Following nearly five hours of testimony and deliberation, the Hoopa Valley Tribal Council on Monday voted to remove Chair Joe Davis from his position as chair, citing allegations of gross negligence and neglect of duty. The council voted 5-1, with Councilmember Daniel Jordan casting the lone dissenting vote.
Joe Davis | Image via Hoopa Valley Tribe
The tribal council’s push to remove Davis from his position has sparked outrage across social media in recent weeks. Members of the Hoopa Valley Tribe filled tribal council chambers on Monday morning to defend Davis and call for reconciliation among councilmembers, to no avail.
The tribal council previously voted to suspend Davis from his position at the beginning of January, pending an investigation into a potential conflict of interest concerning the Hoopa Development Fund (HDF). On Feb. 13, the tribal council issued five charges against Davis, including failure to supervise tribal staff and departments of the Tribe, repeated failure to follow tribal council directives and policies, failure to maintain the Tribe’s website, and repeated failure to disclose potential conflicts of interest despite advice from legal counsel. On Feb. 16, the council voted to suspend Davis and begin formal removal proceedings.
One week later, on Feb. 23, Davis filed for an injunction in Hoopa Valley Tribal Court, alleging that the council’s action to suspend him and restrict his communications with tribal staff violate the tribe’s constitution. Judge Pro Tem Joseph Wiseman ruled in Davis’ favor and determined that the tribal council “violated the law” and “acted outside the scope of their authority in suspending [Davis] from his duties as chairman,” according to the 15-page decision.
“Petitioner [Davis] does not claim the removal process is unconstitutional, rather he claims the tribal council members did not follow the constitutional removal process and disciplined him beyond their authority,” the decision states. “For the foregoing reasons, the Court finds that Petitioner [Davis] was denied due process, and he has sufficiently shown he will suffer irreparable harm if the scheduled removal hearing … proceeds.”
Speaking during Monday’s special tribal council meeting, Davis’ legal representative, Wendy Ferris-George, former tribal court judge pro tem, accused the tribal council of slandering Davis’ reputation and causing “irreparable harm to not only him but the Hupa community,” she said. “Chairman Davis comes before you today, not to fight or cause dissension, but rather to clear his name from the misstated, misleading and unfounded accusations he has been charged with.”
The “unfounded accusations” Ferris-George referred to center around an alleged conflict of interest that occurred in May of 2023, when Davis and his wife, Kayla Davis, submitted a $50,000 loan application to the HDF. After his wife applied for the loan, Davis contacted Tom Schlosser, the Tribe’s legal counsel, to ask about the legality of the loan application. Schlosser advised Davis to recuse himself from oversight of the department, not knowing that the loan application had already been approved by the department.
However, Davis and his wife decided not to accept the loan, nor did they provide any follow-up documentation, including a formal business plan, for the loan application.
Schlosser argued that Davis’ action violated the Tribe’s Constitution, citing Title 8, “Once elected, each council member shall report to the tribal council and election board any situation that may create a conflict while in office.”
“The chairman did not report to the tribal council a situation that may create a conflict of interest while in office,” Schlosser said during Monday’s meeting. “He did not report that an application was submitted on his behalf for a business loan from the program that he supervised. He continued to supervise the program and the director who vouched that all the supporting documentation was in his application, even though it wasn’t. The chairman did not report to the tribal council that the HDF board approved this loan.”
Speaking to the charges of gross negligence and neglect of duty, Schlosser said Davis had signed three “intermediate/long-term” loans for the HDF board without consulting the rest of the tribal council after he was advised to recuse himself from oversight of the department.
Davis admitted that he had made a mistake by signing the loans, but said, “I don’t feel that it’s something that warrants removal.”
“My mistake was when they came to me, I did not double-check the policy to make sure that I was within my right to sign it, because I am in my right to sign off on short-term loans, but not ‘intermediate’ as per the policy that you provided to me,” Davis said. “I’ll live up to that – it was a mistake.”
