Forest battle continues over defining the upper bounds of fish habitat

A long-running battle over how to manage potential fish habitat on commercial forestland could be coming to a head — although it isn’t clear if the solution will satisfy either forestland owners or environmentalists.

Jamie Glasgow of Wild Fish Conservancy (center) leads a crew surveying a stream for the presence of fish in 2014. // Photo: Chris Linder

To be clear, there is not much argument about streamside buffers where salmon, trout and other fish are readily found, thanks to state and federal rules stemming from the landmark Forests and Fish Report. Buffers are designed to save trees that serve the needs of fish — including insects for food, shade for cool water and eventually down trees that form pools for resting as well as hiding places and spawning areas.

Environmentalists contend that it is important to protect unoccupied fish habitat as well as areas occupied by fish at any point in time. If salmon populations are to rebound, salmon fry could need extra space to grow and develop, says Jamie Glasgow, a biologist with Wild Fish Conservancy. That means larger buffers should go where fish habitat can be found.

Of course, timberland owners don’t want to leave large buffers on small stream segments where fish would never go. For them, perhaps hundreds of millions of dollars in commercial timber could be left standing under new rules, depending on how the state’s Forest Practices Board comes down on this issue of fish habitat. The board is scheduled to take up the issue again with some kind of action planned on Aug. 9.

Fish habitat is defined in the Forest and Fish Report as areas of a stream “used by fish at any life stage at any time of the year, including potential habitat likely to be used by fish which could be recovered by restoration or management and includes off-channel habitat.” (The emphasis is mine.)

The Forest and Fish Report was incorporated into state law by the Washington Legislature, and federal agencies adopted those concepts as a statewide “habitat conservation plan” to protect species listed under the Endangered Species Act, including chinook salmon.

One of the big arguments about fish habitat revolves around how to determine just how far upstream fish would likely go and where they would be deterred under various natural conditions they encounter, such as streamflow or natural barriers such as waterfalls.

The Forest and Fish Report anticipated that a map would be developed with all stream segments designated as either fish habitat or not fish habitat. After several years, such a map was developed in 2005, based on the size and steepness of the streams, using the best information available.

It soon became apparent, however, that fish were being found in areas marked as non-habitat on the maps. Other areas designated as habitat were sometimes unable to support fish. Some fish-bearing streams were not even on the maps, and some streams were in the wrong place. I wrote about the efforts by Wild Fish Conservancy to correct some maps three years ago (Kitsap Sun, Sept. 27, 2014). Previous maps had proved to be a problem as well, even before the Forest and Fish Report (Kitsap Sun, May 28, 1996).

The maps are still used as guidance, but buffer determinations must be made for each logging or development project based on actual site conditions. If a stream is 2 feet wide and the steepness is less than a 20 percent — or 16 percent in some areas — it is assumed that fish can get there.

But — and here’s the rub — an allowable fall-back method is to identify the presence of fish, either through snorkel surveys or by “elecrtrofishing,” which involves putting a nonlethal current in the water to stun the fish. Where fish are located, the area is designated as fish habitat, along with waters that extend upstream to a natural “break,” such as a waterfall or a stream confluence that would prevent fish from going any farther.

Much history surrounds this issue, and all sides should be given credit for working through many thorny habitat problems through the years. Nobody wants to go back to a time when the spotted owl was a symbol for conflict about whether forests were mainly for jobs or fish and wildlife.

As for fish habitat, experts have renewed their attempt to come up with reliable and objective methods to identify the break points between habitat (known as “Type F waters,” which stands for fish) and non-habitat (“Type N waters”) without the costs and impacts of surveying every stream for fish.

Environmental groups became impatient with the effort — or lack of effort at times — over the past 12 years — or more if you go back to the Forest and Fish Report. The matter has gone into formal dispute resolution, as provided by the Forest and Fish Law, and it now is up to the Forest Practices Board to provide a resolution.

“For the past 12 years, we have been using the interim water-typing rule that does not protect fish habitat …,” Glasgow said. “The interim rule allows surveyors to go to a stream anytime (during a specified period) and electrofish a stream. If they do not find fish during the one-day survey, they can identify it as Type N.”

The result is that many miles of fish habitat are getting little or no buffer protection, he argues. Where mistakes are made and small buffers or no buffers are allowed, it will take decades before the trees grow back to become good habitat again.

In mediation talks, the various parties — landowners, environmental groups, tribes and governments — have come to consensus on the overall framework to identify break points where the fish habitat ends, but the details are still unresolved.

