what is your opinion, would it be unethical or environmentally destructive to bypass a natural structure like snoqualmie falls with a fish ladder to let native steelhead have access to tens or hundreds of miles of new spawning territory?

could it be done in a way that kept the hatchery fish from being able to go up there?

would it destroy the upper river for trout?

That sounds pretty expensive, never mind environmentally risky, and I don't think it would even work. First, that habitat doesn't appear to be particularly productive; the trout populations are fair to middling at best. Second, no anadromous fish have ever had access to those habitats; they're not necessarily suitable or productive habitats for steelhead.

But I kind of like the sentiment, and I have a more modest proposal. Removing the manmade fish-passage barrier WDFW maintains at the Tokul Creek Hatchery would re-open about 50 miles of good summer steelhead spawning and rearing habitat in the lower Snoqualmie Basin. In 1996 the state recognized the WDFW diversion dam on Tokul Creek as the most significant manmade fish-blockage in the entire Snoqualmie watershed. In 2004, it's still blocking fish (though WDFW, through WT initiative, does trap and transport ESA-listed chinook around the barrier in the fall).

WDFW acknowledges that there are at least 38 fish-passage barriers associated with their various hatcheries. Taken together, they probably add up to the tens or hundreds of miles of habitat you're talking about, perfectly good habitat that steelhead and salmon used for thousands of years, that they could use again if the barriers were removed or fixed.

Hatchery barriers aren't the only problem. of course. Simple road culverts and small water diversions often block fish from utilizing dozens of miles of otherwise productive habitat. Washington Trout works with public agencies, community organizations, and individual property owners to evaluate, identify, prioritize, and remove fish-passage barriers throughout the state.

Look for more information about the WT "Habitat Lost and Found Program" at http://www.washingtontrout.org .

Ramon Vanden Brulle
Washington Trout

Lupo -
One of the things that this part of the world so great for us fishermen is the diversity of the fishery resource. This in turn is the result of the diveristy of our rivers. It is the barriers the separate anadromous from resident fish. And partial barriers the allow for the developement of diverse steelhead populations - summer verus winters. Let's leave our rivers and their fish populations the way they are! Once we start the game of playing God we gets to decide which species are favored? - commerical over sport, or anadromous over resident.

I have to agree with Ramon - let's use our efforts in fixing passage problems that man has created and leave the rest as they are.

I agree that the passage problem at the hatchery on Toklu needs fixing I do have to question the amount of potential summer steelhead found in the Creek. As a youngster in the early 1960s I had the opportunity to fish various reaches of the creek above the falls (located less than 2 miles from the mouth) and all that we found there was resident cutthroat (and a rare Eastern Brook). I had heard of no summer steelhead in the creek until hatchery fish were planted in the late 1960s in the upper Snoqualmie. When those fish first return one could consistently find hatchery summers at the base of the falls. I suppose that under some condition it was possible that a hatchery fish may have been successful in jumping the falls but it is hard to imagine how. Now the fact remains that cutts and eastern brook are the only trout found above the falls - based on the Tokul watershed plan, WDFW bag checks, and various angler reports. I know of no summer steelhead population on the west coast where the resident part of the population does not include rainbows - either the information that upper Tokul is summer steelhead is erroneous or the salmonid population above the falls is extraordinarily unique.

Tight lines
S malma

Nice information, guys...

So we've discussed not bypassing Snoqualmie Falls (probably a good idea!), and we've discussed removing manmade barriers to traditional habitat (excellent idea)...what about existing bypasses to natural barriers?

South Fork Skykomish
South Fork Stillaguamish

Comments from Smalma and Ramon?

Fish on...

Todd

I guess there's new work scheduled on bypass routes on the Klickitat to help passage of wild steelhead and chinook past the falls.

You can read about it here. http://www.columbian.com/08292004/front_pa/182910.html

Todd -
As the article that Dan referred to indicates it seems that we continually have to muck with natural systems in the name of salmon recovery. With the significant salmon production occurring in the habitat made accessible to them at Sunset and Granite it would seem unlikely that there would be the political will to return those areas to historic conditions - to easy to call them mitigation for other habitat abuse.

I would hope if that such projects were proposed today that they would not be built. If it were left for me to decide I would end the truck and haul at Sunset and disable the ladder at Granite. I strongly believe that the key to restoring and keeping healthy wild salmonid populations is the maintance of the natural process in which the fish had evolved - that includes those habitat features that allowed the species diveristy to develop.

I'm sure to no one's surprise many folks would disagree with my position - it is much easier politically to allow mucking with "improving habitat" features than "paying the piper" for habitat protection or restoration.

Tight lines
S malma

Lupo,

Putting anadromous fish upstream of Snoqualmie Falls has not only been contemplated, but was routinely done in the 1970s by the former WDF, long before the merger with WDW. WDF planted surplus hatchery chinook and coho fry in the upper forks of the Snoqualmie in an attempt to increase overall salmon production. WDF even proposed adding a formal upstream fish passage system and screens to Puget Sound Energy's hydropower water diversion above the falls.

There was no monitoring of the effectiveness of the stocking in the upper Snoqualmie, and biologists reasonably assumed that many downstream migrating smolts were killed either by PSE's hydro diversion or if they landed on the rocks below the falls.

The idea of developing anadromous runs upstream of the falls was finally dismissed as poorly thought out and out of tune with contemporary environmental values.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

Smalma wrote:

"I strongly believe that the key to restoring and keeping healthy wild salmonid populations is the maintance of the natural process in which the fish had evolved - that includes those habitat features that allowed the species diveristy to develop. "

...and people wonder why I jump up and roll up my sleeves and dive in to speak up on your behalf whenever I get the chance!

Thank you for that last quote...

Fish on...

Todd