About Myths, Water and California’s Salmon Industry
Posted March 16, 2010 in Saving Wildlife and Wild Places
Three cheers to the Los Angeles Times for running this column “Deceptive Arguments are Being Made in California’s Water Wars" by Michael Hiltzik about the misleading arguments made by some in the current debate over California water policy and protections for the Bay-Delta ecosystem and its fisheries.
The column points out that unemployment in the Central Valley is a long-term problem, exacerbated mostly by water rights and drought -- not fisheries protections. But perhaps the most important point is the often overlooked linkage between the mismanagement of water projects and the collapse of California’s salmon runs – leading to a two-year closure of the salmon fishery, along with the loss of thousands of jobs and hundreds of millions of dollars to commercial and recreational fishing communities.
The salmon fishing community has noticed that they have been frequently ignored in the debate about water policy – and they’re speaking up. Here’s a post by Zeke Grader, on behalf of commercial salmon fishermen. Dick Pool writes here from the perspective of the recreational fishing community and the many jobs it represents. And just yesterday, Paul Johnson, the well known owner of Monterey Fish Market, cookbook author and sustainable fishing advocate, posted this piece on Grist and Ethicurian.
The Hiltzik column points out a clear pattern -- deceptive claims about the cause of water shortages, exaggeration of economic impacts, and failure to mention impacts to salmon and fishermen who depend on a healthy Delta ecosystem. Put this pattern together and one is left with a suggestion that we face a simple choice of “fish or people.” The reality, however, doesn’t correspond with this myth. People actually do value and depend on a healthy environment. They like to be able to serve their families local, sustainable seafood. There actually are limits to how much water we can squeeze out of any river system. And we have plenty of other options to meet our urban and agricultural water needs.
Facing the reality of California’s complex water supply picture may not be as simple as focusing on the myths – but it’s the path to finding workable solutions.
Comments are closed for this post.
Comments
Laer Pearce — Mar 16 2010 11:01 PM
This points to the wisdom of the new, sustainability-based water paradigm for California - co-equal goals. Just as it's important to remember the needs of the salmon fishermen, so is it important to remember the 3/5ths of California's human population that is dependent on water imported from the Colorado and Sacramento Delta for up to 100% of their water. Extremism has no place in this argument.
Dave Simmons — Mar 17 2010 12:20 PM
Some biologist believe that the Salmon's decline is more about poor ocean conditions than water exports.
http://www.sierra2thesea.com/sierra2thesea.com/Home/Entries/2010/3/15_More_Salmon_Coming_Back__Good_News_for_Fish_and_Farms.html
Scary Nelson — Mar 17 2010 12:50 PM
You want to talk about misleading - blaming farmers for declines on fish populations. As fish populations have supposedly declined the last few years, pumping restrictions have been in place effectively eliminating water exports to many water users south of the delta. So, I don't see the connection - farmers have not been getting water and yet are being blamed for declines in salmon? I understand the economic importance of these fish, but in terms of species protection and all that jazz, remember this - you plan on giving the fish water to spawn and grow so that you can catch, kill and eat them!! Doesn't that help lead to the inevitable extinction as some have called it?? Sustainable food sources are ones that can be recreated - tomatoes, onions, almonds, lettuce, etc. are all renewable resources that can be grown year after year very predictably, assuming some water gets sent to those users. Your precious fish however are being impacted by a number of negative external forces - invasive species, improper dumping into the delta, fishing!
Mike Wade — Mar 17 2010 12:58 PM
What a difference a viewpoint makes…the same LA Times headline could be applied to a story that fully presents the opportunity to safeguard California’s water future. Instead of calling for reasonable discussions among water interests and new conservation technology to resolve our water problems like the author does, the story should read that conservation alone will not solve our problems but it is only one piece of the puzzle.
When an individual becomes unemployed, he/she strives to regain dignity through newfound employment but when the job market has dried up because of reduced water flowing to our farms, it’s kind of hard for the individual to think about why the job was lost. Instead, they scramble to provide for their families. Attempts to gloss over this human tragedy is truly deceptive.
Deception is also applied to pointing an accusatory finger at the Delta pumps as the cause of the salmon decline, as many are oft to do. These efforts ignore the effects that ocean temperatures and disappearing food supplies have on salmon during their 2-3 year stay in the ocean. Fortunately, scientists are providing answers that more fully present all the impacts on the salmon decline and what do you know…it’s not the pumps as many believe. Mike Wade/CA Farm Water Coalition
Wes Rolley — Mar 17 2010 01:56 PM
I have frequently disagreed with Barry, but not this time. I have already tweeted the link to Hiltzik's column as soon as I saw it.
Still, I am beginning to wonder about the reality of some of the solutions enacted last fall. Specifically, as the Sacramento Politicos seem to be loathe to appoint members to the Delta Stewardship Council and the one appointed member named has a constituency which demands more water from the delta, it would seem that the residents of this important region, both humans and fish, will once again be shut out of the process.
It is similar to the fast track MLPA process where those who would benefit the most from disturbing the ecological balance (e.g. petroleum industry lobbyist) get the seats at the table and the affected public doesn't.
Chris Lawson — Mar 17 2010 10:28 PM
The Problem does lay in the delta pumping.
Its been documented that over eighty percent
of smolts released from the hatcheries never
make it past the pumps. As far as the poor
ocean condition theory, that has been disproven. Of the three major salmon producing rivers on the west coast, the Sacramento is currently the only one suffering.
Dave Simmons — Mar 18 2010 12:17 AM
Chris:
While the export pumps are an easy target, there are many major stressors going on in the Delta, It would be foolish to only concentrate on one. You could easily have the wrong one and by the time you figure it out, it maybe to late. Unless it is not about saving the fish?
Research last year estimated that striped bass consumed 21 to 42 percent of
endangered winter- and spring-run juvenile salmon, respectively. Other
studies show the water projects took less than 3 percent.
The National Marine Fisheries Service has stated that predation on winter-run
salmon is a “major stressor.”
Ocean food sources for salmon have dropped in recent years, coinciding with
the lower salmon population levels.
Commercial salmon fishing claims significantly more salmon than losses due
to the water projects, according to research by the University of California.
Chris Lawson — Mar 18 2010 12:53 PM
Dave,
You are right Dave, there are many stressors, but the Delta pumping happens to be the single most damaging stressor for Central Valley fall run chinooks. This is the run targeted by the commercial and sport fisheries. As far as your University of California claim, that is completely false.
Currently, ocean feed conditions and temperatures are excellant. As a commercial fisherman, I monitor ocean conditions daily, just as a farmer monitors thier fields. There has not been a commercially caught salmon in California for three years and its absurd to claim fishing is the cause of the current decline.
Dave Simmons — Mar 19 2010 01:53 AM
Chris, I didn't say that fishing was the cause of the decline. Only that it claims significantly more Salmon than the water projects.
As far as everthing else goes, just because you say so does not make it true. The export pumps may take a few fish but, it is far from certain that export pumps are the cause of of the fish declines. Assuming so, I believe is very foolish. If you have it wrong, it may be too late by the time you figure it out.
Dave Simmons — Mar 19 2010 11:29 AM
Look up the the Frasier River Salmon crisis. Our Northern neighbors Salmon are in trouble too. Are our water exports somehow killing their fish too? Nope. There is more to the picture.