Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Land Use and Water Management The Klamath River watershed covers 12,000 mi2 Of northern Califor- nia ancT southwestern Oregon ancT extends more than 350 river mi from its Backwaters to its estuary at the Pacific Ocean. The watershed derives its unique character largely from its geology ancT climate (Mount 1995), which are cTiscussecT in the first quarter of this chapter. The rest of the chapter describes lancT uses ancT resulting changes in the basin since 1848, the begin- ning of the goicT-mining era. The topography, hycTrology, ecosystems, ancT unusual plant ancT animal communities of the watershed reflect cTiverse dynamic processes in the lancTscape of today ancT in the past. These features of the watershed are tick to the natural resource economies of the water- shecT, which inclucle logging, grazing, agriculture, mining, ancT fisheries. The diversity of lancT uses ancT lancTscape features poses a significant challenge to lancT managers ancT those seeking to restore the watershecT's aquatic communities. As this chapter shows, simple or uniform approaches to res- toration of impaired ecosystems are unlikely to succeed in a watershed as cTiverse as that of the Klamath River. DESCRIPTION OF THE KLAMATH RIVER WATERSHED Geologic Setting The physiography of the Klamath watershed records the oblique con- vergence between the North American tectonic plate ancT the plates that unclerlie the Pacific Ocean. The luan cle Fuca ancT Gorcia Plates, which lie 46
LAND USE AND WATER MANAGEMENT 47 off the shore of Washington, Oregon, anti northern California, are being subcluctecI in a northeasterly direction beneath western North America, forming the Cascaclia subduction zone (Figure 2-11. A consequence of the subduction is the formation of an extensive north-south oriented chain of volcanoes known as the Cascaclia volcanic arc or Cascade Range. The arc inclucles two of the more prominent volcanoes in the upper I(lamath water- shecI: Mount Shasta anti Mount Mazama (the site of Crater Lake). The volcanic arc bisects the I(lamath watershed, clivicling the upper basin from the lower basin (Figure 2-11. The upper basin, inclucling the large natural lakes ancI their tributaries, lies in the back-arc of the Cascaclia margin. The lower basin which inclucles the mountainous, steeper portions of the main- stem I(lamath ancI the Scott, Salmon, ancI Trinity rivers lies in the cly- namic fore-arc area of the margin. The Shasta River stracicIles the tectonic boundary between the back-arc ancI the fore-arc (Figure 2-11; its confluence with the main-stem I(lamath occurs in the fore-arc region. Geophysical ancI geodetic surveys couplecI with geologic mapping ef- forts have shown that portions of the fore-arc ancI back-arc regions of the Cascaclia margin form discrete crustal blocks, each with its own motion (Welis et al. 1998, McCaffrey et al. 20001. The motion of these blocks ancI their interactions with each other have clictatecI the dynamic topography of the region. Tectonic Setting of Klamath Watershed motion with Plate 1> ~~ ~ OREGON / ~ North America ~ ) - ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ O large voIcano ~ ~ ~ :~' ~ - _| 7/- 1-- ~ = ~ ~ E$~NE~V~ FIGURE 2-1 General tectonic setting for northern California and southern Oregon illustrating the Cascadia subduction zone, the Cascade volcanic arc, the Basin and Range Province, and the Oregon fore-arc and Sierra Nevada blocks. Note that the I(lamath watershed occurs at the intersection of these tectonic blocks. Source: Mod- ified from Wells and Simpson 2001.
48 FISHES IN THE KLAMATH RIVER BASIN Within the I(lamath watershed region, the back-arc portion of the Cascaclia margin is part of the crustal block known as the Basin anti Range Province. Although attached to North America, the province is undergoing east-west extension of as much as 1 cm/yr (Bennett et al.1998, Magill et al. 19821. Right-lateral shear oriented north northwest-south southeast occurs along the western ecige of the province anti is superimposed on the east- west extension (Bennett et al. 1998, 19991. This shear has formecI the distinctive grabens showing north-northwest south-southwest orientation, which appear topographically as fault-bouncI troughs anti valleys of the I(lamath Lake area. The crustal extension of the northwestern basin anti range in southern Oregon anti northern California has been accompanied by wiclespreacI Neogene volcanism that has formecI the distinctive volcanic tablelancis anti broacI valleys anti marshes of the upper tributaries within the I(lamath watershed. Unlike most watersheds, the I(lamath watershed has its greatest relief anti topographic complexity in its lower half rather than in its heac~waters. This unusual physiography stems from the location of the fore-arc region, which encompasses the lower half of the watershed. The Cascaclia fore-arc of northern California is arguably the most dynamic lanciscape in the region (Mount 19951. The regional compression associated with subduction of the Gorcia Plate immecliately off shore has proclucecI some of the fastest rates of uplift recorclecI in California. Aciclitionally, the fore-arc occurs at the poorly clefinecI intersection between two large crustal blocks (Figure 2-11: the Sierra Nevada block anti the Oregon fore-arc block (Welis et al.1998, McCaffrey et al. 20001. The Sierra Nevada block inclucles the Sierra Nevacia-Great Valley of central California anti the I(lamath Mountains anti Coast Ranges of Northern California. The block is bounclecI on the east by the Basin anti Range Province anti on the west by the San Ancireas-Coast Range Fault system (Welis et al. 19981. Geodetic surveys indicate that the block is moving northwest relative to North America anti is rotating in a counter- clockwise manner (Argus anti Gordon 19901. The Oregon fore-arc block extends from the Cascaclia subduction zone on the west to the Basin anti Range on the east. Its southern boundary occurs at the transition to the Si- erra Nevada block, roughly in the vicinity of the California-Oregon border. The Oregon fore-arc block is rotating clockwise relative to North America (Welis et al. 19981. The lower I(lamath River watershed, which extends from Iron Gate Dam to the I(lamath estuary, traverses the northern portions of the Sierra Nevada block along its transition to the Oregon fore-arc block (Figure 2-1). The steep, rugged watersheds of the lower I(lamath, couplecI with the becI- rock-controllecI main stem, reflect the rapicI uplift in the region anti the constant adjustment of the river to its dynamic lanciscape (Mount 19951. The patterns of uplift anti faulting also control the orientation of most
LAND USE AND WATER MANAGEMENT 49 tributaries. Because the main tributaries of the lower I(lamath River the Shasta, Scott, Salmon, anti Trinity rivers are important for salmonicis, their incliviclual geologic features are of interest. The Shasta River watershed is at the junction between the Basin anti Range Province, in the Sierra Nevada block within the Cascaclia volcanic arc. Its watershed, which originates at Mount Ecicly, encompasses about 800 mi2. Like the Scott River watershed to the west, the Shasta has a large central ai~uv~ai valley, steep Breakwaters on the west, anti a steep gorge in the lowermost portion of the watershed. The eastern portions of the water- shecI are clominatecI by Tertiary ancI Quaternary volcanic flows ancI by clebris flows associated with Cascade volcanism. The lower gorge anti westernmost ecige of the basin are uncleriain by Paleozoic metamorphic rocks of the Sierra Nevada block. The most conspicuous topographic fea- ture of the Shasta Valley is a large Pleistocene volcanic clebris avalanche clerivecI from nearby Mount Shasta that creates the unusual hummocky topography in the upper reaches of the valley (Cranciall 19891. The north- south orientation of the valley is associated with large basin anti range .. . . .. . . . faults similar to those controlling the formation of the upper basin. The hycirology of the Shasta River watershed, unlike that of the other tributary watersheds of the lower basin, is clominatecI by discharge from numerous springs. The Shasta subbasin lies within the extensive rain shaclow of the Salmon anti Marble mountains. Precipitation averages 12-18 in/yr anti is as low as 5 in/yr in the vicinity of Big Springs (Mack 19601. The bulk of this precipi- tation occurs from October to March as snow. Like the upper I(lamath basin, the Shasta subbasin has warm summers (mean ciaily temperatures commonly exceeding 30°C) ancI coo! winters (mean ciaily temperatures of 5°C). The average length of the growing season in the basin is about 180 clays (Mack 19601. As cliscussecI in Chapter 8, climate may change over the coming clecacles. The Scott River watershed lies at the transition between the Cascaclia volcanic arc ancI the fore-arc basin (Figure 2-11. The watershed, which is about 820 mi2, has heac~waters nearly 8,000 ft above sea level in the Salmon Mountains along the west sicle of the watershed. The Scott joins the I(la- math River at river mile 142. The physiography of the watershed shows elements of its neighboring watersheds. Like the Salmon watershed, the heac~waters of the Scott are heavily forested ancI have annual precipitation of 50 in or more, high water yielcis, ancI extensive snowpack more than 4,000 ft above sea level. Like the Shasta watershed, the Scott has a large, fault-bouncI alluvial valley in the micicIle portions of the watershed that supports extensive agriculture ancI grazing. This valley, like the eastern portion of the Scott watershed, lies in the rain shaclow of the Salmon ancI Marble mountains; mean annual precipitation is about 20 in. The Scott
so FISHES IN THE KLAMATH RIVER BASIN River, like the Shasta River, has a steep bedrock gorge downstream of the alluvial valley ancI above its confluence with the I(lamath River. Mean ciaily temperatures in the valley exceed 32°C cluring late luly or early August (peaks, above 40°C); mean ciaily temperatures reach 10°C in winter (Rantz 1972, CDWR 2002). The tributaries of the Scott River strongly affect the hycirology (Mack 1958) ancI aquatic habitat of the basin. The fourth-orcler tributaries of the west sicle of the watershed inclucling Scott, French, Sugar, Etna, Patterson, I(i cicler , an cI Shacklefor cI creeks are steep -gradient, perennial be cirock tri- butaries. Several of these tributaries have built coarse-grainecI alluvial fans where their gradients decrease as they meet the valley floor. In contrast, the East ancI South Forks of the Scott ancI the third- ancI fourth-orcler creeks of the Scott River Canyon, a tributary of the Scott, enter the river in steep reaches ancI have no alluvial fans. The relatively ciry east sicle of the water- shecI has several low-graclient ephemeral tributaries; Moffett Creek is the largest ancI most important of these. In its upper reaches ancI within the canyon, the Scott River is primarily a bedrock river characterized by alternating step-pool ancI cascade reaches with discontinuous riffle-pool reaches containing narrow alluvial floocI- plains. Within the Scott Valley, the river has various forms that are con- trollecI principally by grain size, slope, tributary contributions, ancI channel modifications. In coarse-grainecI, steep-graclient reaches of the river, the channel appears to be actively braiding. In low-graclient, fine-grainecI reaches with cohesive banks, the channel alternates between a single-channel meandering river ancI a multichannel, anastomosing river, albeit with nu- merous modifications for floocI management ancI irrigation diversions. Some incision within the channelizecI reach has lowerecI the channel becI by sev- eral feet (G. Black, Siskiyou Resource Conservation District, Etna, Califor- nia, personal communication, 20021. Sloughs, which indicate historical channel avuision ancI cutoff events, apparently were numerous before agri- cultural clevelopment of the valley. Several large sloughs remain in the valley along the west sicle ancI receive flow from tributaries ancI from the main stem cluring large flow events. At 750 mi2 the Salmon River is the smallest of the four major tributar- ies to the lower I(lamath basin (Figure 2-11. The Salmon watershed is steep ancI heavily forested ancI, in comparison with its neighboring watersheds, relatively unclisturbecI. The bulk of the main stem ancI its tributaries consist of bedrock channels with numerous step-pool ancI cascade reaches ancI narrow riparian corridors. The watershed is locatecI entirely within the Cascaclia fore-arc region on the Sierra Nevada block. The high uplift rates ancI the lack of extensional tectonics have prevented the formation of any important alluvial valleys, such as those of the Scott ancI Shasta drainages. The rugged terrain ancI the lack of a large alluvial valley have limitecI some
LAND USE AND WATER MANAGEMENT 51 of the lancI-use activities that have affected anaciromous fishes in other tributaries. The Trinity River is the largest tributary to the I(lamath River. At 2,900 mi2 with an annual average precipitation of 57 in, it is also the largest contributor of runoff ancI sediment to the I(lamath River. It is a rugged, step, ancI heavily forested watershed. Its eastern portions in the Trinity Alps ancI Coast Ranges reach elevations in excess of 9,000 ft ancI support thick winter snowpacks. The bulk of the watershed is below 5,000 ft in elevation ancI is clominatecI by conifer ancI mixed conifer ancI harc~woocI forests. The con- fluence of the Trinity ancI I(lamath rivers is locatecI 43 mi upstream of the mouth ancI exerts consiclerable influence over conditions in the lowermost I(lamath River ancI its estuary. The Trinity watershed is locatecI entirely within the Sierra Nevada block, west of the Cascade volcanic arc. The basin lies close to the junction between the Cascade subduction zone ancI the northernmost San Ancireas Fault. The physiography of the watershed is con- trollecI by high rates of uplift ancI a series of large, seismically active north- west trencling faults. The eastern half of the basin is composed of rocks of the I(lamath Mountains Geologic Province, while the western half is clominatecI by rocks of the Coast Range Geologic Province. Both provinces contain rock types that are prone to lancislicling ancI high rates of erosion, particularly when clisturbecI by poor lancI-use practices. The high rates of uplift, unstable rock types, ancI high rates of precipitation produce a naturally dynamic lanciscape ancI a river with a variable hycirograph ancI sediment yielcis. Uplift in the Trinity watershed has precluclecI the formation of exten- sive alluvial valleys such as those founcI in the Scott ancI Shasta watersheds. The upper reaches of the main stem ancI the tributaries support steep- graclient rivers with numerous cascades. In portions of the main stem ancI the South Fork, however, low-graclient reaches with narrow alluvial valleys occur. These reaches historically supported dynamic, meandering coarse- grainecI channels that proviclecI icleal spawning ancI rearing habitat for salmon ancI steelheacI. The size of the Trinity watershed, couplecI with its extensive high-quality spawning ancI rearing habitat, macle the Trinity a productive source of coho salmon ancI other anaciromous fishes (USFWS/ HVT 1999). Climate and Historical Hydropattern The tectonic setting of the I(lamath watershed exerts primary control over its irregular distribution of precipitation. The uplift of the Cascaclia fore-arc ancI the formation of the Cascade volcanic arc have proclucecI an important rain shaclow in the upper basin ancI the Shasta Valley. The upper watershed has a relatively low mean annual precipitation (27 in; Risley and Laenen 1999), about half of which falls as snow. Precipitation in the lower
52 FISHES IN THE KLAMATH RIVER BASIN watershed varies greatly ancI reaches as much as 100 infer in the temperate rain forest close to the coast. The rapicI uplift of the fore-arc has proclucecI a series of steep mountain ranges with strong orographic effects. Where mountain ranges exceed 5,000 ft above sea level, they maintain large winter ancI spring snowpacks in wet years ancI are associated with very high amounts of runoff cluring warm winter storms. Annual runoff, as measured near the mouth of the I(lamath River, is approximately 13 x 106 acre-ft. The upper watershed above Iron Gate Dam, which comprises about 38% of the total watershed area, provides only 12% of the annual runoff of the watershed. The low yielcis from the upper watershed are a product of its location in the rain shaclow of the Cascades, its low relief, anti its extensive marshes ancI lakes that increase hyciraulic retention times. In contrast, the tributaries of the lower water- shecI dominate the total runoff of the I(lamath watershed. Their high runoff stems from their high relief ancI the orographic influence of the Coast Ranges, Trinity Alps, anti the Marble, Salmon, anti Russian mountains. For example, one relatively small tributary, the Salmon River, supplies runoff about equal to that of the entire upper watershed, but from less than one- fifth of the area (Table 2-1~. TABLE 2-1 Runoff, YielcI, anti Basin Areas for the I(lamath Watershecia Ratio of Average Average Annual Runoff to Runoff, Drainage 1,000 Drainage Runoff, Drainage Area, Location acre-ft Area, mi2 % Area, % acre-ft/mi2 Klamath River below Iron Gate Dam 1,581 4,630 12 38 341 Shasta River near mouth 136 793 1 7 172 Scott River at mouth 615 808 5 7 761 Other tributaries 615 709 5 5 867 Klamath River below Scott River 3,020 6,940 23 57 435 Indian Creek at mouth 360 135 3 1 2,667 Salmon River at mouth 1,330 750 10 6 1,773 Other tributaries 1,350 650 10 5 1,500 Klamath River at Orleans 6,060 8,475 47 70 715 Trinity River at Hoopa 3,787 2,950 29 24 1,283 Other tributaries 3,021 675 23 6 4,476 Klamath River at mouth 12,868 12,100 100 100 1,109 aData compiled from reports of the California Division of Water Resources 2002, represent- ing average current conditions (including depletion caused by consumptive use) and gage records of the U.S. Geological Survey. Periods of record for data vary by site from 22 to 50 yr, principally between 1951 and the present, and include both pre- and post-Trinity River Diversion operations.
