Search

Search Results

• 1. [Article] Fish Management Plan Tenmile Lakes System 1981

  Abstract -- The Tenmile Lakes are large, shallow, highly productive freshwater lakes located in Coos County on Oregon's Pacific Coast. North and South Tenmile lakes have respective surface areas of 970 ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Fish Management Plan Tenmile Lakes System 1981 Abstract -- The Tenmile Lakes are large, shallow, highly productive freshwater lakes located in Coos County on Oregon's Pacific Coast. North and South Tenmile lakes have respective surface areas of 970 and 1,170 acres and are connected by a narrow, shallow canal. Several smaller lakes also drain into Tenmile Creek below the large lakes. The lakes originally contained excellent populations of coho salmon and cutthroat trout. However, these species declined with the development of large populations of warm water fish including largemouth bass, bluegill, yellow perch, and brown bullhead. Management problems in the lakes today concern continued reduction of salmonid populations and high abundance of bluegill. Largemouth bass appear incapable of fully utilizing bluegill as forage. As a result, the Department has considered introducing additional predator species to provide fishing diversity and to better utilize bluegill. Title: Fish Management Plan Tenmile Lakes System 1981 Abstract -- The Tenmile Lakes are large, shallow, highly productive freshwater lakes located in Coos County on Oregon's Pacific Coast. North and South Tenmile lakes have respective surface areas of 970 and 1,170 acres and are connected by a narrow, shallow canal. Several smaller lakes also drain into Tenmile Creek below the large lakes. The lakes originally contained excellent populations of coho salmon and cutthroat trout. However, these species declined with the development of large populations of warm water fish including largemouth bass, bluegill, yellow perch, and brown bullhead. Management problems in the lakes today concern continued reduction of salmonid populations and high abundance of bluegill. Largemouth bass appear incapable of fully utilizing bluegill as forage. As a result, the Department has considered introducing additional predator species to provide fishing diversity and to better utilize bluegill. Close

• 2. [Article] The Oregon Conservation Strategy, 2006

  Abstract -- State and federal agencies, as well as other organizations, have developed and led many plans during the years to guide conservation of Oregon's fish and wildlife and their habitats. Most of ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: The Oregon Conservation Strategy, 2006 Abstract -- State and federal agencies, as well as other organizations, have developed and led many plans during the years to guide conservation of Oregon's fish and wildlife and their habitats. Most of these plans have focused on a particular species, area or natural resource. Although wildlife conservation often has been an implicit concern of these plans, many were developed primarily for other purposes. With the creation of this Oregon Conservation Strategy, Oregon has its first overarching state strategy for conserving fish and wildlife. The Conservation Strategy is an effort to use the best available science to create a broad vision and conceptual framework for long-term conservation of Oregon's native fish and wildlife, as well as various in­vertebrates and native plants. As a guide to conserving the species and habitats that have defined the nature of Oregon, this strategy can help ensure that Oregon's natural treasures are passed on to future generations. The Conservation Strategy emphasizes proactively conserving declining species and habitats to reduce the possibility of future federal or state listings. It is not a regulatory document, but instead presents issues and opportunities, and recommends voluntary actions that will improve the efficiency and effectiveness of conservation in Oregon. Healthy fish and wildlife populations require adequate habitat, which is provided in natural systems and, for many species, in landscapes managed for forestry, agriculture, range and urban uses. The goals of the Conservation Strategy are to maintain healthy fish and wildlife populations by maintaining and restoring functioning habitats, preventing declines of at-risk species, and reversing declines in these resources where possible. These goals fit well with ODFW's statutory obligation to protect and enhance Oregon's fish and wildlife and their habitats for use and enjoyment by present and future generations. However, this is not a management plan for the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Instead, it is a broad strategy for all of Oregon, offering potential roles and opportunities for residents, agencies and organizations. It incorporates information and insights from a broad range of natural resources assessments and conservation plans, supple­mented by the professional expertise and practical experiences of a cross-section of Oregon's resource managers and conservation interests. It is designed to have a variety of applications both inside and outside of state government. Most important, perhaps, it establishes the basis for a common understanding of the challenges facing Oregon's fish and wildlife, and provides a shared set of priorities for addressing the state's conservation needs. The heart of the Conservation Strategy is a blueprint for voluntary action to address the long-term needs of Oregon's fish and wildlife. The future for many species will depend on landowners' and land managers' willingness to voluntarily take action on their own to protect and improve fish and wildlife habitat. The strategy outlined in this document considers fish and wildlife from a statewide perspective, establishing a broader context for decisions about the species and habitats in greatest need of conservation attention. It also recognizes that these issues vary in different regions, requiring conservation actions to be tailored to the unique needs of the fish, wildlife and human communities that coexist throughout Oregon. Much good work already is being done by private landowners. water-shed councils, conservation organizations and agencies like the many soil and water conservation districts. This strategy continues building on the solid foundation these groups have set for Oregon's conservation future. This document is called a strategy, not a plan, because its purpose is to help people make decisions more strategically about how they can invest time and resources in fish and wildlife conservation. To that end, the Conservation Strategy focuses on a suite of species and habitats, many of them closely linked, that are in greatest need of conservation attention. The strategy provides guidance on the types of actions most likely to benefit these species and habitats, and describes a variety of non-regulatory programs that can help landowners and land managers with implementation. For agencies and organizations working on a larger scale, the Conservation Strategy highlights specific geographic "Conservation Opportunity Areas" that provide good opportunities to address the conservation needs of high-priority habitats and species. These landscape-scale areas include both public and private ownership where targeted investments in conservation actions and incentives for private landowners are likely to generate the greatest long-term benefits for fish and wildlife. The expanding footprint of human development and 150 years of landscape alteration have left much of Oregon's fish and wildlife at varying degrees of risk. For example, the song of Oregon's state bird, the western meadowlark, is rarely heard in the Willamette Valley any more. A grassland bird still common in eastern Oregon, the meadowlark is not going to be a candidate for listing under the Endangered Species Act any time soon. But the state bird is in trouble across a significant portion of its historic range in Oregon. Like most of Oregon's wildlife, it retains a natural resilience and will respond to improved habitat conditions. However, the meadowlark needs some conservation attention. For the western meadowlark and dozens of other similarly vulnerable species including fish, amphibians, reptiles, mammals, invertebrates and plants, the Oregon Conservation Strategy offers hope for a more secure future. Title: The Oregon Conservation Strategy, 2006 Abstract -- State and federal agencies, as well as other organizations, have developed and led many plans during the years to guide conservation of Oregon's fish and wildlife and their habitats. Most of these plans have focused on a particular species, area or natural resource. Although wildlife conservation often has been an implicit concern of these plans, many were developed primarily for other purposes. With the creation of this Oregon Conservation Strategy, Oregon has its first overarching state strategy for conserving fish and wildlife. The Conservation Strategy is an effort to use the best available science to create a broad vision and conceptual framework for long-term conservation of Oregon's native fish and wildlife, as well as various in­vertebrates and native plants. As a guide to conserving the species and habitats that have defined the nature of Oregon, this strategy can help ensure that Oregon's natural treasures are passed on to future generations. The Conservation Strategy emphasizes proactively conserving declining species and habitats to reduce the possibility of future federal or state listings. It is not a regulatory document, but instead presents issues and opportunities, and recommends voluntary actions that will improve the efficiency and effectiveness of conservation in Oregon. Healthy fish and wildlife populations require adequate habitat, which is provided in natural systems and, for many species, in landscapes managed for forestry, agriculture, range and urban uses. The goals of the Conservation Strategy are to maintain healthy fish and wildlife populations by maintaining and restoring functioning habitats, preventing declines of at-risk species, and reversing declines in these resources where possible. These goals fit well with ODFW's statutory obligation to protect and enhance Oregon's fish and wildlife and their habitats for use and enjoyment by present and future generations. However, this is not a management plan for the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Instead, it is a broad strategy for all of Oregon, offering potential roles and opportunities for residents, agencies and organizations. It incorporates information and insights from a broad range of natural resources assessments and conservation plans, supple­mented by the professional expertise and practical experiences of a cross-section of Oregon's resource managers and conservation interests. It is designed to have a variety of applications both inside and outside of state government. Most important, perhaps, it establishes the basis for a common understanding of the challenges facing Oregon's fish and wildlife, and provides a shared set of priorities for addressing the state's conservation needs. The heart of the Conservation Strategy is a blueprint for voluntary action to address the long-term needs of Oregon's fish and wildlife. The future for many species will depend on landowners' and land managers' willingness to voluntarily take action on their own to protect and improve fish and wildlife habitat. The strategy outlined in this document considers fish and wildlife from a statewide perspective, establishing a broader context for decisions about the species and habitats in greatest need of conservation attention. It also recognizes that these issues vary in different regions, requiring conservation actions to be tailored to the unique needs of the fish, wildlife and human communities that coexist throughout Oregon. Much good work already is being done by private landowners. water-shed councils, conservation organizations and agencies like the many soil and water conservation districts. This strategy continues building on the solid foundation these groups have set for Oregon's conservation future. This document is called a strategy, not a plan, because its purpose is to help people make decisions more strategically about how they can invest time and resources in fish and wildlife conservation. To that end, the Conservation Strategy focuses on a suite of species and habitats, many of them closely linked, that are in greatest need of conservation attention. The strategy provides guidance on the types of actions most likely to benefit these species and habitats, and describes a variety of non-regulatory programs that can help landowners and land managers with implementation. For agencies and organizations working on a larger scale, the Conservation Strategy highlights specific geographic "Conservation Opportunity Areas" that provide good opportunities to address the conservation needs of high-priority habitats and species. These landscape-scale areas include both public and private ownership where targeted investments in conservation actions and incentives for private landowners are likely to generate the greatest long-term benefits for fish and wildlife. The expanding footprint of human development and 150 years of landscape alteration have left much of Oregon's fish and wildlife at varying degrees of risk. For example, the song of Oregon's state bird, the western meadowlark, is rarely heard in the Willamette Valley any more. A grassland bird still common in eastern Oregon, the meadowlark is not going to be a candidate for listing under the Endangered Species Act any time soon. But the state bird is in trouble across a significant portion of its historic range in Oregon. Like most of Oregon's wildlife, it retains a natural resilience and will respond to improved habitat conditions. However, the meadowlark needs some conservation attention. For the western meadowlark and dozens of other similarly vulnerable species including fish, amphibians, reptiles, mammals, invertebrates and plants, the Oregon Conservation Strategy offers hope for a more secure future. Close

• 3. [Article] 2007 Oregon Chub Investigations Progress Reports 2007

  Abstract -- Oregon chub Oregonichthys crameri, small minnows endemic to the Willamette Valley, were federally listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act in 1993. Factors implicated in the decline ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: 2007 Oregon Chub Investigations Progress Reports 2007 Abstract -- Oregon chub Oregonichthys crameri, small minnows endemic to the Willamette Valley, were federally listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act in 1993. Factors implicated in the decline of this species include changes in flow regimes and habitat characteristics resulting from the construction of flood control dams, revetments, channelization, diking, and the drainage of wetlands. The Oregon chub is further threatened by predation and competition by non-native species such as largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides, crappies Pomoxis sp., sunfishes Lepomis sp., bullheads Ameiurus sp., and western mosquitofish Gambusia affinis. We continued surveys initiated in 1991 in the Willamette River drainage to quantify the abundance of known Oregon chub populations, search for unknown populations, evaluate potential introduction sites, and monitor introduced populations as part of the implementation of the Oregon Chub Recovery Plan. We sampled a total of 70 sites in 2007. New populations of Oregon chub were discovered at Green Island in the lower McKenzie River and in the Muddy Creek drainage (Linn County). We confirmed the continued existence of Oregon chub at 34 locations. These included 23 naturally occurring and 11 introduced populations. We did not find Oregon chub at nine locations where they were collected on at least one occasion between 1991-2006. Nonnative fish were collected at most of these locations. We obtained abundance estimates of 18 naturally occurring populations and 11 introduced populations of Oregon chub located in the Middle Fork Willamette, Santiam, McKenzie, and Mid-Willamette drainages (Table 1). We introduced additional Oregon chub into the South Stayton Pond in the Santiam drainage and into Cheadle and Display Ponds in the Mid-Willamette drainage. The Oregon Chub Recovery Plan (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1998) set recovery criteria for downlisting the species to “threatened” and for delisting the species. The criteria for downlisting the species are: 1) establish and manage 10 populations of at least 500 adult fish, 2) all of these populations must exhibit a stable or increasing trend for five years, and 3) at least three populations meeting criterion 1 and 2 must be located in each of the three recovery areas (Middle Fork Willamette River, Santiam River, and Mid-Willamette River tributaries). In 2007, there were 20 populations totaling 500 or more individuals (Table 1). Fifteen of these populations also met the second criteria. Of the 15 populations meeting criteria 1 and 2, eight were located in the Middle Fork Willamette drainage, four were located in the Mid-Willamette drainage, and three were located in the Santiam drainage. In 2007, we met the downlisting criteria. Findings to date indicate that Oregon chub remain at risk due to the loss of suitable habitat and the continued threats posed by the proliferation of non-native fishes, illegal water withdrawals, accelerated sedimentation, and potential chemical spills or careless pesticide applications. Their status has improved in recent years, resulting primarily from successful introductions and the discovery of previously undocumented populations. Title: 2007 Oregon Chub Investigations Progress Reports 2007 Abstract -- Oregon chub Oregonichthys crameri, small minnows endemic to the Willamette Valley, were federally listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act in 1993. Factors implicated in the decline of this species include changes in flow regimes and habitat characteristics resulting from the construction of flood control dams, revetments, channelization, diking, and the drainage of wetlands. The Oregon chub is further threatened by predation and competition by non-native species such as largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides, crappies Pomoxis sp., sunfishes Lepomis sp., bullheads Ameiurus sp., and western mosquitofish Gambusia affinis. We continued surveys initiated in 1991 in the Willamette River drainage to quantify the abundance of known Oregon chub populations, search for unknown populations, evaluate potential introduction sites, and monitor introduced populations as part of the implementation of the Oregon Chub Recovery Plan. We sampled a total of 70 sites in 2007. New populations of Oregon chub were discovered at Green Island in the lower McKenzie River and in the Muddy Creek drainage (Linn County). We confirmed the continued existence of Oregon chub at 34 locations. These included 23 naturally occurring and 11 introduced populations. We did not find Oregon chub at nine locations where they were collected on at least one occasion between 1991-2006. Nonnative fish were collected at most of these locations. We obtained abundance estimates of 18 naturally occurring populations and 11 introduced populations of Oregon chub located in the Middle Fork Willamette, Santiam, McKenzie, and Mid-Willamette drainages (Table 1). We introduced additional Oregon chub into the South Stayton Pond in the Santiam drainage and into Cheadle and Display Ponds in the Mid-Willamette drainage. The Oregon Chub Recovery Plan (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1998) set recovery criteria for downlisting the species to “threatened” and for delisting the species. The criteria for downlisting the species are: 1) establish and manage 10 populations of at least 500 adult fish, 2) all of these populations must exhibit a stable or increasing trend for five years, and 3) at least three populations meeting criterion 1 and 2 must be located in each of the three recovery areas (Middle Fork Willamette River, Santiam River, and Mid-Willamette River tributaries). In 2007, there were 20 populations totaling 500 or more individuals (Table 1). Fifteen of these populations also met the second criteria. Of the 15 populations meeting criteria 1 and 2, eight were located in the Middle Fork Willamette drainage, four were located in the Mid-Willamette drainage, and three were located in the Santiam drainage. In 2007, we met the downlisting criteria. Findings to date indicate that Oregon chub remain at risk due to the loss of suitable habitat and the continued threats posed by the proliferation of non-native fishes, illegal water withdrawals, accelerated sedimentation, and potential chemical spills or careless pesticide applications. Their status has improved in recent years, resulting primarily from successful introductions and the discovery of previously undocumented populations. Close

