The Sonoma County Water Agency wants to count fish. Despite our best efforts to do in the little guys, coho, chinook and steelhead still live in the Russian River Watershed.
Thriving? No.
Hanging on? Yes.
Our County Water Agency wants to count them. They don't trust the accuracy of a visual count, obtained by trapping and snorkeling. Instead, they are employing a cruel and unusual form of punishment on an endangered species: "Electrofishing."
Using this method, an electric current is passed through the water and the fish, shocked into convulsion or paralysis, float belly-up to the surface so that the researcher can count them! The electrocuted fish are not supposed to die in the process, but some do. They are not supposed to be maimed, but some are. Some break their backs in convulsions and suffer other damage we don't even know about.
Is the Department of Fish and Game aware of the hazard? Yes. The National Marine Fisheries Service? Yes. They say they will "eventually phase out the practice." We say, let's phase out the practice now! Which is more important, absolute accuracy of the count, or preserving as many of the endangered individuals as possible? There is no need to sacrifice any fish in the interest of counting them! We have no idea how electric shock impairs the delicate system of living fish, nor any idea how it might affect any of the remarkable properties anadromous fish possess.
Aside from the common-sense argument, from a scientific point of view, electric shock introduces new variables and "unintended consequences" into the equation (namely, impacts of the electric current). Who knows how many are affected? The visual count is no longer accurate when we take into account the fish killed, maimed and injured, or those whose reproductive viability has been irrevocably impaired by the electric current.
National Marine Fisheries biologist Jennifer Nielsen recently published a report on the electroshock sampling technique which raised serious questions about the wisdom of using the method on endangered species. Her 1998 article, "Electrofishing California's Endangered Fish Populations," states, "In many areas of California where numbers of salmon and trout can be very small...accumulated effects of electrofishing may be significant. Based on this review and personal experience, I believe fisheries biologists frequently electrofish without consideration of potential harm or alternative methods". Nielsen continues, "Sublethal effects are not always externally evident in electrofished populations, and biologists appear to greatly underestimate spinal injuries from external examinations alone". In one study, only 2% of captive rainbow trout that had been subjected to electrofishing had externally visible deformities, but X-ray analysis after one year in captivity showed that 37% of the population had, in fact, been injured.
Nielsen thinks the electrofishers should be controlled through the permit process. We think it's time to completely abandon the practice. Let the Sonoma County Water Agency and the National Marine Fisheries Service know that we think it's time to stop. There are enough assaults on the wild anadromous fish due to pesticide runoff and water diversion. Do we have to kill some to know whether they are still alive? No. Please. Let's be reasonable!
Copyright Mendocino Environmental Center 1999
Permission granted to excerpt or use this article if source is cited