FISH PASSAGE CENTER 847 NE 19 th Avenue, #250, Portland, OR Phone: (503) Fax: (503) us at

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "FISH PASSAGE CENTER 847 NE 19 th Avenue, #250, Portland, OR Phone: (503) Fax: (503) us at"

Shanon Grant
5 years ago
Views:

FISH PASSAGE CENTER 847 NE 19 th Avenue, #250, Portland, OR 97232 Phone: (503) 833-3900 Fax: (503) 232-1259 www.fpc.org/ e-mail us at fpcstaff@fpc.

In response to your request, the Fish Passage Center (FPC) staff has summarized the lamprey monitoring data that were gathered as part of the Smolt Monitoring Program (SMP) over the last seven years

1 FISH PASSAGE CENTER 847 NE 19 th Avenue, #250, Portland, OR Phone: (503) Fax: (503) us at MEMORANDUM TO: Joe Skalicky (USFWS) FROM: Michele DeHart DATE: June 7, 2018 RE: Summary of Juvenile Lamprey Data from the Smolt Monitoring Program, In response to your request, the Fish Passage Center (FPC) staff has summarized the lamprey monitoring data that were gathered as part of the Smolt Monitoring Program (SMP) over the last seven years ( ). Below is a brief summary of our findings, followed by a more detailed description of the analyses we conducted. To date, there have been no issues with collecting lamprey data as part of the SMP. Lamprey condition monitoring at the Lower Columbia sites (BON, JDA, and MCN) has been successful since it first began. Sample counts at the Snake River sites (LGR, LGS, and LMN) remain low and, therefore, FPC still does not recommend that lamprey condition monitoring be expanded to any of these sites. Given that larval and juvenile lamprey have been confirmed to escape the sample tank at LGR, estimates of collection are not reported for this site. Therefore, we do not report on passage timing for this site. In general, it appears that Pacific macropthalmia at BON, MCN, LGS, and LMN have higher weighted average mortality rates than salmonid species at these sites. g:\staff\document\2018_documents\2018_files\32-18.docx

2 Background In 2010 the FPC was requested to expand and standardize the collection of lamprey data for the SMP. The Lamprey Technical Work Group (LTWG) chair met with FPC staff and together developed a list of changes to lamprey monitoring that would address critical needs. Changes to lamprey data collection through the SMP included: (1) adopting a standardized approach to identifying larval and juvenile lamprey using U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) identification methods, (2) treating larval and juvenile lamprey as target species and, thus, assigning a sample rate to lamprey samples at SMP sites (as opposed to treating them as incidental species ), and (3) implementing a pilot study of lamprey condition monitoring. After meetings with USFWS staff and review by the Fish Passage Advisory Committee (FPAC), the FPC adopted and implemented these changes to the SMP in 2011 for all sites, except the Imnaha Trap, which implemented them in After the 2011 SMP season ended, the FPC prepared a summary of the lamprey monitoring data for the LTWG to review. This report is available on the FPC website ( Based on their review of the 2011 data, the LTWG requested that the new lamprey monitoring protocol be continued in future years. In response to this request, juvenile and larval lamprey have remained target species for the SMP since migration year The LTWG also requested that the lamprey condition monitoring be expanded wherever possible. Based on this recommendation, lamprey condition monitoring was expanded to all Mid-Columbia sites (Bonneville, John Day, and McNary), as these were the only sites that sampled larval and juvenile lamprey in large enough numbers. Lamprey condition monitoring has occurred at these three sites since migration year The FPC also added larval and juvenile lamprey to many of the on-line queries of SMP data, as well as adding lamprey to many of the daily and weekly reports of SMP data. In response to requests by the Independent Science Advisory Board (ISAB), the FPC added lamprey data to the 2011 FPC Annual Report and has included these data in subsequent annual reports, which are available on the FPC website ( This memo is an update to previous annual reports to the LTWG, with data summarized through migration year

When a lamprey ammocoete (larva) was collected a key was used to determine species. Ammocoetes were identified as those lamprey with eyes absent and oral disk absent.

