Klamath Dam Removal Begins

Robert Engleheart said:
Finally it’s happening:
www.asce.org

Construction begins on removal of 4 Klamath River dams

The removal of the dams, one of the largest in U.S. history, will restore fish passage along much of the river in southern Oregon and Northern California.
www.asce.org www.asce.org
Click to expand...
I suppose Oregon can liken this project to what Washington had with the Elwha dams removal. Keno and Link River dams are upstream of John C. Boyle dam, the upstream most dam slated for removal. Keno and Link both apparently have fish passage.

Robert - I don't know the history** of salmon and/or steelhead and this river. I wonder, will salmon seek headwaters above Keno and Link? (Wood River, Williamson, Chiloquin......??). Did salmon once swim through Klamath Lake to these rivers?

** I was fishing the Klamath below Keno Dam one morning (1977-78), there was an old gentleman fishing a bamboo rod with nightcrawlers. He was dapping the worms into a lava tube right next to the river bank - this tube was connected to the river and held some nice trout (his stringer of trout was impressive). I visited with him - he told me that Native Americans used to catch salmon right where we were talking and split the fish and fasten them to pine trees to dry. I wasn't sure if I believed him but I think it was likely true. At any rate, great news that these four dams are coming out. I loved fishing the Klamath River.
 
Robert -
I'm guessing the old gentleman was right about the Chinook salmon being fastened to trees, caught there in the run below Keno. I wonder how salmon will do, and hoping they do make it up to Klamath Falls - in that shallow, warm putting green colored lake? I remember the lake area immediately upstream of the Link River being lawn green, but then I also remember seeing that lake frozen solid except where there are hot springs.

Thanks again/Pat
 
The Klamath is unique in that part of its watershed is in the Great Basin. Fall chinook and steelhead should thrive after dam removal as miles of new habitat including cold water tributaries will become available. Steelhead may eventually ascend into the Upper Klamath Lake tribs but fall chinook will likely stay below Keno.

I'm pretty skeptical about the reestablishment of spring run chinook to the upper Klamath Lake tribs. Those springers were long gone well before Copco and Iron Gate dams were constructed and may not have ever been abundant. One of the challenges will be finding the right genetic fit for reintroduction. There are only a few hundred Klamath wild springers returning these days to two tributaries well downstream of the project. The other challenge will be with Upper Klamath Lake which has it's own issues with nutrient overload from 150 years of intensive livestock grazing along the tributaries.
 
RRSmith said:
The Klamath is unique in that part of its watershed is in the Great Basin. Fall chinook and steelhead should thrive after dam removal as miles of new habitat including cold water tributaries will become available. Steelhead may eventually ascend into the Upper Klamath Lake tribs but fall chinook will likely stay below Keno.

I'm pretty skeptical about the reestablishment of spring run chinook to the upper Klamath Lake tribs. Those springers were long gone well before Copco and Iron Gate dams were constructed and may not have ever been abundant. One of the challenges will be finding the right genetic fit for reintroduction. There are only a few hundred Klamath wild springers returning these days to two tributaries well downstream of the project. The other challenge will be with Upper Klamath Lake which has it's own issues with nutrient overload from 150 years of intensive livestock grazing along the tributaries.
Click to expand...


The right genetic fit would be to not use ANY hatchery fish. Only allow wild fish in the new habitat.. as soon as you use a hatchery fish it's reintroduction NOT restoration and in my view it's pretty much pointless to remove the dams.
If a hatchery is involved no restoration is taking place it's that simple.
 
Rob Allen said:
The right genetic fit would be to not use ANY hatchery fish. Only allow wild fish in the new habitat.. as soon as you use a hatchery fish it's reintroduction NOT restoration and in my view it's pretty much pointless to remove the dams.
If a hatchery is involved no restoration is taking place it's that simple.
Click to expand...
I haven't been in the loop since I retired from CDFW but last I heard, there was going to be a conservation hatchery which I assume will be used for springers. Maybe that's changed...
 
RRSmith said:
I haven't been in the loop since I retired from CDFW but last I heard, there was going to be a conservation hatchery which I assume will be used for springers. Maybe that's changed...
Click to expand...
Would that be the current hatchery or will it be removed when the dam is taken down?
 
RRSmith said:
I haven't been in the loop since I retired from CDFW but last I heard, there was going to be a conservation hatchery which I assume will be used for springers. Maybe that's changed...
Click to expand...
i was speaking out of principle not out of any local knowledge. The purpose of a hatchery in conservation would be to establish a wild run that no longer needs the hatchery to maintain the run.
to my knowledge that has never occurred. Therefore I think the best option is to let existing wild fish have the new habitat to themselves..
 