Karen Terwilliger, senior director of forest and environmental policy for the Washington Forest Protection Association, said it is important to remember that these discussions are not about streams where adult salmon will go to lay their eggs.

“It’s the tail end of where the fish might be,” said Terwilliger, whose organization represents large timberland owners. The areas in dispute are generally small streams mostly occupied today by resident fish, including various species of trout and tiny sculpins.

The break point between fish and non-fish areas should be a location where the last fish is equally likely to stop above and below that point, she said. The scientific standard is that the break point should be accurate 95 percent of the time, as required by adaptive management provisions of the Forest and Fish Law.

“We think fish presence will always be an important part of the system,” she said. “Different streams are different. A ‘one size fits all’ does not make sense.”

Environmental groups prefer to avoid methods that rely upon people finding fish, which may or may not be present at the time of a survey. It should be possible to define habitat conditions suitable for fish whether or not they are there at a given time.

Scientific information has evolved to where predictions can be made about where fish will go, Terwilliger said, but there are still questions about what conditions create a barrier to fish. A level of scientific certainty is required before changes can go forward.

“If science says a change needs to be made, then you more forward to make the change,” she said. “To date, we have not seen data that a lot of changes need to be made.”

If a rule change is proposed, it will need to undergo environmental review, a cost-benefit analysis, a small-business economic impact statement and public hearings.

Peter Goldman, director and managing attorney at Washington Forest Law Center, said the adaptive management process should be more than a system of delays. Only recently have things been moving in the right direction, he added.

“The timber industry is powerful,” said Goldman, who represents environmental groups. “They don’t want anything to change.

“We have been trying to negotiate in good faith collaboratively, because that is the Washington way,” he said. “If the Forest Practices Board doesn’t act … it is conceivable that we will have to sue the board and ask the federal government to reconsider the HCP.”

Stephen Bernath, deputy supervisor for forest practices at the Washington Department of Natural Resources and chairman of Forest Practices Board, said the board is moving forward with the help of scientists. New ideas and new technology are being brought into the discussion with the goal of seeing whether a variety of physical parameters alone can be used to identify fish habitat with high probability.

At the Aug. 9 meeting, the board is scheduled to get an update on the progress and to act on staff recommendations about the breaks between fish and non-fish waters. After that, a formal process will begin to incorporate changes into policies, rules and guidance.

Can you identify these marine mammals seen in South Puget Sound?

Who the heck are these guys featured in this video posted on Facebook by meteorologist Nick Allard of KIRO-7 TV?

Pacific white-sided dolphins? Common dolphins? Dall’s porpoises? Harbor porpoises?

Based on the conflicting comments on Nick’s Facebook page, as well comments on reposts, a lot of people are insisting that they know what these animals are. But even some longtime Puget Sound residents got it wrong.

Annie Douglas of Cascadia Research took a look at the video, posted here with Nick’s permission. These creatures, she said, are long-beaked common dolphins.

Last summer, after these common dolphins first showed up, Annie wrote a blog post about their usual travels, noting that they are normally seen in Southern California and Mexico. It appears that they survived the winter a long way from home and have stayed in South Puget Sound, where Cascadia researchers are keeping track of their movements.

Rare long-beaked common dolphins have been spending time in South Puget Sound.
Photo courtesy of Nick Allard

They appear to be generally healthy, Annie said. She has heard reports of their feeding on small fish, and their energy level remains high as they “porpoise” out of the water and do other acrobatic feats.

Before this group showed up last year, the only previous confirmed sighting of long-beaked common dolphins was during the summer of 2003, when several individuals were seen in various locations, including the Boston Harbor area near Olympia, Dalco Passage near Tacoma and Whidbey Island.

Here’s how Annie describes the species:

“In appearance, they have a distinct black cape that extends into a saddle below their dorsal fin, a light underbelly, and a distinct dark eye to pectoral fin stripe. Their average length is 6-8.5 feet and they can weigh up to 500 lbs.

“They can be distinguished from harbor porpoise and Dall’s porpoise — the two species of porpoise commonly encountered in Puget Sound — by morphology, pigmentation, shape and behavior. Both porpoise species have fairly triangular dorsal fins, whereas the long-beaked common dolphin has a more ‘traditional’ falcate-shaped (curved) dorsal fin. Dall’s porpoise are all black with a white patch on their sides, and harbor porpoise are all gray-brown.

