Effects of PIT tagging upstream migrating adult Columbia Basin Sockeye Salmon

Jeffrey K. Fryer, Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish CommissionSkyeler Folks, Richard Bussanich, and Howie Wright, Okanagan NationKim Hyatt, Canada Department of Fisheries and OcieansJen Miller, Confederated Colville Tribes

Background CRITFC has been sampling adult salmonids at

Bonneville Dam (and other sites) since 1985.Recent years have seen an increased demand

for sampling driven by Accords-funded CRITFC projects and data users (e.g. fisheries managers).

At the same time, we have received increased scrutiny and regulation, decreasing sample sizes (and increasing biases?), particularly at higher water temperatures.

Regulator concerns based on possible impacts of sampling/tagging Impact on non-target fish as a result of trapping

(both in traps and bypassed) Impact on sampled fish:

Increased mortality (immediate and delayed)* Spawning success

Oregon Shore Fish Counting and PIT tag detection

Washington Shore Fish Counting and PIT tag detection

Bonneville DamX

X

Adult Fish Facility

Bonneville Dam samplingAnesthetize adults using Aqui-S.Scale sample for age analysis.Length measurement.Assess for condition and fin clips.PIT tag (if not already PIT tagged).Allow to recover and volitionally release.

How to assess Bonneville sampling impacts?1. Immediate mortality.2. Sockeye not detected after release.3. Conversion rate to upstream dams compared

to conversion rates of Sockeye Salmon tagged as juveniles passing Bonneville Dam. (Virtually 100% go through at least 5 dams with PIT tag arrays in their return migration to natal areas.)

1. Immediate Mortality2011 2012 2013 2014 Total

Sampled 766 1636 799 1420 4621

Mortalities

2 0 4 5 11

Rate 0.3% 0.0% 0.5% 0.4% 0.2%

2. Sockeye Not Detected after Tagging at AFF

2011 2012 2013 2014 Combined

Tagged (12 mm) and released 623 1612 791 1412 4439Not subsequently Detected 10 11 19 7 43Rate 1.6% 0.7% 2.4% 0.5% 1.1%Non-detections could be due to the following: Mortality (but we see very few tagged dead sockeye at the AFF) Sockeye not passing counting station PIT tag arrays (upper

BO1 or BO4). These fish could have passed through the navigation locks or gone downstream, bypassing BO3 antennas.

Shed or defective tags. We are hoping to add a PIT tag antenna to the AFF exit fishway

prior to 2015 tagging.

3. Bonneville-McNary Dam Sockeye Conversion Rate

2011 2012 2013 2014 2011-20140%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

AFF (adults) RIS (juveniles) Snake (juveniles)

3. Bonneville Dam-The Dalles Sockeye Conversion Rate

2013 2014 2013-20140%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%AFF (adults) RIS (juveniles) Snake (juveniles)

Acoustic and Temperature Tagging at Wells Dam

Sockeye tagging (2010-2014)Under Columbia Basin Accords BPA-funded

project, we PIT tag adults at Bonneville Dam and PIT, acoustic (Vemco V9), Floy, and temperature disc tag at Wells Dam.

Track the Sockeye upstream to our OKC in-stream array in Canada which detects about 90% of passing Sockeye Salmon.

2010

807 tags

400 tags

Past Wells Detected at OKC:

Bonneville tagged: 75.8%

Wells PIT+Floy: 73.7%

Survival decrease: 2.8%

Selective Harvest Rates (Wells-Zosel):

Tribal: 5.6%

Sport(?): 3.7%

Wells-OKC 2010

Tagging Location Tags Applied N

WEL-OKC conv. rate

Survival

decrease

Wells Floy+PIT 301

73.7% 2.8%

Wells Floy+Temp+PIT 37 55.1% 27.3%

Wells Floy+Acoustic+PIT 62 59.4% 27.8%

Wells Floy+Temp+Acoustic+PIT

15 63.4% 16.4%

Bonneville PIT 413

75.8% -Percentage passing Wells Dam last detected downstream of Wells:

Bonneville tagged: 0.3%

Wells tagged: 1.5%

2011

747 tags

576 tags

Past Wells Detected at OKC:

BON tagged: 76.0%

WEL PIT+Floy: 72.3%

Survival decrease: 4.9%

Selective Harvest Rates (Wells-Zosel):

Tribal: 0.7%

Sport(?): 2.6%

Wells-OKC 2011

Tagging Location

Tagging Regime N

WEL-OKC conv. rate

Survival decrease

Wells Floy+PIT 322 72.3% 4.9%

Wells Floy+Temp+PIT 195 65.9% 13.3%

Wells Floy+Acoustic+PIT

59 70.1% 7.8%

Bonneville PIT 340 76.0% -Percentage passing Wells Dam last detected downstream (all fish):

Bonneville tagged: 1.7%

Wells tagged: 1.7% (4.7% not detected)

Switched ladders at Wells Dam:

Bonneville tagged: 1.7%

Wells tagged: 15.7%

2012All Sockeye tagged at Wells were required to

be released upstream of the dam. Using assistance from the Colville Tribe, we

add tagging at Priest Rapids Dam.

