Trout Recovery

Native fish in the West are experiencing a rate of decline far more rapid than that of most terrestrial species, and as a group, native trout are among the most widely endangered of fishes in the region. Native trout and char are highly valued as symbols of environmental quality and natural integrity. Their pervasive decline is a direct reflection of habitat loss and fragmentation, as well as a host of other human activities that accompany landscape change. In Pacific Rivers Council's goal of native trout recovery, we bring law, science, and policy, and public outreach to bear on the protection and restoration of these important and valuable species and subspecies.

We recognize that protecting native trout will depend to a major degree on protection of their watersheds, particularly the roadless areas and other threads of the western landscape where the land and waters retain, or can be expected to quickly regain, a high degree of ecological integrity.

PRC monitors land management proposals and Endangered Species Act listing decisions that affect native trout populations. The focus of this work has been litigation to ensure federal protection of interior and coastal trout, and field and literature evaluation of salvage logging and fire-related management of forestlands on watershed and aquatic habitat conditions.

PRC has strategically identified particular species of trout when aiming for native trout recovery. These species are Bull trout, Yellowstone cutthroat trout, southwestern Washington-lower Columbia River coastal cutthroat trout, Bonneville cutthroat trout, Westslope Cutthroat Trout, and Rio Grande Cutthroat Trout. These species were selected due to their dwindling populations and lack of adequate protection for recovery as well as the precedent-setting opportunity of their relative cases.

We have sought to raise the standard by which the Fish & Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service make decisions about species and habitat protection and recovery and to ensure that best available scientific information is considered in the process. PRC  played the lead science and policy advisory role in a partnership with The Center for Biological Diversity, Biodiversity Conservation Alliance, and Trout Unlimited, in the Western Native Trout Protection Campaign. Our approach in this campaign was to unite biodiversity, wilderness, and fishing advocates in a focused, action-oriented effort to comprehensively protect native western trout and their habitats throughout the West. Our efforts included sponsoring and advising key scientific studies, conducting and coordinating reviews of existing trout conservation plans, and convening a panel of independent scientists to chart a new map for effective trout conservation and recovery efforts across the western landscape.

Bull Trout Critical Habitat

The Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) agreed to designate critical habitat for the bull trout in 2001, after litigation challenging their failure to do so.  The critical habitat designation process has been long and fraught with problems, and Pacific Rivers Council submitted input along the way.  Read our comments below.  FWS issued final designations for bull trout in 2005, but the designations were limited by many exclusions.  For example, FWS refused to designate any unoccupied habitat, and FWS excluded many areas claiming that the benefits of excluding the areas outweighed the benefits of including the areas, primarily because other protections (though different from those provided by critical habitat) were in place.  The FWS also relied upon a flawed economic analysis that ignored the economic benefits provided by bull trout protection and recovery.  (Read about PRC's economics workshop at which economists and scientists discussed the bull trout critical habitat designation).

Conservation groups filed a lawsuit against the designations, and an Interior Inspector General's investigation revealed that a high level official at the FWS had politically meddled in the critical habitat designation process.  After Obama took office, his administration stated that it would not defend the bull trout critical habitat designation against the conservation group lawsuit because of this meddling.  Read a news story about the judge's decision to dismiss the case in light of the decision to revise the bull trout designation.  The judge has required a new proposal by the end of 2009.  Bull trout may now get a fair shot at a meaningful critical habitat designation.

Read our May 2002 letter encouraging broad critical habitat designation for bull trout

Read our comments on the 2002 proposed critical habitat designation for bull trout, Klamath River and Columbia River populations

Read our comments on the 2002 proposed critical habitat designation and the 2004 final designation for bull trout, Klamath River and Columbia River populations

Read our comments on the proposed critical habitat designation for bull trout, Jarbidge River, Coastal-Puget Sound, and Saint Mary-Belly River Populations

Download our comments on the bull trout draft recovery plan

Related publications

The Geography of Freshwater Conservation: Roadless Areas and Critical Watersheds for Native Trout

POSTER -- Native Trout of the West: Protecting a Unique Natural Legacy

Imperiled Western Trout and the Importance of Roadless Areas

PRC Actions under the Endangered Species Act

Read a press release about our victory in the Ninth Circuit, which held that the FWS's decision not to list the southwestern Washington-lower Columbia River coastal cutthroat trout was illegal.  The FWS solicited public comment as part of its reconsideration of its decision whether to list this population.  Review the Federal Register Notice for more information. 

Read about our challenge  to the Rock Creek mine, which threatened bull trout.  The court recently vacated the Forest Service's approval of this mine; read more in a press release.

Read an article and press release describing our previous successful litigation concerning this mine.