Kerr Dam, PPL Montana

This morning, the U.S. Supreme Court decided to hand over ownership and control of your riverbeds to private, for-profit corporations. After all, “Corporations are people, my friend,” just like you and me. In PPL Montana v. Montana, 10-218 the court decided that there is no longer any such thing as a navigable river, only chunks and bits of navigable rivers.

The decision hinged not on whether the river itself was a corridor of commerce, only where Lewis and Clark had to get out of their canoes for more than 24 hours. If a portion of a river was not navigable at 10:40 am on Nov. 8, 1889, then that river could never be navigable and therefore the citizens of Montana hold no claim to that small portion of river. Ignore the fact that rivers change, that’s what rivers do and I’m pretty sure a lot of our rivers were pretty tightly iced up in November 1889, but that’s neither here nor there. The Corporate Court will decide which portions of which rivers in Montana (and every other state) states can control based on how much it costs Corporate America.

To determine riverbed title under the equal-footing doctrine, this Court considers the river on a segment-by-segment basis to assess whether the segment of the river, under which the riverbed in dispute lies, is navigable or not.

Obviously, I’m no legal scholar, but then I guess neither is the Supreme Court of Montana, or the 26 other states who sided with them, who argued that rivers, like highways, are only useful commercial arteries when considered as a whole, not when considered as individual stretches.

Montana attorneys, on the other hand, argue that portages around naturally occurring obstructions were part of the commercial navigation of the river at the time. The heavy use of the Missouri from Lewis and Clark’s time, through the state’s gold rush and past statehood in 1889, proves the Missouri’s commercial navigability, they said.

The ruling will surely result in quite a bit of turmoil over regulation of navigable rivers within Montana and other states. From now on, states will have to prove in court, paid for by you, that any small portion of any stream was navigable at statehood before they can have any say over how any regulation is applied or enforced on that stretch of river.

For a good overall review of the SCOTUS case, here’s an informative video from PBS about the court case.

Box Canyon Reservoir pike

In the Flathead, we tend to focus on the effects of lake trout, another, more radical nonnative threat to our native fish. We do however have a “pike problem” much like Washington. We have a population of illegally introduced northern pike in the Flathead River and sloughs just upstream of Flathead Lake. According to a 2008 report by fishery biologist Clint Muhlfeld and others, the population numbers 1,200 to 1,300 fish and they annually consume around 8 metric tons of fish including native westslope cutthroat and threatened native bull trout. In fact, the pike population annually consumes about 13,000 westslope cutthroats and 3,500 bull trout.

Interestingly, there is a connection between the Flathead pike population and those in the Pend Oreille drainage downstream. According to the Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife;

Northern pike in the Pend Oreille River (and Box Canyon Reservoir) are the result of illegal stockings in the Flathead, Bitterroot and Clark Fork River systems in Montana. From there, the pike migrated downstream into Lake Pend Oreille, then into the Pend Oreille River through Idaho and into Washington.

In Montana we have taken a backwards position and we treat these invasive, nonnative predators as game fish. We set limits on pike in the Flathead River and even protect them by limiting the season as our native fish populations continue to decline. We have another illegally-planted, popular, if stunted pike fishery upstream from the Flathead River in Smith Lake (limit 15 fish) on Ashley Creek where they likely leak downstream into our native trout waters.  In spring, northerns stage at the mouth of Ashley Creek in large numbers where they would be easy to target if that area wasn’t closed in spring by Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks to prevent over-harvest.

While Washington is planning to remove game-fish status for these invasive predators and allow more aggressive fishing techniques to reduce the pike population and protect their native and nonnative fisheries, we coddle our pike and protect them as they gobble up our declining native fish populations. “Washington has officially declared it isn’t welcoming a non-native fish that poses a major threat to native species ranging from trout to salmon in the Columbia River system.” We have put out the Welcome sign in Montana to illegal plantings by treating them as game fish. There is a strong disconnect in Montana as we protect large predatory, nonnative lake trout and northern pike while at the same time decrying the demise our our native cutthroats and bull trout. We could perhaps learn something from our neighbors to the west.

There have been several articles in the last few days on this question that you should probably be aware of. This morning from the conservation blog at Field & Stream magazine came an article by Hal Herring titled, Hatcheries, Frankenbucks, Disease: When Will We Learn?

In essence: we trade or allow others to trade, our birthright–in the case of salmon aquaculture; clean, mighty rivers, and salmon, living unimaginably wild lives in the open ocean, and returning to spawn in feeder creeks so small that we can step across them, for huge pens, anchored, polluting, protected, filled with facsimile-fish so weak, so pale compared to the real thing, that their very flesh must be dyed orange with harvested krill before anyone will purchase or eat it. The diseases and parasites that flow out from these operations imperil the very survival of the native species, and the economy and ecology that they support.

