logo
California commercial salmon season is shut down again

California commercial salmon season is shut down again

Yahoo18-04-2025

Fall-run Chinook salmon migrate and spawn in the Feather River near state infrastructure and the Feather River Fish Hatchery in Oroville, on Oct. 28, 2024. (Photo by Xavier Mascareñas/ California Department of Water Resources)
This story was originally published by CalMatters.
Facing the continued collapse of Chinook salmon, officials this week shut down California's commercial salmon fishing season for an unprecedented third year in a row.
Under the decision by an interstate fisheries agency, recreational salmon fishing will be allowed in California for only brief windows of time this spring. This will be the first year that any sportfishing of Chinook has been allowed since 2022.
The decision by the Pacific Fishery Management Council means that no salmon caught off California can be sold to retail consumers and restaurants for at least another year. In Oregon and Washington, commercial salmon fishing will remain open, although limited.
'From a salmon standpoint, it's an environmental disaster. For the fishing industry, it's a human tragedy, and it's also an economic disaster,' said Scott Artis, executive director of the Golden State Salmon Association, an industry organization that has lobbied for river restoration and improved hatchery programs.
The decline of California's salmon follows decades of deteriorating conditions in the waterways where the fish spawn each year, including the Sacramento and Klamath rivers.
California's salmon are an ecological icon and a valued source of food for Native American tribes. The shutdown also has an economic toll: It has already put hundreds of commercial fishers and sportfishing boat operators out of work and affected thousands of people in communities and industries reliant on processing, selling and serving locally caught salmon.
California's commercial fishery has never been closed for three years in a row before.
Some experts fear the conditions in California have been so poor for so long that Chinook may never rebound to fishable levels. Others remain hopeful for major recovery if the amounts of water diverted to farms and cities are reduced and wetlands kept dry by flood-control levees are restored.
This year's recreational season includes several brief windows for fishing, including a weekend in June and another in July, or a quota of 7,000 fish.
Jared Davis, owner and operator of the Salty Lady in Sausalito, one of dozens of party boats that take paying customers fishing, thinks it's likely that this quota will be met on the first open weekend for recreational fishing, scheduled for June 7-8.
'Obviously, the pressure is going to be intense, so everybody and their mother is going to be out on the water on those days,' he said. 'When they hit that quota, it's done.'
One member of the fishery council, Corey Ridings, voted against the proposed regulations after saying she was concerned that the first weekend would overshoot the 7,000-fish quota.
Davis said such a miniscule recreational season won't help boat owners like him recover from past closures, though it will carry symbolic meaning.
'It might give California anglers a glimmer of hope and keep them from selling all their rods and buying golf clubs,' he said.
Sarah Bates, a commercial fisher based at San Francisco's Fisherman's Wharf, said the ongoing closure has stripped many boat owners of most of their income.
'It continues to be devastating,' she said. 'Salmon has been the cornerstone of many of our ports for a long time.'
She said the shutdown also has trickle-down effects on a range of businesses that support the salmon fishery, such as fuel services, grocery stores and dockside ice machines.
'We're also seeing a sort of a third wave … the general seafood market for local products has tanked,' such as rockfish and halibut. She said that many buyers are turning to farmed and wild salmon delivered from other regions instead.
Davis noted that federal emergency relief funds promised for the 2023 closure still have not arrived. 'Nobody has seen a dime,' he said.
Before the Gold Rush, several million Chinook spawned annually in the river systems of the Central Valley and the state's northern coast. Through much of the 20th century, California's salmon fishery formed the economic backbone of coastal fishing ports, with fishers using hook and line pulling in millions of pounds in good years.
