How the Return of Salmon to the Klamath River Shows Us What’s Possible in Wildlife Conservation

How Salmon’s return to the Klamath River shows us what is possible in wildlife conservation

Who Jeff Opperman

Imagine standing on a river bank with thousands of dead salmon floating, belly up and rotting in the hot California air. That’s the sight—and smell—that greeted people along the Klamath River in September 2002, when 35,000 fish died in just a few days. They fell victim to warm water temperatures and low river levels, both caused by dams and diversions that altered the river’s flow.

This terrible loss is not the only one: according to October 2024 Living Planet ReportI was a co-author, monitored wildlife populations around the world have declined by an average of 73 percent over the past half century. Freshwater species such as salmon have suffered even greater losses. Agriculture and development, like dams, have caused these declines in natural habitats.

But the Klamath story continues to be written. Just over two decades after the Great Fish Kill, the Klamath became the site The largest dam removal project in history. Since the removal of the lower four dams on the river was completed last month, salmon have moved upstream to parts of the river that haven’t been seen in over a century.

About supporting science journalism

If you like this article, please consider supporting our award-winning journalism subscribe. By purchasing a subscription, you’re helping to ensure a future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas that shape our world.

The Klamath River is no longer a tragic example of the global nature crisis; instead, its restoration serves as an inspiring story of how people can work together to restore wildlife habitats. This great responsibility was made possible through cooperation and continuous commitment, especially by the indigenous people of the region. It is an example that we can learn from and repeat around the world.

The scale of this global need for restoration is enormous. Disturbing results The Living Planet Report are derived from Livable Planet Index (LPI)A set of statistics developed by the Zoological Society of London. LPI provides a comprehensive view of the health of wildlife across the planet, drawing on data from nearly 35,000 populations of birds, mammals, fish, reptiles and amphibians, across more than 5,000 species. It can also be used to track specific groups such as migratory fish…from small gobies to giant fish– those who have experienced Since 1970 there has been a staggering 81 percent decline.

Halting—and then reversing—alarming declines in fish and other wildlife populations will require major changes in how we produce energy and food and how we implement conservation. Klamath shows that such changes are within reach.

The Klamath was the third most productive river for salmon on the west coast of the United States. Native migratory fish were a staple food—and central to the culture—of the Karuk, Yuro, Klamath and other tribes. But, starting in the 1920s, four hydroelectric dams were built on the river, preventing salmon from swimming upstream to spawn and confining them to a reduced section of the river. The expansion of irrigated farming further stressed salmon through reduced flows and high water temperatures—factors that contributed to the 2002 fish kill—and chemical and nutrient runoff.

But from that low point, there was an opening for recovery. At the heart of the Klamath’s amazing turnaround was the tribes’ unwavering dedication to salmon restoration. Legal rights, cultural commitments and determined efforts that had been neglected for a long time made it possible to restore the river. Collectively, their progress demonstrates that implementing conservation at the scale necessary to restore wildlife will require a diversity of leadership and strategies.

First, regulators, conservation groups and tribes negotiated agreements with farmers to reduce agricultural runoff, improve water quality, and balance irrigation demands with water levels in the basin’s lakes and wetlands. That brought it Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement, It was signed in 2010. That agreement also set the stage for the removal of the four hydroelectric dams, an outcome the tribes had sought for decades.

Another catalyst for the removal was PacifiCorp’s legal requirement that reservoir owners renew their reservoir licenses that were set to expire in 2006. to reduce the social and environmental impacts of projects. For Klamath reservoirs, regulatory agencies have recommended fish ladders should be added for license renewal for salmon to swim over dams—construction projects that would have been prohibitively expensive. PacifiCorp eventually signed a remedial agreement with tribes, agencies and conservation groups to remove the four dams, which began late last year.

Removing four hydroelectric dams looks like a huge loss of renewable energy. California’s rapid expansion of wind and solar projects, however, will more than offset the loss of the Klamath dam—which provided just 2 percent of PacifiCorp’s generating capacity. In fact, the new renewable capacity added during the California dam removal process will be nearly 20 times that of the Klamath dams.

Klamath restoration clearly demonstrates Indigenous leadership and resource stewardship that includes lands. 40 percent of the rest of the world’s natural areas—and their efforts will be essential for effective conservation in the 21st century.

Moreover, restoration was only possible through a multi-layered set of strategies. For centuries, nature conservation has been synonymous with setting aside large tracts of land in national parks or wildlife refuges. The Klamath Basin is home to six national wildlife refuges, two national parks and wilderness areas, and approximately two-thirds of the basin is on public lands, mostly national forests. And yet, salmon—one of the basin’s most important environmental and cultural resources—was still on the ropes. To recover this resource, agreements on water use, agricultural management and dam removal were needed to restore river connectivity.

Only such examples are necessary. In November it was completed by representatives of 196 countries United Nations Biodiversity Conference (COP16) in Colombia and, although some are important agreements were reachedMuch of the work in setting goals and designing strategies for nature conservation and restoration is to be done. Reversing the loss of wildlife worldwide will require several strategies. Protected areas will continue to be important, but so will transformations in the way we produce energy and food and implement conservation. And while the “transformation” may sound dramatic, Klamath’s remarkable turnaround shows that nature’s restoration remains within reach.

This is an opinion and analysis article, and the views expressed by the author(s) are not necessarily their own. American scientific