• 4. [Article] 2006 Oregon Chub Investigations Progress Reports 2006

  Abstract -- Oregon chub Oregonichthys crameri, small minnows endemic to the Willamette Valley, were federally listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act in 1993. Factors implicated in the decline ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: 2006 Oregon Chub Investigations Progress Reports 2006 Abstract -- Oregon chub Oregonichthys crameri, small minnows endemic to the Willamette Valley, were federally listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act in 1993. Factors implicated in the decline of this species include changes in flow regimes and habitat characteristics resulting from the construction of flood control dams, revetments, channelization, diking, and the drainage of wetlands. The Oregon chub is further threatened by predation and competition by non-native species such as largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides, crappies Pomoxis sp., sunfishes Lepomis sp., bullheads Ameiurus sp., and western mosquitofish Gambusia affinis. We continued surveys initiated in 1991 in the Willamette River drainage to quantify the abundance of known Oregon chub populations, search for unknown populations, evaluate potential introduction sites, and monitor introduced populations as part of the implementation of the Oregon Chub Recovery Plan. We sampled a total of 103 sites in 2006. No new populations of Oregon chub were discovered. Thirty-five of the 103 sites were new locations that were sampled for the first time in 2006. Sixty-eight sites, sampled on at least one occasion between 1991-2005, were revisited. We confirmed the continued existence of Oregon chub at 33 locations. These included 23 naturally occurring and 10 introduced populations. Locations of naturally occurring populations were: Santiam drainage (Geren Island, Santiam I-5 Side Channels, Santiam Conservation Easement, Stayton Public Works Pond, Green’s Bridge Backwater, Pioneer Park, Santiam Conservation Easement, and Gray Slough), Mid-Willamette drainage (Finley Gray Creek Swamp), McKenzie drainage (Shetzline Pond and Big Island), Coast Fork Willamette drainage (Coast Fork Side Channels and Lynx Hollow), and the Middle Fork Willamette drainage (two Dexter Reservoir alcoves, East Fork Minnow Creek Pond, Shady Dell Pond, Buckhead Creek, two Elijah Bristow State Park sloughs and an island pond, Barnhard Slough, and Hospital Pond). Introduced populations were located in the Middle Fork Willamette (Wicopee Pond and Fall Creek Spillway Ponds), Santiam (Foster Pullout Pond), McKenzie (Russell Pond), Coast Fork Willamette (Herman Pond), and Mid-Willamette drainages (Dunn Wetland, Finley Display Pond, Finley Cheadle Pond, Ankeny Willow Marsh, and Jampolsky Wetlands). We did not find Oregon chub at 14 locations where they were collected on at least one occasion between 1991-2005 (Jasper Park Slough, Wallace Slough, East Ferrin Pond, Dexter East Alcove, Hospital Impoundment Pond, Rattlesnake Creek, Elijah Bristow Large Gravel Pit, Elijah Bristow Small Gravel Pit, Little Muddy Creek tributary, Bull Run Creek, Camas Swale, Barnhard Slough, Camous Creek, and Dry Muddy Creek). Nonnative fish were collected at most of these locations. We obtained abundance estimates of naturally occurring populations of Oregon chub at 18 locations in the Middle Fork Willamette (East Fork Minnow Creek Pond, Shady Dell Pond, Elijah Bristow State Park Sloughs and Island Pond, Hospital Pond, Dexter Reservoir Alcoves, Haws Pond, and Buckhead Creek), Santiam (Geren Island, Gray Slough, Stayton Public Works Pond, Pioneer Park Pond, and Santiam I-5 Side Channels), McKenzie (Big Island and Shetzline Pond), and Mid-Willamette drainages (Finley Gray Creek) (Table 1). We obtained abundance estimates for 10 introduced populations of Oregon chub, located in Fall Creek Spillway Ponds, Wicopee Pond, Dunn Wetland Ponds, Finley Display Pond, Finley Cheadle Pond, Ankeny Willow Marsh, Jampolsky Wetlands, Foster Pullout Pond, Herman Pond, and Russell Pond. The three largest populations in 2006 were introduced populations. In addition, we evaluated eleven potential Oregon chub introduction sites in the Willamette River drainage. We introduced Oregon chub into the South Stayton Pond, a recently restored site located on ODFW property in the Santiam drainage, from Stayton Public Works Pond and Pioneer Park Pond. The Oregon Chub Recovery Plan (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1998) set recovery criteria for downlisting the species to “threatened” and for delisting the species. The criteria for downlisting the species are: 1) establish and manage 10 populations of at least 500 adult fish, 2) all of these populations must exhibit a stable or increasing trend for five years, and 3) at least three populations meeting criterion 1 and 2 must be located in each of the three recovery areas (Middle Fork Willamette River, Santiam River, and Mid-Willamette River tributaries). In 2006, there were 18 populations totaling 500 or more individuals (Table 1). Thirteen of these populations also met the second criteria. Of the 13 populations meeting criteria 1 and 2, eight were located in the Middle Fork Willamette drainage, three were located in the Mid-Willamette drainage, and two were located in the Santiam drainage. With the addition of one more stable population in the Santiam drainage, the downlisting criteria will be met. Findings to date indicate that Oregon chub remain at risk due to the loss of suitable habitat and the continued threats posed by the proliferation of non-native fishes, illegal water withdrawals, accelerated sedimentation, and potential chemical spills or careless pesticide applications. Their status has improved in recent years, resulting primarily from successful introductions and the discovery of previously undocumented populations. Title: 2006 Oregon Chub Investigations Progress Reports 2006 Abstract -- Oregon chub Oregonichthys crameri, small minnows endemic to the Willamette Valley, were federally listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act in 1993. Factors implicated in the decline of this species include changes in flow regimes and habitat characteristics resulting from the construction of flood control dams, revetments, channelization, diking, and the drainage of wetlands. The Oregon chub is further threatened by predation and competition by non-native species such as largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides, crappies Pomoxis sp., sunfishes Lepomis sp., bullheads Ameiurus sp., and western mosquitofish Gambusia affinis. We continued surveys initiated in 1991 in the Willamette River drainage to quantify the abundance of known Oregon chub populations, search for unknown populations, evaluate potential introduction sites, and monitor introduced populations as part of the implementation of the Oregon Chub Recovery Plan. We sampled a total of 103 sites in 2006. No new populations of Oregon chub were discovered. Thirty-five of the 103 sites were new locations that were sampled for the first time in 2006. Sixty-eight sites, sampled on at least one occasion between 1991-2005, were revisited. We confirmed the continued existence of Oregon chub at 33 locations. These included 23 naturally occurring and 10 introduced populations. Locations of naturally occurring populations were: Santiam drainage (Geren Island, Santiam I-5 Side Channels, Santiam Conservation Easement, Stayton Public Works Pond, Green’s Bridge Backwater, Pioneer Park, Santiam Conservation Easement, and Gray Slough), Mid-Willamette drainage (Finley Gray Creek Swamp), McKenzie drainage (Shetzline Pond and Big Island), Coast Fork Willamette drainage (Coast Fork Side Channels and Lynx Hollow), and the Middle Fork Willamette drainage (two Dexter Reservoir alcoves, East Fork Minnow Creek Pond, Shady Dell Pond, Buckhead Creek, two Elijah Bristow State Park sloughs and an island pond, Barnhard Slough, and Hospital Pond). Introduced populations were located in the Middle Fork Willamette (Wicopee Pond and Fall Creek Spillway Ponds), Santiam (Foster Pullout Pond), McKenzie (Russell Pond), Coast Fork Willamette (Herman Pond), and Mid-Willamette drainages (Dunn Wetland, Finley Display Pond, Finley Cheadle Pond, Ankeny Willow Marsh, and Jampolsky Wetlands). We did not find Oregon chub at 14 locations where they were collected on at least one occasion between 1991-2005 (Jasper Park Slough, Wallace Slough, East Ferrin Pond, Dexter East Alcove, Hospital Impoundment Pond, Rattlesnake Creek, Elijah Bristow Large Gravel Pit, Elijah Bristow Small Gravel Pit, Little Muddy Creek tributary, Bull Run Creek, Camas Swale, Barnhard Slough, Camous Creek, and Dry Muddy Creek). Nonnative fish were collected at most of these locations. We obtained abundance estimates of naturally occurring populations of Oregon chub at 18 locations in the Middle Fork Willamette (East Fork Minnow Creek Pond, Shady Dell Pond, Elijah Bristow State Park Sloughs and Island Pond, Hospital Pond, Dexter Reservoir Alcoves, Haws Pond, and Buckhead Creek), Santiam (Geren Island, Gray Slough, Stayton Public Works Pond, Pioneer Park Pond, and Santiam I-5 Side Channels), McKenzie (Big Island and Shetzline Pond), and Mid-Willamette drainages (Finley Gray Creek) (Table 1). We obtained abundance estimates for 10 introduced populations of Oregon chub, located in Fall Creek Spillway Ponds, Wicopee Pond, Dunn Wetland Ponds, Finley Display Pond, Finley Cheadle Pond, Ankeny Willow Marsh, Jampolsky Wetlands, Foster Pullout Pond, Herman Pond, and Russell Pond. The three largest populations in 2006 were introduced populations. In addition, we evaluated eleven potential Oregon chub introduction sites in the Willamette River drainage. We introduced Oregon chub into the South Stayton Pond, a recently restored site located on ODFW property in the Santiam drainage, from Stayton Public Works Pond and Pioneer Park Pond. The Oregon Chub Recovery Plan (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1998) set recovery criteria for downlisting the species to “threatened” and for delisting the species. The criteria for downlisting the species are: 1) establish and manage 10 populations of at least 500 adult fish, 2) all of these populations must exhibit a stable or increasing trend for five years, and 3) at least three populations meeting criterion 1 and 2 must be located in each of the three recovery areas (Middle Fork Willamette River, Santiam River, and Mid-Willamette River tributaries). In 2006, there were 18 populations totaling 500 or more individuals (Table 1). Thirteen of these populations also met the second criteria. Of the 13 populations meeting criteria 1 and 2, eight were located in the Middle Fork Willamette drainage, three were located in the Mid-Willamette drainage, and two were located in the Santiam drainage. With the addition of one more stable population in the Santiam drainage, the downlisting criteria will be met. Findings to date indicate that Oregon chub remain at risk due to the loss of suitable habitat and the continued threats posed by the proliferation of non-native fishes, illegal water withdrawals, accelerated sedimentation, and potential chemical spills or careless pesticide applications. Their status has improved in recent years, resulting primarily from successful introductions and the discovery of previously undocumented populations. Close

