Search
Search Results
-
81. [Article] Lower Snake River Compensation Plan; Oregon Spring Chinook Salmon Evaluation Studies - 2007 Annual Progress Report
Abstract -- This annual progress report summarizes spring Chinook salmon monitoring data for the Lower Snake River Compensation Plan (LSRCP) facilities in 2007. Also summarized are adult broodstock monitoring ...Citation Citation
- Title:
- Lower Snake River Compensation Plan; Oregon Spring Chinook Salmon Evaluation Studies - 2007 Annual Progress Report
Abstract -- This annual progress report summarizes spring Chinook salmon monitoring data for the Lower Snake River Compensation Plan (LSRCP) facilities in 2007. Also summarized are adult broodstock monitoring data collected in the Grande Ronde Basin by our co-managers the Nez Perce Tribe (NPT) and the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR). The main objectives of this report are to document and evaluate spring Chinook salmon culture performance for hatchery programs and achievement of management objectives in the Imnaha and Grande Ronde river basins. These data are used to design culture practices to optimize eggto-smolt survival rate, smolt quality, smolt-to-adult survival rate, successful spawning in nature by hatchery-reared adults, and to provide information to adapt programs to most effectively meet management objectives. This report provides information on rearing and release operations for the 2005 brood year of juvenile Chinook salmon smolts, the collection of eggs for the 2007 brood year, Chinook spawning in nature, adult characteristics of adult Chinook salmon in the 2007 return year, and Bacterial Kidney Disease (BKD) monitoring. Lower Snake River Compensation Plan (LSRCP) ODFW- Eastern Oregon Fish Research (EOFR)
-
82. [Article] Oregon North Coast Spring Chinook Stock Assessment – 2005-06 Information Reports 2008-01
Abstract -- Chinook salmon populations of the Oregon coast exhibit two general life history types, classified as either spring-run or fall-run depending on adult life-history traits. Fall chinook are present ...Citation Citation
- Title:
- Oregon North Coast Spring Chinook Stock Assessment – 2005-06 Information Reports 2008-01
Abstract -- Chinook salmon populations of the Oregon coast exhibit two general life history types, classified as either spring-run or fall-run depending on adult life-history traits. Fall chinook are present in most Oregon coastal basins, and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has identified 28 fall chinook populations in this area (ODFW 2005). Spring chinook salmon are found in larger river basins on the Oregon coast, and the upper portions of the Umpqua and Rogue rivers. This is a more limited distribution than coastal fall chinook and includes only 10 populations (ODFW 2005). Oregon coastal fall chinook stocks have been monitored through a set of 56 standard spawning ground surveys, many conducted since the 1950’s. There has not been a similar, consistent, coast-wide monitoring program for Oregon coastal spring chinook spawners. Abundance of these populations has been monitoring through a variety of methods including; freshwater harvest estimates, counts at dams and weirs, summer resting hole counts, and spawning ground surveys. In 1998, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) reviewed west coast chinook salmon populations in regards to status under the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). The NMFS identified a total of 15 Evolutionarily Significant Units (ESUs) of chinook salmon (Myers et al. 1998). Oregon coastal chinook are predominantly in the Oregon Coast ESU (Necanicum River to Elk River). This ESU includes both spring and fall chinook, and was determined to not warrant listing (Federal Register Notice 1998). In 2005, ODFW conducted a review of Oregon native fish status, in regards to the State’s Native Fish Conservation Policy. This review grouped populations by Species Management Unit (SMU), and examined coastal spring and fall chinook populations separately. The review determined the near-term sustainability of the Coastal Fall Chinook SMU was not at risk, but the Coastal Spring Chinook SMU was at risk (ODFW 2005). The Tillamook and Nestucca spring chinook populations were of particular concern because they failed to pass the interim criteria for abundance, productivity, and reproductive independence. Hatchery supplementation of spring chinook has occurred in the Tillamook and Nestucca