The previous sections identified factors that led to the decline of Upper Columbia spring Chinook, steelhead, and bull trout. In this section the plan summarizes current threats to the continued existence of the three species. These threats are organized according to the five categories as set forth in Section 4(a)(1) of the ESA and all apply to this recovery plan:
The present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range.
Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes.
Disease or predation.
Inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms.
Other natural or human-made factors affecting its continued existence.
The information outlined in this section comes from the Federal Register Rules and Regulations, watershed plans, and subbasin plans.
3.11.1Spring Chinook
The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment of its Habitat or Range
Although land and water management activities have improved, factors such as dams, diversions, roads and railways, agriculture (including livestock grazing), residential development, and historic forest management continue to threaten spring Chinook and their habitat in some locations in the Upper Columbia Basin.
Water diversions without proper passage routes disrupt migrations of adult spring Chinook.
Unscreened diversions trap or divert juvenile spring Chinook resulting in reduced survival.
Hydroelectric passage mortality reduces abundance of migrant spring Chinook.
Sedimentation from land and water management activities is a cause of habitat degradation in some salmon streams.
Loss of habitat complexity, off-channel habitat, and large, deep pools due to sedimentation and loss of pool-forming structures such as boulders and large woody debris threatens spring Chinook and their habitat in some locations in the Upper Columbia Basin.
Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or Educational Purposes
The effects of recreational fishing on naturally produced spring Chinook may be heightened during fisheries for hatchery produced Chinook.
Incidental harvest mortality in mixed-stock fisheries and commercial fisheries contributes to the loss of naturally produced spring Chinook.
Illegal harvest (poaching) continues to threaten spring Chinook.
The presence of non-native (exotic) species (e.g., walleye and smallmouth bass) has resulted in increased predator populations that prey on spring Chinook.
Increased predation by northern pikeminnow affects the survival of downstream migrating spring Chinook.
Avian predation is a threat to spring Chinook populations.
Predation by pinnipeds is also a concern.
Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
The implementation and enforcement of existing Federal and State laws designed to conserve fishery resources, maintain water quality, and protect aquatic habitat have not been entirely successful in preventing past and ongoing habitat degradation.
Although the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) and Shoreline Management Act (SMA) have been significantly changed to improve management, conditions and protection efforts for listed species, local regulatory improvements, and compliance monitoring (enforcement) have lagged behind because of political support and a lack of funding.
The extent and distribution of Federal lands limits the ability of the Northwest Forest Plan and PACFISH/INFISH to achieve its aquatic habitat restoration objectives at watershed and river basin scales.
The “base” State of Washington Forest Practice Rules do not adequately address large woody debris recruitment, tree retention to maintain stream bank integrity and channel networks within floodplains, and chronic and episodic inputs of coarse and fine sediment that maintain habitat that are properly functioning for all life stages of spring Chinook.
Implementation of the Federal Clean Water Act has not been completely successful in protecting spring Chinook, particularly with respect to non-point sources of pollution.
Other Natural or Human-Made Factors Affecting its Continued Existence
Natural climatic conditions (e.g., fires, floods, droughts, landslides, etc.)65 can exacerbate the problems associated with degraded and altered riverine and estuarine habitats.
Drought conditions reduce already limited spawning, rearing, and migration habitat.
Poor ocean conditions (e.g., less upwelling, warm surface waters, etc.) negatively affect spring Chinook production.
The use of non-locally derived broodstock for hatchery programs may negatively affect genetic integrity.
The collection of naturally produced spring Chinook for hatchery broodstock may harm small or dwindling natural populations if not done with caution.
Competition, genetic introgression, and disease transmission resulting from hatchery introductions may reduce the productivity and survival of naturally produced spring Chinook.
3.11.2Steelhead
The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment of its Habitat or Range
Although land and water management activities have improved, factors such as dams, diversions, roads and railways, agriculture (including livestock grazing), residential development, and historic forest management continue to threaten steelhead and their habitat in some locations in the Upper Columbia Basin.
Water diversions without proper passage routes disrupt migrations of adult steelhead.
Unscreened diversions trap or divert juvenile steelhead resulting in reduced survival.
Hydroelectric passage mortality reduces abundance of migrant steelhead.
Sedimentation from land and water management activities is a cause of habitat degradation in some streams.
Loss of habitat complexity, off-channel habitat, and large, deep pools due to sedimentation and loss of pool-forming structures such as boulders and large woody debris threatens steelhead and their habitat in some locations in the Upper Columbia Basin.
Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or Educational Purposes
The effects of recreational fishing on naturally produced steelhead may be heightened during fisheries for hatchery-produced steelhead.
Incidental harvest mortality in mixed-stock fisheries and commercial fisheries contributes to the loss of naturally produced steelhead.
Illegal harvest (poaching) continues to threaten steelhead.
Disease or Predation
The presence of non-native species (e.g., walleye and smallmouth bass) has resulted in increased predator populations that prey on steelhead.