3 Methods Lamprey Identification As in past years, larval and juvenile lamprey were identified using guidelines developed by USFWS. Pacific lamprey (Entosphenus tridentatus) and Western Brook lamprey (Lampetra richardsoni) were the two species most likely to be encountered by SMP personnel. When a lamprey ammocoete (larva) was collected a key was used to determine species. Ammocoetes were identified as those lamprey with eyes absent and oral disk absent. If total length (TL) of the ammocoete was less than 70 mm then the fish was identified as unknown lamprey ammocoete. For ammocoetes greater than 70 mm, species could be identified based upon the color pattern of the caudal region (Figure 1). Ammocoetes that had a uniformly dark caudal fin with a caudal ridge that was faded and appeared lighter than the fin were identified as Pacific lamprey (Figure 1A). Those ammocoetes that had a mottled caudal fin with broad margins lacking pigment; or that appeared blotchy, peppered, or completely clear were identified as Western Brook lamprey (Figure 1B). A B Figure 1. Comparison of caudal region of Entosphenus tridentatus (A) and Lampetra spp (B) ammocoete from USFWS lamprey identification guide used by the Smolt Monitoring Program. If caudal region coloration was not definitive, ventral surface coloration was also used as an additional characteristic for identification. If the ammocoete had a light ventral surface it could have been identified as a Pacific lamprey, otherwise a mottled or uniformly dark ventral surface was considered an indication of Western Brook lamprey. If no determination was possible based on these criteria, the lamprey was identified as an unknown lamprey ammocoete. Since Western Brook lamprey do not exhibit a macropthalmia (or juvenile) life stage the macropthalmia designation was used for lamprey identified as Pacific lamprey. Macropthalmia are eyed juvenile lamprey with oral disk present and for Pacific lamprey these individuals range in size between 100 and 160 mm TL. Because Western Brook lamprey adults range between 100 and 200 mm TL, it was important that distinct characteristics were used to identify these different species (and life stages). Based on the USFWS key, the SMP used the relative size of the eye of Pacific lamprey juvenile compared to Western Brook lamprey adults as a key to identifying the different species/life stages (Figure 2). Pacific lamprey macrothalmia were identified by the large eye that was equal in diameter to the distance between the posterior edge 3

of the eye to the first branchial pore (Figure 2A). By comparison, the Western Brook lamprey adults were identified by the much smaller eyes on lamprey between 100 and 200 mm TL (Figure 2B).

4 of the eye to the first branchial pore (Figure 2A). By comparison, the Western Brook lamprey adults were identified by the much smaller eyes on lamprey between 100 and 200 mm TL (Figure 2B). B A Figure 2. Comparison of the relative eye size of Pacific lamprey macrothalmia (A) and Western Brook lamprey adults (B). Figure from the USFWS key to lamprey identification used by the SMP. In addition, adult lamprey collected in the SMP samples were identified using USFWS pamphlets as well as the guide book Inland Fishes of Washington (Wydoski and Whitney 2003). Adult lamprey continue to be recorded as incidental species. Lamprey Counts, Passage Timing, and Mortality Prior to 2011, SMP personnel recorded larval and juvenile lamprey as incidental species such that all fish in the sample were simply counted and reported and no sample rate information was available. Without sample rate information, an estimation of collection (i.e., abundance estimate of individuals passing through the juvenile bypass system) was not possible. Under the new procedures adopted in 2011, SMP sites were able to report larval and juvenile lamprey sample numbers with an associated sample rate similar to what is done for juvenile salmonids. This allowed for the estimation of collection counts, based on when and where each larval or juvenile lamprey was sampled (i.e., separate sample rates for different tanks or at different times of the day). Estimates of collection are made by expanding the sample count based on the sample rate that was being used when the sample was made. Each site has the ability to adjust the sample rate, either to different sample tanks and/or at different times of the day. The sample rate determines how much time the sample gate is open in a given hour. For example, a sample rate of 10% corresponds to having the sample gate open for 6 minutes in an hour. Sample rates are chosen by site personnel based on how many total fish are expected to be handled each day. As a general goal, the SMP aims to sample between 300 and 500 total target salmonids per day. This sampling goal weighs the desire to limit handling while still allowing for the collection of accurate and precise estimates of collection. In addition, lamprey mortality data were also collected, which allows for comparisons of mortality rates between lamprey and other species or comparisons in lamprey mortality rates between projects. 4