But in 2024, just 99,274 fall-run Chinook — the most commercially viable of the Central Valley's four subpopulations — returned to the Sacramento River and its tributaries, substantially lower than the numbers in 2023. In 2022, fewer than 70,000 returned, one of the lowest estimates ever.
About 40,000 returned to the San Joaquin River. Fewer than 30,000 Chinook reached their spawning grounds in the Klamath River system, where the Hoopa, Yurok and Karuk tribes rely on the fish in years of abundance.
The decline of California's salmon stems from nearly two centuries of damage inflicted on the rivers where salmon spend the first and final stages of their lives. Gold mining, logging and dam construction devastated watersheds. Levees constrained rivers, turning them into relatively sterile channels of fast-moving water while converting floodplains and wetlands into irrigated farmland.
Today, many of these impacts persist, along with water diversions, reduced flows and elevated river temperatures that frequently spell death for fertilized eggs and juvenile fish.
Peter Moyle, a UC Davis fish biologist and professor emeritus, said recovery of self-sustaining populations may be possible in some tributaries of the Sacramento River.
'There are some opportunities for at least keeping runs going in parts of the Central Valley, but getting naturally spawning fish back in large numbers, I just can't see it happening,' he said.
Jacob Katz, a biologist with the group California Trout, holds out hope for a future of flourishing Sacramento River Chinook. 'We could have vibrant fall-run populations in a decade,' he said.
That will require major habitat restoration involving dam removals, reconstruction of levee systems to revive wetlands and floodplains, and reduced water diversions for agriculture — all measures fraught with cost, regulatory constraints, and controversy.
State officials, recognizing the risk of extinction, have promoted salmon recovery as a policy goal for years. In early 2024, the Newsom administration released its California Salmon Strategy for a Hotter, Drier Future, a 37-page catalogue of proposed actions to mitigate environmental impacts and restore flows and habitat, all in the face of climate change.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife Director Charlton H. Bonham said the decision to allow limited recreational fishing 'brings hope. We know, however, that this news brings little relief' to the industry.
He said salmon 'are still recovering from severe drought and other climate challenges and have not yet benefitted from our consecutive years of wet winters and other actions taken to boost populations.'
However, Artis of Golden State Salmon Association said while the state's salmon strategy includes some important items, it leaves out equally critical steps, such as protecting minimum flows for fish. He said salmon are threatened by proposed water projects endorsed by the Newsom administration.
'It fails to include some of the upcoming salmon-killing projects that the governor is pushing like Sites Reservoir and the Delta tunnel, and it ignores the fact that the Voluntary Agreements are designed to allow massive diversions of water,' he said.
Experts agree that an important key to rebuilding salmon runs is increasing the frequency and duration of shallow flooding in riverside riparian areas, or even fallow rice paddies — a program Katz has helped develop through his career.
On such seasonal floodplains, a shallow layer of water can help trigger an explosion of photosynthesis and food production, ultimately providing nutrition for juvenile salmon as they migrate out of the river system each spring.
Through meetings with farmers, urban water agencies and government officials, Rene Henery, California science director with Trout Unlimited, has helped draft an ambitious salmon recovery plan dubbed 'Reorienting to Recovery.' Featuring habitat restoration, carefully managed harvests and generously enhanced river flows — especially in dry years — this framework, Henery said, could rebuild diminished Central Valley Chinook runs to more than 1.6 million adult fish per year over a 20-year period.
He said adversaries — often farmers and environmentalists — must shift from traditional feuds over water to more collaborative programs of restoring productive watersheds while maintaining productive agriculture.
As the recovery needle for Chinook moves in the wrong direction, Katz said deliberate action is urgent.
'We're balanced on the edge of losing these populations,' he said. 'We have to go big now. We have no other option.'
This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