Hatcheries certainly have their place and have been used for more than a hundred years to provide fisheries that would not otherwise exist. In nature there is a reason why fish don’t exist in sterile reservoirs or polluted streams. The use of hatchery fish to replace a fishery that we may have destroyed or that would not otherwise exist can sometimes be economically justified. What hatcheries cannot do is provide solutions to why the fishery was destroyed in the first place or help to provide remedies. Hatchery fish are a very poor substitute for the wild fish that they replace and they should certainly not be employed on top of a healthy, or even depressed population of wild fish to “improve” our ability to catch something, or anything.

Hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent over the last few years to remove two dams on the Elwha River in Western Washington. Those two decrepit dams were built to provide electricity to the burgeoning new west coast population. That the dams destroyed amazing runs of pacific salmon and steelhead was hardly considered at the time. There were millions of such fish available and one small run in one small river would not be missed. Now the entire metapopulation of pacific salmon is considered in dire straits. Removal of the Elwha Dams was done to hopefully restore ninety miles of spawning habitat to restore historic salmon runs. In order to speed recovery of the salmon and steelhead runs, the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribes have proposed a new salmon hatchery to the lower Elwha. Four conservation groups filed suit yesterday to block the hatchery plans.

The groups support the right of the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe to harvest salmon and steelhead, but argue that intensive hatchery production throughout the recovery will reduce the capacity of wild salmon and steelhead to recolonize the newly available habitat, harming ESA listed Puget Sound steelhead, Chinook salmon, and southern resident killer whales that depend on Chinook salmon for their survival.

In California, studies have found that less than 10% of the wild fall-run chinook population remains in the Mokelumne River due to massive dumping of hatchery stocks into the river.

Why does it matter whether you are catching wild or hatchery fish? That question has been long and extensively studied. Most anglers can tell you the difference between a wild fish and a hatchery clone on the other end of a line. The hatchery fish simply are not equivalent to a healthy wild salmon or trout. Hatchery fish have been bred for decades to survive in concrete raceways, and they do so very well. Survival in the wild is another matter. In a recent study from Oregon State University, researchers found that, “a fish born in the wild as the offspring of two hatchery-reared steelhead averaged only 37 percent the reproductive fitness of a fish with two wild parents, and 87 percent the fitness if one parent was wild and one was from a hatchery. Most importantly, these differences were still detectable after a full generation of natural selection in the wild.”

The implication, Michael Blouin [OSU professor of zoology] said, is that hatchery salmonids – many of which do survive to reproduce in the wild– could be gradually reducing the fitness of the wild populations with which they interbreed. Those hatchery fish provide one more hurdle to overcome in the goal of sustaining wild runs, along with problems caused by dams, loss or degradation of habitat, pollution, overfishing and other causes.

The solution, of course, is that it is that we must always be judicious in our use of synthetic fish. It is always better to correct the habitat, or other problems that have caused a decline in fish populations rather than attempt to mask the problems through the addition of genetically and physically inferior hatchery or farmed fish.

Anyone who would say the following out loud in today’s environment is my kind of people:

In this day and age, when science itself is under attack from politicians and special interests, we affirm our belief in scientific methods and scientific inquiry. Science, informed by morals and ethics, is the cornerstone of the North American model of wildlife management. Every position we take here at Conservation Hawks has to meet two criteria. It has to be moral, and it has to have a basis in credible science. If we’re going to share our hunting & fishing with future generations, it’s vital we base our decisions on the best possible science.

Imagine, people who believe climate change is real and peer-reviewed science is not a socialist conspiracy designed to take away your property rights. You might want to lend your support to their effort. At least take a look at their new website and blog and like them on Facebook. We need all the help we can get.

The Lake Pend Oreille Recovery Update shows “lots of indications that the recovery effort is heading in the right direction”. The effort on Pend Oreille has been primarily aimed at recovering the popular kokanee fishery and the 2011 data show that effort has been a resounding success. This past year represents the fourth consecutive year of increases in kokanee spawners since reaching a record low in 2007 due to predation by lake trout.

Lake trout are being removed through gill nets, trap nets and angler incentives ($15 per fish bounty). Netting and anglers removed nearly 18,000 lake trout this past year, a reduction of more than 30% from 2010. Angler catch rates for lake trout have also been falling. “Even more encouraging was a substantial decline in the netting catch rate for juvenile lake trout, which was the first indication that we are overharvesting these smaller fish.” These numbers show that overharvest of lake trout populations can be accomplished with little effect on native fish. Native bull trout numbers have rebounded with redd counts in tributary streams showing average numbers of spawners.

