98-666: Pacific Salmon and Anadromous Trout:
Management Under the Endangered Species Act

Eugene H. Buck
Senior Analyst

John R. Dandelski
Intern
Resources, Science, and Industry Division

Updated October 27, 1999

Summary

Along the Pacific Coast, 26 distinct population segments of Pacific salmon and anadromous (sea-run) trout are listed as either endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). A variety of human activities have combined to greatly reduce or eliminate historic fish habitat, degrade remaining habitat, and otherwise harm anadromous fish populations. In addition, natural phenomena stress fish populations and contribute to their variable abundance. Current management efforts aim to restore the abundance of ESA-listed native northeast Pacific salmonids to historic, sustainable population levels. This report summarizes the reasons for current and proposed ESA listings and outlines efforts to protect ESA-listed species. This report will be updated periodically to reflect the changing situation.

Background. Pacific chinook, coho, chum, sockeye, and pink salmon as well as sea-run cutthroat and steelhead trout are anadromous, i.e., they live as juveniles in fresh water, migrate to the ocean to develop, and, when sexually mature, return to where they hatched to spawn. While some sea-run trout and Atlantic salmon can return to the sea after spawning (and can spawn again in subsequent years), Pacific salmon die after spawning once. Juvenile salmon typically reside in fresh water from a few days (pink salmon) to 3 years (some sockeye salmon) before migrating to the ocean, where they typically spend 1-6 years before migrating back to their natal stream, as much as 900 miles or more inland. Natural phenomena -- predators, droughts, floods, and fluctuating oceanic conditions -- stress salmonids and contribute to the variable abundance of their populations. El Niño conditions have been of particular concern with warmer marine waters reducing food organisms for salmonids and bringing an abundance of predators, such as mackerel.

By the late 1990s, west coast salmon abundance had declined to only 10-15% of what it had been in the 1800s,⁽¹⁾ and precipitous salmon declines in recent years have hurt the economies of fishing-dependent coastal and rural inland communities throughout the Northwest and northern California. As recently as 1988, sport and commercial salmon fishing in that region generated more than $1.25 billion for the regional economy. Since then, salmon fishing closures have contributed to the loss of nearly 80% of this region's job base, with a total salmon industry loss over the past 30 years of approximately 72,000 family wage jobs.⁽²⁾

By late October 1999, 26 distinct population segments of five salmonid species were listed as either endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA, see table 1).⁽³⁾ While no species of anadromous trout or salmon is in danger of near-term extinction, individual population segments (designated as "evolutionarily significant units"⁽⁴⁾) within these species have declined substantially or have even been extirpated. The American Fisheries Society considers at least 214 Pacific Coast anadromous fish populations to be "at risk," while at least 106 other historically abundant populations have already become extinct.⁽⁵⁾

Human Activities Stressing Fish. Anadromous salmonids inhabit clean, silt-free streams of low water temperature (below 68 F) and quality estuarine nursery habitat. Human activities -- logging, grazing, mining, agriculture, urban development, and consumptive water use -- can degrade aquatic habitat. Silt can cover streambed gravel, smothering eggs. Poorly constructed roads often increase siltation in streams where adult salmon spawn and young salmon rear. Removal of streamside trees and shade frequently raises stream temperatures. Grazing cattle remove streamside vegetation and exacerbate streambank erosion. Urbanization typically brings riprap channelization and filled wetlands, altering food supplies and nursery habitat. Habitat alterations can lead to increased salmonid predation by marine mammals, birds, and other fish. Water diversions for agriculture exacerbate these problems. In the Klamath River basin, as much as 90% of the annual flows from the Trinity River have been diverted to California's Central Valley Project for irrigation. According to state water resource agencies, almost every water basin in Oregon, eastern Washington, and northern California is now over-appropriated (i.e., there are more legal permits for diversion than available water) during the hottest and driest months of the year.

Dams for hydropower, flood control, and irrigation substantially alter aquatic habitat and can have significant impacts on anadromous fish. While the design of some dams is described as "fish-friendly" (e.g., Wells Dam on the Columbia River in Washington), poorly designed dams can physically bar or impede anadromous fish migrations to and from the sea, kill juveniles as they pass through a dam's turbines, and expose fish to potentially harmful gas supersaturation.⁽⁶⁾ If delayed by dams, both young and old salmon can be exposed to increased predation, to an increased risk of bacterial infections, and to higher temperatures which cause stress and sometimes death.⁽⁷⁾ Decreased river flow can also harm juveniles by delaying their downstream migration. However, the eight federally owned mainstem dams in the Columbia River basin produce about two-thirds of the power in the Pacific Northwest,⁽⁸⁾ and the reservoirs behind these dams create a major navigable waterway as far inland as Lewiston, Idaho.

