Pulled the following from the NOAA Elwha River Fish Restoration Plan. It was released in April 2008. The summary says closure of the lake "...may be necessary..." . It says that sockeye are extinct in the Elwha River; there is no formal escapement goal; and the preferred recovery is from natural re-colonization from Lake Sutherland kokanee.
Someone mentioned options. From my perspective the WDFW could put a rotating fish screen on the outlet (there used to be a screen but it was removed 3 or 4 years ago) to keep stocker rainbows from out-migrating (10,000 were planted in the lake last spring), a smolt trap program be instituted to see if kokanee are out-migrating and in what numbers, set up a holding tank/trap for any returning adult sockeye for sampling and release into the lake for potential spawning, prohibit the take of adult sockeye over (pick a size) of 16" in length when they start returning to the lake (the take of wild fish in the Elwha River and tributaries is going to be prohibited and I'm fine with that) and keep the lake open for recreational fishing.
There is some other interesting reading on the recovery programs for other salmonids.
http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/assets/25/6760_06202008_151914_ElwhaPlanTM90Final.pdfSockeye Salmon Proposed Restoration Approach
Historically, Elwha River sockeye salmon used Lake Sutherland for spawning and rearing (FERC 1993). Construction of the Elwha Dam blocked anadromous access to Lake Sutherland, leading to the extirpation of anadromous Lake Sutherland sockeye population.
Although adult sockeye salmon are annually observed in the Elwha River, the origin of these fish is unknown and they are not thought to be a viable population. They may be strays or possibly returning adults derived from kokanee smolts (Oncorhynchus nerka), lacustrine sockeye
outmigrating from Lake Sutherland. Lake Sutherland is currently home to a self-sustaining population of kokanee salmon that is thought to be native (DOI et al. 1994). WDFW hatchery records indicate the release of
nonnative kokanee in Lake Sutherland from 1934 until 1964 (Hiss and Wunderlich 1994b). The influence of nonnative kokanee releases on the native kokanee and sockeye population is not fully understood, but tissue samples were collected for genetic analysis in 1994, 2005, and 2006.
Analysis of the 1994 samples indicated that Lake Sutherland kokanee displayed a unique composite haplotype (Powell 1997). For the 2005–2006 samples, data for 15 microsatellite loci were collected and compared with data from Lake Whatcom and Lake Ozette kokanee. The
2005 and 2006 Lake Sutherland collections were highly similar, but statistically different from the Whatcom and Ozette collections. The results of both studies suggest the Sutherland stock is unique and that previous out-of-basin plantings may not have affected the Sutherland population genetically. Additional comparisons will be made between these stocks and the adjacent population in Lake Crescent in the coming years (Winans et al. in press).
Stock Status
Sockeye salmon in the Elwha River are extinct.
Harvest Status
Lake Sutherland is currently open for harvest year-round for resident trout and kokanee.
Hatchery Enhancement Efforts
There are currently no hatchery programs for Elwha River sockeye salmon populations.
Escapement Level
There is no formal escapement goal for sockeye salmon populations in the Elwha River.
Summary
The preferred Elwha River sockeye salmon population restoration or reestablishment strategy is natural recolonization by remnant kokanee. The period required for natural recolonization is uncertain, commencing when upstream and downstream access to Lake Sutherland becomes feasible for kokanee currently inhabiting the lake when the dams blocking anadromous fish access are fully removed. In order to encourage recovery, it may be necessary to curtail recreational fisheries in Lake Sutherland for a period of years and eliminate plants of
nonnative fish in the lake (either kokanee or trout).
I made the following comments at the Commission meeting last Saturday. I think that the process is flawed and that public input was not adequately solicited. I haven't seen any information from WDFW substantiating the need for a closure at this time.
On the Elwha River plan, I have concerns that the process leading up to the WAC closure of Lake Sutherland has not gone through the necessary steps. My questions are:
1. What, if any, opportunities were provided to the local community for any input prior to the December 15 meeting in Port Angeles.
2. Since staff has been aware of the proposed closure for over a year, why didn’t the proposal show up in the 2010 minor cycle regulation proposal?
3. Why was a small business impact statement not done? Such a closure will have an impact on property values and small businesses involved in fishing gear sales.
I’d like to ask you, the Commission, to have staff present a more detailed justification for the closure of Lake Sutherland. There are other options that could meet recovery efforts while keeping the lake open. The proposed WAC can be delayed.
Previous Topic
Index
