Search
Search Results
-
2481. [Article] Methods for Stream Habitat Surveys: Aquatic Inventories Project Information Reports 2007-01
Abstract -- The Aquatic Inventories Project is designed to provide quantitative information on habitat condition for streams throughout Oregon. This information is used to provide basic information for ...Citation Citation
- Title:
- Methods for Stream Habitat Surveys: Aquatic Inventories Project Information Reports 2007-01
Abstract -- The Aquatic Inventories Project is designed to provide quantitative information on habitat condition for streams throughout Oregon. This information is used to provide basic information for biologists and land managers, to establish monitoring programs, and to direct or focus habitat restoration efforts. Development of an Aquatic Inventories Project began within the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) in 1989 with sponsorship by the Restoration and Enhancement Program. Drafting of stream survey methods and implementation of field work began in 1990. The conceptual background for this work came from the experience of project staff and from interactions with Oregon State University, forest industry, and USFS PNW research scientists (Bisson et al. 1982, Grant 1986, Everest et al. 1987, Hankin and Reeves 1988, Moore and Gregory 1989, and Gregory et al. 1991). Significant contributions and review of these methods were provided by ODFW research staff, and from consultation with ODFW and United States Forest Service (USFS) biologists working on similar programs. Members of the Umpqua Basin Fisheries Restoration Initiative and the Oregon Forest Industry Council have provided additional review and consultation. This methodology was designed to be compatible with other stream habitat inventories and classification systems (i.e., Rosgen 1985, Frissell et al. 1986, Cupp 1989, Ralph 1989, USFS Region 6 Level II Inventory 1992, and Hawkins et al. 1993). This compatibility is achieved by systematically identifying and quantifying valley and stream geomorphic features. The resulting matrix of measurements and spatial relationships can then be generalized into frequently occurring valley and channel types or translated into the nomenclature of a particular system. For example, information summarized at the reach level (valley width, channel type, slope, terrace height and width, sinuosity, width, depth, substrate, eroding banks, etc.) can be used to characterize the stream into one of the types described by Rosgen (1985) or to match the parameters collected in other quantitative (USFS) or historic (U.S. Bureau of Fisheries) surveys. The process of conducting a stream survey involves collection of general information from maps and other sources and the direct observation of stream characteristics in the field. This information is both collected and analyzed based on a hierarchical system of regions, basins, streams, reaches, and habitat units. Supervisors are responsible for collecting the general information on regions and basins and for directing the activities of the survey crews. Survey teams will collect field data based on stream, reach and channel unit characteristics. Region and basin data will primarily come from ODFW-EPA region and sub region classifications, and from map analysis. The following instructions and definitions provide the outline for these activities and a description of the tasks involved in conducting ODFW’s stream habitat inventory. Each field crew is comprised of two people with each member responsible for specific tasks. The "Estimator" will focus on the identification of channel unit characteristics. The "Numerator" will focus on the counts and relative distribution of several unit attributes and will verify the length and width estimates for a subset of units. The "Estimator" and "Numerator" share the responsibility for describing reach characteristics, riparian conditions, identifying habitat unit types, and for quantifying the amount of large woody debris. Crew members may switch responsibility for estimator or numerator when they start a new stream. They will not, however, switch estimator and numerator jobs on the same stream.
