According to Washington’s State of Salmon in Watersheds 2020 report, some populations of these iconic fish are close to extinction in the region, even though they remain critical to our nation’s economy, culture, and environment,. 

It’s no surprise that salmon need healthy, flowing rivers to survive. However, an unexpected connection has emerged: Ranchers. Land stewardship practices can play an essential role to preserve the clean rivers that salmon depend on for survival.

Salmon country

Meet Andrea Malmberg, a rancher in northeast Oregon who is at the forefront of regenerative agriculture. Her practices have restored acres of land while giving water back to the salmon who swim past her pastures. 

“Regenerative agriculture is the process of repairing and reparations,” Malmberg says.

The land that Malmberg owns is in salmon country. Catherine Creek, the river that flows through her land, is especially important for the threatened spring Chinook salmon.

Thousands of fish would come up each year to spawn, die, and swim out into the flood plains that are vital to the salmon life cycle.

However, with the Snake River dams slowing these originally flowing rivers, salmon are deprived of the habitat they need to survive. The enormous nutrient cycling that was provided yearly from salmon runs has dwindled.

“There’s not enough death, decay, and rebirth that is happening,” Malmberg says. “Regenerative agriculture, for me, is really trying to repair that process as much as I can.”

And it all starts where we might least expect it: in the gut of an animal. 

Knit Landscapes

Malmberg’s land was historically covered in grasslands and wetlands, teeming with wildlife like migratory elk that grazed the landscape and beavers that boosted the local ecological diversity.

The settlement of and the introduction of ranching practices altered the landscape of northeastern Oregon. Traditional modern ranching practices put pressure on the land through the overgrazing and overresting of plants. To return her pastures closer to their natural, flourishing state, Malmberg uses regenerative ranching to mimic the behavior of migratory grazing herbivores such as elk. She keeps her livestock grouped and moves them frequently so the grass plants are experiencing grazing. 

The first grazing stimulates the grass plants, and when the livestock are removed, the roots are able to expand and the plants are able to recover. 

“Grass plants need to be rejuvenated through the warm gut of an animal,” Malmberg says. 

Once the original grazing ends, the animal saliva, dung, and urine all cycle back into the soil. Insects like beetles and ants are able to take these remnants and recirculate them, and the massive plant material they contain, back into the soil. 

Catherine Creek

When Malmberg first bought her land twelve years ago, the landscape was severely degraded by lots of irrigation from Catherine Creek. The soil was dry, even with severe hydration. Aquatic plants overran the land as a result, producing a lot of plants inedible to animals. With regenerative ranching, Malmberg didn’t need the extra irrigation to produce healthy soils. 

“We ended up releasing our water back into the stream for primarily salmon runs,” Malmberg says, “Salmon need that cool water in order to survive. They need the deeper pools.” 

Native plants that animals could eat came back as a result. Flowering plants reappeared, bringing with them more pollinators. Salmon received more water and Malmberg’s ranch increased its profit.   

“We were able to double our production in ten years without any irrigation water,” Malmberg says. 

Teaching Regenerative Ranching

Today, Malmberg works with other ranchers and organizations to help facilitate and teach regenerative ranching. One of these organizations is Blue Mountain Land Trust which provides its conservation services across the Pacific Northwest. 

Conservation director Amanda Martino says that 13,600 acres of land and 21 miles of rivers and streams are protected under Blue Mountain Land Trust, located in the Blue Mountain region in Oregon and Washington. The organization works with landowners to protect their land through conservation easements: 

“A voluntary agreement that protects natural resources from unwanted development and fragmentation…The land can be sold or passed on to heirs. The conservation easement transfers with it, protecting the land forever.”

Martino says that these lands often have large amounts of wildlife and fish, like salmon. 

“In addition to protecting the properties from being subdivided and developed,” Martino says, “we are also protecting critical fish and wildlife habitat…like salmon spawning habitat and streams.” 

Martino says that she was blown away when she first encountered Malmberg’s regenerative ranching tactics. Today, Malmberg continues to work with Blue Mountain Land Trust through workshops and contracts where they help implement her grazing plan.

Salmon-safe shopping

For readers in the Pacific Northwest looking to support the salmon runs, Malmberg encourages individuals to know where their food and materials come from. Specifically for salmon, individuals can look for the label by Salmon-Safe, an organization that works with farmers, vineyards, and landowners to provide an ecolabel to those who commit to salmon-safe practices. 

Outreach leader Kevin Scribner says their label helps consumers make an eco-friendly choice. 

“We give the consumer the ability to choose between products,” Scribner says. “And that choice will hopefully reward growers who are working to benefit salmon.” 

Not a resident of the Pacific Northwest but want to make a difference? Take the pledge to help save wild salmon.

“What does it mean, in terms of our agricultural economy, if we don’t do more to curb the greenhouse gas issues we’re facing?” Cowan asked.

A good question, and members of Congress don’t ask it often enough. Farmers, and subsequently consumers, are already feeling the effects of climate change. Dr. Joe Glauber, Chief Economist of the USDA, answered the question by discussing a recent USDA report that included these key messages, paraphrased below:

• Bad news: Climate change will have an impact on agricultural productivity, but
• Good news: there are steps we can take to curb emissions and lessen the negative impacts of climate change.