Davis said he did call HDF staff to ask why the loan applications were on his desk and was told that the loans were previously approved by HDF board members, but they didn’t have the authority to sign off.
“Not to pass the buck but, you know, they should have never brought that to me,” he said. “I assumed that they were telling me correctly that [I] can sign these, you know? I didn’t go out of my way to seek out the loans to go sign them, they brought him over to me. But that’s the one area where I will say today that out of all these charges I’m guilty.”
Davis’ wife took responsibility for some of the issues surrounding their loan application, largely chalking it up to miscommunication.
“Technically it was a team effort insofar as I would try and keep him informed with where it was at, but honestly, with him being as busy as he is with his job and being distracted by raising our kids … I’m sure some things fell through the cracks and there was miscommunication or confusion on where we were at in the process,” she said. “I know he was caught off guard when he heard that we were approved for the loan, so when he says he didn’t sign it really wasn’t dishonesty on his part. Embarrassingly, it was just miscommunication between the two of us. I truly apologize for the confusion that this may have caused, it was never my intention.”
Vice-Chair Everett Colegrove maintained that Davis should have informed the council of the loan application when he first applied.
About a dozen tribal members defended Davis’ actions during the public comment portion of the meeting, many of whom urged the council to look at the bigger picture and consider how the removal of the chairman would impact the Tribe’s membership. Speaking via Zoom, tribal member Daren Masten urged the council to reconsider Davis’ removal.
“I understand there needed to be an investigation … but I don’t really see anything that warrants a nuclear decision,” he said. “Were there mistakes made? Absolutely. Were they felonious? No. I think what we’re looking at here [are] infractions. … I think forgiveness is probably the most important word we need to think about right now. Let’s just move forward as a Tribe and put it behind us because we’ve got a lot of work to do.”
Cassandra Chavez, the former financial institution director for the HDF, called the removal proceedings “ridiculous” and shamed the tribal council for airing out dirty laundry in the public rather than handling the matter behind closed doors. “I am embarrassed to be a part of the Tribe that puts this publicly out there like this,” she said. “Every single one of you sitting at that table: listen to your membership. This is not okay.”
Like several others, Hoopa resident Glenna Moore said the tribal council “jumped the gun” with removal proceedings. “I do not see [how] these charges against our chairman rise to the level of removal,” she said. “We don’t want to see you micromanaging our departments and our managers. We want to see you in Washington, DC, and in Sacramento fighting for our sovereign rights and everything that impacts this tribe.”
Moore also noted that the tribal council had withheld the findings of the investigation from Davis. A little later in the meeting, Councilmember Daniel Jordan asked Davis if he had received copies of the two reports, one prepared by financial consultant Wally Weaver and the other by attorney Amy Ann Taylor. Davis said he had requested a copy of each report but did not receive a response from the council.
“Ok, that’s a problem because they actually describe what the findings are from their investigation,” Jordan said. “I am disturbed that you did not get some version of the … reports because they’re very revealing about what they found, and if you don’t have that then you don’t know what you’re commenting on.”
Jordan said he had written a previous memo to the council in which he expressed concern that Davis’ Constitutional rights had been violated following his suspension from the council. “These Constitutional issues are of significant concern to me,” he said.
Before closing out the discussion, Davis asked the council once more to reconsider his removal and said he would be “willing to sit down and have a conversation to work these things out.”
The council went into executive session and about an hour later voted 5-1, with Councilmember Jordan dissenting and Vice-Chair Colegrove recused, to remove Davis from his position as chair.
The Tribe will hold a tribal council primary election on Tuesday, March 19. Two seats on the council will be contested. More information can be found at this link.
Last year, on March 22, 2023, the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office issued a press release notifying the public of Luis Carlos Silva’s disappearance.
This is a just reminder to the public that the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office still needs the public’s help to locate Luis Carlos Silva, 51 years old, of McKinleyville, Ca. Luis is believed to be missing under unknown circumstances and his last communication with his family was on March 2, 2023.