basins since the early 1900’s. Currently, approximately 450,000 spring chinook smolts are released annually from Trask Hatchery, Cedar Creek Hatchery (Nestucca), and from a STEP program at Whiskey Creek. These hatchery smolts have been mass marked with an adipose fin clip since the 1998 brood year. Therefore, hatchery origin adult spring chinook may now be positively identified by the lack of an adipose fin. Declining trends in wild coastal spring chinook populations have resulted in management actions to target harvest on adipose fin clipped hatchery fish, and to restrict harvest of wild origin fish. Results of status reviews, and changes in management practices have required a more thorough evaluation of stock status for the Tillamook and Nestucca spring chinook populations (Keith Braun, personal communication). Therefore, ODFW developed a monitoring plan for spring chinook in these basins. The monitoring plan identified four project objectives; 1) Determine adult spring chinook abundance in the Trask, Wilson, and Nestucca Rivers, 2) Determine hatchery vs. wild ratios for these three basins, 3) Determine age structure and sex ratios for adult spawners, and 4) Determine distribution and abundance for spring chinook recycled from local ODFW hatcheries. This project began in 2004 with an exploratory season to determine distribution, survey methodology, and feasibility of the proposed protocol. In 2005 and 2006 a more intensive sampling effort was implemented, designed to cover the entire distribution of spring chinook spawning in the Nestucca, Trask, and Wilson rivers. Since 2004, project field work has been funded with Restoration and Enhancement Program (R&E) funds, administered by Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Project administration is covered through existing funding for the ODFW Oregon Adult Salmonid Inventory and Sampling Project (OASIS). Funding from R&E is scheduled to continue through the 2008 spawning season. Further monitoring will require a new funding source for project field work. This report documents results for project Objectives 1 to 4, including the abundance and distribution of spring chinook spawners during 2005 and 2006 in Oregon’s Trask, Wilson, and Nestucca river basins.
-
83. [Article] Status and Distribution of Native Fishes in the Goose Lake Basin Information Reports number 2008-02
Abstract -- This study describes the current distribution of the nine native fish species in the Oregon portion of the Goose Lake basin (Lake County): Goose Lake redband trout Oncorhynchus mykiss ssp., ...Citation Citation
- Title:
- Status and Distribution of Native Fishes in the Goose Lake Basin Information Reports number 2008-02
Abstract -- This study describes the current distribution of the nine native fish species in the Oregon portion of the Goose Lake basin (Lake County): Goose Lake redband trout Oncorhynchus mykiss ssp., Goose Lake lamprey Entosphenus sp., Goose Lake tui chub Siphateles bicolor thalassinus, Goose Lake sucker Catostomus occidentalis lacusanserinus, Modoc sucker Catostomus microps, Pit-Klamath brook lamprey Entosphenus lethophagus, speckled dace Rhinichthys osculus, Pit roach Lavinia symmetricus mitrulus, and Pit sculpin Cottus pitensis. The Goose Lake basin is an endorheic, or topographically closed basin located in south central Oregon and northeastern California. The basin is within the usually closed northeastern extremity of the adjoining Sacramento River basin, astride the Oregon-California boundary. Although most of the lake lies in California, most of its valley and nearly two-thirds of the total drainage area (~722 sq. mi.) are in Oregon. The largest streams in the basin are Drews, Cottonwood, and Thomas Creeks. Annual precipitation averages about 36 cm per year (Phillips and van Denburgh 1971). Goose Lake overflowed briefly into the North Fork Pit River in 1868 and 1881, but storage and diversion of irrigation water has substantially reduced the inflow and future overflow is unlikely (USGS 1971). The lakebed was dry in the summers of 1926, 1929- 1934, and 1992. About half the basin is forestland, 20% is hay fields and pastureland, and 16% is shrub and rangeland. Currently, almost 35% of the inflow is diverted for irrigation (OWRD 1989). The Goose Lake basin is home to four endemic fish taxa: the Goose Lake redband trout, lamprey, sucker, and tui chub. Endemic fishes of the Goose Lake basin split their life histories between Goose Lake and its