“Neither of the porpoise species expose much more than their back and dorsal fin when they surface, although Dall’s porpoise will often create a noticeable ‘rooster tail’ splash when swimming at top speed.

“Long-beaked common dolphins often leap out of the water so that much of their bodies are exposed, and they are also more likely to play in the wake of a boat than either of the local porpoise species. Pacific white-sided dolphins commonly found along Washington outer coast are occasionally found in the Strait of Juan de Fuca. They behave similar to the long-beaked common dolphin; however, they have a larger dorsal fin and more complicated black, gray and white pigmentation.”

Annie asks that people report sightings to Cascadia and send along any photos and videos to ABDouglas(at)cascadiaresearch.org. Sightings also can be reported by phone, (360) 943-7325.

Annie reminds boaters to stay at least 100 yards from marine mammals (200 yards for killer whales). It is illegal to harass, chase, feed or otherwise interfere with them, as provided by the federal Marine Mammal Protection Act.

Amusing Monday: Without a doubt, these dogs are athletes

UPDATE: July 19

Purina has posted videos of the Surf Dog competition for both large and small dogs. Check the bottom of this page to watch.
—–

In promotional materials, Purina calls these dogs “canine athletes” for their ability to perform and compete before crowds of observers.

This is the 20th year that Purina Pro Plan has sponsored the Incredible Dog Challenge, which features dog surfing, diving and agility contests, along with the freestyle flying disc competition, which comes about as close to dancing as a dog can get.

I’ve posted videos of the winners of the Diving Dog and Fetch It! finals on this page, including both the Western Regional and Eastern Regional competitions. If you enjoy these videos, you may wish to take time to watch the full competitions:

Both the Diving Dog and Fetch It! contests challenge the leaping ability of water-loving dogs. In Diving Dog, the canines leap off a 40-foot carpeted runway and try to go as far out as they can. The winner is the dog whose nose is the farthest when its chest hits the water.

Fetch It! uses the same runway but adds the physical challenge of touching an object at the end. The winner is the dog who is able to knock the object, called a bumper, the farthest out into the water.

While athletic ability is important, trainer Brianna Minshew of Rome, Ga., says the most important thing for a beginning dog is good obedience.

“My advice for those wanting to get into the sport of dock diving is to start off with a basic obedience class so the dog can learn to sit and/or down stay on the dock,” Brianna said on the Pro Plan’s website. “They also need to learn to track and retrieve a toy. What I believe is the most important is to find a local facility that has a pool and get proper instruction and safety tips for the dock and also to have fun with your dog.”


Brianna is staff supervisor at the Georgia Dog Gym. Her 4-year-old border collie, named Knox, took first place in the Diving Dog competition during the 2014 Eastern Regionals.

Other events in the Incredible Dog Challenge:

WESTERN REGIONAL FINALS

EASTERN REGIONAL FINALS

The Incredible Dog Challenge Eastern Regional Championship was held April 7 and 8 in St. Petersburg, Fla. The Western Regional Championship was held June 9-10 in Huntington Beach, Calif. The national finals are scheduled Sept. 29-30 in St. Louis, Mo.

The Western Regional Championships are scheduled to be rebroadcast on Aug. 3 at 9 p.m. on KING-TV, Channel 5, according to Carson International Events. I anticipate that the finals will be broadcast as well.

Note: The Surf Dog competition, also sponsored by Purina Pro Plan, is normally considered part of the Incredible Dog Challenge. It is my favorite event. So far, I have been unable to locate video of this year’s surfing competition, but I have asked the Purina folks if they have such video and can make it available. If something comes through, I will post an update.

Springer, once a lonely orphan, gives birth to her second baby orca

Springer, the killer whale, has borne a second calf some 15 years after she was rescued as a young orphan swimming alone near Vashon Island in Puget Sound.

Springer with her new calf in Canadian waters.
Photo: Lisa Spaven, DFO, Canada

Springer’s rescue and return to her family in British Columbia is one of the all-time-great orca stories. It was a privilege to be a news reporter in 2001 when I was able to break the news of the lonely orca and follow the rescue effort in Puget Sound.

After Springer was found swimming dangerously close to the Vashon-Fauntleroy ferry lanes, officials with NOAA Fisheries and other organizations put together a rescue plan. The young animal was identified as a member of the Northern Resident killer whales, a group that never comes as far south as Puget Sound. Experts believe that Springer’s mother had died and the young animal wandered all the way to Puget Sound.