Luis was reported missing by his family on March 7, 2023. Luis is a Hispanic male, 5 feet 4 inches tall, 175 pounds, with brownish gray hair, a beard and hazel eyes.
Anyone with information for the Sheriff’s Office regarding Luis’ possible whereabouts should call the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office at (707) 445-7251.
Patricia Ann Janowski, age 80, passed away February 12, 2024 at her residence in Fortuna.
Patti was born on March 29, 1943 in Oceanside, California to Walter and Charlotte Watkins. Her family moved to Humboldt County to open a restaurant in Arcata when she was very young. They settled in Eureka with her attending Lincoln Elementary School, Eureka Junior High and graduating from Eureka High School.
Patti led a career of public service working over 20 years at the Humboldt County Public Works Department. She later retired from the County of Sonoma Risk Management Department. Shortly after retirement she moved to Fortuna to be closer to her family.
Patti or “Nana” as her grandchildren called her, was fiercely independent, kind-hearted and a devoted mother and grandmother. She could always be found in the bleachers at baseball games or ringside at the dairy show at the county fair. She was an avid reader and gardener, cultivating a perfect lawn, beautiful roses and berries. She loved to share her bountiful harvest of roses, blueberries and raspberries with family and friends. Patti was a true animal lover. She was especially passionate and held a special place in her heart about raising her Siamese cats over her lifetime.
Patti is survived by her son Tom and daughter-in-law Denise, and two grandchildren Emily (Mike) Gerhold and Tyler Janowski. She also leaves behind a lifelong friend Jennifer Simms, her special neighbors and dear friends that were like family to mom, Morgan and Savannah Ferguson and their three daughters.
She is preceded in death by her father Walter Ray Watkins and her mother Charlotte Amanda Huntus, sister Nancy Bender, niece Kim Bender, nephew John Card, sister in law Judi Resch, best friends Jesse and Donna Conn and Elaine Oester.
Arrangements provided by Ayres Family Cremation. In lieu of flowers and services, the family suggests memorial gifts may be made to Miranda’s Rescue, 1603 Sandy Prairie Road Fortuna, CA 95540.
###
The obituary above was submitted on behalf of Patti Janowski’s loved ones. The Lost Coast Outpost runs obituaries of Humboldt County residents at no charge. See guidelines here.
Barbara Ann Burnside passed away on March 4, 2024 after a short illness surrounded by family at her home in Fortuna. Barbara was born in San Franciso to Harry “Blackie” Freeman and Janice Ingraham Freeman on August 7, 1938. Her father “Blackie” was an accomplished logger in Humboldt County, which gave her the unique experience of living in several logging camps in her early years along with her younger sister Marty Freeman and her brother Harry Freeman Jr. She attended school in Fortuna, where she met her future husband Lars David Burnside in the 8th grade. On June 21, 1955 Barbara married Lars in Stevenson, Washington. They always made Fortuna their home, celebrating their 68th Anniversary together last year. On August 9, 1955 they welcomed their first child, a daughter named Trudi Anne Burnside. Then on June 15, 1961 they welcomed their second child, a son named Lars David Burnside Jr.
Barbara will be fondly remembered for her brilliant and unforgettable smile. Her smile would light up any room as she often would visit and care for elders throughout her life. She had a great passion for collecting hatpins in her travels with her sister Marty. She also loved strawberries in almost anything. One of Barbara’s many talents were making Angel food cake from scratch. She would always buy fresh strawberries and local whipped cream to enhance the cakes! Barbara also enjoyed finding and buying collectibles that she would then resell at her booth at the Fortuna Antique Mall.
Barbara loved to travel with her cousin Cheryl Pirrozoli. They made several memorable trips to Hawaii. On one such trip, for Barbara’s 70th birthday, Cheryl had Trudi (incognito) join them secretly on the same flight to Hawaii, where they spent a never-to-be-forgotten visit on the Big Isle. Barbara also loved feeding the hummingbirds and sparrows in their backyard.