-
2482. [Article] Status and Distribution of Native Fishes in the Goose Lake Basin Information Reports number 2008-02
Abstract -- This study describes the current distribution of the nine native fish species in the Oregon portion of the Goose Lake basin (Lake County): Goose Lake redband trout Oncorhynchus mykiss ssp., ...Citation Citation
- Title:
- Status and Distribution of Native Fishes in the Goose Lake Basin Information Reports number 2008-02
Abstract -- This study describes the current distribution of the nine native fish species in the Oregon portion of the Goose Lake basin (Lake County): Goose Lake redband trout Oncorhynchus mykiss ssp., Goose Lake lamprey Entosphenus sp., Goose Lake tui chub Siphateles bicolor thalassinus, Goose Lake sucker Catostomus occidentalis lacusanserinus, Modoc sucker Catostomus microps, Pit-Klamath brook lamprey Entosphenus lethophagus, speckled dace Rhinichthys osculus, Pit roach Lavinia symmetricus mitrulus, and Pit sculpin Cottus pitensis. The Goose Lake basin is an endorheic, or topographically closed basin located in south central Oregon and northeastern California. The basin is within the usually closed northeastern extremity of the adjoining Sacramento River basin, astride the Oregon-California boundary. Although most of the lake lies in California, most of its valley and nearly two-thirds of the total drainage area (~722 sq. mi.) are in Oregon. The largest streams in the basin are Drews, Cottonwood, and Thomas Creeks. Annual precipitation averages about 36 cm per year (Phillips and van Denburgh 1971). Goose Lake overflowed briefly into the North Fork Pit River in 1868 and 1881, but storage and diversion of irrigation water has substantially reduced the inflow and future overflow is unlikely (USGS 1971). The lakebed was dry in the summers of 1926, 1929- 1934, and 1992. About half the basin is forestland, 20% is hay fields and pastureland, and 16% is shrub and rangeland. Currently, almost 35% of the inflow is diverted for irrigation (OWRD 1989). The Goose Lake basin is home to four endemic fish taxa: the Goose Lake redband trout, lamprey, sucker, and tui chub. Endemic fishes of the Goose Lake basin split their life histories between Goose Lake and its tributaries, as opposed to the five native but non-endemic species that primarily occupy stream habitats. Pit roach and all endemic fishes except Goose Lake tui chub are listed as a “species of concern” by the USFWS, a designation that implies there is concern about species viability, but not enough information is known to initiate a listing review for threatened or endangered status. The Modoc sucker was listed as a federally endangered species in 1985 (USFWS 1985). No formal recovery plan was required due to an existing “Action Plan for the Recovery of the Modoc Sucker” (USFWS 1984). Most of the recovery actions outlined in the action plan were either completed or are no longer relevant (Stewart Reid, Western Fishes, personal communication). However, actions 26 and 27 pertaining to range expansion remain incomplete. Action 26 suggests reclassification to threatened upon establishment of safe populations (for 3-5 years) throughout the Rush and Turner Creek watersheds in the Pit River basin. Action 27 suggests delisting upon establishing safe populations in two other historic streams. At the time of listing, the historic range of Modoc sucker was thought to have included only two small tributaries of the Pit River in Modoc and Lassen Counties, Ash and Turner Creeks (USFWS 1985). Therefore, a major recovery goal was to expand the species’ range with additional populations (USFWS 1984). In 2001, reexamination of historical documents and museum specimens established that Modoc suckers had also historically occupied Thomas Creek in the Goose Lake basin. Field collections in 2001, with subsequent morphological and genetic analysis, confirmed that the population was still present in Thomas Creek (Stewart Reid, Western Fishes, personal communication); however, the broader range of Modoc sucker in the Goose Lake watershed was not known. In 1995, the Goose Lake Fishes Working Group drafted a conservation plan for “prelisting” recovery of all native fish in response to severe drought and habitat degradation (GLFWG 1995). The Aquatic Inventories Project of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) conducted habitat and fish distribution surveys (1991-1995) to obtain baseline information to help inform recovery efforts (ODFW, unpublished data). Since then, field work to monitor the distribution and abundance of Goose Lake fishes has been limited and sporadic, targeting only Goose Lake redband trout and Modoc sucker (Dambacher 2001; Reid 2007). No comprehensive follow up work has been conducted to evaluate fish response to climatic conditions, habitat restoration projects, and continued irrigation activities. ODFW recently drafted a status review of native fish of Oregon (ODFW 2005). Except for redband trout, Goose Lake fishes were not included in the status review due to a lack of new information since the previous status review in 1995 (Kostow et al. 1995). Further, the review of Goose Lake redband trout was limited by a lack of long-term data series. The first objective of this study was to document the current distribution of native fishes in Oregon’s portion of the Goose Lake basin and assess changes in distribution that may have occurred since the last surveys were conducted 12 years ago. The second objective was to provide new information about the distribution of Modoc suckers within the basin. The third objective was to determine relative abundance and age-class diversity of native fishes at randomly selected sample sites. All objectives were addressed throughout the potential riverine distribution of fish in the Oregon portion of the Goose Lake basin. Information gathered in this study is critical to effective conservation and management of each species and its habitat. In addition, this report describes the distribution and relative abundance of nonnative fishes (fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas), brown bullhead (Ameiurus nebulosus), white crappie (Pomoxis annularis), yellow perch (Perca flavescens), pumpkinseed (Lepomis gibbosus), and brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis)) in the basin. Unlike prior efforts, this study used a statisticallybased design to select sample points with the aim of achieving a representative sample across the Oregon portion of the Goose Lake watershed. Additionally, a wide array of fish sampling gear was employed to maximize our ability to capture all fish species present across the diversity of habitat types encountered.