tributaries, as opposed to the five native but non-endemic species that primarily occupy stream habitats. Pit roach and all endemic fishes except Goose Lake tui chub are listed as a “species of concern” by the USFWS, a designation that implies there is concern about species viability, but not enough information is known to initiate a listing review for threatened or endangered status. The Modoc sucker was listed as a federally endangered species in 1985 (USFWS 1985). No formal recovery plan was required due to an existing “Action Plan for the Recovery of the Modoc Sucker” (USFWS 1984). Most of the recovery actions outlined in the action plan were either completed or are no longer relevant (Stewart Reid, Western Fishes, personal communication). However, actions 26 and 27 pertaining to range expansion remain incomplete. Action 26 suggests reclassification to threatened upon establishment of safe populations (for 3-5 years) throughout the Rush and Turner Creek watersheds in the Pit River basin. Action 27 suggests delisting upon establishing safe populations in two other historic streams. At the time of listing, the historic range of Modoc sucker was thought to have included only two small tributaries of the Pit River in Modoc and Lassen Counties, Ash and Turner Creeks (USFWS 1985). Therefore, a major recovery goal was to expand the species’ range with additional populations (USFWS 1984). In 2001, reexamination of historical documents and museum specimens established that Modoc suckers had also historically occupied Thomas Creek in the Goose Lake basin. Field collections in 2001, with subsequent morphological and genetic analysis, confirmed that the population was still present in Thomas Creek (Stewart Reid, Western Fishes, personal communication); however, the broader range of Modoc sucker in the Goose Lake watershed was not known. In 1995, the Goose Lake Fishes Working Group drafted a conservation plan for “prelisting” recovery of all native fish in response to severe drought and habitat degradation (GLFWG 1995). The Aquatic Inventories Project of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) conducted habitat and fish distribution surveys (1991-1995) to obtain baseline information to help inform recovery efforts (ODFW, unpublished data). Since then, field work to monitor the distribution and abundance of Goose Lake fishes has been limited and sporadic, targeting only Goose Lake redband trout and Modoc sucker (Dambacher 2001; Reid 2007). No comprehensive follow up work has been conducted to evaluate fish response to climatic conditions, habitat restoration projects, and continued irrigation activities. ODFW recently drafted a status review of native fish of Oregon (ODFW 2005). Except for redband trout, Goose Lake fishes were not included in the status review due to a lack of new information since the previous status review in 1995 (Kostow et al. 1995). Further, the review of Goose Lake redband trout was limited by a lack of long-term data series. The first objective of this study was to document the current distribution of native fishes in Oregon’s portion of the Goose Lake basin and assess changes in distribution that may have occurred since the last surveys were conducted 12 years ago. The second objective was to provide new information about the distribution of Modoc suckers within the basin. The third objective was to determine relative abundance and age-class diversity of native fishes at randomly selected sample sites. All objectives were addressed throughout the potential riverine distribution of fish in the Oregon portion of the Goose Lake basin. Information gathered in this study is critical to effective conservation and management of each species and its habitat. In addition, this report describes the distribution and relative abundance of nonnative fishes (fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas), brown bullhead (Ameiurus nebulosus), white crappie (Pomoxis annularis), yellow perch (Perca flavescens), pumpkinseed (Lepomis gibbosus), and brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis)) in the basin. Unlike prior efforts, this study used a statisticallybased design to select sample points with the aim of achieving a representative sample across the Oregon portion of the Goose Lake watershed. Additionally, a wide array of fish sampling gear was employed to maximize our ability to capture all fish species present across the diversity of habitat types encountered.
