Hopefully we'll be out of the doldrums of chronically low returns on the Columbia for a while. My opinion is that the low returns were due to consistently warm and dry weather conditions on land and poor ocean conditions from the mid-1970s to mid-1990s. Climatologists and oceanographers say this is a normal 20 to 30 year cycle and now we are in the 'cool/wet' cycle and should remain there for the next 20 years or so (how global warming will affect this is anyones guess). The cool cycle is better for salmon in the Pacific northwest, but promotes poor survival in Alaskan waters. Fisheries managers have tracked this general flip-flop between the Pac NW and Alaska runs since before World War II.

A couple more comments: the so called record return on the Columbia is still way way lower than pre-dam returns, which numbered in the millions as opposed to the hundreds of thousands. We still have a long way to go. Second, most think that the good return was due to 3 high water years in a row, again related to weather. During high water years, smolts pass over the dams much easier and survival is much enhanced. But during low or average water years, survival over the dams is poor and this is why we have had chronically lousy runs for many years.

Ultimately, one good year shouldn't be held up as proof that we're all barking up the wrong tree with the dams. As said, when rainfall is at best, average, we would not expect to see great runs, as was generally the case over the past decade.

[This message has been edited by obsessed (edited 09-20-2000).]