-
2483. [Article] Distribution of amphibians in wadeable streams and ponds in western and southeast Oregon, Information Report 2009-02
Abstract -- The Oregon Conservation Strategy (ODFW 2006) identified monitoring needs for 17 amphibian species native to the state of Oregon that are designated as “Strategy species”, or Species of Greatest ...Citation Citation
- Title:
- Distribution of amphibians in wadeable streams and ponds in western and southeast Oregon, Information Report 2009-02
Abstract -- The Oregon Conservation Strategy (ODFW 2006) identified monitoring needs for 17 amphibian species native to the state of Oregon that are designated as “Strategy species”, or Species of Greatest Conservation Need (per USFWS requirements for State Wildlife Action Plans). The distribution of many species of amphibians in western Oregon is sparsely documented (Oregon Conservation Strategy, page 27). Although a broad-scale survey for amphibian presence would provide much information about amphibian distribution, most studies have focused on limited areas. One cost-effective approach is to combine amphibian observational surveys with existing aquatic habitat surveys conducted as part of the Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds (OCSRI 1997). The Oregon Plan has been in place since 1997 and the monitoring component provides a survey framework for streams in the lower Columbia River and Oregon coast drainages. The sampling framework is also compatible with implementation of the aquatic components of the Conservation Strategy, as demonstrated by this study. This study describes the presence of amphibians in and along wadeable streams in coastal and lower Columbia River drainages of Oregon, ponds and sloughs in the Willamette Valley, and selected streams in the Great Basin of southeast and central Oregon. As a component of monitoring under the Oregon Plan, the Aquatic Inventories Project (AIP) conducts aquatic habitat surveys at randomly selected and spatially balanced sites across all 1st through 4th order streams (wadeable) in coastal and lower Columbia River drainages. The purpose of the habitat surveys is to describe stream morphology, instream physical habitat, and riparian vegetation. Because the surveyors were already observing features within and alongside the stream channel, they were able to record observations of amphibians. The amphibian component was consistent with the survey protocol used by the US Geological Survey’s Amphibian Research and Monitoring Initiative. The advantage of coupling an amphibian component with the OR Plan aquatic surveys was that it not only was an efficient use of resources, but more importantly, provided information using a statistically rigorous survey design across a broad geographic area. In the summer of 2006, AIP began collecting amphibian occurrence data during physical stream habitat surveys as a pilot study to determine if our standard survey protocol could be modified to document distribution of amphibians characterized as Strategy Species under the Oregon Conservation Strategy. During the summer season, field crews observed four strategy species of amphibians and eleven amphibian species total. The potential to use these data to fill the gaps within the known current distribution of amphibians and to potentially develop a habitat based distribution models for these species led to the summer 2007 work. Amphibian data are also collected during four other survey projects, and although the site selection procedure does not conform to the same statistical standards as the Oregon Plan survey design, the projects offer a number of opportunities to collect amphibian occurrence information over a wide variety of habitats. The amphibian observations from these four projects are also included in this report. The four projects are as follows: • AIP conducts aquatic habitat surveys on selected streams throughout the state. • AIP conducts aquatic habitat surveys at stream habitat restoration projects in Western Oregon. • Surveys to document the distribution of Oregon chub also record amphibian data from over 1,000 pond and slough sites within the Willamette Valley floodplain since 1991. • The Native Fish Investigations Project began a study in 2007 to document the distribution and abundance of Redband Trout in the Great Basin region of Eastern Oregon. Surveys in the summer of 2007 occurred in 8 of Oregon’s 10 ecoregions (Figure 1)(Omernick 1994). Ecoregions are relatively large areas defined by distinctive geographic and ecological characteristics; flora and fauna communities and geographic conditions are typically distinct. Ecoregions provide an ecological