State of California The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "State of California The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME"

Transcription

1 State of California The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME FINAL REPORT SHASTA AND SCOTT RIVER JUVENILE SALMONID OUTMIGRATION MONITORING PROJECT Prepared for the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission Contract No Prepared by Kirstin Underwood, Heather D. Langendorf, Chris Diviney, Amy Debrick, Seth Daniels, Whitney B. Crombie, and William R. Chesney California Department of Fish and Game Anadromous Fisheries Resource Assessment and Monitoring Program November 2010

2 Table of Contents List of Figures...iii List of Tables...v List of Appendices...v Abstract...1 Background...1 Shasta River Rotary Screw Trap Summary Methods...1 Age Determination...2 Trap Efficiency Determinations and Production Estimates...2 Water Temperature and Flow Monitoring...3 Results...3 Chinook...3 Coho...3 Steelhead...4 Temperature monitoring... 5 Discussion...17 Multi-Year Estimates...17 Chinook Steelhead...19 Coho Scott River Rotary Screw Trap Summary Methods...22 Age Determination Trap Efficiency Determinations and Production Estimates Water Temperature and Flow Monitoring...23 Results...23 Chinook...24 Coho...25 Steelhead...25 Discussion...35 Acknowledgements Literature Cited...41 ii

3 List of Figures Shasta River Figures Figure 1. Shasta River 0+ Chinook estimates, Figure 2. Shasta River 0+ Chinook estimates, as percentage of total estimate, Figure 3. Shasta River 0+ and 1+ Chinook weekly mean fork lengths, Figure 4. Shasta River 0+ coho estimates, Figure 5. Shasta River 0+ coho estimates, as percentage of total estimate, Figure 6. Shasta River 1+ coho estimates, Figure 7. Shasta River 1+ coho estimates, as percentage of total estimate, Figure 8. Shasta River 0+, 1+, and 2+ coho weekly mean fork lengths...9 Figure 9. Shasta River 0+ steelhead estimates, Figure 10. Shasta River 0+ steelhead estimates, as percentage of total estimate, Figure 11. Shasta River 1+ steelhead estimates, Figure 12. Shasta River 1+ steelhead estimates, as percentage of total estimate, Figure 13. Shasta River 0+ and 1+ steelhead weekly mean fork lengths, Figure 14. Shasta River 2+ steelhead estimates, Figure 15. Shasta River 2+ steelhead estimates, as percentage of total estimate, Figure 16. Shasta River 3+ steelhead estimates, Figure 17. Shasta River 3+ steelhead estimates, as percentage of total estimate, Figure 18. Shasta River 2+ and 3+ steelhead weekly mean fork lengths, Figure 19. Correlations between 0+ coho and 0+ steelhead trap efficiencies...14 iii

4 Figure 20. Correlations between 1+ coho and 2+ steelhead trap efficiencies...15 Figure 21. Shasta River 2009 flow by Julian Week...15 Figure 22. Shasta River 2009 water temperature by Julian Week Figure 23. Shasta River 2009 mean, maximum, and minimum water temperatures...16 Figure 24. Shasta River Chinook population estimates...18 Figure 25. Shasta River steelhead population estimates...20 Figure 26. Shasta River coho population estimates...21 Scott River Figures Figure 27. Scott River 0+ Chinook estimates, Figure 28. Scott River 0+ Chinook estimates, as percentage of total estimate, Figure 29. Scott River 0+ and 1+ Chinook weekly mean fork lengths, Figure 30. Scott River 0+ coho estimates, Figure 31. Scott River 0+ coho estimates, as percentage of total estimate, Figure 32. Scott River 1+ coho estimates, Figure 33. Scott River 1+ coho estimates, as percentage of total estimate, Figure 34. Scott River 0+ and 1+ coho weekly mean fork lengths, Figure 35. Scott River 1+ steelhead estimates, Figure 36. Scott River 1+ steelhead estimates, as percentage of total estimate, Figure 37. Scott River 0+ and 1+ steelhead weekly mean fork lengths, Figure 38. Scott River 2+ steelhead estimates, Figure 39. Scott River 2+ steelhead estimates, as percentage of total estimate, Figure 40. Scott River 2+ and 3+ steelhead weekly mean fork lengths, Figure 41. Scott River 2009 flow by Julian Week...34 iv

5 Figure 42. Scott River 2009 water temperatures by Julian week...35 Figure 43. Scott River 2009 mean, maximum and minimum water temperatures...35 Figure 44. Scott River 2009 days trapped per week...36 Figure 45. Scott River Chinook population estimates...37 Figure 46. Scott River steelhead population estimates...39 Figure 47. Scott River coho population estimates...41 List of Tables Table 1. Shasta River weekly production estimates for 0+ Chinook salmon, Table 2. Shasta River weekly production estimates for 2+ steelhead, Table 3. Coho 1+ produced per returning adult Table 4. Coho 1+ smolt to adult survival...21 Table 5. Shasta River weekly production estimates for 1+ coho salmon, Table 6. Scott River weekly production estimates for 0+ Chinook salmon, Table 7. Scott River weekly production estimates for 2+ steelhead, Table 8. Scott River weekly production estimates for 1+ coho salmon, Table 9. Yearly mark-recapture totals and corresponding estimates for 1+ coho...41 v

6 List of Appendices Appendix 1. Catch table with weekly data for Chinook 0+, Shasta River Appendix 2. Catch table with weekly data for Chinook 1+, Shasta River Appendix 3. Catch table with weekly data for coho 0+, Shasta River Appendix 4. Catch table with weekly data for coho 1+, Shasta River Appendix 5. Catch table with weekly data for coho 2+, Shasta River Appendix 6. Catch table with weekly data for steelhead 0+, Shasta River Appendix 7. Catch table with weekly data for steelhead 1+, Shasta River Appendix 8. Catch table with weekly data for steelhead 2+, Shasta River Appendix 9. Catch table with weekly data for steelhead 3+, Shasta River Appendix 10. Catch table with weekly data for Chinook 0+, Scott River Appendix 11. Catch table with weekly data for Chinook 1+, Scott River Appendix 12. Catch table with weekly data for coho 0+, Scott River Appendix 13. Catch table with weekly data for coho 1+, Scott River Appendix 14. Catch table with weekly data for steelhead 0+, Scott River Appendix 15. Catch table with weekly data for steelhead 1+, Scott River Appendix 16. Catch table with weekly data for steelhead 2+, Scott River Appendix 17. Catch table with weekly data for steelhead 3+, Scott River Appendix 18. Weekly fork length data for Chinook 0+, Shasta River Appendix 19. Weekly fork length data for Chinook 1+, Shasta River Appendix 20. Weekly fork length data for coho 0+, Shasta River Appendix 21. Weekly fork length data for coho 1+, Shasta River vi

7 Appendix 22. Weekly fork length data for coho 2+, Shasta River Appendix 23. Weekly fork length data for steelhead 0+, Shasta River Appendix 24. Weekly fork length data for steelhead 1+, Shasta River Appendix 25. Weekly fork length data for steelhead 2+, Shasta River Appendix 26. Weekly fork length data for steelhead 3+, Shasta River Appendix 27. Weekly fork length data for Chinook 0+, Scott River Appendix 28. Weekly fork length data for Chinook 1+, Scott River Appendix 29. Weekly fork length data for coho 0+, Scott River Appendix 30. Weekly fork length data for coho 1+, Scott River Appendix 31. Weekly fork length data for steelhead 0+, Scott River Appendix 32. Weekly fork length data for steelhead 1+, Scott River Appendix 33. Weekly fork length data for steelhead 2+, Scott River Appendix 34. Weekly fork length data for steelhead 3+, Scott River Appendix 35. Weekly temperature statistics, Shasta River Appendix 36. Weekly temperature statistics, Scott River Appendix 37. Age length cut-off for Shasta River juvenile salmonids...59 Appendix 38. Age length cut-off for Scott River juvenile salmonids...60 Appendix 39. Additional fish species collected in the Shasta and Scott River rotary traps, Appendix 40. List of Julian weeks and calendar equivalents...54 vii

8 Abstract 2009 was the tenth consecutive year of rotary trapping on the Shasta and Scott rivers. The goals of the project were to determine emigration abundance and timing of all age classes of juvenile salmonids leaving the Shasta and Scott rivers between early February and early July 2009, and to investigate the relationships between in-stream conditions and emigration patterns of juvenile salmonids. Trap efficiencies were determined for all age classes of Chinook (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), coho (Oncorhynchus kisutch) and steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in the catch, and weekly production estimates were calculated for each age class. The weekly mean fork length for all age classes of salmonids in the catch was determined from a measured sub-sample. Due to low numbers of coho expected in 2009, the correlation between 0+ steelhead trap efficiencies and 0+ coho efficiencies observed in previous years was used to produce estimates of trap efficiencies in The same method was followed with 2+ steelhead efficiencies to provide 1+ coho efficiencies. Background 2009 was the tenth consecutive year of rotary trapping on the Shasta and Scott rivers. The goals of the project were: To determine emigration abundance and timing of all age classes of juvenile salmonids exiting the Shasta and Scott rivers between early February and early July To investigate the relationships between in-stream conditions and emigration patterns of juvenile salmonids. The specific objectives were: To estimate the weekly mean fork length at age of salmonids in the catch from a measured sub-sample. To estimate weekly rotary trap efficiencies for all age classes of Chinook, coho and steelhead in the catch and produce weekly production estimates for each age class. To monitor stream flow and temperature at the traps. Shasta River Rotary Screw Trap Summary Methods The Shasta River was sampled with a modified five foot rotary screw trap manufactured by EG Solutions, Corvallis, Oregon. The trap was operated six days per week: Sunday afternoon through Saturday morning, directly downstream of the Shasta River Fish Counting Facility at 041º 49' 46.38" N, 122º 35' 35.38" W. The catch in the trap was processed daily at approximately 0800 hrs. The live car was checked and algae build-up was removed at approximately 1700 hours and at 2200 hours daily as needed. The velocity of the water entering the cone was measured at the beginning and end of each set with a flow meter manufactured by General Oceanics, model 2030R. Total volume sampled was calculated for each set. All vertebrates collected in the trap were identified and counted. Salmonids collected in the trap were classified by species, age and life stage. Scale samples and fork length data were collected from a random sample of salmonids in the catch. 1

