Swiss officials are delighted by a 36-inch Atlantic salmon that apparently migrated 600 miles up the Rhine River, well into the landlocked country of Switzerland, where the fish was caught by an amateur angler.

It was the first salmon seen that far up the Rhine in half a century, according to the English version of Spiegel International.

“In the 19th century, salmon were so plentiful in the Rhine that they were used to feed the poor,” the story states. “In the 1930s, salmon were still relatively plentiful in Basel, with around 120 of them caught each year. But neither tail nor scale of the animal has been seen since 1958.”

This incident reminds me of the ongoing, and somewhat desperate, effort in the Northwest to return sockeye salmon to Redfish Lake in Idaho. But that’s a Kitsap story for another day. (For a quick review without the Kitsap angle, there’s an update in The Idaho Statesman.)

As for the Rhine, a series of dams blocked the migration until fish ladders were installed. In 1986, a chemical spill had disastrous consequences for sea life in the river. Then in 1988, a project called Salmon 2000 set out to improve the river and bring salmon back to Switzerland.

On Sunday, 39-year-old Thomas Wanner was surprised at the fish he caught while dangling his line in the Birs River near Basel, not far from where its waters flows into the Rhine.

“It’s crazy, I can still hardly believe it,” Wanner told the local Basler Zeitung (newspaper).

As luck would have it, Olivier Schmidt, a hobby fisher who is a curator at Basel’s Natural History Museum, was nearby. Schmidt took a photo with his cell phone and sent the picture to Switzerland’s Environment Ministry to confirm the identify of the salmon.

Check out the map of the salmon’s apparent migration route and the obstacles it faced to reach Basel.

In December, Jochen Bolsche of Spiegel International reported on the difficulties faced by the group Salmon 2020 in getting salmon up the Rhine, particularly relating to troubles with dams in France. His story includes this note:

Switzerland, Europe’s environmental poster child, spends millions so that fish can pass through its own sections of the river and in addition pays for 5 percent of the stocked salmon in the entire 1,320 kilometer long Rhine watershed. Yet the Bern-based Federal Office for the Environment complains that Switzerland is, “along with Luxembourg, the only country that has not yet been able to celebrate the successful return of the salmon.”

If you are as fascinated as I am by the struggles to restore salmon in another country, check out this 2004 report called “Rhine Salmon 2020” (PDF 1 mb), which outlines the next phase of recovery.

(Interestingly, Washington Gov. Chris Gregoire has listed 2020 as the date to restore a “healthy Puget Sound.”)

The Salmon 2020 report declares the following “visions,” including the second one that we can hope is getting closer to reality:

1st vision: Several thousands of salmon in the Rhine
2nd vision: Undisrupted salmon migration as far as Basel
3rd vision: Salmon stocking is self-sustaining
4th vision: Wild salmon in the Rhine in 2020

One last item is the press release from the International Commission for the Protection of the Rhine.

Some $33 million was budgeted by our federal and state governments to eliminate tribal claims to commercial shellfish beds that have been managed for many years by clam and oyster farmers.

The legal settlement sounded simple enough. All the commercial growers needed to do was show that they were recognized by the state with an approved “aquatic farm registration” from the Department of Fish and Wildlilfe plus a health certificate from the Department of Health.

Things have not gone as smoothly as the growers had hoped. One of the problems is that one or both of these certifications don’t always identify individual parcels of land. So now attorneys for the 17 tribes involved in the settlement are asking the growers for additional documentation.

The parties have agreed to postpone the final resolution of the matter until next June to work through the complex issues.

I don’t know how this saga will end, but I’ll keep tracking it closely. For a few more details, check out my story on the Kitsap Sun’s Web site. The same story is scheduled for publication tomorrow in the newspaper.

There is nothing like a weekly news magazine to explore the breadth and depth of an issue, as U.S. News and World Report has done in a story titled “Global Warming Triggers an International Race for the Arctic.”

The magazine piece, written by Thomas Omestad, discusses a treasure of oil and minerals, scientific discoveries, commercial potential and possible geopolitical clashes. I recommend it to anyone interested in the confluence of global warming and international intrigue.

A map of this remote area shows how the legendary Northwest Passage could become an important route between the East and West coasts.

