard in public discussions, but the four dams slated for removal provide no irrigation function. All irrigation withdrawals take place upstream, and since water doesn’t flow uphill, there simply isn’t any truth to this myth.

These Dams Provide Flood Control Protection

The draft EIS/EIR projects a maximum 7% difference in Klamath River flows if the dams are removed. The four lower Klamath River dams are not designed to control flows; they’re “run of river” dams which provide little water holding capacity.

In fact, they can store less than 10 hours of high springtime runoff flows before they reach capacity (and start spilling).

In other words, they can’t buffer high flows, so they offer little (if any) real flood protection from high flows.

The Dams Provide “Cheap, Clean” Energy

First, if reservoirs are creating toxic algae blooms, returning warmed water to the river, and starving the Lower Klamath of sediment, they aren’t “clean.” Some hydropower dams operate without significant impacts on fisheries and riverine habitats, but these dams aren’t among that group.

As for the cheap energy argument, FERC estimates the dams will operate at a $20 million annual loss if retained — costs that will have to be borne by PacifiCorp’s ratepayers. In addition, the costs of decimated salmon populations on commercial and recreation salmon/steelhead fishing industry are significant (453 new commercial fishing jobs will be created by the KBRA).

If relicensed, the four lower Klamath River dams would generate less than 2% of PacifiCorp’s energy, and with the utility committing to generating 1400 MW of energy from renewable resources, the loss of 62 MW remains a drop in the ocean.

A Redding Record-Searchlight editorial put it bluntly when they said:

Perfectly good dams? If they were, they’d have been relicensed long ago, as so many of PG&E’s dams are. These are dams with obvious problems.
–Redding Record-Searchlight

The Dams Protect Salmon Populations

Some say the Klamath used to “dry up” in normal years prior to the dams, so the dams are actually protecting the salmon.

It’s not true. The historic low flows on the river (prior to dam building) were in the 800 cfs neighborhood — far from dry. The KBRA provides for a minimum of 800 cfs flows where Iron Gate Dam is today; contrast that with summer flows in 1992 at the same location, which fell to 400 cfs.

The dams aren’t protecting salmon, they’re hammering water quality.

Sediment Is Toxic And Will Destroy Salmon Populations

Extensive testing has shown that very little toxic material is contained in the sediment piling up behind the four lower Klamath River dams, and as seen in dam removal projects like Marmot, Condit, Powderdale and the Clark Fork (MT), rivers have the ability move sediment downriver very quickly during high flows.

The draft EIS/EIR predicts that sediment clouds will have a negative affect on fish populations for a short time after dam removal, but the long-term benefits will be sizable.

Coho Salmon Are Not Native To The Klamath River

This astonishing claim has gained a foothold among dam removal opponents in Siskiyou County, though the evidence used to support it is largely non-existent. Some cite the lack of information about Coho salmon prior to an 1895 planting of Coho in the Trinity River (a large tributary of the Klamath), yet it’s clear that little distinction was made between species of salmon in that era. In addition:

• The Klamath River falls within in the native range of Coho salmon
• Several tributaries of the river (notably the Scott and Shasta Rivers) provide excellent Coho salmon habitat

Still, some cite the 1895 planting of Coho in the Trinity River (A large tributary to the Klamath) as the beginning of the Coho population on the Klamath, ignoring a few key facts:

• The Coho were only stocked in the Trinity in an attempt to supplement the native stocks, which had been decimated by a cannery operation at the mouth of the river
• A California Fish & Game document makes it clear that the 1895 stocking couldn’t have been the source of the Klamath’s Coho populations:

Regardless, because of their three-year life cycle, coho salmon returns from the 1895 plant would have appeared at the Klamathon Racks in only one or two of every three consecutive years. Egg take records from the Klamathon Racks show that this is not the case: coho salmon eggs were taken in substantial numbers in consecutive years beginning with the 1912-1913 season ( Appendix Table D-1).

This would not have been possible if all the adult fish had been descendants of fry and yearling plants made in 1895.

More Klamath River Dam Removal Resources

The Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA) and its sister agreement, the Klamath Hydropower Settlement Agreement (KHSA) can be found here.

The draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and Environmental Impact Report (EIR) are available here (along with selected elements of each should you not want to pick your way through the entire document).

California fly fishing gets its due at Turtle Bay Exhibit

From the exhibit web page:

Fly Fishing: The Art of Deception celebrates the beauty, the mystery and the historical significance of north state fly-fishing. Explore a pastime rich in history, artistry, and one that has spawned a worldwide industry unlike any other.

Fly-fishing is much more than a sport – it is an art, a craft, and a science. People have been casting imitation insects upon the water, hoping to hook a big one, for thousands of years. From bamboo to graphite, horsehair to nylon, barbed hooks to “catch and release,” this exhibition explores the biology, history, and technology of this popular pastime. Meet some of the insects fly tiers work so hard to imitate, and take a close look at how those imitations are made. Get up close and personal with the life cycle of trout. Learn the unique history of our local Rainbow Trout, the most famous and widely distributed trout it the world, and discover why the Lower Sacramento River, right outside our door, is such a special place in the fly-fishing world.

This original exhibition will provide visitors of all ages with an in-depth look at why fly-fishing is about more than just catching fish. It is a family-friendly way to experience the great outdoors and learn about the environment, while helping to promote habitat and species conservation.

Exhibits include the life cycle of salmonids, fly tying exhibitions, an indoor casting area — even a display about the bamboo fly rods Northern California’s rightly famous for.

• Live fly tying demonstrations every Saturday and Sunday, January 28 through April 15th, from 12 p.m to 3 p.m.
• The Shasta Trinity Fly Fishers Fly Tying Expo – February 18 & 19 (10 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. & 1 p.m. – 3:30 p.m.)
• Indoor casting area
• The Tech Corner: indulge your passion for antique gear while seeing the latest and greatest technologies

The Art of Deception chronicles a part of the fly fishing heritage California is rightly famous for, and if you find yourself in the Redding area, it’s worth a visit, even for the whole family.

For more information, click here.

The Fly Fishing Film tour, CalTrout style

Sponsored by CalTrout (who is happy to have you excited about catching and protecting fish) and Leland’s Outfitters, this is not to be missed.

To avoid living a life of ennui and regret, click here.