Barbara and Lars shared a deep love for family, friends and community. She especially enjoyed her time spent, being around all of her grandchildren and great grandchildren.
Music also was an important part of their love story from the early years, when Lars played saxophone to their later years where they could be found dancing in the hallway of their home to “Through the Years” by Kenny Rogers.
Barbara is survived by her husband Lars; her sister Marty Carlson and her husband Bill Greenwood, her brother Harry Freeman Jr. and his wife Gail; her daughter Trudi Burnside McKamey and her husband Mark, her son Lars Burnside Jr. and his wife Cindy. She has four grandchildren; Chandler Burnside Sawyer, Lars David Burnside III and his wife Audrianna, Nicole Woodruff and her husband Michael and Kelsie Lipscomb and her husband Boden. She has nine great-grandchildren; Brayden, Kynslie, Keely and Bodie Lipscomb; Larson, Emma, and Liam Burnside; Ridley and Sawyer Woodruff.
Donations in Barbara’s name can be made to Hospice of Humboldt, www.hospiceofhumboldt.org.
Graveside services for family and close friends will be held at Sunrise Cemetery, 3315 Newburg Road, in Fortuna on June 21 at 1 p.m. A Celebration of Life will be held at the Fortuna River Lodge Conference Center in the Steelhead Room, 1800 Riverwalk Drive, Fortuna, directly after the graveside service at 2 p.m., which will also be Barbara and Lars’ 69th wedding anniversary.
###
The obituary above was submitted on behalf of Barbara Burnside’s loved ones. The Lost Coast Outpost runs obituaries of Humboldt County residents at no charge. See guidelines here.
The Eureka parking lot at Fifth and D, which is slated to be developed into multi-family housing by Dishgamu Humboldt Community Land Trust, a unit of the Wiyot Tribe. | Photo by Andrew Goff.
###
In court this morning, an attorney representing the Wiyot Tribe urged the judge to dismiss one of several lawsuits filed against the City of Eureka by special interest group Citizens for a Better Eureka (CBE).
The group, which is financed by the Rob Arkley-founded real estate acquisition and management firm Security National, filed five legal complaints last year aimed at halting multi-family housing projects slated for development on under-used municipal parking lots around the city.
Arguing that the loss of parking would be devastating to downtown businesses, the group claims in its lawsuits that Eureka failed to follow the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) when it declared the parking lots “surplus property” and invited interested developers to submit proposals for affordable housing projects.
One of the developers to step forward was Dishgamu Humboldt Community Land Trust, a component unit of the Wiyot Tribe, and last July the city awarded development rights to Dishgamu for two projects — one at the corner of Fifth and D streets, very near Security National’s Eureka headquarters, and the other at Sixth and L, next to City Hall.
Today’s case concerned the now-vacant parcel at Fifth and D.
Conceptual design by Dishgamu Humboldt Community Land Trust, a unit of the Wiyot Tribe, for housing at 5th and D streets. | Image via City of Eureka.
###
The Wiyot Tribe was represented in court by Siena Kalina, Indian Law Fellow with the Davis firm of Berkey Williams, LLC. Arguing via Zoom before Judge John Feeney (who was covering for Judge Timothy Canning), Kalina said the Tribe “has a significant interest” in the outcome of the case, even though it was never named as a party in the lawsuit.
“The Tribe has been working very hard to carry out their obligations under the memorandum of understanding [with the City of Eureka] by developing plans and taking steps to acquire funding for the project,” Kalina said. “But this case is directly threatening the Tribe’s work and presenting considerable uncertainty for the tribe and the success of this project.”
She argued that the Wiyot Tribe is “an indispensable party” to the suit, but as a federally recognized Indian Tribe it also has sovereign immunity and thus cannot be “joined” or included in the suit. Therefore, she said, the suit should be dismissed.