LAND USE AND WATER MANAGEMENT 53 The hyciropattern, or timing of runoff, varies throughout the water- shecI. Seasonal runoff from the upper watershed is regulatecI by the long anti complex transport pathways in the basin anti, historically, by the natu- ral buffering effect of overflow into the Lost River anti Lower Klamath anti Tule lakes. Uncler unregulatecI conditions, peak runoff from the upper watershed wouicI typically occur in April anti decrease graclually to minimums in late August or early September. Flow regulation anti lancI-use activities in the upper basin have alterecI the hyciropattern. Unlike the upper basin, the lower Klamath basin exhibits two potential flow peaks, clepencling on the water year. Subtropical storms strike the Klamath watershed with high frequency from late December to early March anti are responsible for all peak ciaily discharges in the Klamath main stem anti its tributaries. The short hyciraulic retention times of the tributaries to the lower Klamath basin enhance the effect of these storms. The second anti more preclictable flow peaks are associated with spring snowmelt. The timing of the snow- melt pulse varies, but it usually occurs in April. Historically, the clecline in flow from the tributaries to the lower basin was graclual anti reached mini- mums in September. During the low-flow periods in the late summer or early fall when no precipitation occurs, spring-fecI tributaries such as the Shasta River anti flow from the upper basin constitute the bulk of base flow in the main stem of the lower basin. Even the Trinity, the largest annual contributor of runoff to the Kla- math, historically proviclecI very little flow in the late summer anti early fall. AQUATIC ENVIRONMENTS IN THE UPPER KLAMATH BASIN The upper Klamath basin encompasses about 5,700 mi2 (USER 2000a). Major lakes in the upper Klamath basin inclucle Upper Klamath Lake (now 67,000 acres at maximum lake elevation), Lower Klamath Lake (historical maximum area, 94,000 acres; now about 4,700 acres), Tule Lake (histori- cal maximum area, 110,000 acres; now 9,450-13,000 acres), Clear Lake, anti Gerber Reservoir (see Chapter 31. Upper Klamath Lake, now the largest water body in the Klamath basin, receives most of its water from the Williamson anti WoocI rivers. The Williamson River watershed consists of two subbasins cirainecI by the Williamson anti Sprague rivers. The Williamson River arises in the Winema National Forest, flows to the north through Klamath Marsh, anti turns south to Upper Klamath Lake. The Sprague River arises in the Fremont National Forest anti flows westward to connect with the Williamson River just below the Chiloquin Dam (Figure 1-11. The Sycan River, a major tributary of the Sprague, cirains much of the northeastern portion of the watershed. Both the Williamson anti Sprague subbasins are primarily for-
54 FISHES IN THE KLAMATH RIVER BASIN estecI (about 70°/O). Other important lancI-cover types are shrub ancI grass- lancI (14%), agriculture (6%~' ancI wetiancI (6%; BoycI et al. 20021. The Williamson ancI Sprague together provide over half the water reaching Upper I(lamath Lake (I(ann ancI Walker 20011. The WoocI River is the second largest source of water (16%) for Upper I(lamath Lake (I(ann ancI Walker 20011. Annie ancI Sun creeks join to form the WoocI River. The watershed cirains an area northeast of Upper I(lamath Lake ancI extends from the southern base of the mountains that surround Crater Lake to the confluence of the WoocI River with Upper I(lamath Lake by way of the northern arm (Figure 1-3), which is often callecI Agency Lake. Although primarily forested, the WoocI River has extensive agricultural lancis ancI wetiancis. The balance of the water reaching Upper I(lamath Lake is clerivecI from clirect precipitation on the lake ancI flows from springs, small streams, irrigation canals, ancI agricultural pumps. Before clevelopment of the I(lamath Project, Lower I(lamath Lake (Fig- ure 1-3) was often larger than Upper I(lamath Lake. Flows from the I(la- math River, supplementecI by springs around the lake, supported a complex of wetiancis ancI open water covering approximately 80,000-94,000 acres in the spring, cluring high water, ancI 30,000-40,000 acres in late summer. The open water proviclecI habitat for suckers, ancI the variable combination of open water ancI marsh created important habitat for migratory bircis along the Pacific Flyway, making it one of the most important aquatic complexes for waterfowl in the West. By 1924, however, clevelopment of the I(lamath Project eliminatecI more than 90°/O of its open water ancI marsh. Only about 4,700 acres of open water ancI wetiancI remain. Drain- ing the lake lecI to the extirpation of sucker populations that hacI been in the lake (USER 2002a), ancI also eliminatecI much of the habitat suitable for waterfowl ancI other bircis. Connections between the I(lamath River ancI Lower I(lamath Lake were severed by clevelopment, which changed the hycirology of both the lake ancI the river in ways that are not entirely clear. Before 1917, when railroacI construction blockecI the I(lamath Straits, "water flowecI from Upper I(lamath Lake, through the Link River into Lake Ewauna, ancI then into the I(lamath River. Between Lake Ewauna ancI I(eno, the river mean- clerecI through a flat, marshy country" (Henshaw anti Dean 1915, p. 655) for about 20 mi before clescencling over a natural rock barrier that stretched across the river at I(eno. "Water in the river perioclically backecI up behind the reef at I(eno anti spreacI out upstream, flowing into Lower I(lamath Lake through I(lamath Straits" (Weciclell 2000, p. 11. Today, connectivity between Lower I(lamath Lake ancI the rest of the basin is limitecI to water pumped through Sheepy Ricige from Tule Lake ancI water from irrigation channels that leacI to the I(eno impoundment (USFWS 2001, Figure 1-21.
LAND USE AND WATER MANAGEMENT 55 Before the I(lamath Project, the lake ancI wetiancis probably retained substantial amounts of early spring precipitation ancI some of the high flow of the river. "By storing ancI subsequently releasing this water into the river, Lower I(lamath Lake wouicI have augmented the effects of grouncI- water in shifting the I(lamath River hycirograph to the river" (Weciclell 2000, p.71. Lower I(lamath Lake was "neither an undrained basin nor a thoroughly cirainecI floociplain. At times, its waters flowecI into the Pacific Ocean via the I(lamath River, yet this drainage was only partial" (Weciclell 2000, p.81. Before 1924, suckers appear to have been abundant in Lower I(lamath Lake, even after its connection to the river was severed in 1917. Suckers migrated into the lake from Sheepy Creek, a spring-fecI tributary on the western ecige of the lake, in numbers large enough to support a fishery (Coots 1965, cited in USFWS 20011. Before the I(lamath Project, Tule Lake (Figure 1-3) varied from 55,000 to over 100,000 acres, averaging about 95,000 acres (making it often larger than Upper I(lamath Lake). Like Lower I(lamath Lake, Tule Lake was connected seasonally to the I(lamath River. During periods of high runoff, water from the I(lamath River flowecI into the Lost River slough ancI clown the Lost River to Tule Lake. The direction of the river's flow is now cleter- minecI by operators of the I(lamath Project, clepencling on irrigation neecis. Most of the former becI of Tule Lake has been cirainecI for agriculture, leaving about 9,450-13,000 acres of shallow lake ancI marsh. The fluctuation in surface area of Tule Lake afforclecI by its connections to the I(lamath River may have been critical in maintaining the high aquatic productivity of Tule Lake ancI its wetiancis (ILM 20001. Tule marshes on the north ancI west sicles of the lake supported populations of colonial nesting water bircis ancI summer resident waterfowl. The large fish popula- tions in the lake supported what was probably the largest concentration of nesting osprey in North America (ILM 20001. Much of the historical vari- ability in lake ancI marsh habitats has been lost as a result of management. Nevertheless, well into the 1960s ancI early 1970s, Tule Lake National WilcIlife Refuge was consiclerecI the most important waterfowl refuge in North America; cluck populations exceeclecI 2.5 million at their peaks. Sil- tation causecI by agriculture ancI loss of wetiancI productivity has occurred in the last several clecacles, however, ancI waterfowl populations have cle- clined (ILM 20001. Historically, suckers in Tule Lake ancI the Lost River were abundant enough to support cannery operations along the Lost River (USFWS 20011. After the I(lamath Project cirainecI most of Tule Lake for agriculture ancI diversion clams of the project blockecI the access of suckers to spawning areas in the Lost River, sucker populations cleclinecI substantially (Scop- pettone et al. 1995, USER 2002a).
56 FISHES IN THE KLAMATH RIVER BASIN The hycirology of Tule Lake anti of the I(lamath River first changed in 1890, when settlers built a clike across the Lost River slough in an attempt to protect lancis near Tule Lake from floocling (USFWS 20011. The clike prevented I(lamath River flooc~waters from overflowing into the Lost River drainage ancI ultimately draining into Tule Lake. As is the case with respect to Lower I(lamath Lake, the amount of water that flowecI from the I(la- math River into Tule Lake ancI the effect of this overflow on the historical hycirograph of the I(lamath River are unclear. Estimates of historical I(la- math River flows are clerivecI from measurements recorclecI before Lower I(lamath Lake was clisconnectecI from the I(lamath River, but the measure- ments were taken after Tule Lake was clisconnectecI from the river. The Lost River cirains Clear Lake ancI flows north toward the I(lamath River (Figure 1-31. The structure ancI hycirology of the Lost River have been highly moclifiecI by the I(lamath Project. Historically, the Lost River was con- nectecI to the I(lamath River cluring periods of high flow via the Lost River slough. There is now no clirect outlet to the I(lamath River, although diversion canals can be used to sencI water into the I(lamath Project (Figure 1-21. Aquatic habitats have been moclifiecI throughout the upper I(lamath basin, but the Lost River watershed has been particularly alterecI by clevel- opment of the I(lamath Project. The Lost River, once a major spawning site for suckers, today supports few suckers (Chapter 61. According to the U.S. Fish ancI WilcIlife Service (USFWS), the Lost River "can perhaps be best characterized as an irrigation water conveyance, rather than a river. Flows are completely regulatecI, it has been channelizecI in one 6-ml reach, its riparian habitats ancI adjacent wetiancis are highly moclifiecI, ancI it receives significant discharges from agricultural cirains ancI sewage effluent. The active floociplain is no longer functioning except in very high water concli- tions" (USFWS 2001, III-2-241. New lakes have been created ancI oicI lakes cirainecI, new waterways have been clug ancI oicI rivers turned into irrigation clitches, anti new sucker habitat has been created while original sucker habi- tat has been eraclicatecI. Before 1910, a natural lake, marsh, ancI meaclow complex occupied what is now Clear Lake (Figure 1-31. Water from this lake cirainecI into the Lost River ancI then to Tule Lake (USER 2000a). In most years, the Lost River below the present Clear Lake clam ran ciry from lune through Octo- ber. To hoicI back flooc~waters from Tule Lake ancI store seasonal runoff for irrigation later in the season, a clam was constructed at Clear Lake in 1910, impounding the waters of the Lost River ancI creating a larger lake. Where Gerber Reservoir now stancis (Figure 1-3), 3,500 acres of sea- sonal wetiancis existed before the I(lamath Project, but there was no lake. Construction of Gerber Reservoir in 1926 for floocI control ancI irrigation created new sucker habitat ancI a population of suckers persists there (USER 2002b, Chapter 51.