5 Lamprey Condition Monitoring A pilot study was carried out at John Day Dam in 2011 to gather information on the condition of juvenile lamprey entering the bypass systems at the dam. Information gathered during this pilot study resulted in the development of a lamprey condition monitoring protocol. The most recent version of this condition monitoring protocol is available on the FPC website (ftp://ftp.fpc.org/fpc32.net/manuals/). At the request of the LTWG, lamprey condition monitoring was expanded to Bonneville Dam, John Day Dam, and McNary Dam in 2012, and has continued since. Results Lamprey Counts, Passage Timing, and Mortality ( ) Larval and Juvenile Lamprey Counts As mentioned above, lamprey juveniles have been recorded as target species and have been identified to life-stage and species at all SMP sites since 2011, except the Imnaha River Trap. The Imnaha River Trap began using the same lamprey sampling protocol in The four lifestage/species combinations for lamprey juveniles were: (1) Pacific Macropthalmia (MP), (2) Pacific Ammocoete (AP), (3) Western Brook Ammocoete (AB), and (4) Unknown Ammocoete (AS). In 2012, the SMP added a fifth juvenile lamprey category, Unidentified Lamprey (LU). This category was intended to be used for lamprey juveniles that were collected during separator clean-out procedures at COE facilities where species and life-stage identification may not have been possible. It was expected that this category would rarely be used. Below is a summary of the sample and collection counts that were recorded over the last seven years at SMP bypass facilities (Table 1) and SMP traps (Table 2). In 2013, a study was conducted at Lower Granite Dam (LGR) to evaluate the prototype juvenile fish collection channel overflow weir and enlarged orifice. This study involved PIT-tagging juvenile salmonids and Pacific lamprey macropthalmia and releasing these PIT-tagged fish into gatewell 5A, 5B, or directly into the orifice gallery channel. The study confirmed that juvenile lamprey can escape the sample tank at LGR prior to being sampled. Consequently, the FPAC recommended that only sample counts would be reported for this site. It is worth noting that even sample counts for lamprey at LGR are likely biased low. Over the seven years of sampling, Pacific lamprey macropthalmia comprised the majority of the lamprey samples at SMP bypass facilities (Table 1). Additionally, no brook lamprey have been collected at any of the SMP bypass facilities since this sampling protocol began in

6 Table 1. Estimates of total collections* of Pacific lamprey ammocoetes (AP) and Pacific lamprey macropthalmia (MP) at SMP bypass facilities, SMP bypass facilities include: Bonneville (BON), John Day (JDA), McNary (MCN), Rock Island (RIS), Lower Granite (LGR), Little Goose (LGS), and Lower Granite (LGR) dams. Site Migration Year AP MP Site Migration Year AP MP BON ,412 LGR , , , , , , JDA , ,479 LGS ,837 21, , , ,303 9, , , ,131 97, ,475 19, , , , ,599 33, , , ,100 MCN , ,568 LMN , , , , , , , , ,120 1, , , , ,100 RIS * Sample counts and collection estimates were interpolated for non-sample days. Interpolation was based on the previous and subsequent days sample or collection counts. LMN and LGS typically sample every-other-day, every 3 rd, and/or 4 th day from early April to the start of transportation; MCN has every-other-day sampling; JDA began every-other-day sampling in 2016, and BON and JDA often have non-sample days in August and/or September due to high temperature sampling protocols. Data reported for LGR are total sample counts. Due to escapement of juvenile lamprey from the sample tank at LGR, estimates of sample are biased low and unreliable. Therefore, estimation of collection is not advised at this site. Due to construction activities at LGR, sampling in 2017 was terminated ~2 months earlier than usual. This early termination may have effected total sample counts, and, therefore, estimates of timing. 6

7 Although larval and juvenile lamprey are target species at all SMP sites, the SMP traps collect very few lamprey juveniles. In fact, only three of the four SMP traps (Grande Ronde River, Imnaha River, and Salmon River traps) have ever collected lamprey juveniles since the new lamprey sampling protocol was implemented (Table 2). Table 2. Total sample counts of Pacific lamprey ammocoetes (AP) and Pacific lamprey macropthalmia (MP) at SMP traps, SMP traps include: the Grande Ronde River Trap (GRN), the Imnaha River Trap (IMN), the Snake River Trap at Lewiston (LEW), and the Salmon River Trap at Whitebird (WTB). Site Migration Year AP MP Site Migration Year AP MP GRN LEW IMN* 2011 N/A N/A WTB N/A N/A * Lamprey sampling protocol was not implemented at the Imnaha River Trap until Passage Timing By incorporating larval and juvenile lamprey as target species in 2011, actual sample rates can be applied to lamprey sample counts, which allow for the estimation of collection counts at bypass facilities (except at LGR). This is particularly important when addressing lamprey passage timing through the hydrosystem, as collection counts are more reliable than sample counts when describing passage timing. For this report, we estimate passage timing based on the estimated collection counts in The one exception to this was LGR, where we did not estimate passage timing since estimation of collection at this site is not warranted. Specifically, we estimated the 10%, 50%, and 90% passage dates for Pacific lamprey ammocoetes and macropthalmia at the bypass facilities on the Columbia (BON, JDA, MCN, and RIS) (Tables 3) and Snake (LGS, LMN) rivers (Table 4). In addition, we provide passage timing curves for both life-stages across all seven years at all facilities, where applicable (Figure 3 for Pacific ammocoetes and Figure 4 for Pacific macropthalmia). Due to infrequent encounters with Pacific lamprey ammocoetes at LMN and MCN, estimating passage timing for this species/life-stage at 7

