An Undammed River’s Sediment Brings New Life Downstream

Anne Shaffer sits on the sandy shoreline of the Elwha River and looks around in amazement. Just two years ago, this area would have been under about 20 feet of water.

So far about 3 million cubic yards of sediment — enough to fill about 300,000 dump trucks — has been released from the giant bathtubs of sediment that formed behind the two hydroelectric dams upstream. And that’s only 16 percent of what’s expected to be delivered downstream in the next five years.

All of that sediment is already reshaping the mouth of the Elwha, which empties into the Strait of Juan de Fuca on the northern shore of Washington's Olympic Peninsula.

The depth at the mouth of the river has changed by about 50 feet. Long, charcoal-colored sandy beaches have formed where there once only smooth, platter-sized cobblestones.

Watch video report:
http://kuow.org/post/undammed-river-s-sediment-brings-new-life-downstream

That was one of the worst areas to walk. Those cobble stones were massive. I can hardly wait to head up there after it re-opens to fishing to see the changes.

P77,
Thanks for posting that. I find this stuff very interesting.
It looks like a spit is forming at the mouth. If things rebound fish wise for the Elwha it would be fun in the future to fish off of it into the straits for returning kings & coho.
SF

I think it's forming what's called a delta. They used to be a common feature at river mouths.

If the enviros have their way no one will be fishing the elwha ever again.

Tru Dat

"Fishyfeller," The "enviros" were the people that had the quasi-illegal dams removed and set up the river for the restoration of native fish. On what basis do you suggest that we may never fish there again? What fishery below the dams was worth saving?
With the outflush of sediment and creation of a new spit, I expect that Ediz Hook spit erosion problems may stop, saving tons of taxpayer money.
I don't see a downside here.

The downside is that if Elwha actually recovers it will be a shining example that removal of dams helps anadromous fish.

If it fails it will offer fuel to the dam-keepers that even with habitat protected in a National Park humans can't restore wild fish.

It is a very interesting two-edged sword. So, let's plant more Chambers Creek fish there.

They closed the area off the Elwha mouth a few years back and expecting it to reopen in your lifetime is not very realistic. It will become the staging/netting area for Natives....not unlike the area off of Dungeness...btw....also closed.....and Port Angeles harbor.....and Discovery Bay......and North of the Hood Canal Bridge....

seeing a pattern here?

I am just a realist with a pesimestic tendency. I truly hope the Elwha does come back to its former glory but I do not see it happening without stopping all salmon fishing from here to Alaska.

I don't believe all will become magical with unicorns and rainbows popping up in the Elwha just because the dams were removed.

The only downside to removing the dams is now I cannot fish the Elwha anymore.

Not going to happen with decisions such as this:

Path: HOME » NEWS
Federal judges deny request for emergency injunction against steelhead planting in Elwha River
By Joe Smillie
Peninsula Daily News

SAN FRANCISCO –– A panel of federal appellate judges has rejected a wild-fish advocacy group’s request to stop the planting of hatchery-born steelhead in the Elwha River.

The ruling clears the way for Lower Elwha Klallam tribal hatchery managers to proceed with their planned release of as many as 175,000 steelhead — an ocean-going salmonid trout species — from the $16.5 million hatchery built to help restore Elwha River fish runs.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday dismissed a request from four wild-fish advocates for an emergency injunction to stop the steelhead plantings.

The appellate court upheld a U.S. District Court judge’s decision to reject the injunction
March 12.

Rob Jones of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Marine Fisheries Service, which oversees the hatchery’s operations, said hatchery managers will proceed with the spring planting as laid out in the hatchery and genetic management plans, or HGMP, assembled to restore the river’s fish runs after removal of the Elwha and Glines Canyon dams.

“It was our belief that the numbers that are in the HGMPs are what’s necessary,” Jones said.

“That doesn’t mean we have to plant that many fish in the river, but we have the option to do that.”