9 Age Determination The same age length cutoffs for salmonids developed in 2007 were used in These cutoffs were determined from fork length frequency distributions and by estimating the age of scales in the collection. Individual scale samples were visually examined and categorized into brood years using scale age-estimation methods (Van Oosten 1957, Chilton and Beamish 1982, Casselman 1983). Fork length intervals for each age class were determined for appropriate time periods and updated throughout the season. The intervals are not absolute and as a result of variable growth, some individuals may be larger or smaller than the cutoff fork length. The fork length cutoffs and the number of scales examined to determine the cutoffs are shown in Appendices 37. Trap Efficiency Determinations and Production Estimates When sufficient fish were in the catch, multiple trap efficiency trials were conducted to determine the mean weekly trap efficiency for 0+ Chinook (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), 1+ coho (Oncorhynchus kisutch), and 0+, 1+, 2+, and 3+ steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss). For each trial, a known number of marked fish from each age class were taken three quarters of a mile upstream from the trap and released. 0+ salmonids were dyed by placing them in a solution of 0.6 grams of Bismarck brown mixed with 19 liters of water for 40 to 50 minutes. The older age fish were marked with a caudal fin margin clip. Three different caudal fin margin clips were used in a weekly rotation allowing us to determine if marked fish were being recaptured outside of the week in which they were marked. Fish marked in the morning processing were held in live cars until the afternoon in order to assess their condition prior to release. For each species and age class, the number of fish recaptured during the week divided by the total number marked equals the estimated trap efficiency for the week. An estimate of the total number of outmigrants per week was determined using a stratified mark and recapture technique (Carlson 1998). Zero was used for the lower confidence limit if the calculated lower confidence limit for the estimate was negative. In weeks when marked fish were released but none were recaptured, the seasonal trap efficiency was used to expand the number of fish trapped to develop an estimate of the total migrants for the week (ODFW Salmonid Lifecycle Monitoring Project). Estimating trap efficiencies for coho In 2009, during weeks of low abundance we chose to minimize our handling of coho and did not attempt mark-recapture trials. Known trap efficiencies between 0+ coho and 0+ steelhead from previous years were correlated to provide a weekly population estimate for 0+ coho. A correlation between 2+ steelhead and 1+ coho trap efficiencies from previous years was used to provide a weekly population estimate for 1+ coho. The correlation between 0+ steelhead and 0+ coho trap efficiencies in 2005, 2006 and 2008 was expressed by the equation y = x (Figure 19). The weekly efficiencies for 0+ steelhead from 2009 were equal to X and we solved for Y to estimate the trap efficiency for 0+ coho. When no 0+ steelhead were marked during the week, the seasonal trap efficiency of 15.83% was used to estimate the number of coho fry produced in When marked 0+ steelhead were released but none were recaptured during the week, the seasonal trap efficiency was correlated using the above equation to provide an efficiency for 0+ coho. 2

10 The correlation between the trap efficiency for 2+ steelhead smolts and 1+ coho smolts observed in 2004, 2005, and 2009 was used to estimate the number of coho smolts produced in This equation is expressed by y = x (Figure 20), where x is equal to 2+ steelhead efficiency and y is equal to 1+ coho efficiency. When marked 2+ steelhead were released but none were recaptured during the week, the seasonal trap efficiency of 19.87% was used to correlate trap efficiency for 1+ coho. Water temperature and flow monitoring Hourly water temperatures were recorded with an Onset Optic StowAway temperature logger attached to the downstream end of the trap (Figures 22, 23). Stream flow measurements presented in this report are preliminary data from the United States Geological Survey (USGS) stream gauge number , Shasta River, Yreka (SRY, Figure 21). This gauge is located approximately.75 miles upstream of the confluence with the Klamath River. Results The Shasta River rotary trap began sampling six days per week on February 11, Trapping ended after 20 weeks on July 1, The trap fished 120 sets for a total of 2, hours. An estimated 266,708,605.9 cubic feet of water were sampled. The number of salmonids trapped, marked and recaptured by week, and weekly population estimates with a 95% Confidence Interval (CI) are shown in Appendices 1-9. Weekly mean fork lengths, sample size, minimum and maximum size and standard deviations for Chinook, coho, and steelhead are shown in Appendices Chinook 0+ An estimated 718, Chinook (95% CI, 687, ,486) emigrated from the Shasta River during weeks 7 through 26. The greatest number of Chinook left during week 12 (112,832, 95% CI, 104, ,815). This is equal to 15.7% of the total estimate (Figures 1 and 2). The mean fork length for 0+ Chinook during week 12 was 44 mm (Appendix 18). Chinook 1+ An estimated 562 (95% CI, ) 1+ Chinook emigrated from the Shasta River during weeks 8 through 19. The greatest number of 1+ Chinook left during week 15 (160, 95% CI, 1-338) (Appendix 2). This is equal to 28.5% of the total estimate. Seasonal trap efficiency of 22.09% was used to provide an estimate for Julian week 17 since no successful mark-recapture trial occurred. The mean fork length for 1+ Chinook during week 15 was 136 mm (Appendix 19). Figure 3 shows the average weekly fork lengths for 0+ and 1+ Chinook. Coho 0+ An estimated 5, coho emigrated from the Shasta River during weeks 13 through 26 based on trap efficiencies compared to 0+ steelhead. The greatest number of coho, 1,364, left during week 20 (Figure 4). This is equal to 25.16% of the total estimate (Figure 5) and is based on the 0+ steelhead seasonal trap efficiency. Seasonal trap efficiency for 0+ steelhead (15.83%) was used to provide an estimate for 0+ coho during Julian weeks 12, 16, 17, and 20. During Julian weeks and 18, 0+ coho 3

11 trap efficiency of 13.41% was derived from a correlation between 0+ steelhead and 0+ coho efficiencies (Figure 19). The mean fork length for 0+ coho during week 20 was 59 mm (Appendix 20). Coho 1+ An estimated 5, coho emigrated from the Shasta River during weeks 8 through 24. The greatest number of coho, 2,110, left in week 16. This number is based on actual mark-recapture trials and is equal to 39.10% of the total estimate (Figure 6 and 7). The correlation between 1+ coho and 2+ steelhead trap efficiencies were used to provide an efficiency and population estimate for 1+ coho during Julian weeks 7, 13-15, and (Figure 20). Seasonal trap efficiency for 2+ steelhead (28.63%) was used to provide a population estimate for Julian weeks 9 and 23. The mean fork length for 1+ coho during week 15 was 143 mm (Appendix 21). Coho 2+ A total of coho were trapped emigrating from the Shasta River during weeks 8 through % of total trapped 2+ coho left during weeks 15 and 16 (Appendix 5). Due to limited mark/recapture trials for 2+ coho, we are unable to correlate efficiencies or provide an accurate population estimate for Figure 8 shows the average weekly fork lengths for 0+, 1+ and 2+ coho. Steelhead 0+ An estimated 5, steelhead (95% CI, 4,160 6,350) emigrated from the Shasta River during weeks 13-15, and The greatest number left during week 25 (1,517, 95% CI, 997 2,038) (Figure 9). This is equal to 28.9% of the total estimate for the period sampled (Figure 10). Seasonal trap efficiency of 15.83% was used to provide an estimate for Julian weeks and 18 since no successful mark-recapture trials occurred. The mean fork length for 0+ steelhead during week 25 was 69 mm (Appendix 23). Steelhead 1+ An estimated 1, steelhead (95% CI, 1,557 2,403) emigrated from the Shasta River in weeks The greatest number left during week 21 (388, 95% CI, ) (Figure 11). This is equal to 19.6% of the total estimate for the period sampled (Figure 12). Seasonal trap efficiency of 24.18% was used to provide an estimate for Julian weeks 9-11, 15, 22-23, and 26 since no successful mark-recapture trials occurred. The mean fork length for 1+ steelhead during week 21 was 157 mm (Appendix 24). Figure 13 shows average weekly fork lengths for 0+ and 1+ steelhead. Steelhead 2+ An estimated 27, steelhead (95% CI, 23,852 30,939) emigrated from the Shasta River during weeks 7 through 25. The greatest number left during week 16 (10,327, 95% CI, 8,601 12,053) (Figure 14). This is equal to 37.7% of the total estimate for the period sampled (Figure 15). Seasonal trap efficiency of 19.87% was used to provide an estimate for Julian weeks 9 and since no successful markrecapture trials occurred. The mean fork length for 2+ steelhead during week 16 was 185 mm (Appendix 25). 4

12 Steelhead 3+ An estimated 2, (95% CI, 1,768 3,610) emigrated from the Shasta River during weeks 8 17 and 19. The greatest number left during week 16 (1,307, 95% CI, 629 1,984) (Figure 16). This is equal to 48.6% of the total estimate for the period sampled (Figure 17). Seasonal trap efficiency of 10.12% was used to provide an estimate for Julian weeks 8, 10, 13, and 19 since no successful mark-recapture trial occurred. The mean fork length for 3+ steelhead during week 16 was 247 mm (Appendix 26). Figure 18 shows average weekly fork lengths for 2+ and 3+ steelhead. Temperature Monitoring The Maximum Weekly Maximum Temperature during the trapping period occurred in Julian week 26 when a temperature of C was observed. The Maximum Weekly Average Temperature of C also occurred in Julian week 26 (Appendix 35). Water temperatures recorded hourly with weekly mean, maximum, and minimum temperatures are shown in Figures 22 and 23, respectively. estimate Shasta River 2009, 0+ Chinook estimates weeks 7-26 estimate 718,949 (95% CI, 687, ,486) Julian week Figure 1 Shasta River Chinook estimates weeks

13 percentage of total 16.00% Shasta River 2009 weekly 0+ Chinook estimates as percentage of total estimate 14.00% 12.00% 10.00% 8.00% 6.00% 4.00% 2.00% 0.00% Julian week Figure 2 Shasta River Chinook estimates as percentage of total mean fork length 160 Shasta River Chinook 2009, weekly mean fork lengths for 0+ and 1+ sampled with standard deviation Julian week Figure 3 Shasta River 2009 weekly mean fork lengths for 0+ and 1+ Chinook sampled 6

14 estimate 1400 Shasta River 2009, 0+ coho estimates based on correlation between 0+ steelhead and 0+ coho efficiencies, weeks 7-26 estimate Julian week Figure 4 Shasta River coho estimates weeks 7 26 percentage of total 30.00% Shasta River 2009 weekly 0+ Coho estimates as percentage of total estimate 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% Julian week Figure 5 Shasta River coho estimates as percentage of total 7

15 Shasta River 2009, 1+ coho estimates based on correlation between 2+ steelhead and 1+ coho efficiencies, weeks 7-26 estimate 5396 estimate Julian week Figure 6 Shasta River coho estimates weeks 7-26 percentage of total Shasta River 2009 weekly 1+ coho estimates as percentage of total estimate 40.00% 35.00% 30.00% 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% Julian week Figure 7 Shasta River coho estimate as percentage of total 8

16 mean fork length 250 Shasta River coho 2009, weekly mean fork lengths for 0+, 1+ and 2+ sampled with standard deviation Julian week Figure 8 Shasta River 2009 weekly mean fork lengths for 0+, 1+, and 2+ coho sampled estimate Shasta River 2009, 0+ steelhead estimates weeks 7-26 estimate 5,255 (95% CI, 4,160-6,350) Julian week Figure 9 Shasta River steelhead estimates weeks