LAND USE AND WATER MANAGEMENT AQUATIC ENVIRONMENTS IN THE LOWER KLAMATH BASIN 57 The lower Klamath River, inclucling the Trinity River, is the largest of the coastal rivers of California (Figure 1-11. The lower Klamath basin historically was clominatecI by large runs of anaciromous fishes with diverse life-history strategies (Chapter 7), some of which penetrated into the heacI- waters of tributary streams ancI into the rivers feeding Upper Klamath Lake. Four major tributaries to the Klamath River the Salmon, Scott, Shasta, ancI Trinity rivers were major salmon ancI steelheacI producers. The Shasta River in particular, with its coo! summer flows, was once one of the most productive streams of its size for anaciromous fish in California (Chapter 71. Historically, most of the aquatic habitat in the lower Klamath River consisted of streams with moderate to high gradients ancI coo! water in summer, although the main-stem Klamath River may have been fairly warm cluring late summer. Similar conditions existed in the Trinity River (Moffett ancI Smith 19501. The flows in tributary streams were high in winter ancI spring from rain ancI snowmelt ancI low in summer. Native fishes of the lower basin are mainly anaciromous but also inclucle a few nonanaciromous stream fishes (Chapter 71. Many small tributaries enter the main-stem Klamath between Iron Gate Dam ancI Orieans. These creeks largely cirain mountainous watersheds clominatecI by forest. Most creeks are affected to some clegree by logging, mining, grazing, ancI agriculture. Water withcirawal leacis to reductions in summer base flows in many of these tributaries. Water quality has not been extensively stucliecI, but these tributaries may be particularly important in providing coicI-water habitats for salmonicis (Chapter 41. As clescribecI below, the watershed has been cirastically alterecI by hu- man activities. The anaciromous fishes have been in clecline since the lath century, when clams, mining, ancI logging severely alterecI many important streams ancI shut off access to the upper basin. The cleclines continued through the 20th century with the clevelopment of intensive agriculture ancI its accompanying clams, diversions, ancI warm water. Commercial fishing also contributed to the cleclines. . . . . . . HISTORY OF LAND USE IN THE KLAMATH BASIN For at least 11,000 yr, ancestors of the Klamath ancI Mocloc Indians inhabited the upper Klamath basin (OWRD 20001. Most of the year, the Klamath ancI Mocloc tribes livecI near creeks, springs, riparian areas, ancI marshes (Cressman 19561. Their family groups were small, so they were able to extract enough resources for survival on a sustainable basis. Family groups came together cluring seasons of resource abundance for communal
58 FISHES IN THE KLAMATH RIVER BASIN hunts, for celebrations, ancI to take advantage of seasonal concentrations of suckers ancI riparian plants (Cressman 19561. The I(lamath Indian name for Lost River suckers is tchwam; shortnose suckers are referred to as kuptu (L. I(. Dunsmoor, I(lamath Tribes, Chilo- quin, Oregon, personal communication, September 3, 20021. Suckers in general became known to settlers as mullet. Lost River suckers in particular were once a staple foocI of the Mocloc ancI I(lamath tribes; they proviclecI important protein in the spring, when foocI reserves hacI been clepletecI (Cope 1879, USFWS 20021. Gilbert (1898) reported them as the most important foocI fish in the I(lamath Lake area, ancI Stern (1965) estimated an artisanal harvest of 50 tons/yr, which wouicI correspond to 13,000 fish at an average weight of 3 kg. The I(lamath ancI Mocloc tribes manipulatecI the wetiancis ancI riparian areas to increase their resources. For example, the I(lamath burned riparian areas because women preferred to weave baskets with the supple young stems that sprouted after a fire. They burned wet meadows in fall to in- crease production of root plants, to lure animals that were attracted to the protein-rich shoots that grew after fire, ancI to protect their shelters from wilcI grasslancI fires. Intensive cligging, particularly for roots, also alterecI riparian areas (C. Burnsicle, Malheur National WilcIlife Refuge, personal communication, 19971. Four tribes occupied the lower I(lamath basin. The Yurok livecI along the Pacific coast from about 15 mi south of what is now Crescent City clown to TriniciacI Bay ancI up the I(lamath River to Bluff Creek, a few miles past the junction with the Trinity River. The Hupa people livecI along the Trinity River, where 13 villages were concentrated in a 7-ml reach callecI Hoopa Valley. The I(aruk livecI along the I(lamath River upstream of the Trinity to a point beyond Happy Camp. Above Happy Camp, the Shasta Nation occupied the upper reaches of the Salmon, I(lamath, Scott, Shasta, ancI McCloucI rivers (Beckman 19981. The Yurok, Hupa, ancI I(aruk were closely alliecI with the sedentary cultures of the northwest coast; the Shasta showed cultural traits more akin to those of the migratory tribes of the iniancI West (Beckman 19981. The Yurok, Hupa, ancI I(aruk spoke languages of three very different language groups Yurok is AIgonquian, Hupa is Athapaskan in origin, ancI I(aruk is Hokan ancI thus associated with oicI languages of Mexico but their cul- tural habits were similar (Beckman 19981. In contrast with the tribes clown river, the Shasta clicI not occupy permanent villages, ancI their traditions were closer to those of the tribes of the upper I(lamath basin. The Yurok ancI Hupa, unlike tribes in the cirier iniancI regions, were able to be almost completely sedentary because of salmon runs (Nelson 19881. As Beckman (1998) noted, their resources were so plentiful that they hacI the free time to nurture the arts ancI crafts in a way that was uncommon in California
LAND USE AND WATER MANAGEMENT 59 ancI that gave them a hierarchy of status ancI wealth. Unlike most other California nations, the Yuroks recognized no chiefs ancI hacI no organized political society. They were unique in believing in incliviclually owned lancI; a family's wealth was measured by the amount of lancI that it owned, ancI lancI couicI be soicI. The Hupa were strictly a river people, whereas the Yurok were cliviclecI between river ancI coastal villages. Most Yurok, however, livecI along the I(lamath River ancI reliecI on riverine resources (Waterman 1920), even though they used coastal resources, such as shellfish, surf fish, ancI seals. Anaciromous fish that brought the abundant energy of the Pacific Ocean upstream were the Yurok's, Hupa's, ancI I(aruk's most important resources ancI were critical resources for the Shasta as well. Fur Trapping When fur trappers from the Hudson Bay Company of Canacia arrived in the I(lamath basin in the 1 820s, tribes throughout the basin coexisted in relative peace with them. Trappers were not seeking to establish permanent settlements in the basin that might threaten tribal rights. Rather, in an attempt to discourage Americans from laying claim to the region, Hudson Bay Company's written policy was to trap fur-bearing animals from streams south of the Columbia River to extinction. In luly 1827, George Simpson of the Hudson Bay Company statecI the policy clearly, writing that the best protection from Americans was to keep the "country closely hunted" (Wil- liams 1971, p. xiv). Peter Skene Ogclen, the trapper who opened up much of the basin to white exploration, followecI that policy. By the summer of 1828, Ogclen wrote of the region that "almost every part of the country is now more or less in a ruined state, free of beaver" (Ogclen 1971, p. 981. During the next spring, he wrote that "it is scarcely creclible what a clestruc- tion of beaver by trapping at this season, within the last five clays upwards of fifty females have been taken ancI on average each with four young reacly to litter. DicI we not hoicI this country by so slight a tenure it wouicI be most to our interest to trap only in the fall, ancI by this mocle it wouicI take many years to ruin it" (Ogclen 1971, p. 171. Ironically, it was the removal of beaver by fur trappers that helpecI create the basis for ranching. When beaver were removed, their clams fell into disrepair ancI the small wetiancis behind the clams were cirainecI ancI became the fertile meaclows that were soon to sustain ranchers' cattle (Elmore ancI Beschta 19 8 71. Mining Although the tribes were able to coexist with trappers, the miners who followecI them provecI disastrous to the Indian nations. Far more than
60 FISHES IN THE KLAMATH RIVER BASIN trappers, miners transformed the basin's rivers ancI wetiancis, partly be- cause of mining activities in the rivers ancI streams ancI also because of their indirect encouragement of permanent white settlements. Miners created a new market for foocI ancI supplies ancI thus attracted farmers ancI ranchers to the region. Many of the settlements in the lower I(lamath River basin originated from the mining boom of the micicIle 1800s (NMFS 20011. Min- ers also clepenclecI upon fecleral troops ancI Indian agents to cope with the problems that mining generated; they created a U.S. Army presence in the basin that further clestabilizecI relations with the tribes (Malouf ancI FincIlay 1986). Mining in the lath century was particularly destructive of fish habitat along the lower I(lamath basin. In 1853, miners cliscoverecI a way to exca- vate goicI-bearing placer deposits by using blasts of water to wash away gravel. Mining companies soon clivertecI creeks into reservoirs that fecI water at high pressure to huge nozzles that couicI cleliver water at up to 30,000 gal/mint The jets of water couicI level entire hilisicles ancI their use rearranged much of the riparian lanciscapes of California. The waterborne clebris was clirectecI into sluices containing mercury, which captured the goicI. Before a court ruling haltecI the practice in 1884, hyciraulic miners releasecI 1.6 x 109 y]3 of sediment into California waterways, while hard- rock miners proclucecI another 3 x 107 y]3 of tailings, and dredgers left behind about 4 x 109 y]3 of debris a total of about 5.6 x 109 y]3 for the entire state Wrist 2001). Water was clivertecI ancI pumped for use in sluicing ancI hyciraulic op- erations that resultecI in increased turbidity anti siltation. Silt from mining harmed benthic invertebrates, covered salmon recicis, suffocated salmon eggs, anti fillecI pools that were used by salmon. WoocI for equipment anti structures, railroacI tracks, housing, anti fuel was obtained through clefores- tation, often on steep slopes, anti caused erosion, floocling, fires, anti loss of animals. Miners also reclucecI freshwater resources by overfishing, ciam- ming, anti diverting streams (Malouf ancI FincIlay 19861. The goicI rush brought extensive changes to the Scott River watershed, particularly the main stem anti South Fork anti Oro Fino, ShackleforcI, anti French creeks. Placer mining began as early as 1851 ancI expanclecI to wiclespreacI hyciraulic mining in 1856 (Welis 18811. Large Yuba cireciges that operated in 1934-1950 (Sommerstram et al. 1990) left some of the most visible effects of mining in the basin. They excavated material 50-60 ft below the river becI anti created tailings piles more than 25 ft high downstream of the town of Callahan. The processing of the sediment by Yuba cireciges left much of the coarsest material (typically bouiclers) at the top of the piles, effectively armoring the finer sediments. Early surveys in the basin (Taft ancI Shapovalov 1935) noted the severe ciamage that the cireciging hacI caused to fish habitat. To support the mining, numerous
LAND USE AND WATER MANAGEMENT 6 clitches were constructed along the margins of the valley to intercept tribu- tary flows, anti these clitches eventually became sources of irrigation water for early agricultural clevelopment. The Salmon anti Trinity rivers were also severely affected by mining. Along the Salmon River, cluring the late 1800s anti into the 1990s, exten- sive placer goicI mining ancI some hyciraulic goicI mining were concluctecI in the main stem ancI the South ancI North Forks. The main stem of the Trinity River was severely impaired by placer mining within the channel ancI by hyciraulic mining ancI extensive cireciging. One of the most problematic effects of the goicI rush was the release of mercury into the environment; the consequences continue today. Mercury was critical in the mining ancI processing of goicI; it is estimated that at least 2.6 x 107 Ib of elemental mercury were used between 1850 ancI 1900 in goicI mining. Much of the mercury remains in soils ancI sediments, ancI some of it has been converted into methyl mercury, which is particularly dangerous for humans because it travels through the foocI chain into fish ancI becomes a threat for those who eat fish. In aciclition to contamination from mercury used in goicI mining, mercury contamination comes from mercury mines, some of which were in the I(lamath basin. Most of the mines are now abanclonecI Wrist 20011. By the late 1850s, goicI mining in California was a large-scale industry that requirecI infusions of capital for construction of mills, rail lines, clams, flumes, ancI smelters. Miners used two major processes to extract goicI: stamp mills ancI hyciraulic placer mining. Both methods used a great clear of mercury. Stamp mills pounclecI goicI-bearing ore into crust that then was washed across mercury-coatecI plates; the goicI sank ancI stuck to the mercury, ancI the less clense clebris was carried away. The mercury- goicI amalgam then was heated in furnaces, which vaporized the mercury ancI left the goicI. Some of the evaporating mercury was captured in a condensation chamber for reuse, but much escaped into the air or was crushed by the stamp mill ancI releasecI into the water. Hyciraulic placer mining releasecI even more mercury into the environment perhaps as much as 1 Ib of mercury for every 3 or 4 oz of goicI recovered, or about 1.3 x 107 Ib of mercury in the lath ancI early 20th centuries (estimate by RonalcI Churchill of the California Division of Mines ancI Geology, cited in I(rist 20011. Because salmonicis achieve most of their growth in the marine environ- meet, mercury accumulation in aclult salmon presents less of a health risk to humans than wouicI mercury accumulation in other kincis of large precia- tory fish. Nevertheless, mercury contamination may affect the coho salmon themselves. Young salmon are sensitive to mercury releasecI by placer min- ing (USFWS 19911. Early life stages of coho salmon are harmed by low concentrations of methyl mercury (Buh! ancI Hamilton 1991, Deviin ancI
62 FISHES IN THE KLAMATH RIVER BASIN Mottet 1992), ancI placer mining releases contaminants that can be toxic to early life stages of salmonicis (Buh! ancI Hamilton 19901. The cleleterious effects of mining on salmonicI habitat were so rapicI ancI intense that in 1852, only 4 yr after Sutter's discovery of goicI in the foot- hilis of the Sierra Nevada, California enacted its first salmon statute, which required "'all goocI citizens ancI officers of justice' to destroy man-macle obstructions to salmon migration, except those erected by Indians." That statute clicI little to stem habitat destruction. In the 1880s, all obstructions to salmon migration, inclucling those built by Indians, were banned by state law (Lufkin 20001. The goicI rush struck all California tribes harcI (Heizer 1978, White 19911. Within a year after Sutter's 1848 discovery, at least 80,000 miners ancI others came to California, overwhelming governmental ancI military authority. In the quarter-century from 1845 to 1870, the Indian population in California cleclinecI from about 150,000 to 30,000 largely because of clirect ancI indirect effects of the goicI rush (Franzius 19971. In 1851-1852, 18 treaties were negotiated with California tribes, in- clucling the Yurok, Hupa, ancI I(aruk. The treaties set asicle 7,466,000 acres of lancis for the tribes ancI promised agricultural ancI eclucational assistance. But in 1852, California's new state senators refused to ratify the treaties. Among the tribes of the lower I(lamath basin, violent resistance to miners ancI to the California legislature's increasingly repressive policies erupted in 1860-1872. The Hupa were more successful than many other California nations in resisting encroachments of settlers on their lancI. When fecleral troops entered the Hoopa Valley, the Hupa were able to withstand the troops ancI force them into a stalemate. On August 12,1864, the Treaty of Peace ancI Friendship was signed between the Hupa ancI the U.S. govern- ment; it promised the Hupa a reservation that incluclecI about 90°/O of their original homelancI. In 1891, President Harrison signed an executive orcler joining the Hupa ancI Yurok reservations. The I(aruk ancI Shasta, however, never gained legal ownership of their homelancI. Most lancI occupied by the I(aruk was claimecI by the government with little compensation, ancI much of it became part of the national forest system. Timber clevelopment in the 20th century brought some measure of prosperity to the Hupa ancI Yurok reservations. For example, seven new sawmills were constructed in the Hoopa Valley cluring the 1950s, ancI timber income was clistributecI throughout the tribe. Yet this was also the "Termination Era," when fecI- eral Indian policy shifted toward the termination of tribal rights ancI the breakup of Indian lancI hoiclings (Nelson 19881. As miners, ranchers, ancI the army came to the I(lamath basin in the 1850s, confrontations erupted, culminating in the Mocloc Indian War of 1872. In 1864, the I(lamath ancI Mocloc tribes ancI the Yahooskin bancI of Snake Indians met with fecleral officials to sign a treaty that relinquishecI
LAND USE AND WATER MANAGEMENT 63 more than 19 million acres of their homeland, reserving about 2.5 million acres for the I(lamath Inclian Reservation. This lane! was soon substantially reclucec! through correction of a fecleral survey error (Gearheart et al. 19951. The treaty of 1864 specified the I(lamath Tribes' exclusive right to hunt, fish, anc! gather on I(lamath Inclian reservation lancis. Although the I(la- math tribes lost their reservation lane! following termination of the reserva- tion in 1954 (Haynal 2000), they retained their water rights anc! their right to harvest a number of fish species clesignatec! as tribal trust species, reflect- . . . . . sing t near trac Mona practices. Ranching After the Mocloc Inclian War, open hostilities between whites anc! Incli- ans climinishec! in the upper basin, anc! white immigration to the basin increased. Early white settlement in the upper I(lamath basin centered on ranching rather than farming because without irrigation, precipitation of- ten was insufficient for growing most crops (Blake et al.20001. The General Allotment Act of 1887 allowed Inclian lancis to pass into white ownership, anc! much of the best grazing lane! on the reservation was bought by whites. In the upper I(lamath basin, as throughout the entire inianc! portion of the West, cattle increased in abundance cluring the 1870s anc! 1880s until by the late 1880s overgrazing became a political anc! ecological issue. In 1875, the Central Pacific Railroad completed a shipping facility at Win- nemucca, Nevada, giving cattle operations relatively rapid access to San Francisco beef markets. With an efficient transportation infrastructure in place, ranchers brought more animals to the open range. When prices were low, few ranchers soic! their young cattle, anc! here! sizes rose while ranchers waited for better prices (Gorclon 18831. Overgrazing was the result. The fecleral government responclec! to overgrazing with the Gordon report, the product of a stucly motivated in part by the disastrous winter of 1879-1880, when extraordinary coic! lee! to high mortality of cattle across the West. Gordon noted that overgrazing meant that wetiancis anc! riparian meadows were becoming critical habitat for cattle, especially in southeast- ern Oregon. Ranchers fenced riparian areas anc! planted them with alfalfa for winter feed. That took some of the pressure off the lancI, but only for a short time (Gorclon 18831. The result, as the 1883 edition of West Shore magazine reported, was a landscape "almost bare of grass except for a few clumps uncler the clense, scraggly sage brush" (Lo Piccollo 1962, p. 1151. In the wake of the 1879-1880 disaster, cattle anc! sheep populations were rebuilt until a combination of ciry summers anc! coic! winters occurred in the late 1880s (Simpson 19871. Cattle prices collapsed in 1885 anc! 1886, anc! ranchers held their stock from market, hoping for higher prices. In 1889, when the geologist Israel Russell toured southern Oregon, streams
64 FISHES IN THE KLAMATH RIVER BASIN throughout the region that Ogclen hacI clescribecI as level with the surrouncI- ing lanciscape in the 1820s hacI begun to incise their channels, ancI Russell (1903, p. 63) concluclecI that this was caused by "the introduction of domestic animals in such numbers that the surface covering of bunch grass was largely clestroyecI, anti in consequence the run-off from the hills acceleratecI. " Government inspectors who were sent to the region warnecI that over- grazing was ruining the very source of the region's prosperity. The inspec- tors recommenclecI that the only solution was to provide more grass by draining wetiancis ancI planting them with hay so that there wouicI be less competition for a c~wincIling resource (Griffiths 1902~. Ranchers clicI exactly that as they began cliking ancI draining wetiancis in the 1890s along the borclers of Upper I(lamath Lake to provide more forage for cattle. GoocI government records of numbers of cattle in the upper I(lamath basin begin with the 1920s, when 30,000 cattle occupied I(lamath County, which makes up only part of the watershed (Walker 2001~. In the 1960s, the cattle population in I(lamath County peaked at 140,000 heacI (Figure 2-2~; by 1999, there were 120,000. To accommodate cattle, ranchers turned to floocI irrigation of pastures ancI drainage of wetiancis. Early methods of floocI irrigation clicI not always clegracle riparian anti wetiancI habitat, but a switch to nonnative species for production of hay in the 1950s required changes in irrigation practices that, while increasing efficiency, severed riparian connections to the lanciscape (Langston 2003~. In 1998, the Environmental Protection Agency's Inclex of Watershed Indicators estimated that at least 1 10,000 acres of the watershed 160 - 120 - ~_ in in =° 80- a) 40 - O - drained | ~ ~ j: wetland acres ~ if . 0/ 1 1 1 1 1 P' ~ ~ cattle 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 - 40 -30 To <. CD rD - 20 ~ ~ CD o - - 1 0 rD o FIGURE 2-2 Changes in numbers of cattle and cumulative acres of drained wetland in I(lamath County, Oregon. Source: Modified from Filers et al. 2001.