8 these sites was only possible in a limited number of years. Due to the limited data at MCN and LMN, these two sites are not included in Figures 3 and 4. Table 3. Estimated 10%, 50%, and 90% passage dates for Pacific lamprey ammocoetes and macropthalmia at Bonneville (BON), John Day (JDA), McNary (MCN), and Rock Island (RIS) dams on the Columbia River, Passage timing was based on estimated daily collections. Site Migration Year Pacific Ammocoetes Pacific Macropthalmia 10% 50% 90% 10% 50% 90% BON Apr 29-May 11-Aug 25-Mar 15-Apr 29-May Mar 14-Apr 3-Aug 23-Mar 14-Apr 22-Jun Mar 29-May 12-Aug 24-Mar 4-Jun 17-Jul Jun 23-Jun 3-Sep 18-Mar 10-Apr 7-Jul May 25-May 15-Sep 6-Mar 28-Mar 17-Jun Mar 4-Jun 16-Aug 9-Mar 12-Apr 1-Jun Jun 3-Jul 23-Sep 3-Mar 23-Mar 5-Jun JDA Apr 18-May 24-Jun 12-Apr 24-May 16-Jun Apr 26-Apr 18-May 8-Apr 5-Jun 7-Jul Apr 14-Apr 22-May 20-Apr 26-May 5-Jul Apr 24-Apr 27-Jun 29-Apr 3-Jun 29-Jun Apr 1-Jun 1-Jun 14-Apr 27-May 13-Jun Apr 5-May 7-May 12-Apr 9-May 3-Jun Apr 12-May 25-Jun 8-Apr 19-May 16-Jun MCN May 20-Jun 10-Jul 23-Apr 24-May 17-Jun May 18-May 10-Jul May 25-May 20-Aug Jun 20-Jun 14-Jul May 13-Jun 12-Jul Apr 15-May 8-Jun Apr 19-May 30-Jun RIS Apr 18-May 21-Jul 19-Apr 17-May 8-Jun Apr 1-May 28-Aug 10-Apr 29-Apr 30-Jul Apr 16-May 5-Jul 11-Apr 27-Jun 13-Aug Aug 14-Aug 27-Aug 21-May 16-Aug 27-Aug May 31-May 30-Jun 3-Jun 13-Jul 15-Aug Apr 27-Apr 25-Aug 6-Apr 12-Apr 18-Jul Apr 5-Jun 29-Jul 3-Apr 26-May 17-Jul 8

9 Table 4. Estimated 10%, 50%, and 90% passage dates for Pacific lamprey ammocoetes and macropthalmia at Little Goose (LGS) and Lower Monumental (LMN) dams on the Snake River, Since estimation of collections is not warranted at LGR, we did not estimate passage timing at this site. Site Migration Year Pacific Ammocoetes Pacific Macropthalmia 10% 50% 90% 10% 50% 90% LGS Jun 5-Jul 4-Aug 6-Apr 12-Apr 19-May May 5-May 13-Jul 19-Apr 2-May 18-Jun Apr 21-May 11-Jul 15-May 17-May 20-May May 12-Jun 21-Jun 19-May 31-May 20-Jun Apr 20-Jun 25-Jun 3-Apr 5-Apr 15-Jun Apr 14-May 12-Jun 28-Apr 10-May 27-May Apr 13-Jun 14-Jul 14-Apr 4-May 10-Jul LMN May 19-May 20-May May 9-Jun 17-Jun May 17-May 22-May May 29-May 3-Jun Apr 13-Jun 18-Jun Apr 15-May 17-May May 11-Jun 11-Jul 13-May 16-May 17-May Due to construction activities at LGR, sampling in 2017 was terminated ~2 months earlier than usual. This early termination may have effected total sample counts, and, therefore, estimates of timing. 9