Springer was captured and placed under medical care at NOAA’s Manchester Lab in South Kitsap. She gained weight and became healthier before she was moved by jet catamaran some 300 miles north to Telegraph Cove near the northern end of Vancouver Island, B.C. After her release, she was soon reunited with other members of her family, as later described in a NOAA video (posted on this page).

Orphan Orca, Saving Springer from NOAA Fisheries on Vimeo.

“Springer’s story is an inspiration on many levels,” said Paul Spong of OrcaLab in a news release. “It proved that an orphan orca, alone and separated from her family, can be rehabilitated and returned to a normal productive life with her family and community; and it showed that disparate parties with diverse interests can come together and work together for the common goal of helping one little whale.”

Springer’s newest calf was spotted June 5 by folks at CetaceaLab on B.C.’s north central coast. The birth was confirmed by Canada’s Department of Fisheries and Oceans. Springer and her first calf Spirit, born in 2013, remain healthy, observers say. They are most often seen in northern British Columbia, visiting Johnstone Strait at times during in the summer.

News of the new birth comes just in time for the 15th anniversary celebration of Springer’s rescue. The event, called “Celebrate Springer,” will be held next weekend in Telegraph Cove. The public is invited to the festivities, including a slide show, “Springer’s Story,” Saturday at 11 a.m. featuring members of Springer’s rescue team. A panel discussion will follow. A new Telegraph Cove Whale Trail sign will be dedicated at 4 p.m., followed by a salmon dinner on the boardwalk at 5:30 p.m.

“We can hardly believe it has been 15 years since Springer was reunited with her family,” said Mary Borrowman, director of the Whale Interpretive Centre in Telegraph Cove. “The most exciting news is the confirmation that Springer has had another calf, and we hope we will be fortunate enough to see this famous mother with her family this summer.”

Lynne Barre of NOAA’s regional office in Seattle said partnerships developed during Springer’s rescue are enduring and demonstrate how federal agencies can work with state, tribal and nonprofit groups to help both Northern and Southern Resident killer whales.

“The Springer success story continues to be an inspiration for all of us working on conservation in the Salish Sea,” Barre said.

“Springer’s reunion is an unqualified success — the only project of its kind in history,” said Donna Sandstrom, director of The Whale Trail and co-organizer of the “Celebrate Springer” event. “To get the little whale home, we had to learn how to work together, as organizations, agencies and nations…. We hope her story inspires people to join us in working on issues facing our endangered Southern Resident orcas today, with the same urgency, commitment, and resolve.”

For additional information, check out the Springer Facebook page.

As much as Springer’s story is one of cooperation and success, her rescue will always be linked in my mind to the tragic death of Luna, another young orca who was orphaned at the same time.

Springer, as we’ve said, was born among the Northern Resident killer whales, which stay mostly in northern British Columbia. At the same time that Springer was lost and alone in Puget Sound, Luna, a Southern Resident, was lost and alone in Nootka Sound on the West Coast of Vancouver Island. In fact, my initial report on the situation featured both young orcas in a front-page story in the Kitsap Sun. The coincidence of two orphans at once is next to unbelievable, considering that orphan killer whales are practically unheard of.

Much has been written about the failed rescue of Luna, which I covered at the time. A full-length documentary was later released by filmmakers Michael Parfit and Suzanne Chisholm. See my review of “The Whale,” originally called “Saving Luna.”

Luna never made it back to his family. He eventually died after being sucked into the propeller of a powerful tugboat.

Before Luna’s death, Parfit wrote about Lunda for Smithsonian magazine. It was a story that I had pieced together over several weeks as a series of newspaper stories. Mike and Suzanne stayed around Nootka Sound to obtain a fuller story for their film.

The greatest lesson from the Luna story may be similar to the one we learned from Springer, that cooperation is the key and that every detail must be considered before the rescue begins.

It was a wet water year, but then the weather reversed its course

After unusually high amounts of rain fell on the Kitsap Peninsula last fall, this summer is starting out with a most unusual pattern of dryness.

It appears that we haven’t had any measurable precipitation anywhere on the peninsula since mid-June. That’s an oddity for dryness not seen in even the driest year on record since 1990, when Kitsap Public Utility District began keeping rainfall data.