-
84. [Article] Status, Distribution, and Life History Investigations of Warner Suckers, 2006-2010 Information Reports number 2011-02
Abstract -- The Warner sucker Catostomus warnerensis is endemic to the Warner Valley, a subbasin of the Great Basin in southeastern Oregon and northwestern Nevada. This species was historically abundant ...Citation Citation
- Title:
- Status, Distribution, and Life History Investigations of Warner Suckers, 2006-2010 Information Reports number 2011-02
Abstract -- The Warner sucker Catostomus warnerensis is endemic to the Warner Valley, a subbasin of the Great Basin in southeastern Oregon and northwestern Nevada. This species was historically abundant (Snyder 1908) and its historical range includes three permanent lakes (Hart, Crump, and Pelican), several ephemeral lakes, a network of sloughs and diversion canals, and three major tributary drainages (Honey, Deep, and Twentymile creeks). Warner sucker abundance and distribution has declined over the past century and it was federally listed as threatened in 1985 due to habitat fragmentation and threats posed by the proliferation of piscivorous non-native game fishes (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1985). The Warner Valley is a northeast-southwest trending endorheic basin that extends approximately 90 km (Figure 1). The elevation of the valley floor is approximately 1,370 m and the basin is bound by fault block escarpments, the Warner Rim on the west and Hart Mountain and Poker Jim Ridge on the east. The Warner basin was formed during the middle Tertiary and late Quaternary geologic periods as a result of volcanic and tectonic activity (Baldwin 1974). Abundant precipitation during the Pleistocene Epoch resulted in the formation of Pluvial Lake Warner (Hubbs and Miller 1948). At its maximum extent approximately 11,000 years ago, the lake reached approximately 100 m in depth and 1,300 km2 in area (Snyder et al. 1964; Weide 1975). The Warner sucker inhabits the lakes and low gradient stream reaches of the Warner Valley. The metapopulation of Warner suckers is comprised of two life history forms: lake and stream morphs. The lake suckers display a lacustrine-adfluvial pattern in which they spend most of the year in the lake and spawn in the streams. However, when upstream migration is hindered by low stream flows during drought years or by irrigation diversion dams, lake suckers may spawn in nearshore areas of the lakes (White et al. 1990). Large lake-dwelling populations of introduced fishes in the lakes likely reduce sucker recruitment by predation on young suckers (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1998). Periodic lake desiccation also threatens the lake suckers. The stream suckers display a fluvial life-history pattern and spawn in the three major tributary drainages (Honey, Deep, and Twentymile Creeks). Threats specific to the stream form include water withdrawals for irrigation and impacts from grazing. Stream suckers recolonized the lakes after past drying events (mid-1930’s and early-1990’s). The Recovery Plan for the Threatened and Rare Native Fishes of the Warner Basin and Alkali Subbasin (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1998) sets three recovery criteria for delisting the species. These criteria require that: (1) a self-sustaining metapopulation is distributed throughout the drainages of Twentymile Creek, Honey Creek, and below the falls on Deep Creek, and in Pelican, Crump, and Hart Lakes; (2) passage is restored within and among these drainages so that individual populations of Warner suckers can function as a metapopulation; and (3) no threats exist that would likely threaten the survival of the species over a significant portion of its range. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (ODFW’s) Native Fish Investigations Project conducted investigations from 2006 through 2010 to describe the conservation (recovery) status of Warner suckers. The objectives of our investigations were to: 1) describe the current distribution of suckers in the Warner subbasin, 2) estimate their abundance in the lakes and streams, 3) collect life history information, and 4) describe the primary factors that currently limit the sucker’s ability to maintain a functioning metapopulation, including connectivity/fragmentation of habitats and factors affecting successful recruitment in the lake and stream environments. Previous similar studies were conducted in 1990, 1991, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, and 2001 (White et al. 1990; White et al. 1991; Allen et al. 1994; Allen et al. 1995; Allen et al. 1996; Bosse et al. 1997; Hartzell et al. 2001). We addressed these objectives by implementing the following tasks: 1) conducting surveys in Hart and Crump Lakes to describe the distribution and quantify the abundance of Warner suckers, search for evidence of recent recruitment, estimate sucker abundance relative to nonnative fish abundance, and describe certain life history characteristics, 2) tagging suckers with Passive Integrated Transponder (PIT) tags in the lakes and tributaries to estimate growth rates and describe seasonal movements, 3) radio tracking suckers in the lakes and tributaries to describe seasonal movements, 4) fishing screw traps in Warner basin tributaries to monitor downstream movements, 5) operating a trap at a fish ladder on a Warner tributary to assess upstream passage success, 6) conducting surveys in Warner basin tributaries to describe the current distribution of stream resident populations of Warner suckers and to quantify their abundance, 7) describing associations between the distribution of suckers and habitat variables in Twentymile Creek, 8) trapping larval suckers in the tributaries to describe the relative abundance and timing of larval movements, 9) describing life history parameters including growth rates, length frequency distributions, length at maturity, and weight-length relationships, 10) evaluating a nonlethal ageing technique, 11) describing the distribution and abundance of the Warner suckers at Summer Lake Wildlife Management area, where a self-sustaining population became established after fish salvage from Hart Lake during the 1992 drought, and 12) collecting tissue samples for future genetic analyses. This report compiles the results of this work, synthesizes and interprets findings relative to the conservation status of the species, and recommends future studies.