The 2011 Annual Fisheries Report for the Panhandle Region also gives a good overview of conditions in Priest Lake where native fish and kokanee populations have also been hit hard by lake trout invasion. Priest Lake has been managed as a trophy lake trout fishery due to popularity and the relative difficulty in removing the invasive lake trout. The report indicates that there may be a need to rethink the direction of lake management. An effort has been made to remove lake trout from Upper Priest Lake in recent years, but the population is rapidly recolonized by fish from the lower lake negating much of the effort.

These lakes once supported a unique and popular fishery for kokanee and native cutthroat and bull trout. Since the lake trout invasion, fishing pressure has fallen to about half of what it was.

Lake trout have populated to the point where growth is limited by available forage. Lake trout reach 15 inches fairly quickly (3-4 years), on a diet of invertebrates. With very few forage fish to feed on, however, growth then comes to a screeching halt, with fish typically only growing a third to half inch/year. The lake trout fishery of the future will primarily be comprised of lots and lots of 14-20 inch. Like it or not, with such poor growth rates, there’s little that can be done to manage for larger (10-20 lb.) lake trout.

Flathead Bull Trout

Managers must now decide whether it is worthwhile to manage for for shrinking and overpopulated lake trout in this troubled fishery or perhaps take a more costly approach in the future. “Along with kokanee, a restored cutthroat/bull trout fishery would likely generate more angling effort, and ultimately be of greater economic value to the Priest Lake region.”

Restoration efforts continue in Quartz Lake and in Swan Lake in the Flathead and these projects have shown many of the same results seen in Idaho. Although both Montana projects are too early in the cycle to see a positive response from native fish, results are encouraging. Bycatch of native bull trout remains low in the three-year effort on Swan Lake and the size and number of netted juvenile lake trout seems to be decreasing indicating a declining overall population. Although the size of the lake trout population in Swan Lake is likely being reduced, the invaders have now spread throughout the Swan drainage and those upstream populations will continue to leak predators into the entire system from now on.

Given challenges faced by both the Northern Idaho native fisheries and those in Montana, the latest results from lake trout removal efforts in both states continue to be encouraging and with prudent management strategies, it would seem likely that damage done over many decades to our native fish populations is, at least partially, reversible.

Snow cover map

January 5th, 2012. I’m sitting here staring out the window at sunny skies, a few puffy clouds and 48 degrees. The prediction for Billings today is near 60 and breezy. “More than a dozen communities across central and Eastern Montana saw record-high daily temperatures on Wednesday.” Did I mention that it’s January 5th? Snow cover for the West just sucks.

Wyoming: “Many basins across the state have already lost a month or more of snowpack production. The short-term forecast shows little in the way of big snowmakers.”

Colorado: With skiing conditions all but non-existent, fly fishing is picking up. “With subpar skiing and snow conditions, the Fryingpan River has been seeing far above average numbers of anglers fishing…”

Idaho: “What will be the latest-ever opening for the Bogus Basin ski area — the previous record was Jan. 6, 1989 — forced Bogus managers this week to implement a cost-reduction plan, including cutting pay and positions.”

Utah: “October and November had above-average precipitation in northern Utah, Dunn said. But December was the driest on record. And thus far, January has been bone dry.”

Montana: “Two wildfires raging overnight on Montana’s Blackfeet Indian Reservation burned thousands of acres, forced scores to evacuate and destroyed several buildings, officials said early Thursday.”

“I wouldn’t recommend that people go out there on the ice,” [FWP manager Craig] Marr said. “There were people fishing on it three weeks ago, but with the warm weather I’m telling people to be careful. The ice has water on top of it.”

“In Great Falls, the weather service reported a high of 59, breaking the old record of 58 set in 1984. White Sulfur Springs set a new Jan. 4 high of 53, topping a record set that same year, while Townsend broke an 18-year-old record with a high of 59 degrees.”

With the snow deficit we are building up, hopes for summer streamflows are fading fast. The lack of snow on the ground warms up the air making it all that much harder for temperatures to drop to freezing conditions. There is still some slim hope for winter this year. It just may come in what we euphemistically call Spring this year.

The project also includes replacement of the old concrete bridge over Rose Creek on the Going to the Sun. There are concerns about the long-term structural stability of the existing bridge and it also presents problems with fish passage at lower flows. The new bridge would remove all structural components from the creek and improve streamflow through the section. You can view the Park Service project page on the NPS website. Comments will be accepted until Jan. 23, 2012.

Get involved! This is one more chance to show your commitment to native fish. You can read the EA documentation and post your comments on the NPS site.

