City of Eureka Launches First Slough Fish Passage and Habitat Restoration Project
Press release from the City of Eureka:
Vegetation management and construction has begun on the City of Eureka’s First Slough Fish Passage, Floodplain Restoration and Coastal Habitat Connectivity Project. The nearly five-million-dollar project is fully funded by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (CDFW) Fisheries Restoration Grant Program (FRGP).
Once the project is complete, salmonids will be able to migrate upstream under 14th Street, which is currently a barrier to fish. The existing culverts at 14th Street and M Street will be replaced. The existing culvert at N Street will be removed entirely. The project also includes habitat improvements near Cooper Gulch Park.
Vegetation management is currently taking place in the Cooper Gulch area. Beginning in early to mid-August, 14th Street will be closed to through traffic for an extended amount of time between N and P Streets to allow for the installation of the new culvert. Additional notifications and reminders on the 14th Street Road closure will follow. Construction will wrap up by end of October 2024 and revegetation will take place through March 2025.
Questions can be directed to Project Manager, Brittany Powell at [email protected] or (707) 441- 4127.
Join the discussion! For rules visit: https://kymkemp.com/commenting-rules
Comments system how-to: https://wpdiscuz.com/community/postid/10599/
How will the failed city council deal with the unhomed living on this greenbelt? Or dose fish and game have that jurisdiction?
Salmon swimming through syringes
Free food. Some of those folks know how to fish and don’t care about licensing or protections, but go ahead and spend all that money. It’s not impossible, if one looks at say, Francis Creek in Ferndale where kids have fished for decades, but seems a money pit to me. Fix and repair sure, but expecting 10lb salmon or steelhead is a pipe dream.
Oh my gawd. This is a complete waste of money.
And I mean a RADICAL waste of money.
—
Stream has NO bed substrate suitable for Salmon.
Bed is Sandy Clay and Mud all the way up from the bay, until it hits the ‘swamp’ (about 1/4 mile up from the bay). (See the attached photo above.)
—
Salmon require a gravel (and larger) base to the stream… and need good aerated water going through the ‘redds’ below the surface. Good base and water flow are necessary for the survival of the young. (Redd is a term for the salmon nesting site.)
—
Stream has no base, no adequate flow, and the water column is loaded with bacteria/algae from the swamp. Long ago, the city used to plant ‘Mosquito Fish’ (Gambusia) in there… but they couldn’t survive.
—
Who figures/finances these projects ?
—
Maybe it could be elected Officials ? Vote them OUT !
—
Kim Bergel Leslie Castellano G. Mario Fernandez Kati MoultonScott Bauer Renee Contreras-DeLoach
—
Want more info ? Search on ‘redd salmon spawning’… and you will see what an astounding and magnificent waste of money this project is.
—
Go figure.
These salmonoids are different. They’re homeless:). Thanks for your post.
Dear Bozo- Please look up information about non natal rearing in anadromous fish restoration.
Thanks- Sincerly The Freshwater Creek spawned Coho that immediately used the First Slough habitat that was made accessible when the last culvert project was completed there.
I’ll second this. All these streams draining the sandy Hookton Formation provide awesome habitat for juvenile salmonids wandering far and wide in search of food resources. The tributaries around Humboldt bay are awesome for this in that they are close by, rich in food and close to brackish water. We need more of this. The many tiny tributaries lining Humboldt bay were once incredible rearing habitat for juvenile steelhead, coho and chinook, what we see no is a ghost of what once was…
Why is it that people like you, who know nothing about a project and the benefits it will bring, are compelled to make completely uninformed comments?
Because this is the RHBB comment section. Not interested in facts, just outrage. Don’t cite your sources. Racism encouraged.
Where does it say anything about spawning?
I assumed that. Sorry about that.
But now the project makes even less sense… envisioning massive swarms of Smolts swimming upstream in a minor drainage ditch.
—
Go figure.