Since May 17, Central Kitsap has seen only 1.4 inches of rain, while less than half an inch fell in Hansville during that time period. That’s barely any rain, given that we are talking about nearly two months. Holly has experienced about 2.4 inches in that time — still way low for the rain belt region of the Kitsap Peninsula. And to think that last fall I was contemplating that we might break a record this year. See Water Ways, Oct 27.

I will admit that I used to avoid writing weather stories for the Kitsap Sun. If an editor asked me to write about the weather, I would think for a moment and promise a “much better” story of a different kind. Now, as I try to keep up on climate change, I find myself fascinated with what I can learn from rainfall patterns — including the extremes you see going from south to north on the Kitsap Peninsula.

If you haven’t been around the area much, you may not know that we get more and stronger rainstorms in the southwest corner of the peninsula around Holly, while Hansville at the peninsula’s northern tip may get a third as much rainfall in some years.

Take a look at the pink lines in the charts on this page to see the average over 25-30 years. The scales on the left side of the graphs are different, but the charts show an average precipitation around 30 inches for Hansville in North Kitsap, 50 inches for Silverdale in Central Kitsap, and nearly 80 inches for Holly in Southwest Kitsap.

These charts also show the rainfall patterns in each area for this year with a blue line. Last year, which had above normal rainfall, is shown in orange. And the year that ended with the highest total rainfall is shown in green.

Hansville is especially interesting, because this year and last year essentially kept pace with the record rainfall year of 1999 as spring ended and summer began. In fact, on May 16 of all three years, the total accumulation to date in Hansville was 38 inches, give or take less than half an inch.

After May 16, the three years diverged in accumulated rainfall, and this year’s dry spell makes the blue line as flat as it can get for an extended period. Last year, the driest time came in April, as you can see from the flat section of the orange line.

July and August are typically the driest months of the year, but that can vary greatly by year. I used to tell people that we Puget Sound residents can expect a full three months of summer each year, but nobody can predict when it will happen or whether it will be divided up, say a week here and a week there.

Anyway, as I mentioned on April 1 in Water Ways, we are on a trajectory to exceed the average rainfall this year even if we get no more rain until the water year is over on Sept. 30. It appears our water wells will survive, but we need more rain for the streams to rise by early fall for salmon to increase their numbers.

Amusing Monday: Hey, did you see that strange dude at the beach?

Dude Perfect, a goofy group of friends who became known for their mouth-dropping trick shots and crazy stunts, has just released a video highlighting the quirkiness of people you might see hanging out at the beach.

The new video, first on this page, is part of the Dude Perfect “Stereotypes” series, which the guys started in 2013 by noting that players in basketball pickup games fall into certain obnoxious categories. Check on the second video on this page for the basketball stereotypes video.

I didn’t know that there were so many different kinds of fishermen until I watched the Dude Perfect “Fishing Stereotypes,” the third video on this page. As I watched the dudes act out a variety of characters, I realized that, Oh, yes, I have seen that guy!

I have to say that all of the stereotype videos are pretty good, because annoying people are everywhere. If you can’t laugh at them, what are you going to do?

As for the trick-shot videos, if you haven’t seen them, I recommend:

Dude Perfect got its start while the friends were betting each other sandwiches on who could make the best basketball trick shots, which became the subject of the first video, according to an entry in Wikipedia, which claims that Dude Perfect has broken several Guinness World Records and now has more than 3.2 billion views on all its videos. The article says Dude Perfect has 20 million subscribers, making it the 18th most subscribed channel on YouTube and the most subscribed sports-related channel.

Orca hormones linking pregnancies to prey will go into medical files

Hormones found in the feces of killer whales are providing unique insights about the health of Southern Resident orcas — including pregnancy status and stress levels. Fortunately, such information can be gathered with little disturbance to the animals.

Tucker, a Labrador retriever mix, has a keen ability to track down killer whale feces, which contains trace levels of hormones and toxic chemicals. // Photo: Kelley Balcomb-Bartok

The latest information about hormones will soon be incorporated into a new health-status database with individual medical reports being compiled for each whale in the Southern Resident population.

A recently published study confirms hormonally what researchers have observed for years, that when the whales’ primary food supply — chinook salmon — is plentiful, the number of newborn calves goes up. Conversely, when the food supply is low, population growth seems to stall out or go down.

Now, thanks to the new hormonal report, we are learning that nearly two-thirds of the pregnancies among Southern Resident killer whales end in miscarriages. And, of those miscarriages, about one-third take place during the last stage of pregnancy — something highly unusual for mammals.