Wild-fish groups Wild Fish Conservancy, Conservation Angler, Federation of Fly Fishers Steelhead Committee and Wild Steelhead Coalition filed suit in federal court last year to have the plans changed, saying the agencies that assembled the hatchery program did not adequately address the impacts hatchery-bred fish would have on wild species.

U.S. District Court Judge Benjamin Settle rejected seven of the advocacy group’s eight motions to stop the federal government’s hatchery plan March 26.

Settle did rule that federal agencies must review their plans to see whether the release numbers that call for 175,000 hatchery steelhead and 425,000 hatchery coho could be reduced.

He said the government should confer on a compromise with the conservation groups who had proposed a release of 50,000 of each species.

“We’re disappointed in the appeals court’s decision, but we’re still working our way through Judge Settle’s court on the overall program, so we’ll see where we go now,” said Kurt Beardslee, executive director of Wild Fish Conservancy, based in Duvall.

“That’s what we’re hoping. We still haven’t heard from them on that meeting, though.”

Hatchery managers released 77,000 coho smolt into the Elwha at the end of March.

The Elwha River once produced 400,000 spawning fish, a number that declined to fewer than 3,000 after the Elwha and Glines Canyon dams were built without fish passage structures in the early 20th century.

Jones said the hatchery was developed to ensure survival of the species that use the Elwha to spawn.

“None of us have really had to deal with a situation like the Elwha before,” Jones said. “So we tried to be extremely risk-averse when we put together the HGMPs.”

He noted the fish born in the hatchery are genetically identical to the wild species.

The plans call for adult fish to be captured in the fall to spawn in the hatchery so their smolt can be released in the spring.

One factor that jeopardizes the survival of the fish runs is the heavy loads of sediment that had built up in the riverbed behind the dams.

In April 2013, the state Department of Fish and Wildlife, operating a separate fish hatchery along the Elwha River, attributed the deaths of hundreds of year-old chinook salmon, which were found along the Elwha banks, to heavy sedimentation in the river.

Now that the river has been reopened, sediment is being flushed out of the river valley.

Hatchery releases are timed to avoid planting fish during those times when the river is heavily loaded with sediment, officials said.

“That’s an additional issue hatcheries elsewhere don’t have to deal with,” Jones said.

“The sediment is complicating juvenile survival.”

Eventually, the hatchery is expected to ramp down production, Jones said, as the sediment clears and the fish population becomes self-sustaining.

“If we give them a chance, they’ll be more and more successful as the river heals,” Jones said.

________

Sequim-Dungeness Valley Editor Joe Smillie can be reached at 360-681-2390, ext. 5052, or at jsmillie@peninsuladailynews.com.

Last modified: April 10. 2014 6:53PM

Yeah, because the few hundred wild steelhead that return along with all those hatchery fish will swim around the nets and go upstream and spawn and "heal the river" while fishing continues on unabated.

Totally.

What's the chances that they put in early timed Chambers Creek fish and then only net up until January 15th?

Fish on...

Todd

It looks to me like the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals finally brought some common sense into this situation.

BTW, these steelhead being released are from the Tribe's native steelhead program, not the Chambers Creek program, which has been terminated.

I only hope that the defendants, can charge the plaintiff groups for some very expensive attorney time.

Perfect...that way they can net the wild fish swimming alongside those hatchery fish and "heal the river".

What a fuckin joke, and what a fuckin great opportunity squandered by the usual...greed and stupidity.

Fish on...

Todd

It is your assumption that they are going fishing for these hatchery fish, not mine. During the preservation and re-colonization portion of the program, they can be used for various re-introduction approaches identified in the restoration plan, therefore there is no need to fish for them.

So what else does one do with Chambers turds?

Obviously they can serve as the foundation for steelhead recovery. Since WDFW has (at least temporarily) agreed not to plant them so they can be fished on, they must be for recovery.

I will repeat one more time. These are not the Chambers Creek steelhead. That program was terminated. These are from their native steelhead program.

And I believe the CC were removed from the program not because they were inappropriate but because of court action.