• 5. [Article] Lamprey

  Abstract -- The majority of scientific studies on lamprey have investigated biological attributes, with few studies investigating historic abundance, detailed distribution and specific ecological requirements ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Lamprey Abstract -- The majority of scientific studies on lamprey have investigated biological attributes, with few studies investigating historic abundance, detailed distribution and specific ecological requirements and role. Because of the paucity of information and concerns of declining lamprey population in the Pacific Northwest, the Applegate River Watershed Council (ARWC) with the Medford District of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) collaborated to study lamprey populations in the Applegate River watershed of southwest Oregon (Close et al. 1995, Larson & Belchik 1998, Kostow 2002). The objectives of the study included: (1) Identifying species composition; (2) determining the distribution of lamprey species; and (3) relating the distribution of lamprey ammocoetes (juveniles or larvae) to physical stream characteristics. This paper summarizes the life histories of the two most common lamprey species in the Oregon, the Pacific (Lampetra tridentata) and Western Brook (Lampetra richardsoni), details the methods of study, reports the results and summarizes the findings. Also included are recommendations and suggestions for future lamprey work in the Applegate basin. Title: Lamprey Abstract -- The majority of scientific studies on lamprey have investigated biological attributes, with few studies investigating historic abundance, detailed distribution and specific ecological requirements and role. Because of the paucity of information and concerns of declining lamprey population in the Pacific Northwest, the Applegate River Watershed Council (ARWC) with the Medford District of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) collaborated to study lamprey populations in the Applegate River watershed of southwest Oregon (Close et al. 1995, Larson & Belchik 1998, Kostow 2002). The objectives of the study included: (1) Identifying species composition; (2) determining the distribution of lamprey species; and (3) relating the distribution of lamprey ammocoetes (juveniles or larvae) to physical stream characteristics. This paper summarizes the life histories of the two most common lamprey species in the Oregon, the Pacific (Lampetra tridentata) and Western Brook (Lampetra richardsoni), details the methods of study, reports the results and summarizes the findings. Also included are recommendations and suggestions for future lamprey work in the Applegate basin. Close

• 6. [Article] Species of Concern South Coast District, 1990

  Abstract -- The Fish Division requested each District Fish Biologist to review the present status of the fish stocks in their District, and then identify, by species, each population that is of concern ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Species of Concern South Coast District, 1990 Abstract -- The Fish Division requested each District Fish Biologist to review the present status of the fish stocks in their District, and then identify, by species, each population that is of concern at this time. This included populations that are thought to be at a sensitive level by the biologists and, also, ones that the public think may be declining or at low levels. Also, any hatchery programs that are presently not meeting the management goals of the basin should be addressed. The following populations and programs were identified by South Coast District personnel as meeting the criteria for "concern" Title: Species of Concern South Coast District, 1990 Abstract -- The Fish Division requested each District Fish Biologist to review the present status of the fish stocks in their District, and then identify, by species, each population that is of concern at this time. This included populations that are thought to be at a sensitive level by the biologists and, also, ones that the public think may be declining or at low levels. Also, any hatchery programs that are presently not meeting the management goals of the basin should be addressed. The following populations and programs were identified by South Coast District personnel as meeting the criteria for "concern" Close

• 7. [Article] Lower Snake River Compensation Plan; Oregon Evaluation Studies; Steelhead Life History Characterization; Genetic Characterization; Kelt Reconditioning - Progress Report 2003

  Abstract -- Many salmonids exhibit partial migration: the phenomenon of populations partitioned into migratory and non-migratory individuals (Jonsson and Jonsson 1993). Oncorhynchus mykiss exhibit a complex ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Lower Snake River Compensation Plan; Oregon Evaluation Studies; Steelhead Life History Characterization; Genetic Characterization; Kelt Reconditioning - Progress Report 2003 Abstract -- Many salmonids exhibit partial migration: the phenomenon of populations partitioned into migratory and non-migratory individuals (Jonsson and Jonsson 1993). Oncorhynchus mykiss exhibit a complex of life-history strategies ranging from residency in small headwater streams to anadromy involving migrations of hundreds of kilometers. In the Grande Ronde River basin of Northeast Oregon, both resident and anadromous life-history forms coexist, and thus populations found there likely exhibit partial migration. Partial migration may have important consequences for “anadromous” species listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The recent decline of summer steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) stocks in the lower Snake River has prompted their listing under the ESA. Declines in steelhead are potentially due to elevated mortality rates associated with anadromous migrations. If resident and anadromous life-history characteristics result from a phenotypically plastic trait (i.e. a genetic trait that is highly variable due to influences from environmental factors), then elevated mortality associated with the anadromous type may be shifting the populations towards residency. Further, although the anadromous expression of the trait may be declining, the trait would not necessarily be lost. Identification of the plasticity of these traits would then be important for the management of these stocks. We investigated life history traits of O. mykiss with studies in both the hatchery and natural environment. We anticipated that these complimentary approaches would allow us to evaluate the relationship between the two life-history forms. They should further allow us to explore the feasibility of using hatcheries to produce anadromous progeny from resident parents if the number of anadromous life-history forms becomes severely depressed. Lower Snake River Compensation Plan (LSRCP) ODFW- Eastern Oregon Fish Research (EOFR) Title: Lower Snake River Compensation Plan; Oregon Evaluation Studies; Steelhead Life History Characterization; Genetic Characterization; Kelt Reconditioning - Progress Report 2003 Abstract -- Many salmonids exhibit partial migration: the phenomenon of populations partitioned into migratory and non-migratory individuals (Jonsson and Jonsson 1993). Oncorhynchus mykiss exhibit a complex of life-history strategies ranging from residency in small headwater streams to anadromy involving migrations of hundreds of kilometers. In the Grande Ronde River basin of Northeast Oregon, both resident and anadromous life-history forms coexist, and thus populations found there likely exhibit partial migration. Partial migration may have important consequences for “anadromous” species listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The recent decline of summer steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) stocks in the lower Snake River has prompted their listing under the ESA. Declines in steelhead are potentially due to elevated mortality rates associated with anadromous migrations. If resident and anadromous life-history characteristics result from a phenotypically plastic trait (i.e. a genetic trait that is highly variable due to influences from environmental factors), then elevated mortality associated with the anadromous type may be shifting the populations towards residency. Further, although the anadromous expression of the trait may be declining, the trait would not necessarily be lost. Identification of the plasticity of these traits would then be important for the management of these stocks. We investigated life history traits of O. mykiss with studies in both the hatchery and natural environment. We anticipated that these complimentary approaches would allow us to evaluate the relationship between the two life-history forms. They should further allow us to explore the feasibility of using hatcheries to produce anadromous progeny from resident parents if the number of anadromous life-history forms becomes severely depressed. Lower Snake River Compensation Plan (LSRCP) ODFW- Eastern Oregon Fish Research (EOFR) Close

• 8. [Article] 2006 OPRD- Oregon Chub Population Monitoring on Oregon State Park Lands Progress Reports 2006

  Abstract -- Oregon chub Oregonichthys crameri, small minnows endemic to the Willamette River drainage of western Oregon (Markle et al. 1991), were federally listed as endangered under the Endangered Species ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: 2006 OPRD- Oregon Chub Population Monitoring on Oregon State Park Lands Progress Reports 2006 Abstract -- Oregon chub Oregonichthys crameri, small minnows endemic to the Willamette River drainage of western Oregon (Markle et al. 1991), were federally listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act in 1993 (Markle and Pearsons 1990; Rhew 1993). This species was formerly distributed throughout the Willamette River Valley (Snyder 1908) in off-channel habitats such as beaver ponds, oxbows, backwater sloughs, and flooded marshes. These habitats usually have little or no water flow, have silty and organic substrate, and have an abundance of aquatic vegetation and cover for hiding and spawning. In the last 100 years, off-channel habitats have disappeared because of changes in seasonal flows and habitat characteristics resulting from the construction of flood control dams, revetments, channelization, diking, and the drainage of wetlands for bottomland agriculture. This loss of habitat combined with the introduction of non-native species to the Willamette Valley resulted in a restricted distribution and sharp decline in Oregon chub abundance. The Oregon chub is further threatened by predation and competition by non-native species such as largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides, crappies Pomoxis sp., sunfishes Lepomis sp., bullheads Ameiurus sp., and western mosquitofish Gambusia affinis. To evaluate abundance and distribution of Oregon chub populations, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife has conducted surveys since 1991. Information collected also included the presence of non-native and native species, the characteristics of Oregon chub habitats, the characteristics of potential introduction sites, evaluation of Oregon chub introductions, and life history characteristics (Scheerer 2002, Scheerer and McDonald 2003, Scheerer et al. 2006). The Oregon Chub Recovery Plan (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1998) set recovery criteria for downlisting the species to “threatened” and for delisting the species. The criteria for downlisting the species are: 1) establish and manage 10 populations of at least 500 adult fish, 2) all of these populations must exhibit a stable or increasing trend for five years, and 3) at least three populations meeting criterion 1 and 2 must be located in each of the three recovery areas (Middle Fork Willamette River, Santiam River, and Mid-Willamette River tributaries). In 2006, there were 18 populations totaling 500 or more individuals. Thirteen of these populations met the above criteria. Eight were located in the Middle Fork Willamette drainage, three were located in the Mid-Willamette drainage, and two were located in the Santiam drainage (Scheerer et al. 2006). The status of this species has improved substantially over the past decade and with the addition of a single Santiam population, the downlisting criteria will be met (Scheerer et al. 2006). Title: 2006 OPRD- Oregon Chub Population Monitoring on Oregon State Park Lands Progress Reports 2006 Abstract -- Oregon chub Oregonichthys crameri, small minnows endemic to the Willamette River drainage of western Oregon (Markle et al. 1991), were federally listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act in 1993 (Markle and Pearsons 1990; Rhew 1993). This species was formerly distributed throughout the Willamette River Valley (Snyder 1908) in off-channel habitats such as beaver ponds, oxbows, backwater sloughs, and flooded marshes. These habitats usually have little or no water flow, have silty and organic substrate, and have an abundance of aquatic vegetation and cover for hiding and spawning. In the last 100 years, off-channel habitats have disappeared because of changes in seasonal flows and habitat characteristics resulting from the construction of flood control dams, revetments, channelization, diking, and the drainage of wetlands for bottomland agriculture. This loss of habitat combined with the introduction of non-native species to the Willamette Valley resulted in a restricted distribution and sharp decline in Oregon chub abundance. The Oregon chub is further threatened by predation and competition by non-native species such as largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides, crappies Pomoxis sp., sunfishes Lepomis sp., bullheads Ameiurus sp., and western mosquitofish Gambusia affinis. To evaluate abundance and distribution of Oregon chub populations, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife has conducted surveys since 1991. Information collected also included the presence of non-native and native species, the characteristics of Oregon chub habitats, the characteristics of potential introduction sites, evaluation of Oregon chub introductions, and life history characteristics (Scheerer 2002, Scheerer and McDonald 2003, Scheerer et al. 2006). The Oregon Chub Recovery Plan (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1998) set recovery criteria for downlisting the species to “threatened” and for delisting the species. The criteria for downlisting the species are: 1) establish and manage 10 populations of at least 500 adult fish, 2) all of these populations must exhibit a stable or increasing trend for five years, and 3) at least three populations meeting criterion 1 and 2 must be located in each of the three recovery areas (Middle Fork Willamette River, Santiam River, and Mid-Willamette River tributaries). In 2006, there were 18 populations totaling 500 or more individuals. Thirteen of these populations met the above criteria. Eight were located in the Middle Fork Willamette drainage, three were located in the Mid-Willamette drainage, and two were located in the Santiam drainage (Scheerer et al. 2006). The status of this species has improved substantially over the past decade and with the addition of a single Santiam population, the downlisting criteria will be met (Scheerer et al. 2006). Close

• 9. [Article] Progress Reports 2004: 2004 Oregon Chub Investigations

  Abstract -- Oregon chub are endemic to the Willamette River drainage of western Oregon (Markle et al. 1991). This species was formerly distributed throughout the Willamette River Valley (Snyder 1908) in ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Progress Reports 2004: 2004 Oregon Chub Investigations Abstract -- Oregon chub are endemic to the Willamette River drainage of western Oregon (Markle et al. 1991). This species was formerly distributed throughout the Willamette River Valley (Snyder 1908) in off-channel habitats such as beaver ponds, oxbows, stable backwater sloughs, and flooded marshes. These habitats usually have little or no water flow, have silty and organic substrate, and have an abundance of aquatic vegetation and cover for hiding and spawning. In the last 100 years, off-channel habitats have disappeared because of changes in seasonal flows resulting from the construction of dams throughout the basin, channelization of the Willamette River and its tributaries, and agricultural practices. This loss of habitat combined with the introduction of non-native species to the Willamette Valley resulted in a sharp decline in Oregon chub abundance. The reduction of habitat and the restricted distribution of the Oregon chub resulted in a determination of "endangered" status under the federal endangered species act (Markle and Pearsons 1990; Rhew 1993). To evaluate Oregon chub population abundance and distribution, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife conducted surveys in April-October 2004. We conducted similar surveys in 1991-2003 (Scheerer et. al. 1992; 1993; 1994; 1995; 1996; 1998; 1999; 2000; 2001; 2002; 2003; 2004; Scheerer and Jones 1997). The survey objectives were to collect information on the status, distribution, and abundance of Oregon chub, the presence of non-native and native species, the characteristics of Oregon chub habitats, the characteristics of potential introduction sites, and to evaluate the success of Oregon chub introductions. In addition, we reviewed and evaluated projects and activities with the potential to impact Oregon chub and their habitats and provided summaries to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Title: Progress Reports 2004: 2004 Oregon Chub Investigations Abstract -- Oregon chub are endemic to the Willamette River drainage of western Oregon (Markle et al. 1991). This species was formerly distributed throughout the Willamette River Valley (Snyder 1908) in off-channel habitats such as beaver ponds, oxbows, stable backwater sloughs, and flooded marshes. These habitats usually have little or no water flow, have silty and organic substrate, and have an abundance of aquatic vegetation and cover for hiding and spawning. In the last 100 years, off-channel habitats have disappeared because of changes in seasonal flows resulting from the construction of dams throughout the basin, channelization of the Willamette River and its tributaries, and agricultural practices. This loss of habitat combined with the introduction of non-native species to the Willamette Valley resulted in a sharp decline in Oregon chub abundance. The reduction of habitat and the restricted distribution of the Oregon chub resulted in a determination of "endangered" status under the federal endangered species act (Markle and Pearsons 1990; Rhew 1993). To evaluate Oregon chub population abundance and distribution, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife conducted surveys in April-October 2004. We conducted similar surveys in 1991-2003 (Scheerer et. al. 1992; 1993; 1994; 1995; 1996; 1998; 1999; 2000; 2001; 2002; 2003; 2004; Scheerer and Jones 1997). The survey objectives were to collect information on the status, distribution, and abundance of Oregon chub, the presence of non-native and native species, the characteristics of Oregon chub habitats, the characteristics of potential introduction sites, and to evaluate the success of Oregon chub introductions. In addition, we reviewed and evaluated projects and activities with the potential to impact Oregon chub and their habitats and provided summaries to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Close

