The salmon that spawn in the Lower American River need a steady supply of cold water at the proper flow.
With the current water supply for the river, dictated by what can be stored in Folsom and Nimbus dams, generally inadequate to maintain this supply, we have called for the building of the Auburn Dam, as it will provide the adequate supply of cold water (and protect the physical integrity of the Parkway) while allowing the Bureau of Reclamation—who manages the dams—enough supply to meet the demands of our growing region and the needs of the salmon.
Continuing to call for the saving of the salmon without also calling for enough water storage to create the water conditions to save them is irresponsible, as is the idea to demolish the dams communities rely on for water and survival.
Editorial: Save the salmon
Published 12:00 am PDT Sunday, April 13, 2008
Whether you like your chinook grilled or poached, or even if you have no taste for salmon, last week's vote to ban salmon fishing off the California and Oregon coasts is the exclamation point on an unmitigated disaster.
In one fell swoop, thousands of fishermen, fish processors and charter boats will see their livelihoods wiped out, at least for a year.
Consumers will see prices rise for whatever salmon is left – the farm-raised stuff and wild sockeye from Alaska.
Recall when cod fishing was banned off of New England in the 1990s? A vast coastal region was hammered. Now another one will be.
"For the entire West Coast, this is the worst in history," said Don McIsaac, executive director of the Pacific Fishery Management Council. On Thursday, the federal council, as expected, approved a one-year ban on commercial and recreational fishing for chinook salmon from California to northern Oregon.