10 Figure 3. Cumulative passage timing curves for Pacific lamprey ammocoetes Bonneville, John Day, Rock Island, and Little Goose dams, Passage timing is based on estimated daily collections. Note the x-axes have been standardized but sampling scheduled differ between projects. 10

11 Figure 4. Cumulative passage timing curves for Pacific lamprey macropthalmia at Bonneville, John Day, McNary Rock Island, Little Goose, and Lower Monumental dams, Passage timing is based on estimated daily collections. Note the x-axes have been standardized but sampling scheduled differ between projects. Mortality Rates Over the last several years, the FPC has summarized mortality rates for juvenile salmonids and juvenile and larval lamprey in our Annual Report. These summaries are generally presented in Appendix I of the Annual Report (see the 2016 FPC Annual Report for reference). When summarizing the daily mortality data, we only included days where a minimum of 20 individuals of a given species were sampled. This was done in order to remove days with low sample size and, thus, potentially inflated mortality rates. For salmonids, daily mortality rates were weighted by the daily passage index. Weighting for lamprey juveniles was based on the estimated daily collection, except at LGR where weighting was based on the daily sample count. The weighting of daily mortality rates allowed us to estimate a weighted average mortality for each migration year. A weighted average mortality is a more fair representation of the overall seasonal mortality, as it gives more weight to the days where a higher number of juveniles passed, versus 11

12 giving equal weight to all days. Limited sample counts for Pacific ammocoetes meant that estimating weighted average mortality for this life stage was not possible at nearly every site and year. Therefore, estimates of weighted average mortality for Pacific ammocoetes have not been summarized in FPC annual reports. The estimates of the weighted average seasonal mortality rates for Pacific macropthalmia and target salmonids in are provided in Tables 5 and 6. Table 5 contains data for the Columbia River bypass facilities while Table 6 contains data for the Snake River bypass facilities. Table 5. Weighted average mortality (percent) for Pacific macropthalmia (MP), subyearling Chinook (CH0), yearling Chinook (CH1), sockeye (SO), and steelhead (ST) at Bonneville (BON), John Day (JDA), and McNary (MCN) dams in Minimum and maximum daily mortality rates are provided in parentheses. Daily samples of lamprey macropthalmia have not met or exceeded 20 fish minimum to estimated weighted average mortality at Rock Island Dam. Site Year CH0 CH1 CO SO ST MP BON ( ) 1.0 ( ) 1.0 ( ) 2.1 ( ) 0.1 ( ) 8.0 ( ) ( ) 1.8 ( ) 0.6 ( ) 6.8 ( ) 0.3 ( ) 8.9 ( ) ( ) 0.5 ( ) 0.2 ( ) 1.1 ( ) 0.3 ( ) 4.7 ( ) ( ) 0.3 ( ) 0.3 ( ) 1.7 ( ) 0.1 ( ) 5.8 ( ) ( ) 0.6 ( ) 0.5 ( ) 1.8 ( ) 0.2 ( ) 2.6 ( ) ( ) 0.3 ( ) 0.4 ( ) 0.4 ( ) 0.1 ( ) 5.3 ( ) ( ) 0.3 ( ) 0.2 ( ) 1.5 ( ) 0.2 ( ) 1.4 ( ) JDA ( ) 0.4 ( ) 0.2 ( ) 1.6 ( ) 0.3 ( ) 0.4 ( ) ( ) 0.3 ( ) 0.3 ( ) 1.2 ( ) 0.1 ( ) 0.2 ( ) ( ) 0.3 ( ) 0.2 ( ) 0.4 ( ) 0.2 ( ) 0.02 ( ) ( ) 0.2 ( ) 0.0 ( ) 0.6 ( ) 0.2 ( ) 0.4 ( ) ( ) 0.3 ( ) 0.2 ( ) 0.5 ( ) 0.3 ( ) 0.7 ( ) ( ) 0.2 ( ) 0.0 ( ) 0.3 ( ) 0.2 ( ) 1.0 ( ) ( ) 0.3 ( ) 0.0 ( ) 1.0 ( ) 0.1 ( ) 0.1 ( ) MCN ( ) 1.6 ( ) 0.5 ( ) 1.5 ( ) 0.3 ( ) 5.4 ( ) ( ) 0.4 ( ) 0.0 ( ) 0.8 ( ) 0.4 ( ) 2.9 ( ) ( ) 0.7 ( ) 0.0 ( ) 1.5 ( ) 0.1 ( ) 1.5 ( ) ( ) 0.8 ( ) 0.5 ( ) 0.9 ( ) 0.2 ( ) 3.2 ( ) ( ) 0.2 ( ) 0.0 ( ) 0.3 ( ) 0.2 ( ) N/A* ( ) 0.3 ( ) 0.6 ( ) 0.3 ( ) 0.1 ( ) 1.9 ( ) ( ) 0.3 ( ) 0.0 ( ) 0.7 ( ) 0.7 ( ) 1.2 ( ) * There were too few days ( 1) where samples met or exceeded 20 fish to estimate a weighted average mortality rate. 12