framework for describing amphibian distribution across the state. The goals of our 2007 work were to: • Increase the consistency, efficiency and ability of habitat crews in identifying amphibians through improved training. • Increase knowledge of distribution and habitat associations of amphibians in streams in western Oregon (location, stream size and type), and infer distribution in all coastal and lower Columbia drainages. • Describe temporal changes in stream habitat use by amphibians (seasonal, annual). • Estimate surveyor bias by comparing standard crew data with intensive resurveys. • Describe distribution of amphibians in ponds, sloughs and other off channel aquatic habitats in the Willamette Valley. • Describe distribution of amphibians in the Great Basin of eastern Oregon. Many of Oregon’s amphibians rely on aquatic habitats at some point of their life, either for breeding and juvenile development or to inhabit as adults. Most aquatic amphibians breed from late winter to early summer, and many adults remain in or near their breeding sites into the summer. Most tadpoles and juvenile amphibians are also active in and occupy aquatic habitats during the summer. The aquatic habitat and redband trout surveys are appropriate opportunities to observe species and life stages (breeding adults, tadpoles and juveniles) that occupy aquatic or riparian habitats during the summer. Likewise the Oregon chub surveys are likely to observe amphibian species and life stages in ponds and sloughs during the spring and fall. These types of surveys are an efficient and cost-effective means to collect information on amphibian species that are closely tied to aquatic habitat throughout their life cycle. Amphibian species that are more terrestrial in nature may be better surveyed through a different approach.
-
Abstract -- Bacterial kidney disease (BKD) is a major health problem of cultured Pacific salmon, Oncorhynchus sp. It has been particularly problematic in captive broodstock programs, where the interests ...
Citation Citation
- Title:
- Prevalence of Bacterial Kidney Disease in Natural vs. Hatchery-Reared Adult Chinook Salmon Spawned in a Hatchery and in Nature Information Reports number 2009-06
Abstract -- Bacterial kidney disease (BKD) is a major health problem of cultured Pacific salmon, Oncorhynchus sp. It has been particularly problematic in captive broodstock programs, where the interests of gene conservation and fish health can conflict when spawning females with signs of BKD. Not rearing those fish reduces the genetic diversity of an already depleted population, while rearing those fish may increase the prevalence of BKD in the natural population. We used data collected during spawning at Lookingglass Fish hatchery and on spawning ground surveys to examine the prevalence of BKD, based on enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay optical density (ELISA OD) values, to monitor the prevalence of BKD in natural and hatchery-reared Chinook salmon O. tshawytscha from Grande Ronde and Imnaha basin streams in northeast Oregon. Mean ELISA OD levels differed among all sampled streams from 2004-2008 and was lowest in the Imnaha River salmon (0.0839) and highest in the Minam River (0.1750). Salmon spawned at LFH had a lower mean ELISA OD level (0.086) than those collected from carcasses on spawning ground surveys (0.118). Natural salmon mean ELISA OD level was 0.1058 and 97% were from salmon with ELISA OD level <0.2 and in hatchery salmon, 96% had an ELISA OD level <0.2 and mean ELISA OD level was 0.1138, with no difference between the groups. Over 17 years in the Imnaha River we see no difference in mean ELISA OD levels between natural and hatchery Chinook salmon. There was no difference in mean ELISA OD levels between adult Chinook salmon from wilderness (0.1663) vs. supplemented (0.1184) streams. However, when comparing mean ELISA OD for only natural Chinook salmon carcasses recovered in these streams, we found that mean ELISA OD level was higher in the wilderness streams (0.1676) than in the supplemented streams. Returning adults from the Captive Broodstock F1 generation had a higher mean ELISA OD level (0.1349) than those of Conventional Hatchery Program offspring (0.0957). Annual mean ELISA OD level decreased over time in the Lostine River stock but did not change for any of the other stocks. The data for BKD in Chinook salmon from northeast Oregon streams and hatcheries show that this disease is not prevalent and we found no evidence that the release of hatchery salmon is causing an increase in BKD prevalence in the monitored streams. However, we will continue to monitor this disease.