It's Expensive to Become a Teacher in California. This Bill Would Pay Those Who Try
It's Expensive to Become a Teacher in California. This Bill Would Pay Those Who Try

Yahoo

time2 days ago

  • Yahoo

It's Expensive to Become a Teacher in California. This Bill Would Pay Those Who Try

This article was originally published in CalMatters. This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters. When Brigitta Hunter started her teaching career, she had $20,000 in student loans and zero income – even though she was working nearly full time in the classroom. 'We lived on my husband's pathetic little paycheck. I don't know how we did it,' Hunter said. 'And we were lucky – he had a job and my loans weren't that bad. It can be almost impossible for some people.' Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter Each year, about 28,000 people in California work for free for about a year as teachers or classroom aides while they complete the requirements for their teaching credentials. That year without pay can be a dire hardship for many aspiring teachers, even deterring them from pursuing the profession. A new bill by Assemblymember Al Muratsuchi, a Democrat from Torrance, would set aside money for school districts to pay would-be teachers while they do their student teaching service. The goal is to help alleviate the teacher shortage and attract lower-income candidates to the profession. 'Nothing makes a bigger difference in improving the quality of public education than getting highly qualified teachers in the classroom,' Muratsuchi said. 'This bill helps remove some of the obstacles to that.' To be a K-12 public school teacher in California, candidates need a bachelor's degree and a teaching credential, typically earned after completing a one-year program combining coursework and 600 hours of classroom experience. During that time, candidates work with veteran teachers or lead their own classes. Teacher credential programs cost between $20,000 and $40,000, depending on where a student enrolls and where they live. In 2020, about 60% of teachers borrowed money to finish their degrees, according to a recent study by the Learning Policy Institute, with loans averaging about $30,000 for a four-year bachelor's degree and a credential program. Entering the profession with hefty student loans can be demoralizing and stressful, the report said, adding to the challenges new teachers face. The average starting teacher salary in California is $58,000, according to the National Education Association, among the highest in the country but still hard to live on in many parts of the state. It could take a decade or more for teachers to pay off their loans. Muratsuchi's bill, AB 1128, passed the Assembly on Monday and now awaits a vote in the Senate. It would create a grant program for districts to pay student teachers the same amount they pay substitute teachers, which is roughly $140 a day. The overall cost would be up to $300 million a year, according to Assembly analysts, but Gov. Gavin Newsom has set aside $100 million for the program in his revised budget. Muratsuchi has another bill related to teacher pay, also working its way through the Legislature. Assembly bill 477, which passed the Assembly this week, would raise teacher salaries across the board. Christopher Carr, executive director of Aspire Public Schools in Los Angeles, a network of 11 charter schools, called the bill a potential 'game changer.' Teacher candidates often have to work second jobs to make ends meet, and sometimes finish with debt of $70,000 or more, he said. That can be an insurmountable barrier for people with limited resources. Paying would-be teachers would attract more people to the teaching profession, especially Black and Latino candidates, he said. School districts around the state have been trying to diversify their teacher workforces, based on research showing that Black and Latino students tend to do better academically when they have at least one teacher of the same race. Carr's schools pay their teachers-in-training through grants and a partnership with a local college, which has led to more of them staying on to teach full time after they receive their credentials, he said. That has saved the schools money by reducing turnover. 'This could open doors and be a step toward racial justice,' Carr said. 'California has a million spending priorities, but this will lead to better outcomes for students and ultimately save the state money.' Tyanthony Davis, chief executive director of Inner City Education Foundation, a charter school network in Los Angeles, put it this way: 'If we have well paid, qualified, happy teachers, we'll have happier classrooms.' Muratusuchi's bill has no formal opposition. The California Taxpayers Association has not taken a position. The California Teachers Association, the state's largest teachers union, is a supporter. 'This legislation comes at a critical time as we continue to face an educator recruitment and retention crisis,' said David Goldberg, the union president. 'Providing new grants to compensate student teachers for important on-the-job training is a strong step forward in the right direction to strengthening public education.' Hunter survived her student-teaching experience and went on to teach fourth grade for 34 years, retiring last year from the Mark West Union School District in Santa Rosa. The last 15 years of her career she served as a mentor to aspiring teachers. She saw first-hand the stress that would-be teachers endure as they juggle coursework, long days in the classroom and often second jobs on nights and weekends. But paying student-teachers, she said, should only be the beginning. Novice teachers also need smaller class sizes, more support from administrators and more help with enrichment activities, such as extra staff to lead lessons in art and physical education. 'We definitely need more teachers, and paying student teachers is a good start,' Hunter said. 'But there's a lot more we can do to help them.' This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

‘Prudent remedy' for veto error is special session, Legislative Council advises
‘Prudent remedy' for veto error is special session, Legislative Council advises