Rob Allen said:
The purpose of a hatchery in conservation would be to establish a wild run that no longer needs the hatchery to maintain the run.
to my knowledge that has never occurred.
Click to expand...
And your knowledge would be wrong Rob. South Puget Sound chum salmon were severely over-fished in the north Sound area in the 60s and 70s. Small hatchery operations were undertaken on a couple of south Sound creeks in the 70s and the intercepting fisheries were restricted. The runs bounced back such that very small south Sound creeks have had very large runs of chum salmon until the recent drop off of most runs of most species most places. And the ESA Hood Canal summer chum would be another example. Small demonstration hatcheries were set up on two or three streams and operated for 12 years to jump start summer chum recovery. It's made a difference, but not as dramatic as the south Sound chum, likely because of environmental factors.
 
Salmo_g said:
And your knowledge would be wrong Rob. South Puget Sound chum salmon were severely over-fished in the north Sound area in the 60s and 70s. Small hatchery operations were undertaken on a couple of south Sound creeks in the 70s and the intercepting fisheries were restricted. The runs bounced back such that very small south Sound creeks have had very large runs of chum salmon until the recent drop off of most runs of most species most places. And the ESA Hood Canal summer chum would be another example. Small demonstration hatcheries were set up on two or three streams and operated for 12 years to jump start summer chum recovery. It's made a difference, but not as dramatic as the south Sound chum, likely because of environmental factors.
Click to expand...


so you're saying that they planted hatchery chums, the runs rebounded as a result specifically of the planting and that the runs sustained once hatchery plants were stopped?

any examples of chinook or steelhead?
 
They weren't hatchery chums; they were remnants of the original populations. The efficiency of hatchery reproduction jump-started the rebound, and the runs maintained because one main limiting factor - over-harvest - was greatly reduced. I'm not aware of any Chinook or steelhead examples. Those species have a more complex life history, plus most Chinook interceptions are outside the control of WA state. They're using hatchery intervention to try to jump start Hood Canal steelhead. It's still in the early stages, and I don't know if there are any results to evaluate yet.
 
As far as the steelhead and hatchery intervention goes, does anyone have experience with the resident rainbow population of upper klamath? If there are significant wild breeding populations of rainbows in the lake, there shouldnt be a need to introduce steelhead. We saw with the elwha that the fish never stopped trying to go to the ocean, and that is likely true of any cut off population that once produced anadramous fish.

Salmon are a different animal. It will likely take multiple dozens of generations before fish would establish themselves naturally in the upper extent of their available habitat. However, you consistently see chinook at the base of many dams and barriers, and they would clearly go beyond them even if they were not born up there. So maybe it wouldnt take as long as i think.

Im thrilled we get to have these discussions and watch the results of these dams coming down, even if mistakes are made along the way.
 
Rainbow trout in the Klamath Watershed have been known to exhibit at least five distinct life histories (not unlike coastal cutthroat) so it's not a given that they will all want to head to the ocean. Genetic work has shown a linkage between populations of steelhead trout downstream of Iron Gate Dam and current resident forms in the Klamath River and tributaries upstream of Iron Gate Dam, as well as in tributaries to Upper Klamath Lake. One of the fishery biologists I worked with looked at resident rainbow trout and steelhead downstream of Iron Gate Dam. His research indicated that it is relatively common for returning steelhead to be progeny of resident adults and vice versa. I believe the expectation is that steelhead trout will recolonize upstream once the dams are out.

I think the expectation is for fall chinook to rapidly recolonize available habitat between Iron Gate and Keno. Not so sure about coho, lamprey and of course spring run chinook.
 
I have fished this river for 4 days and it has stunning scenery but I never connected on a steelhead. It seemed like a tough nut to crack. I would love to go there and fish again and actually catch something.
 
cdn.jwplayer.com

Freeing the Klamath River

9:58 | Following the largest fish die-off in U.S. history, a decadeslong fight to remove dams from the Klamath River aims to return healthy water to the tribes and wildlife who depend on it. (Ramo...
cdn.jwplayer.com
 
RRSmith said:
The Klamath is unique in that part of its watershed is in the Great Basin. Fall chinook and steelhead should thrive after dam removal as miles of new habitat including cold water tributaries will become available. Steelhead may eventually ascend into the Upper Klamath Lake tribs but fall chinook will likely stay below Keno.

I'm pretty skeptical about the reestablishment of spring run chinook to the upper Klamath Lake tribs. Those springers were long gone well before Copco and Iron Gate dams were constructed and may not have ever been abundant. One of the challenges will be finding the right genetic fit for reintroduction. There are only a few hundred Klamath wild springers returning these days to two tributaries well downstream of the project. The other challenge will be with Upper Klamath Lake which has it's own issues with nutrient overload from 150 years of intensive livestock grazing along the tributaries.
Click to expand...

My wife and I drove from Bend to K'Falls yesterday - it's interesting sitting in our hotel room looking at the Klamath River (Lake Ewauna) and fantasizing about salmon swimming through this reservoir, up the Link and through Klamath Lakes to those tributaries. Hard to imagine, really. We can hope.

IMG_2604.jpg


For the folks who are birders, what an amazing place to watch birds; perhaps 60 Western Grebes in some sort of formation, ten white pelicans. a number of terns, seagulls, two egrets, geese with goslings, ducks with little ones and a whole lot of other birds I can't identify.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top