She also argued that the Tribe’s plans for the Fifth and D lot are inextricably linked to the outcome of this lawsuit.
“There’s no way this case can be reconfigured to limit the impact to the Wiyot Tribe because the removal of parking that took place at the April 2023 city council meeting is a necessary first step in the Tribe’s development,” Kalina said.
In a rebuttal, Citizens for a Better Eureka attorney Brad Johnson (also appearing via Zoom) argued that the case technically doesn’t involve the Wiyot Tribe at all. It concerns only the legality of the city’s decision to reduce its parking supply by eliminating several lots, a decision that took place months before the city awarded development rights to Dishgamu.
As for the argument that the Wiyot Tribe is an “indispensable party” to the suit, Johnson disagreed, citing as precedent a 1997 case called People ex rel. Lungren v. Community Redevelopment Agency, which he referred to simply as “Lungren.”
That case concerned a southern California tribe’s plans to build a gaming casino in Riverside County via a development agreement with the City of Palm Springs Redevelopment Agency. The California Attorney General filed a complaint, arguing that the deal conflicted with the state’s anti-gambling laws, and the tribe (the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians) filed a motion to dismiss on the grounds of tribal immunity.
In that case, Johnson pointed out, the court ultimately denied the tribe’s motion, explaining that “tribal immunity does not extend to barring suit against a third, non-immune party solely because the effect of a judgment against the third party will be felt by the
tribe.”
Johnson reiterated that his client, Citizens for a Better Eureka, has no problem with the Wiyot Tribe’s development plans, per se. (Elsewhere, representatives of the group have said that their lawsuits wouldn’t necessarily prevent any downtown housing projects; they’d simply require developers to build even more parking than what’s currently there.)
Johnson said the case is purely about whether the city violated CEQA when it declared the parking lots surplus property in preparation for future housing developments.
“Here,” he said, “the Wiyot Tribe is not party to the action that was challenged. The agreement with the city that they formed months later is not subject to challenge, and there’s nothing in this case, Your Honor, that would undo the agreement between the city and the Tribe. And as counsel for the Wiyot Tribe noted, there may be some delay [in the housing development], but delay is not adequate to trump all of the legal principles outlined in Lungren.”
Johnson asked the court to deny the Tribe’s motion.
In response, Kalina argued that the Lungren case was different than the one at hand and should not be considered as a governing authority.
“This case does affect the Wiyot Tribe,” she said. “The Wiyot Tribe’s development is dependent on the city’s actions at that April meeting to remove parking. … The Wiyot Tribe has exerted significant time and resources to develop this property and would like to be able to continue this development pursuant to their memorandum of understanding and their awarded development rights.”
She added that if the court rules to require additional environmental analysis under CEQA, the Wiyot Tribe will be forced to bear the cost of additional studies before it can proceed with the housing development.
“Your Honor,” Kalina said, “to say that the Tribe has no interest that is affected by this case, and that it’s analogous to Lungren, is just simply incorrect.”
She asked Judge Feeney to grant the dismissal.
The City of Eureka’s attorney, Autumn Luna, appeared via Zoom for today’s hearing but did not address the court. In response to these lawsuits from Citizens for a Better Eureka, Luna argues that Eureka fully complied with CEQA when it updated the Housing Element for its 2040 General Plan. The parking lots slated for redevelopment were designated for affordable housing in that document, which was certified by the state in 2019.
In February, the state’s Attorney General came to Eureka’s defense, urging the court to reject the various legal motions from Citizens for a Better Eureka.
At the outset of today’s hearing, Feeney said he needs more time to read and consider the documents submitted in the case. After today’s arguments he said he’ll take the matter under submission and issue a written ruling before the end of this week.
Chinook Salmon swimming along the Scott River on Oct. 30, 2023. Photo by Larry Valenzuela, CalMatters/CatchLight Local
California’s fishing industry is bracing for another bad year as federal managers today announced plans to heavily restrict or prohibit salmon fishing this year, following a complete ban last year.