LAND USE AND WATER MANAGEMENT 65 hac! been converted to irrigated pasture or other agricultural activities; Risley anc! Laenen (1999) estimated an 11-foic! increase in acreage of irri- gatec! lane! between 1900 anc! the 1990s. While numbers of cattle were only slightly lower in the 1990s than in the 1960s' the acreage of lane! being grazec! cleclinec! much more substan- tially. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) estimated that by 2000 only 35% of the Upper I(lamath Lake watershed was grazec! (USER 2002a). By 2002, nearly 100,000 acres of irrigated agriculture hac! been retired, anc! some of this was restored to wetiancI. Thus, production intensity appears to have increased. Transport of cattle to California cluring the winter was part of the method for keeping cattle production high while the acreage of irrigated pasturelanc! cleclinecI. The effects of grazing in the watershed were probably profounc! but are impossible to quantify. Overgrazing in riparian zones can harm fish by clegracling riparian vegetation (Chapter 41. Grazing can mobilize nutrients anc! sediments, both of which are of concern in the upper I(lamath basin (Stubbs anc! White 19931. By 1900, native perennial grasses were being replaced with annual grasses anc! fortes that, when combined with soil compaction from cattle, may have resulted in higher erosion anc! greater peak flows (NMFS 20011. For example, on Fishhole Creek, cattle hac! clestroyec! streambank vegetation, resulting in erosion anc! lowered water tables (Thompson et al. 19891. Conditions are similar in the Wood River valley anc! in some of the Sprague River watershed. Season-long grazing in the past probably contributed to recluction of spawning habitat for trout anc! suckers in the Sprague River, increased stream temperatures, anc! in- creasec! transport of sediment anc! nutrients. These changes lee! the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality to identify the Sprague River as one of the highest-priority streams in Oregon for control of non-point-source pollution (Stubbs anc! White 19931. Cattle clo not always leac! to such adverse effects; well-managec! riparian pastures can be consistent with gooc! . . stream cone ltlons. Irrigated pasture required water diversions from I(lamath basin tribu- taries, anc! the diversions have played a substantial role in the clecline of suckers in the upper basin anc! of salmonicis in the lower basin (Chapters 5 anc! 71. The Chiloquin Dam on the Sprague River near Chiloquin, Oregon, constructed in 1914-1918 for water diversion anc! timber milling, is one example. Timber Much of the blame for poor watershed conclitions is placed on agricul- ture, but nearly 80% of the Upper I(lamath Lake watershed is forested, anc! much of the forest lane! has been harvested uncler fecleral, tribal, anc! private
66 FISHES IN THE KLAMATH RIVER BASIN management (Gearheart et al. 19951. According to the Oregon State Water Resources BoarcI Cited in Gearheart et al. 1995), over 73°/O of the forest lancI in the upper I(lamath basin is subject to severe erosion. Therefore, timber management may well have contributed to the clecline of suckers ancI salmonicis. Commercial logging began in the upper basin in 1863 when the U.S. Army constructed a sawmill. The pace of logging acceleratecI cluring the late l910s, when ponclerosa pine became an important timber resource for the nation (Langston 19951. By 1918, large amounts of reservation timber were being soicI to private parties; by 1920, annual harvest rates hacI increased to 120 million boarcI ft. Peak lumber production occurred in 1941, when 22 lumber mills processed a total of 808.6 million boarcI ft within the upper basin. Harvest has ciroppecI to about 400 million boarcI ft in recent years (Eilers et al. 2001, Gearheart et al. 19951. Poorly clesignecI roacis anti damaging harvest practices on pumice ancI volcanic soils anti on steep slopes probably contributed to loss of fish habitat. When stripped of vegetative cover, steep slopes are subject to ero- sion. In the lower basin, roacI construction has increased erosion ancI also created barriers to fish passage (USER 2001b). Log storage on the I(lamath River below I(lamath Falls also has affected fish habitat. After fish kills in the late 1960s, log storage was greatly reclucecI on the river, but it continues (Stubbs ancI White 1993). Forest management anti fire suppression over the last century changed forest composition in the I(lamath basin. The change may have alterecI flow regimes in the rivers anti nutrient movement in the watershed. Before the 1920s, the upper basin forest was composed largely of oicI-growth poncle- rosa pine except at high elevations, anti frequent, low-intensity fires mini- mizecI unclerstory growth. Logging anti fire suppression have lecI to a much clenser unclerstory populatecI with grancI fir (Risley ancI Laenen 19991. As forest composition has changed, the risk of intense fires has increased sub- stantially. Such fires can contribute damaging amounts of sediments ancI nutrients to streams anti rivers. Moreover, intensive clearcutting may have increased peak flows, anti the increased unclerstory ancI clenser forests may have clecreasecI total water yielcI (Risley anti Laenen 19991. In the lower I(lamath basin, timber harvesting began in the 1850s in the Scott River watershed commensurate with the growth in mining. As in most northern California watersheds, logging activity reachecI a peak in the 1950s (Sommerstram et al. 19901. The construction of roacis ancI trails in the watershed has been a major source of fine sediment in the basin, particularly on clecomposecI granite soils. About 40°/O of the Scott River watershed that is uncleriain by such soils was harvested in 1958- 1988; more than 288 mi of logging roacis ancI 191 mi of skicI trails were constructed (USFS ciata, summarized in Sommerstram et al. 19901. Secli-
LAND USE AND WATER MANAGEMENT 67 meets have aciversely affected spawning ancI rearing habitat of coho (West et al. 19901. Along the Salmon River, logging has been substantial, particularly since the 1950s. RoacI networks have been iclentifiecI by the U.S. Forest Service (USES) ancI the California Department of Fish ancI Game (CDFG) as an important source of sediment in the basin, ancI roacI crossings have been iclentifiecI as affecting salmonicI habitat (CDFG 1979a). Also, the heavily forested Salmon River watershed is susceptible to large wilcifires. Since the early 1900s, more than 50°/O of the basin has burned, ancI most of the fires have been intense crown fires (USFS data, summarized in Salmon River Restoration Council 20021. Although poorly funclecI, fecleral fuel-manage- ment efforts are uncler way in the basin in cooperation with the Salmon River Watershed Council. In the Trinity River watershed, logging practices, clescribecI as "abu- sive" by the Secretary of the Interior in a 1981 decision regarding flow releases on the Trinity, has hacI significant effects on the quality of salmonicI habitat on the Trinity (USFWS/HVT 19991. Extensive logging roacI net- works, couplecI with highly erosive soils, have proclucecI high yielcis of fine sediment within the basin. Very large floocis on the Trinity River in Decem- ber of 1964 introclucecI especially large volumes of fine sediment that caused severe clegraciation of spawning ancI rearing habitat in the South Fork ancI . , ~ ~ . . main stem ot t ne runty. Agriculture in the Upper Basin Serious efforts at irrigation ancI drainage in the I(lamath basin started in about 1882; by 1903 about 13,000 acres in the upper I(lamath basin were irrigated by private interests. LancI speculators urgecI USBR to con- sicler the I(lamath basin for irrigation, ancI a USBR engineer estimated in 1903 that irrigation couicI water 200,000 acres of farmiancI. California ancI Oregon hacI acquired Lower I(lamath Lake through the Swamp Lancis Act of 1860, but their efforts to stimulate drainage ancI reclamation hacI failecI. In 1904 ancI 1905, California ancI Oregon ceclecI the lake back to the fecleral government for use by USBR. Oregon gave USBR the right to the water of the I(lamath River (lessup 19271. In February 1905, Congress approved the I(lamath Project, ancI work began. USBR engineers focused their early efforts on Lower I(lamath Lake ancI Tule Lake. The project wouicI ciry up these two lakes so that the lancI uncler them couicI be farmed. The government wouicI then construct two new lakes to hoicI water for irrigation Behind Clear Lake ancI Gerber clams, Figure 1-31. A clam anti canal wouicI clivert the Lost River to the I(lamath River. Heac~works wouicI take water from Upper I(lamath Lake into an elaborate irrigation system. USBR wouicI funcI construction of
68 FISHES IN THE KLAMATH RIVER BASIN irrigation works; people (mostly veterans) wouicI buy lancI irrigated by those works from the fecleral government in parcels of up to 80 acres anti wouicI pay for the lancI ancI improvements over 10 yr. The fecleral govern- ment soicI the lancI, but not the water rights, to I(lamath Project irrigators; irrigators were promised use of sufficient water for irrigation each year for a moclest fee. Meanwhile, just three months after Congress authorized the I(lamath Project in early 1905, conservationists cliscoverecI the basin's extraordinary abundance of avian life. During the summer of 1905, just a few months after Congress approved the I(lamath Project, the conservationist William Finley toured the marshiancis in the lower I(lamath basin. He was awed by what he founcI, inclucling extraordinary concentrations of pelican rookeries anti what he believecI to be the greatest feeding anti breeding grouncI for waterfowl on the Pacific Coast. By 1908, Finley hacI persuaclecI President Roosevelt to create the Lower I(lamath Lake National WilcIlife Refuge (Figure 1-3), thus preserving nesting grouncis for migratory waterfowl. It was to be one of the largest wilcIlife refuges ever authorized, one of the first on lancI of any agricultural value, anti the first to be establishecI in a water- shecI being transformed by USBR. In 1911, President Taft establishecI the Clear Lake National Refuge ancI in 1928 President Coolicige establishecI Tule Lake National WilcIlife Refuge. The Biological Survey wouicI manage the refuges, ancI lancI within refuge boundaries wouicI not be macle available for settlement. President Roosevelt's designation created inherent conflicts. The ref- uges were to be managed by the Biological Survey, which couicI not func- tion with full inclepenclence because the refuges were on lancI of USBR, which also controllecI the water reaching the area. To USBR, wetiancis anti riparian areas were wastelancis waiting for conversion (reclamation) to agri- culture (Langston 20031. President Roosevelt hacI intenclecI no settlement within the boundaries of the refuge, but USBR interpreted refuge boundaries as encompassing only lancI covered by water all year. Thus, if USBR cirainecI the lakes anti wetiancis, it wouicI no longer be refuge lancI, anti it couicI be soicI or leasecI. Before draining Lower I(lamath Lake, USBR commissioned soil surveys to see whether the area wouicI be goocI farmiancI. C. F. Marbut, a govern- ment soil scientist with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), com- pletecI a report indicating that the lakebecI wouicI be utterly worthless for agriculture. "We can not cite an example of the successful cultivation of a soil of similar character," acimittecI Copley Amory, an economist with USBR, in response to that discouraging report (Amory 1926, p. 801. More- over, the report statecI, wetiancis surrounding the lake wouicI have only a slim chance of supporting agriculture because the unclerlying peat, once cirainecI, wouicI be subject to smoiclering fires anti subsidence.