The report explains that the economic effects of climate change on agriculture depend on a complex web of factors. For example, climate change can impact the livestock industry through the price of feed grains, competition for pasture land, and changing patterns of pests and diseases. How it all plays out could very well depend on how the livestock industry adapts to climate change. Farmers could build livestock shelters to protect their animals from extreme temperatures, but how will farmers protect livestock from the less predictable changes in disease distribution?

Climate change is already costing us. Continuing to use the agricultural economy as an example, consider the hefty price tag of the drought of 2012; it cost taxpayers $14.2 billion in crop insurance alone. Our pocketbooks will be feeling the cost of rising food prices throughout 2013. That is why it is even more important to take action and promote agricultural policies that encourage climate-friendly farming.

As several agricultural producers testified in the hearing, conservation practices have the potential to make farming systems more resilient to changing weather patterns.  For example, conservation tillage practices and cover crops have the potential to improve soil health so that the soil holds more water and sequesters more carbon, keeping harmful greenhouse gases out of the atmosphere and making agricultural land more productive.

 Sometimes people ask me why NWF is involved in the fight on climate change.  I work on agricultural issues, but all natural systems are connected. There is no greater threat to wildlife than climate change; it’s that simple.  A recent report by NWF shows the urgency of acting to protect wildlife against climate impacts. That is why I hope you’ll join us this Sunday at the “Forward on Climate Rally” in DC, or consider financially supporting our work.

Domestication

Scientists study the origin of domestic animals by looking at bones dug up at sites of early human settlements. The main problem: Telling a wild animal from an early domestic one isn’t easy. True, in the confines of captivity, animals change. They may become less robust; for example, their teeth may become smaller. But when looking at a 10,000-year-old Middle Eastern farm site, archaeologists may find the bones of wild species so early in the domestication process that they had not yet changed into the currently recognized domestic forms. So, are the bones of wild sheep found at an early farming site the remains of animals killed in the wild and eaten at home, or are they early domestics born and raised in a corral?

Despite this difficulty, scientists have used DNA analysis and other methods to begin figuring out quite a bit about domestic animals. Recent studies suggest domestication may occur relatively fast. For example, researchers in Russia who selectively bred formerly wild silver foxes in captivity found that by choosing only naturally tame animals, the little canines took on the look of doggy domestication in just 20 years, including such traits a floppy ears, variable fur color, changes in breeding cycles, friendliness and tail wagging.

Now let’s look at the origins of creatures we might think of as table domestics.

Chicken

Colonel Sanders’ fried bird of choice is descended from Asia’s red jungle fowl, a colorful wild chicken that looks much like some barnyard hens or roosters. In fact, the domestic chicken is considered the same species as the red jungle fowl. The domestic chicken is likely descended from wild birds in Thailand and nearby regions. Domestication in Vietnam can be traced back 10,000 years. Travelers carried the domestic chicken to China by 6000 B.C. and to India and eastern Europe by 3000 B.C. Egypt had them by 1400 B.C. but used them mainly for cockfighting. However, in Greece the tradition of eating them was well established by 400 B.C. Today, some 50 billion chickens are produced yearly worldwide, making the chicken the most numerous bird on the planet.

Turkey

Here’s an all-American bird, first domesticated about 2,000 years ago in southern Mexico and in what today is the U.S. Southwest. Spanish explorers in the 1500s found the big birds—they can weigh upwards of 20 pounds in the wild—being kept by the Aztecs in what is now Mexico City. The Spaniards took turkeys to Europe, where they were raised in captivity and became a popular food. These domestic birds were later brought back to the eastern United States by colonists. Though the turkey did well as a domestic, it fared poorly in the wild. In the era of uncontrolled hunting, it was shot nearly to extinction throughout much of its original range, which ran from New England woods all the way into the Far West. Restoration programs by state wildlife agencies, beginning in the 1920s, saved the bird, which is now common in many areas where it had been exterminated.

Pigs

Archeological finds indicate that pigs were domesticated at several times at several places in Europe and Asia. Some evidence suggests that domestic pigs were first brought to Europe from the Middle East. Later, however, wild hogs native to Europe were domesticated and became the ancestors of today’s European domestic pigs. Domestic hogs number about 2 billion worldwide, making them the most numerous of the world’s 13 pig species. Interesting facts: Pigs lack sweat glands and so seek water to keep cool; they also use a coating of mud to prevent sunburn.

Sheep

The sheep was one of the first domesticated animals, dating to between 9,000 and 11,000 years ago and descended from Mesopotamia’s wild mouflon sheep, which looks like North America’s bighorn sheep. Mouflon were a good choice for early domestication because even in the wild they tend to follow leaders and are not aggressive. These two factors made them easy to tame and control. Domestic sheep number about 1 billion today, far more than all five wild sheep species combined.

Cattle

The origin of beefsteak and hamburger is murky. Evidence suggests that farmers in the Near East domesticated cattle about 8,000 years ago. These animals later reached Europe and Africa, where people crossbred them with native wild species to give rise to European and African domestic cattle breeds. Domestication of yet another species of wild cattle in Asia more than 7,000 years ago produced the humped species of that region, collectively called zebu and seen in rodeos as Brahma bulls.