• 10. [Article] Performance of Progeny From Steelhead and Rainbow Trout Crosses - Final Report 2009

  Abstract -- Many salmonids exhibit partial migration: the phenomenon of populations partitioned into migratory and non-migratory individuals (Jonsson and Jonsson 1993). Oncorhynchus mykiss exhibit a complex ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Performance of Progeny From Steelhead and Rainbow Trout Crosses - Final Report 2009 Abstract -- Many salmonids exhibit partial migration: the phenomenon of populations partitioned into migratory and non-migratory individuals (Jonsson and Jonsson 1993). Oncorhynchus mykiss exhibit a complex of life-history strategies ranging from residency in small headwater streams to anadromy involving migrations of hundreds of kilometers. In the Grande Ronde River basin of northeast Oregon, both resident and anadromous life-history forms coexist, and thus populations found there likely exhibit partial migration. Partial migration may have important consequences for anadromous species listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The recent decline of summer steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) populations in the lower Snake River has prompted their listing under the ESA. Declines in steelhead are potentially due to elevated mortality rates associated with anadromous migrations. If resident and anadromous life-history characteristics result from a phenotypically plastic trait (i.e. a genetic trait that is highly variable due to influences from environmental factors), then elevated mortality associated with the anadromous type may be shifting the populations towards residency. Further, although the anadromous expression of the trait may be declining, the trait would not necessarily be lost. Identification of the plasticity of these traits would then be important for the management of these populations. We investigated life history traits of O. mykiss with studies in both the hatchery and natural environment. We anticipated that these complimentary approaches would allow us to evaluate the relationship between the two life-history forms. They should further allow us to explore the feasibility of using hatcheries to produce anadromous progeny from resident parents if the number of anadromous life-history forms becomes severely depressed. The overall goal of this study was to determine the plasticity of life history forms, specifically the ability of resident adults to produce anadromous progeny. Lower Snake River Compensation Plan (LSRCP) ODFW- Eastern Oregon Fish Research (EOFR) Title: Performance of Progeny From Steelhead and Rainbow Trout Crosses - Final Report 2009 Abstract -- Many salmonids exhibit partial migration: the phenomenon of populations partitioned into migratory and non-migratory individuals (Jonsson and Jonsson 1993). Oncorhynchus mykiss exhibit a complex of life-history strategies ranging from residency in small headwater streams to anadromy involving migrations of hundreds of kilometers. In the Grande Ronde River basin of northeast Oregon, both resident and anadromous life-history forms coexist, and thus populations found there likely exhibit partial migration. Partial migration may have important consequences for anadromous species listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The recent decline of summer steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) populations in the lower Snake River has prompted their listing under the ESA. Declines in steelhead are potentially due to elevated mortality rates associated with anadromous migrations. If resident and anadromous life-history characteristics result from a phenotypically plastic trait (i.e. a genetic trait that is highly variable due to influences from environmental factors), then elevated mortality associated with the anadromous type may be shifting the populations towards residency. Further, although the anadromous expression of the trait may be declining, the trait would not necessarily be lost. Identification of the plasticity of these traits would then be important for the management of these populations. We investigated life history traits of O. mykiss with studies in both the hatchery and natural environment. We anticipated that these complimentary approaches would allow us to evaluate the relationship between the two life-history forms. They should further allow us to explore the feasibility of using hatcheries to produce anadromous progeny from resident parents if the number of anadromous life-history forms becomes severely depressed. The overall goal of this study was to determine the plasticity of life history forms, specifically the ability of resident adults to produce anadromous progeny. Lower Snake River Compensation Plan (LSRCP) ODFW- Eastern Oregon Fish Research (EOFR) Close

• 11. [Article] Scappoose Bay Watershed Assessment

  Abstract -- The Scappoose Bay Watershed Assessment focuses on habitat conditions for salmonids (salmon, steelhead and trout) in the watershed. The report follows the guidelines of the Oregon Watershed ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Scappoose Bay Watershed Assessment Abstract -- The Scappoose Bay Watershed Assessment focuses on habitat conditions for salmonids (salmon, steelhead and trout) in the watershed. The report follows the guidelines of the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Manual (WPN 1999). The Scappoose Bay Watershed Assessment presents the existing baseline information on watershed conditions (based on available reports and data) and oral history interviews. A Geographic Information System (GIS) was built to display, analyze and store much of the data. Habitat factors for the decline of salmonids are compared, and major protection and restoration opportunities are identified and prioritized. This Phase I assessment does not generally provide the detailed field reconnaissance and comprehensive field studies that are necessary for proceeding with specific protection and restoration projects. Rather, this assessment lays out the groundwork for a second phase of assessment that bridges the gap between identifying major areas for action and conducting specific projects. Topics included are preliminary analysis of existing data, GIS base map and baseline information, historical habitat conditions, channel habitat typing, fisheries resource and habitat assessment, channel modifications, sediment sources, riparian and wetland conditions, water quality, water use and hydrology, refugia, watershed condition, data gaps, significant legal and public issues, prioritized preservation and restoration, opportunities, and GIS metadata. Title: Scappoose Bay Watershed Assessment Abstract -- The Scappoose Bay Watershed Assessment focuses on habitat conditions for salmonids (salmon, steelhead and trout) in the watershed. The report follows the guidelines of the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Manual (WPN 1999). The Scappoose Bay Watershed Assessment presents the existing baseline information on watershed conditions (based on available reports and data) and oral history interviews. A Geographic Information System (GIS) was built to display, analyze and store much of the data. Habitat factors for the decline of salmonids are compared, and major protection and restoration opportunities are identified and prioritized. This Phase I assessment does not generally provide the detailed field reconnaissance and comprehensive field studies that are necessary for proceeding with specific protection and restoration projects. Rather, this assessment lays out the groundwork for a second phase of assessment that bridges the gap between identifying major areas for action and conducting specific projects. Topics included are preliminary analysis of existing data, GIS base map and baseline information, historical habitat conditions, channel habitat typing, fisheries resource and habitat assessment, channel modifications, sediment sources, riparian and wetland conditions, water quality, water use and hydrology, refugia, watershed condition, data gaps, significant legal and public issues, prioritized preservation and restoration, opportunities, and GIS metadata. Close

• 12. [Article] OWEB Project Number 216-5042-12451 Phase IV - Wallowa Mountains Bull Trout Monitoring, Final Report

  Abstract -- Bull trout were listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 1998 due to declining populations. Spawning survey data is important for determining relative abundance and distribution ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: OWEB Project Number 216-5042-12451 Phase IV - Wallowa Mountains Bull Trout Monitoring, Final Report Abstract -- Bull trout were listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 1998 due to declining populations. Spawning survey data is important for determining relative abundance and distribution trends in bull trout populations. Without adequate funding, it has been difficult to find sufficient numbers of experienced bull trout surveyors and packers for surveys in the back-country, and to obtain adequate supplies to get the work accomplished. OWEB funding supported the continued survey of bull trout spawning areas in years 2016 through 2018 in the Grande Ronde and Imnaha drainages of northeast Oregon. Surveys were conducted by fisheries consultants, the Service, Nez Perce Tribe, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, U.S. Forest Service, Freshwater Trust, Wallowa Resources, Anderson Perry, Inc., Grande Ronde Model Watershed, and volunteers. Timing of spawning, total redds, redd sizes, and redd locations are documented in the attached report. In 2016-2018, surveys were located on the Lostine and Imnaha Rivers, and Big Sheep and Bear Creeks. In addition, the Upper Minam and Wenaha were surveyed in 2018. OWEB funding helped to accomplish a total of 43.3, 41.1, and 71.7 stream miles surveyed in 2016, 2017, and 2018, respectively. Title: OWEB Project Number 216-5042-12451 Phase IV - Wallowa Mountains Bull Trout Monitoring, Final Report Abstract -- Bull trout were listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 1998 due to declining populations. Spawning survey data is important for determining relative abundance and distribution trends in bull trout populations. Without adequate funding, it has been difficult to find sufficient numbers of experienced bull trout surveyors and packers for surveys in the back-country, and to obtain adequate supplies to get the work accomplished. OWEB funding supported the continued survey of bull trout spawning areas in years 2016 through 2018 in the Grande Ronde and Imnaha drainages of northeast Oregon. Surveys were conducted by fisheries consultants, the Service, Nez Perce Tribe, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, U.S. Forest Service, Freshwater Trust, Wallowa Resources, Anderson Perry, Inc., Grande Ronde Model Watershed, and volunteers. Timing of spawning, total redds, redd sizes, and redd locations are documented in the attached report. In 2016-2018, surveys were located on the Lostine and Imnaha Rivers, and Big Sheep and Bear Creeks. In addition, the Upper Minam and Wenaha were surveyed in 2018. OWEB funding helped to accomplish a total of 43.3, 41.1, and 71.7 stream miles surveyed in 2016, 2017, and 2018, respectively. Close

• 13. [Article] Spawning distribution and habitat use of adult Pacific and western brook lamprey in Smith River, Oregon Information Reports 2006-1

  Abstract -- Coastal Oregon populations of Pacific lamprey Lampetra tridentata and western brook lamprey L. richardsoni are considered depressed due to habitat loss and passage problems (Close et al. 2002, ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Spawning distribution and habitat use of adult Pacific and western brook lamprey in Smith River, Oregon Information Reports 2006-1 Abstract -- Coastal Oregon populations of Pacific lamprey Lampetra tridentata and western brook lamprey L. richardsoni are considered depressed due to habitat loss and passage problems (Close et al. 2002, Nawa 2003, ODFW 2006). Pacific lamprey was listed as an Oregon state sensitive species in 1993 and in 1996 was protected through restriction of harvest (ODFW 2006). Western brook lamprey is not protected and has no special state status. Abundance of Pacific lamprey throughout the coast and Columbia River has declined dramatically since the1960s. Dam counts at Winchester, Bonneville, and Leaburg dams show a dramatic decrease from historical levels (Kostow 2002, Nawa 2003, ODFW 2006). In 2003, eleven environmental groups petitioned the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to list Pacific, western brook, and two other lamprey species as endangered in the Pacific Northwest and California (Nawa 2003). Even though the petition cited habitat losses due to reduced in-stream flows, water diversions, dredging, scour and channnelization issues, pollution and degradation of riparian communities, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service determined the petition did not contain adequate information to warrant a listing (Federal Register, 69 (27 December 2004) 77158-77167). The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife recently reviewed the status of western brook and Pacific lamprey and found populations to be ‘at risk’ of extinction (ODFW 2006) due to habitat loss, passage barriers and pollution. However data necessary to conduct a thorough and detailed assessment are lacking. Much of the data lacking are critical to the effective management and conservation of Oregon’s coastal lamprey species. The Columbia River Basin Lamprey Technical Workgroup (CRBLTW 2005) and members of Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission (CRITFC 2004) have identified and prioritized critical data gaps for Pacific lamprey, many of which also apply to western brook lamprey. Among these are 1) methods to assess distribution and abundance of all life stages and appropriate techniques for monitoring population status; 2) population structure and delineation; 3) population dynamics; 4) basic biology including interspecific and community level relationships; 5) limiting factors and threats including passage issues, and 6) habitat needs and requirements. This study addresses information needs pertaining to distribution and habitat use in addition to providing basic descriptive ecology. Our goal was to identify habitat variables associated with spawning Pacific and western brook lamprey in order to infer distribution throughout coastal Oregon. The objectives of this study were to 1) determine distribution of spawning Pacific and western brook lamprey in the Smith River basin; 2) describe redds of both species; and 3) describe associations of spawning Pacific and western brook lamprey in relation to habitat unit and reach scale habitat characteristics. Title: Spawning distribution and habitat use of adult Pacific and western brook lamprey in Smith River, Oregon Information Reports 2006-1 Abstract -- Coastal Oregon populations of Pacific lamprey Lampetra tridentata and western brook lamprey L. richardsoni are considered depressed due to habitat loss and passage problems (Close et al. 2002, Nawa 2003, ODFW 2006). Pacific lamprey was listed as an Oregon state sensitive species in 1993 and in 1996 was protected through restriction of harvest (ODFW 2006). Western brook lamprey is not protected and has no special state status. Abundance of Pacific lamprey throughout the coast and Columbia River has declined dramatically since the1960s. Dam counts at Winchester, Bonneville, and Leaburg dams show a dramatic decrease from historical levels (Kostow 2002, Nawa 2003, ODFW 2006). In 2003, eleven environmental groups petitioned the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to list Pacific, western brook, and two other lamprey species as endangered in the Pacific Northwest and California (Nawa 2003). Even though the petition cited habitat losses due to reduced in-stream flows, water diversions, dredging, scour and channnelization issues, pollution and degradation of riparian communities, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service determined the petition did not contain adequate information to warrant a listing (Federal Register, 69 (27 December 2004) 77158-77167). The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife recently reviewed the status of western brook and Pacific lamprey and found populations to be ‘at risk’ of extinction (ODFW 2006) due to habitat loss, passage barriers and pollution. However data necessary to conduct a thorough and detailed assessment are lacking. Much of the data lacking are critical to the effective management and conservation of Oregon’s coastal lamprey species. The Columbia River Basin Lamprey Technical Workgroup (CRBLTW 2005) and members of Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission (CRITFC 2004) have identified and prioritized critical data gaps for Pacific lamprey, many of which also apply to western brook lamprey. Among these are 1) methods to assess distribution and abundance of all life stages and appropriate techniques for monitoring population status; 2) population structure and delineation; 3) population dynamics; 4) basic biology including interspecific and community level relationships; 5) limiting factors and threats including passage issues, and 6) habitat needs and requirements. This study addresses information needs pertaining to distribution and habitat use in addition to providing basic descriptive ecology. Our goal was to identify habitat variables associated with spawning Pacific and western brook lamprey in order to infer distribution throughout coastal Oregon. The objectives of this study were to 1) determine distribution of spawning Pacific and western brook lamprey in the Smith River basin; 2) describe redds of both species; and 3) describe associations of spawning Pacific and western brook lamprey in relation to habitat unit and reach scale habitat characteristics. Close