17 percentage of total 30.00% Shasta River 2009 weekly 0+ steelhead estimates as percentage of total estimate 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% Julian week Figure 10 Shasta River steelhead estimates as percentage of total estimate 700 Shasta River 2009, 1+ steelhead estimates weeks 7-26 estimate 1,980 (95% CI, 1,557-2,403) Julian week Figure 11 Shasta River steelhead estimates weeks

18 percentage of total Shasta River 2009 weekly 1+ steelhead estimates as percentage of total estimate 20.00% 18.00% 16.00% 14.00% 12.00% 10.00% 8.00% 6.00% 4.00% 2.00% 0.00% Julian week Figure 12 Shasta River steelhead estimates as percentage of total mean fork length Shasta River steelhead 2009, weekly mean fork lengths for 0+ and 1+ sampled with standard deviation Julian week Figure 13 Shasta River 2009 weekly mean fork length for 0+ and 1+ steelhead sampled 11

19 estimate Shasta River 2009, 2+ steelhead estimates weeks 7-26 estimate 27,395 (95% CI, 23,852-30,939) Julian week Figure 14 Shasta river steelhead estimates weeks 7 26 percentage of total 40.00% Shasta River 2009 weekly 2+ steelhead estimates as percentage of total estimate 35.00% 30.00% 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% Julian week Figure 15 Shasta River steelhead estimates as percentage of total 12

20 estimate 2000 Shasta River 2009, 3+ steelhead estimates weeks 7-26 estimate 2,689 (95% CI, 1,768-3,610) Julian week Figure 16 Shasta River steelhead estimates weeks 7 26 percentage of total 50.00% Shasta River 2009 weekly 3+ steelhead estimates as percentage of total estimate 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% Julian week Figure 17 Shasta River steelhead estimates as percentage of total 13

21 mean fork length Shasta River steelhead 2009, weekly mean fork lengths for 2+ and 3+ sampled with standard deviation Julian week Figure 18 Shasta River 2009 weekly mean fork lengths for 2+ and 3+ steelhead sampled 60.00% Shasta River 2005, 2006, 2008 correlations between 0+ coho and 0+ steelhead trap efficiencies for Julian weeks y = x R 2 = coho 0+ trap efficiency 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 0+ steelhead trap efficiency Figure 19 Shasta River coho/0+ steelhead efficiency correlations weeks

22 50.00% Shasta 2004, 2005, 2009 correlations between 1+ coho and 2+ steelhead trap efficiencies for weeks y = x R 2 = coho trap efficiency 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% 40.00% 2+ steelhead trap efficiency Figure 20 Shasta River coho/2+ steelhead efficiency correlations cfs Shasta River 2009 flow by Julian week, recorded at 15 minute intervals, USGS Gauge # Julian week Figure 21 Shasta River 2009 flow by week 15

23 C Shasta River 2009 water temperatures Recorded hourly at the rotary trap, Julian weeks Julian week Figure 22 Shast a River 2009 water temperatures by week Shasta River 2009 weekly mean, maximum and minimum water temperatures recor ded at the rotary trap (lo gger # ) Cº Julian week maximum mean minimum Figure 23 Shasta River 2009 weekly mean, maximum, and minimum water temperatures 16

24 Discussion Multi year estimates Annual estimates of the number of juvenile salmonids produced in the Shasta River began in The multi year estimates listed below are limited to years in which the methods and the period sampled are comparable. The age class presented for each species is the most common age at which smolts are produced. These estimates are presented here for the purpose of comparison and to identify trends in the population. Details of the trap operation and catch can be found in the individual annual reports. The estimates presented below were made using methods similar to those described in this report. 95% confidence intervals are available for the weekly estimates except for weeks when no marked fish were recovered. Estimates for these weeks were made by expanding the weekly catch by the seasonal trap efficiency. C hinook Annual estimates of the number of 0+ Chinook produced from the Shasta River for are shown in Figure 24. The estimate of 718,949 for 2009 is the sixth largest in the eight years of trap operation shown in Table 1. Table 1. Shasta River weekly production estimates for 0+ Chinook, Julian Week total 3,509,388 1,020,905 2,486, , , , , ,949 17

25 Chino ok 0+ estimates 4,000,000 3,500,000 3,000,000 2,500,000 2,000, 000 1,500, 000 1,000, ,000 Figure 0 Shasta Rive r 0+ Chino ok estimates year 24 Shasta River Chinook estimates 18

26 Steelhead Individual annual estimate s for 1+ and 2+ steelhead w ere first possi ble beginning in 2004 with the development of age leng th cuto ffs (Appendix 37 and 38). Prior to 2004 we produced combined estimates f or 1+ and 2+ stee lhead. Annual estimates of the number o f 2+ steelhead produced from the Shasta River for are shown in Fig ure 25. The estimate of 27,395 for 2009 is the fourth largest for the six years for wh ich 2+ estimates have been made (Table 2). Table 2. Shasta River weekly production estimates for 2+ steelhead, Julian Week , , , , , , ,962 1, ,626 1, ,500 1, ,890 1, , , ,048 3,278 2,391 7,637 1, ,886 5,648 17,136 4,541 1, ,120 4,015 6,930 19,421 2, ,398 3,718 4,975 6,543 1, ,195 2, , TOTAL 96,426 24,235 32,621 56,483 12,386 27,395 19

27 total estimate 110, ,000 90,000 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 Shasta River steelhead population estimates year Figure 25 Shasta River steelhead estimates Coho 2003 was the first year we conducted trap efficiency trials for 0+ and 1+ coho and the first year that weekly and annual estimate s were made. Weekly es timates for 2003 through 2009 are show n in Table 3; annual estimates are shown in Figure 26. Table 3, Shasta River weekly production estimates for 1+ coho, Julian W eek , , , , , , TOTAL 11,052 1,799 2,054 10,833 1, ,396 20

28 total estimate Shasta River, coho Population Estimates year Figure 26 Shasta River coho estimates Coho smolt production and smolt to adult survival Estimates of the number of smolts produced per returning adult from 2003 through 2010 is shown in Table 4. The average number of smolts per adult produced for these years is smolts. The projected adult returns for 2010 through 2013 are shown in Table 4 using the average rate of return of 2.90%. Figure 26 shows the annual population estimates from Brood year 2009 is the largest remaining cohort, producing 5, coho smolts (Table 5). Table 4 Coho 1+ produced per returning adult Brood year Adults 1+ produced in Year Smolts per Adult Projected production in 2011 and 2012 based on the average production of 18.38, 1+ smolts produced per returning adult and grilse for brood years

29 Table 5 Coho 1+ to adult survival Brood year Adults Emigration year 1+ produced % return Adults returning in Brood year % % % % % % % % % % Projected 1+ estimate for 2011 and 2012 were made using the mean smolt produced per adult and grilse value (18.38%) from 2001 through 2008 Projected adult returns in are based on the average 1+ smolt to adult survival rate for (2.90%). Trap operation Even with afternoon and evening trap checks, heavy debris loading during weeks 18, 19, 20, 23 and 24 made it necessary to end a total of twelve sets by midnight. During these sets, large amounts of filamentous algae loaded the live car so quickly that it would have been necessary to tend the trap continuously to prevent fish mortalities. Sets were ended by raising the cone and bringing the trap to the bank. The catch was processed as usual in the morning. Scott River Rotary Screw Trap Summary Methods The Scott River was sampled with a five foot and an eight foot rotary screw trap manufactured by EG Solutions, Corvallis, Oregon. The traps were operated six days per week, Sunday afternoon through Saturday morning, at approximately 4.75 miles upstream of the confluence with the Klamath River at 041º 43' 34.87" N, 123º 00' 30.11" W. The catch in the trap was processed daily at approximately 0900 hours. Velocity of the water entering each cone was measured at the beginning and end of each set with a flow meter manufactured by General Oceanics model 2030R. Total volume sampled was calculated for each set. All vertebrates collected in the trap were identified and counted. Salmonids collected in the trap were classified by species, age and life stage. Scale samples and fork length data were collected from a random sample of salmonids in the catch. 22

30 Age Determination The same age length cutoffs for salmonids in 2007 were used in These cutoffs were determined from fork length frequency distributions and by estimating the age of scales in the collection. Individual scale samples were visually examined and categorized into brood years using scale age-estimation methods (Van Oosten 1957, Chilton and Beamish 1982, Casselman 1983). Fork length intervals for each age class were determined for appropriate time periods and updated throughout the season. The Scott River coho cut off was in question and therefore the scales collected in 2009 were examined. After the scales were examined the existing cut off from 2007 was determined to be correct and remained unchanged. The intervals are not absolute and as a result of variable growth, some individuals may be larger or smaller than the cutoff fork length. The fork length cutoffs and the number of scales examined to determine the cutoffs are shown in Appendix 38. Trap Efficiency Determinations and Production Estimates Trap efficiencies for steelhead and Chinook were calculated weekly using the same methods described in the Shasta River section of this report on page 2. Due to the expected increase in smolt production from the return of 1,622 adult coho in 2007 (Knechtle 2008), we conducted weekly efficiency trials for 0 and 1+ coho. Changes in sampling equipment throughout the season made it necessary to calculate three separate seasonal trap efficiencies for each species in Early season trap efficiency was based on Julian weeks 7-11 when only the eight foot trap was fishing. Mid-season trap efficiency was based on Julian weeks when both the five and eight foot trap were fishing. Late season trap efficiency was based on Julian weeks when only the five foot trap was fishing in the former location of the eight foot trap. Due to the high flow event on 5/5, no estimates or trap efficiency were calculated for week 19. Water temperature and flow monitoring Hourly water temperatures were recorded with an Onset Optic StowAway temperature logger attached to the downstream end of the trap. Stream flow measurements presented in this report are made using preliminary data from the United States Geological Survey (USGS) recorded at stream gauge number (Figure 38). This gauge is located approximately 19.5 miles upstream of the trap. Several large tributaries without stream gauges and numerous small streams enter the Scott River between the gauge and the trap and are not included in the flow measurements. Results The eight-foot Scott River rotary trap began sampling six days per week on February 11, This trap broke loose from its rigging during a high flow event on May 5, 2009; consequently, its final set for the season was on May 4, The trap fished 72 sets for a total of 1, hours. An estimated 143,021,086 cubic feet of water was sampled. The five-foot Scott River rotary trap began sampling six days per week on March 18, Trapping ended on July 1, The trap fished 76 sets for a 23