After describing some strategic flurries in the Arctic by Russia and Canada, Omestad offers this observation:

The United States, for its part, has not acted with the same urgency. “We are behind when it comes to what is happening with our other Arctic neighbors,” says Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska.

The lagging begins with the Law of the Sea convention. Despite Bush administration support, Senate ratification of the 1982 treaty remains blocked by conservative Republicans fearful that the treaty will give away American sovereignty. The other four Arctic coastal states have adopted the convention and are eligible to file their claims for economic control.

The Pentagon has also appeared slow to focus on the region. The U.S. Coast Guard maintains just two working icebreakers, with another docked until repairs are authorized. The question of expanding the icebreaker force has been left unanswered, while a broader, interagency review of Arctic policy has continued for nearly two years….

I recently cited some sketchy stories about this subject on Watching Our Water Ways. Now this U.S. News article has placed the issue into the appropriate context. If the prescribed dominoes begin to fall, international tensions will no doubt rise in this remote part of the Earth.

Six Canadian environmental groups have filed a lawsuit against their federal government to protect the habitat of killer whales, including the Southern Resident animals that frequent Puget Sound in the summer and fall.

“This is the first lawsuit ever of its kind in Canada,” said Lara Tessaro, staff lawyer at Ecojustice. “We hope to force the federal government to legally protect the critical habitat of endangered species — like the Southern Resident killer whales.”

Tessaro was quoted in a news release on the Ecojustice Web site and in a story by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.

The lawsuit covers the Southern Residents, listed as “endangered” under Canadian law, and the Northern Residents, listed as “threatened.” The listing criteria are somewhat different in the two countries. Canadian authorities, like their U.S. counterparts, have officially recognized the whales at risk of extinction.

“DFO’s decision not to protect critical habitat of resident killer whales is symptomatic of the federal government’s widespread failure to implement the Species at Risk Act,” Gwen Barlee, policy director of the Wilderness Committee, said in the news release.

Also mentioned in both the news story and release was Lance Barrett-Lennard, recognized as an expert on killer whales throughout the Northwest and co-chairman of Resident Killer Whale Recovery Team in Canada. Barrett-Lennard said the team has resisted efforts by government officials to remove scientific information from the team’s list of recommendations.

“If the response by the [fisheries] minister stands, it effectively means that nothing has to be done under the Species at Risk Act to protect killer whales, so it’s a hard pill to swallow,” he said in the CBC story.

I placed a call this morning to DFO to see if anybody wishes to discuss this lawsuit. Officials responded this afternoon that they can’t comment because the issue is before the courts.

Backgrounders on killer whales in Canada and in the United States.

Bonneville Power Administration has removed the last of more than 100,000 capacitors containing PCBs throughout its distribution system, thus reducing the risk of spilling these toxic chemicals that never seem to go away.

Officials with the Environmental Protection Agency recognized the accomplishment, as stated in a press release.

“EPA congratulates BPA for its proactive and voluntary efforts to remove a significant source of PCBs from the Northwest’s largest transmission system,” said Elin Miller, administrator for EPA’s Region 10. “This action by BPA shows their commitment to protect human health and the environment by preventing future releases of toxic PCBs.”

BPA replaced more than 101,000 capacitors at 69 substations. The $102-million cost was spread over a 17-year period beginning in 1991.

Eliminating the chance of spilling PCBs also reduces the financial risk of a costly cleanup hanging over BPA since PCBs were outlawed in the 1970s.

We hear a lot about dangerous levels of PCBs residing in marine mammals, including killer whales, seals and sea lions. These chemicals are considering endocrine disruptors with effects on the immune and reproductive systems of all kinds of animals.

I’m not sure if anyone has identified the predominant sources of PCBs are in the marine environment, but we know it will take a long time to eliminate the problem.

UPDATE, OCT. 10: Eric Robinson of the Vancouver Columbian does a nice job covering this story.

North Atlantic right whales will get some needed protection, thanks to a new federal rule that calls upon big ships to slow down to reduce collisions with these highly endangered marine mammals.

“The ship strike rule, based on science, is a major addition to NOAA’s arsenal of protections for this endangered species,” Navy Vice Admiral Conrad C. Lautenbacher, Jr. said in a press release (PDF 28 kb).