13 Table 6. Weighted average mortality (percent) for Pacific macropthalmia (MP), subyearling Chinook (CH0), yearling Chinook (CH1), sockeye (SO), and steelhead (ST) at Lower Monumental (LMN), Little Goose (LGS), and Lower Granite (LGR) dams in Minimum and maximum daily mortality rates are provided in parentheses. Site Year CH0 CH1 CO SO ST MP LMN ( ) 0.0 ( ) N/A* 0.0 ( ) 0.1 ( ) N/A* ( ) 0.3 ( ) 0.0 ( ) 0.0 ( ) 0.2 ( ) N/A* ( ) 0.2 ( ) 0.0 ( ) 0.0 ( ) 0.2 ( ) 1.7 ( ) ( ) 0.3 ( ) N/A* N/A* 0.3 ( ) 0.0 ( ) ( ) 1.0 ( ) 0.2 ( ) N/A* 1.3 ( ) N/A* ( ) 0.7 ( ) 0.0 ( ) 0.3 ( ) 0.2 ( ) N/A* ( ) 0.4 ( ) 0.3 ( ) N/A* 0.4 ( ) N/A* LGS ( ) 0.7 ( ) N/A* N/A* 0.1 ( ) N/A* ( ) 0.3 ( ) 0.0 ( ) N/A* 0.1 ( ) N/A* ( ) 0.1 ( ) 0.0 ( ) 0.0 ( ) 0.1 ( ) 1.9 ( ) ( ) 0.2 ( ) 1.2 ( ) 0.1 ( ) 0.1 ( ) 1.9 ( ) ( ) 0.2 ( ) 0.0 ( ) 4.2 ( ) 0.2 ( ) N/A* ( ) 0.3 ( ) 0.0 ( ) 2.6 ( ) 0.1 ( ) N/A* ( ) 0.6 ( ) 0.0 ( ) N/A* 0.2 ( ) 2.2 ( ) LGR ( ) 0.8 ( ) 0.0 ( ) 0.8 ( ) 0.3 ( ) N/A* ( ) 0.7 ( ) 0.0 ( ) 0.0 ( ) 0.2 ( ) N/A* ( ) 0.5 ( ) 0.0 ( ) 2.5 ( ) 0.4 ( ) N/A* ( ) 0.3 ( ) 0.0 ( ) 4.2 ( ) 0.4 ( ) N/A* ( ) 0.4 ( ) 0.2 ( ) 2.9 ( ) 0.2 ( ) 0.0 ( ) ( ) 0.6 ( ) 1.3 ( ) N/A* 0.3 ( ) N/A* ( ) 0.8 ( ) 0.0 ( ) 0.8 ( ) 0.3 ( ) N/A* * There were too few days ( 1) where samples met or exceeded 20 fish to estimate a weighted average mortality rate. Exceptionally high mortality on June 3, 2013, not used in estimation of weighted average mortality. Mortalities recorded for this date were accumulation of several days. Exceptionally high mortality on May 13, 2014, not used in estimation of weighted average mortality. Mortalities recorded for this date were accumulation of several days. It appears that Pacific macropthalmia at BON and MCN consistently have a higher weighted average mortality rates than nearly all species of salmonids at these sites (Table 5). The few exceptions to this pattern were: 1) 2013 at MCN, where Pacific macropthalmia had similar weighted average mortality rates as subyearling Chinook and sockeye and 2) in 2017 at BON where Pacific macropthalmia had slightly lower weighted average mortality rates as sockeye and slightly higher weighted average mortality rates as subyearling Chinook. At John Day Dam, Pacific macropthalmia passing seemed to have similar weighted average mortality rates as salmonids, with one exception (2016) when weighted average mortality rates for Pacific macropthalmia were higher than all salmonid species (Table 5). In addition, for four of the five total years where estimates were possible at LGS and LMN, Pacific macropthalmia at these sites had higher weighted average mortality rates than did all species of salmonids (Table 6). 13