Yahoo

time3 days ago

  • Yahoo

‘Prudent remedy' for veto error is special session, Legislative Council advises

Gov. Kelly Armstrong speaks during a meeting of the Senate Appropriations Committee on March 27, 2025. (Michael Achterling/North Dakota Monitor) Legal staff for North Dakota's legislative branch concluded the 'prudent remedy' to correct an error with Gov. Kelly Armstrong's line-item veto would be for the governor to call a special session, according to a memo issued Friday. But Attorney General Drew Wrigley, who is working on a separate opinion, maintains that Legislative Council has no role in determining the execution of the governor's veto. Armstrong announced May 22 a 'markup error' with a line-item veto that crossed out $35 million for a state housing development fund. The red X over the funding did not match what Armstrong indicated in his veto message that explained his reasoning. North Dakota governor unintentionally vetoes $35 million for housing programs A Legislative Council memo distributed to lawmakers Friday concluded that legal precedent supports the marked-up bill as the official veto document. 'Engaging in interpretive gymnastics' to disregard the markings on the bill could lead to unintended consequences in the future, Legislative Council concluded. Emily Thompson, legal division director for Legislative Council, said the Legislature needs to have an objective document to clearly illustrate what was vetoed, such as the specific veto markings on the bill, so lawmakers can exercise their veto override authority effectively. Lawmakers have six days remaining in their 80-day limit and could call themselves back into session to address the veto. However, the memo cautions that the Legislature may need those days to reconvene to respond to federal funding issues or other unforeseen reasons. Legislative Council recommends the governor call a special session, which would not count against the 80-day limit. A special session of the Legislature costs about $65,000 per day, according to Legislative Council. Armstrong is waiting for an attorney general's opinion to determine the next steps, according to a statement from his office. He previously said he would call a special session if necessary. Wrigley said Friday it's up to his office to assess the situation and issue an opinion on the governor's question. 'The power in question is strictly the governor's power and it has to be in compliance with the constitution and laws of North Dakota,' Wrigley said. 'That's the only assessment here. There's no role for this in Legislative Council. They have no authority in this regard.' Armstrong on May 19 issued two line-item vetoes in Senate Bill 2014, the budget for the state Industrial Commission. His veto message explained his reasons for objecting to a $150,000 one-time grant for a Native American-focused organization to fund a homelessness liaison position. But the marking also crossed out $25 million for housing projects and programs and $10 million to combat homelessness, which he later said he did not intend to veto. Chris Joseph, general counsel for Armstrong, wrote in a request for an attorney general's opinion that the markings served as a 'color-coded visual aid,' and the veto message should control the extent of the veto. Wrigley said his office is working on the opinion and aware that resolution of the issue is time sensitive. Bills passed by the Legislature with appropriations attached to them, such as the Industrial Commission budget, go into effect July 1. 'I look forward to publishing my opinion on that at the earliest possible time,' he said. The Legislative Council memo states, 'It would not be appropriate to allow the governor and attorney general to resolve the ambiguity by agreement.' In addition, Legislative Council concluded that if the governor's veto message is to be considered the controlling document for vetoes in the future, more ambiguities would likely be 'inevitable and frequent' and require resolution through the courts. The memo cites a 2018 North Dakota Supreme Court opinion involving a case between the Legislature and then-Gov. Doug Burgum that ruled 'a veto is complete and irrevocable upon return of the vetoed bill to the originating house,' and further stated the governor does not have the power to 'withdraw a veto.' 'Setting a precedent of the attorney general issuing a letter saying we can just go ahead and interpret the governor's veto message to mean what was, or was not, vetoed, that's a really concerning precedent to set,' Thompson said in an interview. Wrigley said any issues resulting from the opinion could be addressed by the courts. 'I sincerely hope that they (Legislative Council) are not trying to somehow publicly advocate, or attempt to influence a process for which they have no role,' Wrigley said. Legislative Council memo SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Government moves to drop Sheetz race case after Trump halts use of key civil rights tool
Government moves to drop Sheetz race case after Trump halts use of key civil rights tool

Yahoo

time3 days ago

  • Yahoo

Government moves to drop Sheetz race case after Trump halts use of key civil rights tool