Increased predation by northern pikeminnow affects the survival of downstream migrating steelhead.
Avian predation is a threat to steelhead populations.
Predation by pinnipeds is also a concern.
Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
The implementation and enforcement of existing Federal and State laws designed to conserve fishery resources, maintain water quality, and protect aquatic habitat have not been entirely successful in preventing past and ongoing habitat degradation.
Although the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMS) and Shoreline Management Act (SMA) have been significantly changed to improve management, conditions and protection efforts for listed species, local regulatory improvements, and compliance monitoring (enforcement) have lagged behind because of political support and a lack of funding.
The extent and distribution of Federal lands limits the ability of the Northwest Forest Plan and PACFISH/INFISH to achieve its aquatic habitat restoration objectives at watershed and river basin scales.
The “base” State of Washington Forest Practice Rules do not adequately address large woody debris recruitment, tree retention to maintain stream bank integrity and channel networks within floodplains, and chronic and episodic inputs of coarse and fine sediment that maintain habitat that are properly functioning for all life stages of steelhead.
Implementation of the Federal Clean Water Act has not been completely successful in protecting steelhead, particularly with respect to non-point sources of pollution.
Other Natural or Human-Made Factors Affecting its Continued Existence
Natural climatic conditions (e.g., fires, floods, droughts, landslides, etc.) can exacerbate the problems associated with degraded and altered riverine and estuarine habitats.
Drought conditions reduce already limited spawning, rearing, and migration habitat.
The use of non-locally derived broodstock for hatchery programs may negatively affect genetic integrity.
The collection of naturally produced steelhead for hatchery broodstock may harm small or dwindling natural populations if not done with caution.
Competition, genetic introgression, and disease transmission resulting from hatchery introductions may reduce the productivity and survival of naturally produced steelhead.
3.11.3Bull Trout
The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment of its Habitat or Range
Although land and water management activities have improved, factors such as dams, diversions, roads and railways, agriculture (including livestock grazing), residential development, and historic forest management continue to threaten bull trout and their habitat in some locations in the Upper Columbia Basin.
Water diversions without proper passage routes disrupt movements of migrant bull trout.
Unscreened diversions trap or divert juvenile bull trout resulting in reduced survival.
Passage through hydroelectric projects may reduces abundance of migrant bull trout.
Sedimentation from land and water management activities is a cause of habitat degradation in some bull trout streams.
Loss of habitat complexity, connectivity, channel stability, and increased water temperatures due to land and water management activities threatens bull trout in some locations in the Upper Columbia Basin.
Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or Educational Purposes
Illegal and incidental harvest (e.g., during the Lake Wenatchee sockeye fishery) reduces the abundance of bull trout in the Upper Columbia Basin.
Harvest as a result of misidentification continues under existing fishing regulations.
Poaching continues and can be especially detrimental to small, isolated, local populations of migratory bull trout.
Disease or Predation
The presence of non-native species (e.g., brook trout, bass, lake trout, etc.) has resulted in increased predator populations that prey on juvenile bull trout.
Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
The implementation and enforcement of existing Federal and State laws designed to conserve fishery resources, maintain water quality, and protect aquatic habitat have not been entirely successful in preventing past and ongoing habitat degradation.
Although the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMS) and Shoreline Management Act (SMA) have been significantly changed to improve management, conditions and protection efforts for listed species, local regulatory improvements, and compliance monitoring (enforcement) have lagged behind because of political support and a lack of funding.
The extent and distribution of Federal lands limits the ability of the Northwest Forest Plan and PACFISH/INFISH to achieve its aquatic habitat restoration objectives at watershed and river basin scales.
The “base” State of Washington Forest Practice Rules do not adequately address large woody debris recruitment, tree retention to maintain stream bank integrity and channel networks within floodplains, and chronic and episodic inputs of coarse and fine sediment that maintain habitat that are properly functioning for all life stages of bull trout.
Implementation of the Federal Clean Water Act has not been completely successful in protecting bull trout, particularly with respect to non-point sources of pollution and water temperature.
Other Natural or Human-Made Factors Affecting its Continued Existence
Natural climatic conditions (e.g., fires, floods, droughts, landslides, etc.) can exacerbate the problems associated with degraded and altered riverine habitat.
Drought conditions can reduce already limited spawning, rearing, and migration habitat.
Introduction of brook trout threatens bull trout through hybridization, competition, and predation.
Introduction of non-native species for recreational fisheries may increase incidental catch and illegal harvest of bull trout.
As noted earlier, recent activities to address threats and reverse the long-term decline of spring Chinook, steelhead, and bull trout in the Upper Columbia Basin are being initiated at Federal, State, and local levels (e.g., restrictive harvest regulations, adoption of various land management rules, and development of conservation strategies and plans). While these efforts are important to the conservation and recovery of ESA-listed species, additional work is needed to minimize threats to recovery (the subject of Section 5).