14 Lamprey Condition Monitoring at John Day, McNary, and Bonneville Dams Introduction In 2011, a pilot study was carried out by the SMP at the John Day Dam Smolt Monitoring Facility to gather information on the condition of out-migrating, bypassed juvenile Pacific lamprey. Condition exam results represent a combination of in-river baseline conditions, such as disease and predation marks, and also provide data about injuries incurred while passing through the bypass systems and other routes at the dam(s) as well as injuries that may have occurred due to encounters with predators. Based on information gathered in 2011, the FPC staff and staff from JDA developed a handling and condition sampling protocol for future monitoring efforts. After the 2011 pilot study, it was determined that lamprey condition monitoring would be expanded to the other sites on the Mid-Columbia (BON, JDA, and MCN), as these were the only sites with high enough sample counts to warrant condition monitoring. This expanded lamprey condition monitoring began in 2012 and has continued since. All sites conducting lamprey condition monitoring have been operating under the same condition monitoring protocol. For the most recent copy of this condition monitoring protocol, see the FPC website: ftp://ftp.fpc.org/fpc32.net/manuals/. Lamprey Condition Results Length and Weight Data Under the lamprey condition monitoring protocol, up to 100 of each lamprey species/life-stage may be examined for condition data each day, at each site. This means that, on high sample days, the condition sample could be a subset of the overall sample. Part of the condition monitoring protocol is to record lengths and weights of larval and juvenile lamprey. Average (and 95% confidence intervals) lengths and weights for Pacific lamprey ammocoetes and macropthalmia from condition monitoring at BON, JDA, and MCN are presented in (Table 6). 14

15 Table 6. Average length (mm TL) and weight (g) of Pacific ammocoetes and Pacific macropthalmia sampled for condition monitoring at BON, JDA, and MCN in Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence intervals. Site Migration Year Ammocoetes Macropthalmia Length (mm) Weight (g) Length (mm) Weight (g) BON ( ) 2.7 ( ) ( ) 4.3 ( ) ( ) 3.0 ( ) ( ) 3.6 ( ) ( ) 3.8 ( ) ( ) 4.4 ( ) ( ) 2.5 ( ) ( ) 4.0 ( ) ( ) 3.0 ( ) ( ) 3.8 ( ) ( ) 3.4 ( ) ( ) 4.3 ( ) JDA ( ) 5.2 ( ) ( ) 4.2 ( ) ( ) 5.1 ( ) ( ) 4.3 ( ) ( ) 5.5 ( ) ( ) 4.1 ( ) ( ) 5.3 ( ) ( ) 4.2 ( ) ( ) 4.9 ( ) ( ) 4.1 ( ) ( ) 4.9 ( ) ( ) 4.1 ( ) ( ) 5.3 ( ) ( ) 4.4 ( ) MCN ( ) 3.9 ( ) ( ) 4.2 ( ) ( ) 4.3 ( ) ( ) 4.5 ( ) ( ) 4.3 ( ) ( ) 4.1 ( ) Injury Rates Under the lamprey condition monitoring protocol, injuries were to be recorded only for instances that could not be clearly attributed to disease, parasites, and/or predators. Therefore, marks that were thought to be consistent with birds or other predators were recorded as Predator marks, with the type of predator noted, instead of injuries. Similar to weighted average mortality rates, the FPC has provided weighted average injury rates for juvenile salmonids and juvenile and larval lamprey in our Annual Report. These summaries are also presented in Appendix I of the Annual Report (see the 2016 FPC Annual Report for reference). The methods for estimated weighted average injury rates are similar to those outlined above for weighted average mortality rates. Limited sample counts for Pacific ammocoetes meant that estimating weighted average injury rates for this life stage was not possible at nearly every site and year. Therefore, estimates of weighted average injury for Pacific ammocoetes have not been summarized in FPC annual reports. The estimates of the weighted average injury rates for Pacific macropthalmia and target salmonids in are provided in Table 7. 15

