Marine mammals are admired by millions of beachgoers every year, but most people do not realize that these majestic creatures are often left fighting for their lives after interactions with humans and man-made materials. Sea lions are adored due to their inquisitive nature, but this is what often leads them into deadly situations. Every year, it is estimated that 17 billion pounds of plastic and other debris enter our oceans (1). Typical materials in the sea are packing bands, rubber bands, net, rope, and fishing gear, all of which make interesting toys for sea lions (2). These materials may work their way around the animal, leading to restricted movement, growth, or even breathing; this is known as ‘entanglement,’ and it has taken the lives of thousands of marine mammals every year. Photos of entanglement cases are often horrifying, and it is a saddening realization that our trash has cost these loveable animals their lives. Unfortunately, entanglement is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to marine mammals losing their lives due to acts of human neglect.
In the 1960s, many species of marine mammals were on the brink of extinction, and it was essential to take action before these species were lost for good. Marine mammals lost their lives when they were caught as bycatch, hunted for their pelts, injured by boats, or killed for their blubber (3). President Nixon pushed for the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) in 1972 in hopes of gaining more public approval. The purpose of this act was to criminalize the harassment, hunting, killing, or capture of American marine mammals. U.S. fisheries were also forced to be more responsible with their fishing practices in order to reduce bycatch and entanglement caused by fishing gear left behind in the water. This act allowed people to begin associating marine mammals with the American culture, causing people to feel a stronger responsibility to protect these animals (3). The MMPA led many species to come back from the brink of extinction, and some populations are returning to stable levels once again, making this legislation a success for the environment.
Recently, the MMPA has been brought to the attention of the Senate with hopes of significant modifications (4). In the Columbia River Gorge, the population of sea lions has been on the rise, and the primary prey of these animals are the salmon native to this river. If a sea lion is seen to be eating salmon in an area close to human activity, such as the Bonneville dam, state officials attempt to deter the animals with rubber bullets. If the sea lion returns, it is branded, and if it is seen in the area for five consecutive days than the state is allowed to turn to ‘lethal deterrence,’ or killing the mammal. Currently, it is legal for the states to deter 93 sea lions a year lethally, but the newly proposed H.R. 2038 bill calls for a tenfold increase of this number. This increased removal of sea lions is expected to allow the endangered salmon populations to rebound, but perhaps legalizing the killing of their predators is not the proper way to tackle this issue (4).
Naomi Rose, a marine mammal scientist from the Animal Welfare Institute, argues that killing sea lions in the Columbia River would temporarily allow salmon populations to rebound, but we need to address the ways that humans are harming these populations instead of transferring the blame to sea lions (4). Rose states that sea lions “are not the biggest consumers of fish, we are.” The H.R. 2038 bill targets sea lions for consuming too many salmon but does not address greater issues caused by humans, such as habitat degradation and commercial fishing (5). Rose worries that “this misguided and indefensible bill sets a dangerous precedent for marine mammals and their management in the U.S.” If this bill is passed and it becomes legal for the states to kill more sea lions, this weakens the way that the MMPA is perceived and could lead to citizens killing sea lions or lead to the harm of other marine mammal species (5).
For instance, if it becomes legal to kill sea lions in Oregon and Washington, fishermen may take the practice of lethal deterrence into their own hands if they witness a sea lion disturbing their fishing gear (5). There would be a false sense of impunity because if it is legal for the state to kill these animals, why can’t citizens do this as well? This could snowball into hunting sea lions for sport, leading to more animals being killed than the law originally intended for. If this bill becomes law, it will only apply to Washington, Oregon, and Idaho, but for how long will this be the case (5)? If Californians become overwhelmed with the number of sea lions on their coastline, it would be relatively simple to pass a similar law to the one that affects its neighboring states. It is dangerous to weaken the laws that are in place that protect one species of marine mammal because it could lead to decreased protection of other species of marine mammals as well. Our lawmakers have shown that they stand with maintaining profits over the health of our environment, and if it becomes legal to kill sea lions in order to preserve fish populations, what is to stop additional laws from being passed that call for the lethal deterrence of other marine mammals who consume salmon, such as seals or even whales?
This is not the first instance of a species being targeted for the overconsumption of salmon on the Columbia River. In 2016, a federal judge ruled for the continuation of killing double-crested cormorants from North America’s largest nesting colony on the river (6). Each year, the U.S. Army Corps is allowed to kill 11,000 cormorants and spread oil in 26,000 nests in order to limit the growth of these species. In 2015 and 2016, 7,086 adult birds and 6,181 eggs were killed, and this has not provided any noticeable increase in the local salmon populations. The Audubon Society of Portland was outraged by the unnecessary killing of thousands of birds, and the conservation director Bob Sallinger said,"It is time for the government to stop this slaughter and recognize that its cormorant killing program rests on a foundation of broken laws." This controversial ruling was made by U.S. District Court Judge Michael Simon, and he did not know the approximate number of fish that would be saved by this reduction of cormorants, but he wanted to give the benefit of the doubt to the endangered species. The Audubon Society of Portland described this decision as “deeply disappointing” because it has set a precedent for the lethal deterrence of species when humans activity is to blame for the drastic reduction in the salmon populations due to the construction of hydroelectric dams and commercial fishing (6).