LAND USE AND WATER MANAGEMENT 69 Despite Marbut's report, USBR authorized $300,000 for drainage of Lower I(lamath Lake. Conservationists challengecI USBR's plans in court, ancI President Wilson in 1915 reclucecI the Lower I(lamath Lake National WilcIlife Refuge from 80,000 acres to 53,600 acres, freeing up the rest for drainage ancI sale or lease. The fecleral government signed an agreement with railroacI companies according to which the companies wouicI construct an embankment across the marshes with a gate that wouicI close I(lamath Straits. The gates were closecI in 1917, cutting off flow of water from the I(lamath River into the lake ~ lessup 19271. Within a year, the flooded area of the lake decreased by about 53%, from 76,600 acres to 36,000 acres; within 5 yr, most of the waters of the lake hacI evaporated (Weciclell 20001. USBR entered into contracts in 1917, first with California-Oregon Power Company, selling it water rights to the river for power generation, ancI then to a drainage ancI lancI-speculation company, the I(lamath Drainage District. The shrinkage of the lake greatly reclucecI waterfowl populations. The peat becis of the wetiancis began to burn ancI collapse, farm efforts failecI, anti, by 1925, homesteaders were going bankrupt. By 1925, nearly everyone involvecI agreed that the project was a failure. After USBR hacI cirainecI Lower I(lamath Lake, it leasecI what remained of the refuges for grazing. The ornithologist Ira Gabrielson (1943, p.13) clescribecI the situation in 1920: The water table on the lake has been lowered several feet by closing the gates which control the inflow from the I(lamath River. This action, made under agreement with the water users' association, has uncovered large areas of alkali flats without thus far benefiting the settlers adjoining the lake or opening up additional land suitable for agriculture. Its future as a refuge is seriously jeopardized. This is an understatement of the wildlife tragedy involved in the loss of one of the two greatest waterfowl refuges then in existence. Near Tule Lake National WilcIlife Refuge, water from cirainecI wet- lancis was being pumped into heac~water clitches, used for irrigation, ancI then collectecI in the Tule Lake Sump on the refuge, where it was allowecI to evaporate. Farmers wanted the lancI uncler the sump for farming, but the Tule Lake Sump was overflowing with irrigation return flows as more ancI more farmers irrigated reclaimecI lancis. A reclamation engineer, I. R. Iakish, proposed to pump the irrigation return flows from the Tule Lake Sump through a 6,600-ft tunnel beneath the ridge to Lower I(lamath Lake to put out the fires ancI restore the wetiancI. Such a plan, Iakish argued, wouicI create more farmiancI by cirain- ing the sump ancI more wetiancI for bircis by putting out the fires on Lower I(lamath. In 1941, the tunnel was finished, ancI in the next year, water
70 FISHES IN THE KLAMATH RIVER BASIN flowecI once again into Lower I(lamath Lake. Some of the Lower I(lamath Lake wetiancis began to refill, anti some of the abanclonecI farmiancis were reclaimecI when clevelopers figured out how to use the irrigation wastewa- ter, in conjunction with creep cirains, to leach alkali out of soils. Lower I(lamath, people argued, couicI incleecI be farmecI profitably, so waters in- tenclecI for restoration were instead used for farming (Blake et al. 20001. In 1946, USER authorized new allotments on lancis north of Tule Lake (shrunk by use of the tunnel) anti helcI a lottery drawing for WoricI War II veterans. The fecleral government urgecI thousands of veterans to apply for these new homesteads, promising them as much water as they wouicI ever neecI for irrigation. Some of the lancI on the refuges was given to veterans. A total of 22,000 acres was leasecI to farmers for agriculture in what became known as the lease-lancI program. For example, nearly half the 39,000 acres of the Tule Lake National WilcIlife Refuge became croplancI Temper 20011. lapane se anti lapanese-American citizens who ha cI been internecI at the Tule Lake Camp cluring WoricI War II were the first to farm much of this lancI, anti their labor helpecI make it icleal farmiancI for returning veterans. Agriculture in the Lower Basin During the early l900s, farmers anti ranchers removed riparian vegeta- tion anti valley forests along the lower I(lamath River anti its tributaries (CDFG 19341. For example, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, in conjunc- tion with the National Resource Conservation Service (then known as the Soil Conservation Service), concluctecI a series of projects on the main stem anti tributaries of the Scott River, inclucling removal of riparian vegetation on the micicIle reaches of the valley, drainage of remaining wetiancis, anti construction of a series of floocI-contro! anti bank-stabilization projects (Scott River Watershed CRMP Council 19971. Today, the Scott Valley supports more than 30,000 acres of farms anti irrigated pasture (CDWR, RecI Bluff, CA, unpublishecI material, 1993; Scott River Watershed CRMP Council 19971. The principal crops are alfalfa (33,000 acres) and grain (2000 acres). There are 153 registered diversions in the Scott Valley; 127 are listecI by the Siskiyou County Resource Conservation District (SRCD) as active. Fish screens have been installecI on 65 of the diversions; another 38 have been funclecI but not yet built. In the Shasta River watershed, after the goicI rush in the late 1800s, most of the lancI cover of the Shasta Valley was converted for agriculture anti range. About 28% of the watershed is irrigable lancI that supports a mix of alfalfa, irrigated pasture, anti some grain (CDWR 19641. Non- irrigable lancI supports range anti limitecI cirylancI farming. The mix of agricultural uses has remained relatively constant in the basin. Mining anti timber harvesting are limitecI anti clo not substantially affect the river.
LAND USE AND WATER MANAGEMENT 7 Significant urbanization, however, is taking place in the watershed. Most development is occurring in the vicinity of Yreka, the county seat of Sis- kiyou, and Montague, in the northern portions of the Shasta Valley. There is also increasing pressure to develop in the upper watershed, particularly around the town of Weed and near Lake Shastina (Dwinnell Dam). FISHING AND ATTEMPTS TO REGULATE LOSS OF FISH Mining, timber management, dams, and agriculture have degraded fish habitat, but overharvesting also has affected fish populations (Chapters 5 and 71. In the upper I(lamath basin, tribal harvests of suckers for family consump- tion were augmented by commercial harvests beginning in the 19th century, including a cannery that processed Lost River suckers captured from the Lost River near Olene, Oregon, in the late 1890s (53 Fed. Reg. 27130 F198811. Before the drainage of Tule Lake and Sheepy Creek in the 1920s, suckers were taken in large numbers from Sheepy Creek for consumption by both humans and livestock (Coots 19651. A recreational snag fishery for suckers developed as early as 1909; it focused on fish that were moving into tributary rivers to spawn and secondarily on fish attempting to spawn around the edges of Upper I(lamath Lake. The snag fishery remained unregulated until I(lamath suckers were declared game species in 1959. Commercial harvests of salmon intensified with the development of canning technology. Commercial harvesting of salmon began later in the I(lamath River basin than in other basins in California and the Pacific Northwest partly because of the inaccessibility of much of the terrain. Nevertheless, by the early 20th century, habitat destruction combined with commercial harvests had resulted in serious salmon depletion on the I(la- math River (Pacific Watershed Associates 19941. Cobb (1930) estimated that the peak of the I(lamath River salmon runs occurred in 1912; Snyder (1931, p. 7) observed substantial declines in the 1920s. As Snyder observed, "in 1912 three Lcanneries] operated on or near the estuary and the river was heavily fished, no limit being placed on the activities of anyone." Millions of juvenile coho salmon, Chinook salmon, and steelhead are released into the I(lamath and Trinity rivers each year by the Iron Gate and Trinity River hatcheries, which were built to mitigate the salmonid losses created by large dams. These hatcheries were intended to maintain fisheries for coho and Chinook salmon, but they may have had adverse effects on wild populations of salmonids in the basin (Chapters 7 and 81. WETLAND TRANSFORMATIONS Even before the I(lamath Project, the actions of humans in the upper basin were concentrated on wetlands. Cattle ranching had been concen-
72 FISHES IN THE KLAMATH RIVER BASIN tratecI on the margins of wetiancis, extensive efforts to cirain wetiancis began in 1889, ancI drainage acceleratecI with the I(lamath Project; restoration began in the 1990s. Figure 2-3 shows the cumulative cirainecI acreage by year for Upper I(lamath Lake. The drop in cirainecI wetiancI acreage after 1990 reflects wetiancI restoration efforts in the upper basin. In Tule ancI Lower I(lamath lakes, original wetiancis were estimated at 187,000 acres; about 25,000 acres remain (Gearheart et al. 19951. Reclamationists ancI farmers cirainecI wetiancis by builcling clikes to isolate them hycirologically, constructing a network of drainage clitches within them, ancI pumping surface water ancI shallow grounc~water (Snycler anti Morace 1997, Walker 20011. One effect of lowering the water tables in this way was an increase in aerobic decomposition of peat soils, which liberatecI nutrients ancI removed organic deposits. Disking ancI furrowing can introduce oxygen into the soils, ancI increase the rate of peat clecompo- sition ancI nutrient release. Cattle grazing, in contrast, can compact cirainecI soils ancI slow their decomposition (Walker 20011. Some scientific work in the upper basin suggests that cirainecI wetiancis can become a substantial source of phosphorus (Snycler ancI Morace 1997), which can leacI to increased nutrient loacling in the Upper I(lamath Lake (Bortleson anti Fretwell 1993, Walker 20011. Extensive efforts to restore wetiancis, partly to improve nutrient retention, have taken place in the upper basin in the last two clecacles. Above Upper I(lamath Lake, an area of about 101,136 acres has been removed from irrigated agriculture anti con- 25000 - a, tt 20000- U ~ U 15000- 0000 - 0 ~ ·~t a, 5000 ~ Q ~ Q 7 0 o . ~ ~ 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 FIGURE 2-3 Net loss, through drainage, of wetland connected to Upper I(lamath Lake. A decrease beginning in the l990s indicates the effects of restoration. Source: Modified from Boyd et al. 2001, p. 48.
LAND USE AND WATER MANAGEMENT 73 vertecI to artificial wetiancis since the 1980s (E. Bartell, The Resource Con- servancy, Inc., Fort I(lamath, Oregon, unpublishecI report, 20021. The ef- fects of these conversions on water quality are unclear. Although wetiancis of different types often are lumpecI in analyses of wetiancI change in the basin, different kincis of wetiancis may have different effects on water quality. Geiger (2001) argues that wetiancis in the littoral zone of Upper I(lamath Lake may have hacI particularly important effects on water quality because they were connected to the lake ancI contributed humic substances that may have playecI a role in suppressing algae (see Chapter 31. Drainage efforts ancI subsidence have hacI pronounced effects on those wetiancis. For example, the littoral wetiancI of Upper I(lamath Lake once comprised 51,510 acres of the total lake area (46.2% at maxi- mum elevation). By 1968' after cliking ancI draining, littoral wetiancI hacI clecreasecI to 17~370 acres (22.4% of total lake area). The littoral wetiancI area was reclucecI by 66.3%' ancI the wetiancI area at minimum storage volume (4~136 ft vs the earlier minimum of 4~140 ft) hacI shrunk from 20~320 acres to 0 acres (Geiger 20011. Some 34~140 acres of former wet- lancI now is isolatecI behind clikes on Upper I(lamath Lake. A total of 17~553 acres of former wetiancis behind clikes is now being reclaimecI, but subsidence has meant that, even after being restored, these areas remain clisconnectecI from the lake ancI clo not function as the littoral wetiancis once clicI. Once clikes are removed, subsiclecI areas become open-water habi- tat rather than littoral wetiancis (Geiger 20011. Even so, reconnection of the littoral perimeter with open water wouicI leacI to the return of processes ancI functions that have been lost through severance of much of the littoral zone from the offshore areas of the lake. The conversion of wetiancis ancI associated channelization of riparian habitat have hacI cleleterious effects on sucker habitat (Chapters 5 ancI 61. For example, sucker larvae historically moved through a meandering Wil- liamson River into the clelta area ancI the adjacent shoreline areas of Upper I(lamath Lake. Since 1940' the Williamson River has been channelizecI, ancI the clelta ancI adjacent shoreline have been clikecI ancI cirainecI, leaving lit- tie of the wetiancis ancI riparian vegetation (I(lamath Tribe, Chiloquin, Oregon, unpublishecI material, 1993, cited in Gearheart et al. 19951. As a result, nursery areas have been greatly reclucecI. Larvae reach the lake sooner, exposing them to poor water quality at an earlier age ancI for longer. Substantial wetiancis remain in the basin. I(lamath Marsh, a 60,000- acre basin uncleriain by pumice, is one example; 37,000 acres is protected as a fecleral wilcIlife refuge. A total of 23,000 acres of the Sycan Marsh was purchased by The Nature Conservancy in 1980 ancI is undergoing restora- tion. The largest wetiancI still connected to Upper I(lamath Lake is Upper I(lamath Marsh, a fecleral wilcIlife refuge on the northwest ecige of Upper
74 FISHES IN THE KLAMATH RIVER BASIN I(lamath Lake; this refuge is the remnant of an emergent anti open-water marsh system that once covered 60,000 acres of the WoocI River valley (Gearheart et al. 19951. THE ECONOMY OF THE KLAMATH BASIN This section provides an overview, without conclusions or recommen- ciations, of the structure of the economy of the I(lamath basin on the basis of ciata from the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) anti the IMPLAN (impact planning) mocleling process (Minnesota IMPLAN Group, Inc.~. It is cliviclecI into discussions of the upper anti lower basin economies, which differ substantially. Special attention is given to sectors of the economy oriented toward natural resources, inclucling agriculture in both the upper ancI lower basin ancI commercial fisheries in the lower basin. It shouicI be noted that this analysis only inclucles economic anti employment values associated with commodities anti services that are traclecI in markets. Non- market values, such as those associated with existence of species, preserva- tion of environmental quality or maintenance of a particular lifestyle, are not reflectecI clirectly in the economic values reported here. Upper Basin The upper I(lamath basin inclucles parts of five counties in Oregon anti California. Almost all the Oregon portion of the basin is in I(lamath County, anti the basin covers most of the county, inclucling the county seat, I(lamath Falls (population about 21,000), which is the major regional population center. In California, the basin covers the northwest corner of Mocloc County, not inclucling the county seat, Alturas (population, about 3,000), anti the northeast corner of Siskiyou County, inclucling the county seat, Yreka (population, about 7,5001. The economy of the upper I(lamath ba- sin, which is home to about 120,000 people, in 1998 proclucecI $4 billion worth of output, aciclecI $2.3 billion in value to purchased inputs, anti hacI almost 60,000 jobs (Weber anti Sorte 20021. This section, which is aciaptecI by permission from Weber anti Sorte (2002), describes the upper basin economy. Over the last 30 yr, full- anti part-time employment in the upper I(la- math basin has increased from 40,000 to 60,000 jobs, while employment in Oregon as a whole has more than cloublecI. The composition of the regional economy has changed ciramatically over that time. The sectors that grew most rapicIly were wholesale tracle anti services (Table 2-21. Employment in several other sectors cleclinecI: military, transportation anti public utilities, anti manufacturing. Employment in farming, mining, anti fecleral civilian employment grew, but increased more slowly than the regional average