Well Bozo, Martin Slough was somewhat of a “ditch” until the four-year channel enhancement fixed the tide gate, widen the channel and added off-channel features. Now 1000s of juvenile coho from the Elk River annually overwinter in Martin Slough and exhibiting excellent growth rates. In addition, the tidewater goby population exploded in Martin Slough after project completion. Reconnecting as many “ditches” that were former creeks to Humboldt Bay boosts the availability of winter rearing habitat for juvenile coho that have been documented moving from watershed to watershed around the bay. Also, look at the City of Eureka’s lower Elk River project that turned a diked and drained dairy cow pasture into a slough network that supports coho, tidewater gobies, longfin smelt and at least a dozen other estuarine fish species as well as waterfowl. Collectively these projects are restoring some of the lost biological integrity of Humboldt Bay and its watersheds.
An older lady told me that coopers gulch stream used to have a rocky bottom, I imagine fixing the culverts will improve flows and clear out the sediment
Nope. That chunk of Eureka is build on sandy clay. ‘Headwaters of the Cooper Ditch’ is at the Eureka High School field. Damaged drainage pipes under the field are washing the sand/clay out and creating sinkholes.
—
If you drive by that site… you can see the soil profile over on the northern side of the gulch.
I have no real knowledge of salmon, but I used to work at ecs in a position that I knew some information. The district lore is that when Albee stadium was built it was backfilled with tons and tons of sand trucked up from somoa. This has become unstable (sink wholes) causing Albee stadium to close. Prior to the district starting repair there was involvement from fish and game and environmental reports, which was a bit frustrating for the district which viewed that as a drainage ditch, not a protected wetland. Anyway, long story made a bit shorter, now that repairs are being done to Albee stadium, they are digging out that ancient drainage system as well as much of that sand. Perhaps (and I clearly don’t know this) that is part of the sand and mud in the creek and with that getting fixed as well as the change in the culvert there will be a chance for this project to be successful in rejuvenating that creek? I used to walk past the stadium every day and you could hear water flow underground, even in late summer, so there dies appear to be consistent water flow.
Well, this is a strange project.
If the fish have been blocked from this route for many years now, then it doesn’t seem there would be any fish that are trying to get to this location to spawn.
If they are going to plant fish here once the project is complete, then why subject those fish to our polluted, transient filled green belts when there are other already existing locations that could benefit from improvement funding.
Is this just a round about way to flush out the transient encampments and the city to then have more legal rights to keep them out of a protected habitat? I’m curious about which city officials live near here and how they benefit from this “restoration.”
I mean, let’s be honest… I live in Eureka… it’s a total dump right now and only getting worse. This is due mostly to transient activity, but many others also treat our land poorly. Restoring a fish habitat is a nice idea, but I just feel really bad for those future fish that are going to be forced into becoming Eureka residents too.
Dear Here- Please look up information about non natal rearing in anadromous fish restoration.
Thanks- Sincerly The Freshwater Creek spawned Coho that immediately used the First Slough habitat that was made accessible when the last culvert project was completed there.
You forgot what has already been mentioned: the people that already inhabit the gulch. Do you have new homes for them and a plan to prohibit their return? It would be foolish to ignore that they are there.
Wont do a bit of good
Love Bozo’s experienced comments. On the one hand it would be nice to have fish, and on the other hand, the side of reality, Bozo has many valid points. Not to be rude, the homeless in that gulch are not prone to housekeeping (truck loads of litter, needles and other drug paraphernalia- thanks to Ms. Bergel…) or being mindful of keeping nature (trees, critters etc.) things as they should be – left alone. We continually find evidence of poaching. It seems the length of the slough and this little creek would not be deep enough or travel far enough and there really is no protection from poachers etc. Hope Fish & game take their time and set up some kind of monitoring including game cameras to catch the bad actors.
Really? Bozo has experienced comments? Maybe about the fish using all these streams up to the point they can’t swim up any more? Why are we advocating for blocking fish when we have plenty of backyard waters waiting to be used by juvenile fish on a seasonal basis with a little help. Please stop the fish hate. Serves no purpose.
>”Really? Bozo has experienced comments?”
Yeah… 4 years with the ‘old’ Fish and Game.
2 summers ‘Salmon Checking’ with the Pacific Marine Fisheries Commission.
—
>”Please stop the fish hate. Serves no purpose.”