31 total of 1, hours. An estimated 192,967,802.9 cubic feet of water was sampled during the season. The number of fish trapped, marked and recaptured by week, and weekly estimates with 95% CI for all age classes of salmonids with population estimates are shown in Appendices Weekly mean fork length, sample size, minimum and maximum size and standard deviation for each species and age class are shown in Appendices Seasonal trap efficiencies Table 6 shows the seasonal trap efficiencies for all age classes of juvenile Chinook, coho and steelhead for three different time periods throughout the season. These time periods correspond to the use of different sampling equipment and events as described in the methods section of this report. Table 6. Scott River seasonal trap efficiencies by period and species and age class Seasonal Trap Efficiency Species Age Class Week 7-11 Weeks Weeks Chinook % 8.54% 3.87% % 18.52% Coho % 8.00% % 11.30% 5.65% Steelhead % 1.10% % 10.02% 4.48% % 2.98% % Chinook 0+ An estimated 930, Chinook (95% CI, 876, ,433) emigrated from the Scott River during the period sampled. The greatest number of 0+ Chinook left during week 16 (275,700, 95% CI, 242, ,261) (Figure 27). This is equal to 29.6% of the total estimate (Figure 28).The mean fork length for 0+ Chinook during week 16 was 40 mm (Appendix 27). The seasonal trap efficiency was used to generate estimates for 0+ Chinook in Julian weeks 8 and 10 due to the absence of marked fish in the catch. Chinook 1+ An estimated 9, Chinook (95% CI, 6,978 12,413) emigrated from the Scott River during weeks The greatest number left during week 8 (2,738, 95% CI, 1,409 4,067). This is equal to 28.2% of the total estimate. Mid-season trap efficiency of 18.52% was used to provide an estimate for Julian week 17 since no successful mark-recapture trial occurred. The mean fork length for 1+ Chinook during week 8 was 92 mm (Appendix 28). Figure 29 shows the average weekly fork lengths for 0+ and 1+ Chinook. 24

32 Coho 0+ An estimated 3, coho (95% CI, 3,061 4,736) emigrated from the Scott River during weeks and The greatest number left during week 17 (1,864 95% CI, 1,191 2,538) (Figure 30). This is equal to 47.8% of the total estimate (Figure 31). Mid-season trap efficiency of 16.67% was used to provide an estimate for Julian weeks since no successful mark-recapture trial occurred. Late-season trap efficiency of 8.00% was used for Julian weeks 22 and 24. The mean fork length for 0+ coho during week 17 was 35 mm (Appendix 29). Coho 1+ An estimated 62,220 (95% CI, 54,277 70,163) 1+ coho emigrated from the Scott River during weeks The greatest number left during week 10 (13,029, 95% CI, 7,770 18,287) (Figure 32). This is equal to 20.9% of the total estimate (Figure 33). Late-season trap efficiency of 5.56% was used to provide an estimate for Julian week since no successful mark-recapture trial occurred. The mean fork length for 1+ coho during week 10 was 91 mm (Appendix 30). Figure 34 shows the average weekly fork lengths for 0+ and 1+ coho. Steelhead 0+ An estimated steelhead (95% CI, 20 1,817) emigrated from the Scott River during weeks Week 26 is the only week when a successful mark-recapture trial occurred. Efficiency of 3.92% in this week may not be sufficient to create an accurate population estimate. The greatest number of steelhead was observed during week 25 (65 total trapped, Appendix 14). The mean fork length for 0+ steelhead during week 25 was 43 mm (Appendix 31). Steelhead 1+ An estimated 88, steelhead (95% CI, 74, ,494) left the Scott River between weeks 7 through 26. The greatest number left during week 11 (21,208 95% CI, 11,720 30,696) (Figure 35). This is equal to 24% of the total estimate for the period sampled (Figure 36). Early-season trap efficiency of 5.11% was used to provide an estimate for Julian week 8 since no successful mark-recapture trial occurred. Late-season trap efficiency of 4.50% was used for Julian weeks 21 and The mean fork length for 1+ steelhead during week 11 was 78 mm (Appendix 32). Figure 37 shows the average weekly fork lengths for 0+ and 1+ steelhead. Steelhead 2+ An estimated 8, steelhead (95% CI, 4,325 12,342) left the Scott River in weeks The greatest number left during week 16 (2,518 95% CI, 56 4,980) (Figure 38). This is equal to 30.2% of the total estimate for the period sampled (Figure 39). Early-season trap efficiency of 3.49% was used to provide an estimate for Julian weeks 7-8 and 10 since no successful mark-recapture trial occurred. Midseason trap efficiency of 2.98% was used for Julian weeks 17 and 18. The mean fork length for 2+ steelhead during week 16 was 128 mm (Appendix 33). Steelhead 3+ 25

33 A total of six 3+ steelhead were trapped in the Scott River in weeks 7, 8 and 15 (Appendix 17). Figure 40 shows the average weekly fork lengths for 2+ and 3+ steelhead. Temperature Monitoring The Maximum Weekly Maximum Temperature (average of daily maximum temperature for each week) of C occurred in Julian week 26. The Maximum Weekly Average Temperature of C also occurred in Julian week 26. (Appendix 36). Water temperature recorded hourly and mean, maximum, and minimum temperatures recorded weekly are expressed on figures 42 and 43 respectively. estimate Scott River 2009, 0+ Chinook estimates weeks 7-26 estimate 930,731 (95% CI, 876, ,433) 350, , , , , ,000 50, Julian week Figure 27 Scott River Chinook estimates weeks

34 percentage of total Scott River 2009 weekly 0+ Chinook estimates as percentage of total estimate 30.00% 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% Julian week Figure 28 Scott River Chinook estimates as percentage of total Scott River Chinook 2009, weekly mean fork lengths for 0+ and 1+ sampled with standard deviation mean fork length Julian week Figure 29 Scott River 2009 weekly mean fork lengths for 0+ and 1+ Chinook sampled 27

35 estimate 3,000 Scott River 2009, 0+ coho estimates weeks 7-26 estimate 3,899 (95% CI, 3,061-4,736) 2,500 2,000 1,500 1, Julian week Figure 30 Scott River coho estimates weeks 7 26 percentage of total Scott River 2009 weekly 0+ coho estimates as percentage of total estimate 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% Julian week Figure 31 Scott River coho estimates as percentage of total 28

36 estimate 20,000 18,000 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 Scott River 2009, 1+ coho estimates weeks 7-26 estimate 62,220 (95% CI 54,277-70,163) Julian week Figure 32 Scott River coho estimates weeks 7 26 percentage of total Scott River 2009, weekly 1+ coho estimates as percentage of total estimate 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% Julian week Figure 33 Scott River coho estimates as percentage of total 29

37 fork length (mm) Scott River 2009, weekly mean forklength for coho 0+, 1+ sampled with standard deviation Julian week Figure 34 Scott River 2009 weekly mean fork lengths for 0+ and 1+ coho sampled estimate 32,000 Scott River 2009, 1+ steelhead estimates weeks 7-26 estimate 88,424 (95% CI, 74, ,494) 28,000 24,000 20,000 16,000 12,000 8,000 4, Julian week Figure 35 Scott River steelhead estimates weeks

38 percentage of total Scott River 2009 weekly 1+ steelhead estimates as percentage of total estimate 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% Julian week Figure 36 Scott River steelhead as percentage of total Scott River steelhead 2009, weekly mean fork length for 0+ and 1+ sampled with standard deviation fork length (mm) Julian week Figure 37 Scott River 2009 weekly mean fork length for 0+ and 1+ steelhead sampled 31

39 estimate Scott River 2009, 2+ steelhead estimates weeks 7-26 estimate 8,334 (95% CI, 4,325-12,342) 5,400 4,800 4,200 3,600 3,000 2,400 1,800 1, Julian week Figure 38 Scott River steelhead estimates weeks 7-26 percentage of total 35.00% Scott River 2009 we ekly 2+ steelhead estimates as percentage of total estimate 30.00% 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5. 00% 0.00% Julian week Figure 39 Scott River steelhead estimates as percentage of total 32

40 fork length (mm) 600 Scott River steelhead 2009, weekly mean fork length for 2+ and 3+ sampled with standard deviation Julian week Figure 40 Scott River 2009 weekly mean fork lengths for 2+ and 3+ steelhead sampled cfs 4000 Scott River 2009 flow by Julian week, recorded at 15 min intervals, USGS gauge # Julian week Figure 41 Scott River 2009 flow by week 33

41 C Scott River 2009, water temperatures by Julian week, recorded hourly at the rotary screw trap (logger # ) Julian Week No water temperature available in Julian week 19 due to loss of the trap and temperature logger. Figure 42 Scott River 2009 water temperatures by week Scott River 2009 weekly mean, maximum and minimum water temperatures C recorded at the rotary trap (logger # ) maximum mean minimum Julian week No water temperat ure available injulian week 19 due to loss of the trap and temperature logger Figure 43 Scott River 2009 weekly mean, maximu m, and minimum water temperature 34

42 Discussion Due to low f lows, we were unable to fish the five foot trap during Julian weeks 7 through 11. B oth the five foot trap and the eight foot tra p were operating in Julian Week 12 (Figure 44). At 11:15 on 5/4/2009, flow at the USGS Scott River gauge was 685 CFS, by 11:15 on 5 /5/2009; the flow had increased t o 3,120 C FS at the gaug e. This sudden increase in flow separated the eight foot trap from its rigging. The eight foot trap drifted approximately.5 miles downstream to the first riffle below the trap site where the front harness fortunately wrapped on a large submerged rock (Photo 1). Photo 1 View from the deck of the 8 trap were it came to rest in the first riffle downstream of the sampling site. The trap broke loose from its rigging during the high flow event of 5/5/09. With the eight foot trap out of service, the five foot trap was moved to the eight foot trap site and resumed sampling on 5/13/09. Only one set was completed for Julian Week 19. For the remainder of the season, the five foot trap was the only trap in operation (Figure 44). 35

43 Days fished per week 7 Scott River 2009 Days and traps fished per week foot trap 8 foot trap Julian week Figure 44 Scott River 2009 days traps fished per week Multi Year Estimates Chinook Annual estimates of the number of Chinook produced from the Scott River for are shown in Figure 44. The estimate of 930,731 for 2009 is the second largest in the nine years of trap operation (Table 6). Table 6. Scott River weekly production estimates for 0+ Chinook, Julian Week , , , , ,188 2, ,293 32, ,499 9, , ,822 12, ,422 12, ,491 3, ,690 30, ,677 21, ,594 37, ,404 14, ,439 79, ,057 7, ,945 14, ,080 4, ,274 32, ,860 3, ,088 35, ,935 3, ,154 20, ,739 4, ,732 5, ,661 3, ,795 29, ,650 6, ,838 52, ,028 10, ,321 32, ,100 3, ,526 33, ,377 2, ,746 36, ,803 16,578 2,624 52,180 53, ,107 42,808 4, ,592 1, TOTAL 1,029, ,885 10, , , ,731 36

44 total estimate 1,200,000 Scott River, Chinook Population Estimates 1,000, , , , , year Figure 45 Scott River Chinook estimates Steelhead Annual estimates of the number of 2+ steelhead produced from the Scott River for are shown in Figure 46. The estimate of 8,334 for 2009 is the fourth largest in the nine year s of trap operation. In 2004 only one efficiency trial in Julian week 16 was successful with a single recaptured fish. Table 7. Sco tt River weekly production estimates for 2+ steelhead, Julian Week , , , ,283 1, , , , ,946 1, , ,461 3, , ,302 3, , , , , ,519 2, , , , , TOTAL ,074 7,629 46,810 13,671 8,334 37

