Readers of this blog have undoubtedly already read about the recent fish salvage operation in one side channel of the Upper Deschutes River organized by the Deschutes River Conservancy. Claims of 10,000 fish saved have been made. I don’t know how this number was determined and no size or condition factor data has been provided but years ago ODFW dismissed this operation as largely biologically insignificant. The annual dewatering of this particular side channel has been going on for decades, there are other areas that are also dewatered, and most of the fish captured when ODFW was involved were very small. Fingerlings moved from rearing habitat to mainstem areas will have very low survival rates. Nonetheless, I commend the volunteers who want to have some positive impact. There’s nothing wrong with doing something.

Here is a more critical analysis of the operation from George Wuerthner. I am not endorsing everything he says, or the way he says it, but George makes some points worth considering on the dewatering of this particular side channel as well as the larger issue of water ownership and management. He does not, however, comment on the fact that the dewatering of the Upper Deschutes will be reduced in the coming years as winter flows are increased per the terms of the Deschutes Basin Habitat Conservation Plan. There is a partial solution in the works, although it will take a lot more time to implement. Of course, the DBHCP only applies to the Upper Deschutes, it is of no help to the Middle Deschutes which is in even worse shape.

One point that George could have made is that the implementation of the DBHCP is mostly being funded with taxpayer dollars. Flows in the Upper Deschutes will be increased as old, leaking irrigation canals are piped. Water saved from this piping will be returned to the Upper Deschutes. I have years of posts discussing the pros and cons of taxpayers funding piping projects and the economic return on investment. In short, the overwhelming majority of irrigators who withdraw water from the Upper Deschutes river are not real farmers as defined by the US Department of Agriculture. Clearly, we taxpayers have a long history of subsidizing real farming but should we be shouldering the cost of also subsidizing hobby farmers? There are ways that could more equitably solve the problem.