The goal of fish hatcheries, operated along the Pacific Coast since 1877, was, and continues to be, to augment natural salmonid populations and to produce fish to replace those lost where dams completely blocked fish passage and destroyed native salmonid populations. Today, at least 80% of the salmon caught commercially in the Pacific Northwest and northern California each year come from hatcheries. In the 1970s, however, scientists discovered that some hatchery practices reduced genetic diversity in fish populations.⁽⁹⁾ The mixing of populations by hatcheries and transplantation has generally resulted in decreased genetic fitness of wild populations and the loss of some stream-specific adaptations. Also, hatchery fish generally have lower survival rates than wild fish, and are less able to adjust to changing ocean conditions or to escape predators.

The harvest of intermingled fish populations from different watersheds presents several problems, including the issue of how to protect ESA-listed populations while promoting the harvest of abundant native and hatchery fish. Since hatcheries are often more productive than natural fish populations, managing fisheries to avoid hatchery surpluses overharvests natural populations. Controversy arises when managers must consider how much the harvest of abundant populations must be curtailed to protect less-abundant ESA-listed native populations. Such policies can frustrate both commercial fishermen and sport anglers. ESA-listed or seriously depressed populations thus can become the limiting factor on fisheries, resulting in tens of millions of dollars in foregone fishing opportunities to avoid further depressing the weakest populations.

Protection Efforts. The task of implementing the ESA for anadromous salmonids falls to the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) in the Department of Commerce. NMFS can receive a petition or initiate the process to determine whether a species or population merits listing as either "endangered" or "threatened." Based on facts presented in the petition, the Secretary of Commerce decides whether the petition presents substantial information indicating that listing may be warranted. If the Secretary decides that the petitioned action may be warranted, a 90-day notice announcing the initiation of a status review is published in the Federal Register. Once the status review is completed, NMFS publishes a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register and seeks public comment for those species or populations NMFS believes should be listed. A final listing decision must occur within 12 months after publication of the notice. Once listed, NMFS is required to designate critical habitat⁽¹⁰⁾ and, finally, develop and publish a recovery plan for the species. The goal of ESA listing is species recovery, defined as removal from the ESA list. (For more information on the ESA process, see CRS Issue Brief IB10009, Endangered Species: Continuing Controversy.) NMFS is in the very early stages of a long process aimed at recovering ESA-listed salmonid ESUs as well as avoiding future listings. Most of the effort to date has been directed toward identifying ESUs for listing. This effort is scheduled to continue through December 1999.

When a federal activity may harm an ESA-listed species, the ESA requires the federal agency to consult with NMFS to determine whether the activity is likely to jeopardize the survival and recovery of the species or adversely modify its critical habitat. In response to a biological assessment submitted by the federal agency, NMFS issues a "biological opinion" (BO) with an incidental "take" statement which authorizes a limited take of the species and specifies reasonable and prudent measures to minimize such taking of the species. If NMFS issues a jeopardy opinion, it includes a reasonable and prudent alternative which would not be expected to jeopardize the continued existence of the species. NMFS issues numerous BOs related to salmon each year. For example, a 1995 BO for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Bonneville Power Administration sought to develop a biologically sound (safe) strategy to deal with salmon passage in the Columbia and Snake Rivers. The major impact of this 1995 BO and its 1998 supplement has been the move away from transporting the majority of juvenile salmonids downstream via truck or barge, and implementing a "spread the risk" policy which calls for an increase in spilling water and fish over dams, thus circumventing the power-producing turbines, to speed juvenile fish through the river toward the ocean with lower mortality. The Corps is also conducting a System Operations Review, due to be completed late in 1999, of the Columbia and Snake River hydropower system, with breaching the four lower Snake River dams being considered as one option. In addition, NMFS is working on a revised BO, to be completed early in 2000, that will review the strategies outlined in the 1995 and 1998 BOs and recommend any necessary changes.

Prior to the listing of salmonid ESUs under the ESA, the majority of salmon conservation efforts were conducted by individual states, tribes, and private industries that managed salmon habitat. In the Columbia River Basin, the Northwest Power Planning Council took the lead under the 1980 Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act (P.L. 96-501), by attempting to protect salmon and their habitat while also providing economical power to the region. Subsequently, federal agencies and public utilities spent hundreds of millions of dollars on technical fixes for dams, habitat enhancement, and water purchases to improve salmon survival, yet many populations have continued to decline. Recent years have seen an increased interest by state governments and tribal councils in developing comprehensive salmon management efforts. States generally seek to prevent ESA listings, or, if listings do occur, to reduce federal involvement affecting state-managed lands. With limited staff and funding to implement a wide range of programs, NMFS has encouraged integrated management efforts among federal, state, and tribal agencies as a powerful and necessary tool in saving listed salmonid species, as well as possibly avoiding the need for future listing of additional ESUs through state-managed comprehensive recovery efforts.⁽¹¹⁾ NMFS views the Oregon Coastal Salmon Restoration Initiative (OCSRI), to promote comprehensive and proactive state-based recovery efforts and avoid listing coho salmon in Oregon, as precedent for federal/state/local partnerships. However, a recent federal court decision clarified that, to avoid an eventual listing, such plans cannot be based primarily on speculative or proposed future measures, but must instead be based on recovery measures that are enforceable or reasonably likely to occur, as, for instance, measures embodied in laws, regulations, or long-range and stable funding mechanisms.⁽¹²⁾ With the listing of many salmonid ESUs in the Columbia River basin, management has become increasingly constrained, and new options for governance are being explored, such as a "three sovereigns" approach involving equal partnerships among federal, state, and tribal parties. Restoration efforts for some California salmon, including water reforms, were embodied in the Central Valley Project Improvement Act (Title XXXIV of P.L. 102-575). In June 1997, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service released a draft plan, including 100 measures such as fish screens, fish ladders and water pollution reduction, to double by 2002 the native fish populations in the Central Valley Project area.