-
85. [Article] Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation; Annual Progress Report 1994 - 1995
Abstract -- This report summarizes the activities of the Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project (UBNPME) from September 30, 1994 to September 29, 1995. This program was funded ...Citation Citation
- Title:
- Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation; Annual Progress Report 1994 - 1995
Abstract -- This report summarizes the activities of the Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project (UBNPME) from September 30, 1994 to September 29, 1995. This program was funded by Bonneville Power Administration and was managed under the Fisheries Program, Department of Natural Resources, Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation. An estimated 36.7 km (22.6 miles) of stream habitat were inventoried on the Umatilla River, Moonshine, Mission, Cottonwood and Coonskin Creeks. A total of 384 of 3,652 (10.5%) habitat units were electrofished. The number of juvenile fish captured follows: 2,953 natural summer steelhead (including resident rainbow tout; Oncorhynchus mykiss), one hatchery steelhead, 341 natural chinook salmon (0. tshawytscha), 163 natural coho salmon (0. kisutch), five bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus), 185 mountain whitefish (Prosopium williamsoni), and six northern squawfish (Ptychocheilus oregonensis). The expanded population estimate for the areas surveyed was 73,716 salmonids with a mean density of 0.38 fish/m2. The following number of non-salmonids were visually estimated: 7,572 speckled dace (Rhinichthys osculus), 5,196 sculpin (Cottus spp.), 532 suckers (Catostomus spp.) and 191 redside shiners (Richardsonius balteatus). The gross estimated density of all non-salmonids combined was 0.84 fish/m2. The estimated ratio of non-salmonids to salmonids was 2.4: 1. Relative salmonid abundance, seasonal distribution and habitat utilization were monitored at index sites throughout the basin. During index site monitoring, the following species were collected in addition to those listed above: american shad (Alosa sapidissima), smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu), carp (Cyprinus Carpio) and chiselmouth (Acrocheilus alutaceus). Thirty nine sites were electrofished during the spring and summer seasons, while 36 sites were sampled in the fall season. Index sites with the. highest mean salmonid catch/minute (fish/min.) during the three sample periods were located at the following sites: East Birch Creek (3.4 fish/min.), Boston Canyon Creek (3.2 fish/min.), Spring Creek (3.1 fish/min.) and upper Squaw Creek (3.0 fish/min.). The highest electrofishing catch rates were observed in the Umatilla River tributaries above river mile (RM) 70 in the August and September sample period (Table J-2 catalogs river miles with associated landmarks). During the November sample period, catch rates were highest in Birch Creek tributaries. Most salmonids were captured in slow water near the bank during the November and March sampling periods. A study of the migration movements and homing requirements of adult salmonids in the Umatilla River was conducted during the 1994-95 return years. Radio telemetry was used to evaluate the movements of adult salmonids past diversion dams in the lower Umatilla River and to determine migrational movements of salmonids following upstream transport. Radio transmitters were placed in 30 summer steelhead, 15 spring chinook, nine fall chinook, and eight coho salmon. Salmon were released at Three Mile Falls Dam (TMD). An additional 11 summer steelhead and ten spring chinook salmon were tagged, hauled upstream, and released at either Barnhart, Nolin, Thornhollow, or Imeques C-mem-ini-kem. On average, summer steelhead required 36 days to successfully migrate from TMD to Stanfield Dam. Spring chinook required 18 days. Average passage times for summer steelhead (hours and minutes) at Westland, Feed Canal, and Stanfield