The Pacific Fishery Management Council today released a series of options that are under consideration, all of which either ban commercial and recreational salmon fishing in the ocean off California or shorten the season and set strict catch limits. The council’s final decision is expected next month; the commercial season typically begins in May and ends in October.
While more Chinook salmon returned from the ocean to spawn last year than in 2022, fishery managers said the population is expected to be so small that they must be protected to avoid overfishing.
Fall-run Chinook salmon are a mainstay of commercial and recreational fishing and tribal food supplies. But their populations are now a fraction of what they once were — dams have blocked vital habitat, while droughts and water diversions have driven down flows and increased temperatures, killing large numbers of salmon eggs and young fish.
The plan is a devastating blow for an industry still reeling from last year’s closure. State officials estimate that last year’s closurecost about $45 million — which the fishing industry says vastly underestimates the true toll.
“There’s no way to sugarcoat it, as it’s simply catastrophic,” said Scott Artis, executive director of the Golden State Salmon Association, which represents the commercial and recreational fishing industry, other businesses, restaurants and environmentalists.
“The fishing industry and many thousands of salmon families and businesses eagerly waiting to get back to work are potentially facing another year in the harbor instead of putting food on the table.”
The options are likely to evolve as the Pacific Fishery Management Council continues to analyze them over the next month. Two call for significantly shortened seasons and harvest limits for both commercial and sport fishing off California this year. The third would cancel the season for the second year in a row.
“In response to poor river and ocean conditions, California stocks are forecast to have 2024 abundance levels that are well below average,” Marci Yaremko, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s appointee to the Pacific council, said today. “The options that have been developed that do authorize some fishing are very precautionary.”
Harvest limits and other restrictions on the number of fish caught per trip are new concepts for managing ocean salmon fisheries, Yaremko said.
Jared Davis stands aboard his boat, the Salty Lady, in Richmond on March 8, 2023. Photo by Martin do Nascimento, CalMatters
“Even the best option that they give us there is crumbs compared to a regular salmon season,” said Jared Davis, captain of the Salty Lady, a charter fishing boat.
Still, of all the options, he said, he’d prefer complete closure. The shortened seasons don’t offer enough days to sustain his business and the potential repercussions aren’t worth it.
“I think fishing on low abundance such as we have this year is reckless and irresponsible,” he said. “It’s really playing with fire for us to take any fish out of there.”
Sarah Bates, who owns a commercial fishing boat berthed at Fisherman’s Wharf in San Francisco, called the decision “tragic.”
“We’re looking at numbers of fish that don’t even make it worthwhile to untie the boat,” she said. “It’s not enough fish to pay for the maintenance and preparation.”
A financial nightmare — some may never fish again
RJ Waldron, 48, put his sportsfishing boat, the Sundance, up for sale in January. When the salmon season closed last year, an estimated 85% of his business dried up. Few clients took him up on his offer to switch to halibut, striped bass or rockfish.
Buying the boat eight years ago to run a charter fishing business out of the East Bay had been a dream come true for Waldron, a long-time fishing and hunting guide.
“Basically this last year, I’ve just been blowing through my cash, blowing through the savings, just trying to stay afloat,” Waldron said. “I put everything I had into this fishing business, into the salmon. And it’s totally out of my control. I can’t resurrect it.”
“We’re looking at numbers of fish that don’t even make it worthwhile to untie the boat. It’s not enough fish to pay for the maintenance and preparation.” — Sarah Bates, commercial fisherwoman in San Francisco
California’s commercial fleet and recreational anglers still await federal disaster aid for last year’s losses. The federal government allocated only $20.6 million in disaster funding, and a year later, none of the salmon fishers CalMatters interviewed has received a check.
Waldron called the lack of disaster aid a “big slap in the face.”