We are also learning that nutritional stress — caused by low food supplies — can be linked to the success or failure of the pregnancies, thanks to ongoing studies by a research team led by Sam Wasser, a University of Washington professor and director of the Center for Conservation Biology. Information about nutritional stress comes from fecal samples collected with the help of Tucker, a poop-sniffing dog who follows the whales in a boat.

I reported on Sam’s findings nearly a year ago for the Encyclopedia of Puget Sound after he presented the results during the Salish Sea Ecosystem Conference in Vancouver, B.C. His findings were published 10 days ago in the online journal PLOS One.

The hormonal information has been collected along with DNA samples from a growing number of Southern Residents, providing key information about the health of individuals as well as the overall status of the population.

Sam’s data will be included in a database being compiled to provide as much medical information as possible about each of the killer whales. I first reported details about the database in Water Ways on March 29, 2016. As mentioned in the blog, the medical files could be valuable in helping the whales throughout their range or even intervening when an animal goes into a health emergency.

General observations could be put into the database along with:

  • Fecal samples, including levels of various hormones;
  • Breath samples, including the types of bacteria harbored by individual killer whales;
  • Observations of skin conditions;
  • Photos taken from boats and from the air to show body conditions, including evidence of malnutrition or possible pregnancy; and
  • Blubber samples for some whales, including DNA fingerprints and other health conditions.

Joe Gaydos of SeaDoc Society, who is helping coordinate the database, told me that the project is finally getting off the ground this summer with formulation of the database structure. Commitments are coming together from those who can contribute information, including observations as soon as they are collected by researchers — including those with the Center for Whale Research and NOAA’s Northwest Fisheries Science Center.

A memorandum of understanding has been drafted to allow various researchers who submit information to have access to the data but limit access only to specified groups, Joe said. A governing body will oversee creation and use of the database. So far, information is being submitted on a “good-faith handshake.”

At least two research reports are being planned to prove the value of the database and build support for funding. One could be a paper that puts together information about skin diseases observed in the Southern Residents, mainly compiled by the Center for Whale Research.

Another report could look at the relationship between contaminants and pregnancy, including information collected by Sam Wasser.

“We are where we wanted to be a year ago, actively updating data,” Joe admitted to me, adding that things are now coming together more rapidly.

More information:

The latest report on orca pregnancy and nutritional stress is described in UW Today.

News stories were published by the Seattle Times as well as The Associated Press.

Previous work by Sam Wasser’s associate Katherine Ayres focuses on stresses caused by lack of food and boating activities. See PLOS One, June 6, 2012, or review the summary in UW Today.

Erlands Point family thrilled during orca encounter in Dyes Inlet

It was the thrill of a lifetime when a group of killer whales headed directly toward the Johnson family sitting in their boat on Dyes Inlet. The screams of delight leave no doubt, as you can see and hear from one of the best orca videos I’ve viewed in quite a while.

It was Wednesday evening this week, and the Johnsons had just put their 23-foot runabout in the water for the first time this summer. The family lives on Erlands Point in Dyes Inlet, and it seemed like a good idea to drive the boat over to the Bremerton Marina for dinner at Bremerton Bar and Grill, Julie Johnson told me.

On the way home, the boat was passing under the Manette Bridge when the group spotted the orcas. Aboard the boat were nine people: Julie and her husband Dr. Jerrold Johnson, their five kids, a nephew and a friend.

The boat passed the whales at a safe distance, Julie told me, then the boat slowed to a stop and the motor was turned off.

“They were coming in our direction, and then they turned and started coming right at us,” Julie recalled. “It was a little intimidating.”

Just before the whales reached the boat, they turned sharply and crossed behind the stern.

“It was a once-in-a-lifetime experience,” she said. “We all came home filled with excitement. We felt very lucky.”

Interestingly, the couple recently took a cruise in Alaska, thinking they would see killer whales. The only sighting was a group of whales far off in the distance.

As for Wednesday night, the boats on Dyes Inlet seemed to be keeping a safe distance from the whales, Julie said.

On Thursday, reports of boat traffic around the orcas were mixed, and Susan Berta of Orca Network said she received some emails with photos of boats that may have been violating the law. She forwarded the photos to federal law enforcement officers.

Federal law requires boaters to stay 200 yards to the sides of killer whales and more than 400 yards to the front.
Graphic: Be Whale Wise

“We kept getting complaints,” Susan said. “It is hard to tell from photos. One showed a boat that may have been close but was stopped. Some cases involved speedboats under full power following the whales and paralleling them close. It’s always hard to tell distances.”