2012

1597 tags

769 tags

Wells-OKC:

BON tagged: 41.4%

WEL PIT+Floy: 41.8%

PRD PIT+Floy: 44.1%

Survival Decrease:

PRD: -6.5%

WEL: -1.0% (5.2%)

Selective Harvest Rates (Wells-Zosel):

Tribal: 4.1%/5.0%

Sport(?): 12.8%

751 tags

Wells-OKC 2012Tagging Location Tagging

RegimeN

WEL-OKC conv. rate Survival

decrease

Wells Floy+PIT 709 41.8% -1.0%/5.2%

Wells Floy+Acoustic+PIT

60 38.8% 6.3%

Priest Rapids

Floy+PIT 562 44.1% -6.5%

Bonneville PIT 1001

41.4% -

RIS Juvenile

PIT 45 46.7% -% passing Wells Dam last detected downstream:

Wells tagged (released upstream): 0.8%

Priest Rapids tagged: 0.1%

Bonneville tagged: 0.4%

Wells-OKC 2013

Tagging Location Tagging Regime N

WEL-OKC Conv. Rate

Survival

decrease

Wells Floy+PIT 694 54.8% 3.2%

Wells Floy+Acoustic+PIT 61 46.1% 15.9%

Wells Floy+Temperature+PIT

135 3.9% 93.0%

Bonneville PIT 400 57.0% -

RIS Juvenile PIT 38 71.1% -% passing Wells Dam last detected downstream:

Wells tagged (released upstream): 3.6%

Bonneville tagged: 1.3%

Tagging Impacts SummaryBonneville: MinimalPriest Rapids: MinimalWells: 5.2% (comparison to 2012 PRD tagged

Sockeye)Wells acoustic tags: 6-28%Wells temperature tags: 13-28%

Other considerations in estimating tagging impacts

Tag impact also includes sampling impact which may differ from site to site. (Priest Rapids and Bonneville traps require less handling than Wells and have recovery areas with volitional release. Wells tagged fish are trucked upstream and released into shallow [warm] water.)

Sockeye tagged at Wells dams are more mature than those at Priest Rapids and Bonneville dams, possibly affecting survival.

Tagging at Priest Rapids and Wells also includes Floy tagging which may lead to additional tagging impacts. In addition, this opens up the issue of fishery selectivity.

Traps at dams may also be selective for some particular trait which may affect comparisons. (For instance, the Wells trap selects for larger Sockeye.)

AcknowledgementsCory Kamphaus, Keely Murdoch, Greg Robison, Barry Hodges, and Tim Jeffris (YN), John Arterburn and Casey Baldwin (CCT), Crystal Chulik, Jason Five Crow, Buck Jones, Denise Kelsey, Agnes Strong, John Whiteaker, and others (CRITFC), Tom Kahler (DPUD), Chris Carlson (GPUD), and Josh Murauskas (AnchorQEA).

Funding provided by BPA (through the Columbia Basin Accords) and the Pacific Salmon Commission.

PIT tagging impact on the Wells to OKC conversion rate 2010-2013

Fishery

YearTagging Location

Conversion Rate

Decrease

Tribal (selective

) Sport (?)

2010

Wells 2.8% 5.6% 3.7%

2011

Wells 4.9% 0.7% 2.6%

2012

Wells -1.0% 4.1% 12.7%

2012

Priest Rapids

-6.5% 4.1% 12.7%

2013

Wells 3.2%

Temperature and acoustic tagging impact on Wells to OKC conversion rates 2010-2013

Year Regime

Conversion Rate

Decrease

Fishery

Tribal (selective)

Sport (?)

2010

Floy+Temp+PIT 27.3% 5.6% 3.7%

2010

Floy+Acoustic+PIT 27.8%

2010

Floy+Temp+Acoustic+PIT

16.4%

2011

Floy+Temp+PIT 13.3% 0.7% 2.6%

2011

Floy+Acoustic+PIT 7.8%

2012

Floy+Acoustic+PIT 6.3% 4.1% 12.8%

2013

Floy+Acoustic+PIT 15.9%