75 o - 1 ~9 o o · - c~ At At of At an Q Q A ._ A Cal o - o - Q Cal \ o be) 1 Cal ~) =N . . 10~ o O \ E-° - s~ 5 5 so ~ o ¢ ~ U) of ~ ~ ~ ~ on ~ O ~ ~ ~ O 00 ~ ~ 00 - 1 ~ ~ ~ on on ~ ~ O r-1 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ rat 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O on ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oO oO r-1 ~ 00 00 1 1 ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ on ~ ~ on o o o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ on - 1 - 1 ~ ~ - 1 - 1 ~ oo 0 - 1 - 1 oo ~ oo oo oo ~ ~ r-1 0 O r-1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ O ^ 1 ^ ^ ' ~ ~ ~ O ~ r-1 1 ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ oo ~ ~ oo oo ~ r-1 00 ~ O O ~ 00 ~ ~ ~ O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - 1 ~ - 1 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O r~ 1 ~ ~ ~ r-1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r-1 ~ ~ 00 ~ 00 ~ ~ 00 ~ ~ 00 ~ ~ O O ~ ~ - 1 - 1 ~ 0 - 1 ~ ~ - 1 oo ~ oo ~ ~ ~ oo ~ r-1 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oO ~ ~ r-1 ~ ~ ~ 00 O ~ ~ - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - 1 ~ - 1 - 1 0 ~ ~ O ~ o oo O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - 1 ~ - 1 ~ oo ~ - 1 ~ ~ oo ~ ~ ~ ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O oo ~ ~ ~ O ~ oo - 1 0 ~ ~ ~ - 1 O ~ r-1 ~ ~ 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ r-1 r-1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ O O r-1 ~, ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oo ~ ~ ~ ~ oo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - 1 ~ O ~ ~ O oo - 1 O ~ oo r-1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oO ~ r-1 - 1 U) E~ ~ ~ S~ ~ =i ~ ~ O ~ ~ _ i, CG Z ' ~ O ~ ~L) ·o ~ ~ ~ ~ 2 · 2 U U ~ ' ~ ~ r ~ _ C ' C ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ D , ~ U 0~= ~~¢~0~' E~ ~ ~ ~i o ~1 o U) C~ s~ _O o .~ o o U)
76 FISHES IN THE KLAMATH RIVER BASIN over the last three clecacles. Because of the more rapicI growth in other sectors, the share of jobs in farming cleclinecI from 10.3% to 7.6%. Thus, over the last three clecacles, the basin's economy has grown slowly, has become more specializecI in sectors that are growing rapicIly in Oregon as a whole (services anti wholesale tracle), has shown little proportionate change in some slowly growing sectors (farming anti fecleral civilian employment), anti has become less specializecI in other siow-growth sectors (manufactur- ing anti transportation, public utilities). Table 2-3 presents estimates of some basic economic indicators of the regional economy anti their distribution among sectors for 1998. The four sectors with the largest shares of output in 1998 were woocI products, consisting of forestry, logging, anti manufacturing of woocI products (15.5%~; agriculture, consisting of foocI, beverage, anti textile manufactur- ing (11.1%~' construction (8.1%~' anti health care anti social assistance (7.8%~. The four sectors with the largest shares of value aciclecI were woocI products (11%~' retail trade (8.8%~' real estate (8.7%~' and public admin- istration (8.6%~. The four sectors with the largest employment shares were retail tracle ( 1 1.1 °/O ), agriculture ( 10.7% )' eclucational services ( 10. 1% ), anti health care anti social assistance (9.9°/O). These measures provide a perspective on the distribution of the regional economic activity among sectors. None of them identifies, however, how much the regional economy clepencis on each sector. Table 2-4 summarizes the contribution of each sector to total regional employment anti is based on an analysis using the upper I(lamath basin input-output moclel. Such moclels use estimates of exports from each inclus- try anti multipliers for each sector to generate estimates of the clepenclence of the regional economy on each sector's exports. The procedure used to clerive the estimates in Table 2-4 is clescribecI in Waters et al. (19991. The table compares the employment in a sector with employment that clepencis on a sector's exports. The jobs uncler "Sectoral Employment" are within the sector. The jobs uncler "Export-Depenclent Employment" are from all sectors that clepencI on the exports from a sector. As an example, there were 4~328 jobs in the woocI-proclucts manufacturing sector, but 7~018 jobs in the region were clepenclent on woocI products exports. Of these, 3~089 jobs were clirectly clepenclent on the export of woocI products from the county where they were proclucecI; these jobs were re- latecI to direct purchases from woocI-proclucts firms by househoicis, firms, anti governments outside the region. In aciclition, 2~126 jobs were inclirectly clepenclent on woocI-proclucts exports; these jobs were created when woocI- products firms purchased inputs (such as logs) from firms in the county anti when the suppliers purchased from other businesses in the county. Yet another 1,803 jobs were inclucecI by exports of woocI products; these jobs were in retail tracle, real estate, anti health care anti were created when
77 C Cat ~ ho \ ~ o of ¢ ° ~ ~ _ ·C~^ Cat ~ Cut ~ C E E ¢ 5 5 Q 5 o ¢ _ ~ o en sit C C ~ C Cat Cat ~ ~ ~ Cat X Qua ~ Cat A <: _ ~ ~ bc sit ~ o ~ =2 C4 5 ° c; b;> ~ o 5 ,= I'= :~: ~ ~ ~ .~ . ° ~ ~ ~ ~ U (~.CC C C C C C ¢~ Cat be .= Cat sit o Cat ~ o C~ ~o ) ~ (~! C~ C~ ~ _ ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 C~ L) (~! Q . ~ ~ _ c<: ~ 5 ~d u bC ._ C~ C~ - C~ - C~ s~ S~ C~ ~ s~ ~ ~ s~ C~ ~ o ~0 ~ C~ ~o ._ o oo o C~ ._ ._ ._ C~ C~ C~ s~ Q Q s~ o C~ C~ C~ C~ <= ^ o ~ . ~ ·bC '~. s~ C~ bC ._ C~ ,= · C~ s_ C =0 .= ~ ~ o .0 C ·bC =^ ~ o .m E~ ~ t . O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - 1 ~ oo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O O ~ O ~ O ~ ~ O ~ ~ 00 ~ r-1 ~ r-1 ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ O ~ ~ ~ o ~ oo ~ ~ ~ oo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ o 0 - 1 ~ ~ ~ - 1 ~ ~ oo - 1 ~ ~ ~ oo - 1 ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - 1 ~ ~ oo oo 0 ~ - 1 - 1 ~ ~ - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ' O ~ r-1 00 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O ~ O O O ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ ~ 00 ~ r-1 0 0 00 ~ ~ 00 0 0 ~ o - 1 ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ - 1 oo - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O O r-1 ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ O ~ ~ O 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ r-1 ~ O r-1 r-1 ~ - 1 ~ - 1 ~ ~ ~ - ^ -1 r-1 00 ~ oO ~ r-1 ~ 00 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 00 ~ ~ O r-1 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ O O oo ~ ~ 0 - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 0 0 ~ O ~ ~ O O ~ O O O ~ ~ oO oO ~ ~ ~ oo r-1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O 00 - 1 ~ - 1 - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oo 0 - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r-1 ~ ~ r-1 ~ ~ r-1 ~ ~ oo r-1 0 ~ r-1 oo O ~ ~ ~ - 1 0 O c~ O ~ _ c~ · . c~ O Q ~ < c~ Q ~ _ c~ ~ c~ ~ ~ .o ~ ·_ c~ · _ (d _^ . ¢ ¢ X
78 oo _ Cal Cad Cad Cad so an Q Q At o Q At Cal Cad o Kid rid - o Q Q o Q X s~ O O Q t) U) ~ _ ~ X Q ~ C~ E-° s~ ._ s~ ._ ~o o: C~ O _ O s~ o U) - 1 ~ ~ ~h o oo 1 ~ 1 oo ~ r-1 C r-1 0 ~ 00 - 1 oo ~ O ~ -1 ~ 1 C-1 oo c-1 =N =N ) ~ ) ~ ~ ~1 . . . . . . . . . . . - 1 ~ O O O ~ O 0 - 1 0 0 00 ~ O O ~ - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~1 - ) 0 ~1 ~ 00 r-1 ~ oO ~ r-1 ~ ~ ~ °O - 1 ~ ~ ~ - 1 ~ ~ - 1 r-1 ~ ~ ~ ~ - 1 oo . . . . O O O ~ - ) O O ~ o Q C~ O ._ o bC s~ Q C~ _ X ._ 1 o ~ O ~ O Q o o C~ ~ V ~ O C~ C~ O C~ b · ,L~ C~ ~ s-- '-> ~ ~ ~ ·0_ C~ ~ s~ ·u c<: cd ~ 5 o ~ ~ ~ cdQ~ ~ C~. ~ oo o o . - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ oo ~ ~ - 1 ~ oo - 1 ~ - 1 o oo - 1 ~ - 1 ~ ~ - 1 - 1 o ~ oo - 1 - 1 ~ - 1 ~ ~ o ~1 O oo ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ O oo ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ O 1 - 1 ~ - 1 ~ - 1 oo - ) ~) - ) ~ ~) ~ oo - ) ~ - 1 - 1 ~ O oO ~ ~ r-1 ~ ~ ~, ~ O ~ 00 ~ - 1 0 ~ ~ - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - 1 r-1 . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oo o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O O ~ O ~ O ~ ~ O ~ ~ oO ~ - 1 ~ - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ O oo ~ ~ ~ oo 0 - 1 - 1 ~1 oo - 1 ~1 c~ - s~ c~ c~ bC c~ s~ _ ~ O =0 ~ c~ ~ ~ ._ . O u c~ . .= ~ ~ ~ ~ c~ ~ _ c~ s~ ~ O Q . s~ ~ ~ ~ c~ Q c~ (~! Q _ ~ Q C~ bC 5~ ~ O X O ,= s~ Q ~ ~ s~ O ~ ~ O bC = ._ ._ ._ I-~~ ~) =N t~) c~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ 1 . ) ~) oo ~ ) ) ~ ) ) ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 - O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r-1 ~ ~ 00 00 0 - 1 ~ ~ - 1 c~ ._ s~ c~ u ~ ~ u s_ O ~ Q ~ c~ <~ ~0 ~ ~ ~ ~ _ (~^ C ~ O C C cU C C U §, u ~ D e _ v ~ _~$si~r==C~:~_ Io . . ~r~
LAND USE AND WATER MANAGEMENT 79 househoicis respent income earnecI in all of jobs generated clirectly ancI inclirectly by export of woocI products. The spending ancI respencling of money brought into the region by export of woocI products generated a total of 6~922 jobs. Table 2-4 indicates the clepenclence of the basin's regional employment on two natural-resources sectors. Agriculture (agriculture ancI relatecI plus foocI-proclucts manufacturing) supports 13.7% of the region's jobs, ancI woocI products (forestry anti logging plus woocI products manufacturing) supports 12.5%. Table 2-4 also identifies the clepenclence of the regional economy on two sectors that often are the focus of local economic clevelopment efforts. Although the tourism sector Accommodation anti foocI services; arts, enter- tainment, ancI recreation) is responsible for 10% of the total jobs in the region, it contributes only 3.4% of the export employment base. Retail tracle, the sector with the largest employment share (11.1%~' provides only 1% of the export employment base. Table 2-4 also shows that regional employment is more clepenclent on income of househoicis outside the region than on any single sector. House- hoicI income from government transfer payments (for example, social secu- rity), cliviclencis, commuters' income, rental payments, ancI other sources of income originating outside the region supported 17~084 jobs (28.8%) in 1998. The clepenclence of the basin's economy on fecleral anti state govern- ment ancI eclucational institutions also is evident in Table 2-4. Almost one- fifth of the jobs in the region clepencI on fecleral anti state funding for such services as education anti other public services. Public administration, which supports 10.1% of jobs, inclucles fecleral ancI state payments to local gov- ernments (for example, fecleral payments in lieu of taxes, fecleral forest payments, anti state-sharecI cigarette anti highway revenues) ancI to govern- ment personnel (in USES, USDA, ancI USFWS, for example). State ancI fecleral funding of eclucational services (such as 1(-12 schools, the commu- nity college in California, ancI the Oregon Institute of Technology) ancI tuition payments by nonresidents support 9.8% of the region's jobs. There were 2~239 farms in the upper I(lamath basin in 1997 (Table 2-5~. A farm is clefinecI as "any place from which $1,000 or more of agricul- tural products were proclucecI or soicI, or normally wouicI have been soicI, cluring the census year" (USDA 1999' p. VII). Farms thus inclucle many places that clo not clepencI significantly on farm income. IncleecI, as shown in Table 2-5' 29% of farm operators work more than 200 clays per year off the farm, anti only 60% consider farming their primary occupation. lust over half the farms (57%) have more than $10,000 in annual sales. Farms averaged 896 acres; 78% hacI some irrigation, anti 27% of the region's farmiancI is irrigated. Most farms (82%) are sole proprietorships,
80 Cal so Cal so an Q a Cal Cal Cal so Cal _ Cal Cal Cal Cal so an Q Q a Cal .o Cal ._ so Cal so Cal Cal o Em sit ~ A ._ Q <t ~4 ¢ o o ¢ o .^ Cal ._ U) a - ._ Cal ._ s~ C~ s~ C~ C~ oo ~ - 1 ~ ~ ~ O ~ oo oo ~ ~ ~ - 1 oo O ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - 1 0 ~ - 1 ~ ~ ~ - 1 - 1 ~ oo ~ ~ - 1 - 1 - 1 oo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oo - 1 - 1 r-1 ~ ~ ~ oO ~ ~ r-1 O ~ ~ ~ - 1 - 1 O ~ - 1 ~1 O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - 1 - 1 1 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ O ~ ~ 1 ~ O oo ~ ~ 1 - 1 ~ - 1 ~ ~ 0 - 1 - 1 r-1 oo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - 1 oo ~ ~ oo ~ - 1 - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ oo ~ ~ - 1 oo ~ ~ - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ - 1 ~ ~ O oo ~ ~ ~ - 1 ~ ~ - 1 - 1 ~ ~ ~ - 1 - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ O O ~ ~ ~ ~ oo ~ - 1 oo O r-1 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 00 O ~ ~ oo - 1 ~ ~ oo oo O O oo r-1 - 1 ~ o 4, =~ e c O ~ C C 0 ~r ~ ~ · ~ ~ ~ ~ -O ~ ~ C ~ ,~ ~; ·D ~ 0 c v, ~ ~D 5 u u cu C O ~ ~ ,= A e C ~ ~ ~ CD =~ ~ ~ D ~ ~ ~ e ~ =- ~ ~ e ~D e . ~1 o o ~1 S~ o U) C~ S~ ¢ U) . . C~ U)
LAND USE AND WATER MANAGEMENT 8 and 780/0 are operated by the person living on the farm. About one-thircI of the farms (38%) hire farm workers. The average annual pay per hirecI farm worker was $4~364. About one-fourth (24%) of the 6~238 farm workers worked 150 clays or more in 1997. Net cash return per farm from agricultural sales in the upper I(lamath basin averaged $21~323 in 1997. Net cash return equals the value of agri- cultural products soicI minus operating expenses (not inclucling cleprecia- tion). Almost one-fifth of the farms (19%) received government payments in 1997' which averaged $6~720. Table 2-6 reports the value of agricultural production by commodity for each upper I(lamath basin county ancI for the region. The regional value of total agricultural production in 1998 was estimated to be $283 million. Cattle, hay, ancI pasture accounted for 58% of the value of production, but potato production was also important (15%~. Farm income in the upper I(lamath basin, as elsewhere, varies consicler- ably from year to year ancI from county to county. BEA provides county- leve! estimates of realizecI net income from farming farm proprietors' in- 1 ~ 1 1 · a_ 1 · 1 · · 1 1 1 come, and tarm-labor income. Realized net income Is equal to total cash receipts from marketing plus other income (inclucling government pay- ments, such farm-relatecI income as custom work ancI rent, ancI imputed rent for farm c~wellings) minus total production expenses (inclucling clepre- TABLE 2-6 Value of Agricultural Production Thousands of Dollars) in Upper I(lamath Basin, 1998, by County Share of Upper Total Klamath, Siskiyou, Modoc, Basin Value of Commodity OR CA CA Total Production, % Alfalfa hay 30,726 25,203 12,825 68,754 24.3 Cattle 32,850 23,635 9,000 65,485 23.2 Potatoes 14,217 19,323 7,866 41,406 14.6 Pasture and range n/a 13,005 7,560 20,565 7.3 Other hay 4,856 3,713 3,588 12,157 4.3 Parley 5,225 3,280 2,187 10,692 3.8 Onions n/a 2,862 2,464 5,326 1.9 Wheat 1,660 2,805 859 5,324 1.9 Dairy 13,112 2,442 n/a 15,554 5.5 Horseradish n/a n/a 896 896 0.3 Sugarbeets 3,832 n/a 3,284 7,116 2.5 Nursery products n/a 17,271 n/a 17,271 6.1 Other 1,000 5,319 5,973 12,292 4.3 Total 107,478 118,858 56,502 282,838 100 Abbreviations: n/a, not applicable. Source: Oregon State University Extension Service, California Agricultural Statistics Service.