Dams were 13:06, 83:24, and 2:58, respectively. Spring chinook salmon required 04:30 at Westland, 89:42 at Feed Canal, and 04:01 at Stanfield Dams. Migrational delays were observed at Feed Canal Dam at flows ranging from 563 to 1,601 cubic feet/second (cfs). Thirty-eight percent of the fish ladder at Westland Dam, 75% at Feed canal, and 31% at Stanfield Dam. Average passage times at Feed Canal Dam (1995) were more than 15 times those at Stanfield Dam in 1994 and more than 20 times those at Stanfield Dam in 1995. Data related to homing and passage needs of Umatilla River salmonids was investigated in an attempt to maximize homing to the Umatilla River. Straying rates of adult summer steelhead and spring chinook salmon were found to be low while coho and fall chinook salmon stray rates were high in some groups, particularly adult returns from subyearling smolt releases of fall chinook salmon. Attraction flows of from the mouth of the Umatilla River of at least 150 cfs were required to encourage migration and reduce straying of fall chinook and coho salmon. Significant numbers of summer steelhead entered when flows exceeded 500 cfs. Spring chinook salmon entry was variable with fish entering at flows ranging from 150 to more than 2,000 cfs. Adult anadromous salmonids potentially available to spawn above TMD from August 26, 1994 to June 27, 1995 included: 593 adult and 530 jack fall chinook salmon (1994 brood), 879 adult and 54 jack coho salmon (1994 brood), 784 natural and 509 hatchery summer steelhead (1995 brood), and 378 adult and 62 jack spring chinook salmon (1995 brood). During escapement surveys (fall of 1994), a total of 82 fall chinook salmon redds, 24 coho salmon redds and seven unidentified salmon redds (112 redds total, 2.6/mile) were enumerated along 42.3 miles of the mainstem above TMD. In 1995, we enumerated and flagged 126 summer steelhead redds (3.6 redds/mile) along 35.3 miles of lateral tributaries of the Umatilla River. Also enumerated were 90 spring chinook salmon redds (1.6 redds/mile) along 55.8 miles of the mainstem. Ninety-six percent of the adult fall chinook salmon carcasses examined had spawned while 94% of the coho had spawned; 66.8 % of the spring chinook salmon carcasses examined bad spawned. A total of 49.3% of spring chinook salmon released above TMD were sampled during spawning ground surveys and 60 coded wire tags (CWTs) were recovered from 78 adipose clipped fish. The rotary screw trap in the Umatilla River (RM 76) operated 63 of 113 days from September 21, 1994 to January 13, 1995. The trap captured 596 juvenile steelhead with a mean trap efficiency rate of 9.9%. A total of 1,368 juvenile chinook salmon were captured with a mean trap efficiency rate of 28. 8 % . The rotary screw trap at the Imeques C-mem-ini-kem site (RM 79.5) operated 43 out of 43 days from May 5 through June 16, 1995. The trap captured 304 natural juvenile steelhead with a mean trap efficiency rate of 6.6%. A total of 102 natural juvenile chinook salmon were captured with a mean trap efficiency rate of 10.5%. The rotary screw trap at the Barnhart site (RM 42,2) operated 87 out of 125 days from March 3 to June I, 1995. The trap captured 105 natural juvenile steelhead, 247 natural juvenile chinook salmon, five natural coho salmon, 6,265 hatchery juvenile chinook salmon, 467 hatchery steelhead and 16,844 hatchery coho salmon. Mean trap efficiency rates ranged from 2.3 to 5.7% . Harvest monitors estimated that tribal anglers harvested 25 hatchery and five natural summer steelhead during the spring of 1995. There was no spring chinook salmon fishery in the Umatilla River during 1995 because of the low number of returning adults. Scale analysis determined that over 85 .0% of naturally produced juvenile summer steelhead sampled during biological and index surveys were age O+ or l +. Naturally produced summer steelhead adults, returning to the Umatilla River in 1994-95, were mostly from the 1990 (46.4%) and 1991 (33.9%) brood years.