Low ph and salmon productivity

That all depends on what water quality issue you are dealing with! Is it a man-made local source (mining, logging, sewage, overallocation...). That can be dealt with with political will and money by addressing the source. Climate change impacts, not so easy.
 
searun said:
Have to agree with you here. There is strong evidence that larger out-migrant smolts are now preferred prey for some harbour seals that have become smolt predator experts. Some recent research showing that up to 47% of out-migrant Chinook, for example, are being consumed within a very short time period of emerging from their natal river estuaries. The issues facing survival are of course more profoundly complex than just pinniped predation. Water quality is certainly a factor, the question is where does that sit on a scale of 1 - 10 when we start looking at where to spend limited resources to help address the limiting factors impacting salmon and steelhead. I have heard recently of some pretty impressive freshwater productivity for steelhead - so perhaps the bottleneck isn't water quality as much as it is other areas.

The other big question also being, even if we did determine that water quality was in the top 10 list, what practical solutions could be implemented on a local level that redress the problem? Other than using some polyphosphates, I'm not aware of simple pragmatic solutions we could deploy to help address water quality - thoughts?
Click to expand...
Which streams have recent impressive freshwater productivity?
 
browningmirage said:
It's in all of the publicly available data, look at the DFO and FLNRO continuously monitored systems. Some systems are 4-5 times as productive as historical, but with marine survival into the 0.05% range.

There is an impact in freshwater that's important and shouldn't be ignored, but I dont think I'd be remiss to suggest that the marine environment is the challenge. The problem with climate change is the unpredictability in impacts on a cold water species that can benefit by transient improvements in productivity in concert with the other impacts of increased CO2
Click to expand...
I am still curious as to which streams are 4-5 times more productive than historically?
 
A friend works at the Quinsam Hatchery - they monitor a counting fence which tabulates down-stream out-smolt migration. He sent me a note a few months back with encouraging news that recent trends (steelhead) are well above historic levels, which was a very positive sign.
 
searun said:
A friend works at the Quinsam Hatchery - they monitor a counting fence which tabulates down-stream out-smolt migration. He sent me a note a few months back with encouraging news that recent trends (steelhead) are well above historic levels, which was a very positive sign.
Click to expand...
Well that's encouraging!! Did your friend have any reasoning as to why the trend has changed there? I'm curious when this started? Was it the increase of habitat from the falls project or did the trend start erlier? Do they sample for invertebrates there? Are the juvenile counts higher than in the mid 1980's?

I tested the Quinsam river for pH and alkalinity March 13 2016. The stream was in flood. The pH was 6.9 and alkalinity was 28ppm. For that heavy rain fall it seemed that the stream was buffering the rain nicely which was 5.5 at the time. Not sure if the stream was as successful at buffering during the 1990's when the rain pH dipped into the mid 3's.

My last rain pH tests here in PA from Christmas till last night are the highest yet averaging 6.7pH. So the rain is not toxic at this time and has higher pH than the last many decades! In water quality theory all coastal streams that have poor buffering capability should start to increase in productivity as long as this higher rain pH trend continues.

In my personal opinion the ecology drought is over. I feel we are going to see marked improvements in biomass and biodiversity across the coast. The signs are already here in some local streams and vegetation. It is just going to take a few years for invertebrate recruitment to repopulate the areas that have been wiped out.

I know water quality is not big on your top ten list. Even if we goes into a high productivity trend do you not think it is worthy of devoting funds and effort to understand why freshwater productivity changes? What if I am wrong and pH has no effect on local ecology. Should we not look to fill the gaps in knowledge?
 
Ken, have you read through Bob Hooton's book, Days of Rivers Past?

I've been reading through it recently and his documentation of what happened on the Gold after I'd left there are illuminating and sad at the same time.

His second trip to the Gold was 1972 and I left in 1973, so I didn't witness the after-affects of the clear-cut logging the company did in the headwaters of the Gold and around Gold Lake, which had just begun when I left.

When I next saw the Gold, in 1990, I was dismayed at some of the changes so evident to me, having been away nearly 17 years.

The filling in of the substrate, aka "paving", dealt serious damage to the streambed and eliminated huge areas where aquatic insects used to live, diminishing the food supply for rearing juveniles, amongst other things. That played a role in the losing of insect populations I'd imagine.

Anyway, I'd recommend you and others who are interested in the history of Steelhead here on Vancouver Island and also up in the Skeena drainage get a copy of Bob's book and check it out.



Take care.
 
It’s a major problem with a lot of our watersheds, urbanization and logging absolutely fills in all critical habitat.
One of the flows I fish is changing almost weekly and the amount of areas filled with each storm is sad. All the redds washed out or buried under feet of gravel.
The gold is a prime is example of this....as are so many others on the coast.
 