82 FISHES IN THE KLAMATH RIVER BASIN ciation). In 1997' realizecI net income in the upper I(lamath basin was $30 million, ancI incomes were positive in all counties. In 1998 (not shown in Table 2-51' realizecI net farm income in the upper I(lamath basin was less than in 1997 (about $1.2 million), ancI in I(lamath County it was negative (-$7 million). BEA estimates farm labor income at $24 million for 1997 ancI $26 million for 1998 (the 1997 Census of Agriculture estimates hirecI farm-worker payroll at $27 million). Farm employment is not as variable as farm income. BEA estimates that there were 2~601 farm proprietors in 1997 and 2~702 in 1998. The Census of Agriculture reports only 2~239 farm operators in 1997 (Table 2-5' USDA 19991. BEA estimates full- ancI part-time farm wage ancI salary employment at 1~812 in 1997 and 1~491 in 1998. The Census of Agricul- ture reports more than 4 times as many hirecI farm workers (6~238) in the upper I(lamath basin in 1997 (Table 2-5' USDA 19991. The Oregon Em- ployment Department estimate of total agricultural (worker) employment in I(lamath County in 1997 was 1~490' twice the BEA estimate of 784' suggesting that BEA substantially unclercounts farm workers. The I(lamath Reclamation Project provides water to 63% of the 2~239 farms ancI to 80% of the irrigated farms in the upper I(lamath basin (Table 2-71. The I(lamath Project contains 36% of the region's irrigated acreage. Farms servecI by the I(lamath Project produce almost half (45%) the value of agricultural sales in the region. Lower Basin Except for regulation of releases at Iron Gate Dam, USBR's I(lamath Project is clisconnectecI from the lower basin, but the economic implications of measures that may be necessary to facilitate the recovery of coho ancI benefit other fishes alone the I(lamath main stem may be consiclerable for the lower basin. As explainecI in this chapter, irrigation-basecI economies are important in the Shasta anti Scott rivers anti in the Trinity River, which has been stucliecI specifically with reference to water transfers that generate economic benefits outside the watershed. Changes in irrigation practices anti facilities may be necessary for the benefit of the coho anti other species, anti any such changes in the lower basin wouicI neecI to be carried out with the coopera- tion of private water providers anti private lanc~hoiclers. As will be shown in Chapters 7 ancI 8' present timber management ancI mining practices may also be inconsistent with the welfare of the coho salmon anti may require modification, which couicI affect both public entities ancI private parties. Commercial fishing is involvecI economically in the restrictions on take, which are a clisacivantage in the short term, anti in efforts at restoration, which potentially provide long-term benefits.
LAND USE AND WATER MANAGEMENT 83 TABLE 2-7 Farms in the I(lamath Reclamation Project anti in the Upper I(lamath Basin Irrigated Farms, 1997 Basin Project Irrigated Acres, 1997 (l,OOOs) Basin Project Value of Sales, 1997 ($000) Basin Project 1,744 1,400 542 195 $238,663 $108,539 Sources: USDA 1999; and Tables 1 and 2 from Burke 2002. The lower I(lamath basin inclucles parts of three counties in northwest- ern California: De! Norte, Humboicit, anti Trinity. The I(lamath River flows from the upper basin in I(lamath County, Oregon, into Mocloc anti Siskiyou counties, California, anti then to the lower basin in northern Humboicit County. It continues through southern De! Norte County before reaching the Pacific Ocean near Requa, California. Although the I(lamath River itself cloes not flow through Trinity County, the county is cirainecI mostly by the Trinity River, which is the largest tributary of the I(lamath River. The basin cloes not inclucle Crescent City, the county seat in De! Norte County, or the region's most populous area, Humboicit Bay (inclucI- ing Eureka anti Arcata) in Humboicit County. Because demographic anti economic statistics are gathered for government jurisdictions, the analysis that follows inclucles all three relevant counties. Humboicit County clomi- nates the region clemographically anti economically; it has three-fourths of the region's population anti over three-fourths of its full- anti part-time jobs. The economy of the lower I(lamath basin, which is home to about 167,000 people, in 1998 proclucecI $5.9 billion worth of output, aciclecI $3.3 billion in value to purchased inputs, anti hacI more than 84,000 jobs. Much of the information given below is clerivecI from a report by Sorte anti Wyse (in press) anti like information on the upper I(lamath basin, is basecI on longituclinal ciata from BEA; profiles of farm numbers, type, anti production from the 1997 Census of Agriculture (USDA 1999) anti Califor- nia County agricultural commissioners' reports; anti information from a proprietary input-output economic IMPLAN mocle! constructed by the Minnesota IMPLAN Group, Inc. The IMPLAN mocle! was eclitecI by using agricultural-procluction ciata from the California Agricultural Statistics Ser- vice, employment ciata from BEA's Regional Economic Information Ser- vice, anti fisheries ciata from Hans Racitke anti Shannon Davis of The Research Group, Corvallis, Oregon. Because a number of ciata sources were usecI, there is some variation in the categories used to aggregate the inclus- trial sectors anti to estimate the number of jobs in each sector. From 1969 to 1999, full- anti part-time employment in the lower I(la- math basin increased by 171% from 49,000 to 84,000 jobs. Over the same
84 FISHES IN THE KLAMATH RIVER BASIN period, employment in California increased by 211%' anti U.S. employ- ment by 180%. As in the upper basin, the composition of the regional economy changed substantially over this time. A summary of the changes is proviclecI in Table 2-8. In the lower basin, the sectors that grew most were construction anti services. The share of jobs in construction grew from 2.9% to 5.4% of the total; jobs in services grew from 16.6% to 29.9%. Moclest growth occurred in agricultural services, forestry, fishing, anti other; retail tracle; anti finance, insurance, anti real estate. Employment cleclinecI in the mining, manufacturing, anti military sectors. Lower than average growth occurred in the farming, transportation anti public utilities, wholesale tracle, anti fecleral civilian sectors. Table 2-9 gives estimates of some basic economic indicators anti their distribution among sectors for 1998. This table, which is basecI on ciata from Minnesota Implan Group's Input-Output IMPLAN Moclel, varies slightly from Table 2-8' which is basecI solely on Bureau of Economic Analysis ciata. The sectors with the largest shares of output in 1998 were com bine cI wo o cI pro clucts inclu cling fore stry anti logging an cI manufactur- ing wood products, etc. (19.8%~' construction (8.4%~' retail trade (6.8%~' anti combined agriculture inclucling agriculture, fishing anti relatecI anti manufacturing foocI, etc. (6.5%~. The four sectors with the largest shares of value added were wood products (12.4%~' retail trade (10.4%~' educa- tional services (9.8%~' anti health care anti social assistance (9.4%~. Retail trade (12.8%~' educational services (12.2%~' and health care anti social assistance (11.8%) hacI the greatest shares of jobs in the economy. As noted for the upper-basin economy, output, value aciclecI, anti em- ployment measures indicate the magnitude anti distribution of economic activity among sectors in a region. The magnitude of economic activity in a sector, however, cloes not necessarily reflect the extent to which the sector . . . . . . sustains economic activity In t ne region. Table 2-10 summarizes the contribution of each sector to total regional employment, anti is based on an analysis that used the Lower I(lamath Basin Input-Output Moclel, which was clevelopecI for this report. The jobs uncler the sectoral employment columns are within the sector, whereas the jobs in the export-clepenclent columns are from all sectors that clepencI on the exports from a sector. For example, there were 5~017 jobs in the con- struction sector but 6~941 jobs in the region clepenclecI on construction exports (for example, builcling homes for retirees from outside the region or construction roacis for fecleral or state governments). Of those, 3~886 jobs clepenclecI clirectly on the exports of construction services from the region; these jobs were relatecI to direct purchases from construction firms from househoicI, firms, anti governments outside the region. In aciclition, 1,687 jobs clepenclecI inclirectly on construction exports; these jobs were created when construction firms purchased inputs (for example, builcling materials)
85 be At o - Q 1 ~9 _ Cal Cad Cad Cad so At At ._ A Cad - C~ so 5 5 so ~0 o - o - Q \ o 1 \ o No or so o U) ~ ~ ~ - 1 ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ of ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - 1 - 1 ~ ~ - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ - 1 on of ~ - 1 of O - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ O ~ - 1 1 r-1 1 ~ ~ r-1 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r-1 00 ~ ~ r-1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r-1 ~ 00 r-1 00 Do ~ ~ ~ O O of ~ oo ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 - 1 - 1 - 1 O ~ ~ r-1 ~ 00 r-1 ~ ~ 1 ~1 ~ ~1 ~ 00 ~ O 00 r-1 0 oo ~ ~ ~ ~ r-1 - 1 ~ ~ ~ - 1 1 ~ 1 O ~ ~ ~ - 1 oo - 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O ~ ~ ~ - 1 - 1 ~ oo ~ O ~ ~ ~ - 1 oo ~ ~ oo ~ 0 O ~ r~ 1 ~ ~ ~ r-1 - 1 oo ~ ~ oo 0 - 1 oo ~ O ~ ~ - 1 - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oo r-1 oO ~ ~ ~ 00 r-1 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ oo - 1 ~ ~ - 1 oo ~ ~ ~ oo ~ oo oo oo ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ - 1 ~ ~l ~ ~1 0 - 1 oo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - 1 ~ O O ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ O ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - 1 0 - 1 ~ ~ - 1 ~ ~ ~ 0 - 1 O oo ~ ~ ~ ~ r-1 ~ ~ r-1 ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ O O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - 1 ~ O ~ ~ oo O ~ ~ ~ r-1 ~ ~ oc ~ O r-1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ O oo r-1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r-1 ~ ~ ~ 00 0 O oo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r~ 1 ~ ~ r-1 00 u~ E~ =0 ~ ~ ~7 O ~ ~ _ ~ ~ / ~ _~ ~ , , ~ ~ D ~ _ E~ ~ ~
86 of _ Do _ Cal Cal Cal Cal so an o ._ an o - Q Cal A ¢ At 5 - 5 Q 5 a - so Cal U) Cal o D ¢ .0 _ ,0 O ~ so o U) ~ ~ O ~ ~ r-1 ~ ~ ~ O ~ 00 oO ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ rat 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ on ~ - 1 ~ O . . . . . . . . . DO ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r-1 ~ O O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - 1 - 1 ~ O O ~ ~ ~ ~ oo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r-1 00 oO ~ ~ ~ r-1 oO ~ ~ ~ ~ r-1 O O ~ - 1 ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ ~ ~ - 1 ~ ~ 00 ~ ~ - - 1 - 1 0 ~ - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - 1 0 ~ ~ 00 O ~ ~ . . . . . . ~ O ~ ~ - 1 0 ~ ~ o ~ oo ~ oo ~ ~ - 1 . . . . ~ ~ ~ O oo ~ ~ ~ ~ - 1 0 oo ~ ~ ~ oo - 1 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ oo ~ - 1 0 0 ~ - 1 ~ ~ O 0 - 1 ~ oo oo - 1 - 1 0 . . . . . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~1 ~ ~ ~ ~1 . . . . ~ ~ ~ oo ~ ~ ~ ~l ~ oo ~ ~ . . . . ~ ~ ~l ~ oo ~ ~ o . . . . ~ ~ oo o oo ~l ~ ~ ~1 - 1 - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ - 1 - 1 ~ ~ ~ oo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oo ~ ~ - 1 0 0 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O oo ~ ~ ~ 0 - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - 1 0 0 oo - 1 ~ ~ O ~ ~ oo ~ ~ o o ~ ~ ~ . . . . . ~ ~ ~ - 1 0 oo ~ ~ oo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ oo o ~ oo ~ oo ~ r-1 00 ~ r-1 ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ ~ ~ r-1 O O ~ ~ - 1 ~ ~ ~ - 1 - 1 - 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ - 1 ~ oo O ~ ~ oo ~ ~ - 1 oo ~ ~l ~ o oo ~ o ~ oo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - 1 ~ ~ ~ - 1 - 1 ~ - 1 c~ c~ - ~ ~ s~ c~ ~ ~ - s~ . ~ Q ~ (~! C~ c~^ Q ~ bL) bL) ~ O . _ s~ ~ O ~ O s~ ~ Q ~ s~ ~ C~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ C ~ 't,o ~ ~ ~ C 5 ', , D C · ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (~! C~ n~ C~ ._ bC . ~ C~ C~ C~ 0 _ C~ . _ . =~ e ~ _ O C~ ~ ¢ ~ ~ 0 00 ~ - ) O . . . . . - 1 ~ ~ oo O - 1 - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~1 O C~ O t) s~ ~ _ C~ · .O s~ O Q ~ c~ <~ ~ Q ~ _ ~ ._ ~ ~ ~ .o ~ ~ C~ ._ ~ ~ C O C U ~ O t) s~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ . _ C ~ ~ ~r _ _ C c. _ C
87 - o Q Q sit O Q .. 0^ .= _ Cal Cal ~ _ ~ O 3 ~ so o At o - Q an Cal Cal so o of ¢ Do X Ct E-° . ~ ._ \ o o . o o - oo ~ ~ ~ - 1 ~ O ~ 0 - 1 oo O O ~ ~ - 1 ~ 0 - 1 0 To ~ ~ - 1 ~ 0 - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ - 1 o r-1 - 1 ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ C ~ ~ oo ~ ~ r-1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O r-1 ~ 00 r-1 ~ O O oo oo ~ ~ ~ ~ oo r-1 ~ ~ ~ ~ r-1 00 ~ r~ 1 ~ 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ r-1 ~ ~ ~ O ~ 00 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ r-1 ~ O O O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ r~ 1 ~ ~ ~ oO ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r-1 ~ O O O ~ ~ ~ O ~1 ~1 ~O~o ~ 1 ~ ~n00ol ~ ~ ~ ~ oo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r-1 00 oO ~ ~ ~ r-1 oO ~ ~ ~ ~ r-1 O O ~ r-1 ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ ~ ~ oO ~ ~ ~ r-1 ~ ~ 00 ~ ~ r-1 ~ ~ ~ ~ - 1 - 1 0 ~ - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - 1 0 ~ ~ 00 S~ C~ ~C . _ S~ ~ Q ~ c~ O ~ ~ .= O u _ 5 u Ci ~~70 ~ -~~ U _ U ~L ~_5c~53_~$;c<<C~c< o o c~ c~ ~ - c~ ~ ~ · - · o ~ ~ ~ Q ~ < c~ n~ ~ c~ ._ s~ c~ oo O - 1 - 1 ._ s~ c~ c~ · _ C ~ V) D . U c<: D .= ~ ~ ·_ _ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ _ O s~ C~ ._ ~0 o . - Q ~ o c~ ~ O Q c~ ,= O E~ ~ . ~ 0^ .= Q _ c~ s~ c~ ~ sO~ ~ ~ ·bC O ,= c~ ~ ~ ._ ^= O Q~ s~ . - c~ s~ O ~ c~ c~ ^= s~ O ~ ~0 .= (~ c~: ~ .o c~ s~ s~ c~ Q s~ O c~ o o bC ~ O O c~ ~ ~L) xo ~ ~ Q
88 FISHES IN THE KLAMATH RIVER BASIN from firms within the region and when the suppliers purchased from other businesses in the region. Another 1,368 jobs were induced by exports of wood products; these fobs were in sectors like retail trade, real estate, and health care that were created when households respent income earned in all the jobs generated directly and indirectly by exports of wood products. The spending and responding of money brought into the region by exports of construction generated a total of 6,941 jobs. Table 2-10 shows that the lower-basin economy depends on the natu- ral-resources sectors, although not to the same extent as that of the upper basin. The combined agricultural sectors support 6.3% of the region's jobs, and the combined wood products sectors support 13.9%. Together, these two natural-resources sectors make up about 20.2% of the lower- basin economy. In the upper basin, the agricultural sector supports 14% of the region's jobs, and wood products supports 12.5%, for a total of about 27% of the economy. Table 2-10 also identifies the dependence of the lower-basin regional economy on four other sectors that often are the focus of local economic development efforts, particularly in rural econo- mies oriented to natural resources. Specifically, these are the sectors that include substantial activity related to tourism associated with visitors from outside the region, such as retail trade, accommodation and food services, other services, and arts, entertainment, and recreation, which together contribute 12.5% of the export employment base (slightly more than in the upper basin). Still, these tourism sectors remain primarily service sectors. For example, the retail-trade sector's share of sectoral employment is 12.8%, and it provides just 3.8% of the export employ- ment base. The lower basin's employment, like the upper basin's, depends heavily on income to households. Household income from government transfer payments (such as social security), dividends, commuters' income, rental payments, and other sources of income originating outside the basin is the most Important part of the export base. In 1998,17,191 jobs, or 20.7%, depended on those payments. The dependence of the basin's economy on federal and state govern- ment and educational institutions is also evident in Table 2-10. Almost one- fourth of the jobs in the region depend on federal and state funding for services, such as education and other public services. Public administration supports 8.0% of all jobs in the basin; this sector includes federal and state payments to local governments (such as federal payments in lieu of taxes, federal forest payments, and state-shared cigarette and highway revenues) and to government personnel (USES, USDA, and USFWS, for example). State and federal funding for educational services plus tuition payments by nonresidents support 14.9% of the region's jobs.