-
2485. [Article] 2008 Amphibian Distribution Surveys in Wadeable Streams and Ponds in Western and Southeast Oregon, Information Reports Number 2010-05
Abstract -- The ODFW Oregon Conservation Strategy identified monitoring needs for 17 amphibian species native to the state of Oregon that are designated as “Strategy species”, or Species of Greatest Conservation ...Citation Citation
- Title:
- 2008 Amphibian Distribution Surveys in Wadeable Streams and Ponds in Western and Southeast Oregon, Information Reports Number 2010-05
Abstract -- The ODFW Oregon Conservation Strategy identified monitoring needs for 17 amphibian species native to the state of Oregon that are designated as “Strategy species”, or Species of Greatest Conservation Need (per USFWS requirements for State Wildlife Action Plans). The distribution of many species of amphibians in western Oregon is sparsely documented (Oregon Conservation Strategy, page 27). Although a broad-scale survey for amphibian presence would provide important baseline information about amphibian species composition and distribution, most studies have focused on limited areas. The majority of Oregon’s amphibians rely on aquatic habitats at some point of their life, either for breeding and juvenile development or to inhabit as adults. Most aquatic amphibians breed from late winter to early summer, and adults frequently remain in or near their breeding sites into the summer. Most tadpoles and juvenile amphibians are also active in and occupy aquatic habitats during the summer. Ongoing aquatic habitat and fish surveys are opportunities to observe species and life stages (breeding adults, tadpoles and juveniles) that occupy aquatic or riparian habitats during the summer. One cost-effective approach is to combine amphibian surveys with existing aquatic habitat and fish surveys such as those conducted as part of the Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds (OCSRI 1997). The Oregon Plan has been in place since 1997 and the monitoring component provides a survey framework for streams in the lower Columbia River and Oregon coast drainages. The sampling framework is also compatible with implementation of the aquatic components of the Conservation Strategy, as demonstrated by this study. This study describes the presence of amphibians in and along wadeable streams in coast and lower Columbia River drainages of Oregon, ponds and sloughs in the Willamette Valley, and selected streams in the Great Basin of southeast and central Oregon. As a component of monitoring under the Oregon Plan, the Aquatic Inventories Project (AIP) conducts aquatic habitat surveys at randomly selected and spatially balanced sites across all 1st through 4th order streams in coastal and lower Columbia River drainages. The purpose of the habitat surveys is to describe stream morphology, instream physical habitat, and riparian vegetation. Because the surveyors were already observing features within and alongside the stream channel, they were able to record observations of amphibians. The amphibian component was consistent with the survey protocol used by the US Geological Survey’s Amphibian Research and Monitoring Initiative (http://armi.usgs.gov/). The advantage of coupling an amphibian component with the OR Plan aquatic surveys was that it not only was an efficient use of resources, but more importantly, provided information using a statistically rigorous survey design across a broad geographic area. The Native Fish Investigations Project began a six year study in 2007 to document the distribution and abundance of redband trout in the Great Basin region of Eastern Oregon. The site selection procedure is comparable to the statistical standards as the Oregon Plan survey design. Amphibian data are also collected during three other survey projects, and although the site selection procedure does not conform to the same statistical standards as the Oregon Plan survey design, the projects offer a number of opportunities to collect amphibian occurrence information over a wide variety of habitats. The amphibian observations from these three projects are also included in this report. The three projects are as follows: • AIP conducts aquatic habitat surveys on selected streams throughout the state. • AIP conducts aquatic habitat surveys at stream habitat restoration projects in Western Oregon. • Native Fish Project conducts surveys of pond and slough sites for Oregon chub in the Willamette Valley. Due to the success of the 2006 and 2007 field studies, we continued our research during the summer of 2008 to improve our knowledge of distribution and community structure of amphibians. The summer 2008 surveys took place in 9 of Oregon’s 10 ecoregions (Figure 1) (Thorson et al. 2003). Ecoregions provide a framework for discussing amphibian distribution across the state because they are relatively large areas defined by distinctive geographic and ecological (flora and fauna) characteristics. The goals of our 2008 work were to: • Increase the consistency, efficiency and ability of habitat crews in identifying amphibians through improved training. • Increase knowledge of distribution, community structure, and habitat associations of amphibians in streams in: o Western Oregon coastal and lower Columbia drainages. o Ponds, sloughs and other off-channel aquatic habitats in the Willamette Valley. o Great Basin of eastern Oregon and selected streams in central Oregon. • Combine the 2008 observations with the 2006-07 results.