45 Scott River, steelhead population estimates total estimate 50,000 45,000 40,000 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5, year 2009 Figure 46 Scott River steelhead estimates Coho W eekly estimates of the number of 1+ coho emigrating from the Scott River in 2003 and 2005 through 2009 are shown in Table 8. Figure 47 shows the annual population estimates for the same period. In 2004 there were no recaptures for either 2+ steelhead or 1+ coho and no estimate was possible (Table 9).. Scott River, Coho population estimates total estimate 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10, year Figure 47 Scott River coho population estimates 38

46 Table 8. Scott River weekly production estimates for 1+ coho, Julian Week Multiyear Average , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , TOTAL 34, ,660 75,097 3, ,220 19,777 Table 9 Yearly mark-recapture totals and corresponding estimates for 1+ coho Scott River 1+ coho catch total marked released Recaptures population estimate ,412 1, , no estimate , ,828 2, , , ,330 3, ,220 39

47 Acknowledgements The CDFG, Anadrom ous Fisheries Resource Assessment and Monitoring Program (AFRAMP) would like to acknowledge the people who contributed their efforts to a successful field season in 2009: Christopher Adams Luciano Chiaramonte Jack Herr Annie Horton Kristen Kirkby Denton Lopez Mark Pisano Donn Rehberg Steven Stenhouse Lou Uecker Joelle Vincent Thanks to the following agencies and organizations for their support: Shasta River Resource Conservation District AmeriCorps Watershed Stewards Project California Department of Fish and Game, Fisheries Restoration Grants Program Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission Additional Thanks to: Bob Noyes of Gravity Works, for his excellent river safety training program and assistance 40

1998 Willow Creek Downstream Migrant Trap Report. Draft. Prepared By: C. A. Walker. Lower Trinity Ranger District. Six Rivers National Forest

1998 Willow Creek Downstream Migrant Trap Report. Draft. Prepared By: C. A. Walker. Lower Trinity Ranger District. Six Rivers National Forest 1998 Willow Creek Downstream Migrant Trap Report Draft Prepared By: C. A. Walker Lower Trinity Ranger District Six Rivers National Forest September 1998 Executive Summary The downstream migrant trap was

More information

State of California The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME

State of California The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME State of California The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME ANNUAL REPORT SHASTA AND SCOTT RIVER JUVENILE SALMONID OUTMIGRANT STUDY, 2-21 PROJECT 2a1 by William R. Chesney Northern California,

More information

BOGUS CREEK SALMON STUDIES 2002

BOGUS CREEK SALMON STUDIES 2002 BOGUS CREEK SALMON STUDIES 2002 BY: JEANNINE RICHEY California Department of Fish and Game KLAMATH RIVER PROJECT 303 SOUTH STREET YREKA, CALIFORNIA 96097 (530) 842-3109 California Department of Fish and

More information

Blue Creek Chinook Outmigration Monitoring Technical Memorandum

Blue Creek Chinook Outmigration Monitoring Technical Memorandum Blue Creek Chinook Outmigration Monitoring 2012 Technical Memorandum Prepared by: Andrew Antonetti and Erika Partee Yurok Tribe Fisheries Program PO Box 1027 Klamath, California 95548 In Partnership with:

More information

OREGON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE ROGUE FISH DISTRICT REPORT

OREGON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE ROGUE FISH DISTRICT REPORT OREGON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE ROGUE FISH DISTRICT REPORT TITLE: Upper Rogue Smolt Trapping Project, 1999 STREAM: Big Butte, Little Butte, South Fork Big Butte, Slate and West Fork Evans Creeks

More information

Shasta and Scott River Juvenile Steelhead Trapping

Shasta and Scott River Juvenile Steelhead Trapping KRIS edition Annual Report Study 3a1 Shasta and Scott River Juvenile Steelhead Trapping 2 California Department of Fish and Game Steelhead Research and Monitoring Program Yreka, CA. prepared by : William

More information

c h a p t e r 6 n n n Related to the VAMP

c h a p t e r 6 n n n Related to the VAMP c h a p t e r 6 n n n Complimentary Studies Related to the VAMP Throughout 27 several fishery studies were conducted to advance the understanding of juvenile salmon abundance and survival in the San Joaquin

More information

Monitoring of Downstream Fish Passage at Cougar Dam in the South Fork McKenzie River, Oregon February 8, By Greg A.

Monitoring of Downstream Fish Passage at Cougar Dam in the South Fork McKenzie River, Oregon February 8, By Greg A. Monitoring of Downstream Fish Passage at Cougar Dam in the South Fork McKenzie River, Oregon 1998- February 8, 2 By Greg A. Taylor Oregon Dept. of Fish & Wildlife 315 E. Main Street Springfield, OR 97478

More information

Horse Linto Creek Anadromous Monitoring Project. Funded by: SB-271 California Department of Fish and Game Agreement #P

Horse Linto Creek Anadromous Monitoring Project. Funded by: SB-271 California Department of Fish and Game Agreement #P 2000-2001 Horse Linto Creek Anadromous Monitoring Project Funded by: SB-271 California Department of Fish and Game Agreement #P0010554 Prepared By: Heidi Peura Lower Trinity Ranger District November 2001

More information

Juvenile Salmonid Monitoring on the Lower Trinity River, California, 2001

Juvenile Salmonid Monitoring on the Lower Trinity River, California, 2001 Juvenile Salmonid Monitoring on the Lower Trinity River, California, 21 Prepared By: Seth W. Naman Scott Turo Tim Hayden Yurok Tribal Fisheries Program Hwy 96 Box 196 Hoopa, CA 95546 sethnaman@earthlink.net

More information

ASSESSMENT OF THE STATUS OF NESTUCCA RIVER WINTER STEELHEAD

ASSESSMENT OF THE STATUS OF NESTUCCA RIVER WINTER STEELHEAD ASSESSMENT OF THE STATUS OF NESTUCCA RIVER WINTER STEELHEAD Gary Susac and Steve Jacobs Coastal Salmonid Inventory Project Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife August 21, 2001 INTRODUCTION This report

More information

LOWER YUBA RIVER ACCORD MONITORING ANNUAL ROTARY SCREW TRAPPING REPORT AND EVALUATION PLAN OCTOBER 1, 2008 AUGUST 31, 2009

LOWER YUBA RIVER ACCORD MONITORING ANNUAL ROTARY SCREW TRAPPING REPORT AND EVALUATION PLAN OCTOBER 1, 2008 AUGUST 31, 2009 LOWER YUBA RIVER ACCORD MONITORING AND EVALUATION PLAN ANNUAL ROTARY SCREW TRAPPING REPORT OCTOBER 1, 28 AUGUST 31, 29 Prepared for: The Lower Yuba River Accord Planning Team by Casey Campos and Duane

More information

Downstream Migrant Trapping in Russian River Mainstem, Tributaries, and Estuary

Downstream Migrant Trapping in Russian River Mainstem, Tributaries, and Estuary Downstream Migrant Trapping in Russian River Mainstem, Tributaries, and Estuary Introduction In September 2008, the National Marine Fisheries Service issued the Russian River Biological Opinion, which

More information

Job 1. Title: Estimate abundance of juvenile trout and salmon.

Job 1. Title: Estimate abundance of juvenile trout and salmon. STUDY PERFORMANCE REPORT State: Michigan Project No.: F-53-R-13 Study No.: 461 Title: Population dynamics of juvenile rainbow trout and coho salmon in Lake Superior tributaries Period Covered: April 1,

More information

OREGON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE ROGUE WATERSHED DISTRICT REPORT INTRODUCTION

OREGON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE ROGUE WATERSHED DISTRICT REPORT INTRODUCTION OREGON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE ROGUE WATERSHED DISTRICT REPORT TITLE: Upper Rogue Smolt Trapping Project, 2003 STREAM: Bear, Little Butte, Elk, Slate and West Fork Evans Creeks and the Little Applegate

More information

Downstream Migrant Trapping in Russian River Mainstem, Tributaries, and Estuary

Downstream Migrant Trapping in Russian River Mainstem, Tributaries, and Estuary Downstream Migrant Trapping in Russian River Mainstem, Tributaries, and Estuary Introduction In September 2008, the National Marine Fisheries Service issued the Russian River Biological Opinion, which

More information

2015 Lower Cowlitz River Rotary Screw Trap (CRST) 2016 Cowlitz River Fisheries and Aquatic Science Annual Conference

2015 Lower Cowlitz River Rotary Screw Trap (CRST) 2016 Cowlitz River Fisheries and Aquatic Science Annual Conference 2015 Lower Cowlitz River Rotary Screw Trap (CRST) 2016 Cowlitz River Fisheries and Aquatic Science Annual Conference Chris Wagemann - WDFW April 20, 2016 Presentation Overview Objectives Site Selection

More information

***Please Note*** April 3, Dear advisory committee members:

***Please Note*** April 3, Dear advisory committee members: April 3, 29 Dear advisory committee members: The fifth meeting of the CHF advisory committee will be held April 13 in Grants Pass from 6:-8:3 PM, and the purpose of this document is to help committee members

More information

Downstream Fish Migration Monitoring at Woodbridge Irrigation District Dam Lower Mokelumne River, January 2004 through June 2004.

Downstream Fish Migration Monitoring at Woodbridge Irrigation District Dam Lower Mokelumne River, January 2004 through June 2004. Downstream Fish Migration Monitoring at Woodbridge Irrigation District Dam Lower Mokelumne River, January 24 through June 24 September 24 Michelle L. Workman East Bay Municipal Utility District, 1 Winemasters

More information

LOWER MOKELUMNE RIVER UPSTREAM FISH MIGRATION MONITORING Conducted at Woodbridge Irrigation District Dam August 2014 through July 2015.