Dams have a much more significant impact on salmon populations than predators do because they make large portions of the river unusable for the fish (7). Dams lead to flooding of spawning areas, alterations in river flow, and increased water temperatures, all of which point to significant declines in reproduction. Hydroelectric dams have caused over 55% of the habitat once available to salmon to be permanently blocked, which makes spawning and rearing nearly impossible. When dams are built, a reservoir is formed; this leads to slow rates of water flow along with temperature increases that are lethal to many species of endangered salmon. The dams prevent sediment from flowing downstream, and this alters the life cycle of not only salmon but of other species of migratory fish, marine birds, and aquatic flora. The technology behind hydroelectric dams has significantly improved since dams were first built. It was initially believed that fish were able to pass through dam’s turbines and emerge through the other side unscathed. Unfortunately, this was not the case. When fish are drawn into turbine pits, they are often killed or injured after striking a blade that spins approximately 70 times per minute, being slammed into a concrete wall, or being subjected to intense water pressure. It is estimated by biologists that approximately 15% of fish are killed as they pass through a turbine, and if this is the only way for salmon to pass through to complete their migration, this is a significant problem affecting salmon populations (7). Fortunately, many of the problems caused by dams are reversible with enough time and money, and the Elwha Dam on Washington’s Olympic Peninsula is proof of this. In 2014, the National Park Service spent 325 million dollars to remove the Elwha and Glines Canyon dams and allow the river to return to its original condition (8). The decision to remove these dams was made in 1992, but it wasn’t until 2011 that the Elwha dam was de-constructed in six months, followed by the Glines Canyon dam in 2014 (9). The process of removing a dam is costly and time-consuming, but the benefits are worth the sacrifice. Josh Geffre, a fisheries technician in the Olympic national park, explained how it is“very satisfying to know the fish are recolonizing into areas upriver of the former dam sites...It’s exciting to watch them” (8). The process of restoring a river has four stages, which are protection, recolonization of native species, local adaptation, and complete restoration, and, incredibly, the salmon in the Elwha River are progressing through these stages ahead of schedule. According to the predicted timeline, the fish should be in the protection stage but are acting as if they are in the recolonization stage— which is years ahead of schedule. A spike in the population is expected in the next few years as they reach pre-dam levels once again. The environmental impact study for the dam predicts that once all the populations are restored, there could be over 31,000 chinook, 34,000 coho, and 10,000 steelhead salmon per year. Because of the success of the restoration thus far, these numbers may be reached earlier than expected and fishing can begin again in the Elwha River in as soon as 2019 (8).
If lawmakers are concerned with protecting our salmon populations from extinction, there are ways to do this without harming sea lions. Instead of passing the blame of the declining salmon population onto these animals, it is essential to acknowledge the impact that humans have had on the Columbia River ecosystem. Removing dams on the river and setting stricter limits or temporary bans on salmon fishing would be a much more efficient solution for allowing populations to rebound instead of increasing the number of sea lions killed each year. The absence of significant results from the lethal deterrence of cormorants already revealed that eliminating predators does not yield significant increases in the salmon populations. If we want to save these fish from extinction, it is up to us to reverse the damage that we have caused. Congressman Kurt Schrader from Oregon argued that “Salmon are an important part of the culture, identity and the economy of the people and tribes of the Pacific Northwest” (10). The only practical way to address this issue and prevent extinction would be to alter our fishing practices and evaluate the impact that dams are causing on fish populations.
Works Cited
“Pinniped Entanglement in Marine Debris.” Beluga Whales | NOAA Fisheries Alaska Regional Office, U.S. Department of Commerce, alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/pr/pinniped-entanglement.
Raum-Suryan, Kimberly L., et al. “Entanglement of Steller Sea Lions (Eumetopias Jubatus) in Marine Debris: Identifying Causes and Finding Solutions.” Marine Pollution Bulletin, vol. 58, no. 10, 2009, pp. 1487–1495., doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2009.06.004.
Hogge, Katie. “5 Things You Should Know About the Marine Mammal Protection Act.” Ocean Conservancy, 20 Oct. 2017, oceanconservancy.org/blog/2017/10/20/5-things-know-marine-mammal-protection-act/.
Sabalow, Ryan. “To Protect Salmon in the Columbia, Will We Have to Kill More Sea Lions?” Sacbee, The Sacramento Bee, 6 July 2018, www.sacbee.com/news/local/environment/article213884519.html.
Banse, Tom. “Senate To Vote On Salmon Protection Bill Allowing Killing Of More Sea Lions.” Oregon Public Broadcasting, 1 Aug. 2018, www.opb.org/news/article/salmon-protection-oregon-washington-congress-sea-lions/.
Associated Press. “Judge Allows Killing of Cormorants on Columbia River to Continue.” OregonLive.com, OregonLive.com, 3 Sept. 2016, www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2016/09/judge_allows_killing_of_cormor.html.
“Dams: Impacts on Salmon and Steelhead.” Grand Coulee Dam: History and Purpose, 2018, www.nwcouncil.org/reports/columbia-river-history/damsimpacts.
Major, Jesse. “Fish Recolonizing Areas Upriver of Former Dam Sites on Elwha River.” Peninsula Daily News, Peninsula Daily News, 11 Aug. 2017, www.peninsuladailynews.com/news/fish-recolonizing-areas-upriver-of-former-dam-sites-on-elwha-river/.
“Elwha River Restoration.” National Parks Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, www.nps.gov/olym/learn/nature/elwha-ecosystem-restoration.htm.
Plaven, George. “House Passes Bill to Cull Predatory Columbia River Sea Lions.” Congressman Kurt Schrader, 29 June 2018, schrader.house.gov/newsroom/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=391230.