-
2486. [Article] Status, Distribution, and Life History Investigations of Warner Suckers, 2006-2010 Information Reports number 2011-02
Abstract -- The Warner sucker Catostomus warnerensis is endemic to the Warner Valley, a subbasin of the Great Basin in southeastern Oregon and northwestern Nevada. This species was historically abundant ...Citation Citation
- Title:
- Status, Distribution, and Life History Investigations of Warner Suckers, 2006-2010 Information Reports number 2011-02
Abstract -- The Warner sucker Catostomus warnerensis is endemic to the Warner Valley, a subbasin of the Great Basin in southeastern Oregon and northwestern Nevada. This species was historically abundant (Snyder 1908) and its historical range includes three permanent lakes (Hart, Crump, and Pelican), several ephemeral lakes, a network of sloughs and diversion canals, and three major tributary drainages (Honey, Deep, and Twentymile creeks). Warner sucker abundance and distribution has declined over the past century and it was federally listed as threatened in 1985 due to habitat fragmentation and threats posed by the proliferation of piscivorous non-native game fishes (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1985). The Warner Valley is a northeast-southwest trending endorheic basin that extends approximately 90 km (Figure 1). The elevation of the valley floor is approximately 1,370 m and the basin is bound by fault block escarpments, the Warner Rim on the west and Hart Mountain and Poker Jim Ridge on the east. The Warner basin was formed during the middle Tertiary and late Quaternary geologic periods as a result of volcanic and tectonic activity (Baldwin 1974). Abundant precipitation during the Pleistocene Epoch resulted in the formation of Pluvial Lake Warner (Hubbs and Miller 1948). At its maximum extent approximately 11,000 years ago, the lake reached approximately 100 m in depth and 1,300 km2 in area (Snyder et al. 1964; Weide 1975). The Warner sucker inhabits the lakes and low gradient stream reaches of the Warner Valley. The metapopulation of Warner suckers is comprised of two life history forms: lake and stream morphs. The lake suckers display a lacustrine-adfluvial pattern in which they spend most of the year in the lake and spawn in the streams. However, when upstream migration is hindered by low stream flows during drought years or by irrigation diversion dams, lake suckers may spawn in nearshore areas of the lakes (White et al. 1990). Large lake-dwelling populations of introduced fishes in the lakes likely reduce sucker recruitment by predation on young suckers (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1998). Periodic lake desiccation also threatens the lake suckers. The stream suckers display a fluvial life-history pattern and spawn in the three major tributary drainages (Honey, Deep, and Twentymile Creeks). Threats specific to the stream form include water withdrawals for irrigation and impacts from grazing. Stream suckers recolonized the lakes after past drying events (mid-1930’s and early-1990’s). The Recovery Plan for the Threatened and Rare Native Fishes of the Warner Basin and Alkali Subbasin (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1998) sets three recovery criteria for delisting the species. These criteria require that: (1) a self-sustaining metapopulation is distributed throughout the drainages of Twentymile Creek, Honey Creek, and below the falls on Deep Creek, and in Pelican, Crump, and Hart Lakes; (2) passage is restored within and among these drainages so that individual populations of Warner suckers can function as a metapopulation; and (3) no threats exist that would likely threaten the survival of the species over a significant portion of its range. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (ODFW’s) Native Fish Investigations Project conducted investigations from 2006 through 2010 to describe the conservation (recovery) status of Warner suckers. The objectives of our investigations were to: 1) describe the current distribution of suckers in the Warner subbasin, 2) estimate their abundance in the lakes and streams, 3) collect life history information, and 4) describe the primary factors that currently limit the sucker’s ability to maintain a functioning metapopulation, including connectivity/fragmentation of habitats and factors affecting successful recruitment in the lake and stream environments. Previous similar studies were conducted in 1990, 1991, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, and 2001 (White et al. 1990; White et al. 1991; Allen et al. 1994; Allen et al. 1995; Allen et al. 1996; Bosse et al. 1997; Hartzell et al. 2001). We addressed these objectives by implementing the following tasks: 1) conducting surveys in Hart and Crump Lakes to describe the distribution and quantify the abundance of Warner suckers, search for evidence of recent recruitment, estimate sucker abundance relative to nonnative fish abundance, and describe certain life history characteristics, 2) tagging suckers with Passive Integrated Transponder (PIT) tags in the lakes and tributaries to estimate growth rates and describe seasonal movements, 3) radio tracking suckers in the lakes and tributaries to describe seasonal movements, 4) fishing screw traps in Warner basin tributaries to monitor downstream movements, 5) operating a trap at a fish ladder on a Warner tributary to assess upstream passage success, 6) conducting surveys in Warner basin tributaries to describe the current distribution of stream resident populations of Warner suckers and to quantify their abundance, 7) describing associations between the distribution of suckers and habitat variables in Twentymile Creek, 8) trapping larval suckers in the tributaries to describe the relative abundance and timing of larval movements, 9) describing life history parameters including growth rates, length frequency distributions, length at maturity, and weight-length relationships, 10) evaluating a nonlethal ageing technique, 11) describing the distribution and abundance of the Warner suckers at Summer Lake Wildlife Management area, where a self-sustaining population became established after fish salvage from Hart Lake during the 1992 drought, and 12) collecting tissue samples for future genetic analyses. This report compiles the results of this work, synthesizes and interprets findings relative to the conservation status of the species, and recommends future studies.