The rule, from the National Marine Fisheries Service, requires ships 65 feet or longer to reduce their speed to 10 knots within 20 nautical miles of key ports along the East Coast.

Also from the press release:

With only 300 to 400 in existence, North Atlantic right whales are among the most endangered whales in the world. Slow moving right whales are highly vulnerable to ship collisions, since their migration route crosses major East Coast shipping lanes. Along with existing measures to prevent entanglement of right whales in fishing gear, the new ship strike reduction rule is the most comprehensive approach that NOAA has taken in its effort to help right whales recover.

For more information, including a fact sheet, check out NOAA Fisheries’ Web page on the Strategy to Reduce Ship Strikes to North Atlantic Right Whales.

Officials at the International Fund for Animal Welfare — including Jeffrey Flocken, director of IFAW’s Washington, D.C., office —were encouraged by the action.

“While we had hoped a 30-nautical-mile zone would be established around major ports,” Flocken said, “we are pleased by the U.S. government’s decision today to establish this new whale ship strike regulation. It will make great strides towards the protection of our nation’s endangered right whales.”

Flocken criticized the so-called “sunset” provision, which would allow the regulation to expire after five years. NOAA has said that the provision was established in order to take into consideration “ongoing scientific research.”

IFAW argues that the U.S. government should not only support ongoing research but should launch an extensive enforcement program to protect the whales.

“With this five-year ‘sunset’ provision, the sun may soon set not only on this important regulation, but on the future of right whales unless the U.S. government actively engages in developing and implementing new technologies to protect whales,” Flocken said in the press release.

“To be truly effective, IFAW feels it is vital for this regulation to be partnered closely with actual on the water enforcement as well as the development of improved right whale protection solutions before it is too late,” he said.

Even if all threats to right whales were eliminated today, they would still be critically endangered in five years, he said.

Scientists calculate that the species will become extinct within 200 years unless urgent action is taken, Flocken noted.

IFAW, he said, has been a key player in U.S. right whale conservation efforts, including: supporting the establishment of the Mandatory Ship Reporting System, removing discarded and dangerous fishing gear from Massachusetts waters, partnering with the U.S. government and lobster industry to develop whale safe lobster gear, supporting the disentanglement of whales caught in deadly fishing line, partnering to develop “pop-up” acoustic buoys that can detect and monitor whales, and supporting the establishment of the new U.S. whale ship strike regulation.

The power of the U.S. president to override environmental laws is a central issue in the sonar case before the U.S. Supreme Court.

In a story posted shortly after noon today on the Kitsap Sun’s Web site, Mark Sherman of the Associated Press reported that Justice David Souter ridiculed the idea that the administration could declare an emergency to try to get around complying with environmental laws. The Navy opted not to conduct a more rigorous environmental impact study before beginning the long-planned exercises, Souter said.

“If there’s an emergency, it’s one the Navy created simply by failing to start EIS preparation in a timely way,” he said.

The Bush administration has taken the position that the president has the authority to override environmental laws during emergencies. He essentially declared an emergency to make sure the Navy could adequately train to locate enemy submarines, an issue related to national security.

Justice Samuel Alito suggested that he found little evidence in the court record that marine mammals would be harmed by the sonar use proposed by the Navy, Sherman reported.

Alito also said there was “something incredibly odd” that a single federal judge, who issued the first order against the Navy in this case, would be able to force changes in the exercises.

Warren Richey of the Christian Science Monitor lays out the background of the case in a story yesterday.

“Call this story ‘save the whales’ meets ‘The Hunt for Red October,’ Richey writes.

“The case doesn’t simply pit the environment against national security,” he continues. “It is also a major clash over power – the power of judges to order environmental compliance versus the power of the president and the executive branch to defend the nation. But at its most basic, the case is about whales and warfare.”

HERE ARE SOME ADDITIONAL STORIES ABOUT TODAY’S SUPREME COURT HEARING
Read the rest of this entry »

Skokomish Indian Tribal Enterprises is developing a plan for a marina near Potlatch in southern Hood Canal and would like to know what boaters and residents think of the idea. Check out my story in today’s Kitsap Sun.