When people are watching from shore, it is especially hard to tell how close the boats are to the whales, Susan said. It may look like boats are swarming around the whales when they may be at a safe distance.

People who have concerns about boater behavior can file a report directly by filling out a form on the Be Whale Wise website. The form goes to enforcement officers for NOAA Fisheries. One can also call the toll-free hotline, (800) 853-1964.

Federal regulations prohibit boat operators from approaching killer whales closer than 200 yards or to position a vessel in the path of a killer whale within 400 yards. A chart explaining the rules (PDF 8 mb) can be downloaded from the Be Whale Wise website.

The whales in Dyes Inlet this week were identified as marine-mammal-eating transient killer whales, probably part of a group of 30 to 50 transients spread around Puget Sound and the San Juan Islands starting on Tuesday, the Fourth of July.

The orcas in Puget Sound appeared to be at least four different family groups, according to Alisa Lemire Brooks, whale sighting coordinator for Orca Network. At least half a dozen orcas came into Dyes Inlet on Wednesday, she said, including an older female (T-36) and her daughter (T-36-B) plus the offspring of her daughter. Other identifications will probably come later. Yesterday, another group (the T99s) were seen among the whales.

When whales come into Dyes Inlet, good viewing locations from shore include Bremerton’s Lions Park when they are coming in or going out. If they stay around, you may be able to spot them from Tracyton or Chico boat launches or from Silverdale Waterfront Park.

Amusing Monday: Strangest impossible secrets of the ocean

“The Richest,” which bills itself as the “world’s most entertaining website,” often features celebrity gossip along with plenty of freakish people, animals and events. Sometimes the website tries to be helpful with videos such as “10 awesome school hacks every student should know.”

In short, it is a three-ring circus with thousands of different acts.

For amusement, I pulled up some water-related videos, which you can watch on this page or link to YouTube:

As implied by the name “The Richest,” this website goes out of its way to find opulent places and products, as in the gold-plated water bottle that one can buy for $60,000. See “10 times rich people took it too far.” It is also amusing to watch “10 ridiculously expensive things that President Trump owns.”

“The Richest” is owned by Valnet, Inc., based in St. Laurent, Quebec, Canada. The company operates 10 similar websites containing well-hyped stories on just about every topic, including :

“The web has a become a streamlined environment where operational excellence wins, and we have embraced this new reality to its fullest,” declares a statement on the Valnet website.

The company boasts of 80 million users with 52 million of them from the U.S., all producing 800 million page views a month. The managers are searching for web content producers, freelance writers and future staffers to build and manage its web production. See the webpage “Careers.”

Hood Canal summer chum could be removed from Endangered List

Because no population of salmon has ever been taken off the Endangered Species List, nobody knows exactly how to go about it. Still, Hood Canal summer chum, a threatened species, could be proposed for delisting within about five years.

“I think we are in the home stretch for recovery,” declared Scott Brewer, executive director of the Hood Canal Coordinating Council, opening a day-long symposium about the future of Hood Canal summer chum.

“I’m not going to declare victory,” Scott cautioned. “You are not going to see a sign behind me saying ‘mission accomplished.’”

Total run size of Hood Canal summer chum in Hood Canal, not including extinct subpopulations // Graphic: Hood Canal Coordinating Council

And yet, after discussing the remarkable gains in summer chum populations in many local streams, experts at yesterday’s symposium in Bremerton became focused almost exclusively on what it would take to delist this unique population of chum salmon, which lives in Hood Canal and the eastern Strait of Juan de Fuca.

Hood Canal summer chum were listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 1999. By then, state and tribal officials had already taken actions to reduce commercial harvests of these fish and to boost production with temporary hatcheries. A federal recovery plan formalized actions and goals to restore the overall population. The plan also spelled out criteria for eventually removing summer chum from the Endangered Species List.

Total run size of Hood Canal summer chum in Strait of Juan de Fuca
Graphic: Hood Canal Coordinating Council

The main goal for recovery has been to restore at least one viable run of summer chum in each geographic area where the fish were known to exist. The criteria require an abundance of fish returning and successfully spawning in key areas each year. To ensure that the overall population survives at least 100 years, the various subpopulations need to be diverse — both in their stream location and in their genetic makeup.