• 14. [Article] Abundance, Life History, and Distribution of Bull Trout in the Hood River Basin: A Summary of Findings from 2006 to 2009 Information Reports number 2010-01

  Abstract -- Bull trout have been adversely affected by many land, water, and fisheries management activities throughout the range of the species. Degraded and fragmented habitat and negative interactions with ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Abundance, Life History, and Distribution of Bull Trout in the Hood River Basin: A Summary of Findings from 2006 to 2009 Information Reports number 2010-01 Abstract -- Bull trout have been adversely affected by many land, water, and fisheries management activities throughout the range of the species. Degraded and fragmented habitat and negative interactions with nonnative fishes have led to a decline in bull trout distribution and abundance, several local extirpations, and a federal listing in 1998 as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act (USFWS 2002). Distribution and abundance of bull trout also have declined in Oregon, and most management units in the state are considered to be threatened by conservation risks (ODFW 2005). One of these at-risk management units exists in the Hood River basin (ODFW 2005). Bull trout in Hood River basin currently are thought to exist as two independent reproductive units (USFWS 2002), known as local populations (Rieman and McIntyre 1995). The Clear Branch local population was isolated from the rest of the basin by the construction of Clear Branch Dam in 1968. This dam provides limited downstream fish passage during periods of spill and no voluntary upstream passage. Bull trout in this population inhabit Laurance Lake reservoir and the tributaries Pinnacle Creek and upper Clear Branch, which flow into the reservoir. The Hood River local population is distributed in the mainstem Hood River, Middle Fork Hood River (Middle Fork), and a few Middle Fork tributaries. Fluvial migrants from Hood River basin also forage and winter in the Columbia River (Pribyl et al. 1996, Buchanan et al. 1997). Bull trout have been observed in the East and West Fork basins of the Hood River, but these sightings have been rare. Presently, there is little evidence to suggest local populations exist in these tributary basins (USFWS 2002, Reagan and Olsen 2008). The status of both local populations is extremely precarious. Threats that put the Clear Branch population at risk of extirpation include low abundance, negative interactions with illegally introduced smallmouth bass, isolation from upstream migration and immigration, and diminished spawning and rearing habitat (USFW 1998). The Hood River population also appears to be small and is affected by passage barriers, unscreened irrigation diversions, impaired water quality, and periodic debris flows during glacial outbursts (USFWS 1998). As mandated by their federally designated threatened status, recovery plans were drafted by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for each distinct population segment, including for Hood River bull trout in 2002. This draft plan listed four goals for recovery in this basin: 1) establish at least one more local population in addition to the two existing populations, 2) increase the estimated adult population in the basin to at least 500 individuals, 3) achieve a stable or increasing trend at the population recovery level for at least two generations (=10 years), and 4) improve habitat connectivity by addressing problems with passage and screening at diversions and seasonal water quality barriers (USFWS 2002). The recovery plan also sets out research and monitoring needs critical to the recovery of these populations. Needed are accurate adult abundance estimates; a standardized monitoring program; more life history information for each local population, including how Hood River bull trout use of the Columbia River and the effects of potential passage obstructions on movement; and more information on the threat posed to the Clear Branch population by the illegal introduction of smallmouth bass in Lake Laurance reservoir. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW), with the help of the USDA Forest Service (USFS), initiated a four-year study in 2006 seeking to address these needs by synthesizing available data and conducting further studies to improve our understanding of the abundance, life history, and potential limiting factors of bull trout in the Hood River recovery unit. This report describes our findings, summarizes previous studies in the context of new information, and recommends a standardized monitoring protocol and future research. Our specific study objectives were as follows: 1. Assess adult abundance of the Clear Branch local population and develop a monitoring protocol to track abundance trends that is statistically reliable, cost-effective, and that minimizes potential adverse effects on this small isolated population. 2. Describe the juvenile and adult life history patterns of the Clear Branch local population. 3. Assess the potential impact of smallmouth bass on bull trout in Laurance Lake reservoir. 4. Determine current distribution of bull trout reproduction and early rearing in potential bull trout streams in the Hood River basin. 5. Describe the migratory life history of Hood River bull trout and assess the potential impacts of Coe Diversion and two new falls on the Middle Fork Hood River (scoured by the November 2006 glacial outburst) on bull trout migrations. Title: Abundance, Life History, and Distribution of Bull Trout in the Hood River Basin: A Summary of Findings from 2006 to 2009 Information Reports number 2010-01 Abstract -- Bull trout have been adversely affected by many land, water, and fisheries management activities throughout the range of the species. Degraded and fragmented habitat and negative interactions with nonnative fishes have led to a decline in bull trout distribution and abundance, several local extirpations, and a federal listing in 1998 as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act (USFWS 2002). Distribution and abundance of bull trout also have declined in Oregon, and most management units in the state are considered to be threatened by conservation risks (ODFW 2005). One of these at-risk management units exists in the Hood River basin (ODFW 2005). Bull trout in Hood River basin currently are thought to exist as two independent reproductive units (USFWS 2002), known as local populations (Rieman and McIntyre 1995). The Clear Branch local population was isolated from the rest of the basin by the construction of Clear Branch Dam in 1968. This dam provides limited downstream fish passage during periods of spill and no voluntary upstream passage. Bull trout in this population inhabit Laurance Lake reservoir and the tributaries Pinnacle Creek and upper Clear Branch, which flow into the reservoir. The Hood River local population is distributed in the mainstem Hood River, Middle Fork Hood River (Middle Fork), and a few Middle Fork tributaries. Fluvial migrants from Hood River basin also forage and winter in the Columbia River (Pribyl et al. 1996, Buchanan et al. 1997). Bull trout have been observed in the East and West Fork basins of the Hood River, but these sightings have been rare. Presently, there is little evidence to suggest local populations exist in these tributary basins (USFWS 2002, Reagan and Olsen 2008). The status of both local populations is extremely precarious. Threats that put the Clear Branch population at risk of extirpation include low abundance, negative interactions with illegally introduced smallmouth bass, isolation from upstream migration and immigration, and diminished spawning and rearing habitat (USFW 1998). The Hood River population also appears to be small and is affected by passage barriers, unscreened irrigation diversions, impaired water quality, and periodic debris flows during glacial outbursts (USFWS 1998). As mandated by their federally designated threatened status, recovery plans were drafted by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for each distinct population segment, including for Hood River bull trout in 2002. This draft plan listed four goals for recovery in this basin: 1) establish at least one more local population in addition to the two existing populations, 2) increase the estimated adult population in the basin to at least 500 individuals, 3) achieve a stable or increasing trend at the population recovery level for at least two generations (=10 years), and 4) improve habitat connectivity by addressing problems with passage and screening at diversions and seasonal water quality barriers (USFWS 2002). The recovery plan also sets out research and monitoring needs critical to the recovery of these populations. Needed are accurate adult abundance estimates; a standardized monitoring program; more life history information for each local population, including how Hood River bull trout use of the Columbia River and the effects of potential passage obstructions on movement; and more information on the threat posed to the Clear Branch population by the illegal introduction of smallmouth bass in Lake Laurance reservoir. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW), with the help of the USDA Forest Service (USFS), initiated a four-year study in 2006 seeking to address these needs by synthesizing available data and conducting further studies to improve our understanding of the abundance, life history, and potential limiting factors of bull trout in the Hood River recovery unit. This report describes our findings, summarizes previous studies in the context of new information, and recommends a standardized monitoring protocol and future research. Our specific study objectives were as follows: 1. Assess adult abundance of the Clear Branch local population and develop a monitoring protocol to track abundance trends that is statistically reliable, cost-effective, and that minimizes potential adverse effects on this small isolated population. 2. Describe the juvenile and adult life history patterns of the Clear Branch local population. 3. Assess the potential impact of smallmouth bass on bull trout in Laurance Lake reservoir. 4. Determine current distribution of bull trout reproduction and early rearing in potential bull trout streams in the Hood River basin. 5. Describe the migratory life history of Hood River bull trout and assess the potential impacts of Coe Diversion and two new falls on the Middle Fork Hood River (scoured by the November 2006 glacial outburst) on bull trout migrations. Close

• 15. [Article] 2011 Warner Sucker Investigations (Honey Creek) Progress Reports 2011

  Abstract -- The Warner sucker (Catostomus warnerensis) is endemic to the Warner Valley, an endorheic subbasin of the Great Basin in southeastern Oregon and northwestern Nevada. Historically, this species ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: 2011 Warner Sucker Investigations (Honey Creek) Progress Reports 2011 Abstract -- The Warner sucker (Catostomus warnerensis) is endemic to the Warner Valley, an endorheic subbasin of the Great Basin in southeastern Oregon and northwestern Nevada. Historically, this species was abundant and its range included 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) (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1985). 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 sucker inhabits the lakes and low gradient stream reaches of the Warner Valley. The Warner sucker metapopulation is comprised of both lake and stream life history morphs. The lake suckers are lacustrine adfluvial or potamodromous fish that normally spawn in the streams. However, upstream migration may be blocked by low stream flows during low water years or by irrigation diversion dams. When this happens, spawning may occur in nearshore areas of the lakes (White et al. 1990). Large lake-dwelling populations of introduced fishes likely reduce recruitment by preying on young suckers (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1998). The stream suckers inhabit and spawn in Honey, Deep, and Twentymile Creeks. 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 recovery criteria for delisting the species. These criteria require that: 1) a self-sustaining metapopulation is distributed throughout the Twentymile, Honey, and Deep Creek (below the falls) drainages, and in Pelican, Crump, and Hart Lakes, 2) passage is restored within and among the Twentymile, Honey, and Deep Creek (below the falls) drainages so that the 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. To inform progress towards the first criteria, our objectives in 2011 were: 1) obtain a population estimate for suckers in the Honey Creek drainage and describe their current distribution and 2) describe the association between the distribution of suckers and habitat variables in Honey Creek. In addition, we obtained a population estimate of suckers at the Summer Lake Wildlife Management Area (WMA), where a self-sustaining population became established after a fish salvage from Hart Lake in 1991 when the lakes desiccated. Title: 2011 Warner Sucker Investigations (Honey Creek) Progress Reports 2011 Abstract -- The Warner sucker (Catostomus warnerensis) is endemic to the Warner Valley, an endorheic subbasin of the Great Basin in southeastern Oregon and northwestern Nevada. Historically, this species was abundant and its range included 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) (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1985). 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 sucker inhabits the lakes and low gradient stream reaches of the Warner Valley. The Warner sucker metapopulation is comprised of both lake and stream life history morphs. The lake suckers are lacustrine adfluvial or potamodromous fish that normally spawn in the streams. However, upstream migration may be blocked by low stream flows during low water years or by irrigation diversion dams. When this happens, spawning may occur in nearshore areas of the lakes (White et al. 1990). Large lake-dwelling populations of introduced fishes likely reduce recruitment by preying on young suckers (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1998). The stream suckers inhabit and spawn in Honey, Deep, and Twentymile Creeks. 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 recovery criteria for delisting the species. These criteria require that: 1) a self-sustaining metapopulation is distributed throughout the Twentymile, Honey, and Deep Creek (below the falls) drainages, and in Pelican, Crump, and Hart Lakes, 2) passage is restored within and among the Twentymile, Honey, and Deep Creek (below the falls) drainages so that the 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. To inform progress towards the first criteria, our objectives in 2011 were: 1) obtain a population estimate for suckers in the Honey Creek drainage and describe their current distribution and 2) describe the association between the distribution of suckers and habitat variables in Honey Creek. In addition, we obtained a population estimate of suckers at the Summer Lake Wildlife Management Area (WMA), where a self-sustaining population became established after a fish salvage from Hart Lake in 1991 when the lakes desiccated. Close