LOWER MOKELUMNE RIVER UPSTREAM FISH MIGRATION MONITORING Conducted at Woodbridge Irrigation District Dam August 2014 through July 2015. LOWER MOKELUMNE RIVER UPSTREAM FISH MIGRATION MONITORING Conducted at Woodbridge Irrigation District Dam August 2014 through July 2015 August 2015 Casey Del Real and Matt Saldate East Bay Municipal Utility

More information

Mill Creek Salmonid Lifecycle Monitoring Station Juvenile Coho Salmon Outmigrant Trapping Project , Smith River, California

Mill Creek Salmonid Lifecycle Monitoring Station Juvenile Coho Salmon Outmigrant Trapping Project , Smith River, California Mill Creek Salmonid Lifecycle Monitoring Station Juvenile Coho Salmon Outmigrant Trapping Project 2014-2017, Smith River, California OCTOBER 2017 FINAL REPORT TO THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE

More information

Smolt Monitoring Protocol at COE Dams On the Lower Snake and Lower Columbia rivers

Smolt Monitoring Protocol at COE Dams On the Lower Snake and Lower Columbia rivers Smolt Monitoring Protocol at COE Dams On the Lower Snake and Lower Columbia rivers 1.0 Introduction There are two primary goals of the Smolt Monitoring Program (SMP); to provide realtime data on juvenile

More information

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT FEDERAL AID IN SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACT. Grant Title: Inland and Anadromous Sport Fish Management and Research

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT FEDERAL AID IN SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACT. Grant Title: Inland and Anadromous Sport Fish Management and Research ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT FEDERAL AID IN SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACT State: California Grant Agreement: F-51-R-13 Grant Title: Inland and Anadromous Sport Fish Management and Research Project No. 22: North

More information

Juvenile Salmonid Monitoring On The Mainstem Trinity River At Willow Creek, California, William D. Pinnix and Shane Quinn

Juvenile Salmonid Monitoring On The Mainstem Trinity River At Willow Creek, California, William D. Pinnix and Shane Quinn U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Arcata Fisheries Data Series Report DS 2009-16 Juvenile Salmonid Monitoring On The Mainstem Trinity River At Willow Creek, California, 2006-2007 William D. Pinnix and Shane

More information

Abundance of Steelhead and Coho Salmon in the Lagunitas Creek Drainage, Marin County, California

Abundance of Steelhead and Coho Salmon in the Lagunitas Creek Drainage, Marin County, California scanned for KRIS Abundance of Steelhead and Coho Salmon in the Lagunitas Creek Drainage, Marin County, California Prepared for: Marin Municipal Water District 220 Nellen Drive Corte Madera, California

More information

THE CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE WARM SPRINGS RESERVATION OF OREGON

THE CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE WARM SPRINGS RESERVATION OF OREGON THE CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE WARM SPRINGS RESERVATION OF OREGON To: Branch of Natural Resources P.0. Box C, Warm Springs, Oregon 97761 Phone (541) 553-2002/2003 Fax (541) 553-1994 The Independent Science

More information

Robyn Bilski, Jason Shillam, Charles Hunter, Matt Saldate and Ed Rible East Bay Municipal Utility District, 1 Winemasters Way, Unit K, Lodi, CA

Robyn Bilski, Jason Shillam, Charles Hunter, Matt Saldate and Ed Rible East Bay Municipal Utility District, 1 Winemasters Way, Unit K, Lodi, CA Emigration of Juvenile Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tschawytscha) and Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in the Lower Mokelumne River, December 29 through July 21 Robyn Bilski, Jason Shillam, Charles Hunter,

More information

Red Salmon Lake Data Report 2011

Red Salmon Lake Data Report 2011 Red Salmon Lake Data Report 2011 Prepared by: Nathan Weber, Biologist February 2012 The Red Salmon Lake Project was made possible through an Alaskan Sustainable Salmon Fund grant received from the Alaska

More information

Cemetery Creek Smolt Trap Data Summary What is a smolt? What is a smolt trap? Cemetery Creek Smolt Trap Data:

Cemetery Creek Smolt Trap Data Summary What is a smolt? What is a smolt trap? Cemetery Creek Smolt Trap Data: Cemetery Creek Smolt Trap Data Summary What is a smolt? A "smolt" is one of the life stages of a juvenile salmon. This life stage occurs when the juvenile salmon begins its migration from freshwater to

More information

Redd Dewatering and Juvenile Salmonid Stranding in the Lower Feather River,

Redd Dewatering and Juvenile Salmonid Stranding in the Lower Feather River, Redd Dewatering and Juvenile Salmonid Stranding in the Lower Feather River, 2005-2006 Interim Report for NOAA Fisheries Prepared by: California Department of Water Resources Division of Environmental Services

More information

Knife River Trap Report 2015

Knife River Trap Report 2015 Minnesota F29R (P)-Segment 32 (Year 1) Study 3 Job 3 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF FISH AND WILDLIFE SECTION OF FISHERIES SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT Knife River Trap Report 2015 Completed

More information

Judd Lake Adult Sockeye Salmon Data Report 2012

Judd Lake Adult Sockeye Salmon Data Report 2012 Judd Lake Adult Sockeye Salmon Data Report 2012 Prepared by: Nathan Weber, Biologist July 2013 The Judd Lake Project was made possible through a State of Alaska Designated Legislative Grant. This page

More information

SURFACE TEMPERATURES AND SALMON DISTRIBUTION RELATIVE TO THE BOUNDARIES OF THE JAPANESE DRIFT GILLNET FISHERY FOR FLYING SQUID (Ommastrephes bartrami)

SURFACE TEMPERATURES AND SALMON DISTRIBUTION RELATIVE TO THE BOUNDARIES OF THE JAPANESE DRIFT GILLNET FISHERY FOR FLYING SQUID (Ommastrephes bartrami) FRI UW 83 17 October, 1983 SURFACE TEMPERATURES AND SALMON DISTRIBUTION RELATIVE TO THE BOUNDARIES OF THE JAPANESE DRIFT GILLNET FISHERY FOR FLYING SQUID (Ommastrephes bartrami) by Robert L. Burgner and

More information

THE OREGON PLAN for. Salmon and Watersheds. Smith River Steelhead and Coho Monitoring Verification Study, Report Number: OPSW-ODFW

THE OREGON PLAN for. Salmon and Watersheds. Smith River Steelhead and Coho Monitoring Verification Study, Report Number: OPSW-ODFW THE OREGON PLAN for Salmon and Watersheds Smith River Steelhead and Coho Monitoring Verification Study, 2007 Report Number: OPSW-ODFW-2009-11 The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife prohibits discrimination

More information

1996 Progress Report. Anadromous Salmonid Escapement and Downstream Migration Studies. in Prairie Creek, California,

1996 Progress Report. Anadromous Salmonid Escapement and Downstream Migration Studies. in Prairie Creek, California, 1996 Progress Report Anadromous Salmonid Escapement and Downstream Migration Studies in Prairie Creek, California, 1995-1996 By Dr. Terry Roelofs and Bernard Klatte Humboldt State University Arcata, California

More information

Wetland Recovery and Salmon Population Resilience: A Case Study in Estuary Ecosystem Restoration

Wetland Recovery and Salmon Population Resilience: A Case Study in Estuary Ecosystem Restoration Wetland Recovery and Salmon Population Resilience: A Case Study in Estuary Ecosystem Restoration Daniel L. Bottom NOAA NW Fisheries Science Center, Newport, OR Kim K. Jones, Trevan J. Cornwell, Staci Stein

More information

Strategies for mitigating ecological effects of hatchery programs

Strategies for mitigating ecological effects of hatchery programs Strategies for mitigating ecological effects of hatchery programs Some case studies from the Pacific Northwest Kathryn Kostow Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Ecological risks occur when the presence

More information

NATIVE FISH CONSERVATION PLAN FOR THE SPRING CHINOOK SALMON ROGUE SPECIES MANAGEMENT UNIT

NATIVE FISH CONSERVATION PLAN FOR THE SPRING CHINOOK SALMON ROGUE SPECIES MANAGEMENT UNIT Attachment 4 NATIVE FISH CONSERVATION PLAN FOR THE SPRING CHINOOK SALMON ROGUE SPECIES MANAGEMENT UNIT Figures in Draft Plan of February 28, 27 Figure 1. Map of the Rogue River Basin. PASSAGE ESTIMATES

More information

Data Report : Russian River Basin Steelhead and Coho Salmon Monitoring Program Pilot Study

Data Report : Russian River Basin Steelhead and Coho Salmon Monitoring Program Pilot Study Data Report 1999-1: Russian River Basin Steelhead and Coho Salmon Monitoring Program Pilot Study Sonoma County Water Agency 215 West College Avenue Santa Rosa, California 951 Prepared by David Cook Senior

More information

Stock Assessment of Anadromous Salmonids, 2003 Report Number: OPSW-ODFW

Stock Assessment of Anadromous Salmonids, 2003 Report Number: OPSW-ODFW THE OREGON PLAN for Salmon and Watersheds Stock Assessment of Anadromous Salmonids, 3 Report Number: OPSW-ODFW-- The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife prohibits discrimination in all of its programs

More information

LIFE HISTORY DIVERSITY AND RESILIENCE

LIFE HISTORY DIVERSITY AND RESILIENCE LIFE HISTORY DIVERSITY AND RESILIENCE SPRING CHINOOK IN THE WILLAMETTE RIVER BASIN Kirk Schroeder Brian Cannon Luke Whitman Paul Olmsted Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Corvallis Research Lab Thanks

More information

SMOLT MONITORING IN THE LAGUNITAS CREEK WATERSHED 2015

SMOLT MONITORING IN THE LAGUNITAS CREEK WATERSHED 2015 SMOLT MONITORING IN THE LAGUNITAS CREEK WATERSHED 2015 To: California Department of Fish and Wildlife Fisheries Restoration Grant Program Grant # P1130417 Lagunitas Creek Coho Salmon Life Cycle Monitoring

More information

Fish Tech Weekly Outline January 14-18

Fish Tech Weekly Outline January 14-18 Fish Tech Weekly Outline January 14-18 TOPICS: salmon, trout, and char in Southeast Alaska salmonid identification overview salmonid life cycle and stages salmonid freshwater and marine distribution/residence

More information

Steelhead Tagging Project at Moricetown Canyon. Data Analysis and Recommendations

Steelhead Tagging Project at Moricetown Canyon. Data Analysis and Recommendations Steelhead Tagging Project at Moricetown Canyon AUGUST TO SEPTEMBER 2007 by Wet suwet en Fisheries Data Analysis and Recommendations by SKR Consultants Ltd. Smithers, B.C. for Pacific Salmon Foundation

More information

Final Bull Trout Genetics Monitoring Plan for the Wallowa Falls Hydroelectric Project. (FERC No. P-308) June 2017

Final Bull Trout Genetics Monitoring Plan for the Wallowa Falls Hydroelectric Project. (FERC No. P-308) June 2017 Final for the Wallowa Falls Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. P-308) June 2017 Prepared by: Jeremiah Doyle PacifiCorp 825 NE Multnomah Street Portland, OR 97232 June, 2017 Page 1 of 8 Table of Contents 1.0

More information

STEELHEAD SURVEYS IN OMAK CREEK

STEELHEAD SURVEYS IN OMAK CREEK STEELHEAD SURVEYS IN OMAK CREEK 2002 Annual Report Prepared by Chris Fisher John Arterburn Colville Confederated Tribes Fish and Wildlife Department P.O. Box 150 Nespelem, WA 99155 Prepared for Project

More information

Successful downstream passage of juvenile salmonids at a run-of-river hydro project in the Pacific Northwest

Successful downstream passage of juvenile salmonids at a run-of-river hydro project in the Pacific Northwest University of Massachusetts Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst International Conference on Engineering and Ecohydrology for Fish Passage International Conference on Engineering and Ecohydrology for Fish