Thanks for the input guys. Please don't take this the wrong way but I don't believe either of those factors have caused the die off in ecology whatsoever.
Vancouver island, [including gold river], has been getting logged for a long time. Productivity was high in the 1980's regardless of logging activity or not. If logging had anything to do with it then all the streams in Clayquot sound would still have life but that is not the case. They went just as dead too! I also don't believe the factors you two mention is the cause of the global insect decline either. Many remote unlogged streams free of urbanization have gone dead while some city creeks have much better ecology remaining. No disrespect to Bob's assessments in his book but too assume logging is the main culprit without also assessing chemistry is not fully scientific. If Bob would have been out on rainy days testing water chemistry or monitored invertebrate populations VI streams logged vs. unlogged he would probably have a different and more informed opinion.
Anyway, this thread is about pH and salmon productivity not the effects of logging on salmon productivity. Just checked the rain today and the pH was about 6.1. Now considering that in 1994 the rain pH averaged in the low 4's and often went to mid 3's which was 50-100 times more acidic than now, things are looking pretty good! Now just imagine back in 1994 when the pH was going to 3.4. With the kind of rainfall we are seeing right now how do you think ecology would have done in coastal streams back then during these kinds of high discharge events? Have either of you looked into the effects of pH on aquatic ecology? Please do a little and get back to me.
 
I think there is obviously something to look at at wrt water quality.

But logging has had a demonstrable impact on habitat. Without analysis, magnitude is just a **** contest.

If you have the data, the thing you are trying to tease out here is a PhD thesis. It needs analysis, not just forum posting. We have so many world renowned universities and professors...publish!
 
browningmirage said:
I think there is obviously something to look at at wrt water quality.

But logging has had a demonstrable impact on habitat. Without analysis, magnitude is just a **** contest.

If you have the data, the thing you are trying to tease out here is a PhD thesis. It needs analysis, not just forum posting. We have so many world renowned universities and professors...publish!
Click to expand...
If you visually compared stream bed stability on streams like Moyeha river in Clayquot sound or Power river near Brooks both un logged watersheds with heavily logged Gold river, you would see that movements in stream beds are not necessarily caused from logging. Another place to compare with is Deveraux creek in the Klinakleene watershed. It has been totally mowed over many times yet it is like a garden of eden. Natural lay of the land plays a factor too. There are obviously negative impacts from logging as indicated in Carnation creek studies but I believe pH is a far bigger factor than credited.

I have tried getting the salmon foundation to pick up the subject but not much interest there. Couple guys at DFO have shown some interest but.... If I had the resources I would science the **** out of this because if pH didn't kill all the ecology than something else in the water has. It would be best to figure this out!

A professor at UBC did review a bunch of reports I had sent a while back. One of his students did a paper on the topic. It's a pdf file that is too large to upload. I'll see if I can figure out how too load or link it tomorrow.
 
browningmirage said:
I think there is obviously something to look at at wrt water quality.

But logging has had a demonstrable impact on habitat. Without analysis, magnitude is just a **** contest.

If you have the data, the thing you are trying to tease out here is a PhD thesis. It needs analysis, not just forum posting. We have so many world renowned universities and professors...publish!
Click to expand...
Here is the paper from Mitchell Fennell. Thank you Jordan Rosenfeld and Mitch for taking on the subject!
https://1drv.ms/b/s!Atk70l6Zun4raZv1YUKyo4NLdWk
 
Rainfall can’t be that acidic this year is the first time my patio stones have done this. Was perfect in the summer too

upload_2019-1-5_13-51-23.png
 
The green algae has been returning to streams, weeps and rooftops all over the coast. The rain pH is averaging above 6 now. Should be the end of didymo algae in streams too. Here's hoping it continues!!
 
Lots of other new changes happening here too. Blackberry vines retaining green leaves all winter, deciduous trees are keeping their leaves longer, farmers are not needing lime much to green up hay fields. A fellow I fished with this fall was from Scotland. He said there farmers are now having to use rock sulfate to lower pH in soil where they used to use lime to raise it. He claimed the thoughts over there was that factories now use soda ash to buffer the acidic emissions and that was assumed the cause.
 
Fishmyster said:
Here is the paper from Mitchell Fennell. Thank you Jordan Rosenfeld and Mitch for taking on the subject!
https://1drv.ms/b/s!Atk70l6Zun4raZv1YUKyo4NLdWk
Click to expand...

Thanks for finding this one. It's interesting but I had to laugh when I read this part.

While it is clear that considerable attention was given to the issue of freshwater acidification in British Columbia within the past thirty years, few instances of modern scientific inquiry appear to be directed towards assessing the current status. Whalms
ley (1985) summarized various ongoing and proposed studies relating to precipitation based acid deposition on the West coast of North America, providing a plethora of information at the time, such as that provided by Sullivan and Samis (1988). However, for
unknown reasons modern analysis of the potential for continued acidification risk appears to have greatly decreased. A possible reason for this decline is the perception that acid precipitation has been eliminated or reduced, which while true, does not excuse a lack of monitoring of natural ecosystems.

Must be short term memory loss or they were busy in high school to know the reason. I, and others, know exactly why this occurred here in Canada. It was the war on science that we are still feeling effects to this day.
 
After wildmanyeah brought up the Nova Scotia stream liming project on the other thread I googled it some more. Lots of history there with efforts to neutralize acid rain in N.S..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

scott craven
Jeff Beck
Replies
10
Views
874
ab1752
ab1752
F
volcanic pollution vs man made polution
Replies
11
Views
946
halimark
H
Derby
NOAA-approved harvest plan said to threaten federally-protected Chinook and killer whales
Replies
6
Views
523
winephart
W
lumberjac
Nebulus emergency floatation device for snow mobiles and ATV'S
Replies
0
Views
488
lumberjac
lumberjac
C
Research suggests DFO worsened impact of salmon fishery crisis
Replies
9
Views
1K
shuswap
S
Back
Top