• 16. [Article] Warner Sucker Investigations (2009)

  Abstract -- The Warner sucker (Catostomus warnerensis) is endemic to the Warner Valley, an endorheic subbasin of the Great Basin in southeastern Oregon and northwestern Nevada. Historically, this species ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Warner Sucker Investigations (2009) Abstract -- The Warner sucker (Catostomus warnerensis) is endemic to the Warner Valley, an endorheic subbasin of the Great Basin in southeastern Oregon and northwestern Nevada. Historically, this species was abundant and its range included 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) (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1985). 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 sucker inhabits the lakes and low gradient stream reaches of the Warner Valley. The Warner sucker metapopulation is comprised of both lake and stream life history morphs. The lake suckers are lacustrine adfluvial or potamodromous fish that normally spawn in the streams. However, upstream migration may be blocked by low stream flows during low water years or by irrigation diversion dams. When this happens, spawning may occur in nearshore areas of the lakes (White et al. 1990). Large lake-dwelling populations of introduced fishes likely reduce recruitment by preying on young suckers (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1998). The stream suckers inhabit and spawn in Honey, Deep, and Twentymile Creeks. 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 recovery criteria for delisting the species. These criteria require that: 1) a self-sustaining metapopulation is distributed throughout the Twentymile, Honey, and Deep Creek (below the falls) drainages, and in Pelican, Crump, and Hart Lakes, 2) passage is restored within and among the Twentymile, Honey, and Deep Creek (below the falls) drainages so that the 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. Objectives of our 2009 investigations included: 1) obtain a mark-recapture population estimate for suckers in the Twentymile Creek drainage and describe their current distribution, 2) describe associations between the distribution of suckers and habitat variables in Twentymile Creek, 3) evaluate a non-lethal ageing technique, 4) track radiotagged lake suckers (tagged in 2008) in Hart and Crump Lakes to assess spring movement patterns, 5) track spring spawning movements of lake suckers across a PIT-tag antenna installed at the mouth of Honey Creek, 6) test the feasibility of trapping larval suckers near the mouth of Honey Creek using larval drift nets and light traps to describe the relative abundance and timing of larval sucker movements, and 7) obtain a mark-recapture population estimate of suckers at the Summer Lake Wildlife Management Area (WMA), where a self-sustaining population became established after a fish salvage from Hart Lake during the 1991 drought. Title: Warner Sucker Investigations (2009) Abstract -- The Warner sucker (Catostomus warnerensis) is endemic to the Warner Valley, an endorheic subbasin of the Great Basin in southeastern Oregon and northwestern Nevada. Historically, this species was abundant and its range included 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) (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1985). 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 sucker inhabits the lakes and low gradient stream reaches of the Warner Valley. The Warner sucker metapopulation is comprised of both lake and stream life history morphs. The lake suckers are lacustrine adfluvial or potamodromous fish that normally spawn in the streams. However, upstream migration may be blocked by low stream flows during low water years or by irrigation diversion dams. When this happens, spawning may occur in nearshore areas of the lakes (White et al. 1990). Large lake-dwelling populations of introduced fishes likely reduce recruitment by preying on young suckers (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1998). The stream suckers inhabit and spawn in Honey, Deep, and Twentymile Creeks. 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 recovery criteria for delisting the species. These criteria require that: 1) a self-sustaining metapopulation is distributed throughout the Twentymile, Honey, and Deep Creek (below the falls) drainages, and in Pelican, Crump, and Hart Lakes, 2) passage is restored within and among the Twentymile, Honey, and Deep Creek (below the falls) drainages so that the 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. Objectives of our 2009 investigations included: 1) obtain a mark-recapture population estimate for suckers in the Twentymile Creek drainage and describe their current distribution, 2) describe associations between the distribution of suckers and habitat variables in Twentymile Creek, 3) evaluate a non-lethal ageing technique, 4) track radiotagged lake suckers (tagged in 2008) in Hart and Crump Lakes to assess spring movement patterns, 5) track spring spawning movements of lake suckers across a PIT-tag antenna installed at the mouth of Honey Creek, 6) test the feasibility of trapping larval suckers near the mouth of Honey Creek using larval drift nets and light traps to describe the relative abundance and timing of larval sucker movements, and 7) obtain a mark-recapture population estimate of suckers at the Summer Lake Wildlife Management Area (WMA), where a self-sustaining population became established after a fish salvage from Hart Lake during the 1991 drought. Close

• 17. [Article] Warner Valley Fish Investigations- Warner Suckers Progress Reports 2008

  Abstract -- The Warner sucker (Catostomus warnerensis) is endemic to the Warner Valley, an endorheic subbasin of the Great Basin in southeastern Oregon and northwestern Nevada. This species was historically ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Warner Valley Fish Investigations- Warner Suckers Progress Reports 2008 Abstract -- The Warner sucker (Catostomus warnerensis) is endemic to the Warner Valley, an endorheic subbasin of the Great Basin in southeastern Oregon and northwestern Nevada. This species was historically abundant 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 which 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 1976). 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). In 2008, precipitation and snow pack were near average and Hart and Crump Lakes never filled completely. In 2007, Crump Lake water levels were very low with less than a quarter of the surface area wetted during the winter. Both lakes have been watered continuously since 1993. The Warner sucker inhabits the lakes and low gradient stream reaches of the Warner Valley. Two life history forms are present that comprise the metapopulation of Warner suckers: lake and stream morphs. The lake suckers are lacustrine adfluvial or potamodromous fish which normally spawn in the streams. However, upstream migration may be blocked by low stream flows during dry water years or by irrigation diversion dams and spawning may occur in nearshore areas of the lakes (White et al. 1990). The stream suckers inhabit and spawn in the three major tributary drainages (Honey, Deep, and Twentymile Creeks). 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). 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 recovery criteria for delisting the species. These criteria require that (1) a self-sustaining metapopulation is distributed throughout the Twentymile, Honey, and Deep Creek (below the falls) drainages, and in Pelican, Crump, and Hart Lakes, (2) passage is restored within and among the Twentymile, Honey, and Deep Creek (below the falls) drainages so that the 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. In 2008, we conducted investigations in Hart and Crump Lakes to quantify the abundance and distribution of Warner suckers, to search for evidence of recent recruitment, and to estimate sucker abundance relative to nonnative fish abundance. In addition we investigated growth and movement patterns. We used Passive Integrated Transponder (PIT) tagged suckers to determine growth rates and movements, tracked radio-tagged suckers to document seasonal spawning migrations, fished a screw trap in Twelvemile Creek to monitor downstream movements, and operated a trap at the Dyke diversion dam on Twentymile Creek to monitor upstream movements. Title: Warner Valley Fish Investigations- Warner Suckers Progress Reports 2008 Abstract -- The Warner sucker (Catostomus warnerensis) is endemic to the Warner Valley, an endorheic subbasin of the Great Basin in southeastern Oregon and northwestern Nevada. This species was historically abundant 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 which 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 1976). 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). In 2008, precipitation and snow pack were near average and Hart and Crump Lakes never filled completely. In 2007, Crump Lake water levels were very low with less than a quarter of the surface area wetted during the winter. Both lakes have been watered continuously since 1993. The Warner sucker inhabits the lakes and low gradient stream reaches of the Warner Valley. Two life history forms are present that comprise the metapopulation of Warner suckers: lake and stream morphs. The lake suckers are lacustrine adfluvial or potamodromous fish which normally spawn in the streams. However, upstream migration may be blocked by low stream flows during dry water years or by irrigation diversion dams and spawning may occur in nearshore areas of the lakes (White et al. 1990). The stream suckers inhabit and spawn in the three major tributary drainages (Honey, Deep, and Twentymile Creeks). 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). 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 recovery criteria for delisting the species. These criteria require that (1) a self-sustaining metapopulation is distributed throughout the Twentymile, Honey, and Deep Creek (below the falls) drainages, and in Pelican, Crump, and Hart Lakes, (2) passage is restored within and among the Twentymile, Honey, and Deep Creek (below the falls) drainages so that the 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. In 2008, we conducted investigations in Hart and Crump Lakes to quantify the abundance and distribution of Warner suckers, to search for evidence of recent recruitment, and to estimate sucker abundance relative to nonnative fish abundance. In addition we investigated growth and movement patterns. We used Passive Integrated Transponder (PIT) tagged suckers to determine growth rates and movements, tracked radio-tagged suckers to document seasonal spawning migrations, fished a screw trap in Twelvemile Creek to monitor downstream movements, and operated a trap at the Dyke diversion dam on Twentymile Creek to monitor upstream movements. Close

• 18. [Article] Status of Oregon Stocks of Coho Salmon, 2004 through 2008 Report Number: OPSW-ODFW-2009-3

  Abstract -- This report summarizes five years of monitoring status and trend in Oregon’s naturally spawning coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) populations. The five coho run years reported are 2004 through ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Status of Oregon Stocks of Coho Salmon, 2004 through 2008 Report Number: OPSW-ODFW-2009-3 Abstract -- This report summarizes five years of monitoring status and trend in Oregon’s naturally spawning coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) populations. The five coho run years reported are 2004 through 2008. Monitoring results include: abundance of naturally spawning coho; density of spawning coho; coho spawn timing; and proportion of hatchery (marked) coho in naturally spawning populations. These results are based on data from randomly selected spawning surveys, as well as other methods in areas without adequate random surveys. Results for coho standard spawning surveys, as well as spawning surveys for other species are covered in data summaries and reports posted on an Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) web page (see: http://oregonstate.edu/dept/ODFW/spawn/index.htm). Monitoring occurs at three hierarchical spatial scales, as defined by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS): Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU); Stratum; and coho Population. There are three coho ESU’s located entirely or partially within the State of Oregon: the Lower Columbia River (LCR) Coho ESU; the Oregon Coast (OC) Coho ESU; and the Southern Oregon/Northern California Coasts (SONCC) Coho ESU. This report summarizes results for coho populations in the portion of each ESU that is within the State of Oregon. In the Oregon portion of the LCR Coho ESU sufficient surveys were conducted to meet precision goals at the ESU level three out of the five sampling years. At the population complex scale, yearly precision goals were rarely met. Wild spawner abundance remained fairly stable over the five sampling years; hatchery abundance was more variable. Regional patterns in fish distribution, spawn timing, and hatchery proportion are apparent at both the stratum and population scale. In the Oregon Coast ESU sufficient surveys were conducted to meet precision goals at the ESU level in all five sampling years, however at the population scale, precision goals were rarely met. Wild spawner abundance declined over the first four sampling years, but showed a significant increase in the fifth sampling year. The proportion of hatchery fish was generally low, but variable over the five sampling years. Only two populations, Salmon River and North Umpqua River, consistently had over 10% hatchery fish on the spawning grounds. Regional patterns in fish distribution, spawn timing, and hatchery proportion are apparent. Inadequate funding and the need to update the GRTS sampling frame continue to hamper monitoring of the Oregon portion of the Southern Oregon/Northern California Coasts Coho ESU. In the Oregon portion of the ESU insufficient surveys were conducted to meet precision goals at the ESU level in any of the four years when GRTS surveys were done. However, estimates of wild coho spawners were obtained in all five years based on Huntley Park seining. Wild coho spawner abundance declined substantially over the five run years; but the proportion of hatchery coho spawning naturally was fairly low and stable. Regional patterns in fish distribution, spawn timing, and hatchery proportion are apparent. Title: Status of Oregon Stocks of Coho Salmon, 2004 through 2008 Report Number: OPSW-ODFW-2009-3 Abstract -- This report summarizes five years of monitoring status and trend in Oregon’s naturally spawning coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) populations. The five coho run years reported are 2004 through 2008. Monitoring results include: abundance of naturally spawning coho; density of spawning coho; coho spawn timing; and proportion of hatchery (marked) coho in naturally spawning populations. These results are based on data from randomly selected spawning surveys, as well as other methods in areas without adequate random surveys. Results for coho standard spawning surveys, as well as spawning surveys for other species are covered in data summaries and reports posted on an Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) web page (see: http://oregonstate.edu/dept/ODFW/spawn/index.htm). Monitoring occurs at three hierarchical spatial scales, as defined by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS): Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU); Stratum; and coho Population. There are three coho ESU’s located entirely or partially within the State of Oregon: the Lower Columbia River (LCR) Coho ESU; the Oregon Coast (OC) Coho ESU; and the Southern Oregon/Northern California Coasts (SONCC) Coho ESU. This report summarizes results for coho populations in the portion of each ESU that is within the State of Oregon. In the Oregon portion of the LCR Coho ESU sufficient surveys were conducted to meet precision goals at the ESU level three out of the five sampling years. At the population complex scale, yearly precision goals were rarely met. Wild spawner abundance remained fairly stable over the five sampling years; hatchery abundance was more variable. Regional patterns in fish distribution, spawn timing, and hatchery proportion are apparent at both the stratum and population scale. In the Oregon Coast ESU sufficient surveys were conducted to meet precision goals at the ESU level in all five sampling years, however at the population scale, precision goals were rarely met. Wild spawner abundance declined over the first four sampling years, but showed a significant increase in the fifth sampling year. The proportion of hatchery fish was generally low, but variable over the five sampling years. Only two populations, Salmon River and North Umpqua River, consistently had over 10% hatchery fish on the spawning grounds. Regional patterns in fish distribution, spawn timing, and hatchery proportion are apparent. Inadequate funding and the need to update the GRTS sampling frame continue to hamper monitoring of the Oregon portion of the Southern Oregon/Northern California Coasts Coho ESU. In the Oregon portion of the ESU insufficient surveys were conducted to meet precision goals at the ESU level in any of the four years when GRTS surveys were done. However, estimates of wild coho spawners were obtained in all five years based on Huntley Park seining. Wild coho spawner abundance declined substantially over the five run years; but the proportion of hatchery coho spawning naturally was fairly low and stable. Regional patterns in fish distribution, spawn timing, and hatchery proportion are apparent. Close

