The Lower ColumbiaLower River Columbia Estuary River Partnership Estuary Partnership Newsletter 2005 Report on the Estuary Assessing Trends in the Lower Columbia River The view from the river more and more includes osprey nests, on navigation markers, trees, pilings, and power poles. Osprey eat fish almost exclusively and prefer to feed near their nest sites, which they use year after year. Although toxic contaminants remain a concern, Osprey numbers in the lower Columbia and Willamette Rivers continue to climb. Photo by Judy Vander Maten. rom time to time, it is impor- strategy and have been successful The Estuary tant to reflect on where one in securing initial funds to institute Partnership Goals has been to determine where aspects of the strategy. F The ecosystem and species are next to go. The Lower Columbia River This first report becomes our base- Estuary Partnership completed our protected by increasing wetlands and line for future assessment. As we Comprehensive Conservation and habitat by 16,000 acres by 2010 and expand our water quality and ecosys- Management Plan in 1999. Since then, promoting improvements to storm- tem monitoring programs, future we have been working with many water management. reports will provide more detail with partners to implement this regional Toxic and conventional pollution is more data from which we can draw set of actions aimed at improving reduced by eliminating persistent more refined conclusions about the conditions in the 146 miles of lower bioaccumulative toxics, establishing conditions of the river. Columbia River and estuary, from maximum daily loads for streams that Bonneville Dam to the Pacific Ocean. We also include a bit of assessment do not meet water quality standards, about some of the progress the Our Report on the Estuary is an at- reducing hydrocarbon and heavy Estuary Partnership has made involv- tempt to provide a look at the river at metal discharges, and reducing ing students and citizens. This is an this point in time. One of the most bacterial contamination. important aspect of what we do. We important things the Estuary Part- Information about Columbia River believe that “experiential” learning nership can add to existing efforts is ecosystems, economics, history, and by all ages helps us understand the sustained science-based informa- culture is available to a range of river—in all of its ways—better. Full tion that can tell us if conditions are audiences by compiling and evaluat- understanding gives us all better tools improving or worsening. There have ing data about the river, providing with which to make decisions about been many studies, but little long education programs for a range of its uses and its protection. term monitoring of environmental audiences—focusing on children—and conditions. A primary focus of the It is a mighty river—it weaves through improving coordination among public Estuary Partnership is water quality all of us here in the Northwest. We are and private partners. and ecosystem monitoring. With a incredibly fortunate that we have the wide array of partners, we developed means to give it to our children even a long term monitoring plan and better than we found it. 1 www.lcrep.org Are threatened and endangered species in the lower Columbia River recovering? The answer is mixed depending on the species. Populations of some species, such as the bald eagle have improved, while others such as the Columbian white-tailed deer and salmon species continue to face an uncertain future. hen looking at the health tributaries at different times. For the listed Lower Columbia River chinook of native species, the fish and fishermen, times were good. salmon as threatened. The downturn Estuary Partnership can be attributed to many factors— W Times have changed. Since the 1980s focused on three species: Lower hydropower operations, hatcheries, annual Lower Columbia River chi- Columbia River chinook salmon, bald harvest, habitat loss, and ocean condi- nook returns have averaged less than eagles, and the Columbian white- tions among other reasons. However, 100,000 fish—half of them hatchery tailed deer. Each is officially listed as scientists have singled out habitat loss fish. In 1999, just prior to a fish return threatened or endangered. Each is a and degradation due to hydropower of less than 25,000 fish, and with only characteristic species that serves as projects, urbanization, logging, and a few naturally self sustaining an indicator of the general health of agriculture as leading to a significant populations of native chinook salmon the lower Columbia River. reduction in spawning and rearing left in the lower Columbia River, the habitat. National Marine Fisheries Service Lower Columbia River Chinook Salmon Occupied Bald Eagle Nest Sites Lower Columbia River chinook Along the Columbia River salmon is one of twelve species of 120 salmon and steelhead listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act that depends 100 on the lower Columbia River and