Davis said he tried to weather the storm by arranging trips for halibut, striped bass, rockfish and lingcod. Still, he estimates that his business was down 80% from a normal year.
Seeing the season restricted this year, “breaks my heart,” he said. “It’s what I love, and it’s a passion. It’s something I’ve been doing my whole life, and I know that there’s a lot of others in the industry that it’s the same for.”
Fishing boats at a dry dock in Richmond on March 8, 2023. Photo by Martin do Nascimento, CalMatters
Bates estimates that about half the fleet picked up shore jobs. And some, she said, probably won’t return.
“Some people, I’m sure, will not go fishing again,” she said. “They got a job that will hold them through and their momentum will shift, and I’m sure we’re going to lose members of our fleet.”
To make ends meet last year, Bates picked up bookkeeping work. But she doesn’t know yet what she’ll do this year. Bates’ boat is called the Bounty, a cruel irony the past year. Still, she said the boat has seen bad seasons before — and it’s bad luck to change a boat’s name, she said.
Tommy “TF” Graham also will keep working on land. A commercial fisherman based in Bodega Bay, he got a Class A driver’s license so he could drive a truck and stay afloat through the closures. Now, when he’s not crab fishing, Graham wakes up at 3 a.m. to drive frozen and farmed salmon and other fish from around the world into San Francisco.
“A guy has got to get up and put his boots on and go to work every day,” Graham said. Still, he said, “I used to be a provider, now I’m a consumer. It feels like shit, to tell you the truth.”
Tribes with subsistence fishing do not have to follow the federal recommendations, although they often cancel or heavily restrict their own seasons.
Sacramento River fall-run Chinook make up the greatest proportion of the California and Oregon ocean salmon fisheries. Their numbers are down from an average of more than 200,000 fish that returned to spawn in the mid-2000s. And those numbers are a fraction of the historical counts of between one and two million fall and spring-run salmon returning to the Central Valley every year.
Last year, fewer than 134,000 returned to the Sacramento River. That’s more than double the fish that returned in 2022, which was the third lowest count on record. But it barely cleared the federal government’s minimum conservation target of 122,000 fish, and falls 19% short of the number that had been projected to return — despite the cancellation of all salmon fishing.
Now, scientists estimate that 213,606 Sacramento River fall-run salmon are swimming off the coast. It’s more than last year — more even than the upper limit of the fishery’s conservation target. But it is still the second lowest projection in a decade, according to a guidance letter from the National Marine Fisheries Service. “Caution is warranted to reduce the chances that the stock becomes overfished again.”
But the salmon industry also points to state and federal management of the Sacramento River and operations of the vast Central Valley Project, which funnels water south from Northern California’s rivers to irrigate a third of the state’s agricultural land and supply a million households.
In 2021, almost all of the endangered winter-run Chinook eggs in the Sacramento River were wiped out, cooked in dangerously hot water. The Pacific Fishery Management Council told state and federal water managers in 2022 that the conditions also could harm eggs of spring-run and fall-run Chinook salmon. Expressing their “grave concerns,” they said “a major factor” was the “high river temperatures that were under (the U.S. Bureau of) Reclamation’s control.”
“It’s really hard for me to swallow that we export all this water and have little to no regulation on the farming,” Waldron said. “We’re taking away from a resource to give to another resource. And I don’t understand how we can let that happen, especially (since) the salmon are a natural resource.”
The Newsom administration unveiled a plan in January aimed at protecting and restoring salmon “amidst hotter and drier weather exacerbated by climate change.”
###
CalMatters.org is a nonprofit, nonpartisan media venture explaining California policies and politics.
Holy wow! Three or more cheers are in order for St. Bernard’s girls basketball team who made history over the weekend by becoming the first team in H-DNL history to earn a state championship.
Taking the court at the Sacramento Kings’ Golden 1 Center on Saturday morning, the team scored a dominant 47-29 win over Grossmont High School out of San Diego.