More information

Yale Reservoir Kokanee (Oncorhynchus nerka) Escapement Report 2016

Yale Reservoir Kokanee (Oncorhynchus nerka) Escapement Report 2016 Yale Reservoir Kokanee (Oncorhynchus nerka) Escapement Report 2016 North Fork Lewis River Hydroelectric Project Yale FERC No. 2071 Prepared by: Jeremiah Doyle, PacifiCorp April 4, 2017 1.0 INTRODUCTION

More information

Garcia and Associates One Saunders Avenue San Anselmo, CA Phone: (415) Fax: (415)

Garcia and Associates One Saunders Avenue San Anselmo, CA Phone: (415) Fax: (415) Garcia and Associates One Saunders Avenue San Anselmo, CA 94960 Phone: 415) 458-5803 Fax: 415) 458-5829 To: From: Gregory Andrew, Fishery Program Manager Marin Municipal Water District Rob Aramayo Date:

More information

Agenda Item Summary BACKGROUND. Public Involvement ISSUE ANALYSIS. Attachment 1

Agenda Item Summary BACKGROUND. Public Involvement ISSUE ANALYSIS. Attachment 1 Agenda Item Summary Attachment BACKGROUND Between 996 and 03 white sturgeon fisheries in the Columbia River downstream from Bonneville Dam were managed under a series of management accords between the

More information

P/FR/SK/54 DE LEEUW, A. D. MAMIN RIVER STEELMEAD: A STUDY ON A LIMITED TAGGING CPOX c. 1 mm SMITHERS MAMIN RIVER STEELHEAD: A STUDY ON A LIMITED

P/FR/SK/54 DE LEEUW, A. D. MAMIN RIVER STEELMEAD: A STUDY ON A LIMITED TAGGING CPOX c. 1 mm SMITHERS MAMIN RIVER STEELHEAD: A STUDY ON A LIMITED P/FR/SK/54 DE LEEUW, A. D. MAMIN RIVER STEELMEAD: A STUDY ON A LIMITED TAGGING CPOX c. 1 mm SMITHERS MAMIN RIVER STEELHEAD: A STUDY ON A LIMITED TAGGING STUDY UNDERTAKEN DURING WINTER, 1984 by A.D. de

More information

2001 Juvenile Chinook Salmon Capture and Production Indices Using Rotary-Screw Traps on the Lower Tuolumne River

2001 Juvenile Chinook Salmon Capture and Production Indices Using Rotary-Screw Traps on the Lower Tuolumne River 2001 Juvenile Chinook Salmon Capture and Production Indices Using Rotary-Screw Traps on the Lower Tuolumne River Prepared by Jason Vasques Fisheries Biologist and Ken Kundargi Fisheries Biologist California

More information

State of San Francisco Bay 2011 Appendix O Steelhead Trout Production as an Indicator of Watershed Health

State of San Francisco Bay 2011 Appendix O Steelhead Trout Production as an Indicator of Watershed Health State of San Francisco Bay 2011 Appendix O Steelhead Trout Production as an Indicator of Watershed Health Gordon Becker and Katherine Smetak, Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration 290 Introduction

More information

Swan Lake Sockeye Salmon Smolt Data Report 2010

Swan Lake Sockeye Salmon Smolt Data Report 2010 Swan Lake Sockeye Salmon Smolt Data Report 2010 Prepared by: Nathan Weber, Biologist June 2013 The Swan Lake Project was made possible through enhancement taxes paid by the commercial fishermen in Area

More information

Measurements of Key Life History Metrics of Coho Salmon in Pudding Creek, California 1

Measurements of Key Life History Metrics of Coho Salmon in Pudding Creek, California 1 Measurements of Key Life History Metrics of Coho Salmon in Pudding Creek, California 1 David W. Wright 2, Sean P. Gallagher 3, and Christopher J. Hannon 4 Abstract Since 2005, a life cycle monitoring project

More information

Assessment of 2003 Steelhead Smolt Yield from the Englishman River, Vancouver Island

Assessment of 2003 Steelhead Smolt Yield from the Englishman River, Vancouver Island Assessment of 23 Steelhead Smolt Yield from the Englishman River, Vancouver Island A pair of Englishman steelhead smolts Prepared for Community Fisheries Development Centre Suite 22-155 Skinner Street

More information

Informational Report 1 USFWS Mass Marking Update April 2005 Update on USFWS 2005 Mass Marking Initiative Background Under Section 138 of FY 2003 Omnibus Appropriations Act (PL 108-7), Congress directed

More information

The Fishery. Newfoundland Region Stock Status Report D2-05

The Fishery. Newfoundland Region Stock Status Report D2-05 Fisheries Pêches and Oceans et Océans DFO Science Newfoundland Region Stock Status Report D2-05 ATLANTIC SALMON INSULAR NEWFOUNDLAND, SOUTHWEST COAST, SALMON FISHING AREAS 12-13 Background Salmon Fishing

More information

Redwood Creek Rotary Screw Trap Downstream Migration Study Redwood Valley, Humboldt County, California April 4 - August 5, 2000

Redwood Creek Rotary Screw Trap Downstream Migration Study Redwood Valley, Humboldt County, California April 4 - August 5, 2000 Redwood Creek Rotary Screw Trap Downstream Migration Study Redwood Valley, Humboldt County, California April 4 - August 5, 2000 Prepared by Michael Sparkman For Doug Parkinson 1/16/01 Acknowledgements

More information

Monitoring Project - Final Report Metrics Form

Monitoring Project - Final Report Metrics Form Monitoring Project - Final Report Metrics Form OWEB receives a portion of its funds from the federal government and is required to report how its grantees have used those funds. The information you provide

More information

2012 Hat Creek Trout Population Estimate

2012 Hat Creek Trout Population Estimate 2012 Hat Creek Trout Population Estimate Michael Dege Introduction In 1972 a section of Hat Creek, Shasta County (from PG&E s Hat Creek Powerhouse #2 to Lake Britton) became one of California s first designated

More information

ASSESSMENT OF WHITE PERCH IN LAKE WINNIPESAUKEE, TUFTONBORO (2016) Anadromous and Inland Fisheries Operational Management Investigations

ASSESSMENT OF WHITE PERCH IN LAKE WINNIPESAUKEE, TUFTONBORO (2016) Anadromous and Inland Fisheries Operational Management Investigations ASSESSMENT OF WHITE PERCH IN LAKE WINNIPESAUKEE, TUFTONBORO (2016) STATE: GRANT: GRANT TITLE: JOB 9: New Hampshire F-50-R-33 Anadromous and Inland Fisheries Operational Management Investigations Warmwater

More information

Hood River and Pelton Ladder Evaluation Studies Annual Report

Hood River and Pelton Ladder Evaluation Studies Annual Report Hood River and Pelton Ladder Evaluation Studies Annual Report 1998-1999 DOE/BP-00000151-1 September 2000 Field37: This Document should be cited as follows: Olsen, Erik, Rod French, ''Hood River and Pelton

More information

for Salmon and Watersheds

for Salmon and Watersheds for Salmon and Watersheds Stock Assessment of Anadromous Salmonids, Report Number: OPSW-ODFW-3- The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife prohibits discrimination in all of its programs and services on

More information

MEMORANDUM. Ron Boyce, ODFW Bob Heinith, CRITFC. Michele DeHart. DATE: November 30, Operations

MEMORANDUM. Ron Boyce, ODFW Bob Heinith, CRITFC. Michele DeHart. DATE: November 30, Operations FISH PASSAGE CENTER 1827 NE 44 th Ave., Suite 240, Portland, OR 97213 Phone: (503) 230-4099 Fax: (503) 230-7559 http://www.fpc.org/ e-mail us at fpcstaff@fpc.org MEMORANDUM TO: Ron Boyce, ODFW Bob Heinith,

More information

Southern Oregon Coastal Cutthroat Trout

Southern Oregon Coastal Cutthroat Trout Species Management Unit Description Southern Oregon Coastal Cutthroat Trout The Southern Oregon Coastal Cutthroat Trout SMU includes all populations of cutthroat trout inhabiting ocean tributary streams

More information

Executive Summary. Map 1. The Santa Clara River watershed with topography.

Executive Summary. Map 1. The Santa Clara River watershed with topography. Santa Clara River Steelhead Trout: Assessment and Recovery Opportunities December 2005 Prepared By: Matt Stoecker and Elise Kelley, Ph.D. University of California, Santa Barbara Prepared For: The Santa

More information

UC Coho Salmon and Steelhead Monitoring Report: Summer 2016

UC Coho Salmon and Steelhead Monitoring Report: Summer 2016 UC Coho Salmon and Steelhead Monitoring Report: Summer 2016 Prepared by: Mariska Obedzinski, Nick Bauer, Andrew Bartshire, and Andrew McClary California Sea Grant at University of California January 2017,

More information

Robyn Bilski, Jason Shillam, Charles Hunter, Matt Saldate and Ed Rible East Bay Municipal Utility District, 1 Winemasters Way, Unit K, Lodi, CA

Robyn Bilski, Jason Shillam, Charles Hunter, Matt Saldate and Ed Rible East Bay Municipal Utility District, 1 Winemasters Way, Unit K, Lodi, CA Emigration of Juvenile Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tschawytscha) and Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in the Lower Mokelumne River, December 2010 through July 2011 Robyn Bilski, Jason Shillam, Charles

More information

LOWER COWLITZ ADULT TRIBUTARY ABUNDANCE METHODS

LOWER COWLITZ ADULT TRIBUTARY ABUNDANCE METHODS LOWER COWLITZ ADULT TRIBUTARY ABUNDANCE METHODS WDFW By Chip Nissell Lower Cowlitz Monitoring and Evaluation PRESENTATION OVERVIEW Lower Cowlitz tributary weirs 1. Weir Locations 2. Weir Operations 3.