-
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
- 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.
-
Abstract -- The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has conducted surveys of coho salmon spawning on Oregon coastal streams for over 50 years (Jacobs et al. 2001). The initial surveys were done ...
Citation Citation
- Title:
- Sampling Design and Statistical Analysis Methods for the Integrated Biological and Physical Monitoring of Oregon Streams, Report Number OPSW-ODFW02002-07
Abstract -- The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has conducted surveys of coho salmon spawning on Oregon coastal streams for over 50 years (Jacobs et al. 2001). The initial surveys were done on purposefully selected streams. The sampling design was switched to a stratified random probability design in 1990 (Urquhart and Kincaid, 1999). The current concern with long-term viability of coastal coho populations sparked a review of that design, with an objective of achieving an integrated sampling approach for spawning salmon, juvenile salmon, and freshwater physical habitat. For each for these populations, there was an interest not only in current status in terms of fish numbers or habitat quality, but also in regional temporal trends. In addition, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) wanted a much smaller sample from the same stream population to measure water quality. The design discussed in this report addresses all of these objectives.
-
2489. [Article] Klamath Mountains Province Steelhead Project, 2001-02 Annual Report Report Number: OPSW-ODFW-2004-08
Abstract -- The steelhead supplement to the Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds (OSPW) is intended to maintain wild steelhead populations in Oregon at sustainable and productive levels that provide substantial ...Citation Citation
- Title:
- Klamath Mountains Province Steelhead Project, 2001-02 Annual Report Report Number: OPSW-ODFW-2004-08
Abstract -- The steelhead supplement to the Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds (OSPW) is intended to maintain wild steelhead populations in Oregon at sustainable and productive levels that provide substantial environmental, cultural, and economic benefits. The OSPW attempts to better define "sustainable and productive" by committing the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) to establish "Population Health Goals" for each Evolutionary Significant Unit (ESU) of wild steelhead within the state. In addition, section ODFW IB1S of the plan calls for ODFW to assess adult escapement and juvenile production of wild steelhead in each ESU. The National Marine Fisheries Service identified seven ESUs for steelhead in Oregon and concluded that steelhead produced in coastal basins between Cape Blanco in southern Oregon and the Klamath River Basin in northern California constitutes one ESU. This area closely corresponds to the geologic boundaries of the Klamath Mountains Province (KMP). Steelhead in the KMP differ from those in adjoining areas because of distinctive life history and genetic characteristics (Busby et al. 1994). Primary differences in life history parameters have been identified for wild KMP steelhead. Summer steelhead and winter steelhead differ in time of return as adults, tendency to return to fresh water on a false spawning migration (the "half-pounder" run), age at ocean entry, growth rate and migration patterns of juveniles in fresh water (ODFW 1990; ODFW 1994). As a result of these differences, separate health goals seem warranted for summer and winter steelhead populations. Winter steelhead inhabit streams throughout the KMP, while summer steelhead are found only in a portion of the Rogue River Basin. However, the distribution of summer and winter steelhead overlap in major areas of the Rogue River Basin (Everest 1973) and, as juveniles of the respective races cannot be differentiated, some population health goals have to apply to both races. The status of wild steelhead in the Klamath Mountains Province ESU is not readily apparent from historic sources of information. Uncertainty about resource status, coupled with a comprehensive conservation plan developed by Oregon and the termination of wild fish harvest in almost all KMP streams, lead the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), in 1998, to defer a listing of KMP steelhead under the Endangered Species Act. On 30 March, 2001, NMFS announced that, after a review of new information, that an Endangered Species Act listing was not warranted for KMP steelhead. In 2002, ODFW adopted new methods to monitor steelhead populations on the Oregon coast. Allied with the decision, ODFW decided to terminate the KMP steelhead project. Consequently, this report presents findings from the third, and final, year of the project. The goal of the project was to develop and implement assessment methods to determine the status of wild steelhead in the Oregon portion of the KMP. Project objectives included (1) develop population health goals and allied monitoring methods and (2) determine resource status in relation to health goals Satterthwaite (2002a). Directed sampling began in 1999 and findings from the first two years of the project were reported by Satterthwaite (2002b) and Satterthwaite (2003).