Fish hate ? Nope. I object to spending million$ of dollars with the er… ‘expectation’ of massive swarms of smolts up in what amounts to a drainage ditch coming from a swamp.
— Bit of history.
From the 1900’s to the late 1970’s, there were millions of salmon(s) (Coho/Kings) out in the ocean. In the fall, there were thousands of them headed upstream in the rivers, followed later on by schools of Steelhead feeding on the eggs that got free from the Redds.
—
Salmon had healthy populations that went through the early destructive coastal logging, massive floods (55; 64), and water diversions (Trinity, Eel).
“The record catch — 1.4 million salmon — was in 1988.”
—
All that was with no ‘mudflat mania’, ‘creek rehab’ projects, ‘dam tearing out’, now being e$pou$ed these day$.
—
As far as Coho… in 1977… the first er… ‘modern’ drought hits California.
Small feeder creeks (ala Coho) dried up and those with water… warmed up.
No spawning. No eggs. No fish.
Those Coho populations took a huge hit. Couple years of recovery… then came more droughts… then the recent big one from ‘2012 to 2016’. Coho populations took a massive hit.
Now we have huge expenditures of money and time to ‘rehab’ the creeks.
Creeks\Estuaries that weren’t in trouble anyways (aside from lack of rain).
Now, with a couple years of more ‘normal’ rain… salmon populations are recovering.
—
” California’s coho salmon have made a surprising comeback. The 2023-24 spawning season is on track to be the best in more than 15 years, said the National Park Service.’
—
‘Jan 23, 2024 — Record-breaking Coho Salmon Spawning Delights San Geronimo Tributaries San Geronimo Watershed, California.” (Etc)
—
If it rains there will be fish. If it doesn’t, there will be no fish.
Contrary to what the “experts” in this comment section are saying, this project is not being done to provide spawning habitat. This important project is being done to provide what’s called “non-natal rearing habitat” – mainly for juvenile coho salmon, but also for trout and other native species. If you want to learn more about why access to non-natal rearing habitat is critical around Humboldt Bay, google this: “non-natal rearing habitat coho salmon Humboldt Bay” and learn from the real experts what these comment section misinformation gurus don’t know.
Aww… but we wanted something to complain about.
Your injection of fact into this gripe-fest sure is a buzzkill.
Yeah, and if we’re lucky we might get on The Ed Sullivan Show.
>”… mainly for juvenile coho salmon, but also for trout and other native species.”
Your kidding… yes ?… yes ?
Meanwhile… should read the research. Indicates this is a fantastically bogus project.
—
Coho salmon smolts, as observed from mobile tracking, used deep channels and channel margins more often than floating eelgrass mats, pilings, and docks. In addition, tagged fish were more often detected in the central portions of Humboldt Bay characterized by deep channels with narrow intertidal margins.
There were fewer detections in other portions of the bay characterized by shallow channels with large intertidal mudflats and eelgrass.
—
Grew up in that gulch (1950’s). Dad grew up in that gulch (1930’s).
Have never been any fish in that ditch.
Either smolts or adults. No trout (that’s a joke). No sticklebacks. None, Nada, Zero.
PHENOMENAL WASTE OF MONEY.
—
Someday… folks will wonder where all the money went.
Arm chair fish biologists…. Love it….NOT
Please cite the sources that you’re apparently quoting.
Research Gate “Residence time and habitat use of coho salmon in Humboldt Bay, California: An acoustic telemetry study”.
Again, this is a paper about coho smolts transiting through Humboldt Bay, not about juvenile coho overwintering rearing habitat.
Bozo, that’s from a report about coho smolts out-migrating to the ocean through the bay, not redistribution of coho to non-natal overwintering habitat and what those habitat characteristics are. Obviously, I’m not going to change your mind about this project, but just pointing out your bias of selecting this particular paper to support your opinion, which is not fact, just an opinion.
There’s a fun hike along Ryan Creek in the McKay Community Forest. Access at Redwood Fields in Cutten. While walking, you will see a wild, pre-urban aspect of Eureka and witness a unique riparian habitat (and maybe a juvenile Coho salmon).
Good to know!
Five million would go a long way to homelessness for humans.