NMFS has issued an interim policy on artificial propagation of Pacific salmon under the ESA to provide guidance on how hatcheries should be used to help recover salmonids.⁽¹³⁾ In general, the policy is to recover wild populations in their natural habitat wherever possible, without resorting to artificial propagation. Washington, Oregon, and British Columbia have instituted programs to mark hatchery coho salmon by fin clipping so that marked fish can be readily identified by fishermen as hatchery fish and selectively retained at harvest while unmarked, native fish can be released to spawn. Similar programs are anticipated or are underway for other species, such as chinook salmon and steelhead trout. In addition, controversy and resistance remain over suggested changes to using fishing gear more suitable to releasing wild fish caught inadvertently.

The bilateral 1985 Pacific Salmon Treaty regulates the harvest of salmon of U.S. and Canadian origin. While the Treaty calls for reducing interceptions of the other country's fish, it also calls on the parties to avoid undue disruption of existing fisheries. However, ESA protective measures, including the prohibition against taking ESA-listed fish and the designation of critical habitat, could be undercut by U.S. and Canadian fishermen catching ESA-listed fish as they migrate through Alaskan and Canadian waters.

Table 1: Status of Six Species of Pacific Coast Salmonids

Footnotes

1. ^(back)E. Winninghoff. "Where Have All the Salmon Gone?" Forbes (Nov. 21, 1994):104-116.

2. ^(back)Pacific Rivers Council. The Economic Imperative of Protecting Riverine Habitat in the Pacific Northwest. Eugene, OR: January 1992; and "Statement of Glen Spain of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations" in: U.S. Senate, Committee on Environment and Public Works, Subcommittee on Drinking Water, Fisheries, and Wildlife. Endangered Species Act Reauthorization. Hearing, June 1, 1995. Roseburg, OR: U.S. Govt. Print. Off. pp. 123-142.

3. ^(back)Source of table information: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, National Marine Fisheries Service, "Progress of Species Status Reviews in NMFS Northwest & Southwest Regions" (http://WWW.NWR.NOAA.GOV/1salmon/salmesa/index.htm, updated Apr. 1, 1999).

4. ^(back)NMFS uses the term "evolutionarily significant unit" (ESU) as synonymous to a distinct population segment that appears to be reproductively isolated from other segments (56 Federal Register 58612, November 20, 1991).

5. ^(back)Willa Nehlsen, Jack Williams, and James Lichatowich. "Pacific Salmon at the Crossroads: Stocks at Risk from California, Oregon, Idaho, and Washington." Fisheries, v. 16 (1991):4-21; and T.L. Slaney, et al. "Status of Anadromous Salmon and Trout in British Columbia and Yukon." Fisheries, v. 21 (Oct. 1996): 20-35.

6. ^(back)Water spilled from dams can become supersaturated with gaseous nitrogen. Fish exposed to supersaturated conditions can develop disorienting and harmful gas bubble disease.

7. ^(back)G. F. Cada, et al. "Effects of Water Velocity on the Survival of Downstream-Migrating Juvenile Salmon and Steelhead: A Review with Emphasis on the Columbia River Basin." Reviews in Fisheries Science, v. 5, no. 2 (1997): 131-183.

8. ^(back)"Saving the Columbia Salmon," Seattle Times (June 8, 1997): B4-B6.

9. ^(back)Jack Stern, Jr. "Supplementation of Wild Salmon Stocks: A Cure for the Hatchery Problem or More Problem Hatcheries?" Coastal Management, v. 23 (1995):123, 140.

10. ^(back)There may be no critical habitat designation, if NMFS decides that it is not prudent, and the critical habitat designation may be delayed up to a year if it is not determinable. In practice, only about 20% of listed species have designated critical habitat.

11. ^(back)Personal communication with Garth Griffin, Branch Chief, Protected Resources Division, NMFS, Portland, OR, on May 21, 1998.

12. ^(back)Oregon Natural Resources Council v. Daley, CV-97-1155-ST (D.Or. June 1, 1998).

13. ^(back)58 Federal Register 17573, Apr. 5, 1993.