-
2490. [Article] Stream Habitat Conditions in Western Oregon 2005 Monitoring Report Report Number: OPSW-ODFW-2007-5
Abstract -- Monitoring programs under the Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds were designed to assess the status and trend in fish populations and aquatic habitat in Oregon’s coastal basins. Although ...Citation Citation
- Title:
- Stream Habitat Conditions in Western Oregon 2005 Monitoring Report Report Number: OPSW-ODFW-2007-5
Abstract -- Monitoring programs under the Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds were designed to assess the status and trend in fish populations and aquatic habitat in Oregon’s coastal basins. Although the Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds was initiated in response to the petition to list Oregon coastal coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), monitoring was subsequently expanded to include other salmonids. Through coordinated surveys we are able to evaluate freshwater habitat, fish distribution, and abundance of juvenile and adult coho salmon and steelhead trout. The habitat survey project has the broadest geographic scope of inference and ties to other program components as well – basin surveys, surveys at habitat restoration sites, adult and juvenile coho surveys, and life cycle watersheds (Flitcroft et al. 2002). The Oregon Plan facilitated cooperation and partnerships to study the contemporary life history dynamics of coho salmon in the Oregon coastal ESU (Evolutionary Significant Unit). A viability and status assessment of Oregon coastal Coho (Chilcote 2005) and the Conservation Plan for the Oregon Coast Coho Evolutionary Significant Unit (Nicholas 2006) evaluated the relationship of aquatic habitat to the productivity of coho salmon populations and recommended actions to promote recovery. The habitat portion of the viability assessment was based on a review of aquatic and riparian habitat collected by the Aquatic Inventories Project (ODFW) from 1990 to 2004 (Rodgers et al. 2005). The authors of the habitat assessment (Rodgers et al 2005) and viability assessment (Chilcote 2005) concluded that coho productivity in 22 coastal coho populations was limited by the complexity of stream habitat used by juvenile coho during their first winter of freshwater residence. The term “stream complexity” integrates geomorphic and structural characteristics of streams and associated aquatic habitat. Complex geomorphic features may be observed in low gradient streams flowing through wide valley floors with multiple channels and off-channel habitats. Structural complexity refers to the size and configuration of pools, large wood pieces and jams, substrate, and undercut banks. The combination of geomorphic and structural features provides cover and refugia during high winter flows for juvenile coho. Stream reaches that can or have the potential to create these conditions are commonly located in lower reaches of moderate size streams in areas with wide valley floors and are considered to contain high quality habitat for juvenile coho. Burnett et al. (2007) developed spatial models to estimate high-quality habitat rearing potential, termed intrinsic potential, in coastal streams. A stream’s intrinsic potential was modeled using valley width, gradient, and stream flow. Historically, streams identified as having high intrinsic potential may have been the most productive for juvenile coho salmon; restoration of these reaches may be the key to recovery of coho salmon. The viability assessment and Coho Plan recommend that we monitor the trends in total amount and spatial distribution of these habitats in coastal drainages. This report discusses the findings from aquatic habitat surveys conducted in summer 2005 in coastal drainages. Our objectives are to describe and compare channel morphology, instream habitat and complexity, and riparian conditions in all wadeable streams in five monitoring areas. The sample design permitted us to post stratify the sample sites into three additional frames: sites within coho and steelhead distribution, sites outside coho distribution, and sites within high intrinsic potential for coho. We also used two habitat models to integrate habitat attributes to describe the habitat quality and capacity for different life stages of juvenile coho and steelhead.