• 19. [Article] 2017 Bull Trout Redd Monitoring in the Wallowa Mountains

  Abstract -- Bull trout were listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 1998 due to declining populations. The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) recommends monitoring bull trout in subbasins ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: 2017 Bull Trout Redd Monitoring in the Wallowa Mountains Abstract -- Bull trout were listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 1998 due to declining populations. The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) recommends monitoring bull trout in subbasins where little is known about the populations, including the Grande Ronde and Imnaha subbasins. Spawning survey data is important for determining relative abundance and distribution trends in bull trout populations. This report summarizes the 2017 bull trout spawning data collected in the Wallowa Mountains of northeast Oregon and compares this with past years’ data. Bull trout spawning surveys have been conducted on similar index areas for selected Grande Ronde and Imnaha River streams from 1999 to 2017. These surveyed streams are located within the Wallowa River/Minam River and Imnaha River bull trout core areas. Surveys in 2017 were conducted by the Nez Perce Tribe (NPT), the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW), the Service, U.S. Forest Service (USFS), Freshwater Trust, and fisheries consultants. Objectives of the survey included: (1) locate bull trout spawning areas; (2) determine redd characteristics; (3) determine bull trout timing of spawning; (4) collect spawning density data; (5) determine and compare the spatial distribution of redds along the Lostine River in 2006 through 2017; and (6) over time use all of the data to assess local bull trout population trends and the long-term recovery of bull trout. Timing of spawning, total redds, redd sizes, and redd locations are documented in the report. Title: 2017 Bull Trout Redd Monitoring in the Wallowa Mountains Abstract -- Bull trout were listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 1998 due to declining populations. The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) recommends monitoring bull trout in subbasins where little is known about the populations, including the Grande Ronde and Imnaha subbasins. Spawning survey data is important for determining relative abundance and distribution trends in bull trout populations. This report summarizes the 2017 bull trout spawning data collected in the Wallowa Mountains of northeast Oregon and compares this with past years’ data. Bull trout spawning surveys have been conducted on similar index areas for selected Grande Ronde and Imnaha River streams from 1999 to 2017. These surveyed streams are located within the Wallowa River/Minam River and Imnaha River bull trout core areas. Surveys in 2017 were conducted by the Nez Perce Tribe (NPT), the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW), the Service, U.S. Forest Service (USFS), Freshwater Trust, and fisheries consultants. Objectives of the survey included: (1) locate bull trout spawning areas; (2) determine redd characteristics; (3) determine bull trout timing of spawning; (4) collect spawning density data; (5) determine and compare the spatial distribution of redds along the Lostine River in 2006 through 2017; and (6) over time use all of the data to assess local bull trout population trends and the long-term recovery of bull trout. Timing of spawning, total redds, redd sizes, and redd locations are documented in the report. Close

• 20. [Article] Oregon Chub Investigations, Progress Report 2001

  Abstract -- Populations of Oregon chub Oregonichthys crameri, endemic to the Willamette Valley, have been drastically reduced. Factors in the decline of this fish include changes in flow regimes and habitat ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Oregon Chub Investigations, Progress Report 2001 Abstract -- Populations of Oregon chub Oregonichthys crameri, endemic to the Willamette Valley, have been drastically reduced. Factors in the decline of this fish include changes in flow regimes and habitat characteristics resulting from the construction of flood control dams, revetments, channelization, diking, and the drainage of wetlands. The Oregon chub is further threatened by predation and competition by non-native species such as largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides, small mouth bass M. dolomieui, crappies Pomoxis sp., sunfishes Lepomis sp., bullheads Ameiurus sp., and western mosquitofish Gambusia affinis. We surveyed in the Willamette River drainage in April-October 2000 to quantify existing Oregon chub populations, search for unknown populations, evaluate potential introduction sites, and monitor introduced populations. We sampled a total of 77 sites in 2000. We collected Oregon chub for the first time from Barnard Slough in the Middle Fork Willamette drainage. Oregon chub were last collected from this location in 1983 (Bond 1984). Thirty-one of the 77 sites were new sites that were sampled for the first time in 2000. Forty-six sites, sampled in 1991-1999, were revisited. Three sites were sampled twice. We confirmed the continued existence of Oregon chub at 20 locations. These include naturally occurring populations in the Santiam drainage (Geren Island, Santiam Conservation Easement, Gray Slough, Santiam 1-5 backwaters, Pioneer Park backwater, Santiam Public Works Pond), Mid-Willamette drainage (Finley Gray Creek Swamp) and Middle Fork Willamette drainage (Dexter Reservoir Alcoves, East Fork Minnow Creek Pond, Shady Dell Pond, Buckhead Creek, Oakridge Slough, Elijah Bristow State Park, Rattlesnake Creek, and Hospital Pond) and introduced populations in the Middle Fork Willamette (Wicopee Pond, Fall Creek Spillway Ponds), Santiam (Foster Pullout Pond), and Mid-Willamette drainages (Dunn Wetland, Finley Display Pond). Oregon chub were not found at several locations (Jasper Park Slough, Wallace Slough, East Ferrin Pond, Dexter East Alcove, Hospital lmpoundment Pond, Logan Slough, Green's Bridge Backwater, Camas Swale) where they were collected on at least one occasion between 1991-1999 (Scheerer et. al. 1992; 1993; 1994; 1995; 1996; 1998; 1999; 2000; Scheerer and Jones 1997). Non-native fish were common in off-channel habitats that were surveyed in the Willamette River drainage. Non-native fish were collected from 23 of the 31 new sites sampled in 1999 (74%); no fish were collected at three locations (10%). Western mosquitofish and centrarchids (largemouth bass and bluegill) were the most common non-native fish collected. Oregon chub were introduced into Menear's Bend Pond in the Santiam River drainage in the October 2000. Additional Oregon chub were introduced into Foster Pullout Pond in October 2000, to supplement the 85 fish introduced in 1999. In the summer of 2000, a habitat enhancement project creating new habitat to benefit Oregon chub was completed in the Long Tom drainage (Mid-Willamette River). Seven potential Oregon chub reintroduction sites were monitored and evaluated. These included four sites in the Mid-Willamette River drainage (Finley National Wildlife Refuge Beaver and Cattail Ponds, Ankeny National Wildlife Refuge Dunlin-Woodduck Pond, Long Tom Ranch Pond), one site in the Santiam River drainage (Menear's Bend Pond), one site in the McKenzie River drainage (Russell Pond), and one site in the Coast Fork Willamette drainage (Layng Pond). Estimates of abundance were obtained for naturally occurring populations of Oregon chub in East Fork Minnow Creek Pond, Shady Dell Pond, Elijah Bristow State Park Sloughs, Hospital Pond, Dexter Reservoir Alcoves, Buckhead Creek, Oakridge Slough, Santiam Conservation Easement Sloughs, Geren Island Ponds, and Finley Gray Creek Swamp. Five of these populations showed an increase in abundance in 2000 (East Fork Minnow Creek Pond, Shady Dell Pond, Middle Buckhead Creek, Dexter Reservoir Alcoves, Finley Gray Creek Swamp). Four populations decreased in abundance (or remain depressed) in 2000 (Geren Island, Santiam Conservation Easement, Elijah Bristow Sloughs, Oakridge Slough) (Table 1 ). Abundance estimates for introduced populations of Oregon chub were also obtained. The Oregon chub population in East Ferrin Pond declined from 7,200 fish in 1997 to O fish in 2000, and is presumed extinct. The Oregon chub population in the Fall Creek Spillway Pond totaled 5,030 fish in 2000, compared to 6,300 fish in 1999. The Oregon chub population in Wicopee Pond expanded dramatically from ~50 fish in 1999 to 4,580 fish in 2000. The Oregon chub population in the Dunn Wetland Ponds increased from 4,860 fish in 1999 to 14,090 fish in 2000. The Oregon chub population in Finley Display Pond increased from 360 fish in 1999 to 1,750 fish in 2000. Three of the four largest populations in 2000 were introduced populations. The Middle Fork Willamette River drainage supported the largest number of Oregon chub populations (n=12), followed by the Santiam drainage (n=B), and the Mid-Willamette drainage (n=5). The most abundant Oregon chub populations were found in the Middle Fork Willamette and Mid-Willamette drainages. The Oregon Chub Recovery Plan (U .S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1998) set a recovery goal for downlisting the species to "threatened" and for delisting the species. The criteria for downlisting the species was to establish and manage ten populations of at least 500 adult fish. All populations must exhibit a stable or increasing trend for five years. At least three populations must be located in each of the three sub-basins (Middle Fork Willamette River, Santiam River, Mid-Willamette River tributaries). In 2000, there were 11 populations totaling 500 or more individuals and six of these populations exhibited a stable or increasing trend for the past five years (Table 1 ). Five of these six populations were located in the Middle Fork Willamette drainage. In summary, Oregon chub remain at risk due to their limited distribution compared with their historic geographic range in the Willamette Valley, the loss of suitable habitat and the continued threats posed by the proliferation of non-native fishes, illegal water withdrawals, unauthorized fill and removal operations, and potential chemical spills or careless pesticide applications. Title: Oregon Chub Investigations, Progress Report 2001 Abstract -- Populations of Oregon chub Oregonichthys crameri, endemic to the Willamette Valley, have been drastically reduced. Factors in the decline of this fish include changes in flow regimes and habitat characteristics resulting from the construction of flood control dams, revetments, channelization, diking, and the drainage of wetlands. The Oregon chub is further threatened by predation and competition by non-native species such as largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides, small mouth bass M. dolomieui, crappies Pomoxis sp., sunfishes Lepomis sp., bullheads Ameiurus sp., and western mosquitofish Gambusia affinis. We surveyed in the Willamette River drainage in April-October 2000 to quantify existing Oregon chub populations, search for unknown populations, evaluate potential introduction sites, and monitor introduced populations. We sampled a total of 77 sites in 2000. We collected Oregon chub for the first time from Barnard Slough in the Middle Fork Willamette drainage. Oregon chub were last collected from this location in 1983 (Bond 1984). Thirty-one of the 77 sites were new sites that were sampled for the first time in 2000. Forty-six sites, sampled in 1991-1999, were revisited. Three sites were sampled twice. We confirmed the continued existence of Oregon chub at 20 locations. These include naturally occurring populations in the Santiam drainage (Geren Island, Santiam Conservation Easement, Gray Slough, Santiam 1-5 backwaters, Pioneer Park backwater, Santiam Public Works Pond), Mid-Willamette drainage (Finley Gray Creek Swamp) and Middle Fork Willamette drainage (Dexter Reservoir Alcoves, East Fork Minnow Creek Pond, Shady Dell Pond, Buckhead Creek, Oakridge Slough, Elijah Bristow State Park, Rattlesnake Creek, and Hospital Pond) and introduced populations in the Middle Fork Willamette (Wicopee Pond, Fall Creek Spillway Ponds), Santiam (Foster Pullout Pond), and Mid-Willamette drainages (Dunn Wetland, Finley Display Pond). Oregon chub were not found at several locations (Jasper Park Slough, Wallace Slough, East Ferrin Pond, Dexter East Alcove, Hospital lmpoundment Pond, Logan Slough, Green's Bridge Backwater, Camas Swale) where they were collected on at least one occasion between 1991-1999 (Scheerer et. al. 1992; 1993; 1994; 1995; 1996; 1998; 1999; 2000; Scheerer and Jones 1997). Non-native fish were common in off-channel habitats that were surveyed in the Willamette River drainage. Non-native fish were collected from 23 of the 31 new sites sampled in 1999 (74%); no fish were collected at three locations (10%). Western mosquitofish and centrarchids (largemouth bass and bluegill) were the most common non-native fish collected. Oregon chub were introduced into Menear's Bend Pond in the Santiam River drainage in the October 2000. Additional Oregon chub were introduced into Foster Pullout Pond in October 2000, to supplement the 85 fish introduced in 1999. In the summer of 2000, a habitat enhancement project creating new habitat to benefit Oregon chub was completed in the Long Tom drainage (Mid-Willamette River). Seven potential Oregon chub reintroduction sites were monitored and evaluated. These included four sites in the Mid-Willamette River drainage (Finley National Wildlife Refuge Beaver and Cattail Ponds, Ankeny National Wildlife Refuge Dunlin-Woodduck Pond, Long Tom Ranch Pond), one site in the Santiam River drainage (Menear's Bend Pond), one site in the McKenzie River drainage (Russell Pond), and one site in the Coast Fork Willamette drainage (Layng Pond). Estimates of abundance were obtained for naturally occurring populations of Oregon chub in East Fork Minnow Creek Pond, Shady Dell Pond, Elijah Bristow State Park Sloughs, Hospital Pond, Dexter Reservoir Alcoves, Buckhead Creek, Oakridge Slough, Santiam Conservation Easement Sloughs, Geren Island Ponds, and Finley Gray Creek Swamp. Five of these populations showed an increase in abundance in 2000 (East Fork Minnow Creek Pond, Shady Dell Pond, Middle Buckhead Creek, Dexter Reservoir Alcoves, Finley Gray Creek Swamp). Four populations decreased in abundance (or remain depressed) in 2000 (Geren Island, Santiam Conservation Easement, Elijah Bristow Sloughs, Oakridge Slough) (Table 1 ). Abundance estimates for introduced populations of Oregon chub were also obtained. The Oregon chub population in East Ferrin Pond declined from 7,200 fish in 1997 to O fish in 2000, and is presumed extinct. The Oregon chub population in the Fall Creek Spillway Pond totaled 5,030 fish in 2000, compared to 6,300 fish in 1999. The Oregon chub population in Wicopee Pond expanded dramatically from ~50 fish in 1999 to 4,580 fish in 2000. The Oregon chub population in the Dunn Wetland Ponds increased from 4,860 fish in 1999 to 14,090 fish in 2000. The Oregon chub population in Finley Display Pond increased from 360 fish in 1999 to 1,750 fish in 2000. Three of the four largest populations in 2000 were introduced populations. The Middle Fork Willamette River drainage supported the largest number of Oregon chub populations (n=12), followed by the Santiam drainage (n=B), and the Mid-Willamette drainage (n=5). The most abundant Oregon chub populations were found in the Middle Fork Willamette and Mid-Willamette drainages. The Oregon Chub Recovery Plan (U .S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1998) set a recovery goal for downlisting the species to "threatened" and for delisting the species. The criteria for downlisting the species was to establish and manage ten populations of at least 500 adult fish. All populations must exhibit a stable or increasing trend for five years. At least three populations must be located in each of the three sub-basins (Middle Fork Willamette River, Santiam River, Mid-Willamette River tributaries). In 2000, there were 11 populations totaling 500 or more individuals and six of these populations exhibited a stable or increasing trend for the past five years (Table 1 ). Five of these six populations were located in the Middle Fork Willamette drainage. In summary, Oregon chub remain at risk due to their limited distribution compared with their historic geographic range in the Willamette Valley, the loss of suitable habitat and the continued threats posed by the proliferation of non-native fishes, illegal water withdrawals, unauthorized fill and removal operations, and potential chemical spills or careless pesticide applications. Close