On the beneficial side, the order also is preventing federal fish hatcheries from sending shipments of non-native rainbow trout eggs or fish to, from or around Montana. That puts a halt to the Ennis National Fish Hatchery planting hundreds of thousands of non-native rainbow trout into Holter and Canyon Ferry Reservoir. It may also stop the hatchery from moving millions of eggs to other hatcheries. The eggs will have to be destroyed if not shipped by Jan. 2. Just wondering…

Sean Hinderson with the Ennis fish hatchery said it typically ships about 17 million eggs to 15 to 20 hatcheries in the lower 48 states, including Montana, and workers are gearing up to ship 5.7 million eggs in the next two months. If the ban remains in place, they can put the eggs in “chillers” to slow down their development for up to three weeks. If it goes on much longer, though, the eggs will probably be destroyed.

While I can’t speak to the legalities or adviseability of the Governor putting a halt to federal fish and wildlife shipments, it does highlight somewhat just how many non-native fish our state ships around the country, sometimes to the detriment of native fish populations. I expect the ban won’t remain in place for long. Once Schweitzer has made his point, I’m sure he will reach some sort of deal with the feds and they will happily go about their job of ruining native fish populations across the country.

Photo courtesy of USFWS

I do have one question. There is a story in the New York Times this morning about trucking native bull trout around the lower Clark Fork dams to allow them to get to upstream spawning areas. This is being done as as way for Avista Corporation to meet their requirements under their re-licensing agreement. While this may not technically be a federal project, federal agencies are involved. If you truck bull trout from below Cabinet Gorge Dam in Idaho and dump them above the dam in Montana, are you defying the Governor’s ban?

While we sort it out, Merry Christmas to you and yours from all of us here at Flathead Valley Trout Unlimited.

Deep Trouble in Western Waters

Fast growing, long-lived populations of Salvelinus namaycush are decimating native fish populations in more than 200 lakes and watersheds around the west. Native trout have faced every challenge thrown at them for more than 10,000 years, but are no match for these voracious non-native predators.

The article highlights attempts to do something about the lake trout invasions in Yellowstone Lake, Lake Pend Oreille and in the Flathead Basin. In just a few years the native cutthroat spawning run in Clear Creek, tributary to Yellowstone Lake, has dropped from 50,000 fish to only about 500 today due to lake trout predation. In Flathead Lake, less than 3,000 native bull trout remain in our largest western freshwater lake. The lake trout population has more than doubled in the last 20 years under a feeble attempt to reduce lake trout numbers using only recreational angling. As crowded lake trout radiate out from Flathead Lake, we have lost native fish populations in 12 of our stronghold lakes including Swan Lake, which became a catch-and-release fishery for native bull trout for the first time this year due to lake trout predation.

There are some success stories. Lake Pend Oreille in Idaho is seeing a rebound in their native bull trout populations as well as a hopeful return of their popular kokanee fishery nearly decimated by lake trout. They have applied an aggressive lake trout netting program and a bounty system. It’s not a matter of wiping out lake trout in our western waters. Once they have established a foothold, lake trout are here to stay, but if we ignore the problem much longer and don’t make the attempt to reduce lake trout numbers and re-balance some of these important native fish waters, we face the very real danger of losing one of the West’s greatest genetic treasures, not to mention many dandy fishing opportunities.

10 December 2011

Dear Flathead Valley TU members and friends,

Help protect and restore crucial habitats for cutthroat and bull trout!

With your help, S. 268, the Forest Jobs and Recreation Act (FJRA) could pass Congress this year, protecting a million acres of undeveloped headwaters and spawning tributaries of Rock Creek and the Blackfoot, Big Hole, Clark Fork and Beaverhead Rivers, while also creating tools that further restoration of damaged streams on national forest lands.

Call Rep. Denny Rehberg today and ask him to support the Forest Jobs and Recreation Act

With your help, S. 268, the Forest Jobs and Recreation Act (FJRA) could pass Congress this year, protecting a million acres of undeveloped headwaters and spawning tributaries of Rock Creek and the Blackfoot, Big Hole, Clark Fork and Beaverhead Rivers, while also creating tools that further restoration of damaged streams on national forest lands.

The U.S. Senate is supporting inclusion of this important made-in-Montana measure in the 2012 Omnibus Appropriations bill. However, it appears this measure could be blocked in the House of Representatives. Contact Rep. Rehberg today and ask him to support including FJRA in the House version of the appropriations measure, an action that could further protection of key habitats for Montana wild trout, while also advancing restoration of damaged habitats and the jobs that go with it.

Call Rep. Rehberg’s Helena District Office at 406-443-7878 and e-mail him by clicking here.

Leave him a message that urges him to support adding the Forest Jobs and Recreation Act to the House version of the Omnibus Appropriations Bill. Tell him this measure, which is supported by a majority of Montanans, will protect and improve Montana’s angling and hunting opportunities (let him know if you fish or hunt), and that it can create jobs in the woods restoring damaged habitats.

It is important to contact Rep. Rehberg before December 13.

For more information, contact Bruce Farling at bruce@montanatu.org

Montana Trout Unlimited
phone: 406-543-0054