16 Table 7. Weighted average injury rates (percent) for subyearling Chinook (CH0), yearling Chinook (CH1), Coho (CO), Sockeye (SO), Steelhead (ST), and Pacific macropthalmia (MP) at Bonneville, John Day, and McNary Dams. Minimum and maximum daily injury rates are provided in parentheses. Site Year CH0 CH1 CO SO ST MP BON ( ) 2.4 ( ) 1.8 ( ) 2.6 ( ) 4.8 ( ) 7.1 ( ) ( ) 1.8 ( ) N/A* 1.9 ( ) 1.7 ( ) 2.7 ( ) ( ) 1.2 ( ) N/A* 2.2 ( ) 3.2 ( ) 0.2 ( ) ( ) 1.2 ( ) 0.0 ( ) N/A* 3.1 ( ) N/A* ( ) 2.4 ( ) 3.0 ( ) 2.5 ( ) 4.0 ( ) 1.3 ( ) ( ) 3.1 ( ) 1.6 ( ) 1.5 ( ) 4.5 ( ) 0.0 ( ) JDA** ( ) 3.1 ( ) 2.5 ( ) 4.7 ( ) 7.7 ( ) 9.4 ( ) ( ) 3.0 ( ) 2.0 ( ) 3.5 ( ) 4.8 ( ) 2.7 ( ) ( ) 4.1 ( ) 3.8 ( ) 4.7 ( ) 5.8 ( ) 1.8 ( ) ( ) 1.9 ( ) 0.6 ( ) 3.2 ( ) 3.6 ( ) 2.7 ( ) ( ) 2.5 ( ) 3.0 ( ) 2.5 ( ) 3.0 ( ) 1.3 ( ) ( ) 4.2 ( ) 2.9 ( ) 3.0 ( ) 7.4 ( ) 7.0 ( ) ( ) 4.7 ( ) 4.2 ( ) 4.8 ( ) 5.8 ( ) 2.7 ( ) MCN ( ) 2.9 ( ) 2.3 ( ) 5.9 ( ) 6.0 ( ) 6.5 ( ) ( ) 4.7 ( ) 3.4 ( ) 5.1 ( ) 7.2 ( ) 3.8 ( ) ( ) 8.1 ( ) 5.6 ( ) 10.2 ( ) 10.9 ( ) 3.0 ( ) ( ) 9.9 ( ) 5.7 ( ) 11.8 ( ) 10.6 ( ) 3.0 ( ) ( ) 11.6 ( ) 7.9 ( ) 13.8 ( ) 14.6 ( ) 6.4 ( ) ( ) 11.2 ( ) 8.8 ( ) 13.1 ( ) 16.6 ( ) 3.6 ( ) * There were too few days ( 1) where the number of individuals examined for injuries met or exceeded 20 fish to calculate a weighted average injury rate. ** Pilot condition monitoring program at JDA in 2011 may have entered suspected predator marks as injuries. In 2012, FPC provided clarification that injuries are recorded only for instances that cannot be clearly attributable to disease, predator, or parasite. Patterns in weighted average injury rates are less clear (Table 7). For example, in 2012 and 2013 the weighted average injury rates for Pacific macropthalmia at BON were higher than all salmonid species in those years. However, this was not the case in 2014, 2016, or Weighted average injury rates for Pacific macropthalmia at JDA and MCN were generally within the ranges observed for salmonids. The one exception to this was in 2012 at MCN, where the weighted average injury rate for macropthalmia was 6.5%, which was slightly higher than that for salmonids. Conclusion Migration year 2017 marked the seventh year where larval and juvenile lamprey were included as target species by the Smolt Monitoring program. To date, there have been no issues with collecting lamprey data as part of the SMP. In addition, lamprey condition monitoring at the Lower Columbia River sites (BON, JDA, and MCN) has been successful since it first began. 16

17 Compared to the Lower Columbia sites, SMP crews at the Snake River sites continue to have infrequent encounters larval and juvenile lamprey and, when they are encountered, sample counts tend to be small. Therefore, the FPC still does not recommend that lamprey condition monitoring be expanded to the Snake River. Literature Cited FPC Annual Report (2016) FPC Memos to Lamprey Technical Work Group: November 22, 2011 ( November 14, 2012 ( December 3, 2013 ( November 12, 2014 ( Wydoski, R.S. and R.R. Whitney Inland Fishes of Washington: Second Edition, Revised and Expanded. University of Washington Press. Seattle, WA. CC: Christina Wang (USFWS) Brian McIlraith (CRITFC) Dave Statler (Nez Perce Tribe) 17

RE: Results of 2011 lamprey monitoring and request for guidance for 2012

RE: Results of 2011 lamprey monitoring and request for guidance for 2012 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: Christina Luzier (USFWS),