More information

Preliminary survival estimates for the passage of spring-migrating juvenile salmonids through Snake and Columbia River dams and reservoirs, 2017

Preliminary survival estimates for the passage of spring-migrating juvenile salmonids through Snake and Columbia River dams and reservoirs, 2017 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE Northwest Fisheries Science Center Fish Ecology Division 2725 Montlake Boulevard East

More information

Juvenile Salmonid Emigration Monitoring in the Middle Sacramento River. Diane Coulon California Department of Fish and Wildlife

Juvenile Salmonid Emigration Monitoring in the Middle Sacramento River. Diane Coulon California Department of Fish and Wildlife Juvenile Salmonid Emigration Monitoring in the Middle Sacramento River Diane Coulon California Department of Fish and Wildlife Monitoring is conducted primarily to develop information on emigration timing

More information

The Effects of Stream Adjacent Logging on Downstream Populations of Coastal Cutthroat Trout

The Effects of Stream Adjacent Logging on Downstream Populations of Coastal Cutthroat Trout The Effects of Stream Adjacent Logging on Downstream Populations of Coastal Cutthroat Trout. D. S. Bateman 1, R.E. Gresswell 2, Aaron M. Berger 3, D.P. Hockman-Wert 4 and D.W. Leer 1 1 Department of Forest

More information

CUSHMAN RESERVOIRS. Skokomish Watershed Monitoring Conference - Public Meeting Florian Leischner 9/17/2015

CUSHMAN RESERVOIRS. Skokomish Watershed Monitoring Conference - Public Meeting Florian Leischner 9/17/2015 CUSHMAN RESERVOIRS Skokomish Watershed Monitoring Conference - Public Meeting Florian Leischner 9/17/2015 CUSHMAN RESERVOIRS MONITORING Management and monitoring of Tacoma Power reservoirs Lake Cushman

More information

Chinook salmon (photo by Roger Tabor)

Chinook salmon (photo by Roger Tabor) Stream Residence 1. The choice : emigration vs. residence 2. Food: Abundance, density, and variation 3. Territory and Dominance 4. Fish Responses: Distribution, growth, survival 5. Mortality Migration

More information

CHAPTER 2 - THE COQUILLE FISHERY

CHAPTER 2 - THE COQUILLE FISHERY CHAPTER 2 - THE COQUILLE FISHERY TABLE OF CONTENTS A. INTRODUCTION... 2-1 FIGURE 2-1 Life Histories of Anadromous Salmonids in the Coquille River... 2-2 1. Coho Salmon... 2-2 FIGURE 2-2 Coho Packed or

More information

Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Division of Fish and Wildlife Section of Fisheries. Stream Survey Report. Luxemburg Creek.

Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Division of Fish and Wildlife Section of Fisheries. Stream Survey Report. Luxemburg Creek. Minnesota F-29-R(P)-24 Area 315 Study 3 March 2016 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Division of Fish and Wildlife Section of Fisheries Stream Survey Report Luxemburg Creek 2015 Mark Pelham Sauk

More information

ACUTE TEMPERATURE TOLERANCE OF JUVENILE CHINOOK SALMON FROM THE MOKELUMNE RIVER

ACUTE TEMPERATURE TOLERANCE OF JUVENILE CHINOOK SALMON FROM THE MOKELUMNE RIVER ACUTE TEMPERATURE TOLERANCE OF JUVENILE CHINOOK SALMON FROM THE MOKELUMNE RIVER Charles H. Hanson, Ph.D. Hanson Environmental, Inc. SUMMARY A series of static acute tests were performed to determine the

More information

C R I TFC. Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission

C R I TFC. Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission 700 NE Multnomah, Suite 1200 503.238.0667 Portland, OR 97232 www.critfc.org C R I TFC T E CHNI C AL R E P O R T 13-07 Analyses for Effect of Survey Week and

More information

August 11 Snorkel SCC side channel network (SBA, SCC3) feet 707

August 11 Snorkel SCC side channel network (SBA, SCC3) feet 707 Date Survey Type Habitat July 29 Snorkel (reconnaissance) Table 1. Fish use survey schedule 2004 Water temperature 1 (ºC) Estimated Mean visibility 2 discharge 3 (cfs) Mainstem (units #1 42) ND ND 814

More information

Rogue Winter Steelhead

Rogue Winter Steelhead Rogue Winter Steelhead Existing Populations The Rogue Winter Steelhead SMU includes eight populations within the Klamath Mountains Province (KMP) in southwest Oregon (Table 93). None of the populations

More information

Confidence Interval Notes Calculating Confidence Intervals

Confidence Interval Notes Calculating Confidence Intervals Confidence Interval Notes Calculating Confidence Intervals Calculating One-Population Mean Confidence Intervals for Quantitative Data It is always best to use a computer program to make these calculations,

More information

Preliminary survival estimates for the passage of spring-migrating juvenile salmonids through Snake and Columbia River dams and reservoirs, 2016

Preliminary survival estimates for the passage of spring-migrating juvenile salmonids through Snake and Columbia River dams and reservoirs, 2016 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE Northwest Fisheries Science Center Fish Ecology Division 2725 Montlake Boulevard East

More information

Willow Creek Road 2 nd Bridge Area Fish Passage Project Jenner, Sonoma County, California Final Fisheries Monitoring Report April 2014

Willow Creek Road 2 nd Bridge Area Fish Passage Project Jenner, Sonoma County, California Final Fisheries Monitoring Report April 2014 Willow Creek Road 2 nd Bridge Area Fish Passage Project Jenner, Sonoma County, California Final Fisheries Monitoring Report April 2014 Prepared for: Stewards of the Coast and Redwoods P.O. Box 2 Duncans

More information

PARASITIC COPEPOD INFECTION ON SALMONID SPECIES REARING IN WILLAMETTE VALLEY RESERVOIRS

PARASITIC COPEPOD INFECTION ON SALMONID SPECIES REARING IN WILLAMETTE VALLEY RESERVOIRS PARASITIC COPEPOD INFECTION ON SALMONID SPECIES REARING IN WILLAMETTE VALLEY RESERVOIRS Principal Investigators: Fred R. Monzyk Jeremy D. Romer Thomas A. Friesen Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife

More information

English Bay Lakes Salmon Enhancement Progress Report 2013

English Bay Lakes Salmon Enhancement Progress Report 2013 English Bay Lakes Salmon Enhancement Progress Report 2013 Prepared by: Caroline Cherry, Hatchery Operations Coordinator January 2015 - Revision This year's operation of the English Bay Lakes Salmon Enhancement

More information

Spilling Water at Hydroelectric Projects in the Columbia and Snake Rivers How Does It Benefit Salmon?

Spilling Water at Hydroelectric Projects in the Columbia and Snake Rivers How Does It Benefit Salmon? Spilling Water at Hydroelectric Projects in the Columbia and Snake Rivers How Does It Benefit Salmon? Hydropower development in the Columbia and Snake rivers has left its mark on salmonid populations,

More information

THE OREGON. PLAN for Salmon and Watersheds. Stock Assessment of Anadromous Salmonids, Report Number: OPSW-ODFW

THE OREGON. PLAN for Salmon and Watersheds. Stock Assessment of Anadromous Salmonids, Report Number: OPSW-ODFW THE OREGON PLAN for Salmon and Watersheds Stock Assessment of Anadromous Salmonids, Report Number: OPSW-ODFW-1- The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife prohibits discrimination in all of it s programs

More information

Oregon Coast Coastal Cutthroat Trout

Oregon Coast Coastal Cutthroat Trout Oregon Coast Coastal Cutthroat Trout Species Management Unit Description The Oregon Coast Coastal Cutthroat Trout Species Management Unit (SMU) includes all populations of cutthroat trout inhabiting ocean

More information

State of California The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME

State of California The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME State of California The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME BUTTE AND BIG CHICO CREEKS SPRING-RUN CHINOOK SALMON, ONCORYHNCHUS TSHAWYTSCHA LIFE HISTORY INVESTIGATION 2-22 By Paul D. Ward Tracy

More information

Calibration of Estimates of Coho Spawner Abundance in the Smith River Basin, 2001 Report Number: OPSW-ODFW

Calibration of Estimates of Coho Spawner Abundance in the Smith River Basin, 2001 Report Number: OPSW-ODFW for Salmon and Watersheds Calibration of Estimates of Coho Spawner Abundance in the Smith River Basin, 2001 Report Number: OPSW-ODFW-2002-06 Calibration of Estimates of Coho Spawner Abundance in the Smith

More information

Migration, Behaviour and Habitat Selection by Anadromous Brook Trout, Salvelinus fontinalis (Mitchell), in a Nova Scotia Southern Upland:

Migration, Behaviour and Habitat Selection by Anadromous Brook Trout, Salvelinus fontinalis (Mitchell), in a Nova Scotia Southern Upland: Migration, Behaviour and Habitat Selection by Anadromous Brook Trout, Salvelinus fontinalis (Mitchell), in a Nova Scotia Southern Upland: FFRC Year-End REPORT E.A. Halfyard Dalhousie University and the

More information

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT FEDERAL AID IN SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACT. State: California Project Number: F-51-R-6

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT FEDERAL AID IN SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACT. State: California Project Number: F-51-R-6 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT FEDERAL AID IN SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACT State: California Project Number: F-51-R-6 Project Title: Category: Project No. 17: Job No. 1 & 2: Inland and Anadromous Sport Fish Management

More information

ANNUAL REPORT KLAMATH RIVER FISHERIES ASSESSMENT PROGRAM

ANNUAL REPORT KLAMATH RIVER FISHERIES ASSESSMENT PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT KLAMATH RIVER FISHERIES ASSESSMENT PROGRAM JUVENILE SALMONID TRAPPING ON THE MAINSTEM TRINITY RIVER AT WILLOW CREEK AND ON THE KLAMATH RIVER AT BIG BAR 1990 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

More information

Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Fisheries Division, Lake Superior Area

Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Fisheries Division, Lake Superior Area Minnesota F-9-R(P)- Study 4 Job 616 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Fisheries Division, Lake Superior Area Coaster Brook Trout Status in Minnesota-Lake Superior Tributaries Following Regulation

More information

California Steelhead: Management, Monitoring and Recovery Efforts

California Steelhead: Management, Monitoring and Recovery Efforts California Steelhead: Management, Monitoring and Recovery Efforts Jonathan Nelson Steelhead Restoration & Management Program Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus California Steelhead Distinct Population Segments

More information

Preliminary Summary of Out-of-Basin Steelhead Strays in the John Day River Basin

Preliminary Summary of Out-of-Basin Steelhead Strays in the John Day River Basin Preliminary Summary of Out-of-Basin Steelhead Strays in the John Day River Basin Prepared by: James R. Ruzycki and Richard W. Carmichael Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife La Grande, Oregon Introduction

More information

FISHERIES BLUE MOUNTAINS ADAPTATION PARTNERSHIP

FISHERIES BLUE MOUNTAINS ADAPTATION PARTNERSHIP FISHERIES A warming climate, by itself, substantially affects the hydrology of watersheds in the Blue Mountains. Among the key hydrologic changes projected under all scenarios for the 2040s and beyond

More information

CHINOOK AND COHO SPAWNING REPORT LOWER TRINITY RANGER DISTRICT SIX RIVERS NATIONAL FOREST. Final: April 1999

CHINOOK AND COHO SPAWNING REPORT LOWER TRINITY RANGER DISTRICT SIX RIVERS NATIONAL FOREST. Final: April 1999 1998-99 CHINOOK AND COHO SPAWNING REPORT LOWER TRINITY RANGER DISTRICT SIX RIVERS NATIONAL FOREST Final: April 1999 Prepared By: Becky L. Dutra and Sean A. Thomas, AmeriCorps Watershed Stewards Project

More information

OR DUNGENESS CRAB FISHERY:

OR DUNGENESS CRAB FISHERY: E 55 OR DUNGENESS CRAB FISHERY: an economic analysis of productivity and profitability David S. Liao Joe B. Stevens OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY SEA GRANT COLLEGE PROGRAM Publication no. ORESU-T-75-005 AGRICULTURAL

More information