Thanks to restoration efforts, the geographical diversity of summer chum appears to meet the delisting goals for the west side of Hood Canal on the Olympic Peninsula — including strong runs in the Quilcene, Dosewallips, Duckabush and Hamma Hamma rivers. But on the opposite side of the canal, on the Kitsap Peninsula, only the Union River stock near Belfair has done well. Efforts to restore summer chum with hatchery projects on Big Beef Creek and the Tahuya River were declared unsuccessful. Meanwhile, summer chum on their own have failed to recolonize the Dewatto River and Big Anderson Creek, where the populations went extinct in the 1980s.

While current conditions might meet the recovery goal for geographical diversity, many summer chum biologists would like to see at least one more success story on the east side of Hood Canal, according to Larry Lestelle, a consultant with Biostream Environmental who is assisting the Hood Canal Coordinating Council with its plans to restore summer chum.

Big Beef Creek might be a candidate for another hatchery project, Larry said, noting that recent restoration projects have restored habitat in the stream. Better habitat would likely increase survival for summer chum in Big Beef.

In addition, transplanting Union River stock to Big Beef Creek the next time around could improve survival over the Quilcene River stock that was used last time, he said. Studies suggest that the extinct Big Beef summer chum were more closely related to those in the Union River than to those in the Quilcene, he added.

Another option would be to launch a small-scale hatchery project on the Dewatto River south of Holly. Conditions in the stream and estuary are still relatively natural, compared to other streams in the region.

When to formally propose delisting to the federal government remains a major question to be answered. Following years of study, salmon biologists have concluded that Hood Canal summer chum generally survive in greater numbers during so-called “cool phases” in the Pacific Ocean. The shift from warm to cool and back again over 20 to 30 years is known as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation.

Recent recovery of Hood Canal summer chum has corresponded with the more productive cool phase, Larry noted. In January 2014, ocean conditions abruptly shifted into a warm phase. Effects — such as reduced survival in and near the streams — are fairly quickly observed in the Strait of Juan de Fuca, but the same effects in Hood Canal are typically delayed by about two years.

“This provides a test,” Larry told an audience of experts and other interested folks at Kitsap Conference Center. “We are staring it in the face. It is time to sit on the edge of our seats and anxiously await… Are the spawners going to come in?”

The answers should become clear during migrations of adult summer chum to Hood Canal from 2018 to 2022, Larry said. The end of that period could be a good time to decide whether to move forward with a delisting proposal — especially if summer chum runs remain strong during the current warm phase in the PDO cycle.

Meanwhile, the effects of long-term climate change also must be considered in the effort to save the summer chum from extinction. Over the coming years, climatologists predict more extreme conditions, including higher winter streamflows that can wash salmon eggs out of the gravel and possibly smother them with silt.

The answer to climate change is to give the salmon a better chance of survival by protecting and restoring floodplains and increasing stream channel complexity. These actions can reduce the rushing waters and help salmon find refuge against the flows.

“The year 2022 could be a decision year, but not necessarily THE decision year,” Larry said. “It is all about letting the fish tell us what is going on.”

Jennifer Quan of NOAA said she is eager to work with local experts to keep restoring the Hood Canal summer chum and eventually assist in legally removing the fish from the Endangered Species List.

“We spent a lot of time over the last decade getting good at listing species,” she said. “Now we are starting to see that turn around. We are starting to develop new skills for delisting.”

Last year, NOAA denied a request to delist the Snake River fall chinook, one of 13 populations of Columbia Basin salmon and steelhead protected under the Endangered Species Act. The request came from a group of commercial fishers in Alaska — the Chinook Future Coalition — which said protecting the Snake River fish throughout their range could limit chinook harvests off the coast of Alaska. Even though good numbers of chinook were returning, NOAA biologists were concerned that only one subpopulation was viable because of Hell’s Canyon Dam on the Snake River. Potential delisting scenarios were described in a question-and-answer format (PDF 531 kb).

In 2015, the Oregon chub, a small minnow found only in the Willamette River Basin, became the first fish in the nation to be delisted under the Endangered Species Act. See the news release from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. That delisting process could provide some guidance for Hood Canal summer chum, Jennifer said.

Hood Canal Coordinating Council, which oversees summer chum recovery, is made up of county commissioners in Kitsap, Mason and Jefferson counties, along with the leaders of the Skokomish and Port Gamble S’Klallam tribes. As HCCC director, Scott Brewer said he is prepared to continue discussions right away with experts and others interesting in developing a step-by-step plan for delisting Hood Canal summer chum.