estuary. Also listed are Lower 80 Columbia River chum, Lower Colum- Washington bia River steelhead, and Lower Oregon Columbia River coho, as well as some 60 Willamette River, upper Columbia, and Snake River salmon. Source: Oregon 40 Cooperative One hundred years ago, between Fish and Wildlife Research Unit 450,000 and 550,000 wild Lower Columbia River chinook returned to 20 dozens of lower Columbia River tributaries. A variety of unique 0 populations—spring, early fall, and 1991 1978 1981 1979 2001 1997 1987 1993 1992 1989 1982 1983 1984 1986 1980 1998 1999 1988 1994 1996 1995 1985 1990 2003 2002 2004 late fall—returned to different 2000 Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership 2 In the past five years, salmon returns nest sites have been steadily growing Columbia white-tailed Deer Counts have improved some. Federal, state along the Columbia River for over 25 in the Lower Columbia River and tribal fisheries experts believe years. While a few pairs nest above improved ocean conditions are the Bonneville Dam, most nest sites are in 450 main reason for the recent up-swing. the lower Columbia River. These Colder ocean temperatures brought eagles are year-round residents who 400 more nutrients to the surface for generally use the same breeding salmon to feed on and their ocean location year after year. A typical nest 350 productivity and survival increased. site is near water and an adequate fish 300 supply, away from human activity, and However, climatic signs are beginning surrounded by at least four large trees. to show that the Pacific’s temperature 250 may be warming again. Coupled with Unfortunately, problems remain. 200 the sixth consecutive below-average Extensive monitoring of bald eagle water year in the northwest, the status nests—all lower Columbia River nest 150 of Columbia Basin salmon are still sites have been monitored for produc- significantly at risk. tivity since the late 1970s—shows that 100 the productivity of pairs nesting below Bald Eagles river mile 60 remain low, especially 50 for those nesting between river miles Bald eagles were listed under the 0 13 and 31. The problem is blamed on 1991 2001 1997 1987 1993 1992 1989 1986 1998 1999 1988 1994 1996 1995 1985 1990 2002 Endangered Species Preservation Act 2000 significant concentrations of DDE, PCB, in 1966. Their declining numbers, Source: Lower Columbia River Fish Recovery Board and dioxins in bald eagle egg shells. both around the country and in the lower Columbia River, were primarily Various studies have been unable to attributed to pesticides. Particularly establish why higher levels of these endangered in 1968. They once According to refuge managers, a to blame was the pesticide DDT toxic bioaccumulative chemicals are ranged throughout river valleys from variety of factors are hindering (Dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroeth- congregating in this stretch of the the Umpqua River in Southern recovery, including: river. Possibly, fine sediments and Oregon to Puget Sound, but by the ane), which was used for nearly three • Degradation of riparian habitats their associated toxins are being late sixties only the lower Columbia decades to control insect pests on through logging and brush removal. crop and forest lands, around homes continually suspended in this mixing River population and a Roseburg, and gardens, and for industrial and zone where the river’s flow and the Oregon population remained. Habitat • Historic riparian zone commercial purposes. The chemical, ocean’s tides come together. More destruction and over hunting, development for beef production, which stays in the environment for research is needed to truly under- primarily in the early 1900s, are most cottonwood plantations, alder years, was eventually banned in 1972 stand the sources and causes for low often cited for the decline. harvests, and marinas. bald eagle productivity in this reach. by the US Environmental Protection After the refuge was established, • Deer and automobile collisions. Agency because of increased insect Columbian white-tailed deer num- • Poaching. resistance, development of more Columbian white-tailed Deer bers in the lower Columbia River effective alternative pesticides, and • Entanglement in barbed wire fences. The Columbian white-tailed deer is began to rebound, to the point that in growing public and user concern over one of the largest land mammals 1995, officials considered changing • Competition with livestock for adverse environmental side effects. living within the lower Columbia the deer’s official status from endan- habitat and food. One of those side effects was bald River, and the only one with its own gered to threatened. But severe • The introduction of wild pigs on eagle productivity. DDT and other US Wildlife Refuge—the Julia Butler flooding in February 1996 killed Wallace Island in 1980. chemicals like it accumulate up the Hansen Refuge for the Columbian more than half the population. • Habitat destruction resulting from food chain.