Possible marina location near Cushman power plan SITE map (Click to enlarge)

The project is undergoing a feasibility study, but it could include slips for 25 to 35 boats and various amenities including a restaurant, fuel dock, fish-cleaning station, sewage-pumpout facility and restrooms.

Ed Binder of SITE said the tribe recognizes the sensitivity of Hood Canal but hopes to work through the various issues. Water coming out of the Cushman power plant could help stir the waters and reduce environmental impacts, he said.

Boaters and area residents are encouraged to express their opinions about the project in an online survey. If the project moves forward, it would take several years before the project would be built, Binder said.

When a strange-looking fish washed up on the shoreline property of Kim and Ela Esterberg of Bainbridge Island, they had no idea what kind of fish they were looking at or how truly rare it was.

“We live about a mile south of Faye Bainbridge State Park,” Kim said. “We went down to the beach last Sunday (Sept. 28) after the Harvest Fair, and there was this long fish, about four feet long, lying on the beach.

Lancetfish found on East Bainbridge shoreline // Photo courtesy of Kim and Ela Esterberg

“It had come up with the tide,” Kim continued. “I didn’t know what it was. I had never seen a fish like that before.”

Since then, several biologists have identified it as a longnose lancetfish, a deep sea fish known as a voracious predator and seen only rarely in Puget Sound. See the University of Washington fish catalog for basic information.

They are so rare in inland waters that many biologists have never seen them alive or dead in Puget Sound.

A 2002 paper by Alexei M. Orlov and Vasily A. Ul’chenko suggests that the fish come ashore during periods of sudden ocean changes.

In 1994, Greg Johnston, a reporter for the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, related a story of a 21-year-old fisherman who caught one of these strange fish off Brown’s Point near Tacoma. The fisherman didn’t know what to do with it, so he took its picture and threw it back.

The Environmental Protection Agency has issued a report about what climate change could do to the nation’s water resources and how people should respond.

The report, from EPA’s National Water Program, is called Water Impacts of Climate Change (PDF 584 kb).

The report relies on scientific predictions, which suggest that climate change will bring warmer air and water, a shift in the location of rain and snow, increased storm intensity in some areas, a rise in sea level, and changes in the ocean ecosystem.

Some of the predicted effects:

• Oxygen: Warmer water will hold less oxygen, resulting in increased stress on aquatic organisms and an increase in harmful algal blooms,
• Pollution: Heavier precipitation will increase surface water flows, affecting aquatic health and releasing more nutrients, pathogens and toxic chemicals into water bodies.
• Water supplies: In some areas of the country, droughts will decrease water supplies for drinking, for industrial uses and for agriculture. In other areas, sea level rise will lead to salt water intrusion with similar effects on water supplies.
• Invasive species: As waters become warmer, aquatic life in many areas will be displaced by plants and animals better adapted to warmer waters. Because the changes will occur at an uneven pace, harmful species could become established.
• Combined effects: Coastal areas could see a combination of these various effects — including sea level rise, increased storm intensity and floods, reduction in drinking water supplies and greater ocean acidity.

As a result of these effects, the National Water Program is calling for five goals to respond to ongoing climate change:

• Goal 1, mitigation: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions through existing programs; promote carbon sequestration with regard to energy production and industrial processes; and support improved operation of water systems.
• Goal 2, adaptation: Be ready with new strategies to adjust to changes in watersheds, wetlands other natural systems. Develop tools and science to guide and support planning and management.
• Goal 3, research: Strengthen the link between EPA water programs and climate change researchers to allow water managers to anticipate changes.
• Goal 4, education: Educate federal, state and local water program managers to better anticipate and respond to climate change.
• Goal 5, management: The National Water Program should maintain its Climate Change Workgroup and reach out to other federal agencies dealing with climate change.

Tasks to be completed to help all regions of the U.S. adjust to the water-related impacts of climate change:

• Data: Agency scientists need to develop information to understand how the environment is changing.
• Extremes: Water managers need to plan and be prepared for extremes, including heavy storms, excess water and water shortages.
• Resilience: A “watershed approach” based on science should increase the long-term sustainability of ecosystems.
• Analysis: Water managers need to acquire a range of analytical tools to help them understand and respond to climate change.
• Partnerships: Sharing information across geographic areas and among levels of government should help water managers develop the best strategies in response to climate change.