• 21. [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 Citation Abstract Copy 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. 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. Close

• 22. [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 Citation Abstract Copy 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. 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. Close

• 23. [Article] Recovery of Wild Coho Salmon In Salmon River Basin, 2008-2010 Report Number: OPSW-ODFW-2011-10

  Abstract -- Hatcheries have been a centerpiece of salmon management in the Pacific Northwest for more than a century but recent evidence of adverse interactions between hatchery and naturally-produced ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Recovery of Wild Coho Salmon In Salmon River Basin, 2008-2010 Report Number: OPSW-ODFW-2011-10 Abstract -- Hatcheries have been a centerpiece of salmon management in the Pacific Northwest for more than a century but recent evidence of adverse interactions between hatchery and naturally-produced salmon have resulted in substantial changes in many hatchery programs. In 2007 the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife terminated a 30-year artificial propagation program for coho salmon in the Salmon River basin after a status assessment concluded that wild population viability was threatened by hatchery effects on salmon productivity (Chilcote et al. 2005). Hatchery-reared coho comprised 50-100% of the naturally spawning population in recent years. Low productivity was reflected in a low spawner to recruit ratio, and life-stage specific survival was lower than that of nearby populations. The temporal distribution of adult spawning in the basin was truncated and peaked 1.5 months earlier relative to the pre-hatchery period and adjacent coastal populations. The cessation of hatchery releases into Salmon River not only removed the primary factor believed to limit productivity of the local population, it also constituted a rare management experiment to test whether a naturally-spawning population can recover from a prolonged period of low abundance after interactions with hatchery-produced coho salmon are eliminated. This report summarizes the results of coho population studies at Salmon River for the first three years after the hatchery program was discontinued. The study in Salmon River is timely because ecological interactions between hatchery and wild fish have been implicated in the reduced survival and decreased productivity of wild coho and other salmonid populations (Nickelson 2003, Buhle et al. 2009, Chilcote et al. 2011). Recent studies involving a diversity of salmonid species and watersheds have shown a negative relationship between hatchery spawner abundance and wild population productivity regardless of the duration of hatchery influence (Chilcote et al. 2011). Yet neither the mechanisms of these productivity declines nor their potential reversibility have been investigated. Recent management changes at Salmon River provide an opportunity to experimentally evaluate coho salmon survival and productivity following the elimination of a decades-long hatchery program. The results will provide new insights into the reversibility of hatchery effects and the rate, mechanisms, and trajectory of response by a naturally spawning coho salmon population. Hatchery programs have been shown to change the timing and distribution of naturally spawning adults, but ecological and genetic influences on the spatial structure and life history diversity of juvenile populations are poorly understood. Conventional understanding of the life history of juvenile coho has presumed a relatively fixed pattern of rearing and migration. However, recent studies have found much greater variation in juvenile life history and habitat-use patterns than previously expected (Miller and Sadro 2003, Koski 2009), including evidence that estuaries may play a prominent role in the life histories of some coho salmon populations. A recent study in the Salmon River basin found considerable diversity in the life histories of juvenile Chinook salmon, including extended rearing by fry and other subyearling migrants within the complex network of natural and restored estuarine wetlands (Bottom et al. 2005). Unfortunately, interpretation of juvenile life history variations at Salmon River was confounded by the Chinook hatchery program, which has concentrated spawning activity in the lower river near the hatchery and may directly influence juvenile migration and rearing patterns. Discontinuation of the coho hatchery program at Salmon River provides an opportunity to quantify changes in juvenile life history following the elimination of all hatchery-fish interactions with the naturally spawning population. Such responses may provide important insights into the mechanisms of hatchery influence on wild salmon productivity and population resilience. Our research integrates adult and juvenile life stages, examines linkages to physical habitat conditions in fresh water and the estuary, and describes variability between juvenile performance and adult returns. It also monitors the coho salmon population across habitat types and life history stages to identify population responses at a landscape scale. We will determine productivity and survival at each salmon life stage and monitor the response of the adult population following the cessation of the coho salmon hatchery program. From these indicators, we will determine the potential resiliency of the coho salmon population, and evaluate the biological benefits or tradeoffs of returning the ecosystem to natural salmon production. Our study design encompasses four population phases: (1) pre-hatchery conditions (Mullen 1979), (2) dominance by hatchery-reared spawners (2008), (3) first generation naturally produced juveniles (2009-2011), and (4) second generation naturally produced juveniles (starting in 2012). This research will validate assumptions about factors limiting coho recovery and determine whether recovery actions have been effective. Here, we report on findings from 2008-2010 to address four principal objectives: 1. Quantify life stage specific survival and recruits per spawner ratio of the coho salmon population before and after hatchery coho salmon are removed from Salmon River. 2. Assess whether the Salmon River coho population is limited by capacity and complexity of stream habitat. 3. Describe the diversity of juvenile and adult life histories of coho salmon in the Salmon River basin, and estimate the relative contributions of various juvenile life histories to adult returns. 4. Determine seasonal use of the Salmon River estuary and its tidally-inundated wetlands by juvenile coho salmon. The field sampling that supported the study on coho salmon also captured Chinook salmon and steelhead and cutthroat trout during routine sampling in the watershed and estuary. This report emphasizes coho salmon results, but also summarizes catch, distribution, and migration data for other salmonids to compare densities and abundances in freshwater and the estuary. Additional results for Chinook, steelhead, and cutthroat are presented in Appendix A. See Stein et al. (2011) for more detailed information on life history diversity, migration patterns, habitat use, and abundance of cutthroat trout. Title: Recovery of Wild Coho Salmon In Salmon River Basin, 2008-2010 Report Number: OPSW-ODFW-2011-10 Abstract -- Hatcheries have been a centerpiece of salmon management in the Pacific Northwest for more than a century but recent evidence of adverse interactions between hatchery and naturally-produced salmon have resulted in substantial changes in many hatchery programs. In 2007 the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife terminated a 30-year artificial propagation program for coho salmon in the Salmon River basin after a status assessment concluded that wild population viability was threatened by hatchery effects on salmon productivity (Chilcote et al. 2005). Hatchery-reared coho comprised 50-100% of the naturally spawning population in recent years. Low productivity was reflected in a low spawner to recruit ratio, and life-stage specific survival was lower than that of nearby populations. The temporal distribution of adult spawning in the basin was truncated and peaked 1.5 months earlier relative to the pre-hatchery period and adjacent coastal populations. The cessation of hatchery releases into Salmon River not only removed the primary factor believed to limit productivity of the local population, it also constituted a rare management experiment to test whether a naturally-spawning population can recover from a prolonged period of low abundance after interactions with hatchery-produced coho salmon are eliminated. This report summarizes the results of coho population studies at Salmon River for the first three years after the hatchery program was discontinued. The study in Salmon River is timely because ecological interactions between hatchery and wild fish have been implicated in the reduced survival and decreased productivity of wild coho and other salmonid populations (Nickelson 2003, Buhle et al. 2009, Chilcote et al. 2011). Recent studies involving a diversity of salmonid species and watersheds have shown a negative relationship between hatchery spawner abundance and wild population productivity regardless of the duration of hatchery influence (Chilcote et al. 2011). Yet neither the mechanisms of these productivity declines nor their potential reversibility have been investigated. Recent management changes at Salmon River provide an opportunity to experimentally evaluate coho salmon survival and productivity following the elimination of a decades-long hatchery program. The results will provide new insights into the reversibility of hatchery effects and the rate, mechanisms, and trajectory of response by a naturally spawning coho salmon population. Hatchery programs have been shown to change the timing and distribution of naturally spawning adults, but ecological and genetic influences on the spatial structure and life history diversity of juvenile populations are poorly understood. Conventional understanding of the life history of juvenile coho has presumed a relatively fixed pattern of rearing and migration. However, recent studies have found much greater variation in juvenile life history and habitat-use patterns than previously expected (Miller and Sadro 2003, Koski 2009), including evidence that estuaries may play a prominent role in the life histories of some coho salmon populations. A recent study in the Salmon River basin found considerable diversity in the life histories of juvenile Chinook salmon, including extended rearing by fry and other subyearling migrants within the complex network of natural and restored estuarine wetlands (Bottom et al. 2005). Unfortunately, interpretation of juvenile life history variations at Salmon River was confounded by the Chinook hatchery program, which has concentrated spawning activity in the lower river near the hatchery and may directly influence juvenile migration and rearing patterns. Discontinuation of the coho hatchery program at Salmon River provides an opportunity to quantify changes in juvenile life history following the elimination of all hatchery-fish interactions with the naturally spawning population. Such responses may provide important insights into the mechanisms of hatchery influence on wild salmon productivity and population resilience. Our research integrates adult and juvenile life stages, examines linkages to physical habitat conditions in fresh water and the estuary, and describes variability between juvenile performance and adult returns. It also monitors the coho salmon population across habitat types and life history stages to identify population responses at a landscape scale. We will determine productivity and survival at each salmon life stage and monitor the response of the adult population following the cessation of the coho salmon hatchery program. From these indicators, we will determine the potential resiliency of the coho salmon population, and evaluate the biological benefits or tradeoffs of returning the ecosystem to natural salmon production. Our study design encompasses four population phases: (1) pre-hatchery conditions (Mullen 1979), (2) dominance by hatchery-reared spawners (2008), (3) first generation naturally produced juveniles (2009-2011), and (4) second generation naturally produced juveniles (starting in 2012). This research will validate assumptions about factors limiting coho recovery and determine whether recovery actions have been effective. Here, we report on findings from 2008-2010 to address four principal objectives: 1. Quantify life stage specific survival and recruits per spawner ratio of the coho salmon population before and after hatchery coho salmon are removed from Salmon River. 2. Assess whether the Salmon River coho population is limited by capacity and complexity of stream habitat. 3. Describe the diversity of juvenile and adult life histories of coho salmon in the Salmon River basin, and estimate the relative contributions of various juvenile life histories to adult returns. 4. Determine seasonal use of the Salmon River estuary and its tidally-inundated wetlands by juvenile coho salmon. The field sampling that supported the study on coho salmon also captured Chinook salmon and steelhead and cutthroat trout during routine sampling in the watershed and estuary. This report emphasizes coho salmon results, but also summarizes catch, distribution, and migration data for other salmonids to compare densities and abundances in freshwater and the estuary. Additional results for Chinook, steelhead, and cutthroat are presented in Appendix A. See Stein et al. (2011) for more detailed information on life history diversity, migration patterns, habitat use, and abundance of cutthroat trout. Close