The Future of Wild Salmon & Steelhead on the White Salmon River

Critical Questions that will inform our research:

  1. Is the capacity and habitat for salmon and steelhead decreasing, stable or increasing?
  2. Can wild salmon be restored to the point of allowing a fishery with harvest of wild fish?

We are losing precious time and data by not having the means to monitor the recovery of these species following the removal of a major dam.

The research will:

  • provide critically important information about salmonid recovery after dam removal,
  • help evaluate the potential of other dam removal projects, and
  • inform salmon recovery throughout the entire Pacific Northwest.

Q & A Session

with Board Member Dr. Pat Connolly, scientist Emeritus and Research Fish Biologist working for the Columbia River Research Laboratory.

How did the construction of Condit dam impact fish?

It closed most of the watershed to use by anadromous fish including Chinook salmon, coho salmon, steelhead, and Pacific lamprey. These fish were once plentiful in the river. It also trapped potential for expression of the steelhead life history, but the potential appears to have survived for nearly a hundred years within resident rainbow trout. 

What happened when Condit Dam was removed?

A free-flowing river was restored, reopening many miles of habitat for salmon and steelhead.  Species once wiped out have been recently documented in the White Salmon River above the old dam site, including Chinook salmon, spring Chinook salmon, coho salmon, steelhead, Pacific lamprey, and bull trout.  Beyond rudimentary information about fish response to the dam removal, many questions remain.

What makes the White Salmon River’s fish population so uniquely important?

Prior to the removal of Condit Dam, an inter-agency and tribal technical group recommended that wild fish be allowed to recolonize the White Salmon River without supplementation by hatchery fish.  To-date, that recommendation has been followed, which makes the White Salmon River a unique on-going experiment with results that could inform salmon recovery throughout the entire Pacific Northwest. 

What Do We Know?

The White Salmon River is known to be a valuable cold-water refuge for salmon and steelhead destined for the mid and upper Columbia River and the Snake River, in need of respite from the high-water temperatures of the Columbia River during summer. 

Several generations of fish have potentially migrated upriver, spawned, hatched, produced smolts that emigrated to salt water, and returned as adults. 

The owner of the dam invested $37 million in restoring fish passage to the White Salmon River.  Numerous complicated permits were required from state and federal agencies, including NEPA and clean water permits.  The Yakama Nation, and numerous environmental groups also invested time and money in removal.  It is unacceptable to have spent such a large amount of public and private time and money to remove Condit Dam, for the purpose of salmon restoration, and not know if expectations for increased fish production have been fulfilled.

What Don’t We Know?

  • Are the freshwater trout returning to anadromy in meaningful numbers?
  • Are anadromous fish species returning and establishing sustainable populations?
  • What fish stocks are using the refuge and in what numbers?

A full scientific assessment of returning salmonids and of the return of freshwater trout to anadromy on the White Salmon could provide critically important information about salmonid recovery after dam removal and help evaluate the potential for other dam removal projects. 

What research has been or is being done?

US Geological Survey researchers have operated a rotary screw trap for about three months each spring, starting in 2015, but ending in 2022 for lack of funding. These researchers have captured, counted, PIT-tagged, and released outgoing smolts and parr, tagging about 500 each year.  During the summer of those same years, juvenile fish density studies have been done on Buck and Rattlesnake creeks. 

While the current research is important and useful, the scale is too small, and some important pieces are missing.  Most glaringly there is no PIT tagging occurring and there are not any PIT tag interrogators (reader) in the watershed.

Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife is surveying Chinook salmon spawning in the lower portion of the White Salmon River. Trout Unlimited has garnered volunteers to conduct spawning surveys for steelhead and coho.  Yakama Nation and US Fish & Wildlife Service have done limited surveys for other species, including coho and lamprey.

What additional research is needed?

A systematic program to provide reliable and useful scientific data that includes the following:

  1. Operating a rotary screw trap for three months in the spring, taking data and harvesting genetic samples from at least 100 fish and PIT tagging up to 3,000 fish per year;
  2. Promptly processing the genetic samples;
  3. Counting salmon redds and conducting spawning surveys for a few months in the fall;
  4. Monitor parr (juveniles) growth, survival, and density as they rear in the river, which in the case of steelhead is up to three or four years before they head out to the ocean. This would include habitat assessment and fish associations; and
  5. Counting incoming adult anadromous fish by conducting PIT tag detections, spawning surveys, and possibly snorkel surveys.

What would a full program cost?

A full monitoring program is estimated to cost $2-3 million over five years, including equipment, supplies, evaluation of genetic samples, and field research costs. The commitment to a five-year period is critically important, given the life cycle of the fish. The monitoring can, of course, be separated into less expensive phases depending on funding.

The Salmon Recovery Funding Board recently began providing limited monitoring funding in the state for specific needs. Those funds were able to kick-start limited juvenile monitoring on the White Salmon in 2016 and 2017, but have not been available in the White Salmon in recent years.

Despite the work of many agencies to find funding to support limited, basic research following the removal of Condit Dam, the agencies have not been successful in finding sufficient and on-going funding to support a multi-year project that is critically needed in this watershed. 

Why is this research not funded through the usual public institutions?

Some agencies fund limited fish research, usually with very specific needs and goals. For example, US Army Corp of Engineers and Bonneville Power Administration are interested in how the Columbia River hydroelectric system impacts anadromous fish. Since those funds are not available for competitive grants and the White Salmon River is not part of the federal hydroelectric system, those sources are not available in this basin. US Fish & Wildlife Services funds limited research on how their hatchery system impacts wild fish, but their work on the White Salmon River has been very limited in scope and duration.  

What are the Priorities for Immediate Funding?

  1. Place at least one, preferably three, PIT tag interrogators in the watershed, one in Rattlesnake Creek, one in Buck Creek, and one in the mainstem White Salmon River above its confluence with the Columbia River. These interrogators will provide information and about all tagged fish coming in and out of the river,

    The cost of a small PIT tag interrogator for a tributary system like Rattlesnake Creek is about $30,000. The cost for a large one for the mainstem White Salmon would be about $50,000.

  1. Assure funding for 2024 and forward for the current rotary screw trap, PIT tagging, and juvenile density research. The cost is approximately $70,000, which includes $50,000 for the rotary screw trap work and $20,000 for the juvenile density work.