LAND USE AND WATER MANAGEMENT 89 Two important industries based on natural resources, agricultural crop ancI livestock pro Suction ancI fisheries , are aggregate cI ancI summarize cI in the tables as the agriculture, fishing, ancI relatecI sector. Because they are both so strongly affected by water resources in the I(lamath basin, some aciclitional review of these industries follows. Using the same definition of a farm as in the upper basin, there were 974 farms in the lower I(lamath basin in 1997' that is about 40% of the number of farms in the upper basin (Table 2-111. As noted in the discussion regarding the upper basin, farms inclucle many places that clo not clepencI on their farm operations as their major source of income. IncleecI, as shown in Table 2-11' 35% of farm operators work more than 200 ciays/yr off the farm, ancI only 51% consider farming their primary occupation. Fewer than half the farms (45%) have more than $10,000 in annual sales. Farms averaged 653 acres; 39.5% hacI some irrigation ancI 3.7% of the region's farmiancI is irrigated. Over half the farms (61%) are sole proprietorships, ancI 72% are operated by the person living on the farm. About one-thircI of the farms (35%) hire farm workers. The average annual pay per hirecI farm worker was $6~754. Thus, the number of farm workers in the lower basin is about one-thircI the number in the upper basin, but the average pay per worker is greater in the lower basin. About half (44%) the 2~183 farm workers worked 150 or more clays in 1997. Net cash returns per farm from agricultural sales in the lower I(lamath basin averaged $23~016 ancI were similar to those of the upper basin ($21~323) in 1997. Net cash returns equals the value of agricultural procI- ucts soicI minus operating expenses (not inclucling depreciation. Very few farms (3.1%) received government payments in 1997' which averaged $2~000. Table 2-12 reports the value of agricultural production by commodity for each of the counties in the lower I(lamath basin ancI for the region. The regional value of total agricultural production in 1998 was estimated to be $114 million, compared with $283 million in the upper basin. Dairy ancI nursery products are the principal agricultural products of the region, to- gether accounting for 75.6% of the value of agricultural-commoclity pro- cluction. Cattle ancI livestock products are also important; they account for 13.7% of the value of agricultural commodity production. Fishing is an important part of the culture of the lower-basin culture ancI the economy. Table 2-13 provides information on catch ancI value for the fishing industry in 1997-2001. The catch information reflects only ocean-relatecI commercial fishing, not fishing in rivers. The lower I(lamath basin input-output mocle! explicitly considers ocean fishing in the agricul- ture, fishing, ancI relatecI sectors because the catch is soicI clirectly for pro- cessing or consumption. River fishing is incluclecI only inclirectly in the moclel; that economic activity ancI other activities relatecI to fish in the
90 . - c~ at pa at ~ - o o ~ Em .~= ~ at o EM At At At At At Q o Cal Cal so Cal _ Cal Cal Cal Cal so At ~0 o Cal . ~ Cal ._ so Cal so Cal _ o ~ C C so ~ o ._ Cal ._ so Cal so Cal Cal o ~ o - , ~ =N Be, Be, ~ ~ Be, o ~ ~ ~ o ~ o of - 1 - 1 ~ - 1 - 1 - 1 oo - 1 - 1 ~ - 1 0 - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 - 1 oo ~ oo ~ ~ oo O ~ oo r-1 ~ ~ ~ oO ~ O ~ r-1 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 - 1 0 - 1 ~ ~ - 1 ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oo ~ r-1 ~ ~ r ~ 1 r-1 00 00 ~ ~ O ~ O O O ~ ~ 0 - 1 ~, ~ ~ r', ~ ~ ~ ~ ~1 oo ~ ~ ~ r-1 ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - 1 ~ oo ~ - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O O 0 - 1 oo - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ O O O O ~ - 1 - 1 ~ - 1 - 1 ~ ~ - 1 - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ oo ~ ~l ~ o - ~ . O (d bL) ~ ~ o ~ · ~ ~ ~ o 5 cu ~ O u: O ~ C~ · ~ ~ - - , ~ ~ + o ~ ~ ~ ' D r ~ ~ ~ U C ~ O _ _ , _~ =2 ~ C ~ ~ A e v ¢ ~ c ~ ~ ¢ 3. ¢ ~ c ~ ~ ~ ¢ c~ . c~ c~ c~ o o o ~1 o Q C, bC ~ c~ _ ,~ O ¢ ~ X O c~ c~ O c~ O O ~1 ~ c~ ~ c~ s~ ,L) ~ s~ s~ c~ c~ ~ ~L) · ~ O ._ ._ bC . ~ ¢ E- o o c~ ~ r-1 -1^ c~ c~ ~L) c~ ~ O ;> c~ ._ ,= 0 - 1 O ._ 5~ c~ O ~ ¢ u~ - . . u~
LAND USE AND WATER MANAGEMENT TABLE 2-12 Value of Agricultural Production in the Lower I(lamath Basin, 1998 91 Value of Agricultural Production, $000 Commodity Dairy Nursery products Cattle and livestock products Hay and pasture Vegetables Sheep, lambs, and wool 38 435 472 29,766 Del Norte Humboldt Trinity up UP Lp UP Lower 13 asin Total Share of Total Value of Production o/ /o 10,578 13,322 3,495 1,351 75 Fruit and nuts Other Total 39,028 23,277 11,074 8,179 676 116 91 20 82,461 o 37 1,088 463 32 8 105 49 1,782 49,606 36,636 15,657 9,993 783 162 631 541 114,009 43.5 32.1 13.7 8.8 0.7 0.1 0.6 0.5 100.0 Source: California Agricultural Statistics Service. I(lamath River main stem are reflectecI primarily in the tourism sectors. Thus, the actual effects of fish migration through the I(lamath basin are clifficult to estimate accurately. As Table 2-13 indicates, commercial fishing hacI a value of $12.4 million in 2001, which was less than in prior years anti continues to steaclily clecline. In relative terms, commercial fishing accounts for about 10% of the value of agriculture in the lower basin. The most valuable components of the catch are grouncifish <$s.s million in 2001) and crab and lobster ($4.1 million in 20011. Salmon (Chinook) landings were valued at about $0.2 million in 2001. The economic effects of eliminating or reducing any of the ocean fisher- ies in the lower-basin economy can be calculatecI with the same procedure used earlier to determine the export clepenclency indexes. Using the cletailecI multi-sector version of the Lower I(lamath Basin Input-Output Moclel, which is basecI on the 1998 IMPLAN moclel, to be consistent with the upper basin analysis, the effect of removing all the salmon catch in 2001 ($107,887), assuming that the catch is exported from the region, is a total loss to the regional economy of $164,507. This effect, though relatively small in comparison to the commercial fishing industry or the total regional economy, clicI extend across 193 of the 204 sectors in the regional economy. Commercial fishing has a multiplier of approximately 1.5 on both employ- ment anti output in the region. Thus, for every clollar or job clirectly in- volvecI in commercial fishing there is approximately another fifty cents or
92 FISHES IN THE KLAMATH RIVER BASIN TABLE 2-13 Fisheries Characteristics of Ports of Eureka (Humboicit County) and Crescent City (Del Norte County) Round Pounds Species Group 1997 1998 1999 2000 Groundfish 16,246,794 13,888,084 12,036,198 10,116,024 Pacific whiting 13,958,624 12,614,230 2,881,997 10,988,772 Salmon (troll chinook) 16,675 26,450 34,500 26,450 Crab and lobster 6,454,585 7,425,668 7,122,922 4,764,952 Shrimp 12,441,711 1,460,207 3,658,543 2,170,063 Coastal pelagic 176,167 161,285 46,246 14,168 Highly migratory 2,222,487 727,022 647,952 823,779 Halibut 9,007 477 891 289 Sea urchins 63,624 2,357 36,532 3,735 Other 1,822,974 564,703 597,413 841,699 53,412,648 36,370,483 27,063,194 29,793,910 Source: Hans Radtke and Shannon Davis, unpublished. half a job lost as suppliers or businesses that sell to those working in fishing, or for the suppliers or businesses experiencing reclucecI sales. The current economic effects of the commercial salmon catch may significantly uncler- state the potential contribution of the salmon fishing to the economy of the lower I(lamath basin. Salmon lanclings at the ports of Eureka anti Crescent City have cleclinecI by more than 95°/O since the 1970s. If the average 1976- 1980 lanclings from the two ports of 2~547~000 rouncI Ib couicI be reached, anti they were soicI at 2001 prices of $1.47 per Ib, the combined output from the salmon fishery wouicI be $3~744~090. The estimated value-aciclecI component of that level of output in 2001 clollars wouicI be $2~476~908. Returning to that level of output wouicI require an estimated 67 direct jobs in the commercial fishing sector. The multipliecI effect of these jobs on commercial fishing to businesses that supply the fisheries sector anti from househoicI expenditures in service sector businesses couicI be an aciclitional 30 jobs, for a total of 97 jobs. These estimates of the economic effects of increased salmon harvest assume the catch is exported outside the region anti that the effects are not reclucecI by changes that might be necessary to achieve the increases (e.g., shifting water from irrigated agriculture to in- crease stream flows). In summary, the economics of the upper anti lower basins clisplay characteristics common to many rural economies, inclucling heavy reliance on natural resources sectors, such as agriculture ancI woocI products. To- gether, the entire basin showed economic activity valuecI in 2002 at $10.5 billion. Of that, about 26% (or $2.7 billion) was clerivecI from sectors basecI
LAND USE AND WATER MANAGEMENT 93 Value (Nominal), $ 2001 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 8,708,018 9,309,576 6,615,305 6,308,414 6,631,668 5,461,928 5,081,398 581,399 391,780 115,275 764,851 170,967 73,600 21,298 41,427 61,577 42,795 107,887 1,719,814 11,132,662 12,193,371 13,210,063 9,403,268 4,073,747 3,447,869 5,020,462 951,542 1,982,483 1,172,213 1,236,641 148,548 93,398 39,260 11,365 7,879 52,975 1,414,603 1,870,065 764,542 630,488 841,564 1,155,138 8 17,866 790 1,669 723 16 22,595 35,352 825 26,438 3,224 12,279 388,929 509,044 227,912 217,430 262,536 138,378 21,005,382 28,591,122 21,226,754 22,565,202 19,130,721 12,409,956 on natural resources. Reliance on such sectors is slowly cleclining across both the upper ancI lower basins. OVERVIEW The I(lamath basin is exceptionally diverse geomorphically because it has been strongly influencecI by both crustal movement ancI volcanism. Geomorphic diversity in the basin has proclucecI a wicle variety of aquatic habitats, inclucling extensive wetiancis, large shallow lakes, swiftly flowing main-stem waters, ancI various tributary conditions. The watershed is not clensely populatecI but shows strong anthropogenic influences of several kinds. Management of water for irrigation, which has been in progress for more than a century, has alterecI the basic environmental conditions for aquatic life, inclucling the hycirographic features of flowing waters, the distribution ancI extent of wetiancis, ancI the extent ancI physical character- istics of the lakes that were founcI originally in the basin. Of the total economic activity in the I(lamath basin ($10.5 billion), about 26% is cle- rivecI from natural resources, inclucling mostly agriculture, woocI products, ancI ocean fishing. Irrigation ancI agricultural practices have blockecI or clivertecI fish from migration pathways, causecI adverse warming of waters, ancI augmented nutrient transport from lancI to water. Commercial fishing also has left a mark through clepletecI stocks of some species anti, although now controllecI, may have hacI legacy effects that are clifficult to reverse. Timber harvest ancI mining along tributaries have causecI, ancI in some cases
94 FISHES IN THE KLAMATH RIVER BASIN continue to cause, severe physical impairment of aquatic habitats. Although aquatic habitats now are regarclecI as valuable for the maintenance of native species, remecliation of ciamage to habitat presents great clifficulties because of the extent anti diversity of changes that have occurred in the basin over the last century.