Federal authorities moved Friday to drop a racial discrimination lawsuit against the Sheetz convenience store chain, part of a broader effort by President Donald Trump's administration to halt the use of a key tool for enforcing the country's civil rights laws. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the top federal agency for enforcing workers rights, filed a motion in a Pennsylvania federal court to dismiss the Sheetz lawsuit, citing Trump's executive order directing federal agencies to deprioritize the use of 'disparate impact liability' in civil rights enforcement. Disparate impact liability holds that policies that are neutral on their face can violate civil rights laws if they impose artificial barriers that disadvantage different demographic groups. The concept has been used to root out practices that close off minorities, women, people with disabilities, older adults or other groups from certain jobs, or keep them from accessing credit or equal pay. Trump's executive order is part of his campaign to upend civil rights enforcement through firings and other steps that have consolidated his power over quasi-independent agencies like the EEOC, redirecting them to implement his priorities, including stamping out diversity and inclusion practices and eroding the rights of transgender people. In the Sheetz case, filed in April 2024 under the Biden administration, the EEOC had claimed that the company's policy of refusing to hire anyone who failed its criminal background checks discriminated against Black, Native American and multiracial job applicants. The lawsuit could survive even if the EEOC drops it: A Black worker who was let go from his Sheetz job in Pennsylvania filed a motion in federal court Thursday evening to intervene and pursue his own class action lawsuit. In its motion Friday, the EEOC asked the court to delay its dismissal of the lawsuit for 60 days to allow potential claimants to intervene. The Supreme Court recognized the concept of disparate impact in a landmark 1971 case, which held that a North Carolina power plant discriminated against Black employees by requiring high school diplomas and an intelligence test for certain higher paying roles, even though the requirements were irrelevant to the jobs. In 1991, bipartisan majorities in Congress voted to codify disparate impact in Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which prohibits workplace discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin. The concept holds that it is illegal to impose barriers to employment if such practices have a discriminatory effect and have no relevance to the requirements of the job. The April 23 order declared that it is 'the policy of the United States to eliminate the use of disparate-impact liability in all contexts to the maximum degree possible.' The order argued that disparate impact has become a 'key tool' of a 'pernicious movement' that threatens meritocracy in favor of 'racial balancing' in the workforce. Craig Leen, a former top official at the Labor Department under the first Trump administration, said while the executive order take a more aggressive approach, it reflects long-standing conservative concerns that disparate impact liability encourages the assumption that any racial imbalance in the workforce is a result of discrimination. Harmeet K. Dhillon, assistant U.S. attorney general for civil rights, said the Trump administration would rightfully 'focus on individual discrimination cases,' which she said are 'more factually sound, less susceptible to manipulation, and more closely hews to the original intent' of civil rights law. The EEOC filed the original Sheetz lawsuit after an eight-year investigation that arose from complaints filed by two job applicants. But following Trump's disparate impact order, the EEOC filed a motion District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania to dismiss the lawsuit. The EEOC had sent letters to potential claimants notifying them of its intention to drop the case and urging them to act quickly if they wished to intervene. U.S. workers can pursue federal discrimination lawsuits on their own if the EEOC declines to take up their complaints but often don't because of the resources required. The EEOC declined to comment further on the case. One of the potential claimants, Kenni Miller, filed a motion to intervene late Thursday. Miller, 32, was hired as a shift supervisor at a Sheetz in Altoona, Pennsylvania, in 2020, according to the motion filed by the law firm Outten & Golden, which represents workers in employment disputes, and the Public Interest Law Center. After working there for a month, Miller was told he failed the background check because of a felony drug conviction and was let go, according to the motion. According to the EEOC's lawsuit, Sheetz' policy of denying jobs who anyone who failed a background check resulted in 14.5% Black job applicants being denied employment, compared to 8% of white applicants. For Native American applicants, the rate was 13%, and for multiracial applicants, it was 13.5%. In court filings, Sheetz denied the allegations. Attorneys for the company, which is being represented by the law firm Littler, declined to comment further. The EEOC has not said how many potential claimants have been identified but Outten & Golden estimates the number to likely be in the thousands. Sheetz has more than 20,000 employees and operate at least 700 brand-store locations in Maryland, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia, according to court documents. The Sheetz case echoes a 2018 lawsuit against Target claiming that the retailer's hiring process, which automatically rejected people with criminal backgrounds, disproportionately kept Black and Hispanic applicants from getting entry level jobs. Target agreed to pay more than $3.7 million to settle the lawsuit, and revised its policy so fewer applicants with criminal records would be disqualified. In 2020, Walmart agreed to pay $20 million and discontinue a preemployment strength test that the EEOC had claimed in a lawsuit unfairly excluded women from jobs at grocery distribution centers. And in one of the biggest sex discrimination cases in recent years, Sterling Jewelers, the parent company of Jared and Kay Jewelers, agreed in 2022 to pay $175 million to settle a long-fought lawsuit alleging that some 68,000 women had been subjected for years to unfair pay and promotion practices. The Justice Department, EEOC and other federal agencies have moved quickly to quash the use of disparate impact liability. The Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, for example, has moved to dismiss several Biden-era lawsuits against police departments in Kentucky and Minnesota, saying the cases claimed patterns of unconstitutional policing practices 'by wrongly equating statistical disparities with intentional discrimination.' In a May memo to employers, EEOC Acting Chief Andrea Lucas said the agency would deprioritize disparate impact cases. She also warned companies against using demographic data, which large companies are required gather and submit annually to the EEOC, to justify policies that favor any employees based on race or sex, something Lucas has long argued many well-intentioned DEI policies do in violation of Title VII. A Supreme Court ruling Thursday could help open the door for more complaints against DEI policies that Lucas has said will be her priority. Jenny Yang, a former EEOC chair now with Outten & Golden, said the pullback on federal enforcement of disparate impact risks dissuading companies from proactively examining hiring and other practices to ensure they do not discriminate. At the same time, Yang and nine other former Democratic EEOC commissioners and counsels have released a letter to employers emphasizing that the Trump's order does not change the law. 'Employers should not expect that they will have a free pass on disparate impact liability simply because the President has instructed federal agencies not to pursue enforcement of the law,' wrote the former EEOC officials. ________ The Associated Press' women in the workforce and state government coverage receives financial support from Pivotal Ventures. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store