2010 work planned, 2010 work planned, new operations, and new operations, and

wrap upwrap up

Presenter: Robin EhlkePresenter: Robin Ehlke

CSS Annual Meeting Apr 2CSS Annual Meeting Apr 2ndnd 20102010

2010 – Work Planned2010 – Work PlannedContinue building long-term databaseContinue building long-term database

• Monitoring SAR rates Monitoring SAR rates • Passage characteristics and demographic dataPassage characteristics and demographic data• Continue coordination/cost saving effortsContinue coordination/cost saving efforts

New Snake River Sockeye analysisNew Snake River Sockeye analysisNew Snake River Chinook tag groups New Snake River Chinook tag groups Additional Snake River Steelhead taggingAdditional Snake River Steelhead taggingNew upper Columbia tag groupsNew upper Columbia tag groupsEvaluate SARs for PIT tagged and unmarked Evaluate SARs for PIT tagged and unmarked

fishfish

Snake River SockeyeSnake River Sockeye

2009 first year for large tag group2009 first year for large tag groupSBT requested that CSS report SBT requested that CSS report

include analysis of PIT tag datainclude analysis of PIT tag data2010 report 12010 report 1stst year for juvenile year for juvenile

metricsmetricsFuture reports to include adult Future reports to include adult

metricsmetrics

Snake R. Hatchery ChinookSnake R. Hatchery Chinook

Spring/summer covered upstream of Spring/summer covered upstream of LGRLGR• Five major hatcheriesFive major hatcheries• Hatchery specific metrics possibleHatchery specific metrics possible

2009 three additional hatcheries2009 three additional hatcheries• Cooperative effortCooperative effort• Clearwater, Pahsimeroi and SawtoothClearwater, Pahsimeroi and Sawtooth

Now nearly all sp/su hatchery Chinook Now nearly all sp/su hatchery Chinook upstream of LGR are representedupstream of LGR are represented

Snake R. Hatchery Snake R. Hatchery SteelheadSteelhead

1997-2007 no funding for CSS tags1997-2007 no funding for CSS tags• Aggregate of existing tags groups (10-25K)Aggregate of existing tags groups (10-25K)• Limited to metrics for this aggregateLimited to metrics for this aggregate

2008 secured funding, worked 2008 secured funding, worked cooperativelycooperatively• All steelhead hatchery releases >LGRAll steelhead hatchery releases >LGR• No new tag groups, but able to refine No new tag groups, but able to refine

metrics (by hatchery, A run vs. B run) metrics (by hatchery, A run vs. B run) • 2010 report first year for juvenile metrics2010 report first year for juvenile metrics

Upper Columbia StocksUpper Columbia Stocks

Wild Chinook and SteelheadWild Chinook and Steelhead

Wenatchee, Methow, Okanogan Wenatchee, Methow, Okanogan basinsbasins

Juvenile data available in 2011 reportJuvenile data available in 2011 report

Comparing SARs for PIT tagged and unmarked fish

Estimate variability for adult returns used in run-reconstruction SARs

Design PIT tag bias studies for several hatcheries in the basin

Implement pilot study of PIT tag bias at Carson Hatchery

Summary – Snake RiverSummary – Snake River

Travel time and survival rates are Travel time and survival rates are strongly influenced by managed river strongly influenced by managed river conditions including spill and flowconditions including spill and flow• Chinook and steelhead exhibited Chinook and steelhead exhibited

relatively high survival under low flow relatively high survival under low flow and high spill conditions of 2007and high spill conditions of 2007

Smolt to Adult (SAR) survival for Smolt to Adult (SAR) survival for Chinook and steelhead fell well short Chinook and steelhead fell well short of the NPCC 2% minimumof the NPCC 2% minimum

Summary – Snake River

TIRs and D through 2006-2007TIRs and D through 2006-2007• Steelhead TIRs >1, Chinook D <1Steelhead TIRs >1, Chinook D <1

TIRs of both wild Chinook and TIRs of both wild Chinook and steelhead variable across years and steelhead variable across years and associated with in-river survivalassociated with in-river survival

Relative effectiveness of Relative effectiveness of transportation declines as in-river transportation declines as in-river survival increasessurvival increases

Summary – Snake River

Conditions in both freshwater & ocean Conditions in both freshwater & ocean environments determine life cycle survival environments determine life cycle survival (SARs)(SARs)

River conditions during seaward migration River conditions during seaward migration have strong influence on first year ocean have strong influence on first year ocean survival (evidence of delayed mortality)survival (evidence of delayed mortality)

Extremely difficult to achieve NPCC SAR Extremely difficult to achieve NPCC SAR goals without major changes to seaward goals without major changes to seaward migration conditions in the mainstem migration conditions in the mainstem Columbia & Snake riversColumbia & Snake rivers

Summary – Snake RiverSummary – Snake River

Transportation negatively affects Transportation negatively affects adult success rate for wild/hatchery adult success rate for wild/hatchery steelhead and Chinooksteelhead and Chinook

Transported adults strayed at a Transported adults strayed at a significantly higher rate than their in-significantly higher rate than their in-river counterpartsriver counterparts• Hatch. + wild steelhead, hatch. ChinookHatch. + wild steelhead, hatch. Chinook

SummaryMid/Upper Columbia River

stocksExtend time series of CSS metrics for Extend time series of CSS metrics for

Mid/Upper Columbia River stocksMid/Upper Columbia River stocksThe mark groups for these The mark groups for these

populations provide the opportunity populations provide the opportunity to assess hydrosystem managementto assess hydrosystem management

Questions?Questions?

Courtesy of Clinton Winn